What Should Auditors be looking at?
Climate change is increasingly influencing the conditions under which farms, packhouses, and all types of agri-businesses operate. Water scarcity, heatwaves, flooding, soil erosion, changing pest pressures and disruptions to production cycles can create environmental and social risks which must be identified and addressed before they escalate into significant challenges.
The auditor’s role is to understand the climate context in which a business operates, identify where climate-related conditions may increase existing risks, and assess whether those risks are being effectively managed and whether appropriate measures are in place to strengthen resilience.
Apply a climate lens
Consider whether climate-related conditions have increased risks associated with:
- Water: scarcity, over-abstraction, poor water-use efficiency, pollution risks or impacts on water resources and aquatic ecosystems.
- Soil: erosion, loss of soil cover, salinisation or degradation following drought or heavy rainfall.
- Energy, materials and waste: increased resource pressures, pollution risks, hazardous-material containment or waste-management challenges following extreme weather.
- Biodiversity and ecosystems: habitat degradation, changing pest pressures, invasive species or increased wildfire risk.
- Workers and operations: heat stress, access to drinking water and shade, working arrangements during extreme heat, and infrastructure damage that may create additional environmental or safety risks.
The SIZA Environmental Standard requires businesses to consider their resilience against climate change and associated extreme weather events, and therefore businesses to assess risks relating to soil, water, energy, materials, waste, and biodiversity and ecosystems.
Look beyond just the paperwork
A management plan does not, on its own, demonstrate that a risk is being effectively controlled. Auditors should assess whether documented procedures are reflected in day-to-day practices on the farm.
Evidence should be triangulated through records, management and worker interviews, and physical observations. For example, where heatwaves are a known risk, procedures can be compared with workers’ experiences and field observations, such as access to water, shade, and opportunities for rest. Similarly, where drought or water scarcity is significant, evidence of the legality of the water uses within the business, and the efficiency measures implemented to ensure water is used sustainably, will be reviewed to determine whether resilience through continuous improvement is achieved.
Report the impact, not the climate event
Where a non-compliance is observed, auditors should report the observable and verifiable impact or management system failure and link it to the relevant SIZA requirement. Reporting should remain factual and avoid assumptions about future impacts. For example, heavy rainfall is not a non-compliance. However, resulting contaminated runoff entering a watercourse, uncontrolled erosion, damaged containment systems, or inadequate hazardous-waste storage may indicate inadequate measures to mitigate the potential risks associated with climate change.
Auditors and suppliers should understand the context in which the business operates, identify areas of increased risk, ask the right questions, follow the evidence, and assess whether the implemented measures are effective in mitigating the risk. Applying a climate lens should strengthen the effective risk management and resilience of the agri-business.
