[MPWG] QUESTION OF THE MONTH: Certification Schemes
Cafesombra at aol.com
Cafesombra at aol.com
Mon Dec 6 16:40:11 CST 2004
Re Patricia's excellent questions:
The urls listed in the initial email that started this discussion should
answer your questions regarding IFOAM and NOP since the websites for both are
listed among the five or six sites suggested.
Currently, the National Organic Program standards do already apply to
dietary supplements. Recently an attempt to remove them was overturned, mostly due
to public comment. "Dietary supplement," food, or herb, they are
agricultural products and the organic methods of growing and processing them apply no
matter what you call them.
Wildcrafted items are ocnsidered organic if they come from a certified
organic property. If not, the item is negotiated independently based on the
reputation of the supplyer., i.e., they cannot technically be called "organic" but
if they come from a reputable organic farmer, the buyer may trust that
source enough to pay a higher premium for the product, voluntarily.
Regarding quality: beyond legally applicable food handling and bioterrorism
requirements for commerce, standards for quality are determined by industry
professionals, i.e., buyers, especially those who operate on an economy of
scale that gives them greater clout in the industry. Some products that have a
long history of commercial trade have well recognized quality standards.
Ginseng, goldenseal, ginger are among them. No doubt any of our colleagues in
the Herbal Products Assocation can address this point.
I've been helping farmers in Latin America learn quality control and
certification norms for gaining access to specialty markets (like the fair trade
market for example). What we hear from growers both abroad and in the United
States is that the certifications are requiring more and more paperwork, so
that farmers are having to become computer literate bureaucrats, or hire
desk-bound paper-pushers just to keep up with it all. In cases of small farmer
foriegn co-ops, many of the producer members seeking these certifications are
functionally illiterate, so the certification process demands that they become
dependent on aid agencies or outsiders (like myself). This is an important
point in regard to fair trade which currently, overwhelmingly applies to
foriegn trade. Many of the agencies don't even offer the application forms in any
language but English (I was recently surprised to learn that the Fair Trade
Federation does not have forms available in Spanish or French though they do
much business in Latin America and in Africa).
A big point of contention on the buyer end of things is that some industry
professionals would like to see a whole-business certification, rather than
partial or product-by-product certification. In other words, why is Dole
Organic on the shelves? Dole is not an organic company. Or, why is Starbucks
having so much trouble because they tried to run a fair trade selection ? --
it's because the consumer who wants fair trade wants 100% fair trade, not a
single pick on a menu that by default, is not "fair". At any rate, it may be
safe to predict that whole-business certification is the next and coming level.
Another big point of contention is is that fees are not adjusted by national
currency values -- farmers outside the US pay just as much for
certification, often multiple certifications, as do domestic farmers, though the cost in
comparison to national economic indicators skyrockets for the foriegn farmers.
Then, the US consumer for the most part refuses to pay, or cannot afford to
pay, a higher premium for products carrying one or more certifications. We
can all say okay, then buy domestic... but the price goes up. "Outsourcing"
does not just apply to IT services. And, what about tropical or regional
crops not available from domestic farmers?
It would be nice to believe that farmers are out there following the highest
standards of production and quality but, the fact is, people lie. We need
third party certification to verify claims. The only way around it seems to
be the Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) model. That was, you as a
consumer can get to know and trust your farmer. But this is frankly inconvenient.
Consumers have to engage in sourcing their own products which most people
don't want to do, unfortunately. Nevertheless, the CSA model offers some
interesting alternatives and hope for a more engaged, well-educated consumer
public. For information about how a model of the CSA applied to organic
medicinal herbs might work please see "Earth Medicine Share" and "Reserve Notes" at
the Heartsong website _http://www.herbsandapples.com/FarmGrown/index.html_
(http://www.herbsandapples.com/FarmGrown/index.html)
or write to Nancy and Michael with questions. (I have nothing to do with
their farm. They are just friends).
If certification is too much effort for farmers and too confusing for
consumers, what that really means ultimately is that large scale commerce simply
isn't working. Going local, and creating local-to-local direct trade
relationships (village-to-village) giving a human face to the trade relationship,
getting rid of the middle-man to the degree possible, and co-creating standards
that work on a local level, that's the only way around expensive bureaucratic
third-party certifications. But, its an ideal that is not yet in practice.
Maybe the next generation...
Okay, I'll stop posting now! and see what others have to say. Please
excuse my passion, this is the area of what I do...
Best regards, Jennifer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20041206/64334ba0/attachment.html>
More information about the MPWG
mailing list