Meat+Poultry - June 2018 - 92

FROM THE CORRAL

What SUSTAINABILITY is - and isn't
When asked what sustainability is,
it is sometimes difficult to define.
If you are in charge of overseeing a
supply chain, you need to ensure that
anything unsustainable is kept out of
your supply chain. Everybody now
has a video camera in their pocket
and a video of something bad can
instantly go viral.
There are three major components
of sustainability:
Environmentally
sound practices
Social responsibility
(including animal welfare)
Economic viability
(each member of the supply chain
has to be able to make a living)
This definition or a very similar
one is on many sustainability
websites. Sometimes there are
tradeoffs between the three
components of sustainability that
can lead to debates about different
practices. An example is the current
debate facing the poultry industry
about transitioning to slower-growing
chickens to improve animal welfare.
From an environmental sustainability
viewpoint, this would be bad because
20 percent to 25 percent more
grain would be required to feed the
chickens. Compared to 10 years ago,

1
2
3

broilers have less lameness and better
mobility. I have visited farms and
have seen the improved broilers. The
tradeoff may be a 5 percent to 8 percent
increase in feed.
It may be easier to define what
is not sustainable. Most people who
are interested in sustainability can
agree there are certain bad practices
that should be stopped. A manager
must take steps to prevent obvious
bad practices. The first step is for top
managers to get out of the office and
visit different parts of their supply
chain. In many different industries,
the worst problems occur when a
product passes through multiple layers
in a supply chain. Global supply chain
disasters, such as deadly contamination
of pharmaceutical products, or
hundreds of people killed in a clothing
factory, occurred in segmented global
supply chains.

DEFINING UNSUSTAINABLE
There must be clear guidelines on
practices that are not sustainable. This
is required when a supplier is removed
from an approved supplier list for not
complying with sustainability standards.
Obvious bad practices that violate
environmental responsibility:
x Cutting down rainforest to grow
crops or livestock;
x Draining manure or farm chemicals
directly into a river;
x Depleting an aquifer that is not
renewable;

x Depleting stocks of wild fish;
x Damaging land due to over
application of manure or other
fertilizers (the right amount is
beneficial); and
x Poor grazing programs where
pastures are stripped (well-managed
grazing programs can improve
pastures).
Obvious bad practices that violate
social responsibility include:
x Abusive handling of livestock or
poultry (if it would look bad online,
don't do it.) Handling of animals
is better today, however in the last
two years, there have been several
undercover videos depicting severe
animal abuse.
x Filthy animal housing with high
ammonia levels;
x Transporting unfit animals that
should have been euthanized on the
farm (see pork and beef industry
guidelines);
x Serious food safety violations which
result in death; and
x Serious worker safety violations
where a worker dies or loses a limb.
Obvious bad practices violating
economic responsibility:
x Failure to pay suppliers;
x Deliberately mislabeling lower
quality products with labels for higher
quality products; and
x Payments to contract farmers that
are too low for them to obtain basic
needs.
T E M P L E G R A N D I N | m e a t p o u l t r y @ s o s l a n d .c o m

There are tradeoffs between the three
components of sustainability that can
lead to debates about different practices.
Rosalie Winard

92

MEAT+ POULTRY | 06.18 | www.meatpoultry.com
http://www.meatpoultry.com
Meat+Poultry - June 2018

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Meat+Poultry - June 2018
