As part of its implementation of national organic standards, USDA as of Oct. 8, 2004, had accredited 56 domestic certifying agencies and 41 certifying agencies from outside the United States. There also were other agencies still under review for possible accreditation.
Two years after implementation of national organic standards finds some major hurdles remaining. The biggest bump during 2004 materialised in April, when USDA’s National Organic Program, without prior warning or consultation with the organic industry, posted guidance documents and directives that redefined the scope of enforcement for national organic standards and offered provisions that threatened the high integrity of organic practices. The redefinition of the scope of enforcement, for instance, said that personal care products, dietary supplements, fertilizers, soil amendments, manure and related materials, fish and seafood, and pet foods could not display the USDA Organic seal or imply that they were produced or handled to the USDA NOP standards. The document gave companies until Oct. 21, 2005, to use up existing supplies of labels and packaging.
After great outcry from OTA, others within the industry, consumers and members of Congress decrying these measures, Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman in late May directed the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to rescind the documents and to work with the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) and the organic industry to reach the best solutions to issues raised in implementing national organic standards.
In response, OTA as well as NOSB and other interested organisations began working on drafting formal responses to NOP to help resolve these issues to uphold the integrity of the organic label.
Meeting in October in Washington, D.C., NOSB offered detailed critiques on the three guidance documents (NOP scope, the use of fishmeal in livestock feed, and antibiotics in livestock health care) and the directive to certifiers regarding allowing the use pesticides containing unknown inert ingredients. In its discussion, NOSB:
•
Opposed allowing the use of pesticides with unknown inert ingredients.•
Opposed feeding livestock fishmeal that contains a synthetic preservative not listed as an approved material.•
Opposed allowing antibiotics in livestock being raised to produce organic products. NOSB has drawn up recommendations concerning the origin of organic dairy livestock and has urged NOP to issue a proposed rule change based on them.NOSB backed the NOP stance that organically produced agricultural products should be prohibited from being certified as produced according to the NOP rule if used for dietary supplements or other items not specifically mentioned in the Organic Foods Production Act.
OTA, however, has voiced its opposition to this stance, and explained it believes that if a product meets the rule, it is by definition an organically produced agricultural product, and therefore should fall under the scope of the National Organic Program.
NOP reported that it would post its responses to NOSB’s positions on the NOP web site by the end of November.
By the end of 2004, the industry was looking forward to the posting of results from the American National Standards Institute’s (ANSI’s) peer review audit of NOP’s accreditation program and NOP’s reply to this review. However, OTA said that this should not substitute for establishing a peer review panel for certification agencies, as mandated by the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990.
During OTA’s Congressional Education Day visits in Washington, D.C., in October, OTA was given the assurance that members of Congress would be putting together a “dear colleague” letter directing the Secretary of Agriculture to have NOP appoint a peer review panel. Because issues specific to organic certification, such as maintaining an organic system plan, require specialised knowledge, it is vital to have a panel of peers review the work of certifiers, the
Meanwhile, NOP has indicated that it is creating certifier trainings that will be implemented in fiscal year 2005. Without certifiers both domestically and internationally working with the same guidance, implementation at times has fallen short of industry expectations.
Katherine DiMatteo, OTA’s executive director, points out that the ANSI audit of accreditation, a peer review panel of certification agencies, and certifier trainings will go a long way to help tie up some of the major loose ends that have plagued implementation of national organic standards. With these in place, the U.S. national organic standards should be back on the right track. 13.1.6 Consumer acceptance
Meanwhile, consumer acceptance of organic products continues to grow. 66 percent of U.S. consumers report they use organic products at least occasionally, according to The Hartman Group’s report, Organic Food &
Beverage Trends 2004: Lifestyles, Language and Category Adoption. That
number is up from 55 percent in 2000.
A surge in periphery organic shoppers - those who buy organic products only occasionally - has been largely driven by increased access to organic products in mainstream markets, heightened concern about health, gradual emergence of organic alternatives in mainstream brands, and an increase in information sources. “Health and nutritional concerns remain the most frequently selected reason for purchasing organic foods, with 46 percent of all organic consumers citing this as a reason,” according to Laurie Demeritt, president and chief operating officer for The Hartman Group.
The Hartman Group’s December 2003 Organic Trends Study of 5’000 consumers found that certain ethnic groups - Asian Americans, Native Americans, Hispanic and African Americans are more apt to chose organic products than Caucasians. In fact, compared with the general population, Asians and Spanish-origin consumers are less deterred by price and more motivated by family reasons for choosing organic products.
Consumers selecting organic products feel generally responsible for their and their family’s health. They are willing to pay more for specific organic products because they equate them with high value, and they have an increased reliance on food as preventative medicine, the study showed. Many are also looking for a taste or gourmet experience.
According to The Hartman Group findings, frequency of use has grown, with those using organic products daily growing from eight percent in 2000 to eleven percent in 2003, weekly use growing from nine percent to 16 percent of consumers, and monthly growing from five percent to ten percent of consumers.
Although those reporting occasional use dropping from 34 percent to 28 percent, those reporting never eating organic dropped from 45 percent to 34 percent. Meanwhile, The Organic Consumer Trends Report 2004 from the Natural Marketing Institute projected U.S. sales of organic food and beverages would grow to 12.3 billion in 2004, up about 22 percent from 2003. Marketing channels include natural food stores (46 percent), mainstream supermarkets (42 percent), mass merchandisers five percent, and direct marketing and other channels (7 percent).
The leading organic sales categories include non-dairy beverages, packaged fresh produce, frozen entrees, milk, and baked goods. Showing great growth are frozen and refrigerated organic meat, poultry and seafood. According to NMI data, devoted consumers represent about 7.5 percent of all consumers, temperates represent 25.1 percent, dabblers represent 7.3 percent, and reluctants represent 60.1 percent.
13.1.7 Research
There continue to be strides on the U.S. front for organic research. One indication that there is progress was the announcement that researcher Kathleen Delate at Iowa State University now holds the first tenured professor position in organic agriculture in the United States