at Fri, 01 Oct 2004 16:08:48 GMT in <20041001100848.257416c3@wafer>,
(Eric Jorgensen) wrote :

>On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 01:08:45 -0000
(Alex Rast) wrote:
>
....
>> > On the other hand, I would be skeptical of 'organic' labeling on
>> > any
>> >agricultural product from india.
>> >
>>
>> Why? I can't see any specific reason why a farmer in India couldn't
>> decide to follow organic farming rules, ...
>
> Well, to tell the truth, having had conversations with some of the
>farmers who started the whole 'organically grown' movement (Some of
>their sons are friends of mine), I'm skeptical of most 'organic'
>labeling - almost as skeptical as they are. The sentiment is that the
>'movement' got out of hand and the standards for organic farming miss
>the point.

What, exactly, do the people who you've talked to believe *is* the point?
Now, the USDA standard isn't necessarily perfect, at least not by one
person's definition, nor could any standard be perfect except to the people
who drafted the standard. Euro standards also aren't "perfect", nor are any
of the state standards, 3rd-party certifications, or anything.

Organic means different things to different people. Ultimately, some large,
oversight body has got to agree on a set of standards that others must
follow and for individuals and farmers then privately to claim that the
standards aren't "really organic" is at that point a personal polemic
rather than a statement of fact.

Without getting into the details, I think most consumers want organic to
be:

Pesticide and synthetic fertiliser-free
Hormone and antibiotic-free
Non-GMO
Non-irradiated
Free from chemical preservatives, additives, etc.
Free from certain aggressive industrial processes

Of course the last 2 are the slippery slope, because it's hard to define an
exact list of industrial processes and additives that are not allowable.
However, that's what we have standards bodies to do.

> I know some indian business people. I'm pretty sure that, even if
> they
>had local regulations on what constitutes 'organic', they'd be more than
>willing to bend the rules and lie about it.

In any country there are going to be a few people without solid ethics who
will be willing to bend the rules. This no doubt happens in India, in
Italy, in Illinois. But I think by and large people are honest, at least
when it comes to organic labelling. Furthermore, that's the other reason we
have standards bodies - to make sure there's enough oversight that little
rules-bending actually goes on. The certifying bodies typically monitor the
producers for compliance. Everybody knows, too, that the risk is enormous.
If a farmer who chose to bend the rules with organic got caught, the impact
to his business would be devastating - probably more than if a conventional
farmer got caught doing something directly illegal, even though the latter
is probably more harmful. So there's a powerful incentive to abide by the
rules.

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)