From
the sticker on your banana to the future of farming, we’re breaking
down the definition of “organic” into bite-size pieces.
According
to the Organic Trade Association, organic foods have become a $20
billion industry. And a quick scan of the grocery store aisles seems to
confirm that. But the more people buy into it, the bigger the question
becomes: What exactly does “organic” mean?
What’s in a Name?
You’ve
probably noticed by now that organic products tend to be pricey.
That’s partially because federal certification costs money, and
partially because the right to use the word “organic” requires meeting
the USDA standards that were set in 2002. Even imported foods have to be
up to government snuff before they can be called organic.
The USDA rules are pretty stringent. To be certified as organic,
farmers can’t use synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, or hormones for
three full years before applying. Further, any animals they have must be
raised on organic foods. Genetically modified crops are a no-no, as
are farming practices that cause high levels of pollution. Even the
shipping and processing procedures are monitored. Organic foods have to
be kept separate from non-organics until they arrive in the grocery
store.
It’s up to the non-governmental agencies that are certified
by the USDA to determine whether or not a product gets to use the
organic label. They monitor every step of the system, and in the end,
they’re the ones who slap that big “O” on the finished product.
Although
the USDA criteria cover a lot of ground, many people feel the
“organic” label should mean more. For example, some say it should cover
how humanely the animals are treated. While many organic farmers treat
their animals well as a matter of principle, the USDA’s stance on the
matter is flimsy. All they require is for animals to have access to the
outdoors—a rule that is not strictly enforced. One farm got away with
just putting unlocked (but closed) flaps on their chicken coops. While
the chickens technically had access, they were never taught how to open
the doors.
Organic farms also don’t have to be owned by mom and
pop. Large-scale, corporate organic farms are now common. While critics
complain that these big farms betray organic ideals by using
monoculture practices that deplete the soil, the fact is that
multinational conglomerates have quietly bought out many organic food
suppliers.
War of the Words
During the past few years,
concerns about the USDA’s organic label have intensified. In August
2008, the organization announced that 15 organic monitoring agencies
weren’t implementing USDA standards and threatened to close them down
if changes weren’t made within the year. While this could be seen as
the system catching problems, groups such as the Organic Consumers
Union said the announcement proves that subpar food has been sneaking
by inspectors.
The
fact that non-organic foods have been allowed to slip under the
organic label has also frustrated groups. Until 2007, it was permissible
for only five predetermined non-organic ingredients to appear in
certified organic products, and even then, they could only make up 5
percent of the total ingredients. Dozens of non-organic ingredients have
been given a pass, including 19 food colorings, pig-intestine sausage
casings, and hops. This has pushed some hardcore organic lovers over
the edge. Tired of fighting for control of the label they created, some
want to replace “organic” with new terms, such as “authentic food” and
“conservation agriculture.”
Feeding the Children
These
days, there’s another debate raging around organic foods. Although they
may benefit first-world, health-conscious consumers, critics say
organic foods don’t help the rest of the planet. Agronomist Norman
Borlaug, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 for introducing
life-saving farming techniques to poor countries, doubts that organics
can feed the world. He maintains that the problem is output. A 2002
study published in
Science found that while organic farms use
50 percent less fertilizer and 97 percent fewer pesticides than
conventional farms, they produce 20 percent less food. Borlaug believes
that if the entire world switched to organic farming, we’d need three
times as much farmland to feed everyone.
But organic supporters
say this is bogus. The Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture
points out that hunger is more about poverty and access to food,
problems that have nothing to do with pesticides and artificial
fertilizer. What’s more, the data on output isn’t cut and dry. In 2000,
after reviewing multiple studies that compared organic and
conventional farms, Christos Vasilikiotis of UC Berkeley found that
organic farms kept up with their chemically dependent brothers, so long
as they were run efficiently.
Right now, only one thing is
certain about the future of the organic-food industry: As long as
there’s organic food being processed, there will be arguments about how
best to label it.
Checking the Labels
Need
a dictionary to understand the labels on your food? Well, it won’t
help. The hair-splitting semantics of the food industry could dumbfound
the best of linguists. Lucky for you, we’ve broken it down right here.
LABEL: “100% Organic,” featuring the classy USDA seal
WHAT’S INSIDE? Nothing but USDA-certified organic ingredients.
LABEL: “Organic,” with the USDA seal
WHAT’S INSIDE? Food made with at least 95 percent USDA organic ingredients.
LABEL: “Made with organic _______,” without the USDA seal
WHAT’S INSIDE? Food made with at least 70 percent USDA organic ingredients.
LABEL: “All-Natural” or “Natural”
WHAT’S INSIDE?
That depends. By USDA standards, “natural” meat can’t contain
artificial flavoring, coloring, chemical preservatives, or synthetic
ingredients, but the animals can be raised with hormones and
antibiotics. Other foods with the “natural” label? That’s tougher. It’s
supposed to mean there are no synthetic or artificial ingredients, but
nobody officially monitors the process.
LABEL: “No Chemicals Added”
WHAT’S INSIDE? Nobody knows.
“It was a mental fist fight,” Speronis’ attorney 
