Why is M&E of the 2020 Certification Program important?
As a member of the ISEAL Alliance, we need to demonstrate how we will measure and improve the results of our certification program to ensure that we are contributing to the desired impact (See: ISEAL Impacts Code of Good Practice). In short, this comes down to describing our Theory of Change, which includes the intended sustainability outcomes and impacts of the standard, and the strategies that contribute to these outcomes (causal pathways). In addition to the Theory of Change, we need to describe the indicators that we use to measure the intended outcomes and impacts.
Apart from complying with the ISEAL code, we use this Theory of Change and the corresponding indicators as a framework for our own internal M&E on the certification program, and to communicate to external stakeholders about our program impacts.
Theory of Change for the 2020 Certification Program
The Theory of Change presents the results chain logic for the 2020 certification program including the following stages of cause-and-effect logic:
Outputs and short-term outcomes: The main program components and interventions.
Intermediate outcomes: The intended direct outcomes of program interventions, including practice adoption by certificate holders and market actors.
Long-term outcomes: Changes in agronomic, environmental, and social performance on the ground, as well as changes in management systems of farms, farm groups, and supply chain actors.
Impacts: The long-term, large-scale changes that the program intends to deliver. These correspond to RA’s mission.
This Theory of Change reflects the key features of the Reimagining Certification approach:
Continuous improvement: The requirements of the standard are formulated to help drive continuous improvement in sustainability performance by certificate holders via a mix of mandatory core criteria (pass/fail), mandatory stepwise improvement criteria, and voluntary improvement criteria.
Contextualization of requirements and auditing processes: Compared to our previous standard, the 2020 standard is more contextualized (based on risk maps), whereby not all criteria apply everywhere. This also allows the design and intensity of audits to be adapted based on risk level. The program includes new data-driven assessment processes for determining risk level.
Assess & Address: A due diligence approach to key human rights issues (e.g., child labor and forced labor), which emphasizes building and strengthening internal management systems of farms and groups to identify and remedy human rights violations.
Building in better monitoring: Certificate holders and auditors will be required to track certain indicators of practice adoption and farm- and group-level performance to assess progress on continuous improvement topics. Part of this is the “Smart Meter” feature, which is intended to furnish data that adds value and improves decision-making for both producers and market actors in the program, as well as for M&E purposes.
Digitalization: Many key processes (certification, group management, traceability, transactions) have become more digitalized, which generates new opportunities to further integrate M&E, assurance, and adaptive management functions.
Shared responsibility: Whereas the previous standards focused mostly on producers, the 2020 supply chain standard stipulates new responsibilities for buyers, such as paying a sustainability differential (SD) and making (traceable) sustainability investments (SI) in their supply chain. The goal of this approach is to distribute the costs and benefits of sustainability improvements more equitably across the value chain.
The Theory of Change also describes the complementary strategies that strengthen the enabling environment, contributing to the overall impact.
Indicator Framework for the 2020 Certification Program
The Excel file linked below provides a list of indicators that RA uses to monitor the outputs and outcomes of the certification program. This list differentiates between the indicators measured for all participants in the certification program (Level 1) and the indicators measured for a sample of participants, for instance as part of specific research studies (Level 2 and 3). Some of these indicators are already being monitored in the current certification programs (particularly reach indicators); some are planned to be monitored as the 2020 certification program is fully rolled out (smart meters and other standard indicators); and some are mostly aspirational at this point.
The indicator list also includes some unintended effects that can influence the outcomes of the standard in a positive or negative way. These unintended effects need to be monitored to assess whether the certification program is not having any negative unintended effects on the farmers, workers, families, communities or nature.