> Excuse me if these ideas have already been covered. I am very behind
> in reading the Sanet posts.
>
>
> I wonder why there couldn't be just a USDA "certified organic FOR
> EXPORT" program for those who want to be able to participate in
> international markets, and those who only want domestic certification
> could opt for a cheaper private label certification?
>
> It seems to me that the most compelling reason for national
> standards is to facilitate international trade. For example, without
> national standards, trade with the EU is quite a bit more involved,
> less efficient (and for that reason more expensive) because we do not
> have a federal govt program, and there is always the chance that the
> EU will do what the Japanese have done and say "until you get
> national govt-instituted standards, we won't accept your organic
-
> label." (This is what I have been told is the latest stand of the
> Japanese, though I don't have a reference for this info.) Let me
> repeat this: there is tremendous pressure from external markets to
> have a national organic program that is put out by the government.
> This is not something that AMS invented just to make everyone's life
> more difficult! Organic export markets are lucrative (and
> potentially even more so) so this is an important issue. (Lawrence
-
> and Sal, if you want to know why it is that the EU and Japan and
> who-knows-next wants a stamp of approval from USDA rather than IFOAM
> or OTA, that is a whole other discussion/dilema.)
Yes, and It is one that makes not a particle of sense. How would "they"
(those participating in such a "lucrative" scheme) expect small or
medium-sized organic farmers, opposing mandatory certification, to
be fooled by such a ploy.
1) Government sets the standards for what constitutes organically
produced products - defines the O word
2) Certifying organizations are forced by law to meet these USDA
standards or the may exceed, to any degree they choose, these standards
3) Grower, if he wishes to sell to EU, Japan or wherever, hires the
certifier of his choice, gets certified and moves on to
export his product(s) overseas or at home
4) EU or other, by buying GrowerX's CertifierX-certified product
gets "a stamp of approval from USDA" automatically. How could it be
otherwise?
So, what could possibly be wrong with this system? Tell us what the big
mystery is all about, the "that is a whole other discussion/dilema" part.
Curious,
Lawrence
>
> However, in most cases, I'd guess (don't have stats) that the
> products of the vast majority of organic producers never get near
> international markets. Even now, most producers know that if they
> want to sell abroad, they better certify with one of the big,
> internationally recognized certifiers like Oregon Tilth, QAI, OCIA,
> etc. They wouldn't certify with Podunk Certified Organic
> Organization, even though the standards with Podunk might be rigorous
> and respectable. So I think that there is already a precident for
> this sort of two-tier certifying.
>
> I think it should be recognized that not all organic producers look
> alike. Bart has pointed out several time now that there is a wide
> range of quality and integrity. So I guess we shouldn't do away with
> the inspectors yet, as Sal suggests. But we could organize things a
> bit and allocate extra costs to those who will benefit from extra
> certification.. I don't see why a farmer who just wants to market at
> the farmer's market or to national stores with a certified organic
> label should pay the extra expenses incurred so that someone else can
> produce a product (or an ingredient of a product) that is intended
> for export.
>
> These are some of my thoughts as to the arrangement of the deck
> chairs, as long as we're consigned to life on the Titanic. I have to
> say that if we have the choice of changing boats, I much prefer
> Roberto's idea of putting the inspection burden on those who choose
> to farm with chemicals. Maybe the "sick" farm should have to get a
> "prescription" for his agro-chemicals! And while I'm designing this
> new LIFE boat.... Let's put the ideas of that design guy that Ann
> mentioned in charge of the Land Grant Schools of Agriculture
> curriculae. I just love the whole change of perspecitive offered in
> this scenario.
>
> Anita
>
> Anita Graf
> Market Development of National Organic Products
> University of Georgia
>
> make a difference: http://www.thehungersite.com
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail