logo

Wednesday 22nd of February 2012

The Journal


feed-image Feed Entries
Home News feed
News feed
Look ahead and around Print Email
Leader
Written by Gunnar Rundgren   
Tuesday, 17 January 2012 10:22

During 2011 several reports and studies were released showing how limited the impact of organic production has been on the environment or income of farmers (see, for instance, in TOS 122, ‘Impact of certification questioned’). A study on the use of eco labels in aquaculture, reported in this issue of TOS (page 15), shows that many labels barely guarantee a performance that is better than business as usual. Other studies revealed that the actual impact of a standard is a minor factor when it comes to what influences consumers choose a certain standard (see, for instance, in TOS 120, ‘What gives value to an eco label?’). And just recently the International Herald Tribune wrote about how the organic sector has moved away from its roots (‘Organic Farming drifts from its roots’ 2 January).

This issue of TOS contains a report on another survey that shows how the commercial value of eco labels, such as organic labels, diminishes as they become successful (see page 17 in the PDF). For a company, the added value of having a certified product is much less if certification is ‘normal’. And the same is true for consumers; we are more likely to buy a product based on a label if it is exclusive to the product rather than being the norm. The more products in the same category that carries the mark, the less interesting the mark becomes as a differentiating tool, and it will move from the front to the back of the product, before it ultimately disappears.

What does all this matter? It matters a lot to the future of the model of a separate organic market, based on premium prices and a set of standards, conformity assessment and a label, which is the main development model for the organic sector. The sector spends a great deal of energy discussing minute details in the standards and control system, often with the illusion that there is one standard or one certain control measure that is ‘right’. But what is ‘right’ must be seen in relationship to what the system is supposed to accomplish, who it serves, what are the parameters for success? Very few organisations engaged in the Organic Guarantee System have a clear vision of where they want to be ten years ahead: many are just stewards of a system developed thirty years ago with little reflection of where it is heading.

‘Development’ is mainly viewed in terms of increasing service delivery in certification. For instance, development might be considered to be offering other certifications or using a web based interface for certification bodies; making more standards for standard setters and addressing loopholes or sharpening enforcement for regulators. Nothing wrong with any of that, but what does this really accomplish? Those that feel alienated in the system have been more innovative, for instance, the development of the Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) is a good example. Others just stand aside criticising, but often have neither a consistent alternative development model nor a consistent vision.

Through government regulation harmonisation has been forced on the sector. Though this harmonisation has had short-term benefits, by lowering costs for all involved, it could, in the longer term, be a straight-jacket. Organic regulations have become the final arbiter of what is right, instead of letting the consumers and markets choose what is right. The latter is a more evolutionary and less fundamentalist approach. Today already some consumers and activists have left the organic fold, not – I believe – because the sector has betrayed its roots, but rather because it has no expressed vision to be enthused by.

The main point of this discussion is to stimulate a debate on what path the organic movement should take in the future. Initially, it needs to be decoupled from the daily discussions about regulations and requirements. Instead it should be based on the four principles of organic farming: the principle of health, care, ecology and fairness. Then, sometime in the future, this needs to result in practical tools for development, tools that will serve us as well, or better, than the certified organic model that has worked so well for thirty years.

Gunnar Rundgren

 
Don’t make it too difficult to import Print Email
2011 November
Written by Gunnar Rundgren   
Sunday, 20 November 2011 17:54

IFOAM submits a policy brief advising governments not to complicate organic trade regulations

In a new policy brief, approved by the World Board in July 2011, IFOAM advises governments to not rush into regulating organic agriculture, and to do it with a view not to complicate imports and trade in organic products. IFOAM claims, perhaps contrary to common belief, that import of organic products to countries where the sector is small and emerging can help to develop the sector: ‘It is proven that consumers need a wide offer of products before the organic choice can become their daily habit. Hence facilitating imports of certified organic products into the country is an efficient way to promote domestic demand, which will in turn encourage domestic production.’

The brief states that the most important technical barrier to organic trade is the increasing number of government organic regulations that do not recognise or accept each other as equivalent. Very few countries recognise each others’ organic regulatory systems, which means that organic products have to be certified several times in order to access several markets. This places an unnecessary burden on producers, especially on small producers in developing countries.

The policy brief suggests measures to be taken to minimise those barriers. The recommendations were:

Consider organic product imports from the outset of establishing a regulation. Ensure that imports are primarily based on equivalence, not compliance.

An organic regulation should state that organic products may be imported if they comply with the domestic regulation, or if they comply with equivalent production and certification rules.

Adopt efficient processes to approve a high number of organic standards and technical regulations as equivalent.

Such processes recommended by IFOAM are to:

  • Officially endorse the IFOAM Family of Standards.
  • Make use of IFOAM’s equivalence assessment reports and conclusions.
  • Fast-track their decisions on granting equivalence to other standards and regulations.
  • Negotiate bi- or multi-lateral equivalence agreements on the basis of approval of their regulations in the IFOAM Family of Standards or the use of the Common Objectives and Requirements of Organic Standards, (COROS).

Adopt an efficient process to recognise a high number of performance requirements governing organic certification in other countries.

Here the recommendation is to accept IFOAM Accreditation as well as the new Global Organic System Accreditation. Both programmes are implemented by the International Organic Accreditation Service (IOAS). Governments that want to make their own assessments can use the ITF International Requirements for Organic Certification Bodies (IROCB) as the tool that will be used for recognition of certification requirements and foreign certification bodies.

Finally, IFOAM recommends that governments should engage in international efforts to harmonise organic standards and regulations, such as the processes to develop the Codex Alimentarius organic guidelines or the IFOAM Standard. At the regional level, governments can consider engaging in cooperation projects to harmonise standards and technical regulations and/or to foster regional equivalence. Such regional initiatives have been developed in East Africa, the Pacific, the Caribbean and in Asia. The recommendations in the policy brief are largely built on the analysis and recommendations emerging from the International Task Force on Harmonization and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture, a joint venture between FAO, IFOAM and UNCTAD.

Gunnar Rundgren

Source: How Governments can Regulate Imports of Organic Products Based on the Concepts of Harmonization and Equivalence, IFOAM July 2011, available at www.ifoam.org

 
THE ALTERNATIVE FOR AFRICA Print Email
2011 November
Written by Gunnar Rundgren   
Sunday, 20 November 2011 07:22

The International Conference ‘Ecological Organic Agriculture: The alternative for Africa’ is being held on 15-16 November 2011 at UNEP Headquarters in Nairobi/Kenya.

In addition to building awareness of accessible, productive and resilient organic farming systems, the conference will help to build alliances, capitalising on the African Union’s Resolution on Organic Farming. It will also implement the African Ecological Organic Agriculture Action Plan.

World Food Prize Laureate and winner of the One World Award, Hans Herren, and Peace Nobel Laureate, Wangari Maathai, will be speakers at the conference. In addition, the speakers’ line-up also includes three African Alternative Nobel Prize Laureates: Tewolde Eghziaber (Ethopia), Helmy Abouleish (Egypt) and Nnimmo Bassey (Nigeria).

Conference website: www.ifoam.org/events/ifoam_conferences/Organic_Alternative_for_Africa_2011.html

 
Fair Trade USA announces split from FLO Print Email
2011 October
Written by Grace Gershuny   
Friday, 21 October 2011 10:09

 

In a September press release, Fairtrade International (FLO) and Fair Trade USA jointly announced that Fair Trade USA (formerly TransFair) would be resigning its membership in the Fairtrade International (FLO) system effective 31 December, 2011.  The statement emphasised that, ‘as we go our separate ways, both Fairtrade International and Fair Trade USA are committed to maintaining the benefits we have achieved for farmers and workers, for business partners and for our supporters, and to growing impact over time.’  However, FLO expressed regret over the decision.

A short time later, Fair Trade USA announced that it was entering into a strategic partnership with Scientific Certification Systems to provide third party certification. Californian based Scientific Certification Systems, founded in 1984, provides third party certification in a variety of industries including food and agriculture, forestry and manufacturing. According to the press release, the new arrangement will allow Fair Trade USA introduce certification to a wider range of producer groups, introduce new standards for a wider range of products and offer cost-effective certification services.

The new arrangement does not sit well with many involved in the international fair trade movement.  A statement by the World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO) characterises the change as a move to extend the scope of Fair Trade to include plantations and factories, saying that ‘We are convinced that this decision will have long-term and far-reaching consequences for the Fair Trade movement.’

This controversy will be addressed more fully in a future issue of TOS.

Grace Gershuny - GAIA Services

For more information see:

www.fairtradeusa.org

www.wfto.com

 

 
Wal-Mart fined for selling ordinary pork labelled as organic pork Print Email
Latest
Written by The Organic Standard   
Thursday, 20 October 2011 13:26

CHONGQING, Oct. 11 (Xinhua) -- Officials with the Chongqing Municipal government said on Tuesday that the business management of Wal-Mart may be "problematic" after 13 Wal-Mart stores in the city were closed temporarily and fined over a case of product mislabeling.

The local government ordered the stores to close for 15 days and fined the company 2.69 million yuan (421,894.58 U.S. dollars) after the stores were found to be selling ordinary pork labelled as organic pork, the Chongqing Administration of Industry and Commerce said on Sunday.

Don't mess with the Chinese authorities!

Source:

http://english.cntv.cn/program/china24/20111018/103719.shtml

 
EU CERTIFIED INGREDIENTS ACCEPTED IN US COSMETICS Print Email
2011 October
Written by Nuria Alonso Villalon   
Saturday, 15 October 2011 09:07

NSF International – which describes itself as ‘an independent, not-for-profit organization that provides standards development, product certification, auditing, education and risk management for public health and the environment’ - has expanded its  American National Standard for Personal Care Products Containing Organic Ingredients (NSF/ANSI 305) to allow plant-based ingredients that are certified according to the EU Regulation. As a result, companies formulating personal care products for compliance with the NSF/ANSI 305 Personal Care Products Containing Organic Ingredients standard are now able to source from both US National Organic Program (NOP)-certified ingredients and EU-certified ingredients suppliers.

Further information in the fact sheet: www.nsf.org

For background information on the NSF/ANSI 305 Standard, see TOS issues 118 and 120.

 
ECOCERT ACQUIRES US CERTIFICATION BODY Print Email
2011 October
Written by Joy Michaud   
Saturday, 15 October 2011 09:06

In a recent press release ECOCERT, a French based certification body, has announced that it has acquired Indiana Certified Organic (ICO), a US certification body operating in the US and US Virgin Islands. ECOCERT explain that the transaction is key to its strategy in developing its North American business plan with well-established local partners in the USA. The acquisition of ICO brings over 300 additional US clients to the ECOCERT Group.

Informal discussions between ECOCERT and ICO started in 2009, and the formal process was initiated in July 2010 and completed on 28 January 2011.

Commenting on the acquisition, former ICO CEO, Cecilia Bowman noted, ‘ECOCERT was a natural choice as we share the same values and commitment to organic farmers and handlers.’ ECOCERT CEO, William Vidal, agreed, saying ‘We are proud to have ICO within the ECOCERT Group. It will strengthen our commitment to the organic sector’.

Source: ECOCERT press release, 20 September 2011.

 
New faces in the IFOAM board Print Email
Latest
Written by The Organic Standard   
Wednesday, 05 October 2011 07:16

The 20th IFOAM General Assembly in South Korea was held 3-5 October. Andre Leu was elected as the new President, and the two Vice Presidents are Gabriella Soto and Roberto Ugas.

Katherine di Matteo stepped down as the IFOAM President. Six of the incumbent World Board members stood for re-election, but it was only the two Vice Presidents André Leu and Roberto Ugas that made it to the new board, with an overwhelming support. This means that there are eight out of ten new Board members.

Andre Leu President Male Australia Vice-president since 2008
Roberto Ugas Vice President Male Peru Vice-president since 2008
Gabi Soto Vice President Female Costa Rica new candidate
Matthew Holmes Male Canada new candidate
Mathew John Male India new candidate
Volkert Engelsman Male The Netherlands new candidate
Eva Torremocha Female Spain new candidate
James Benjamin Cole Male Ghana new candidate
Manjo Smith Female Namibia new candidate
Frank Eyhorn Male Switzerland new candidate

There were no decisions for any particular re-orientation of IFOAM in the General Assembly. Issues relating to Organic Guarantee System were not brought to the agenda by the Board. There was a member motion from France for limitations of growing greenhouse crops out of soil, which was amended in agreement with the World Board. The motion passed which means that IFOAM has to develop more detailed standards for greenhouse production.

The Assembly voted against proposals to introduce a gender quota in the board as well as a proposal to introduce staggered 6-years terms. A motion to increase the prominence of regional groups in IFOAM was approved. A decision was made to oppose “speculative” systems for carbon payments for agriculture.  Next IFOAM General Assembly will be held in 2014 in Istanbul, Turkey.

Gunnar Rundgren

IFOAM

The General Assembly was held in Namyangju City, Gyeonggi Province, Republic of Korea from October 3rd to October 5th, 2011. Read more on IFOAM's website.

 

 
IFOAM Organic Guarantee System Expert Print Email
Promotional articles
Written by The Organic Standard   
Friday, 23 September 2011 13:14

IFOAM is the global organic umbrella organization with 800 affiliates in over 115 countries representing the organic farming and food sector covering over 37 million ha of organically managed land and 55 billion US$ consumer purchases. We are looking for an Organic Guarantee System Expert to complement our team in Bonn, Germany. The Expert develops and implements the Organic Guarantee System and assures marketing and quality development of our services.

We welcome electronic applications until November 15, 2011 to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

See www.ifoam.org/jobs for the detailed profile.

 
Paving the way in Asia Print Email
2011 September
Written by Ong Kung Wai   
Sunday, 18 September 2011 19:25

Initial meeting on equivalence between the Philippines and Indonesia

Notwithstanding postponements and the possibility that Philippine delegates were not going to get their travel papers signed in time, the initial meeting on equivalence of their respective organic systems between Philippines and Indonesia held last July reportedly went well and met all key objectives.

The meeting was first mooted at the Global Organic Market Access (GOMA) Project meeting in Shanghai, in May 2010. Indonesian and Philippine delegates then agreed to conduct an equivalence determination exercise of their respective standards according to the EquiTool. The GOMA project is a joint collaboration between FAO, UNCTAD and IFOAM, established to promote and support the use of equivalence tools developed by the International Task Force for Harmonisation and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture (ITF). The ITF process, which took place between 2003 and 2009, also led by FAO, UNCTAD and IFOAM, produced two tools, i.e. the EquiTool, a guide for assessing equivalence of organic standards and technical regulations, and the international requirements for organic certification bodies (IROCB).

By the time delegates met on 28 and 29 July 2011, in Bogor, Indonesia, the equivalence exercise had expanded to include their respective conformity systems with the objective of reaching a full mutual equivalence agreement between the two countries. This is the first such initiative in the Asia region. It will pave the way for other members of the Asia Working Group, including India and China, who are involved in the regional multilateral equivalence initiative currently under discussion, facilitated by GOMA. It augurs well that the Director General of the Directorate of Quality and Standardization, Ministry of Agriculture, the lead agency for the competent authority of organic agriculture in Indonesia, addressed the meeting. In his speech he stressed that Indonesia’s interest to progress in the harmonisation and equivalence initiative is not just for Indonesia, but also for the development interest of the organic sector in the whole region.

Known as the rain city of Indonesia, it did rain hard during the meeting in Bogor, but that did not wash out delegates’ effort to meet all key objectives. The Philippine delegation, led by the Bureau of Agriculture Food Product Standards (BAFPS), got on well with the host Indonesian delegation, led by the Directorate of Quality and Standardization. It helped that some delegates were familiar with each other from previous engagements in ASEAN GAP (good agriculture practice) and other government work missions.

The meeting, assisted by a GOMA steering committee member and consultant from the region, reviewed ITF/GOMA documents, particularly the EquiTool, the Common Objectives and Requirements for Organic Standards (COROS), and IROCB. Also taking into consideration the Canada-USA equivalency process, the meeting managed consensus on a set of choices regarding: scope of equivalence; equivalence assessment process; choice of equivalence tools; supervision of certification; and elements and mechanisms to implement the agreement, including an action plan with deadlines and a confidentiality agreement.

Scope of agreement:

Parties agreed to start with the product scope of crop production, wild collection (including wild harvest honey), processing and farm inputs. Other sectors, such as aquaculture and animal husbandry, that are only just emerging in both countries, were not included as trade in the products is not expected in the near future. Grower group certification will be included. A decision on whether the equivalence agreement is only limited to products certified within the respective countries or if it will also cover products certified by approved certification bodies (CB) outside their respective countries was reserved for further discussion. Likewise, a decision on to what extent the equivalence agreement will or will not include products recognised by one party vis-à-vis other equivalency agreements with other parties was postponed.

Equivalence assessment process:

Parties agreed on the adoption of the EquiTool process for the equivalence assessment of both standards and certification requirements as follows:

a) Self assessment by respective parties.

b) Review of self assessments and initial feedback by respective parties.

c) Response to initial Assessment Review by respective parties on a need basis.

d) Resolution of equivalence issues between parties.

Choice of equivalence tools:

Parties agreed to use the COROS, including the Criteria for Variations as provided by the EquiTool, as the basis of their equivalence assessment of each other’s standards. In consideration of the development of the Asian Regional Organic Standard (AROS), parties also decided to include assessment of their respective standards against the AROS as an additional exercise. This was in light of the initiative and likelihood of the AROS being adopted as the ASEAN standard for organic agriculture.

Parties agreed to use the IROCB as the basis of their equivalence assessment of each other’s certification requirements. However, as the delegates were not all fully familiar with the IROCB, parties also agreed to include a side-by-side assessment of their respective certification requirements to support the decision.

Review of supervision of certification; monitoring and enforcement activities:

Parties will exchange sets of documents relevant to the implementation and enforcement of their respective organic labelling regulations. Based on their respective document reviews, parties will discuss the need for on-site evaluations of supervision and enforcement activities before making an agreement and arrangements accordingly.

Elements and mechanisms to maintain agreement:

An initial discussion identified key elements, and suggestions to address them were developed for further discussion:

  • On-going maintenance and updating of list of approved CB.
  • Information exchange regarding changes and modifications to implementation, e.g. revision of standards, certification or supervision rules.
  • Verification of effective supervision.
  • Handling of complaints.

Action Plan

An exchange of Letters of Intent between the respective competent authorities is expected before the two parties proceed further. Delegates agreed to target completion of the process before the GOMA conference scheduled in conjunction with BioFach in February 2012.

Ong Kung Wai

 

 
SWEDISH SNUS FROM ORGANIC TOBACCO Print Email
2011 September
Written by Eva Mattsson   
Sunday, 18 September 2011 19:00

Swedish ‘snus’ is a popular tobacco product that is used by many Swedes – you might have seen Swedes putting a brown, smelly substance under their upper lip with a happy smile. Swedish snus is only allowed in Sweden and cannot be sold in the rest of the EU, but is also used in some places in the US and Canada. Now the first Swedish snus made with organic tobacco has been released by Swedish Match. The product is not called organic and is not labelled with any organic logo as the national food administration has decided that as snus is not a food product it is not possible to make organic claims.

www.svensktsnus.se/en/Products/General/

 
GMO FREE HONEY IN THE EU Print Email
2011 September
Written by Nuria Alonso Villalon   
Sunday, 18 September 2011 18:53

The Court of Justice of the EU has ruled in September on the presence of pollen from GM crops in honey, and decided that honey and food supplements containing pollen derived from a GMO are foodstuffs produced from GMOs and cannot be marketed without prior authorisation.

The Court concluded that a substance such as pollen collected from a variety of genetically modified crops, which has lost its ability to reproduce and is totally incapable of transferring the genetic material it contains, cannot be considered a GMO. Nevertheless, it considers that products such as honey and food supplements containing such pollen constitute foodstuffs which contain ingredients produced from GMOs within the meaning of the Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 on genetically modified food.); The Court also observed that the authorisation scheme for foodstuffs containing ingredients produced from GMOs applies irrespective of whether the pollen is introduced intentionally or adventitiously into the honey.

Source: http://curia.europa.eu

 
Page 1 of 2
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner
Banner

The Organic Standard is owned and published by Grolink.