New Variance Request Process Increasing Stakeholder Input Goes Live
ASC’s new Variance Requests (VR) process, which gives greater opportunity for stakeholders such as local communities and NGOs to contribute to decisions on local variances to ASC standards, has now gone live.
The new process for VRs to ASC standards also requires that decisions about requests involve a technical analysis. Variance Requests are a vital part of any credible global certification programme. They provide the necessary means to adapt a global standard to specific local conditions without lowering requirements.
As of December 15 2020 the new process must be used by Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs) – the independent, third-party bodies which carry out audits against the ASC standards. The new process was published in October to give CABs and other stakeholders the opportunity to familiarise themselves with it. Another new process, for variance requests made to ASC’s Certification and Accreditation Requirements (CAR) is also live from the same date, and CABs have been given guidance documents and training to support the transition.
New Online Platform
An online VR Platform is also now live. It allows CABs or any interested stakeholders to easily search previous variance requests and questions asked against different aspects of the ASC standards, and filter these by a number of categories including topic, standard, and country.
One of the most significant changes to the process is the inclusion of stakeholder consultation – including proactively notifying relevant stakeholders of a VR so they can provide feedback based on their relevant knowledge or experience. This addition was itself based on stakeholder feedback which ASC sought as it developed the new process, and it means that NGOs or local community groups can have their say on any proposed variances to the standard.
Consistent and Inclusive
The new process for VRs to ASC standards allows variances to be requested in a way that is consistent, inclusive, and requires that all decisions are the result of a technical analysis. This analysis will be carried out taking into account stakeholder input, and will be presented to the VR Committee, made up of independent members of the ASC’s Technical Advisory Group with additional independent oversight.
The addition to the process of strict and defined timelines should also improve the process for CABs and ensure decisions that are timely as well as evidence-based. In line with ASC’s commitment to transparency, all decisions and the reasoning and analysis behind them will be published, along with all evidence and feedback submitted in the process.
These decisions, published in a consistent way, will also make clear if or how variances might be applicable to other situations, improving consistency in future requests. Stakeholders can also now contact ASC at any time about variance requests, which can be re-assessed by ASC if new evidence or information is provided which makes this necessary.
Certification and Accreditation Requirements
Variance requests made to the ASC’s CAR are also now live. Whereas ASC standards set out the requirements that must be met by farms to be certified, the CAR is a document that sets out requirements for the independent Conformity Assessment Bodies. It provides requirements on how standards should be applied, and ensures that all CABs operate in a consistent manner.
Just as with the ASC standards, the CAR is applied in widely varying circumstances all over the world and as a result sometimes variances will be required, but as a different document the updated process for variance requests to the CAR is slightly different.
Unlike variance requests to the ASC standards, variances requested to the CAR are more related to the certification processes implemented by the CABs and has limited connection to the practices of the Unit of Certification. Therefore, they do not need to include the stakeholder consultation in the VR review process.
Variance Requests are so important to the effective running of a global certification programme that they are required of all members of ISEAL – the member organisation for the world’s most credible certification schemes. Importantly, they do not allow farms or auditors to weaken standards, but are intended to allow the ASC’s robust requirements to be applied in diverse situations, which cannot all be prescribed in one global standard.