Initial Formation & Early Development of an Aquaculture Standards Working Group, known as the Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF)

Final Report
Prepared by:

Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance
CASF / IFQC
P.O. Box 81100, World Exchange Plaza
Ottawa, ON, K1P 1B1

Submitted to:

Aquaculture Management Directorate
Department of Fisheries and Oceans
200 Kent St.
Ottawa, ON, K1A 0E6

March 31, 2009

Table of Contents

• Report Overview
• Project Management
• Initial Meetings and Timelines
• Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF) Toronto Workshop
• Standards and Certification Global Market Report & Glossary
• BCSFA Open Audit Gap Analysis Project
• Option # 1: Assess, Monitor, Influence (Status Quo)
• Option # 2: Initiate GobalGAP Standards Development Programming
• Option # 3: Concurrent with Option # 2, and Determine Possibility of Developing the Proposed ACE’s program
• Option # 4: Immediately Develop an Internationally Accredited “Made-in-BC” Salmon Standard which is Branded
• CASF 2009-2010 Follow Up
• Appendix

Report Overview

In 2008, DFO’s Aquaculture Management Directorate, through the AIMAP program, financially supported the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance (CAIA) initiative to establish an Aquaculture Standards Working Group. The initiative was in response to the Canadian industry’s need to gain a better understanding of the range of options and developments related to standards and certification, as well as the increasing market and social requirements to objectively demonstrate industry sustainability.

The initiative is envisioned as being truly national in scope, character and objective, with positive international overtones and involvements associated with positioning of Canadian aquaculture standard and certification objectives and programs as world class. Furthermore, it is envisioned that the program will be designed to cover the interests of all aquaculture farmed species and growing regions.

The overall objective during the short time-frame from November 2008 to March 2009 was to take initial steps toward establishing processes for the advancement of common understanding, dialogue, and capacity building related to standards, accreditation, and certification. The initial funding support covered the period November 1, 2008 to March 31, 2009. This is a report on activities during this period.

The report will cover the following project deliverable topics:

• Project Management
• Initial Meetings and Timelines (plus Appendices)
• Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF) Toronto Workshop
• Standards and Certification Global Market Report & Glossary
• BCSFA Open Audit Gap Analysis Project   

Project Management

Project Manager: Ruth Salmon, Executive Director, CAIA

Lead Organization: CAIA 
CAIA is a national industry association that represents the Canadian aquaculture operators, feed companies and suppliers, as well as provincial finfish and shellfish aquaculture associations. CAIA is dedicated to facilitating an environment in which the Canadian aquaculture industry can achieve its full potential; toward this aim, CAIA supports all initiatives that strengthen the international competitiveness of the Canadian Aquaculture industry. CAIA also provides effective representation of industry issues with the federal government and services to meet the needs of members.

With broad membership support from all sectors and regions across Canada, and strong relationships with both industry members and government agencies, CAIA is well positioned to take the lead role in this project.

Contracted Subject Experts and Administrative Partner: IFQC Ltd. (IFQC)
IFQC is a leading, dedicated Seafood Certification and Inspection and Standards Services Provider. IFQC is accredited by INAB to ISO 65 / EN45011. INAB are members of the International Accreditation Forum (IAF), which ensures that IFQC accreditation is recognized in over 40 countries. As a leading seafood certification body, the Company is uniquely placed with insights into the leading standards throughout the world.

Initial Meetings and Timelines

Upon project approval, CAIA enlisted the experienced standards and certification support services and dedicated involvement of IFQC. Officials from CAIA, IFQC and DFO took the opportunity to meet to discuss the project objectives in Edinburgh, Scotland on November 12, 2008 (following an international salmon aquaculture meeting). Ultimately, it was agreed that an expanded and representative industry and Government group would meet in Ottawa on December 8, 2008, to conduct a detailed process design, planning and issues/agenda development meeting. It was agreed this group would serve as a project management team.

Consequently, a Project Management Team (PMT) was identified and tasked with governance oversight and guidance to help CAIA shape and manage the ongoing effort. Detailed Terms of reference were prepared and the PMT met for the first time in Ottawa on December 8, 2008. Note: Following the December 2008 meeting, this project and initiative is referred to as the Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF). PMT Membership and initial Meeting Notes are attached to this submission as Appendix A and B, respectively.

The PMT made two major recommendations:

1. next step for CASF development would be a Toronto-based industry workshop in February 2009;
2. effective and ongoing communications must become a CASF priority.

  
Appendix B (December 2008 Meeting Notes) provides an effective overview of some of the events and activities leading up to this project. For example, it is very important to note important Canadian industry standard and certification projects immediately prior to December 2008. In particular:

• BCSFA members embarked upon a detailed review of standards and certification issues and options during 2008. This included a strategic gap analysis process at the farm/industry level conducted by IFQC’s experienced audit team using proprietary audit tool frameworks.
• CAIA / BCSFA have been directly participating in and closely following international standard development initiatives such as the WWF Salmon Dialogues and Global Aquaculture Alliance (GAA) program development.

Other relevant initiatives include:

• Aboriginal Aquaculture Association efforts to create a unique First Nations standard;
• Cooke Aquaculture’s concentrated efforts toward standard and certification adoptions through 2008;
• DFO leading the development and legitimization of Canadian organic standards for aquaculture;
• emergence of a significant generic Mussel marketing program in Atlantic Canada which would have strong potential and natural fit for future standard and certification programming (though there were no mussel standard/certification activities in 2008).

Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF) Toronto Workshop

A successful CASF workshop was held on February 22 and 25, 2008, with strong and diverse industry, Government and market-based representation. An effective workshop agenda included the following diverse set of subject expert speakers:

• Peter Redmond, Epiphany Group (former Wal-Mart USA, V.P Seafood and Director of Sustainability);
• Jamey Smith, Director, Certification & Sustainability Reporting, , DFO
• Peter Marshall, IFQC, Managing Director
• David Smith, Vice President for Retail Strategy, Sobeys Inc.
• Mary Smith, Director of Marketing, The Plitt Company (Chicago)
• Katherine Bostick, Sr. Program Officer, Aquaculture – WWF
• Dave Garforth, IFQC, Technical Director
• Dr. Petter Arnesen, Marine Harvest

These speakers confirmed the importance of achieving and maintaining appropriate certification. There was a strong consensus among speakers that these marketplace demands are here to stay.

It was hoped that the February 2009 workshop would solidify Canadian industry support and direction, and that expectation was met. In fact, the workshop was very successful in attracting many key company representatives from all major species groups, i.e., salmon, mussels, oysters, char and trout. In particular, industry views, expectations and desires were explored and expressed through sector break-out discussions featuring the shellfish and finfish representatives in attendance. The session considered whether or how the shellfish and finfish sectors would constructively move forward. The strong Canadian industry representation at this meeting confirms that producers are increasingly becoming more aware of the need to understand and become more active in certification processes (of the approximately 60 delegates attending the workshop, over half were leading company representatives). The following outcomes were achieved:

The BCSFA members confirmed their continuing commitment to maintain their salmon standards and certification working group. The BCSFA initiative is reported upon separately and at length below. On the east coast, Cooke Aquaculture remains very committed to their corporate standards and certification initiative. There is no discussion or apparent need of an east-west salmon working group at this time, although CAIA/CASF remains committed to reaching out to the smaller east coast producers.    

There was also a definitive outcome and expression of interest from a highly representative shellfish industry group at the workshop. Specifically, the Mussel members expressed a strong desire to mobilize efforts down a programmatic path which includes preparation and development toward standard and certification. Furthermore, there was a general view that such programming, including the development of relevant Canadian mussel standards, should be applicable on the east and west coasts. The shellfish session also resulted in the nomination of a representative Working Group – with east and west coast membership - that would function as an advisory team for the next phases of development on mussels. Furthermore, it was also indicated that this Working Group should also double as the team responsible for Oysters. And, on that topic, there was a strong expression of interest to move toward standards and certification programming for Oysters.    

The shellfish members also wished to include a gap analysis process similar to that conducted by IFQC for the BCSFA members. In such a process IFQC auditors would conduct trial audits of the operations of interested harvesters and processors. This culminates in a totally confidential gap analysis report which advises the farmer or processor of their current level of preparedness to meet the requirements of specific standards. The written reports and follow–up presentation allows the company to develop high levels of understanding and comfort levels as they determine what measures they have to improve upon to meet the standard, should they wish to do so. General industry and specific company needs will be identified and discussed through the gap analysis program, with particular focus for the shellfish sector on food safety, traceability, environmental monitoring/impacts, seed supply, and product quality standards.

With respect to the gap analysis efforts, CAIA has identified technical knowledge and skills gaps related to global standards and certification program development and execution. An overriding objective of the CASF program is to reduce and eliminate these essential knowledge gaps so that Canadian industry proceeds as quickly as possible to full readiness for standards and certification program adoption. To that end, CAIA/CASF will work closely with internationally experienced and qualified consultants in the area of aquaculture standards and certification programs, as it develops next steps to assist the interested sectors move forward. This is particularly important for the shellfish sector where, unlike the salmon sector, there are fewer international standard references.  

There were also trout and arctic char producers in attendance at the Toronto workshop. While they are smaller in size and number, it is clear they are also interested in advancing toward standard and certification programming. Their feedback was less evident at the workshop, but they directly transmitted their interest to CAIA following the workshop. Furthermore, like salmon and shellfish, they expressed their interest in learning more - including becoming more knowledgeable regarding the gap analysis approach. In particular, the trout and char producers are interested in learning more about their best future options.

In terms of general workshop outcomes, the list of agreed upon potential next steps may be summarized as follows:

1. Continuing high level of communication and accessibility of standards and certification information/knowledge to Canadian Industry through CASF;                                                
2. Strong continuing movement toward standards and certification programming in salmon:
   
   
   • BCSFA members Working Group follow up and review of recent specific recommendations;
   • Cooke Aquaculture (continuing corporate programs).                                                          
3. Toward Pan-Canadian sector program developments in:
   
   
   • Mussels
   • Oysters
   • Freshwater (trout/char)
   • General programming next steps
     • Working groups
     • Gap analysis
     • Sector development/awareness.

Standards and Certification Global Market Report & Glossary

As part of CASF’s commitment to communication and ensuring accessibility of standards and certification information and knowledge to Canadian Industry, CAIA/CASF remains on target for delivery of a high level discussion document during 2009. As proposed, this relates to the identified need to build up common language and understanding for all stakeholders. Furthermore, the significant level of industry participation at the February 2009 Workshop indicates that there is a strong interest in this subject matter and that the publication of a Canadian oriented Report will be timely and well received. In fact, the Report will require additional thought and consideration given the recent strong expressions of interest from the shellfish and freshwater sectors. As scheduled, a first draft of this document will be presented to CASF for review in Spring 2009, with a view to publishing a final document by mid-2009.

BCSFA Open Audit Gap Analysis Project   

In August 2008, IFQC produced a report for the BCSFA entitled: Preliminary Report: Standards and Certification. Their Role and Industry Options with Specific Emphasis on Sustainability Criteria. That report provided a high-level assessment of the level of preparedness for the BC salmon farming industry to meet the potential demands of emerging international certification programs.

The preliminary findings indicated that all BCSFA members are well-placed for the adoption of existing aquaculture standards, with a general operating environment considered to meet best practice on the key indicators. A staged developmental approach was recommended for effective understanding, communication, planning, and, if advisable, implementation of relevant standard(s) and certification programs.

In follow-up, and under the auspices of this project, BCSFA invited IFQC to conduct a more in-depth review of its members’ operations. The intention was to provide the companies with private, individualized recommendations regarding their options and relative ability to adopt various standards. This was described as a “gap analysis” exercise estimating organizational preparedness for the adoption of known Standards. One-day, marine site audits were conducted by an experienced IFQC auditor in January 2009. To assist with gap analysis, IFQC utilized a proprietary open-audit tool and scoring system to capture and illustrate company ‘audit performance’ as a means of generating useful feedback. The audit findings were compared against known aquaculture Standards, international reference documents, and guides of interest or applicability to aquaculture with specific reference to sustainability. Finally, IFQC communicated the findings and associated recommendations to the individual companies through written reports, face-to-face meetings, and presentation overviews.

Aquaculture Standards and references reflected in the open-audit criteria included; Global GAP Salmonid Standard, Certified Quality Eco-Salmon Standard Program, European based Organic Standards, ISO 14000 Standard, FAO Technical Guidelines to Certification, SA 8000 Social Accountability Standard, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting criteria and WWF Salmon Dialogue references.  Other more general references included Global Aquaculture Alliance Best Aquaculture Practice Standards (shrimp/catfish in the absence of salmonid standards), BC Regulations for environmental compliance, fish health and fish farm licensing and some global references such as UN Biosphere Reserves and Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, 1971.
 
Drawing upon globally accepted sustainability criteria, IFQC also developed a set of basic Principles for the BCSFA open audit program. These Principles were constructed from common understanding of drivers of ‘sustainability’ within aquaculture and other primary resource sectors, and they form the basis for development of audit criteria. It must be pointed out, however, there was per se no direct measurement of Economic dimensions. Instead, IFQC focused on a more relevant (critical) and practical set of quality performance measurements. Therefore, the audit focused upon ‘quality and best practices’ including: fish health; product quality; welfare; husbandry; and, food safety. 

It was also pointed out that common Social and Economic criteria are generally absent from the entire range of Aquaculture Standards on offer to date. This becomes a limiting factor for BCSFA companies who intend to highlight and demonstrate their commitment and success in these vital and tightly linked matters. The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) was discussed as a rapidly emerging generic framework and communication tool for social and economic evaluation for all business types and as a method of objective verification. GRI sets out principles and indicators that organizations can use to measure and report their economic, environmental, and social performance.

The Gap Analysis reports indicated that the BC salmon farming industry is exceptionally well prepared to meet the demands of all conventional, internationally recognized salmon aquaculture standards. General suggestions for areas of improvement, e.g., tightening of certain procedures or documentation, were made to each company, but there are no significant issues of concern.

The reports were necessarily and intentionally proprietary, but the style of feedback to the companies was substantive and, wherever possible, presented in visually and organizationally appealing ways. In addition to usual organized Tables and Chart, IFQC relayed company positioning relative to local and global benchmarks using the proprietary audit/scoring system. For example, Environmental, Quality, and Social License Performance of the various companies were both discussed and demonstrated visually. As an example of visual presentation, the following types of graphs were utilized as part of the Gap Analysis feedback (See Table 1, 2 and 3).

Having confirmed internal preparedness, external factors were discussed as considerations when the companies decide upon “next steps” toward standard and certification choices. For example, discussions revolved around two broad external categories of concern - Markets and Provincial relations. On the market side, at this point in North America the pros and cons of choosing one salmon aquaculture standard over another are equal. There is no standards front runner and unless selling into a specialized and demanding market, e.g., WholeFoods with its highly restrictive standard, companies should have latitude with whatever standard(s) is chosen in the short to medium term.

Given the emerging situation in Chile, it is highly recognized that strong market demand for BC product will continue for the next three years, with limited pressure from retailers to require certification considering the scarce supply situation. Other market factors discussed, for example, are whether the companies are interested demonstrating their achievements on Business-to-Business or on a Consumer Facing basis. For example, Global GAP provides visuality of achievement on a Business-to-Business basis only, e.g., Global GAP logo on stationary or shipping materials. Global GAP does not provide Consumer Facing logos, e.g., retail product logo. On the other hand, GAA (when it comes on stream for salmon), aggressively promote their consumer-facing Best Aquaculture Practices (BAP) logo. These are the types of considerations that must be evaluated in relation to corporate strategy.

The analysis of the operating environment in BC led to discussions regarding challenges related to certain public perceptions and, in some cases, community acceptance. Whether the perceptions are justified or not is (largely) irrelevant; it would appear to be a reality that must be managed. This reality, and the objective role for standards and certification programs to help address it, was articulated in the Final Report and Recommendations by the BC Pacific Salmon Forum (January 2009). The Forum has encouraged Governments to support such programming with the belief that, “Third party certification will reassure the public that both the commercial and farmed salmon sectors are meeting rigorous environmental standards and complying with regulations.”

In terms of future standard development possibilities, the potential for the Aboriginal Certification of Environmental Sustainability (ACE’s) program was also considered. While ACE’s is an independent initiative and not yet an established offering, it remains a compelling possibility with potential to positively impact industry stability and growth.

In terms of possible routes forward, four possible options - not in any way, shape or form the only possible options - were discussed at length. These options appeared to represent best case options. It is important to note that these recommendations were made in consideration of the appropriateness and availability of existing and accredited salmon aquaculture standards. For example, both the GAA and WWF have the possibility of finalizing draft salmon standards within the next 12 months, but in both cases these will be non-accredited standards. As for WWF, it is quite unclear what group or body will be charged with administering the program – by their own estimates, those processes will take at least 18-24 months, or more. The GAA will have their own issues related to development and accreditation. It is felt unlikely they will have an ISO 65 accredited standard for at least 18-24 months. For various unknown and associated risk factors, GAA and WWF did not factor highly in immediate recommendations.

The four possible options that were discussed with the BCSFA members (understanding that individual reports varied) were:

Option # 1: Assess, Monitor, Influence (Status Quo)

Continue to assess national and international standard and certification developments while keeping future options open. Continue dialogue with Retailers, GAA and WWF, and develop  industry wide sustainability reporting drawing on GRI framework and signal to BC public that industry is very interested and aggressively assessing the Pacific Salmon Forum recommendation regarding Third Party Certification.     

Option # 2: Initiate GobalGAP Standards Development Programming

Adopt and Implement GlobalGAP standard on an industry-wide basis while keeping future options open. Promote specific standard choice to Retailers, but continue dialogue with Retailers, GAA and WWF, and develop  industry wide sustainability reporting drawing on GRI framework and signal to BC public that industry is very interested and aggressively assessing the Pacific Salmon Forum recommendation regarding Third Party Certification.        

Option # 3: Concurrent with Option # 2, and Determine Possibility of Developing the Proposed ACE’s program 

Same as Option # 2, except addition of support for possible pilot project to develop an operational framework for the proposed ACE’s program. At this point, it is unclear how long it would take to transform the proposed ACE’s framework into a workable standard.  

Option # 4: Immediately Develop an Internationally Accredited “Made-in-BC” Salmon Standard which is Branded

Draw upon the existing, accredited and salmon aquaculture specific CQS standard frameworks to quickly create and implement a world-class, made-in-BC salmon aquaculture standard. Announce to BC public that industry agrees with - and is immediately following - the Pacific Salmon Forum recommendation regarding Third Party Certification. Indicate that due to uniqueness of BC social and physical environment that - in addition to establishing an internationally accepted standard - a made-in-BC approach is preferable. Participate in, monitor and, as necessary, influence GAA and WWF standards developments. Promote BC standards choices to Retailers and promote BC standards choices and developments to BC people.  

Finally, the reports and presentations to the BCSFA companies assessed the pros and cons of these options. Ultimately, as intended, the companies have been provided thorough Gap Analysis feedback and been engaged in thought-provoking discussions regarding the merits of possible standard and certification program options.

CASF 2009-2010 Follow Up

Based on the preliminary November 2008-March 2009 program, CAIA is very encouraged that the CASF is meeting intended goals. Future CASF projects must continue to be aimed at creating a constructive and knowledgeable environment which facilitates standard and certification program development and addresses emerging opportunities for advancement for the Canadian aquaculture industry. Based on feedback and outcomes, especially direct industry feedback at the February 2009 workshop, multiple projects may be advisable related to standards and certification development and capacity building across key aquaculture sectors, e.g., salmon, mussels, oysters, freshwater, and marine species.

Future initiatives should reflect stated and emerging needs and concerns of CAIA members - and the Canadian industry at large - across complementary pillars:

1. A supportive CASF Communications Strategy aimed at informing and supporting industry and CASF objectives, particularly standards and certification awareness and acceptance by targeted groups; and,
2. Standard and certification development and capacity building initiatives across established and emerging aquaculture species, e.g. more definitive program direction for salmon and mussels, and primary exploration and developmental activities for Freshwater, Oysters, and Marine Species.

Specific 2009-2010 activities may include:

1. Various CASF Communication initiatives, e.g., Market Report, Website, Newsletter, possibly GRI training through CASF, etc.
2. Strong continuing movement toward standards and certification programming in salmon, including BCSFA members Working Group follow up meetings to further discuss/decide upon options, further discussion to determine how or if the East Coast salmon industry may require assistance.                                                          
3. A comprehensive programmatic approach for Mussel sector on a pan-Canadian basis to include Gap Analysis, Working Group, and possible development of a Canadian standard.  
4. Exploratory efforts toward education, awareness, gap analysis, and program development for: Oysters, Freshwater (trout/char), and possibly (for completeness) marine species.

Appendix

Project Management Team Meeting Notes (December 8, 2009)

MEETING NOTES

CANADIAN AQUACULTURE STANDARDS FORUM
Project Management Team
Inaugural Meeting Agenda
8th December 2008
 Delta Ottawa

Opening Comments

The meeting was officially opened at approximately 9:30 AM by Ruth Salmon (Chair), CAIA Executive Director. Ms. Salmon suggested that because the marketplace has not been demanding certification of aquaculture products, to date the Canadian aquaculture industry has not been focused on certification. As a result the aquaculture sector is likely behind the Canadian wild fisheries in general understanding, advancement and management of emerging standards and certification programs related to sustainability, quality and other measurement characteristics.

Meanwhile, she noted growing interest across the CAIA membership to learn and prepare more effectively, especially since the issues were specifically discussed at the Ottawa Workshop hosted by DFO in May 2008. That workshop revealed highly uneven, but predominantly low, levels of understanding and a general lack of capacity across industry related to these emerging issues. The need to become better informed has also been expressed by leading retailers who admit similar low levels of understanding. Furthermore, Ms. Salmon noted DFO’s view of the growing importance of standards and certification initiatives, as well as its commitment to assist industry prepare for and, where appropriate, adopt them.

In follow up to the May 2008 workshop, and with encouragement and support from DFO, CAIA explored ways and means to promote discussion and understanding of these issues. Ms. Salmon noted that this project – Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum (CASF) – was a direct result of that exploratory process. As well, CAIA’s follow-up efforts included discussion and development of a working relationship with IFQC Ltd., a certification body with a long, diverse history in global standards and certification issues. It was indicated that IFQC was engaged by CAIA to provide support services directly to CAIA and the CASF for the purposes of this project. More information below regarding IFQC background, plus see PowerPoint presentation from December 8th meeting (soon to be posted on CAIA’s website).

Comment on Style of Meeting Notes

It was agreed that IFQC would be responsible for providing Meeting Notes for CASF meetings. In this regard, the style of reporting will be general in scope, not verbatim. Furthermore, there will be a significant focus in meeting notes on tracking and recording issues discussed, as opposed to providing attribution to those individuals that either raise or comment on those issues. This does not preclude frequent use of individual attribution where appropriate, especially where new or significant matters of concern are voiced.

ISSUES

Reflecting on the Opening comments, Brian Meaney noted a remarkable preoccupation on matters related to “sustainability” amongst attendees at the recent major seafood show in China. In particular, for the first time ever, virtually all Chinese and Japanese buyers were asking questions related “What is the sustainability of your fish?” He cited this as evidence of a strong global trend and he confirmed his Province’s support for CAIA’s initiative.

Importantly, Mr. Meaney explained that the timing of this CAIA initiative was also excellent from a Federal / Provincial perspective. Standards and Certification have been cited as a definite emerging issue of concern at the provincial and federal Ministerial level for the past two years.

Among Government questions and concerns are:

• What is the role of Government in Research and Science related to sustainability? [Some team member commented that Government has a very important role to play, such as review and commentary of technical papers produced by industry and others.]
• What Government supports does industry require related to markets, certification, etc.? In terms of building industry-government linkages, it was noted that Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers (CCFAM) has struck a Fisheries and Aquaculture Certification Working Group with a representative from each province. It was agreed this CCFAM group should provide natural linkages with CASF.
• How does Government facilitate progress on a sustainable basis? [On a practical basis – related to effective Standards adherence, especially fish health – it was noted that a major problem that Government’s can assist with is more timely Introductions and Transfers. Good Standards will demand a responsive Regulatory system. Mr. Meaney responded that an Atlantic Provinces accord should ameliorate such concerns.]  
• Governments do not want this country to fall behind on Standards and Certification, especially on an international comparative basis. Canada, it was noted, has fallen from world’s 3rd largest seafood supplier to “30-something place.” This is a critical industry threat, especially for the seafood producing Provinces, and it would be dangerous to loose additional competitive ground related to these issues, e.g., sustainability, etc.      
• It was cited as a general concern that a given country could tip the scales of trade by picking a Standards “winner,” thereby creating potential non-tarriff trade barriers for companies. It was agreed that preparing for a standards-based environment seems prudent.       

With growing significance and discrete projects underway in some Provinces, Mr. Meaney suggested that there is major interest at the Ministerial level in hearing Industry issues and concerns. Furthermore, he suggested that it may be appropriate for CAIA to make a presentation to the CCFAM at their September 2009 meeting. Meanwhile, Mr. Meaney has agreed to provide linkages between CASF members and his CCFAM counterparts.

DFO’s Perspective on the CASF Initiative  

The various opening comments were reinforced by Trevor Swerdfager’s views. Like Ruth Salmon, he expressed concern that progress made by wild fisheries in eco-certification, e.g., mainly MSC, may be taken as a proxy across Government for similar progress in aquaculture. He stated that this is not the case, but points to trends and developments in fisheries and food safety as particular warning signs of the drift and certainty of regulatory and international trade trends toward increasing use of standards and certification methods. In this regard, he feels it is timely and incumbent upon the Canadian aquaculture industry to take advantage of the CASF platform to ensure it takes this opportunity to prepare for these future demands. Mr. Swerdfager indicated that it would be his Department’s vision that 3 years from now Canadian aquaculture producers would have full knowledge of Standards options. Furthermore, that producers will be positioned to state that they “are certified to an internationally recognized standard appropriate to their market requirements.” His view is there may be a select group of desirable standards in the future and that, through the CAFS process, Canadian producers will fully understand and be positioned to attain such Standards when and if necessary. While he fully agrees there may not be national consistency any time soon, he supports the concept of an umbrella of key principles that might apply across the country (discussed below).

General Discussions (Presentations)

As anticipated by the Meeting Agenda, following the opening comments and discussions IFQC advanced discussions with two overhead presentations. Mike Rose {IFQC Canada] provided detailed overview of the proposed Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum project. As well, he provided a description of IFQC’s corporate history and specialization related to standards and certification. Dave Garforth [IFQC Europe] followed with a broad over view of Aquaculture Standards and Certification from a Global Perspective, as well as a discussion regarding Terminology, i.e., technical jargon related to standards and certification. Copies of both presentations may be found online, or are available upon request.

Both presentations intended to generate discussion regarding basic questions such as: Why a Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum?; What is Canadian Aquaculture Standards Forum?; How will it Work?, etc. It was acknowledged that industry is challenged and perplexed by the range of options and developments related to standards and certification.

It was proposed that the CASF would promote common and shared understandings of existing and emerging aquaculture standards and certification processes. Interestingly, Linda Sams made the direct comment that there are low levels of understanding around the country. Furthermore, there are quite likely common misunderstandings with people not drawing distinctions between concepts such as Regulations, Best Practices, Standards, Codes, etc. Therefore, there is a great need basic education regarding clarity of language and general knowledge levels.

It was also generally agreed that CASF will help industry prepare for a competitive market environment which features numerous interoperable standards and certification options. These processes would, for example, help guarantee long-term marketability of Canadian aquaculture products by meeting supply chain requirements with respect to quality and sustainable sourcing standards.

However, it was also stressed that these efforts and processes can go deeper than obvious market acceptance. Mary Ellen Walling pointed out that while the BCSFA supports the concept of supply chain protection, their support for the CASF process is as much - or more – related to the ability of these processes to assist their companies and industry demonstrate and maintain their continuing efforts as responsible coastal citizens, i.e., social license.

Ms. Walling expanded upon the importance of social licence by indicating that her association and members have strong interest and support for the proposed First Nations sustainability program known as “Aboriginal Certification of Environmental Sustainability in Aquaculture program” (ACES). That program has been spearheaded by the Aboriginal Aquaculture Association (AAA), so it also was an opportunity for Richard Harry to comment. He noted the ACE’s program would be a method for the Canadian industry to shape positive stories for the marketplace. It would be a program which requires industry operating within First Nation territories to objectively demonstrate their commitment to environmental stewardship. Additionally, he noted that Per Grieg (owner of Grieg Seafoods) recently visited BC and noted that some products are getting 20% more in Europe through effective certification programming. However, Mr. Harry expressed serious concern that the benefits of such a program do not appear to have been recognized since the idea has not – as yet - been picked up and promoted for use by industry and Governments.   

There were discussions regarding the possibility that the CASF could also help shape the ‘sustainability agenda’ as defined by retailers, Government, ENGOs, communities and others. For example, in past years attempts to establish National Codes for aquaculture was not successful; among other reasons, that approach did not adequately recognize or provide regional flexibility. Ruth Salmon noted a range of preparedness across the country and she stated – and all agreed - it would be inadvisable and inappropriate to establish a cookie-cutter approach from East to West in Canada. However, it was uniformly agreed that it would be beneficial for CAIA to establish a baseline of information so industry knows what it is talking about. 

Further to these points, it was agreed that the Project Management Team would initiate efforts to determine if a set of broad Principles could be established to govern CASF’s approach toward Standards and Certification. Ideally, such Principles would be National in scope and provide positive umbrella statements which describe directions and commitment that industry, Government’s and other stakeholders can support.       

Another topic of discussion was the possible formation of Working Group to carry out specific project activities of the CASF. There was a lengthy discussion and opinions were initially mixed on the possible division of working groups, i.e., whether by species, by region or nationally? However, as the discussion unfolded there seemed to be a consensus that national, high-level working groups might be most appropriate: Finfish, Shellfish, and Freshwater. It was also discussed that the Project Management Team shouldn’t dictate direction at this early stage, but that these would be effective discussion points as the CASF process matures.

Current Canadian Initiatives (General Discussion)

There was a brief update regarding relevant projects across Canada. This commenced with comments from Mary Ellen Walling (BCSFA) who highlighted her and her association activities. Generally, as a means to prepare for the possibility that certification may be an appropriate strategy, BCSFA members have embarked upon a detailed review of standards and certification issues and options. This includes gap analysis activities at the farm level and Mary Ellen has been directly participating in and closely following international standard development initiatives such as the WWF Salmon Dialogues and Global Aquaculture Alliance (GAA) program development.

Richard Harry – see earlier comments - provided further commentary regarding the proposed ACE’s program. While the ACE’s concept is not new, there is currently renewed interest and a formal development proposal is currently being prepared.
 
Bev Bacon is an independent consultant who has been working very closely with Cooke Aquaculture as they have analyzed their standard and certification program options through 2008. He noted that this has been a very significant commitment and undertaking by the company; and, the project wouldn’t have happened without full management support.         

Trevor Swerdfager indicated that DFO’s Aquaculture Management Directorate is supporting clarification of Regulations that will enable the legitimization of Canadian organic standards for aquaculture. Industry drafted a standard in 2005 which will form the basis of a new standard; a consultant has been engaged to review the 2005 version and bring it up to date with the assistance of an industry working group. Once that is done, the draft will be submitted to the Canadian General Standards Board where it will be voted on by industry participants and other interested stakeholders. The expectation is that the first meeting of the CGSB to discuss the standard would be held in early March. At some point there will be an open “Public Comment” process and Trevor said that CAIA will be kept abreast of these developments by his department.

Brian Fortune acknowledged the potential applicability and natural fit of these kinds of program for mussels, particularly organic or eco-oriented. There are no active mussel standard or certification programs in place, but a significant generic marketing program is under consideration in Atlantic Canada.     

Project Management Team Discussion

Detailed Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Project Management Team were presented for discussion. It was explained that this was meant to introduce the level formality associated with certain “accredited” standard development and certification processes. This was accompanied by general discussions regarding the importance of documentation, balance and impartiality of associated with the general approach.

While not much time was spent on the TOR, and there were no signatories to it, there was an important discussion regarding the proposed Confidentiality Agreement. It was agreed that CASF is a process that must be fully transparent with virtually all comments discussed at CASF open and available to the public. It was indicated that the process is largely supported by Government dollars and, consequently, there is an expectation that information will flow freely. It was conceded, and agreed, that private information may be discussed in committee from time to time, e.g., company information, and if that is the case the Chair may request a declaration of confidentiality on a case by case basis only. These changes – and others related to readability and transparency - will be reflected in revised TOR which will be reviewed by the Project Management Team.

Project Management Team Membership: It was agreed the purpose of the Project Management Team was project management only. It is constituted based upon project management experience to help CAIA shape and manage the CASF project. It is not, for example, meant to be a representative group assembled for their constituency feedback on issues of public policy. From an industry perspective, however, it was pointed out that the Project Management Team may wish to consider representation from Freshwater; CAIA will revisit this question before the next Project Management team meeting. Generally, there was a fruitful discussion concerning the eventual membership make-up of CASF, including working groups.

NEXT STEPS

February 2009 Workshop
It was agreed that the next step for CASF development will be an industry workshop in February 2009. Specifically, Toronto was identified as the best location for East and West travellers (one or two connecting flights in and out for most.) Furthermore, it would be advantageous for an airport hotel to be chosen as the meeting place.

After some extensive discussion, it was agreed the February workshop may best be characterized as a follow up to DFO’s May 2008 workshop regarding standards and certification. In that regard, CAIA will use the invitation list for that workshop as the basis for the invitation list for the February 2009 workshop. This is believed to be a complete list and - given the relatively short organizational timeframe – provides a natural, practical starting point.

As noted earlier in these notes, there will be no effort to identify CASF Working Groups in advance of the February meeting. Neither will there be any attempt to identify potential working group members, though it is hoped that potential candidates will be present in February.

Two immediate and key industry related groups that must also be included (if not already part of the May 2008 invitee list) are: feed companies and retailers. CAIA will issue an invitation to key representatives from these groups.   

Efforts will be made to include relevant ENGO involvement in the February 2009 workshop. Specifically, it is noted that the leading global ENGO in these matters is the WWF. With that in mind, CAIA will contact Katherine Bostick (Senior Program Officer, USA) about the possibility of sending a speaker to provide an update on the WWF Salmon Dialogue. It may be possible for Ms. Bostick to recommend Mr. Jay Richlan (Suzuki Foundation) as their designated speaker.   

Other possible speakers and topics for the February 2009 include:

• Peter Redmond (former Wal-Mart, USA, Executive and sustainability advocate)
• “Standards and Certification 101”
• Global Aquaculture Alliance programs (George Chamberlain, President)
• Patrick Moore (certification background – forestry sector)
• Avrim Lazar, President & CEO, Forest Products Association of Canada. Forestry experience with certification.
• DFAIT - George Murphy (US) or Richard Stead (EU)
• CEO Panel to discuss relative importance, etc.
• About the CASF: “What it is … What it isn’t!”
• CASF Working Groups: What are they? East and West, or National / By Species? 
• Presentation of “Common Canadian Principles” (as proposed by CASF Project Management Team)  
• “How ISO Works?” (Trevor indicated that ISO is a complicated organization and process. This may be a good topic for a presentation at some point in the future. In particular, we might learn from it how best to participate or relate to ISO activities.

CAIA will coordinate development of the proposed February 2009 workshop, with assistance from IFQC and, where requested, Project Management Team members.

CASF Workplan and Communication

A date for the next formal Project Management Team meeting was not established. In any case, it will not occur until sometime after the February workshop. There was clear discussion, however, that it will be a priority for the CASF project to establish a definite Workplan and associated Communication strategy. This will be a priority item for the Project Management Team. It is expected that the shape and form of the Workplan will be influenced by feedback gathered at the February workshop. 

The Workplan, for example, might include: drafting / agreement of National Principles for Sustainable Aquaculture; Canadian-oriented Standards & Certification Market Report; Glossary of Terms Document; Creation and Management of Working Groups; Facilitation of regional, national or international projects. Effective communications will be vital for such a Workplan to succeed for the mutual benefit of industry, governments and key stakeholders.