Responsible sourcing
OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains
A 2016 joint OECD-FAO framework helping companies in agricultural supply chains conduct due diligence to avoid contributing to human rights, environmental and social harms.
Definition
The OECD-FAO Guidance for Responsible Agricultural Supply Chains, published in 2016, helps enterprises observe standards of responsible business conduct along agricultural supply chains. It applies the OECD due diligence framework to sector-specific risks including land tenure, food security, labour rights, animal welfare and environmental impacts, and sets out a five-step due diligence process with a model enterprise policy.
References
publication year, scope and due diligence steps
sector risks and application context
Overview
What it means
Agricultural supply chains involve distinctive risks — land grabs, deforestation, seasonal and child labour — that generic guidance addresses poorly. The joint guidance translates responsible business conduct into farm-level and trader-level practice for companies sourcing, processing or financing agricultural commodities.
How it is used
Food and agribusiness companies, investors and certification schemes use the guidance to structure due diligence systems; governments reference it in national action plans and it informs commodity-specific initiatives such as those for palm oil and cocoa.
Why it matters
It is the reference due diligence framework for a sector employing over a quarter of the world's workers and driving much global deforestation, linking corporate sourcing decisions directly to rural livelihoods and ecosystems.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.
Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.
Contribute to this entry
Help improve this definition
Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.