Talk:Committee on Sustainability Assessment

Article expansion

Moved from User talk:CaroleHenson to keep the detailed information about expansion of the article here:

Sure, COSAsb Thanks for the link to the article on your page to Committee on Sustainability Assessment (you just need double brackets and the article name). It sounds like a very interesting organization and I would be happy to help. It's actually tapping into a long-held dream of mine... long story, cool objectives!

Some initial questions are:

-Content (no worries if you're not here yet)

1. Do you have a list of the types of information that you'd like to include in the article?
2. Does it seem as if these topics will 1) meet your objectives while 2) also maintaining an encyclopedic tone, objectivity, etc.?
3. Do you have reliable sources, such as books (published vs. self-published), newspaper articles, journals, UN/WHO etc. studies/reports, other?

-Roles

1. In what ways can I help?
2. I assume contributors will declare their relationship with the organization. What do you envision the participant's role to be? Examples for consideration / tweaking:
   1. Very limited - provide scope and request research and writing assistance?
   2. Provide sources, rough outline, request additions
   3. Write the content with reliable secondary sources and request review before posting?

I think that's a start.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much for such prompt and thoughtful response! I just wanted to note that we are working on answers to your questions now and will be in touch as soon as we have a good understanding of our goals and the contributions we are interested in making.

COSAsb (talk) 21:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Sounds great, COSAsb!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Carole, Thank you once again for volunteering to help us out! Responses to your questions are below. Let me know if you have any thoughts or questions.

-Content

1. Shaping the content and categories of the article are definitely an area where we would appreciate some feedback and guidance. I’ve listed some potential categories below with links to the relevant sections of our website.

• About - http://thecosa.org/who-we-are/about-us/
• History - http://thecosa.org/who-we-are/about-us/our-history/
• Activities – (Advisory, Research) http://thecosa.org/what-we-do/ -- perhaps this is better to include in “About”?
• Indicators - http://thecosa.org/what-we-do/our-approach/define-the-pathway/#smart-indicators (scroll down and click the + next to “View Indicators” and then “Open all”) – this is one of the key aspects of our work: developing scientifically valid, reliable indicators of sustainability
• Advisory Panel - http://thecosa.org/who-we-are/about-us/advisory-panel/
• Scientific Committee - http://thecosa.org/who-we-are/about-us/scientific-committee/
• Reports – some of them can be found here http://thecosa.org/news-and-insight/publications/
• Partnerships - http://thecosa.org/our-partners/partners/

2. Our objectives here are to raise the profile of our organization, lend greater credibility to our work, and to update the information available on Wikipedia. As an organization, we employ a fact-based, science-driven approach to our work and strive to maintain a neutral viewpoint, so we should have no problem adhering to standards of objectivity and encyclopedic tone. We are more interested in making sure the available information is accurate and comprehensive than using the article for self-promotion.

3. We have several publications and reports of our own (http://thecosa.org/news-and-insight/publications/) as well as articles written by third parties about us (http://thecosa.org/news-and-insight/news/). Additionally, there is other factual information we are interested in adding to the article, such as the organizations we partner with (see #1 above). Finally, the organization’s founder has published many articles on topics related to our work, many of which can be found on his website (http://www.dgiovannucci.net/publications.htm).

-Roles

1. Are you available to review edits before we post them? What is the appropriate way to handle instances where we disagree with, or would like to make edits to revisions by others? Is it acceptable to reference our website for content for which there is no available secondary source (for example, basic facts such as our current partner organizations)?

2. Our contributors will definitely disclose their relationship in their profiles. We plan to write the content with references to secondary sources and request review before posting. We may request writing assistance if necessary, but I expect that we will be able to provide content on our own that adheres to Wikipedia’s guidelines.

We also intend to make edits to a lesser extent on other pages related to our work. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability_standards_and_certification

We may also make small edits where our reports or studies are referenced but we are not named specifically (on some of the articles for our partners, for example).

One specific edit we’d like to make is related to the page title/URL which was previously moved from “Committee on Sustainability Assessment (COSA)” to just “Committee on Sustainability Assessment”. We strongly prefer the prior as most people know us as COSA and many people in developing countries for whom English is not their primary language search for us under that name and have encountered difficulty finding our pages in the past.

Finally, we would also like to create an article for the organization’s founder, Daniele Giovannucci. We have reviewed Wikipedia’s notability guidelines and believe that he is qualified for a standalone article, as he has been interviewed and cited as an expert in many independent publications regarding sustainability and food crops, and has also published many frequently-cited scholarly articles. I understand that this is a separate project, so I can provide more information when we come to this point.

COSAsb (talk) 20:27, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

There's such great information here about article expansion that I'm going to move it from User talk:CaroleHenson to Talk:Committee on Sustainability Assessment#Article expansion, which does a couple of things: 1) It keeps the history of article expansion plans with the article and 2) allows other editors to weigh-in on the topic, which is a standard vehicle within Wikipedia to engage in conversation and gain consensus.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:56, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Next, I'll break down responses to specific items listed above.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Content

Your objectives make a lot of sense - and the types of content makes sense, too. The goal, should be to try and use independent, secondary sources that are reliable sources (i.e., that have an editorial function, like newspapers, books, journals, etc.) and keep references to the COSA site to a miniumum. The independent link has great direction.

The United Nations article is one example of Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations#Good articles that provide some excellent examples of how to structure an article. There's a wealth of information and links at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If COSA is going to draft content, to be reviewed before posting, it might make sense to work together on an outline to avoid unnecessary effort.

There are two places where the organization's website link can be placed to allow readers to go to COSA for further information: the top of the article in an Infobox and at the bottom in an External links section.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:07, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Roles

Regarding your questions: 1.Are you available to review edits before we post them? What is the appropriate way to handle instances where we disagree with, or would like to make edits to revisions by others? Is it acceptable to reference our website for content for which there is no available secondary source (for example, basic facts such as our current partner organizations)?

Yes, you can post the requested edits here using the {{Request edit}}. See {{Request edit/Instructions}}. I think if we work on an outline first and work on a list of sources first, then that should reduce any potential disputes pretty significantly. I have put information in a section about this, though.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

2. Our contributors will definitely disclose their relationship in their profiles. We plan to write the content with references to secondary sources and request review before posting. We may request writing assistance if necessary, but I expect that we will be able to provide content on our own that adheres to Wikipedia’s guidelines.

Sounds great!--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We also intend to make edits to a lesser extent on other pages related to our work. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability_standards_and_certification

Sounds good! There shouldn't be a need to use {{Request edit}} if you're talking about these issues in general terms.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

We may also make small edits where our reports or studies are referenced but we are not named specifically (on some of the articles for our partners, for example).

Depending upon the type of edit, you may want to post something on that article's talk page about the reason for clarification/expansion/correction to be open about your relationship and intention.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:19, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Article title

Regarding the current title of the article, Committee on Sustainability Assessment, this is common practice for naming articles to have the name of the organization without the acronym. (See: Central Intelligence Agency for instance, which is also commonly known as CIA).

There are already 2 aids established to help users:

1. The disambiguation page COSA, which already has the organization's name and link
2. There's already a redirect Committee on Sustainability Assessment (COSA), which has the acronym with the title.

The one thing I'd suggest, though, is to add a bit of a description on the COSA to help people that get to that page to help the get to your article. I'll put something there. See what you think.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Managing differences of opinions

There are many was to manage differences of opinions:

• Discussion on this article talk page
• If more input is desired:
  • Something can be posted on a project talk page, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organizations, and request the audience to join the conversation, including providing a link to [[Talk:Committee on Sustainability Assessment]]. (To add the specific section, add "#" and the title of the section. For instance, this section is [[Talk:Committee on Sustainability Assessment#Managing differences of opinions]].
  • Post a question on a noticeboard or talk page of a specific topic or guideline.
  • The Teahouse is also a great place to post general questions.

These two steps generally resolve most questions. The Wikipedia:Dispute resolution page has a lot more information about resolving disputes, like Wikipedia:Third opinion and Wikipedia:SEEKHELP.--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Daniele Giovannucci

Based on the number of books where Giovannuci was an author or referenced, I agree. Google scholar is a good source of articles she's written or that mention about her. There are also several news articles that mention her at google news and HighBeam Research news articles.--CaroleHenson (talk) 23:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Article Revision - seeking editor input

Hello to all, my goal is to revise the current COSA entry to address the flags noted and expand the content generally. I have volunteered to COSA to do this revision, and do not receive any payment. I understand that my volunteer role represents a COI, and have noted this on my user page. On this page is my first draft at revised text for the COSA entry. I'd like to find an editor to guide this process. In the meantime, I'd especially welcome feedback on the proposed content below. You'll notice that I'm still working on the appropriate formatting for references. K.Emanuele (talk) 02:36, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Committee on Sustainability Assessment

The Committee on Sustainability Assessment (COSA) is a global consortium of development institutions that work collaboratively to advance the systematic and science-based measurement of sustainability in agriculture. COSA applies a pragmatic and collective approach for using scientific methods to develop indicators and tools to measure sustainability through performance monitoring, evaluation, and impact assessment. These sustainability measurements assess the distinct social, environmental and economic impacts of agricultural practices.

COSA’s approach and indicators have a basis in international treaties and normative references such as the International Labour Organization (ILO) eight fundamental Conventions, the World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines for Water Quality and the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Environmental and Social Performance Standards. The indicators align with internationally recognized accords including the United Nations Global Compact, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (Rio Declaration), UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are benchmarked for consistency and shared use.

History

The concept for COSA was originally developed in 2005 as a project of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the United Nations International Trade Centre (ITC) and was focused on the coffee sector. The COSA indicator development process was inaugurated through the International Coffee Organization (ICO) whose Council unanimously endorsed it, making it the first sustainability assessment system to be formally adopted by a global commodity body. The UNCTAD COSA project focused on developing a thorough and rigorous cost benefit analysis of sustainability practices in the coffee sector via two primary outputs: (1) a tool for assessing costs and benefits according to COSA-defined criteria and indicators; and (2) training to enable stakeholders to “measure and understand the costs and benefits of undertaking sustainable practices and adopting different sustainability initiatives.”

In 2008, the UNCTAD COSA project published “Seeking Sustainability: COSA Preliminary Analysis of Sustainability Initiatives in the Coffee Sector”. The report summarized the findings of the pilot application of the COSA tool to collect and analyze data to facilitate understanding of environmental, social, and economic outcomes associated with sustainability initiatives in the coffee sector. The six coffee sector sustainability initiatives included were: organic, Fair Trade, Common Code for the Coffee Community (4C), UTZ certified, Rainforest Alliance, and Starbucks C.A.F.E. Practices. Three coffee growing regions were included: Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

In 2012, led by its founder and President Daniele Giovannucci, the structure and constitution of COSA was formalized as an independent non-profit organization incorporated under United States law to advance research and training in the field of sustainability. It is as this globally-focused, independent non-profit that COSA continues its work today. Core support has come primarily from the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), the Ford Foundation and the Inter-American Development Bank. COSA is supported half by public grants and half by its advisory services and impact assessment projects.

Working in Partnerships

COSA supports institutions to adopt and integrate approaches to sustainability, and includes more than 40 public and private sector organizations. COSA partners with research and development institutions to adopt, integrate, and build local sustainability measurement and evaluation capacity in the countries where it works, as well as for bilateral learning. Local partnerships to conduct research have included the Institute of Statistical, Social, and Economic Research at the University of Ghana (ISSER), the Centro de Estudios Regionales Cafeteros y Empresariales (CRECE) in Colombia, the strategic think tank of the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (IPSARD), the Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP), the Indonesian Coffee and Cocoa Research Institute (ICCRI), and the CGIAR Consortium of research organizations.

The COSA partnership with the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA), in Kenya and Uganda, led to new processes with the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) for conducting field research to advance the understanding of the challenges faced by smallholder farmers and the roles of their cooperatives. The work, commissioned by the International Social and Environmental Accreditation and Labelling (ISEAL) Alliance with support of the Ford Foundation, evolved methods for effectively assessing the impacts of multiple sustainability certifications on the lives of farmers, their organizations, and communities. COSA piloted the Grameen Foundation’s Progress Out of Poverty Index in coffee (Guatemala, Mexico, Peru) and cocoa (Nicaragua, Colombia), and adopted them into its suite of indicators.

COSA works in development projects with sustainability labels such as Fair trade, Organic, UTZ Certified, 4C, and Rainforest Alliance. Private supply chains have utilized COSA to assess and measure the impact of their sustainability efforts, fostered by development agencies such as the International Finance Corporation, USAID, or the Swiss Government (SECO), and include firms such as Nespresso, Lindt and Sprungli, Mars Drinks, Cargill, ECOM Trading and Mondelez International.

Accomplishments

COSA indicators and tools have been widely incorporated, adopted, and adapted by institutions, corporations, and other organizations:

• The Textile Exchange adapted COSA indicators to create the Organic Cotton Sustainability Assessment Tool (OC-SAT) to assess the sustainability impact of organic cotton farming.
• COSA led the efforts to establish global metrics for small farmer sustainability for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The FAO commissioned COSA, along with the Grameen Foundation and Soil & More International, to develop the metrics for its Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems (SAFA) Tool.
• The ISEAL Impacts Code is aligned with COSA indicators as is the Shared Framework for Performance Measurement of the Sustainable Food Lab (SFL) and the SFL “Shared Approach to Performance Measurement: Common Indicators and Metrics” that was developed in partnership with Ford Foundation, IDH The Sustainable Trade Initiative, Seas of Change, MARS Chocolate, Root Capital, ISEAL Alliance, Nestle, Rainforest Alliance, and Centre for Development Innovation.
• The International Cotton Advisory Committee’s Expert Panel on the Social, Environmental, and Economic Performance of Cotton (SEEP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Plant Production and Protection Division published a guidance framework for measuring the sustainability of cotton farming systems with indicators that were in part informed by COSA’s decade of work in the field.
• For the Ford Foundation, COSA designed simple assessment tools and guidelines for Ford Foundation grantees to utilize to improve the design and management of their food crop projects.
• With the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF) Inter-American Development Bank Sustainable Agriculture, Food, and Environment (SAFE) platform, COSA helps funded projects to establish or improve their measurement and evaluation systems to achieve greater levels of scalability and share lessons and knowledge across the funding Platform.
• COSA also collaborates with multi-stakeholder industry initiatives such as Sustainable Coffee Challenge led by Conservation International and the Global Coffee Platform led by the 4C Coffee Association.

Since its creation, COSA’s reach has expanded to seventeen countries: Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Tanzania, Uganda, and Vietnam. In addition to coffee, COSA now also works with cocoa, cotton, sugar, and food crops.

Recognition

COSA has been recognized in the international development and sustainability communities for its “visible and impartial” assessments. Following the 2014 publication of the COSA Measuring Sustainability Report: Coffee and Cocoa in 12 Countries, the International Society of Environmental Accreditation and Labeling (ISEAL Alliance) called COSA a leader in the “alignment of standards and certification initiatives, showing the potential of harmonizing metrics.”

K.Emanuele (talk) 02:37, 6 October 2016 (UTC)K.Emanuele (talk) 03:09, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

References

Removing alerts added November 2015

As of January 2017, the following two alerts were included on this page: This article needs additional citations for verification. (November 2015) The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations.

I believe I have addressed both of these alerts with the updates included on 1 January 2017, and as such am removing the two alerts. I am a new editor, if this is incorrect, or if a more experienced editor disagrees, please instruct accordingly. Many thanks. K.Emanuele (talk) 02:54, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Notability - Nomination for Deletion

I'm afraid that this page does not appear to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines (see WP:N). Almost all cited sources are primary and this reads like an advert or promotional piece for COSA. COSA has received little to no "mainstream" media attention across news sources and a simple google search yields little information. Furthermore, this page is largely the work of a COSA employee and as such it borders on WP:COI and fails in WP:N, in particular "Independent of the subject", "Significant coverage" and "Sources". As such, unless notability can be established I will nominate this article for deletion. Sadke4 (talk) 09:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I will contest the WP:PROD tag. Reliable sources for such subjects are found in books and academic papers, not from the news and certainly not from a simple Google search, which for just about any subject, however notable, finds mostly unreliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)