Collective interest organisations

Another element present are the collective interest organisations such as NGOs, smallholders and the national federation of palm growers “Fedepalma”.

Fedepalma is an industry organisation for oil palm producers in Colombia. They are a long-standing member of the RSPO and hold a great influence in the field. They have many projects directed at promoting sustainable palm oil and are also involved with smallholder support. Several respondents like industry expert 3 and 4 underline Fedepalma as one of the most essential actors along with the RSPO.

“Fedepalma is a very important actor, and I don't think that, in most other countries, I don't think that that national-level association is nearly as strong. So, as a result, the industry is, is much better organized […] but I think that's a key actor in, in all the, in this entire discussion as well. ” (Industry Expert 3)

2 Greenwashing is defined as the structuring of corporate disclosures regarding environmental matters so as to

”Most of the palm oil mills in Colombia are members of Fedepalma. There are a few, small cases that are outside of Fedepalma […] So, Fedepalma is a member of the RSPO, and you should probably know this. So, they are – one of the biggest drivers […]in Columbia” (Industry expert 4)

The importance of Fedepalma in the Colombian sector can be seen as a result of the missing formal governance. The companies and growers have joined in a federation which have become very influential. Fedepalma is a member of the RSPO and all of their members are working towards sustainable and “ …[Fedepalma] have a goal that in 2025 75 percent of [their] oil is going to be certified…” (Industry organisation 1). This recognition of the RSPO from another powerful actor further legitimises RSPO dominant role in the industry.

NGOs are important actors to support the smallholders due to their essential knowledge about the smallholders needs and challenges and close collaboration with them. This is idea is supported by industry organisation

“… that's a … NGO, we're, we're working with … they visit every grower, and check how that small grower is doing in social and environment aspect and agricultural aspect and economic aspect so we can know how we can help the small grower.” (Industry organisation 1)

However, NGOs also act as protectors of vulnerable groups such as communities, workers and smallholders against exploitation.

“…People do not know, are not aware of their rights. So what are the land rights? What are their rights to natural resources?” … And so the, the companies make use of that. And then we organise, we help communities self-organise … so that the community has representative bodies which—in which they can make decisions on their land and natural resources.” (NGO1).

The NGOs are divided between supporting the RSPO and their approach to sustainability. Some NGOs see the RSPO certification as a way of promoting sustainable production where others see the RSPO as an instigator of exploitation. This exploitation is mostly directed towards smallholders and communities where The latter view is mainly taken on by industry experts and NGO’s who are not members of the RSPO. They take more critical stand on the RSPO in relation to smallholders than RSPO member organisations.

“[Company name] now claims “Well, we will soon become all RSPO certified”. But when you look at the local situations the same is happening as on other plantations. So, communities get under pressure, they lose the land, they use violence towards women from […] So, all these problems are still there and deforestation is still happening.”(NGO2).

This critique highlights the point that they see RSPO as company-driven and therefore mainly serves the interests of big corporations. In the quote below they also exemplifies that companies do not

always comply despite having the certification which can be related to the earlier point of greenwashing. These points of critique are based on the point of view that the RSPO has unequal power distribution between different members and stakeholders, which is not beneficial for the smallholders. The critical NGOs claim that the RSPO“… is a corporate-dominated system, so it’s the corporations that have all the power.” (NGO1). This notion is also supported by Industry Expert 2.

“Neither is questioned the market consumption of the asymmetries of power of the, of the obscured cost of negative externalities because the economic models, in some way […] It does not also question the uneven disposition of resources [within the RSPO]” (Industry expert 2).

It is important to notice that those who holds this type of critique do not operate in Colombia. Their knowledge is based mainly on South East Asia and Africa. It could seem as these problems were less present in the Colombian context. One Colombian-based NGO recognises the critique but views the RSPO as part of the solution rather than the problem. NGO4 highlights the RSPO complaint mechanism as a key tool to solve some of the beforementioned issues.

“There is a lot we don’t agree with, but we do believe that it is important to start applying and exercise the RSPO and this complaint mechanism in order for it to be really powerful. We have seen cases where it has worked and these complaints have been improved and have actually improved the quality of the company’s work.” (NGO4 – own translation from Spanish).

The NGOs give an important input with a more critical approach to the RSPO. It demonstrates that the RSPO certification might not be enough to solve all problems within social or environmental challenges. Despite the division of whether or not the RSPO and its members can solve these issues, it is clear that the RSPO must implement some changes and a better system to secure full compliance of certified members.

Smallholders

Smallholders constitute the final grouping in the collective interest organisations. Though they are not a unified organisation they are the key subject of investigation, and is therefore analysed as a collective group, although we recognise the diversity and difference between them.

Inclusion of smallholders in sustainable production practices are mentioned by 9 respondents as the main challenge in the palm oil industry. The answers are divided on a broad group of interviewees consisting of the corporations, MSI1, industry expert 1 and 3, and industry organisation 2.

Smallholders are mentioned as important to include as they constitute a significant part of the palm oil production. At the same time“… smallholder certification is also a huge challenge in Colombia because there are at least 6,000 to 7,000 smallholders” (MSI2).

Smallholder inclusion is generally seen as an important factor. Based on the data collection, we have created four sub codes that were highlighted by some or all of the respondents as related to smallholders. In general, many respondents saw the RSPO certification as positive for the smallholders and recognised that certification will bring benefits to the smallholders.

There is a general agreement that price premium is one of the main benefits for smallholders in the transitioning to sustainable palm oil. Out of 17 respondents, 6 highlighted price premium as the main benefit for smallholders becoming certified. In this context, it is relevant to underline that the respondents who have this point of view included both members and non-members of the RSPO.

Price premium is also related to market access, which was emphasised by Industry Organisation 2 “Mainly, better prices, higher prices in the European markets here in the local market, we don’t have a differentiation for being, or not being certificated …” (Industry Organisation 2). This quote underlines the importance of international market access, because of the little recognition sustainable palm oil has in the local market. It also shows that better prices is a main driver and one of the biggest benefits for producers of sustainable palm oil. It also underlines the importance of international markets as there is no or minimal demand for sustainable palm oil in Colombia.

Despite the majority of respondents being in favour of the RSPO certification as a promoter of sustainability only NGO4 highlighted better environmental protection as a benefit for smallholders.

“Often the certification will create higher profits when sowing in a way that produces the most oil…

And they protect the environment better.” (NGO 4 - own translation from Spanish). Here the price premium is mentioned as the main motivator for the smallholder, but this motivation could lead to compliance and thereby better the environmental protection

The analysis shows a limited number of benefits from certification in regards to smallholders. As we have not included any smallholder growers in our data collection, it is possible that the respondents are not aware of all of the positive impacts the certification creates for the smallholders. This also accounts for any negative impact.

It could also be argued that the interviewees mentioned price premiums as they see this as the main benefit, and therefore left out other gains. However, a limited amount of benefits could also explain the low inclusion of smallholders in certifications.

Not all respondents share this opinion of the RSPO certification as positive for smallholders. The non-member NGOs of the RSPO and industry expert 1 perceive smallholder inclusion as undesirable.

This is founded in a general scepticism towards the RSPO and a belief that RSPO is not the solution to sustainable production. One of the main concerns was the distribution of power which favours the dominant actors and not the smallholders nor the communities which is supported by NGO1.

“…our approach and our analysis is that these certification system, systems are blocking a global transition […] Also it’s a corporate-dominated system, so it’s the corporations that have all the power.

The NGOs have very limited power …in the RSPO, and the communities and the workers have extremely limited power in the, in the RSPO. […] I we think that outside of the RSPO we can be much more effective in protecting the rights of communities …” (NGO1)

The loss of control is one of the main critiques. “In the RSPO system, and you have these criteria, at the end, the smallholder does he really control something?” (Industry Expert 1). One of the specific points related to control was the control over land. The power asymmetry can lead to different kinds of loss or takeovers. One of the main issues is the loss of land “what they [certifications] do is actually they strengthen the current industry and the position, the political power of the current industry …

…these industrial plantations, they take up all the land. They have the political power.” (NGO1)

All of these respondents were not present in the Colombian context and mainly drew upon examples from South East Asia and Africa. Still, land tenure is seen as one of the biggest problems in Colombia as well. Therefore it can be assumed that these problems are present in Colombia too which is confirmed. “…it was challenging for all the sectors, but now companies are really, really careful when they are going to get some new land. So, I can say that land grabbing is not a challenge now because companies are really, really careful about that.” (NGO3). This quote underlines that conflicts related to land has diminished after the peace treaty was signed. It also highlights that Colombian companies are more careful after few cases hurt their reputation. Thus, the companies does not want to be associated with land grabbing and are therefore careful to consider land ownership. It can be assumed that this issue is diminishing. However, many farmers are still lacking proof of access to their land. This is a current issue which can be traced back to Colombia’s civil

conflict and is another revenant of these troubled times. These issues are currently being handled, but some regions still experience problems with land tenure and violent groups