Minutes

56th Meeting of the Expert Panel on Social, Environmental and Economic Performance of Cotton Production – SEEP

Saturday, 2 December 2023 9:00 am IST

In person and Virtual – Teams

 

Members:

Allan Williams, Australia

Leon Picon, Turkey

Ching Tang Huang, Taiwan

Alan McClay, BCI

 

            Observers:

Kater Hake, USA

Belinda Edmonds, African Cotton Foundation

Alexandra Perschau, CmiA/AbTF

Marzia Lanfranchi, Textile Exchange

Saleena Pookunju, BCI

Jyoti Narain Kapoor, BCI

Peush Narang, Cotton Council International

Will Bettendorf, Cotton Council International

Ron Nickell, Calcot ltd

Patrick Packnett, USDA

Wolfgang Bertenbreiter, CmiA/AbTF

Ronald Franz Quispe, FAO

Sandhya Kranthi, Consultant

Jean Pierre Guinko, Burkina Faso

Suresh Kotak, India

 

ICAC Secretariat:

Eric Trachtenberg, Executive Director

Lorena Ruiz, Economist

Keshav Kranthi, Chief Scientist

Parkhi Vats, Commodity Trade Analyst

 

  1. Introduction and Adoption of the Agenda

The meeting began with introductions from all participants. Attendees included experts and representatives from various sectors, representing diverse backgrounds and organizations related to cotton farming and agriculture.

  1. Report on Regenerative Agriculture

Allan Williams, Chair of the SEEP Panel, opened with a brief introduction and explained the aim of Dr. Kater Hake’s report on regenerative agriculture. He clarified that the report’s objectives were to describe practices that could be considered regenerative and to analyse their feasibility for implementation. He noted that the report does not seek to define ‘regenerative agriculture’ per se, as there are already several existing definitions, and emphasized that the term extends beyond just cotton. The chair highlighted that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss key messages for the upcoming ICAC Plenary Meeting and to deliberate on the next steps for further developing the report.

Dr. Kater Hake presented an overview of the report, leading to a detailed discussion about the complexities of regenerative agriculture, including its diverse definitions and the challenge of translating high-level principles into practical farming methods. The report assesses 22 regenerative agriculture practices across 12 farming systems, considering factors such:

  • cover crops,
  • crop rotation,
  • intercropping,
  • integrated silviculture,
  • no-till or zero-till,
  • minimum till,
  • water use efficiency high or improving,
  • water pollutants contained,
  • manure application,
  • livestock grazing,
  • safe work,
  • human rights,
  • continuous improvement
  • no synthetic fertilizer,
  • no herbicides,
  • no insecticides and acaricides,
  • no fungicides,
  • no nematicides,
  • no bactericides,
  • no Plant Growth Regulators and Harvest Aids,
  • no GMOs with herbicide tolerance, and
  • no GMOs with insect tolerance.

Discussion and Points Raised

The members were encouraged to share their thoughts on how to move the document forward, including any missing elements or areas that needed further detail or explanation.

  • Implications and Risks of Regenerative Practices: The role of the supply chain in demanding these practices, the implementation and unintended risks was a focal point of debate.
  • Understanding Practical Achievability: The group identified a significant gap in understanding the feasibility of regenerative practices for growers, considering both their practicality and long-term environmental benefits. This gap underlines the need for a more realistic assessment of what can be achieved in different agricultural contexts.
  • Communication and Alignment with Supply Chain Demands: The importance of fostering effective communication and mutual understanding among all stakeholders was emphasized. This is crucial for aligning the demands of the supply chain with the actual capabilities and specific needs of various regions and farming systems. The discussion also included understanding the practical aspects of implementing regenerative practices and acknowledging their potential risks.
  • Concerns about Regenerative Practices Implementation: Participants expressed concerns regarding the risks of implementing regenerative practices, especially the burden these practices might place on farmers. The discussion highlighted the need for clear, practical, and farmer-centric recommendations to guide the adoption of these practices.
  • Challenge of Multiple Definitions: The participants discussed the difficulty arising from the various definitions of regenerative agriculture. They acknowledged the need for a unified understanding, considering the wide diversity of farming practices and conditions around the world. 
  • Changing Mindsets Towards Tillage: The meeting addressed the challenge of changing the mindset of smallholding farmers towards tillage, especially in regions like India and Africa. The group discussed strategies to promote the adoption of zero or minimum tillage, aligning with regenerative agriculture practices. Dr. Hake proposed using successful advertising campaigns, such as the “FARM UGLY” program from the U.S. Employing biochar from cotton stalks was also discussed as an alternative practice to improve acidic soils.
  • SEEP’s Role in Regenerative Agriculture: The participants discussed SEEP’s pivotal role in defining regenerative agriculture within the cotton industry. This includes establishing universal principles and reaching a consensus on the goals of regenerative agriculture. A key aspect of this role involves developing standardized methods for measurement of the impacts of adopting regenerative practices, and ensuring a focus on outcomes impact. By adopting this unified approach, SEEP aims to enhance the clarity and effectiveness of implementing regenerative agriculture practices across different cotton-producing regions.
  • Government Policies: The discussion included plans for an instrumental approach that would influence government policies to establish a level playing field for all stakeholders. This strategy aims to set clear objectives at various levels, which would help in reducing duplication and wastage. Additionally, it was noted that such an approach would assist in aligning efforts towards a common direction, focusing on sustainability and combating climate change.

 

Next Steps:

  1. There was a consensus on the need for more comprehensive analysis of different definitions of regenerative agriculture. The importance of building upon the work done by other organizations in this field was also emphasized.
  2. It was suggested to use the document that links the indicators identified by the Textile Exchange to the 22 regenerative agriculture practices assessed in the SEEP draft report.
  3. It was decided that the draft report will be shared with all SEEP members and observers who were in attendance at the meeting. This ensures that everyone has access to the information and can contribute to future discussions and revisions.
  4. The draft report currently lacks a description of the next steps. To address this, participants were requested to provide feedback on what they believe these next steps should be. All participants are encouraged to submit their suggestions in writing. The chair will then review these suggestions with the panel to determine a collective course of action. Participants should send their comments to lorena@icac.org for inclusion in this discussion.
  5. Kater Hake requested participants to contribute additio nal references on Regenerative Agriculture frameworks/standards and peer review articles on Regenerative Agriculture practices pertinent to cotton by sending them to kater.hake@gmail.com
  6. Acknowledging that SEEP meetings and documents are primarily conducted in English, the chair highlighted the need for collaboration and to bring French-speaking countries into the discussion. It was announced that the ICAC will facilitate this by translating the final draft report into both Spanish and French, thereby broadening the accessibility and inclusivity of the discussions and findings.
  7. The panel has not yet defined a strategy for how the document will be socialized and disseminated further. This remains an area for future development.

 

 Other matters

Allan Williams expressed sincere gratitude to all members and observers for their active participation and valuable contributions during the meeting. He emphasized that this meeting was just the beginning of an ongoing series of discussions focused on Regenerative Agriculture. The meeting was officially adjourned at 10:30 am India Standard Time (IST).

 

ATTACHMENT 1: SEEP DRAFT ON REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE PRACTICES

ATTACHMENT 2: SEEP RA Frameworks & Standards

ATTACHMENT 3: SUMMARY TABLE