Just as the 2020 Certification Program is designed to promote continuous improvement by farmers and supply chain actors, the Rainforest Alliance is also committed to doing the same with our work. In practice this means that as we roll out the new program, we continue to engage in dialogue with our partners to make the standard even more practical and flexible to different contexts. Every piece of feedback we receive helps us make the program better.
To date, various stakeholder meetings coupled with feedback from early implementers in the field and other feedback have allowed us to identify adjustments we can make to program documents in order to clarify and specify the requirements. This has been used as a basis for publishing version 1.1 of the program. Please find these adjustments below:
Farm Requirements
Chapter 1. Management
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| In requirement 1.2.5 Worker registration guidance was removed. A reference to Annex S.13, Group member registry is integrated. | This shortens the requirement and provides a template. |
| Language changes to requirement 1.2.12 on geolocation data are aimed at improving the understanding of expectations related to group management. | The requirement remains the same in essence, but there is more clarity on what is expected from group management about geolocation data (% of polygons). |
| A Guidance document has been added to requirement 1.5.1 Grievance mechanism. | This Guidance Document for Grievance mechanism was added to provide stakeholders clarity on how to implement it. |
Chapter 4. Farming
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Changes to requirement 4.4.4, provide clarity that organic fertilizers produced in the farm should be applied when available and possible. Also, that mineral nutrition can be supported by the application of chemical synthetic fertilizers when needed. The Guidance document: Soil matrix was renamed to ‘’soil fertility and conservation’’. | The requirement stated that all producers had to apply organic fertilizer, and only after other types. The aim of the requirement as written now is clearer: To have a balanced nutrition (organic and synthetic) in order to improve soil and plant health. |
| For requirement 4.5.3, language changes aim to provide clarity on the concept of threshold level of pest and diseases and its relationship with the application of different types of pest control methods. | Before, the requirement gave the impression that producers could use any type of control (biological, mechanical etc) until threshold levels were reached. Now it states that alternative methods (biological, mechanical, cultural) should be used before threshold levels are reached. Chemical methods should be used only after threshold level are reached. |
| Language is added to requirement 4.6.1 regarding chemical substances used for livestock and pets. | Clarification that chemical substances used for livestock or pets are not included in the scope of the standard. |
| Requirement 4.7.2 now statesthat test for Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) are not mandatory for producers. | It should now be clear for both Certificate Holder and Certification Bodies That MRL test are not mandatory for producers. |
Chapter 5. Social
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Requirement 5.3 is now linked to the A&A monitoring guidance tool. | It should now be clear to producers that this guidance is available to them. |
| There is new language indicating specific requirements that labor providers need to comply with, in requirements 5.3, 5.3.10 and 5.5. | The requirement now explicitly states requirements 5.3 and 5.5 need to be complied with (requirements on wages and contracts and working conditions). Requirement 5.3.10 now explicitly stipulates that labor providers working with small farms can’t be engaged in fraudulent or coercive recruitment practices. |
| Indicators for requirement 5.4 have been reformatted to better illustrate the living wage data required from certificate holders and match with the Salary Matrix Tool. | New formulation clarifies that this requirement excludes workers on small farms. |
| Indicator 5.5.3 was modified due to inconsistencies with local laws. | Maternity leave must first comply with local laws to avoid women potentially being deprived of social security benefits. In absence of applicable law, the period of a minimum of 12 weeks would apply. |
| Indicator 5.5.4 was modified to clarify the obligation of farmers when children’s workers go to their parents’ workplace. | Previously, the requirement was interpreted in such a way that the farm had to provide facilities for children safety. Children’s safety is priority and facilities could be a means to an end, but the standard leaves other options open that suit local context. |
| Indicator 5.7.1 now includes a line regarding separate beds to avoid individual workers sharing beds. | Correction of an oversight. This line was included in the previous standards and omitted as an oversight in the first version of the 2020 standard. |
| Indicator 5.7.5 now contains specifications for food storage. | This line was added to address this issue as an improvement. |
Chapter 6. Environment
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Indicator 6.3.2 has more extensive langue that indicates the required measures of the riparian buffers around sources of drinking water. | This clarifies the dimension of the additional safeguards for the protection of drinking water. |
| Indicator 6.8.1 has been changed to include “if feasible”. | This clarifies that renewable energy is not mandatory if it is not feasible in a specific context. |
| Guidance Document J: Soil Fertility and conservation has been added to support indicators 6.4.5 and 6.4.6. | The addition will help producers in this area. |
Supply Chain Requirements
Chapter 1. Management
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| In Section 1.2 Administration, a worker registry is included as a requirement when social topics are in scope. | This provides the auditor with more information about workers engaged by CH, which is essential to choosing a representative sample. The Certificate Holders (CH) and Certification Bodies (CB) will therefore have a comprehensive list of workers engaged in the operation. |
| In Section 1.4 Internal Inspection and Self-Assessment, a self-assessment has been included as a requirement. | A self-assessment requirement has been included to highlight difference between internal inspections and self-assessments. Self-assessments need to be completed by all SC CHs, while internal inspections are only applicable to multi-site CHs. |
Chapter 2. Traceability
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Requirement 2.1 was reformulated. | The new language clarifies that selling volume with multiple certifications is allowed, while selling volume twice (double selling) is not. |
| In Section 2.2. Traceability in Online Platform there is a new requirement on verification of purchases for buyers. | This requirement has been included to emphasize that both seller and buyer have a responsibility to keep the traceability platform up to date. |
| In Section 2.2. Traceability in Online Platform, the sector specific approaches to SD/SI implementation requirements were reformulated. | The sector-specific approaches on SD/SI implementation were further worked out. This also needed to be reflected in the Standard requirements. Changes are mainly in formulation while content for implementation is elaborated on in Annex S14. |
Annexes
Annex 1: Glossary
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| In Annex S1: Glossary, definitions were added or modified based on stakeholder feedback. | This allows for improved refinement of terms. Added: Brand owner, Due Diligence, gender sensitive, geographical region, Identity Preserved, labor provider, large farm, location point, market price, Remnant forest trees, renovation, Responsible business conduct, Segregation, Traceability type. Modified: Agrochemicals; agroforestry; Average of ≥ 5 hired workers (Applicable for Small Farms only); Certified; Climate change; Climate change mitigation; Climate-Smart agriculture; compost; Debt bondage (bonded labor); Double selling, farm; farm management, first buyer, Geolocation data Grievance mechanism, Intermediary housing, mass balance, natural forests (combined with previous definition of forest), Non-application zone, pest, Safe drinking water, Service provider, Sustainability Differential (SD) Sustainability Investments (SI), Vegetative barriers. |
Annex 3: Risk Assessment Tool
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| In Annex S3, the Risk Assessment Tool applies to supply chain certification holders with social topics in scope. | The Risk Assessment Tool is used in addition to the Supply Chain Risk Assessment (SCRA) if supply chain certificate holders have social topics in their certificate scope. The tool provides support for implementers as it helps to determine measures to mitigate any identified risks. |
Annex 4: Remediation Protocol
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| The language in Annex 4: Remediation Protocol was modified. | The new language provides greater alignment with the Standard. |
Annex 5: Living income tool and Methodology
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| The methodology document in Annex 5: Living income tool and Methodology was reformulated and separated into a Methodology guide that explains how the Rainforest Alliance arrived at its living wage tool and a User Guide which focuses on step-by-step instructions on how users can fill out the tool. | The changes aim at improving usability for the end user. |
Annex 6: Traceability
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Annex 6 was divided into Annex S6: Traceability and Annex S14: Shared Responsibility. | Having two separate annexes makes it easier for Certificate Holders (CH) and Certification Bodies (CB) to identify relevant content in addition to the traceability and shared responsibility requirements. |
| Annex S6: Traceability was reorganized with more explicit instructions for use of the traceability platform, making it easier to identify relevant content in addition to traceability requirements. In addition, origin matching rules for cocoa were included now that the overall sector approach on origin matching is finalized. | Instructions on how to apply traceability rules are more concrete which allows for improved implementation and verification. |
Annex 7: Pesticide Management
In Annex S7: Pesticide Management, the procedure for the use of the Exceptional Use policy has been adjusted.
Note: the requirements for aerial application of pesticides and the use of drones may still be adjusted based on further research.
Annex 8: Salary Matrix Tool
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| A new tool has been developed for Annex S8, which: groups individuals into job categories prevents the calculated average wage from diverging too greatly from the actual wage of any one employee with extreme values allows changes in staff levels through increased number of seasons uses the locally determined work week when below 48 hours Clearly highlights the data needed for their indicators | The new tool is easier and faster to use for the certificate holder, and it makes calculations more effective. |
Annex 9: Methodology for Measuring Remuneration and Gaps with a Living Wage
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| The methodology in Annex S9 changed, including: further guidance on how to calculate in-kind benefits more clarity on how the bonus can be included guidance on how to better calculate, piece or quota work or when used as a bonus scheme | The changes help the user to use the correct methodology to fill in the annex 8: Salary matrix effectively. |
Annex 10: Living Wage Benchmarks per Country
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Annex S10: Living Wage Benchmarks per Country was updated. | Benchmarks updated to current amounts with new countries added with new data with more clarity on how this is applied in the standard, and how the certificate holder should interpret the calculations. |
Annex 11: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
Annex S11: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) Processes was edited for clarity.
Annex 12: Additional Details on Requirements for No-Conversion
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Annex S12: Additional Details on Requirements for No-Conversion was changed for alignment. | Clearer alignment with the certification rules on conservation and deforestation. |
New Annexes
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Annex S13: Group Member Registry was added. | This Annex was incorporated as it is now compulsory for all group management certificate holders to use this format. |
| Annex S14: Shared Responsibility was added. | This Annex was added with a clear outline per sector of the approach to implementation of Sustainability Differential/Sustainability Investment (SD/SI). While the SD/SI requirements in the Standard are generic in their formulation, the content of Annex 14 outlines how the requirements are to be interpreted per sector and role of the Supply Chain Certificate Holder. Instructions on how to apply SD/SI requirements are more concrete which allows for improved implementation and verification. |
| Annex S15: Details on Off-site Conservation of Natural Vegetation was added. | This new annex is related to the requirement on natural vegetation cover 6.2.3, 6.2.4 and 6.2.6. The Annex indicates the details that a certificate holder must consider when having off-site conservation of natural vegetation. |
| Annex S16: Sustainability Investment Template was added. | As the Standard requires farm CHs to develop an investment plan, Annex S16 is providing farm CHs with a template to facilitate the development of that plan. |
Assurance Documents – Rules for Certification Bodies
Chapter 1. Rules for Authorizing Certification Bodies
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| There have been minor changes to several rules in Chapter 1. Rules for Authorizing Certification Bodies of the Rules for Certification Bodies. | Some rules were changed for precision and to prevent misunderstandings and inconsistencies. |
| The rules on Competence Management of the Certification Body now include a witness assessment of each auditor at least every two years. | The competence management of the Certification Body did not include the requirement to have the auditors assessed through a witness assessment as well. |
| Under the rules for Ethical Certification to Prevent Fraud and Corruption, now it is stated that the Rainforest Alliance reserves the right to exclude any CH or any personnel from a CB that engaged in fraud or corruption. | The chapter did not sufficiently indicate the consequences for engaging in fraud or corruption, so the addition provides more clarity on the consequences. |
Chapter 2. Rule for Certification Body Personnel
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| Section 2.1 now includes a definition of CB personnel. | A definition will help the scheme manager to better understand what sort of staff is expected to be involved in certification activities. |
| Section 2.1 now includes a definition of external training providers, under internal training requirements. | A definition will help the scheme manager to better understand the sort of external training providers that can be hired. |
| Section 2.1 under internal training requirements now includes requirements for external training providers. | There was a request for CB monitoring to provide requirements for external service providers to regulate them and ensure a minimum level of competency. Scheme managers and CB instructors will be able to know which external training providers can be hired based on their credentials and compliance with the requirements. |
| Section 2.2 Personnel Approval Requirements introduces the possibility to meet training requirements for Certifier and CB instructor through Certified ISO 14001:2015. | This addresses CB concerns about the difficulties of meeting the ISO training requirement during COVID. The introduction of this ISO training provides CB with more opportunities to meet the training requirements for Certifier and CB instructor. ISO 14001 specifies the requirements for an environmental management system that an organization can use to enhance its environmental performance. |
| Section 2.2 now lists other ISO partners besides IRCA to facilitate compliance to meet ISO certified training requirements for Certifier and CB instructor. | This addresses CB concerns about the economic constrains and difficulties of meeting the ISO training requirements for Certifiers and CB instructors, and gives CBs more opportunities to choose from among a greater number of ISO accredited agencies for the one that best suits their needs. |
| Section 2.2 makes training requirements clearer by indicating who may design and deliver internal training for CB personnel: CB instructors or external training providers. | This addresses CB concerns about the economic constraints and difficulties of meeting training requirements for all staff, specially lead auditors, due to high rotation of staff. By providing the option of CB instructors or external training providers to develop internal training to train Lead Auditors, Auditors and Trainees, Scheme Managers have more flexibility and opportunities to train their personnel without increasing their costs exponentially. |
| In Section 2.2 Experience in Rainforest Alliance 2017 or UTZ is considered to meet field experience requirements for the Audit Team. | CBs raised concerns about previous experience in Current Programs not being considered, which would reduce the number of auditors authorized to conduct certification activities. Experience in Current Certification programs is considered as valid to ensure a stable auditor supply. |
| The role of Translator is removed from the document to reduce administration processes. | Registering Translators in the RACP might have caused unnecessary administrative burden especially given the fact that some are only hired once. Scheme Managers will not have to spend time registering translators hired during audits. The translator’s name in the audit report will suffice. |
| The role of Lead auditor for social topics is included for social topics in high-risk audits, as it is required in audits that meet the conditions described in Annex AR4: Auditing Social Topics of the 2020 Rainforest Alliance Auditing Rules. | Including a lead auditor for social topics in high-risk audits was done to harmonize the Auditing rules and Rules for CB personnel. Scheme Managers will be able to register their compliance with Annex AR4 in the Certifying Bodies management tool. |
| Taken out the 4-year education minimum to allow for more people to join the program in Section 2.2. | In some countries post-high school education is less than 4 years, making it difficult for Certifying Body staff to be able to comply to the requirements set in the document. This would reduce the number of approved auditors. More auditors can meet the education requirements and thus CB may have a more stable auditor pool. |
| Changed education requirements for Trainee from college to high school in Section 2.2. | Trainee education requirements might have been too high to reflect the reality on the ground. A trainee is considered a junior staff member who has just begun their career in assurance. Thus, asking for a college degree would limit the amount of people eligible for trainee approval. More auditors can meet the education requirements and thus CB may have a more stable auditor pool. |
| Training courses referred to in the requirements in section 2.2 may be held face-to-face or online. This is also explicitly mentioned in point 2.3 of Chapter 2: Rules for Certification Body personnel. | Due to COVID-19 CB are now allowed to meet their training requirements through online training More CB personnel can meet the education requirements and thus CBs may have more stable personnel pool. |
| If a duration is not stated, training courses shall have a minimum duration of 40 hours according to point 2.4 in Chapter 2. | The Rainforest Alliance aims to work with competent assurance professionals who are knowledgeable about the diverse subject of an audit process. Training is a big part of making staff competent. Adding a minimum hour reference to basic courses aims to ensure a minimum quality level of training delivery. CB personnel will increase their chances of receiving quality training on basic assurance topics. |
| Membership of the CB Training program is now explicitly mentioned in point 2.1 of Chapter 2. CB personnel meeting the requirements described in this document for their corresponding roles and scope shall become members of the Rainforest Alliance CB Training program and will have access to its training offer. | CB training is based on the idea of continuous improvement, Automatic membership to the CB training program grants staff access to the different training opportunities offered by the Rainforest Alliance. CB personnel once approved can access training material and register to training offered by the Rainforest Alliance. |
| Rainforest Alliance reserves the right to request CB personnel to follow specific training. This is now mentioned in point 2.2 of Chapter 2. | CB might ask specific personnel to follow mandatory training courses depending on their role or scope to ensure a minimum level of understanding of the 2020 certification. CB personnel will receive training from the Rainforest Alliance to ensure that they have the minimum knowledge and understanding of the 2020 certification program and thus carry certification activities efficiently. |
| Introduction of control point 2.1.1. The new CB structure shall consist at minimum of a scheme manager, certifier, database administrator, lead auditor, and CB instructor. | The assurance system consists of a series of processes, requirements and activities that are to be carried out by different CB personnel. To ensure there is sufficient capacity in each Certification Body to implement the Assurance system, these roles have to be established and filled. CBs will be able to implement the assurance system with sufficient capacity. |
| Introduction of control point 2.1.2 where all CB Personnel roles may be carried out by hired workers, independent contractors, and consultants provided they meet the requirements set for the corresponding role and scope. | Small certification bodies had raised concerns about not having sufficient in-house capacity to implement the assurance system. By allowing outsourced staff to support the certification activities small certification bodies might will be able to implement the 2020 Rainforest Alliance Certification program. Certification Bodies might hire external staff to increase their auditing capacity and to implement the 2020 certification program. |
| Introduction of control point 2.1.3, which states that all CB personnel involved shall be assigned to one or more roles. Previously it was a maximum of three roles. | Small CB had raised concerns about not having sufficient in-house capacity to implement the assurance system. CB personnel might carry a diversity of roles to increase their auditing capacity. |
| Introduction of control point 2.1.5 a new requirement that all CB Audit Team and Certifiers shall meet at least once a year (virtually or physically) to carry out calibration activities or sessions. | This is an ISEAL requirement. CB personnel will have the opportunity to calibrate over the Rainforest Alliance certification program topics to have a standardized understanding and approach. |
| Introduction of control point 2.1.4, a new requirement that the program management team shall have a procedure in place to assess auditors’ performance and competence at least on an annual basis. | This is an ISEAL requirement. The procedure allows CBs to demonstrate that their auditors comply with the requirements outlined in this document. And identify areas of improvement |
Certification and Auditing Rules
Chapter 1. Certification Rules
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made and how do they benefit the certificate holders and certification bodies? |
| In section 1.1 of the Certification Rules, the List of crops was finalized and clarified. | There were decisions outstanding on the crops vegetables and oil palm, and some clarifications needed for herbs and spices. |
| In section 1.2, farm certification options change: No restrictions in types of farms (large or small) to form a group. New certification options are: Group: more than one farm without common ownership (IMS requirements applicable) Single farm: one farm Multi-farm: more than one farm owned or rented by one entity and managed centrally (IMS requirements not applicable) | To avoid confusion related to the certification options multi-group and mixed group, they were all combined into the option group. |
| In section 1.2, it is clarified that a multi-farm only applies when two or more farms are owned or rented by one entity. | Now that large farms can form a group, there needs to be a clear distinction between them. |
| In section 1.2, the restrictions for large farms to be part of a group or even for a group were reduced, although sampling rules are stricter. | If implementation is done well and assurance is thorough, there is no need for restrictions. |
| In section 1.2, the maximum amount of group members allowed in one group was removed. | If implementation is done well and assurance is thorough, there is no need for restrictions. |
| In section 1.2, the regions for allowing Multi-Site certification were adjusted. | To create clarity on the regions, and which countries fall in which regions. |
| In section 1.4 the steps of the certification process and some timelines have been adjusted. | This will make the process smoother. |
| In section 1.4 a table with timelines of the certification process has been added. | To create clarity and an overview on timelines. |
| In section 1.5, the obligation for all surveillance audits to be unannounced has been removed. | This will make audit planning more manageable for CBs. |
| In section 1.5, it is clarified that for farm CHs, surveillance audits shall take place during the harvest in cases of: Crops that have (barely) no workers outside of the harvest CH that have a high risk of nonconformities on social topics | This improves assurance on social requirements. |
| In section 1.7 it is clarified that no sell-off is allowed in case of cancellation or non-certification. | This helps safeguard the credibility of the certification program. |
Chapter 2. Auditing Rules
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made and how do they benefit the certificate holders and certification bodies? |
| In section 2.1 of the Auditing Rules, there is a new rule requiring the CBs to keep record of auditors’ working hours. | This will help to facilitate fair payment of overtime from CBs to its auditors. Auditors will be more likely to have better conditions to perform quality audits. |
| In section 2.1 of the Auditing Rules, it is established that requirements on auditing shifts are applicable to farm audits only. | Based on feedback from CBs that auditing all shifts on different days are not feasible for SC audits this will allow the auditing process at SC CHs to be more manageable for both CB and CH. |
| In different sections of the Certification and Auditing Rules, the timelines for different steps in the auditing process are adjusted. | Based on feedback from CBs and the Rainforest Alliance analysis to find a better-balanced approach. The auditing process will be easier to manage for CBs and CHs. |
| In Section 2.3 of the Auditing Rules, requirements on performing an audit risk assessment are now applicable to only farm audits. | Based on feedback from CBs that auditing all shifts on different days are not feasible for SC audits. Auditing process at SC CHs will be more manageable for both CB/CH. |
| ln Section 2.4 of the Auditing Rules, more detailed on sampling for multi-site supply chain audits are added. | Based on feedback from CBs that auditing all shifts on different days are not feasible for supply chain audits. CB and SC CH can estimate audit duration/costs more easily. |
| In Section 2.4 of the Auditing Rules, the number of large farms in a group CH to be included in a farm audit is increased from 33% to 40% | This will give more assurance that risks at large farms in a group are identified and addressed through the certification process. CHs will be more likely to reduce risks in its certification scope and CB will have more time to help CH identify and reduce risks. |
| In Section 2.5, the requirements for calculating duration in farm audits now exclude transition period audits | Based on feedback from CBs that this formula needs further testing, CBs and CHs will have a field-tested approach from the full certification cycle. |
| In section 2.5, minimum audit duration is added for SC audits. | Based on feedback from CBs that this should be further clarified, so that CBs and CHs can more easily estimate audit duration and audit costs. |
Annex
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made and how do they benefit the certificate holders and certification bodies? |
| In Annex AR3 of the Auditing Rules, the number of interviews and worker file reviews are updated to make the sample size representative while reducing audit time in some cases. | Based on feedback from CB and analysis of the Rainforest Alliance to set more realistic sample sizes, which could in many cases reduce audit costs for CHs. |
Transition Rules
The Transition Rules version 1.1 will be published shortly. The Transition Tool will be updated after that. Some key changes are included in this new version, as follows:
Transition Rules
| What are the most important changes? | Why were they made? |
| In General, the Transition Rules are now also applicable to oil palm vegetables herbs and spices under certain conditions | This is done to better integrate decisions made on these sectors and the collaboration with the Union for Ethical BioTrade (UEBT) and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO). |
| In General, the document was split into two main chapters: Chapter 1 for CHs with farming in scope, and Chapter 2 for CHs without farming in scope. There are example annexes for each chapter. The Executive Summary and the Transition Rules for Certification Bodies are the same for both types of certification. | The split should make it easier for a CH to find the rules applicable to them. Although the document has become longer in total, a smaller and better defined part of it is relevant for each CH. |
| Regarding the Entry into force of Rainforest Alliance 2020 Standard Requirements, certificate holders shall be compliant with the 2020 Standard requirements as of the date they sign the certification agreement with the Certification Body or start purchasing new RA volumes, whichever comes first. This date is always after July 1, 2021. | To give certificate holders more time to implement the new standard. Version 1 asked for compliance as of July 1, 2021. The new version extends this to the moment the certificate holder signs a certification agreement or starts purchasing new RA volumes. |
| Regarding the Entry into force of Rainforest Alliance 2020 Standard Requirements, it is clarified that SD/SI requirements are not applicable to legacy volumes, but current UTZ/Rainforest Alliance premium requirements are. | This clarifies the traceability requirements for legacy volumes. |
| Regarding the Entry into force of Rainforest Alliance 2020 Standard Requirements a graph explaining transition period in audit and certification cycles was added. | This clarifies audit and certification cycles. |
| Regarding the Entry into force of Rainforest Alliance 2020 Standard Requirements, it is now clarified that new Rainforest Alliance volumes may stem from UEBT-certified operations. | This reflects the collaboration between UEBT and the Rainforest Alliance. |
| In Last audits against the current Rainforest Alliance Certification Program Farm certificate holders who have: Certified their 2020 harvest already A certificate expiring/surveillance audit due in the first half of 2021 Harvest starting in the second half of 2021 may obtain an extension so that they can directly transition 3 months before/after the start of the harvest of their main crop. | Making extensions available to current Rainforest Alliance certificate holders to avoid the need to have two audits for the same harvest, as they are moving on the new audit cycle of 3 months before/after the start of the harvest. Certificate holders catching up on their 2020 audits may still need to undergo 2 audits in 2021. |
| In Last verifications against the current UTZ and Rainforest Alliance certification programs: certificate holders: who do not have farming in scope, and who have a valid certificate and who have an audit deadline between July 1, 2021 and June 30, 2022 may receive an extension to their current certificates/annual audit deadlines of up to 6 months to allow them more time to conduct Transition Period Audits. | This is done to ensure that Certification Bodies and the Rainforest Alliance have enough capacity to handle the number of audits/license requests in the first months of the transition, as well as to ensure more time for supply chain certificate holders to implement the new standard and undergo audits. |
| In Transition Period Endorsements, the timeline for endorsements has changed. Transition Period Endorsements will start being issued October 2021 at the earliest and may be issued until December 31, 2022. | The timeline was postponed in alignment with the audit and certification timeline, and other changes for the transition of certificate holders without farming in scope. |
| In Certification Transition Rules (for Supply Chain CHs), CHs now have until the expiry date of their license/certificate/endorsement or deadline for their annual audit to obtain a Transition Certificate. | This should help ensure more time for supply chain certificate holders to implement the new standard and undergo audits without limiting their ability to trade new Rainforest Alliance volumes. |
| In Transition Period Audits for transitioning supply chain CHs, the rule to have a transition period audit within 4 months of purchasing certified volume has been waived. The rule still applies to CHs with gaps in certification or newly registering CHs. | This can help ensure more time for transitioning supply chain certificate holders to implement the new standard and undergo audits without limiting their ability to trade new Rainforest Alliance volumes. |
| In Transition Period Audits, the open non-conformities rule was removed. | Open non-conformities mean different things in the current programs, the rules are now clearer. |
| In Transition Period Audits for Farm Certificate Holders, it was clarified that carry-over volume will be received as new Rainforest Alliance volumes, so certificate holders with farming in scope do not need to continue managing their current UTZ and current Rainforest Alliance accounts. | Simplification of the process for farm CHs. |
| In Activities and transactions, certificate holders that buy certified volumes from other CHs may start trading new Rainforest Alliance volumes if they have a valid certificate/license in the current UTZ and/or current Rainforest Alliance certification programs, even before obtaining a Transition Certificate. | To ensure a smoother transition and avoid any bottlenecks in the supply chain of new Rainforest Alliance volumes, in case farm certificate holders and the retailer are certified but an actor in their supply chain is not. |
| In Activities and transactions, it is clarified under what conditions legacy and new Rainforest Alliance volumes may be physically mixed. | Clarification |
| In Transition Rules for Certification Bodies, there are updated rules on unannounced/surprise audits. | To find a balance between assurance and cost, based on feedback from Certification Bodies. |
| In Transition Rules for Certification Bodies, the rules for current CBs have changed to ensure CHs have key documents of last current audits and that CH upload these in the RACP to prepare for a transition period audit. | Based on feedback from certification bodies and thorough analysis of the technical feasibility of other solutions, CHs providing this data was found to be the most feasible option for ensuring the auditing CBs have all the necessary information from the last audits to be able to prepare for the Transition Period Audit. To solve the issue of CHs sometimes not having this information, we ask CBs to ensure they have shared these documents with their clients before a certain deadline. CB transfer rules will of course be much smoother and clearer once we all transition to the same program. |
| In Transition Rules for Certification Bodies, there are updated rules around the timelines of cancelling current UTZ/Rainforest Alliance certificates in line with the changes and updated timelines above. | Alignment with other changes. |
Version 1.1 of the Rainforest Alliance 2020 Certification Program is now online.
