How the new regulations have caused unnecessary complexity

Though organic agriculture has been a developmental goal of South Korean non-governmental and civil organisations for many years, its popularity gathered momentum when official intervention and support was initiated in mid-to-late 1990s. South Korean authorities see organic agriculture as a part of sustainable or environmentally friendly agricultural systems, which includes at least three types of farming, i.e. organic farming, no-pesticide (chemical-free) farming and low-pesticide (or low-chemical) farming.

Support was first provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, who established the ‘Sustainable Agriculture Department’ as part of the Ministry in December 1994. In December 1997 the ‘Environmental Friendly Agriculture Promotion Act - EFAPA’ (code 5442) was adopted. This law was meant to promote all three types of sustainable farming systems through various policy measures. For instance, the law instructs the national government and local municipalities to establish policies supporting environmental agriculture through education and training, technological promotion, research, market monitoring, use of marks, subsidies and preferential public procurements. It also required the Ministry to establish an Environmental Agriculture Development Committee and develop a 5-year plan of action as well as provide the resources required to implement it. In addition, Article 22 of the law required the establishment of domestic standards for sustainable agriculture, including those for organic farming.

Following the EFAPA law, the Ministry of Agriculture (the name changed in August 1996) issued regulations and standards on environmental agriculture, including organic agriculture. It also assigned the National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service (NAQS) to be responsible for controlling the labelling of fresh agricultural produce and grains. In the initial period, NAQS was the only body allowed to offer organic certification to local producers. But in 2001, the law was revised to allow private certifiers offer organic certification, while NAQS became the competent authority to accredit private certifiers. In practice, however, NAQS has retained its organic certification service as well. The first organic certifier to receive approval from NAQS was the Heuksalim Soil Research Institute (HSRI).

The NAQS’s registration requirements for private certifiers are quite simple. Private certifiers must have a minimum of five inspectors and at least two of them must be full-time staff. The certifier must have separation between the inspection and certification works. It also needs to have a ‘business plan’ that includes internal policies and rules of procedures for its operation. NAQS requires a visit to each branch office of the private certifier applying for approval. Currently, there are 51 local certification bodies approved by the NAQS to conduct organic inspection and certification in Korea.

The regulations only cover fresh products, therefore, the Ministry of Agriculture can only enforce the organic certification and labelling of primary products. Control of processed products, has traditionally been the responsibility of the Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA). The KFDA issued a temporary regulation for control of organic processed products, mainly used for imported products (KFDA Notice #2007-69). KFDA’s regulation recognises IFOAM accreditation for the importation of organic processed products.

As the EFAPA law only covers fresh agricultural produce, all processed foods, either produced locally or imported, are not allowed to use the official organic logo. However, some types of processing, such as the handling of whole milk, is considered simple processing and is covered under EFAPA.

As demand for organic foods is rapidly growing in Korea, the need for controlling organic processed products is becoming more apparent. In November 2007, the South Korean parliament passed a new law called ‘Food Industry Promotion Act - FIPA’, which had its main aim to ‘promote the sound development and competitiveness of the food industry through the strengthening of the synergy between the food industry and agriculture so as to supply diverse and high-quality foods steadily with a view to contributing to the improvement of quality of life of the public and the development of the national economy’. The FIPA authorises the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MIFAFF) (the name was changed again in February 2008) to accredit and control certification bodies that provide inspection and certification services for ‘fine foods’. The term ‘fine food’ was defined to include organic processed food products (FIPA Article 23 ‘certification of organically processed foods’). It should be noted, however, that accreditation of organic processed food is a separate accreditation on top of the NAQS’s accreditation. Also, the MIFAFF conducts the accreditation itself and does not delegate to another department, as in the case of accreditation for certification bodies that certify fresh produce.

The MIFAFF has also developed several regulations (e.g. #2008-48 on 1 August 2008 and #2008-116 on 19 December 2008 and #2008-120 on 19 December 2008) that specify the requirements for manufacturing organic processed foods using imported ingredients and the importation of organic products, as well as registration and accreditation of certification bodies.

Some of the key requirements are:

• All organic raw materials shall comply with the Korean organic standards as specified in the Annex 3 of Article 9 of the Enforcement Regulations of the EFAPA (Article 3 of MIFAFF Notice #2008-120).
• The label must include ‘Organic (product name)’, the name of the certifying agency, and the certification number on the certified product (Article 6 of MIFAFF Notice #2008-120).
• Labelling in a foreign language with the potential of misleading consumers to believe that a product is an organic processed food such as ‘organic’, ‘bio’, ‘eco’, etc. in English or other languages is prohibited (Article 6 of MIFAFF Notice #2008-120).
• Certifiers must have at least three inspectors (Article 31 of FIPA Enforcement Decree) who must be qualified as specified by the MIFAFF Ordinance (Article 32). In addition, the inspectors must be trained at MIFAFF, an authorised education institute. Currently, two bodies are authorised to provide inspector training, i.e. the Korean Food Research Institute (KFRI) and the International Organic Inspector Association (IOIA).
• Certifiers need to report to the MIFAFF quarterly (Article 33 of FIPA Enforcement Decree).
• Certifiers must immediately report to the MIFAFF Minister when a person who received fine food certification has it revoked (Article 35 of FIPA Enforcement Decree).
• Inspection and certification expenses and fees have to be approved by the MIFAFF (Article 27 FIPA Enforcement Regulations).
• Accreditation by MIFAFF includes a document review and an on-site visit of the organic certifier (Article 8 of Guidelines for Designating and Operating ‘Fine Food’ Certification Agencies).

The law became effective in June 2008 but organic operators have until 1 January 2010 to implement the law.

Currently, according to a TOS source, four local certification bodies have been approved by the MIFAFF to do organic processed food certification. These are Doalnara Certified Organic Korea (DCOK), Control Union, Korean Food Research Institute (KFRI) and Global Organic Agriculturist Association (GOAA).

With the enforcement period approaching, the MIFAFF is under pressure from local organic traders and certifiers to revise its complicated rules and regulations in order not to disrupt the organic trade. The key barriers of the current legal system include:

• The double accreditations for fresh and processed products.

• The requirement to visit all branch offices of certifiers applying for fresh produce accreditation. This is particularly difficult when foreign certifiers have multiple offices in different countries.

• The requirement to have all ingredients certified according to South Korean organic standards.This is difficult to implement in the case of imported processed foods with multiple ingredients.

• The requirement to inspect all farms individually by certifier (grower group certification is not recognised) as many of the imported organic products, e.g. coffee, are produced by small-scale producers in developing countries whose certification is done through grower group.

Official organic logo for South Korea

Testing required by the Environmentally Friendly Agriculture Promotion Act (EFAPA)

An issue of concern for the South Korean organic sector is the cost of the comprehensive testing that must be undertaken to fulfil EFAPA requirements.

EFAPA standards do not specify that testing is required. However, it states that certain conditions concerning soil and water must be met. The only way to verify such conditions is through testing. As an example, the tests the certification body, Doalnara Certified Organic Korea, asks for are:

1. Pesticide residues. At present, farm produce is tested for 102 chemicals. If any of these chemical substances is detected, it must be lower than 10% of the allowed amount as set by the Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) in ONLY certain cases, such as drift or contamination from neighbouring irrigated fields. Each allowable level is different per crop.
2. Soil analysis. Soil analysis usually checks pH, sodium, potassium, etc. and is locally government-funded (free).
3. Soil heavy metal testing. Testing is done for eight metals: Cd, Cu, Pb, Cr6+, As, Hg, Ni. Zn.
4. Water quality testing. Water quality must meet standards for agricultural use.

Vitoon Panyakul, Isidor B Yu

Vitoon works with Green Net in Thailand.

Isidor B Yu is the chair of the Korean Organic Inspectors Association. With thanks to Raymond Yang (DCOK IFOAM Program Coordinator) and Jan Schipper (Manager of Control Union Korea office) for the additional information provided.