|
Organic Foods Reference – The Billion Dollar Site
Reference Section @ BillDoll.com – The Billion Dollar Site
|
|
|
|
Organic Foods Reference ..
..
Main Sections @ The Billion Dollar Site
Related sections
Info provided at this section for the following topics:
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Organic Foods
Fruit and vegetables grown organically appear similar to conventionally grown produce. In most jurisdictions, organic food must meet specified production standards, which specify growing and processing conditions different from normal agricultural and food safety requirements.Organic food is produced according to legally regulated standards. For crops, it means they were grown without the use of conventional pesticides, artificial fertilizers or sewage sludge, and that they were processed without ionizing radiation or food additives. For animals, it means they were reared without the routine use of antibiotics and without the use of growth hormones. Also, at all levels, organic food is produced without the use of genetically modified organisms.[1]
Historically, organic farms have been small family-run farms[2] – which is why organic food was once only available in small stores or farmers' markets. Now, organic foods are becoming much more widely available because organic food sales within the US have enjoyed 17 to 20 percent growth for the past few years[3] while sales of conventional food – while still larger in size – have grown at only about 2 to 3 percent a year. This large growth is predicted to continue, and many companies are jumping into the market.[4]
There is evidence that organic farms are more sustainable and environmentally sound, among other benefits. These claims, however, are subject to dispute and are not settled among scientists. One vocal critic in particular, Anthony Trewavas, has written detailed critiques of organic agriculture.[5][6]
..
..
Contents
1 Types of organic food 1.1 Fresh food 1.2 Processed food 2 Identifying organic food 2.1 Legal definition 3 Evidence of the benefits of organic food 3.1 For the environment 3.2 For producers 3.3 For consumers 4 Criticism 4.1 Organic food is elitist 4.2 Food safety 4.3 Organic food has "sold out" 4.4 Sustainability 5 History 5.1 Modern developments 6 Related movements 7 Facts and statistics 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading
Types of organic food
Mixed organic bean sproutsSee also: Organic farming for information on the production of organic food. Organic foods can be either fresh or processed, based on production methods.
Fresh food
Fresh food is seasonal and perishable. Vegetables and fruits are the most available type of organic, fresh food, and are closely associated with organic farming. They are often purchased directly from growers, at farmers' markets, from on-farm stands, supermarkets, through speciality food stores, and through community-supported agriculture (CSA) projects. Unprocessed animal products like organic meat, eggs, dairy, are less commonly available in their purely "fresh" form.
Chips, cookies, and other snacks are an example of processed food.
Processed food
Processed food accounts for most of the items in a supermarket. Often, within the same store, both organic and conventional versions of products are available, and the price of the organic version is usually higher (see modern developments). Most processed organic food comes from large food conglomerates[7] producing and marketing products like canned goods, frozen vegetables, prepared dishes and other convenience foods.
Processed organic food usually contains only (or at least a specified percentage of) organic ingredients and no artificial food additives, and is often processed with fewer artificial methods, materials and conditions (eg: no chemical ripening, no food irradiation).
..
..
Identifying organic food
At first, organic food comprised mainly fresh vegetables. Early consumers interested in organic food would look for chemical-free, fresh or minimally processed food. They mostly had to buy directly from growers: "Know your farmer, know your food" was the motto. Personal definitions of what constituted "organic" were developed through firsthand experience: by talking to farmers, seeing farm conditions, and farming activities. Small farms grew vegetables (and raised livestock) using organic farming practices, with or without certification, and the individual consumer monitored.
The National Organic Program (run by the USDA) is in charge of the legal definition of organic in the United States and does organic certification. It administers the Organic Seal to products and producers that meet strict requirements. Consumer demand for organic foods continues to increase, and high volume sales through mass outlets, like supermarkets, is rapidly replacing the direct farmer connection. For supermarket consumers, food production is not easily observable, and product labelling, like "certified organic", is relied on. Government regulations and third-party inspectors are looked to for assurance.
A "certified organic" label is usually the only way for consumers to know that a processed product is "organic".
Legal definition
To be certified organic, products must be grown and manufactured in a manner that adheres to standards set by the country they are sold in:
Australia: NASAA Organic Standard. Britain: Organic Farmers and Growers Organic Standards. United States: NOP Program Standards. In the United States, the Organic Food Production Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C.A. § 6501-22) created the National Organic Program (NOP). The regulations (7 C.F.R. Part 205) are enfored by the USDA through the National Organic Program under this act. These laws essentially require that any product that claims to be organic must have been manufactured and handled according to specific NOP requirements. A USDA Organic seal identifies products with at least 95% organic ingredients.
Evidence of the benefits of organic food
Defining the benefits of organic food has largely been left to word of mouth, occasional media coverage, and the promotional efforts of organic advocates. Even though many large food and beverage corporations, like Kraft Foods, have rapidly moved to acquire significant stake in both fresh and processed organic products, the specific sales points of "organics" go largely unmentioned on product packaging and in advertising.
These comparisons need to be evaluated with care because neither conventional nor organic farming practices are uniform.
For the environment
In several surveys that have looked at smaller studies to build an overall comparison between conventional and organic systems of farming a general agreement on benefits has been built. In these surveys it has been found that:
Organic farms do not release synthetic pesticides or herbicides into the environment - some of which have the potential to harm local wildlife.
Organic farms are better than conventional farms at sustaining diverse ecosystems. That is, populations of plants and insects, as well as animals.
When calculated either per unit area or per unit of yield:
Organic farms use less energy and produce less waste - waste such as
packaging materials for chemicals. One study found a 20% smaller yield from organic farms using 50% less fertilizer and 97% less pesticide. Studies comparing yields have had mixed results. Supporters claim that organically managed soil has a higher quality and higher water retention. This may help increase yields for organic farms in drought years. One study of two organic farming systems and one conventional found that, in one year's severe crop season drought, organic soybean yields were 52% and 96% higher than the conventional system and organic maize yields were 37% higher in one system, but 62% lower in the other. Studies are also consistent in showing that organic farms are more energy efficient.
For producers
For those who work on farms, there have been many studies on the health effects of pesticide exposure. Even when pesticides are used correctly, they still end up in the air and bodies of farm workers. Through these studies, organophosphate pesticides have become associated with acute health problems such as abdominal pain, dizziness, headaches, nausea, vomiting, as well as skin and eye problems. In addition, there have been many other studies that have found pesticide exposure is associated with more severe health problems such as respiratory problems, memory disorders, dermatologic conditions, cancer, depression, neurologic deficits, miscarriages, and birth defects. Summaries of peer-reviewed research have examined the link between pesticide exposure and neurological outcomes and cancer in organophosphate-exposed workers.
For consumers
A study published by the National Research Council in 1993 determined that for infants and children, the major source of exposure to pesticides is through diet. A recent study in 2006 measured the levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure in 23 schoolchildren before and after replacing their diet with organic food. In this study it was found that levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure dropped dramatically and immediately when the children switched to an organic diet.
Most conventionally grown foods contain pesticides and herbicide residues. There is controversial data on the health implications of certain pesticides. The herbicide Atrazine, for example, has been shown in some experiments to be a teratogen, even at concentrations as low as 0.1 part per billion, to emasculate male frogs by causing their gonads to produce eggs – effectively turning males into hermaphrodites.
The US Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies periodically review the licensing of suspect pesticides, but the process of de-listing is slow. One example of this slow process is exemplified by the pesticide Dichlorvos, or DDVP, which as recently as the year 2006 the EPA proposed its continued sale. The EPA has almost banned this pesticide on several occations since the 1970s, but it never did so despite considerable evidence that suggests DDVP is not only carcinogenic but dangerous to the human nervous system – especially in children.
Criticism
Criticism of organic food and organic agriculture includes the following:
Organic food is elitist
Critics claim that organic food is more expensive than conventional food and thus too highly priced to be affordable to persons on a lower income.
Food safety
Conventional food does contain pesticide residues – often multiple residues, but some toxicologists consider the amount to be so low as to have no effect on the consumer. In today's society, it is virtually impossible to grow produce "residue-free" and even organically grown foods do not claim to be completely free of chemical residues.
The potential health effects of minute quantities of pesticide residues described in the evidence of benefits section are subject to debate. Modern analytical chemistry is capable of detecting such small quantities of a substance that the meaning of a positive result is difficult to interpret, and many scientists think that such residues are without effect. Pesticides are subjected to a battery of tests before they can be approved by the EPA and "residue tolerances" are established above which produce containing these tolerances cannot be sold.
It should also be kept in mind that all substances are toxic at some level.[33] In fact, Professors Lois Swirsky Gold and Bruce Ames have shown that 50% of all natural chemicals in food gave a positive test as a carcinogen when tested in rodents, casting doubt on the validity of the test methods.[34]
Author Thomas DeGregori argues that at the heart of the organic food movement are feelings of anti-technology and anti-modern science and points out that it is modern science, after all, that has increased the life expectancy of many people and helps to feed the world's growing population.
Organic food has "sold out"
Organic food began as a small movement with farmers rejecting the use of conventional farming practices. With the market share of Organic food outpacing much of the food industry many big companies have moved into this market. With these large companies, and with the creation of a legal certification framework (2002 in the US), there is worry that the very definition of organic food will change from what it used to be.[36]
Sustainability
Newer non-organic practices, particularly no-till agriculture, which relies on pesticides to clear the land, offer considerable improvements in energy efficiency. Anthony Trewavas argues that the sustainability of organic agriculture is less than that of conventional agriculture (see Trewavas (2000)).
Soil benefits: Many of the soil benefits of organic agriculture have been demonstrated to be due to crop rotation, which is not an inherently organic strategy (see Trewavas (2000) cited above).
Pesticide use: It is a common misconsception that organic agriculture does not use pesticides. Some pesticides used on organic farms contain the heavy metal copper, which can lead to copper accumulation in the soil. Other pesticides that are approved for use by organic producers include ryania, sabadilla, and rotenone.
Toxicity of "organic pesticides": Conventional pesticides must be thoroughly studied before they can be placed on the market. However, such studies are not required for the pesticides used in organic agriculture. For example, the botanical pesticide Sabadilla is highly toxic to honeybees, and according to the California Department of Environmental Protection its mammalian toxicology has not been fully studied.
John Kent, Lecturer in Agricultural Protection, from the School of Agriculture at Charles Sturt University in Australia supports the idea that organically grown food is not as sustainable, arguing that while organically grown food certainly has its place in today's free market, that if all farmers decided to farm in such a way, "we would soon find ourselves in a grave situation."
History
Modern agriculture, utilizing large amounts of artificial chemical inputs, monocultures, and intensive farming methods, is a recent phenomenon. Indeed, one could argue that almost the entire history of agriculture consists of what would be now termed "organic farming".
Rising consumer awareness of organic methods began in the 1950s with the promotion of organic gardening. In the 1960s and 1970s, one effect of a growing grassroots concern with environmental issues was the appearance of more elaborate approaches to organic food, including food-buying co-ops and dedicated organic producers. In the 1970s and 1980s, private sector organic certification and development of regulations at the governmental level began around the world. In the 1990s, formal organic certification began to be legislated in various countries, and this trend continues to today. During the same period, the organic food market experienced a sustained surge in growth, expanding at around 20% a year (exceeding the rest of the food industry by a factor of at least 10). The first years of the 21st century saw multinational food corporations taking major stakes in the organic market, and this has dramatically increased the variety, availability and falling cost of processed organic food.[citation needed]
Modern developments
The prices for organic food has been, and continues to be, higher than their conventional counterparts. This is because farmers who grow organic food have to meet stricter quality standards to have their products certified organic. More labor is required to achieve this, bringing up the cost.
Since the 80s there is an increasing number of supermarkets that carry large volumes of organic food. This includes Whole Foods Market in the US, and Waitrose in the UK. With large volume sales, these retailers have been bringing the price of organic food down.
In the United States the pressure to bring the cost down will vastly increase soon because in 2006, Wal-Mart, the largest grocery retailer, announced plans to increase the amount of organic food available in its stores.[42] Both conventionally grown and organic versions of certain products will be available, but Wal-Mart intends to keep the price of the organic versions to no more than 10% over the price of the conventionally grown counterparts.
Because of Wal-Mart's size and business practices, their move into selling organic food has some people worried.[43] Specifically, the increase in demand for organic food will require that more organic produce be imported.[44] Secondly, the push to lower prices "would virtually guarantee that Wal-Mart's version of cheap organic food is not sustainable".[45]
Related movements
Various alternative organic standards are emerging. They generally bypass formal certification, which can be expensive and cumbersome, and provide their own definition of organic food. One such, the Authentic Food standard, proposed by leading US organic farmer Eliot Coleman, includes criteria that are incompatible with current agribusiness:
All foods are produced by the growers who sell them. Fresh fruits and vegetables, milk, eggs and meat products are produced within a 50-mile radius of their place of their final sale. The seed and storage crops (grains, beans, nuts, potatoes, etc.) are produced within a 300-mile radius of their final sale. Only traditional processed foods such as cheese, wine, bread and lactofermented products may claim, "Made with Authentic ingredients."[46] Some are also implementing new approaches to defining and buying food. Community-supported agriculture (CSA) is one such approach, that cuts out all the middlemen by having consumers partner with local farmers. CSA members prepurchase "shares" in a season's harvest, and pick up their weekly portions from distribution sites. Thus, consumers provide direct financing for farms, participate in the risks and rewards of annual growing conditions, and participate with farmers in distribution networks.
CSA is one example of "buying locally," which is often valued by both the organic food consumer and producer. Generally speaking, locally-grown seasonal food can be brought to market more quickly than food that has to be transported long distances, and therefore can be better tasting and to some degree more nutritious by virtue of its freshness. Additionally, the act of buying foods that are locally-grown benefits local farmers and other employers. This local food approach is seen as a direct investment in one's own community and a way to reduce economic dependence.
Organic food is also often linked with the fair trade movement, based on the principle that social and environmental sustainability are inextricably interdependent.
Facts and statistics
Organic Seals
United States
Japan
Germany
Australia While organic food accounts for 1–2% of total food sales worldwide, the organic food market is growing rapidly, far ahead of the rest of the food industry, in both developed and developing nations.
World organic food sales were US $23 billion in 2002.[47] The world organic market has been growing by 20% a year since the early 1990s, with future growth estimates ranging from 10-50% annually depending on the country. In the United States, where organic food is federally regulated by the National Organic Program:
"Organic products are now available in nearly 20,000 natural food stores and 73% of conventional grocery stores, and account for approximately 1-2% of total food sales in the U.S." — Feb 2003[48] Two thirds of organic milk and cream and half of organic cheese and yogurt are sold through conventional supermarkets.[49] In the European Union, organic food is regulated by the EU-Eco-regulation
Austria: The government has created incentives so that within the next few years, 10% of its food will comprise locally grown organic foods. [citation needed] Germany: Baby food is almost exclusively organic, and over 30% of bread baked in Munich is organic.[2] Italy: Existing legislation calls for all school lunches to be organic by 2005. [citation needed] Poland: Since May 2004, products of certified organic farms in Poland are allowed to carry the EU organic farming label, but it is not obligatory. This sign certifies that a given product was produced according to the EU 2092/91 organic farming regulation and therefore can be freely traded and marketed on the whole Common Market. In 2005 already 168,000 ha of land were under organic management. The value of the organic market in Poland is estimated at Eur 50 million (2006). [3] UK: By January 2005, 686,100 ha of land was managed to organic standards. Organic food sales increased from just over £100 million in 1993/94 to £1.21 billion in 2004 (an 11% increase on 2003). [4] In Cuba:
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, the government converted the entire country to organic agriculture, and currently organic agriculture is the mainstream and many pesticides are not permitted by law. [5] However, Cuba defines "organic" differently from many countries and encourages genetically engineered crops, particularly those with enhanced nutritional content and vaccines from GMO plants. [6][7]
See also @ Wikipedia
Organic certification Organic farming Organic gardening Pesticide Herbicide Sustainable agriculture Genetically Modified Food Natural food movement Natural Foods Diet
References
^ Organic Food Standards and Labels: The Facts. National Organic Program. Retrieved on 2006-06-06. ^ Family Farms. Local Harvest. Retrieved on 2006-06-06. ^ Hansen, Nanette (2004). Organic food sales see healthy growth (html). MSNBC. Retrieved on 2006-06-20. ^ Warner, Melanie. "What Is Organic? Powerful Players Want a Say". New York Times: Nov. 1, 2005. ^ Trewavas, Anthony (March 2001). "Urban myths of organic farming". Nature 410: 409-410. ^ Trewavas, Anthony (2004). "A critical assessment of organic farming-and-food assertions with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture". Crop Protection 23: 757–781. DOI:doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2004.01.009. ^ [1] ^ "Corporate Industry Structure: 2005", by Phil Howard, Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, University of California, Santa Cruz. ^ Stolze, M.; Piorr, A.; Häring, A.M. and Dabbert, S. (2000) Environmental impacts of organic farming in Europe. Organic Farming in Europe: Economics and Policy Vol. 6. Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart-Hohenheim. ^ Hansen, Birgitte, Alrøe, H. J. & Kristensen, E. S. (Jan 2001). "Approaches to assess the environmental impact of organic farming with particular regard to Denmark". Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 83: 11-26. DOI:doi:10.1016/S0167-8809(00)00257-7. ^ Nelson et.al (April 2004). "Organic FAQs". Nature 428: 796-798. DOI:10.1038/428796a. ^ Mader, et.al. (2002). "Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic Farming". Science 296: 1694–1697. ^ Welsh, Rick (1999). "Economics of Organic Grain and Soybean Production in the Midwestern United States". Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture. ^ Johnston, A. E. (1986). "Soil organic-matter, effects on soils and crops". Soil Use Management 2: 97-105. ^ Lotter, D. W., Seidel, R. & Liebhardt W. (2003). "The performance of organic and conventional cropping systems in an extreme climate year". American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18: 146-154. ^ Reganold et.al (April 2001). "Sustainability of three apple production systems". Nature 410: 926-930. ^ Linda A. McCauley, et.al. (2006). "Studying Health Outcomes in Farmworker Populations Exposed to Pesticides". Environmental Health Perspectives 114. ^ Ecobichon DJ. 1996. Toxic effects of pesticides. In: Casarett and Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons (Klaassen CD, Doull J, eds). 5th ed. New York:MacMillan, 643–689. ^ Arcury TA, Quandt SA, Mellen BG (2003). "An exploratory analysis of occupational skin disease among Latino migrant and seasonal farmworkers in North Carolina". Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health 9 (3): 221–32. ^ O'Malley MA (1997). "Skin reactions to pesticides". Occupational Medicine 12: 327–345. ^ Daniels JL, Olshan AF, Savitz DA. (1997). "Pesticides and childhood cancers". Environmental Health Perspectives 105: 1068–1077. ^ Kamel F, et.al. (2003). "Neurobehavioral performance and work experience in Florida farmworkers". Environmental Health Perspectives 111: 1765-1772. ^ Firestone JA, Smith-Weller T, Franklin G, Swanson P, Longsteth WT, Checkoway H. (2005). "Pesticides and risk of Parkinson disease: a population-based case-control study". Archives of Neurology 62: 91-95. ^ Engel LS, O'Meara ES, Schwartz SM. (2000). "Maternal occupation in agriculture and risk of limb defects in Washington State, 1980-1993". Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 26 (3): 193–198. Cordes DH, Rea DF. (1988). "Health hazards of farming". American Family Physician 38: 233–243. Das R, Steege A, Baron S, Beckman J, Harrison R (2001). "Pesticide-related illness among migrant farm workers in the United States". International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 7: 303–312. Eskenazi B, Bradman A, Castorina R. (1999). "Exposures of children to organophosphate pesticides and their potential adverse health effects". Environmental Health Perspectives 107: 409–419. Garcia AM (2003). "Pesticide exposure and women's health". American Journal of Industrial Medicine 44 (6): 584–594. Moses M. (1989). "Pesticide-related health problems and farmworkers". American Association of Occupational Health Nurses 37: 115–130. Schwartz DA, Newsum LA, Heifetz RM. (1986). "Parental occupation and birth outcome in an agricultural community". Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 12: 51-54. Stallones L, Beseler C. (2002). "Pesticide illness, farm practices, and neurological symptoms among farm residents in Colorado". Environ Res 90: 89–97. Strong, LL, Thompson B, Coronado GD, Griffith WC, Vigoren EM, Islas I. (2004). "Health symptoms and exposure to organophosphate pesticides in farmworkers". American Journal of Industrial Medicine 46: 599–606. Van Maele-Fabry G, Willems JL. (2003). "Occupation related pesticide exposure and cancer of the prostate: a meta-analysis". Occupational and Environmental Medicine 60 (9): 634–642. ^ Alavanja MC, Hoppin JA, Kamel F. (2004). "Health effects of chronic pesticide exposure: cancer and neurotoxicity". Annual Review of Public Health 25: 155–197. ^ Kamel F, Hoppin JA (2004). "Association of pesticide exposure with neurological dysfunction and disease". Environmental Health Perspectives 112: 950–958. ^ National Research Council (1993). Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children, 1st, National Academies Press. ISBN 0-309-04875-3. ^ Lu, Chensheng, et. al. (2006). "Organic Diets Significantly Lower Children’s Dietary Exposure to Organophosphorus Pesticides". Environmental Health Perspectives 114: 260-263. ^ Tyrone Hayes, Kelly Haston, Mable Tsui, Anhthu Hoang, Cathryn Haeffele, and Aaron Vonk (2003). "Atrazine-Induced Hermaphroditism at 0.1 ppb in American Leopard Frogs". Environmental Health Perspectives 111. ^ Raeburn, Paul (2006). "Slow-Acting: After 25 years the EPA still won't ban a risky pesticide". Scientific American 295: 26. ^ FAQ: Chemical Residues. CF Fresh. Retrieved on 2006-10-06. ^ Chem-News October 1990. Cornell University. Retrieved on 2006-10-06. ^ Toxicology & Risk. The Environmental Literacy Council. Retrieved on 2006-10-05. ^ Gold, Lois; Slone, T.H., Ames, B.N., and Manley, N.B. (2001). "Pesticide Residues in Food and Cancer Risk: A Critical Analysis.". In: Handbook of Pesticide Toxicology, (2nd ed.), 799-843, Academic Press. ^ DeGregori, Thomas R. (2004). Origins of the Organic Agriculture Debate. Iowa State Press, Ames, Iowa, 211 p. ISBN 0-8138-0513-9 ^ Shapin, Steven. "Paradise Sold." The New Yorker, May 15, 2006. ^ Trewavas, Anthony (March 2001). "Urban myths of organic farming". Nature 410: 409-410. ^ Trewavas, Anthony (2004). "A critical assessment of organic farming-and-food assertions with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture". Crop Protection 23: 757–781. DOI:doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2004.01.009. ^ Organic Pest Control (2006-07-25). Idaho Association of Soil Conservation Districts (2004). ^ http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/toxsums/pdfs/521.pdf ^ Pesticides in Agriculture. The Regional Institute. Retrieved on 2006-10-6. ^ Warner, Melanie. "Wal-Mart Eyes Organic Foods", New York Times, May 12, 2006. ^ Scheuer, Kif (2006). Wal-mart's organic bomb (html). Grist Magazine. Retrieved on 2006-06-04. ^ Gogoi, Pallavi. "Wal-Mart's Organic Offensive", Business Week, March 29, 2006. ^ Pollan, Michael. "Mass Natural: With Wal-Mart going organic, where will organic go?", New York Times Magazine, June 4, 2006. ^ "Authentic Food - Authentic Farming", by Eliot Coleman, Mother Earth News. ^ The Global Market for Organic Food & Drink (html). Organic Monitor (2002). Retrieved on 2006-06-20. ^ Catherine Greene and Carolyn Dimitri (2003). Organic Agriculture: Gaining Ground (html). USDA Economic Research Service. Retrieved on 2006-06-20. ^ Dryer, Jerry (2003). Market Trends: Organic Lessons (html). Prepared Foods. Retrieved on 2006-06-20.
Further reading
On Organics[show] Environmental Magazine (2005). Green Living. Penguin Group (USA). ISBN 0-452-28574-7. Gussow, Joan Dye (2002). This Organic Life: Confessions of a Suburban Homesteader. Chelsea Green Publishing. ISBN 1-931498-24-5. Nancarrow, Loren; Taylor, Janet Hogan (2000). Dead Daisies Make Me Crazy: Garden Solutions without Chemical Pollution. Ten Speed Press. ISBN 1-58008-156-8. Pretty, J. N., et. al. (2006). "Resource-Conserving Agriculture Increases Yields in Developing Countries". Environmental Science and Technology 40: 1114-1119. Phillips, Michael (1998). The Apple Grower: A Guide for the Organic Orchardist. Chelsea Green Publishing. ISBN 1-890132-04-7. Rubin, Carole (2003). How to Get Your Lawn & Garden Off Drugs: A Basic Guide to Pesticide-Free Gardening in North America. Harbour Publishing Company. ISBN 1-55017-320-0. Stokstad, Erik (May 2002). "Organic Farms Reap Many Benefits". Science 296: 1589. On Conventional vs Organic Farming[show] Guthman, Julie (2004). Agrarian Dreams: The Paradox of Organic Farming in California. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24095-2. Hamilton, Denis; Crossley, Stephen (editors) (2004). Pesticide residues in food and drinking water. J. Wiley. ISBN 0-471-48991-3. Hond, Frank et.al. (2003). Pesticides: problems, improvements, alternatives. Blackwell Science. ISBN 0-632-05659-2. Watson, David H. (editor) (2004). Pesticide, veterinary and other residues in food. Woodhead Publishing. ISBN 1-85573-734-5. Wargo, John (1998). Our Children's Toxic Legacy: How Science and Law Fail to Protect Us from Pesticides. Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07446-8. Williams, Christine (2002). "Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green?". Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 19-24.
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_food
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Organic Certification
Organic certification is a certification process for producers of organic food and other organic agricultural products. In general, any business directly involved in food production can be certified, including seed suppliers, farmers, food processors, retailers and restaurants. Requirements vary from country to country, and generally involve a set of production standards for growing, storage, processing, packaging and shipping that include:
avoidance of synthetic chemical inputs (e.g. fertilizer, pesticides, antibiotics, food additives, etc) and genetically modified organisms; use of farmland that has been free from chemicals for a number of years (often, three or more); keeping detailed written production and sales records (audit trail); maintaining strict physical separation of organic products from non-certified products; undergoing periodic on-site inspections. Certified organic producers are also subject to the same agricultural, food safety and other government regulations that apply to non-certified producers.
Contents
1 Purpose of certification 2 The certification process 3 Certification & Product Labelling 4 Certification around the world 5 Certification issues 5.1 Obstacle to small independents 5.2 Manipulation of regulations 5.3 Misrepresentation of the term organic 6 See also 7 References 7.1 Citations and notes 7.2 General
Purpose of certification
Organic certification addresses a growing worldwide demand for organic food. It is intended to assure quality and prevent fraud. For organic producers, certification identifies suppliers of products approved for use in certified operations. For consumers, "certified organic" serves as a product assurance, similar to "low fat", "100% whole wheat", or "no artificial preservatives".
It is important to note that certification is essentially a marketing initiative, aimed at regulating and facilitating the sale of organic products to consumers. Individual certification bodies have their own service marks, which can act as branding to consumers—a certifier may promote the high consumer recognition value of its logo as a marketing advantage to producers, although it represents certification to identical organic standards as its competitors.
Certification standards and organic laws do not affect existing agricultural policies or legislation.
The certification process
In order to certify a farm, the farmer is typically required to engage in a number of new activities, in addition to normal farming operations:
Study the organic standards, which cover in specific detail what is and is not allowed for every aspect of farming, including storage, transport and sale. Compliance - farm facilities and production methods must comply with the standards, which may involve modifying facilities, sourcing and changing suppliers, etc. Documentation - extensive paperwork is required, detailing farm history and current set-up, and usually including results of soil and water tests. Planning - a written annual production plan must be submitted, detailing everything from seed to sale: seed sources, field and crop locations, fertilization and pest control activities, harvest methods, storage locations, etc. Inspection - annual on-farm inspections are required, with a physical tour, examination of records, and an oral interview. Fee - an annual inspection/certification fee (currently starting at $400-$2,000/year, in the US and Canada, depending on the agency and the size of the operation). Record-keeping - written, day-to-day farming and marketing records, covering all activities, must be available for inspection at any time. In addition, short-notice or surprise inspections can be made, and specific tests (e.g. soil, water, plant tissue) may be requested.
For first-time farm certification, the soil must meet basic requirements of being free from use of prohibited substances (synthetic chemicals, etc) for a number of years. A conventional farm must adhere to organic standards for this period, often, three years. This is known as being in transition. Transitional crops are not considered fully organic. A farm already growing without chemicals may be certified without this delay.
Certification for operations other than farms is similar. The focus is on ingredients and other inputs, and processing and handling conditions. A transport company would be required to detail the use and maintenance of its vehicles, storage facilities, containers, and so forth. A restaurant would have its premises inspected and its suppliers verified as certified organic.
Certification & Product Labelling
The official seal of USDA certified organic foods.Being able to put the word "organic" on a food product is a valuable marketing advantage in today's consumer market. Certification is intended to protect consumers from misuse of the term, and make buying organics easy. However, the organic labelling made possible by certification itself usually requires explanation.
In the US, federal organic legislation defines three levels of organics. Products made entirely with certified organic ingredients and methods can be labelled "100% organic". Products with 95% organic ingredients can use the word "organic". Both may also display the USDA organic seal. A third category, containing a minimum of 70% organic ingredients, can be labelled "made with organic ingredients". In addition, products may also display the logo of the certification body that approved them. Products made with less than 70% organic ingredients can not advertise this information to consumers and can only mention this fact in the product's ingredient statement. Similar percentages and labels apply in the EU.
Certification around the world
In some countries, organic standards are formulated and overseen by the government. The United States, the European Union and Japan have comprehensive organic legislation, and the term "organic" may be used only by certified producers. In countries without organic laws, government guidelines may or may not exist, while certification is handled by non-profit organizations and private companies.
EU countries acquired comprehensive organic legislation with the implementation of the EU-Eco-regulation 1992. Certification is handled on the national level.
In the United Kingdom, organic certification is handled by a number of organizations, of which the largest are the Soil Association and Organic Farmers and Growers. All the certifying bodies are subject to the regulations of the UK Register of Organic Food Standards (UKROFS), which itself is bound by EU legislation.
In Sweden, organic certification is handled by the private corporation KRAV.
Quality Assurance International is the largest private certifier of organic food systems in the US.In the US, the National Organic Program (NOP), was enacted as federal legislation in Oct. 2002. It restricts the use of the term "organic" to certified organic producers (excepting growers selling under $5,000 a year, who must still comply and submit to a records audit if requested, but do not have to formally apply). Certification is handled by state, non-profit and private agencies that have been approved by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Quality Assurance International (QAI), a private US corporation with a partner in Japan, Ecocert-QAI Japan Ltd., is the largest organic certification body in the United States.
One of the first organizations to carry out organic certification in North America was the California Certified Organic Farmers, founded in 1973.
In Canada, the government has published a national organic standard, but it is a guideline only; legislation is in process. Certification is provided by private sector organizations. In Quebec, provincial legislation provides government oversight of organic certification within the province, through the Quebec Accreditation Board (Conseil D'Accréditation Du Québec).
In Japan, the Japanese Agricultural Standard (JAS) was fully implemented as law in April, 2001. This was revised in November of 2005 and all JAS certifiers were required to be re-accredited by the Ministry of Agriculture.
In Australia, the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) is the controlling body for organic certification because there are no domestic standards for organic produce within Australia. Currently the government only becomes involved with organic certification at export, meaning AQIS is the default certification agency. Although there is no system for monitoring the labeling of organic produce sold within Australia, this primarily effects the retail public. Commercial buyers for whom this is an issue have simply taken the export system as a de facto standard and are willing to pay premium prices for produce from growers certified under the National schemes. As of 2006, there are seven AQIS-approved certifying organisations authorised to issue Organic Produce Certifcates, and in 2004 there were 2345 certified operators. The largest importer of Australia's organic produce (by weight) is Japan (33.59%), followed by the UK (17.51%), France (10.51%), and New Zealand (10.21%). The largest certifier of organic products is Australian Certified Organic, which is a subsidiary of Biological Farmers Australia, the largest organic farmers' collective in the country.
Internationally, equivalency negotiations are underway, and some agreements are already in place, to harmonize certification between countries, facilitating international trade. There also international certification bodies, including members of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), the Organic Crop Improvement Association (OCIA), and Ecocert. Where formal agreements do not exist between countries, organic product for export is often certified by agencies from the importing countries, who may establish permanent foreign offices for this purpose. Ecocert is the world's largest organic certification organization with offices in 20 countries, and operating in over 85 countries. They certify over 40,000 farms and companies worldwide.
Certification issues
Organic certification is not without its critics. Some of the staunchest opponents of chemical-based farming and factory farming practices, also oppose formal certification. They see it as a way to drive independent organic farmers out of business, and to undermine the quality of organic food. Other organizations such as the Organic Trade Association work within the organic community to foster awareness of legislative and other related issues, and enable the influence and participation of organic proponents.
Obstacle to small independents
Originally, in the 1960s through the 1980s, the organic food industry comprised mainly small, independent farmers, selling locally. Organic "certification" was a matter of trust, based on a direct relationship between farmer and consumer. Critics view regulatory certification as a potential barrier to entry for small producers, by burdening them with increased costs, paperwork, and bureaucracy.
The pressures of certification on the small farmer producing for the local food market are real and significant, particularly for mixed vegetable production. For instance, certified organic seed is expensive, and the selection is limited: currently, organic seed generally costs three to five times that of uncertified seed, and only a handful of varieties of each crop are available, compared to dozens of varieties in uncertified seed. Seed producers face the same constraints in certification as do organic farmers, however, unlike farmers who choose to farm organically for an identified market, the majority of smaller scale demand is for uncertified seed. Also, the detailed record-keeping formats, from planting to harvest, are usually designed for larger, single-crop harvests; observed strictly, the paperwork can be onerous for farmers harvesting a wide variety of crop in small quantities on daily or weekly schedules. Balancing strict, rule-based certification with practical concerns such as these necessitates "case-by-case" exceptions for all but the biggest organic farmers to survive within the system. Regardless of the intentions, strict certification in practice favors large-scale production.[citation needed]
Manipulation of regulations
Critics of formal certification also fear an erosion of organic standards. Provided with a legal framework within which to operate, lobbyists can push for amendments and exceptions favorable to large-scale production, resulting in "legally organic" products produced in ways similar to current conventional food. Combined with the fact that organic products are now sold predominantly through high volume distribution channels such as supermarkets, the concern is that the market is evolving to favor the biggest producers, and this could result in the small organic farmer being squeezed out.
Manipulation of certification regulations as a way to mislead or outright dupe the public is a very real concern. Some examples are creating exceptions (allowing non-organic inputs to be used without loss of certification status) and creative interpretation of standards to meet the letter, but not the intention, or particular rules. For example, a complaint filed with the USDA in February 2004 against a food ingredient producer and its certifying agent charged that tap water had been certified organic, and advertised for use in a variety of water-based body care and food products, in order to label them "organic" under US law. Steam-distilled plant extracts, consisting mainly of tap water introduced during the distilling process, were certified organic, and promoted as an organic base that could then be used in a claim of organic content. The case was dismissed by the USDA, as the products had been actually used only in personal care products, over which the department at the time extended no labelling control. The company subsequently adjusted its marketing by removing reference to use of the extracts in food products. Several months later, the USDA extended its organic labelling to personal care products; this complaint has not been refiled.
Misrepresentation of the term organic
The word organic is central to the certification (and organic food marketing) process, and this is also questioned by some. Where organic laws exist, producers cannot use the term legally without certification. To bypass this legal requirement for certification, various alternative certification approaches, using currently undefined terms like "authentic" and "natural" instead of "organic", are emerging. In the US, motivated by the cost and legal requirements of certification (as of Oct. 2002), the private farmer-to-farmer association, Certified Naturally Grown, offers a "non-profit alternative eco-labelling program for small farms that grow using USDA Organic methods but are not a part of the USDA Certified Organic program."[2]
A related concern holds that certification is replacing consumer education, and this goes against the essential, holistic nature of organic farming. By reducing complex issues and regulations to a simple, convenient certified organic label, consumers may more easily ignore the principles and practices behind organics, leaving the definition of organic farming and organic food open to manipulation.
See also
Herbicide Organic food Organic Volunteers Pesticide
References
Citations and notes ^ "OCA Files Complaint with USDA's National Organic Program Against 'Organic Water' Scheme". Organic Consumers Association, 18-Feb-2004 . Retrieved 4-Mar-2006. The USDA decision was summarized in a formal letter dated 9-Mar-2005: USDA Final Decision 030905. Retrieved 19-Apr-2006. In August 2005, the USDA did extend NOP coverage to non-food products: "Organic Consumers Association: USDA Yields in Battle Over Access of Personal Care to National Organic Program; Organic Non-Food Products Qualify, Says USDA". Retrieved 21-Apr-2006. ^ Certified Naturally Grown. Retrieved 4-Mar-2006.
General
Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA National Organic Program: Final Rule (7 CFR Part 205; Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 246, 21 December 2000) OCPP/Pro-Cert Canada Organic Agriculture & Food Standard (OC/PRO IS 350/150) The Australian Organic Industry: A Profile, 2004, [1] (pdf) European Commission: Organic Farming
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Organic Farming
Organic farming is a form of agriculture which avoids or largely excludes the use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, plant growth regulators, and livestock feed additives. As far as possible organic farmers rely on crop rotation, crop residues, animal manures and mechanical cultivation to maintain soil productivity and tilth, to supply plant nutrients, and to control weeds, insects and other pests.
According to the international organic farming organisation IFOAM : The role of organic agriculture, whether in farming, processing, distribution, or consumption, is to sustain and enhance the health of ecosystems and organisms from the smallest in the soil to human beings.
Organic farming is also often associated with support for principles beyond agricultural practices, such as fair trade and environmental stewardship.
Contents
1 Overview 2 History 3 Methods 3.1 Organic farming systems 3.2 Standards 4 Productivity 5 Issues 5.1 Pesticides 5.2 Genetically modified organisms 5.3 The environment 5.4 Food contamination 5.5 Food quality 5.6 Children's Health 5.7 Soil conservation 5.8 Rural infrastructure 5.9 Sustainability 5.10 Certification 6 The future 7 References 8 See also
Overview
Organic farming excludes the use of synthetic inputs, such as synthetic fertilizers,pesticides, herbicides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In a number of countries, including the US and most of Europe organic farming is also defined by law, so that the commercial use of the term organic to describe farming and food products is regulated by the government. Where laws exist, organic certification is available to farms for a fee, and it is usually illegal for a non-certified farm to call itself or its products organic. Elsewhere, for example, in Canada, voluntary certification is available, while legislation may be pending.
Methods of organic farming vary. However, organic approaches share common goals and practices. In addition to the exclusion of synthetic agrichemicals, these include protection of the soil (from erosion, nutrient depletion, structural breakdown), promotion of biodiversity (for example growing a variety of crops rather than a single crop or planting hedges around fields), and outdoor grazing for livestock and poultry. Within this framework, individual farmers develop their own organic production systems, determined by factors such as climate, market conditions, and local agricultural regulations.
History
The organic movement began as a reaction of agricultural scientists and farmers against the industrialization of agriculture. Advances in biochemistry, (nitrogen fertilizer) and engineering (the internal combustion engine) in the early 20th century led to profound changes in farming. Research in plant breeding produced hybrid seeds. Fields grew in size and cropping became specialized to make efficient use of machinery and reap the benefits of the green revolution. Technological advances during World War II spurred on post-war innovation in all aspects of agriculture, resulting in such advances as large-scale irrigation, fertilization, and the use of pesticides. Ammonium nitrate, used in munitions[citation needed], became an abundantly cheap source of nitrogen. DDT, originally developed by the military to control disease-carrying insects among troops, was applied to crops, launching the era of widespread pesticide use.
While some indigenous cultures had been farming organically for centuries, organic agriculture began to develop consciously in Central Europe and India in the early twentieth century as a reaction to industrialization. The British botanist, Sir Albert Howard often called “the father of modern organic agriculture” studied traditional farming practices in Bengal, India. He came to regard such practices as superior to modern agricultural science and recorded them in his 1940 book, An Agricultural Testament.
In Germany, Rudolf Steiner's Spiritual Foundations for the Renewal of Agriculture, published in 1924, led to the popularization of biodynamic agriculture.
The first use of the term organic farming is usually credited to Lord Northbourne, in his book, Look to the Land (1940), wherein he described a holistic, ecologically balanced approach to farming.
In the US, J.I. Rodale popularized organic gardening among consumers.
In 1972, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), was founded in Versailles, France. IFOAM was dedicated to the diffusion of information on the principles and practices of organic agriculture across national and linguistic boundaries.
In the 1980s, various farming and consumer groups worldwide began pressing for government regulation of organic production. This led to legislation and certification standards being enacted beginning in the 1990s.
Since the early 1990s, the retail market for organic farming in developed economies has grown about 20 per cent annually due to increasing consumer demand. While small independent producers and consumers initially drove the rise of organic farming, meanwhile as the volume and variety of "organic" products grows, production is increasingly large-scale.
Methods
Organic farming involves fostering natural processes, often over extended periods of time, and what advocates describe as a holistic approach[citation needed]. Enhancing soil health is the cornerstone of organic farming. This is a biological process, driven by microorganisms, that allows the natural production of nutrients in the soil throughout the growing season, and has been referred to as feeding the soil to feed the plant.[citation needed] A variety of methods are employed, including crop rotation, green manure, cover cropping, application of compost, and mulching. Organic farmers also use processed natural fertilizers such as seed meal, and various mineral powders such as rock phosphate and greensand, a naturally occurring form of potash.
Differing approaches to pest control are equally notable. In conventional farming, a specific insecticide may be used against a particular insect pest. Chemical controls can dramatically reduce pest populations for the short term, yet by unavoidably killing (or starving) natural predator insects and animals, can cause an ultimate increase in the pest population. Repeated use of insecticides and herbicides and other pesticides can encourage natural selection of resistant insects, plants and other organisms.
Pest control targets animal pests (including insects), weeds and disease. Organic pest control involves the cumulative effect of many techniques, including, allowing for an acceptable level of pest damage, encouraging or even introducing beneficial organisms, careful crop selection and crop rotation, and mechanical controls such as row covers and traps. These techniques generally provide benefits in addition to pest control—soil protection and improvement, fertilization, pollination, water conservation, season extension, etc.—and these benefits are both complementary and cumulative in overall effect on farm health. Effective organic pest control requires a thorough understanding of pest life cycles and interactions.
Weeds are controlled mechanically, thermically and through the use of mulches.
Organic farms that raise livestock and poultry, for meat, dairy and eggs, provide animals with "natural" living conditions and feed. Ample, free-range outdoor access, for grazing and exercise, is a distinctive feature, and crowding is avoided. Feed is also organically grown, and the addition of drugs, including antibiotics, is prohibited by organic standards. Animal health and food quality are thus pursued in a holistic "fresh air, exercise, and good food" approach.
Organic farming systems
There are a number of formal organic farming systems that prescribe specific techniques. They tend to be more specific than, and fit within, general organic standards. Biodynamic farming is an approach, based on the esoteric teachings of Rudolf Steiner. The Japanese farmer and writer Masanobu Fukuoka invented a no-till system for small-scale grain production that he called Natural Farming. French intensive and biointensive methods are both small scale gardening techniques.
Standards
Increasingly, organic farming is defined by formal standards regulating production methods, and in some cases, final output. Two types of standard exist, voluntary and legislated. As early as the 1970s, private associations created standards, against which organic producers could voluntarily have themselves certified. In the 1980s, governments began to produce organic production guidelines. Beginning in the 1990s, a trend toward legislation of standards began, most notably the EU-Eco-regulation developed in the European Union.
In 1991, the European Commission formulated the first government system to regulate organic labelling. In one go, the European Regulation (EEC) 2092/91 set the rules in 12 countries, creating a huge market[citation needed]. Organic certification, which till then was a voluntary quality control system, became mandatory to all operations and was also to be applied for imports. In the meantime, Europe had become the most prominent market place for organic products and an increasing number of suppliers all over the world accepted this niche as a new challenge and a rewarding option to export high quality and high priced speciality products. All these supplies, of course, had to comply with the requirements of the European market and thus the Regulation (EEC) N° 2092/91 became a universal standard for organic production systems
An international framework for organic farming is provided by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), the international democratic umbrella organization established in 1972. For IFOAM members, organic agriculture is based upon the Principles of Organic Agriculture and the IFOAM Norms.[4] The IFOAM Norms consist of the IFOAM Basic Standards and IFOAM Accreditation Criteria.
The IFOAM Basic Standards are a set of "standards for standards." They are established through a democratic and international process and reflect the current state of the art for organic production and processing. They are best seen as a work in progress to lead the continued development of organic practices worldwide. They provide a framework for national and regional standard-setting and certification bodies to develop detailed certification standards that are responsive to local conditions.
Legislated standards are established at the national level, and vary from country to country. In recent years, many countries have legislated organic production, including the EU nations (1990s), Japan (2001), and the US (2002). Non-governmental national and international associations also have their own production standards. In countries where production is regulated, these agencies must be accredited by the government.
Since 1993 when EU Council Regulation 2092/91 became effective, organic food production has been strictly regulated in the UK. (pdf).
In India, standards for organic agriculture were announced in May 2001, and the National Programme on Organic Production (NPOP) is administered under the Ministry of Commerce. (http://: www.apeda.com/organic/quality.html)
In 2002, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) established production standards, under the National Organic Program (NOP), which regulate the commercial use of the term organic. Farmers and food processors must comply with the NOP in order to use the word.
Productivity
A 22-year farm trial study by Cornell University published in 2005 concluded that organic farming produces the same corn and soybean yields as conventional methods, but consumes less energy and contains no pesticide residues. However, a prominent 21-year Swiss study found an average of 20% lower organic yields over conventional, along with 50% lower expenditure on fertilizer and energy, and 97% less pesticides. A major US survey published in 2001, analyzed results from 150 growing seasons for various crops and concluded that organic yields were 95-100% of conventional yields. Comparative yield studies are still scarce, and overall results remain "inconclusive".
The issue of productivity is more complex than a summary of yield (production per land area), which was the measure used in these studies. Instead, productivity could be calculated in labour time rather than by land area. Organic methods often require more labor, providing rural jobs but increasing costs to urban consumers. Also, grain forms the majority of world agricultural production, and most of that is fed to animals, not humans—broad calculations of how much agriculture is feeding people is therefore complicated when feeding animals to feed people is factored in.
Issues
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Motivations for organic agriculture.
All aspects of organic farming and organic food are under debate. Environmentalists, food safety advocates, various consumer protection, social justice and labor groups, small independent farmers, and a growing number of food consumers are ranged against agribusiness and current government agricultural policies.
The controversy centers on the overall value and safety of chemical agriculture, with organic farming popularly regarded as the "opposite" of modern, large-scale, chemical-based farming. As public awareness increases, there are a number of obstacles to an easy grasp of the overall situation.
The following topics may be argued from both sides.
Pesticides
Organic farming standards do not allow the use of synthetic pesticides, but it does allow the use of certain so-called natural pesticides, such as those derived from plants. Organic advocates state that natural pesticides are a last resort, growing healthier, disease-resistant plants, using cover crops and crop rotation, and encouraging beneficial insects and birds as the primary methods of pest control. The most common organic pesticides, accepted for restricted use by most organic standards, include Bt, pyrethrum, and rotenone. Some organic pesticides - such as rotenone have high toxicity to mammals including humans.
Critics argue that organic farms can work without using pesticides because pests are kept under control in surrounding conventional farms and thus do not spread into organic farms, if it became universal, the "islands" they operate on would disappear and pests would become a severe issue. This argument also works in reverse, as organic farms can be islands of safety for predator insects and pollinators, without which, more pollination services would be required[citation needed], and ever-increasing quantities of pesticides would be needed as pest populations acquired resistance to pesticides (to a degree, in both instances this is already the case).
Workplace safety is a separate, related issue. Pesticides create a hazardous work environment. Chemical accidents and the effects of long-term exposure are both well-known risks faced by many farm workers. Also, the effect of chemicals, airborne after spraying, and in the groundwater, on neighboring communities is a concern.
Genetically modified organisms
A key characteristic of organic farming is its rejection of genetically engineered products, including plants and animals. On October 19, 1998, participants at IFOAM's 12th Scientific Conference of IFOAM) issued the Mar del Plata Declaration, where more than 600 delegates from over 60 countries voted unanimously to exclude the use of genetically modified organisms in food production and agriculture. From this point, it became widely recognized that GMOs are categorically excluded from organic farming.
"GMO-free" is also a popular marketing point for organic food. Opponents of GMOs claim that we don't fully understand the impact of genetic engineering on food quality, plant or animal health. Proponents argue that with a rapidly expanding global population, genetic engineering to create higher volumes of produce could be play an important role in ending world hunger, without requiring additional land. It could also help, they say, to create healthier food, and to ensure proper nourishment, and has the potential to make farming more profitable, allowing agricultural industries to survive in increasingly service-oriented economies. Often overlooked in this debate is the fact that genetic engineering is a technique, not an essential characteristic of the organisms it produces, and that humans have used selective breeding to modify crops and livestock for tens of thousands of years.
A recent advancement in GE involving the insertion of a gene from an animal into the cell or seed of a plant (e.g., a sheep gene placed into a bell pepper seed) is proving to be highly controversial. The science is still in the early stages of development and its future implications on sustainable agriculture and organic farming may add considerable support to the argument against genetic engineering.
The contamination of organic farms with GM product, usually through pollination, is an important issue[citation needed]. Contamination may lead to products being incorrectly labelled as organic or GMO-free, or may reduce the value of crop as it cannot be sold as organic, leading to losses for the farmer.
The mechanism of cross-contamination is not understood, and only beginning to be studied. Meanwhile, cases of cross-contamination have been documented, while the extent is still unclear. A first-time study of genetic cross-contamination, published in Feb. 2004, found that at least two-thirds of conventional corn, soybeans and canola in the US contain traces of genetic material from GM varieties. Along with commercial GM crops, trials for new GM plants producing food, pharmaceuticals (pharmacrops) and industrial materials (eg: plastics), are being conducted in the US, Canada, and elsewhere. With the genetic engineering of alfalfa (not yet widely grown), a primary green manure fertilizer crop, not only primary crops, but the underpinnings of organic agriculture are threatened. It is conceivable that genetic contamination could make GMO-free farming next to impossible.
The environment
The environmental argument, from the pro-organic view, holds that conventional agriculture is rapidly depleting natural resources, particularly fossil fuels and fresh water, and seriously polluting soil, water and air[citation needed]. Cited are the large quantities of agricultural chemicals in use (synthetic pesticides and fertilizers), water wastage through high-volume irrigation, heavy use of petrochemicals for farm machinery and long-distance transport, high densities of various waste products from concentrated operations, and the list goes on[citation needed]. While there is no argument that conventional agriculture relies on an abundance of these resources and creates a high volume of waste, agribusiness supporters (which naturally includes the majority of conventional farmers) argue that the negative claims are exaggerated or inaccurate. The fact that the current food industry exists and has fed the much of the world for several decades is the biggest pro-argument to date.
On the flip side, large-scale organic operations that don't follow sustainable practices would require many of the same resources as conventional operations. For example, an organic farm that made heavy use of farm machinery and indoor production facilities (requiring artificial heat and light), and shipped to far-off markets, would still be a major consumer of energy resources. Also, it is debated whether an organic farm using natural compost and manure on a large scale would cause any less damage to ground water and soil than manufactured fertilizers.
Organic farming may also have a detrimental effect on the environment. Conventional agricultural methods allow agriculturists to precisely apply only necessary fertilizers to soil, in order to minimize expenditures on fertilizers and to minimize waste pollutants. Such agriculturists may identify necessary fertilizers based upon what the soil needs in order to properly grow crops, then may mix custom fertilizer to meet that precise need. Organic farmers, on the other hand, do not have that option. Organic farmers must use fertilizers such as manure which contain fixed amounts of various elements. When applying sufficient manure to meet the soil's need for one element, an organic farmer will incidentally apply an abundance of another element, as the manure is not processed to balance its value as a fertilizer to the soil's needs. As such, the most commonly present elements in manure will be overapplied, and cause a pollution hazard. This generally appears in the form of an abundance of nitrogen, which can contaminate waterways.
Interestingly, many organic farms rely on manure that is not organic(meaning it comes from animals not fed and raised organically) to continue fertilization. This technically does not violate the traditional definitions of organic produce because there are no inorganic components added to the manure, although they may be present in its composition. Studies of the effects of chemicals within manure on organic produce is limited, although studies have shown that many carcinogens are present in variable amounts in even organic foodstuffs.
Some critics, most notably Norman Borlaug, contend that adopting organic farming methods on a global scale would be more detrimental to the environment than conventional farming. Borlaug asserts that if organic farming is to feed the globe, it will require a dramatic increase in cropland area, and that achieving this goal will ultimately lead to wide-scale deforestation.
Food contamination
Critics point out organic food could be less safe than non-organic food, by increasing the risk of exposure to biological contaminants and food-borne diseases. In particular concerns are related to the use of manure, well known for carrying human pathogens and presence of mycotoxins from molds. One large, influential French study, evaluating organic and conventional food during 1999-2000, warned that biological toxins in certain organic products (apples, wheat) should be closely monitored. Food contamination is usually caused by unhygienic handling and storage, including use of contaminated water, which can occur on-farm, in transit, and at the point of preparation. On the other hand, there has been no concrete evidence as of yet showing a direct link between organic farming practices and food contamination.
Food quality
Healthy soils equals healthy food equals healthy people is a basic tenet of many organic farming systems. But the claims of nutritional superiority of food grown by organic methods over conventional grown food is the subject of much controversy. Without conclusive science either way, some organic supporters believe that the overall nutritional and health-promoting value of food is compromised by chemical-farming methods. This involves areas like micronutrients and trace elements, plant physiology, the way plants grow and the process of human nutrition. The common sense appeal is that food grown in unnatural, sheltered, chemically assisted ways isn't as "good" for people as "naturally grown" food, as some things are different or missing[citation needed]. The counter-argument is that, by currently accepted standards of food science, there has been no demonstration of a functional difference between organically and conventionally produced food. Further, there is some concern that due to the limited methods available to organic farmers for combating quality problems while adhering to organic standards, some organic food does not generally achieve comparable safety and quality standards as "conventionally" grown products. Preliminary data from a UN study based in the UK shows that although organic dairy may have higher somatic cell counts, conventional dairy may have antibiotic levels higher than organic dairy.
Children's Health
In 2005 the EPA's "Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment" showed that children receive 50% of their lifetime risks of cancer during their first two years of life. A 2001 study demonstrated that children fed organic diets experienced significantly lower organophosphorus pesticide exposure than children fed conventional diets. A similar but perhaps more convincing study in 2006 measured the levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure in 23 preschool children before and after replacing their diet with organic food. In this study it was found that levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure dropped dramatically and immediately when the children switched to an organic diet. These studies and others like it have helped spur a growing organic baby food trend in the United States. Mothers are more and more hesitant to feed their children potentially dangerous food, given that their small bodies are especially vulnerable to toxins.
Soil conservation
The practice of ploughing (see tillage) to prepare soil for planting is claimed to increase soil damage compared to using herbicides, like glyphosates. In fact, this argument applies primarily to large-scale, chemical-based agriculture, where huge areas are repeatedly tilled and planted with the same crops. By using artificial fertilizer rather than replacing organic material, the soil structure is progressively destroyed, and becomes increasingly susceptible to wind and water erosion. Use of herbicides to kill weeds, instead of plowing them under, may present a short-term solution to this problem. However, repeated use of herbicides can disturb the soil microflora and -fauna that contribute to the decomposition of the plant residues that help rebuild the soil organic matter content. It can also encourage the build-up of resistances in weeds.
Rural infrastructure
Critics condemn agribusiness practices for putting small, independent farmers out of business, destroying rural communities in the process, and causing the "art of farming" to be lost. According to these critics, small-scale organic farming encourages local economies, and provides social and employment alternatives to concentrated, energy-dependent urban living, thus improving the quality of life for everyone.
As discussed previously, the entry of large-scale businesses into production of organic food undermines the belief that a preference by consumers for organic food will necessarily translate into a substantive change in the nature of agribusiness. This is where the distinction between organic farming, organic food, and organic certification becomes tricky. If the strong consumer trend represents simply the desire for an "organic" stamp on their food, then the trend to large-scale, global, corporate farming, certified organic or not, will continue. If consumers embrace a broader concept of "organic", which includes fresh, local food, substantial changes in the food industry would have to follow to meet this demand.
Sustainability
Although it is common to equate organic farming with sustainable agriculture, the two are not synonymous. Sustainability in agriculture is a broad concept, with considerations on many levels, such as "environmental health, economic profitability, and social and economic equity." With regard to organic farming methods, one goal of sustainability would be to approach as closely as possible a balance between what is taken out of the soil with what is returned to it, without relying on outside inputs. An organic operation that imports the manure it uses to replace the nutrients taken out of the soil by crops, must factor in the resources required to produce and transport that manure, when calculating sustainability. Organic farming today is a small part of the agricultural landscape, with a relatively minor impact on the environment. As the size of organic farms continues to increase, a new set of large-scale considerations will eventually have to be tackled. Large organic farms that rely on machinery and automation, and purchased inputs, will have similar sustainability issues that large conventional farms do today.
Certification
Organic certification, particularly where mandated by law, as in the US and the EU, is increasingly being seen by individual organic farmers and consumers as a contentious issue. Where the push for regulation was originally a grassroots effort by organic producers and buyers looking to uphold standards and prevent fraud, the complex regulations and opportunities for loopholes that have emerged have led to charges being levelled against major certifiers and government programs. In the US, where standards became law in 2002, serious complaints have been lodged with the USDA against the largest US certifying agency, and the USDA itself has been taken to court, based on such challenges. A leading US proponent of organic farming, Eliot Coleman, who served as an adviser to the USDA during the drafting of the original organic guidelines in the US in the 1980s, and served a term as Director of IFOAM, more recently stated: "The label 'organic' has lost the fluidity it used to hold for the growers more concerned with quality than the bottom line, and consumers more concerned with nutrition than a static set of standards for labeling." Concern about the "watering down" of standards to facilitate large-scale production is currently a significant aspect of organic farming regulation.
The future
Organic farming is at a crossroads. Despite the growth in the organic food market over the last decade, the future of the small, independent farmer, organic or otherwise, is as much in jeopardy now as it has been in recent decades. The local infrastructure to support small farmers is all but non-existent in most developed nations - the current food distribution system favors high-volume production, and large farming operations. What is commonly known as "organic farming" may change quite dramatically in the coming few years.
Organic farming is now gaining popularity and is being accepted by people all over the world. In Deborah Koons Garcia's film The Future of Food, it is stated that the American market for organically grown food amounted to $1 billion in 1994, and $13 billion in 2003. A growing consumer market is naturally one of the main factors encouraging farmers to convert to organic agricultural production. Increased consumer awareness of food safety issues and environmental concerns has contributed to the growth in organic farming over the last few years.
References
^ Maeder, P. et al Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic Farming from Science v296, 31 May 2002, 1694-1697. Retrieved on 2006-01-06. ^ the Information Bulletin of the Organic Farming Research Foundation. Retrieved on 2005-12-18. ^ 404. Retrieved on 2005-12-18. ^ Le Dossier juin/juillet 2001 (in French). Retrieved on 2005-12-18. ^ Article in online magazine spiked online ^ [http://www.soilandhealth.org/06clipfile/Nutritional%20Quality%20of%20Organically-Grown%20Food.html Nutritional Quality of Organically Grown Food by Steve Diver] ^ [1] ^ EPA's "Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment" ^ study ^ [2] ^ What is Sustainable Agriculture?. Retrieved on 2005-12-18. ^ The Future of Food. Retrieved on 2006-01-04. Kuepper, George and Gegner, Lance. "Organic Crop Production Overview", ATTRA - National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service: August 2004. Emsley, John (April 2001). "Going One Better Than Nature". Nature 410: 633-634. Smil, Vaclav (2001). Enriching the Earth: Fritz Haber, Carl Bosch, and the Transformation of World Food. MIT Press. Trewavas, Anthony (November 1999). "Much Food, Many Problems". Nature 402: 231-232. Trewavas, Anthony (March 2001). "Urban Myths of Organic Farming". Nature 410: 409-410.
See also @ Wikipedia
Organic food Intensive farming Industrial agriculture
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Organic Gardening
Organic gardening is a form of gardening that uses substantial diversity in pest control to reduce the use of pesticides and tries to provide as much fertility with local sources of nutrients rather than purchased fertilizers. The term may have ironically arisen as a response to the effects observed in farming during the first half of the twentieth century and the evolving science of organic chemistry. It is considered by its supporters to be more sustainable. Organic gardeners emphasise the concept "feeding the soil not feeding the plant".
Contents
1 Origins 2 Soil fertility 3 Pest control 4 Weed management 5 Guidelines and certification 6 Organic gardening systems 7 See also
Origins
In the United States, the practice of gardening organically was greatly popularized by J.I. Rodale during the 1940s and 1950s, with his magazine, Organic Farming and Gardening (Rodale Press). Now titled simply Organic Gardening, it is currently the most widely read gardening magazine worldwide.
Soil fertility
Soil fertility is enriched by the addition of green manures, minerals and humus, or by companion plants, as how legumes fix nitrogen into soil. Minerals are obtained from a variety of sources, such as calcium from fossil or recently deceased shellfish, potassium from wood ash, nitrogen from the animal urea in manures or legumes, and phosphorus from bone. Humus is a product of composted vegetable matter. The cellulose in humus acts like a sponge and holds moisture in the garden soil, available for the growing plants. Composting is a process by which vegetable matter (e.g., grass clippings, food waste, leaves) are allowed to be consumed by bacteria, fungi, earthworms and insects until what remains is mostly the cellulose and minerals of the original vegetable matter. This mixture is then utilized as a soil amendment.
Pest control
Control of animal pests can be achieved through natural methods, including crop rotation, physical removal of insects, introduction of prey species, interplanting which reduces the spread of pests and disease that agribusiness monocropping accentuates and through the use of companion planting of plants which may demonstrate pest-repellant characteristics
Weed management
For the organic grower, unwanted plants (or weeds) are suppressed without the use of herbicides. Barriers are often used to prevent weeds from reaching the light they need to grow. Generally called mulches, they can include stones, leaves, straw or wood. Paper can make an excellent barrier which, like leaves, straw and wood, will return its cellulose to the soil. These barriers have the added effect of keeping moisture in the soil below them. Some writers even refer to soil loosened by hoeing and tilling as dirt mulch. There are many forms of tilling devices and cultivators which suppress weeds by mechanically disturbing the weeds' roots and preventing them from absorbing water and nutrients.
Guidelines and certification
The UK based HDRA have developed voluntary guidelines and a charter for organic gardeners and allotment holders, although those wishing to grow at a commercial scale (eg, organic farmers or smallholders) need to comply with the far more stringent standards laid down by the Soil Association in order to gain 'Organic' certification
Organic gardening systems
Systems of organic gardening include: biodynamic agriculture which predates organics by some 20 years, permaculture which emerged in the mid 1970's, Vegan organic gardening, which excludes the usage of animal products such as blood, fish and bone and animal manures (although composted human waste - known as humanure - is permitted) and Veganic gardening, which similarly excludes animal products but uses distinctive 'no-dig' surface cultivation methods. Forest gardening is the growing of a whole ecosystem of native plants in an interlocking system, so that they are all companion plants growing on multiple levels in the same environment. Aquaponics is a combination of hydroponics and aquaculture. It is a system of farming that can be completely organic, using the interactions between fish and plants, with bacteria being the main ingredient which makes the system work.
See also
For more detailed information on subjects relevant to organic gardening and farming see the list of organic gardening and farming topics. Of special relevance may be the article under organic horticulture.
Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_gardening
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_gardening
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Natural Foods Movement
The natural food movement is a term for a style of eating that became popular in America and Western Europe during the 1970s. Its principles include avoiding artificial ingredients and 'processed' foods such as refined sugar and white flour. Adherents of the movement also tend to choose organically grown fruits and vegetables and are often, though not always, vegetarians.
Such a diet is generally followed because it is considered to be more healthful than other types of eating (though some nutritionists dispute this), to have a lighter impact on the environment and to avoid supporting large corporations. The natural food movement is particularly associated with members of the counterculture.
Food produced or sold according to the ideals of the natural food movement is sometimes known colloquially as 'health food,' although many people also use that term in a broader sense to mean any type of healthy eating. Natural-food philosophy overlaps with the organic movement, vegetarianism, whole food, macrobiotics and herbalism, although it is not synonymous with any of these.
Although in modern times the natural food diet has largely been only practiced by a minority, it has frequently influenced the way the wider population eats. Some of the foods that the movement helped introduce to America include yogurt, tofu, carob, brown rice and herbal tea.
There are many shops, restaurants and cookbooks catering to the natural food diet. Until recently, natural food stores tended to be independent ventures or co-ops. However, the growth of chains like the Whole Foods Market has taken the selling of natural foods into the mainstream.
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_food_movement
Content derived from Wikipedia article on Natural Foods Diet
The Natural Foods Diet is the avoidance of all unnatural and refined/processed ingredients. These ingredients include refined sugars, refined flours, milled grains, hydrogenated oils, artificial sweeteners, artificial food colors, artificial flavorings, and other similar ingredients. Unlike most other popular weight-loss programs, there is no counting required for practitioners of the Natural Foods Diet.
Note that Sucanat, Stevia, raw honey, and maple syrup are allowed for practitioners as sweeteners as they are non-processed and all natural. Sea salt is also preferred over table salt.
Proponents of the natural foods diet argue that unnatural ingredients promote obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and mood problems.
Proponents of natural food diets also claim that "the refined, degerminated, demineralized and devitalized foods are a curse to us all. When the miller makes white flour, he takes out the vital portion, or the part that makes a new plant-the wheat germ, and also the bran. It is the part that contains the minerals and vitamins which supply our bodies with blood-making material. A lot of the foods that we eat on a daily basis have been treated in the same manner."[citation needed]
Proponents also argue that canning, cooking and baking are modern constructs that at some prior time were unnecessary, wherein human diets varied with the food products that could be acquired by the season.[citation needed]
Natural foods diet practitioners also advocate the ingestion of juices.[citation needed]
See also @ Wikipedia
Raw food diet
End of Wikipedia content, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Foods_Diet
Credits & Copyright: This page is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the ||Wikipedia article $$$||
|