Suggested PGS Documents

Meeting Dec. 9, 2009
Suggested PGS Documents that are needed to form PGS:

These documents are correlated to the IFOAM PGS Self Evaluation Questionnaire form by question #'s
Click here to download/see the PGS Self-Evaluation Tool form
PGS Self Evaluation Tool in English

Given that

Each individual farm will be certified under the PGS, the PGS needs to have info about each farm on file. Office would be the DOAM office for record keeping.

PGS Producers are the primary decision makers.

Shared Vision
Questions:  # 1, 2, 6    mostly already created in the Standards IFOAM  (DOAM Draft Standards)  # 25

Documented Management Systems  #7  (the forms in the section make up #7)
(* = priority to do first)
*General farm/farmer information: #8/13a/13b/13f Profile (some info already collected from DOAM Market Study)
*Producer oath/pledge: #9
*On site review form: #10/13c
Attendance List for meetings: #13d
Farm Certificate: #13e/34
Outline of Certification process: #15
Certified producer list /member list: #16

Horizonality
Review  mechanisms for procedures /policies: #18  (ongoing)
Appropriate context of some information (cultural) #19  (ongoing)

Non-Compliance
Consequences for non-compliance: #26
Management System for non-compliance: #27  (circumstances for honor system); #29 (ongoing DOAM Training); #30 (DOAM Ag Tech help)

Mechanisms for Supporting Producers
Conflict of interest: #31 =Mechanism to avoid conflict of interest during farmer inspection

Seals and Labels
Seal /label/logos: #32/33
Farmer Certificate (same as Doc Management Systems #5):  #34

Funding:
At present the PGS would be self funding under DOAM and include education, training and operational tech help.   #35
Future funding sources? Fees?

The rest of the #'s do not need forms but are answerable from the above documentation:  4/5/11/12/17/20/21/22/23/24/28

Additional agreed upon statements:

The market system would be separate from the PGS but could be the same people as grows.
Collectively: buying and selling would be the ideal.

Additional Mechanism that would need to be in place:
new intake farmer would have to have planted under the PGS time:  Time would include planting, production and harvesting.

Question:  How to handle a transitional farmer produce and membership in PGS? Do we guide through management committees.



Additional ideas/questions:
PGS is built upon individual TRUST and INFORMATION SHARING
1-2 page info on what can use and cannot use/or at least of list of non-use
length of certification/inspection review
non compliance penalty/consequences/fines/suspension of use
Record keeping form simplification: Vanessa is suppose to bring up a DOAM farm/farmer data form that makes record keeping easy.  


PLEASE COMMENT and ADD IDEAS/ SUGGESTIONS

FYI: For review/questions/critique and comments

IFOAM PGS Self Evaluation form

http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/PGSSelfevaluation.html

click on side column

PDF-Downloads
	PGS Self-Evaluation Questionnaire

IFOAM lists questions in the following questionnaire categories:

Shared vision and agreed upon norms

Procedures to verify producer' compliance and understanding

when is a producer eligible for membership, verification procedure and contract/basic stipulations.

Documented management systems

Horizontality - producers as primary decision makers

communication network

Consumer involvement

Systems for managing non-compliance

Mechanisms for supporting producers

Seals and labels

Questions on the sustainability of pgs programme- i.e. ongoing funding and producer membership costs

Here is an interesting article that explains Participatory Network Certification and compares it to Participatory Guarantee System.

http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/pdfs/AlternativeCertificationAndANetworkConformityAssessmentApproach.pdf

It would seem that we would want to include ideas from both Network and Guarantee:

Here's an excerpt from the article:

Network and third-party conformity assessment and controls methods

Third-party certification is based on a third-party‘s assurance that the product, service, system, process

or material conforms with specific requirements. The conformity assessment (i.e. the inspection) is

carried out by an independent certification body. It was recognised that normal third-party organic

certification is too much of a cost burden for small-scale farmers. To accommodate this problem,

smallholder group certification was developed. Whilst such group certifications lower certification costs

for small-scale producers and share some common features with participatory network certification, their

origin, main purpose and practises are different from each other.

Participatory network certification is based on an assurance by a network of people and organisations

involved in the production, distribution and consumption/use of the product/service with co-responsibility

for guaranteeing the quality system. Farmers in a group certification scheme normally have similar

production and centralised marketing. The certificate of a group certification belongs to the group.

Production in a participatory network is normally diverse, and marketing is not always centralised.

Participatory network farmers are certified as individuals, and the certificate belongs to the farmer.

Group certification, based on an internal control system, is mainly used for organic production by

smallholders in low income countries who want to export to markets in high income countries. Income is

believed to be the primary objective of farmers joining a group certification scheme. Participatory

network certification, on the other hand, is based on peer review visits and social control, and is for

domestic marketing for the time being. Participatory network farmers’ objective for organising

themselves include food security and food sovereignty, as well as a fair price.

Group certification schemes focus on the managers and field officers/inspectors to ensure compliance

through the internal control system. Participatory network certifications focus on training everyone

(farmers, workers, consumers) involved in the process of production, distribution and consumption of

organic food. They conduct ‘peer reviews’ instead of inspections. Peer review visits are carried out by

extension workers and farmers that have practical knowledge in organic production and include support

activities. Consumers also take part on the visits and share responsibility for the quality guarantee system.

The certification decision-making is decentralised.

Participatory networks also rely on ‘social conformity’, enhanced through procedures and social

conventions, such as common group purpose, group standards setting, co-responsibility of certification,

membership codes, interaction, interdependence and long term relations. Trust is engendered within the

social construction and processes of the participatory network built over time between all participants

within the network. A trusting relationship, however, does not eliminate opportunities for deliberate

violations, but neither are third party systems 100% fraud free.

DRAFT of PGS Mission/Values/Objectives in Dominica

Submitted DRAFT of the Mission/Values/Objectives for PGS in Dominica:

Please review and post correction/improvement/ comments.

• Mission:

Provide a transparent, credible, verifiable, affordable, farmer-friendly,  local organic certification system for Dominica that unites, supports and encourages new and existing organic farmers and that will be consistent with organic export requirements.

• Values:

Dominican food security based on nutritious, uncontaminated locally grown foods

Long term sustainable health of Dominican environment and people

Fair pay for farm produce

Support Dominican goal of becoming “organic island”

Support farmer members to achieve sufficient returns on labor and a healthy life style

Attract youth into farming

Social justice: fair pay and work conditions for farm workers;

Availability of quality foods for all income levels

Local agricultural and environmental biodiversity

Support farms of all sizes and types that subscribe to DOAM principles

Honesty, trust, mutual helpfulness, cooperation/collaboration

Be farmer driven

• Objectives

Organize 1 or more groups of farmers and their stakeholders, each of which will:

Constitute itself: Consisting (eventually) of at least 2? 3? Farmers and such stakeholders as consumers, hucksters, markets, value-added producers (including restaurants), youth/potential farmers

Establish verification procedures sufficient to assure compliance with DOAM standards and that are minimally invasive/time consuming for farmer

Support its members to achieve compliance and satisfactory (to farmer) production and life style

Objectives of this dialogue include

Facilitate the development of local markets for organically produced foodstuffs, building on Participatory Guarantee Systems as a credible and affordable method of organic quality assurance.

• Reduce the burden of bureaucratic paperwork and administrative processes on consumer-farmers’ groups starting local markets based on Participatory Guarantee Systems.

• Encourage diverse production by avoiding a strong focus on cash crop monocultures, fostering and safeguarding local agro-biodiversity.

• Bolster peer-support approaches between farmers, by organizing themselves within a Participatory Guarantee System, to achieve food security and food sovereignty, as well as a fair price.

• Encourage public awareness of local agriculture and facilitate access to urban markets for local/regional farmers.

• Revitalize the inclusion of social justice norms and practices as an essential part of organic production systems.

http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/English-PGS-Publ.html

IFOAM PGS Leaflet

http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/standards/pgs/pdfs/IFOAM_PGS_Leaflet_Final_new.pdf