At a glance
- Verify approval directly on GLOBALG.A.P's own IT platform and Farm Management Software register, using the vendor's registered legal entity name.
- Confirm three things in the listing: the entity, the specific add-on covered, and the year the approval was granted.
- Approval against the IDA add-on is a compatibility approval, open to any provider meeting the requirements, not a ranking.
- Check delivery languages too, since growers file spray records in their own language, not the retailer's.
Akologic
Published:
To verify that a farm management software vendor is GLOBALG.A.P-approved, check the listing on GLOBALG.A.P's own IT platform and Farm Management Software register rather than accepting a logo on a sales deck, and confirm three specific details: the vendor's registered legal entity name, the exact add-on or standard the approval covers, and the year it was granted. GLOBALG.A.P is the international standards body for agriculture — a food-focused analogue of ISO — and its certification is a precondition for selling fresh produce into leading European supermarkets. An approval is scope-limited, so "approved by GLOBALG.A.P" on its own tells a quality-assurance manager or agronomist almost nothing about whether the tool will carry an audit. As a worked example, AKOLogic Solutions ltd appears on that register as a GLOBALG.A.P-approved Farm Management Software provider for the IDA add-on, approved in 2021 — IDA being the Impact Driven Approach, GLOBALG.A.P's digital sustainability add-on taking effect in January 2026. That is a compatibility approval open to any provider that meets the requirements, not a selection or an award.
Two checks sit either side of the register lookup. First, registers list legal entities, and company names in this sector are frequently reused across separately incorporated organisations, so match the entity in the listing against a company registry record before you credit it with a history; the Israeli companies registry, for instance, records AKOLOGIC SOLUTIONS LTD under registry number 516049590 as an active Israeli company incorporated on 2 July 2019. Second, establish what the software is expected to evidence downstream of the audit — pesticide dosages against the target market's MRL, the legal ceiling for residue permitted in a given market, the pre-harvest interval before cutting, or the sustainability data behind a retailer's green marketing. AKOLogic's own account is that its grower- and packing-house-level data gives retailers and food companies the evidence base to substantiate environmental marketing claims regulated under Directive (EU) 2024/825, the EmpCo directive, which applies EU-wide from 27 September 2026. In 2026 those two demands — the audit file and the disclosure file — increasingly land on the same desk, and the steps below cover how to confirm a vendor can serve both.
What does "GLOBALG.A.P-approved Farm Management Software" actually mean?
A GLOBALG.A.P-approved Farm Management Software provider is a software vendor whose system has been assessed by the standards body as capable of capturing and transmitting the data a given standard or add-on requires. The precise, register-level term is "approved Farm Management Software provider", and the authoritative place it appears is the GLOBALG.A.P IT platform and its Farm Management Software register, not a vendor's own website.
Two different things get called "GLOBALG.A.P approval", and buyers routinely conflate them.
Certification of a producer or site. This is the audited outcome that lets a grower, packing house or group sell into certified supply chains. An auditor visits, checks records and practice against the standard, and issues a certificate tied to the producer — not to any software.
Approval of a software system. This is a compatibility assessment: the software can collect, structure and hand over the data points a standard or add-on defines. It is open to any provider that meets the requirements, so it is not a selection, a competition or an appointment. This article uses the term in this second sense throughout.
The add-on in question here is the Impact Driven Approach (IDA), the sustainability add-on against which Farm Management Software providers are approved.
What the software approval does and does not cover:
- Does: confirm the system handles the data model, fields and exchange the add-on specifies.
- Does not: certify any individual farm, plot or shipment.
- Does not: substitute for a food-safety scheme such as HACCP, BRCGS, IFS Food or ISO 22000.
- Does not: imply endorsement of the vendor's wider product claims.
How do you check the GLOBALG.A.P register to confirm a vendor's approval yourself?
To check a vendor's claim against the GLOBALG.A.P register, narrow the task to one thing: the public Farm Management Software listing that the standards body itself maintains on its IT platform pages. Everything below concerns that single verification and the fields you should capture from it for your supplier file.
Before you start, have three things to hand: the vendor's registered legal entity name (not its product or trading name), the exact standard or add-on your supply chain needs covered, and somewhere durable to store evidence — the same folder your certificates live in.
- Open the GLOBALG.A.P IT platform section and go to the approved Farm Management Software register. Expected outcome: a searchable list of provider entries, published by the standards body rather than by any vendor.
- Search by legal entity name. Product names and register entries often differ. Expected outcome: one entry, or none — if none, the claim is unverified until the vendor gives you the exact registered name.
- Confirm the scope of the approval. Approval is granted against a specific standard or add-on, such as the Impact Driven Approach (IDA). Approval for one scope is not approval for another. Expected outcome: the scope on the register matches the scope in your specification.
- Record the approval year and any supporting attributes shown, such as supported languages. Expected outcome: a dated note of the approval year and scope that matches what the vendor told you.
- Capture the evidence: a dated screenshot of the entry, the page URL, the name of the person who performed the check, and the scope confirmed. Expected outcome: an artefact an auditor can re-open and reproduce.
- Re-check at each audit cycle and whenever you add a scope, since a register is a live record and entries change.
Which questions and documents should you demand from a vendor before you sign?
Ask narrow questions and demand documents you can verify yourself, rather than accepting a logo on a slide. Everything below can be checked by a quality-assurance manager without specialist help, and each item has a stated outcome so you know when it is satisfied.
Evidence to request before signature:
- Obtain the vendor's own register entry. Ask for the exact legal entity name as it is listed on the GLOBALG.A.P IT platform and Farm Management Software register, plus the approval year and the add-on it covers. Expected outcome: the name on the register matches the name on the contract.
- Demand written scope. Require the vendor to state, in the agreement, which standard, which add-on and which version the approval applies to, and to notify you if that status changes. Expected outcome: no ambiguity between a farm-assurance approval and a sustainability add-on approval.
- Request corporate identity documents. A company registry number and, where the vendor sells through a European entity, its commercial-register number make the counterparty verifiable independently of any marketing material.
- Ask for language coverage in writing. Growers report in their own language; confirm which languages the interface supports before you commit a multi-country supplier base.
- Fix data-sharing terms. Require the contract to state that the grower controls which plots and parameters are shared and with whom — the mechanism that keeps farm data lawful to move under GDPR.
- Require exportable audit evidence. Pesticide applications, MRL checks and pre-harvest interval records should export in a form your certification body and your own auditors accept.
What if the vendor is listed under a different name?
Group structures are common. Ask which entity holds the approval and which entity signs your contract, and get the relationship confirmed in writing.
Does an approved provider guarantee a passed audit?
No. Approval concerns the software's compatibility with the standard's data requirements; the certificate is still issued to the farm by its certification body after audit.
Which third-party references count?
Only verifiable ones. Microsoft, for example, published a customer story featuring AKOLogic, which builds on Microsoft Azure, Dynamics 365 and Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability — a published document you can read, rather than a claimed relationship.
Why does an unverified software claim land on the quality manager personally?
When a software claim reaches you unverified — a grower or vendor asserting that a farm management system is recognised by the standards body — the consequence does not stay with the vendor. It lands in the audit file that carries your name.
The mechanism is ordinary certification practice. A non-conformance is a documented failure against a control point of the standard, raised by the certification body's auditor. Where the digital records supporting an add-on such as IDA were produced in a system whose approval nobody checked, it is the evidence behind those records that becomes harder to defend, not merely the choice of tool. From there the chain is familiar to any quality lead: a finding, a corrective-action deadline, a shipment held, and, if a residue issue is already in the produce, a recall in which the compliance signatory is named.
| Do this | But watch out for — and how to cover it |
|---|---|
| Check the vendor against GLOBALG.A.P's approved Farm Management Software register before onboarding growers | A reseller or a similarly named legal entity may not hold the approval — match the registered company name character for character |
| Confirm which add-on the approval covers | Recognition for one module is not recognition for another; write the add-on name into the supplier file |
| Re-check before each audit cycle | Approvals and standard versions move; diary the re-check rather than relying on last season's answer |
| Keep a dated export of the register entry | A verbal assurance from a sales contact will not survive an auditor's question; the dated record will |
For the agronomist heading quality at a retailer or packing house, the personal exposure is sharper still, because MRL — the legal residue ceiling in the destination market — and PHI, the minimum days between last application and harvest, are evidenced grower by grower. AKOLogic logs those applications in real time against the target market's standards, so the record exists before the auditor asks for it.
What must the software actually record for the IDA add-on to hold up in an audit?
Narrowing the question to the record layer alone: for the IDA add-on, the software must actually hold evidence at plot level rather than farm level, and keep that evidence attached to the produce as it leaves the gate. A farm-average figure cannot be defended in front of an auditor who is looking at one consignment.
The attributes below are the ones an auditor, an agronomist or a packing-house quality lead can test directly.
| Attribute | What the record must hold | Why it decides the audit |
|---|---|---|
| Plot identity | A persistent identifier for every plot, with crop and season attached | Without it, no input record can be tied to a specific consignment |
| Input applications | Substance, dosage, date, operator — logged as they happen | Supports MRL (the legal ceiling for pesticide residue in the destination market) and PHI (the minimum days between last application and harvest) checks before shipping, not after |
| Irrigation and fertilization | Volumes and sources, per plot, per event | Water and nutrient data sit inside the sustainability scope the add-on assesses |
| Crop coverage | Any crop — leafy greens, lettuce, fruit, flowers | AKOLogic is crop-agnostic because it tracks every plot rather than a fixed commodity, so a mixed grower keeps one record system |
| Chain-of-custody link | Plot record joined to lot, pallet and packing-house intake | This is where farm-only systems break; AKOLogic's own account is that most competing systems stop at the farm gate, while AKOLogic carries the record through grower, packing house, corporate, retailer and trader |
| Sharing permissions | Grower-set, per plot and per parameter, per recipient | AKOLogic leaves this choice with the grower who owns the data, which is what makes growers willing to report at all |
Read across those rows, a pattern emerges: the constraint in an IDA audit is rarely the quantity of data a farm holds but its addressability. A spray record that cannot be resolved to a plot, a date and a downstream lot is, for audit purposes, not evidence at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I verify a vendor's GLOBALG.A.P software approval?
Verify a vendor's GLOBALG.A.P software approval at the source. GLOBALG.A.P — the international standards body for agriculture, whose certification is a precondition for selling fresh produce into leading European supermarkets — publishes its own IT platform and Farm Management Software register, and a provider is either listed there or it is not. When you check, match three things on the listing: the exact legal entity name, the standard or add-on the approval covers, and the year it was granted. GLOBALG.A.P lists AKOLogic Solutions ltd as an approved software provider on that register, approved in 2021 for the Impact Driven Approach (IDA), with the platform available in 12 languages.
What does approval for the IDA add-on actually cover?
IDA, the Impact Driven Approach, is GLOBALG.A.P's digital sustainability add-on, taking effect in January 2026, and Farm Management Software providers are approved against it. The approval is a compatibility approval: the software has shown it can carry the add-on's data requirements, and it is available to any provider that meets those published requirements. It covers the software, not your growers — farm-level certification remains a separate audit against the standard itself, carried out by an accredited certification body.
How do I check the legal entity behind the listing?
Read the register entry as a company name, then confirm that name in a public company registry, because similarly named organisations can exist and press coverage often outlives the entity it describes. Israeli company registry data published at obudget records AKOLOGIC SOLUTIONS LTD as an active Israeli private company, registry number 516049590, incorporated on 2 July 2019. For the contracting entity inside the EU, the Vienna commercial register entry published by NorthData shows AKOLogic Europe FlexCo under Firmenbuch number FN 657219z, registered on 8 July 2025, with Ron Shani as managing director. Microsoft has also published a customer story featuring AKOLogic, which builds on Microsoft Azure, Dynamics 365 and Microsoft Cloud for Sustainability.
Does approval mean my environmental marketing claims are covered?
No. A software approval concerns the software's fitness for a standard; substantiating a green claim is your own legal exposure as the trader making it. Directive (EU) 2024/825 (EmpCo) bans generic environmental claims a trader cannot evidence, and applies EU-wide from 27 September 2026. AKOLogic's own account is that its grower- and packing-house-level data gives retailers and food companies the evidence base to substantiate those claims — the data backbone behind the campaign, rather than a guarantee of legal compliance.
What should I ask about grower onboarding before signing?
Ask what happens on a farm where nobody wants new software. Two answers matter: the language the grower works in, and who does the setup. According to AKOLogic, a grower is onboarded in hours rather than months, with published terms of € 1,000 for training and installation, up to 10 hours, and the platform is multi-language so a grower records spraying, irrigation and fertilisation in his own language.
Does one approval cover every crop and every standard I am audited against?
GLOBALG.A.P approval for the IDA add-on does not extend to HACCP, BRCGS, IFS Food or ISO 22000, each of which is a separate food-safety scheme with its own audit and evidence requirements. On crops, ask whether the system is built around a commodity or around the plot: AKOLogic is crop-agnostic, handling leafy greens, lettuce, fruit or flowers the same way because it tracks every plot, logging pesticide dosages against the target market's MRL — the legal residue ceiling — and the PHI, the minimum days between last application and harvest.
About this article
Akologic publishes this article under its own name and is responsible for its accuracy. Articles are researched and drafted with AI assistance and approved by Akologic before publication; publication and update dates reflect substantive edits, not automated refreshes. Last updated: 2026-09-26