Overall Rating Gold - expired
Overall Score 68.39
Liaison Sam Lubow
Submission Date June 29, 2012
Executive Letter Download

STARS v1.2

Stanford University
OP-6: Food and Beverage Purchasing

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 5.28 / 6.00 Jiffy Vermylen
Sustainability Coordinator
Sustainability & Energy Management / Office of Sustainability
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

Percentage of food expenditures that meet one or more of the criteria for this credit (0 - 100):
44

A brief description of the sustainable food and beverage purchasing program:

The Sustainable Food Program is a collaborative effort led and managed by Stanford Dining that includes strategic partnerships with vendors and suppliers, students, staff, faculty and other campus stakeholders. Through these partnerships, the Sustainable Food Program seeks to create positive impact across three areas of focus: education, outreach, and awareness; collaboration and partnership; and operational and culinary excellence.


The Website URL where information about the institution's sustainable food and beverage purchasing efforts is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:

Please note that only 44% of Stanford's food is “sustainable” by the STARS definition. Using Stanford's definition of sustainable food, the figure is 55%. The difference is that STARS only counts items as sustainable if they are certified by a third party, like USDA certified organic. This is problematic in a few ways because, as an example, Stanford buys grass fed beef that is not USDA certified organic because it doesn’t need to be and is in any case more sustainable than a USDA certified organic confined animal feeding operation, which would otherwise count. Moreover, there is no third party certification process for many sustainable production practices, including grass fed beef and other pasture-based livestock management practices. Lastly, third party certification is in many cases unaffordable to those whose food Stanford prizes most: small family farmers, ranchers, and fishermen. For example, we buy 15,000 pounds of wild Alaskan salmon directly from a family of fishermen who fish the Taku River in Alaska—this is among the most sustainable of any seafood purchase transactions anywhere in the world. The Hardcastles (owners of the company) have not pursued Marine Stewardship Council certification, however, because it’s super costly (and it was originally established by the likes and scale of WalMart, to provide a sense for whom the certification was intended), which precludes Stanford's purchase of their fish from this survey.


Please note that only 44% of Stanford's food is “sustainable” by the STARS definition. Using Stanford's definition of sustainable food, the figure is 55%. The difference is that STARS only counts items as sustainable if they are certified by a third party, like USDA certified organic. This is problematic in a few ways because, as an example, Stanford buys grass fed beef that is not USDA certified organic because it doesn’t need to be and is in any case more sustainable than a USDA certified organic confined animal feeding operation, which would otherwise count. Moreover, there is no third party certification process for many sustainable production practices, including grass fed beef and other pasture-based livestock management practices. Lastly, third party certification is in many cases unaffordable to those whose food Stanford prizes most: small family farmers, ranchers, and fishermen. For example, we buy 15,000 pounds of wild Alaskan salmon directly from a family of fishermen who fish the Taku River in Alaska—this is among the most sustainable of any seafood purchase transactions anywhere in the world. The Hardcastles (owners of the company) have not pursued Marine Stewardship Council certification, however, because it’s super costly (and it was originally established by the likes and scale of WalMart, to provide a sense for whom the certification was intended), which precludes Stanford's purchase of their fish from this survey.

The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.