SIZA is committed to establishing processes to ensure that SIZA Social and Environmental audits remain credible, objective, impartial and an effective way to evaluate risk within a business. Measuring risk is, however, not as easy or simple as one would like to believe – it involves an understanding of potential hazards, risk exposure and impact on people and the environment. In agriculture, it’s especially challenging because the risks vary greatly from farm to farm, province to province and commodity to commodity as production processes look different, and workers, cultures and languages vary as well.
When allocating a risk rating, important questions are crucial and must be understood before a finding can be raised or a risk rating can be given. It is important to the SIZA programme that auditors should have the option to assess the situation before a risk rating is issued. SIZA believes that the audit should not be a tick box exercise but a fair and transparent process driving continuous improvement rather than penalising everyone according to a set list cast in stone. The auditor should always ask themselves:
- Was there an intention by the farm/packhouse/management to deviate from the requirements?
- What is the immediate risk for employees and/or the environment?
- What is the root cause behind this finding?
- Are there improvements considering the previous audit, best practices, or are the findings still the same as in the previous audit?
The above questions and a triangulation process will establish for an auditor whether a risk rating should be escalated or decreased based on the circumstances, the intention, and/or evidence that is available or lacking. As discretion is important to auditors and suppliers to understand a specific practice adequately, it is important that auditors are calibrated with and understand international codes and interpretations when allocating a particular risk rating to a finding. Let’s look at an example.
After an auditor arrives at a site, the management of the business explains to the auditor that their workers are very well trained on ensuring all health and safety requirements are met. The business provides evidence of training, worker interviews confirm their knowledge and understanding of the risks in the business and what to do. The auditor, however noticed that individuals were emptying a chemical container into a nearby river. The auditor exclaimed to the site management that this is not good for the people on the farm or the environment. Management appeared shocked and immediately addressed this with the individuals implicated. Discussions indicated that the individual responsible is living on the farm, but is not employed by the site and had no awareness raising or training on the dangers of chemicals or the re-use of chemical containers. Management apologised and committed to expanding their efforts to ensure the site’s health and safety, and representatives will monitor the entire farm’s practices more diligently.
In this scenario, would you agree that the intention of the site was not to deviate from legal requirements? Would you agree that although there exists a clear risk to the people and the environment, the purpose of the audit is to drive improvement and understand how the current practices can be improved? In this example scenario, the findings’ risk rating will need to be appropriate for the risk and be representative of the business’s intention to comply.
To guide auditors in allocating risk ratings during SIZA Social and Environmental audits for each principal category, guidance is provided. The purpose of providing guidance is to ensure adequate calibration amongst various auditors and audit companies across the respective categories. The risk rating guidance documents are in the Resources section of the MySIZA Platform.
The list is not exhaustive but should give an indication of how various issues should be considered in light of the reference guidelines, the reference code and the calibration of auditors. Auditors must understand how to categorise different issues as best practice, minor, major, or critical findings.
For more information on the SIZA Audit Process and Methodology, contact Werner van Dyk at werner@siza.co.za or dial 021 052 8184.
