Can the International Sugar Community help Fiji recover to its former glory as a sugar producer in the South Pacific? Fiji has the soil, climate and people to once again return to a top producer in the region.

Robert Quirk was invited to deliver a seminar at the Sugar Research Institute of Fiji ( SRIF) . Robert then had the opportunity to go out to into the field and inspect the plant breeding facilities, where he observed that some of the varieties that have been produced at the SRIF are world class and could put producers in an enviable position.

In his view, Robert sees that weed control is a major problem, so he connected them to Bayer Crop Sciences to help design a spray programme which allows a minimum to zero tillage implementation programme.

After Robert’s visit to Fiji he invited one of the enthusiastic young researchers( Karuna) to visit his farm to see firsthand Australian farming practices. He spent three days at Robert’s farm and also attended the GIVE conference( Grower Innovation Virtual Expo) where he was able to interact with 250 of Australia's most innovative growers.

Karuna, was inspired by his visit to Australia and upon his return to Fiji he aims to create demonstration sites (with the full support of the Director of SRIF). The sites will show cutting edge techniques on weed control , fertilizer incorporation and zero tillage.

Robert, will continue to provide support by email, Skype and will check on progress when he returns to Fiji later this year.

With Rio+20 approaching, global debate on sustainable development and green economies will gradually move to center stage. Although developing countries are in the epicenter of pressure for improvements, the debate is bound to spread and also include developed countries. In an effort to steer away from “greenwashing,” this article discusses the importance of all countries committing at Rio+20 to the idea of reporting on their impacts on the environment.

In July of 2012, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development will take place in Rio de Janeiro. It is being called Rio+20 because of the important advances in terms of including sustainable development on the international agenda achieved 20 years ago, at the Eco-92 meetings, also held in Rio.

Major achievements at the 1992 gathering include the launch of several United Nations agreements to address sustainability. The event led to the so-called "Rio Conventions," on biodiversity, desertification and climate change. In addition, it was Eco-92 that coined the concept of the three pillars of sustainable development: economic growth, social development and environmental protection.

Rio+20 is designed to take stock of advances and setbacks, as well as examine future plans for the international community in the context of sustainable development. This time, discussions will center on two main themes: the new international system of governance on sustainability and the green economy.

In any debate on the environment and sustainability, developing countries tend to be the "flavor of the month." Poverty, social inequality, illiteracy and uncontrolled deforestation are always high on the agenda. In fact, they are all disturbing issues that all countries, developed or developing, should attack. There is no excuse to avoid them. All of us – governments, private sector, civil society and individuals – have an obligation to act diligently to solve them. Rio+20 will provide an opportunity to generate incentives that move us toward correcting these situations.

However, it is also important to consider that these challenges are commonly raised in trade discussions, particularly by developed countries. Not that this is by definition a problem: some demands – as long as they are feasible, transparent and contextualized – are positive and can lead to improvements. But we know that interests that define such policies are often diffuse. There is nothing noble about "green protectionism."

In this debate, there are no good or bad guys. It is no secret that developed nations are the main cause of global warming. It is no secret that in these countries, preserved areas with native vegetation are very scarce. It is no secret that there are numerous cases in which dangerous or even toxic waste is “exported” to other countries. It is no secret that consumption and waste levels in these countries outpace the rest. It is no secret that the energy matrixes in these countries are amongst the dirtiest on the planet. All these challenges are equally important for developing or developed nations and should be tackled with equal weight and similar commitments. 

In the context of these discussions, the word “greenwashing” is used to describe something along the lines of false or misleading advertising. Indeed, several countries promote a green image when their actions in fact run counter to the image they hope to promote.

European legislation for biofuels, for example, states that the imported product must meet certain sustainability criteria, such as the absence of deforestation in its production process. Germany is the most vocal defender of that strategy. At the same time, in discussions on reforming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union (EU), there is a proposal that European farmers meet certain sustainability criteria in order to be eligible for financial subsidies at levels they are accustomed to. Germany, one of the largest agricultural producers in Europe, has expressed strong opposition to this proposal.

All these challenges are seldom approached with the much needed transparency they require. So mechanisms that expose such situations with clarity must be developed, to in effect generate pressure that leads to corrections, as so often happens with developing countries. In this respect, Rio+20 would provide an opportunity for countries to commit to reporting on their policies and impacts on the environment in order to expose their true level of commitment to sustainable development. In other words, countries would have to declare their sustainability "footprint" within rules that allow comparisons to be made.

This is already common practice when dealing with climate change, with countries required to report their emissions. At Rio+20, a proposal introduced by Colombia, if adopted, would move in the same direction by suggesting the creation of sustainable development indicators. The proposal, however, does not establish that national reports on sustainability would be mandatory.

Along with the levels of inequality, rates of deforestation and other extremely important aspects, some new indicators should be considered. The percentage of land covered with native vegetation, the per capita consumption of fossil energy and domestic garbage production are all examples of what should be officially reported by countries.

Most of this information is known, as reports, studies and surveys with this type of data already exist. The problem is that the data is not available in organized and consolidated fashion. If all countries declared their own situations in a harmonized manner, the world would become aware of their “national footprints,” leading to pressure from the international community. That might just be the type of “fuel” needed to promote real change towards a more sustainable future – not only here, but there as well.

In an increasingly integrated world, where demand for transparency is an essential part of the relationship between businesses, nothing seems more appropriate and fair than to demand the same from governments. This would be a decisive step to protect everyone from misleading government propaganda, or what one might describe as “state-run greenwashing.”

* Luiz Fernando do Amaral is Sustainability Manager at the Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (UNICA) and a Counselor at the Climate Change National Fund. He is also Head of the Brazilian Delegation to ISO: Sustainability of Bioenergy, and a Director at the Better Sugarcane Initiative (BONSUCRO).

Abstract
Sustainable production is becoming an increasingly important issue in the process industries. In the cane sugar industry, pressure for sustainable production has come largely from the importers of ethanol from sugarcane. This has focused attention on sustainable production in the sugar industry in general. Some of the major producers of white sugar are aware of the advantages in the market place of sustainable manufacturing processes in terms of brand enhancement and are using the low carbon footprint of sugar to their advantage. This paper aims to introduce the main elements of sustainability and the major sustainability issues facing producers. The estimation of the carbon footprint for raw and refined sugar production is described and the aspects of production affecting greenhouse gas emissions are identified. Opportunities for refiners in terms of reducing the carbon footprint of their products and the implications are described. Attempts to certify production as sustainable have led to the need for formal certifiable sustainability standards in the sugar industry. The process of developing credible sustainability standards is described. Substantial progress has been made in this respect by the Better Sugar Cane Initiative (now referred to as Bonsucro) in the development of standards for the certification of sustainable production, paving the way for auditing and certification in 2011.

INTRODUCTION
Companies can no longer afford to ignore sustainability because it is central to long term competitiveness. Sustainability has been identified as a megatrend, which requires businesses to adapt and innovate or be swept aside (Lubin and Esty 2010). It is clear that there is a growing corporate move to address sustainable development and companies are beginning to appreciate that there are sound business reasons to adopt more sustainable production and processing practices. In addition, managing social and environmental risks is important for growers, processors, traders and food companies due to regulatory pressures as well as shareholder and consumer expectations. Increasingly environmental and social performance is affecting access to markets and to capital as well. The pressure for a system to certify that sustainable practices are being adhered to has come largely from the market place. In particular this has come about due to the need to demonstrate sustainable production of biofuels, where for instance the import of biofuels into Europe requires that these fuels are produced following sustainable practices. A number of large industrial consumers of sugar also want to be able to certify that sugar and other ingredients in their products are produced by means of sustainable practices. Issues relating to sustainability in the cane sugar industry have been highlighted by Rein (2009).

Read More »