LEAF Marque Standard v17.0 Public Consultation Survey - Landscape & Biodiversity

Welcome to the LEAF Marque v17.0 Standard Public Consultation Survey

LEAF Marque is a leading global environmental assurance system recognising more sustainably farmed products. The LEAF Marque Standard is based on LEAF’s Integrated Farm Management (IFM) principles, and all LEAF Marque certified businesses are independently inspected.

The LEAF Marque Standard v17.0 Draft #2 has been developed with input from multi-stakeholder working groups and focus groups, the LEAF Marque Technical Advisory Committee, research conducted by LEAF, and feedback from the first v17.0 Public Consultation.

This survey contains targeted questions on the changes made to the standard. We are particularly interested in your views on whether these changes are relevant, feasible, and auditable. We recommend you read the summary of changes before completing this survey.

Click here to view the LEAF Marque Standard v17.0 Draft
Click here to view the LEAF Marque Standard v16.1

Public consultation on the LEAF Marque Standard v17.0 Draft will open on the 1 October and runs until the 29 November. Please ensure we receive your comments by the close of consultation on the 29 November.

Please note the following:
• The updated Livestock Management section (called Animal Husbandry in v16.1) is now included in the v17.0 draft.
• The V17.0 draft is not final. There may be additional changes to the draft (for example, to incorporate feedback from the public consultations).
• The new guidance column is not final – there will be more guidance added.

For further information on the LEAF Marque Standard and other ways to provide feedback, please visit the public consultation website.

If you have any questions or require assistance in answering this survey, please contact LEAF (E: alexandra.davies@leaf.eco; T: +44 (0) 2476 413 911).

LEAF Marque will collate and review all comments received during the consultation. An anonymised summary of the comments and changes made to the Standard will be shared with all participants in the public consultation. No confidential information will be disclosed in the summary. LEAF Marque treats all information received from respondents with care.
1.Please input your name
2.Please input a contact email(Required.)
3.Please input your organisation
4.Please select the type of organisation you work for(Required.)
5.Please input your country(Required.)
6.Is your business LEAF Marque Certified?
7.7.1 There is a Landscape and Biodiversity Assessment. (Core)

a.iii. The Assessment is reviewed by a specialist advisor in the first year and at least every 5 years after.

7.2 There is a Landscape and Biodiversity Plan. (Core)

a.iv. The Plan is reviewed by a specialist advisor in the first year and at least every 5 years after.

The requirements in 7.1 and 7.2 have been updated to specify that a specialist advisor reviews the Landscape and Biodiversity Assessment and Plan in the first year and then at least every 5 years after in order to support the business to understand and plan management strategies that are effective and appropriate for the local environment.

(See control point 7.1 in the v17.0 draft for guidance on the specialist advisor)

Do you think these requirements are achievable, and auditable?
8.7.8 Natural forests, protected areas and peatland have not been converted into agricultural use. (Core)

A new control point about peatland conversion that was introduced during the first public consultation has been combined with control point 7.8 to reduce duplication. The requirement for preventing peatland conversion will become effective on the publish date of the 17.0 Standard.

Do you think this requirement is achievable, and auditable?
9.7.10 Strategies are implemented to restore habitats/ecosystems. (Advanced)

This control point has been added to encourage the restoration of habitats and ecosystems and promote better quality habitats. While other requirements focus on preventing biodiversity loss and enhancing habitats for biodiversity, this requirement focuses on restoring degraded habitats/ecosystems, ideally to their natural state where possible. This will remain an Advanced requirement due to its complexity and difficulty.

Do you think this requirement is achievable, and auditable?
10.7.13 The business justifies tree removal. (Core)

The wording of this control point has been updated to clarify that the requirements apply to both crop and non-crop trees. The control point also includes a requirement for the business to explain plans for the area where trees have been removed in the Landscape & Biodiversity Management Plan.

Do you think these requirements are achievable, and auditable?
11.7.14 Waterbodies are managed to protect biodiversity. (Core)

The wording of the control point has been updated to more clearly reflect the purpose – to protect biodiversity near waterbodies. A requirement has been added for businesses to have strategies to promote biodiversity in the buffer zones/areas surrounding waterbodies.

Do you think these requirements are achievable, and auditable?
12.7.15 There is habitat area.

7.15.b 5% habitat area. (Core)

7.15.c 10% habitat area. (Advanced)

This control point combines both the 5% and 10% habitat area control points into one, to reduce repetition. While 5% habitat area is a Core requirement, it has now been updated, such that where habitat area is less than 5%, there must be more than 0% habitat area and the business must justify why 5% habitat area cannot be achieved. The business must have strategies to enhance the quality of the habitat area, regardless of the quantity of habitat area, as high-quality habitats are important for supporting and enhancing biodiversity.

Do you think these requirements are achievable, and auditable?
13.7.21 At least one species is monitored on farm. (Core)

The control point has been updated to require that one species is monitored, instead of two species to make this Core requirement more accessible. However, the advanced requirement (7.21.d) still specifies that four or more species are monitored.

Do you think these requirements are achievable, and auditable?