The New Organics Standards: Are There Problems Already?

Sarabeth Matilsky
October 30, 2002

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the new standards regulating the organic food industry are pretty darn good. "After October 21, 2002," claims the statement on the USDA's website, "when you buy food labeled 'organic,' you can be sure that it was produced using the highest organic production and handling standards in the world." Many individuals and watchdog groups agree that the standards are a good thing for the industry, even a necessary step now that hundreds of manufacturers are rushing to label their food with the newly-hip 'organic' sticker. But as usual, not everyone agrees.

Currently, the USDA seems unsure how to monitor the enforcers of the new regulations. One week before the U.S. Organic Food Production Act went into effect, the USDA had yet to establish a peer review panel to oversee the accreditation of organic certifiers. On October 16, 2002, organic farmers and food safety organizations (including Center for Food Safety (CFS), National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture, and Union of Concerned Scientists) filed a legal petition to force the USDA to establish such a panel, which is required by both the new law and USDA's own regulations. So far, the USDA has failed to act.

Appropriate certification of organic farms is essential for obvious reasons, and certifying the certifiers seems still more important. According to the Pesticide Action Network of North America (PANNA), the number of organic certifying agencies in the U.S. has recently increased drastically: between 40 and 50 agencies existed up until 2000; since then, the number unexpectedly jumped to 122. "Without a Peer Review Panel, consumer groups, many organic farmers and farmer-based certifying organizations fear that large agribusiness corporations will have an undue influence on who will be certifying organic producers and how that certification will be conducted... Farmer-based certifying entities are especially concerned that without adequate oversight of the USDA accreditation program, they will be discriminated against by the agency during review and audit of their accreditation applications. The petition cites inconsistencies in clarifications from the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) to different organic certifiers, calling into question the level of fairness and scrutiny of applications of accreditation."

Besides the current lack of a peer review oversight process, petitioners raised concern that the USDA may be abusing its authority by creating loopholes in organic standards enforcement. According to PANNA, one company has attempted to pressure the NOP into relaxing the 100% organic feed requirement for organic chicken production. If an unbiased panel does not oversee the certification process, cheating could flourish, damaging both consumer confidence and the organics industry nationwide.

In an October 2002 article in the environmental newsdaily Greenwire, USDA spokesman George Chartier says the agency is still working on the program and is still considering formation of a peer-review panel. "Just because we haven't done it doesn't mean we don't want to," he said. "The program is still evolving."

Well, George, here's hoping that the program evolves quickly, so we don't end up with National "Somewhat Organic" Food Certification.