The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) und the Foundation Ecology and Agriculture (SÖL) will present the latest statistics about organic agriculture worldwide at BioFach 2008. The results of this year’s study titled “The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2008” will be presented at the world’s largest trade fair for organic products on Friday February 22nd 2008 at 10:00 in Room Shanghai.

The study shows that 30.4 million hectares are currently certified according to organic standards (data as at the end of 2006). Australia continues to account for the largest certified organic surface area, with 12.3 million hectares, followed by China (2.3 million hectares), Argentina (2.2 million hectares) and the USA (1.6 million hectares). The greatest share of global organic surface area is in Oceania/Australia (42%), followed by Europe (24%) and Latin America (16%). In terms of certified land under organic management as a proportion of national agricultural area, the Alpine countries, such as Austria (13%, 361,487 hectares) and Switzerland (12%, 125,596 hectares), top the statistics. Compared to the adjusted data of the previous survey, the global organic area grew by approximately 1.8 million hectares during 2006. Growth was strongest in Oceania/Australia (more than 600,000 hectares) and Europe (more than 500,000 hectares). From the first figures available for 2007, Helga Willer of FiBL expects that the area under organic management has continued to grow.

The global market for organic products reached a value of 38.6 billion US Dollars in 2006, with the vast majority of products being consumed in North America and Europe, according to Organic Monitor. This constitutes a growth of five billion US Dollars compared to the 2005 data. Healthy growth rates are expected to continue in the coming years. Angela Caudle de Freitas, IFOAM Executive Director, suggests that the ever-growing demand for organic products offers attractive opportunities for producers – especially those in developing countries.

The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2008 is being presented for the ninth consecutive year at BioFach 2008. In addition to chapters reviewing organic agriculture worldwide, numerous illustrations and graphs, and completely revised reports about the emerging trends and regional development highlights on each individual continent, the study includes a comprehensive annex with the entire data set and expanded coverage of land-use data.

Performance of the global survey and production of the yearbook has been supported by NürnbergMesse since 2000. Starting in 2008, support is now also being provided by the Swiss State Secretariat of Economic Affairs (SECO), Berne/Switzerland, within the framework of its support activities for organic production in developing countries and by the International Trade Centre (ITC), Geneva/Switzerland, which has joined the survey as a partner. The global survey on organic farming and the publication of the yearbook have been carried out jointly by IFOAM, FiBL and SÖL since 2000.

Within the organic sector, it remains important that innovation and enterprise be recognised and rewarded where appropriate. I have already commented on the importance and functionality of the producers cooperative, particularly in marginal economies where establishment costs of farming equipment and primary infrastructure might be shared amongst several members. The additional benefits of this model might include the ability to distribute practical agricultural knowledge and experience and to negotiate improved terms of trade.

Producer Cooperatives in prosperous regions often have the additional resources which enable them to undertake more sophisticated operations. This might include capacity to engage specialist technical consultants, managerial advisors, and to encourage capital investment or beneficial partnerships through a range of external sources. Closely linked to most business success these days is the ability to generate favourable media and public relation profiles. These might be limited to the promotion of a particular product or service, but can also incorporate the challenging task of educating and informing consumers.

The Canadian organic sector is admirably represented by Quinte Organic Farmers Coop (QOFC). On October 17th, QOFC received the New Cooperative of Distinction Award, presented by the Ontario Cooperative Association. In addition to supplying organically certified foods for regional farmers markets, QOFC members have demonstrated their commitment to facilitating wider appreciation and understanding of organic agriculture and food production technologies. Members express their community spirit through a series of radio programs which broadcast as “Listen to the Land”. Throughout the series of eight documentary style episodes, one learns of the challenges and rewards associated with various forms organic agriculture.

“Listen to the Land” is currently posted on the QOFC website as a series of downloadable audio files. After listening to these, I was impressed by members’ awareness of important connections between the cooperative business model and their motivation to protect the environmental resources which sustain local communities as well as ensuring a future agricultural livelihood. Highly recommended.

A recent decision by Australia’s Victorian and New South Wales State Governments to allow the planting of GE herbicide tolerant canola represents a significant blow for both Australia’s organic industry and those seeking out alternatives to Genetically Engineered food. “The announcement today by Victorian and NSW governments that they will allow the planting of Genetically Engineered food crops next year is a major affront to the organic food industry, and in turn consumers in Australia”, said Scott Kinnear, BFA GMO spokesperson today.

“The planting of GE herbicide tolerant canola will make it impossible to know whether organic or non-GE farmers are at risk, where GE canola has been planted and its pollen remains floating in the environment. Unless farmers undertake expensive tests they will not know if they have been contaminated.

“Organic and non-GE food processors will be burdened with additional requirements for tests of grains and oils to manage and eliminate contamination risk. In addition costly supply chain segregation such as containerisation will need to be considered by grain farmers and food processors. Other potential costs may include expensive food recalls where contamination has occurred.

“The support for GE canola flies in the face of significant evidence of costs to the economy, health and environment presented to the panels in both Victoria and NSW. The BFA put in a submission to both governments outlining substantial issues in all three areas and it is of significant concern that our submission appears to have been completely overlooked.”

“The organic food industry is the global good news food story that is growing at 15-20% per year. Governments would reap benefits for the environment and public health by supporting more organic food production rather than GE foods,” said Mr Kinnear.

Chairman of the BFA’s Organic Standards Committee, which presides over the Australian Organic Standard (AOS) by which the majority of the country’s organic farmers are certified, noted that “this step will mean the inevitable unleashing of pollens that cannot be completely regulated nor controlled in the open environment and the food and seed chain. This will restrict choice and freedom, particularly for organic farmers and a wider range of consumers, under current regulatory and market arrangements, said Dr Andrew Monk.

“In the absence of sufficient labeling regulation which gives consumers a transparent and complete choice of GMO and non GMO, the only real choice in the market place for non GMO foods will remain certified organic products, which prohibit such technologies as GMOs. This proposal by Victoria and NSW to potentially allow the release of food crop GMOs into the environment next year will impact on this sector by the admitted inevitable contamination of such crops and their seed lines. It will also risk future export markets and further burden that sector with compliance and regulatory costs.

“Both the National Standard, regulated for export by AQIS, as well as the Australian Organic Standard which regulates both for domestic and international markets, prohibit any presence of GMOs in organic food products. Their presence would lead to the decertification of such products and their removal from the marketplace, placing further cost, and loss of choice, on consumers and producers alike.” noted Dr Monk.

Christmas is approaching quickly so it’s probably time to begin stocking up on the organically certified snack and finger foods. I’ve decided to avoid most of the unhealthy ones this year. These include salt laden chips, peanuts, toffee, marshmallow, and those syrupy rum balls which Granddad likes. To avoid harsh judgments from all and sundry, it’s important to come up with alternative snacks which reasonable minded people will accept and enjoy. Here’s a list which comes readily to mind.

Rice crackers offer a healthy alternative to potato chips. These authentic Japanese snacks are baked instead of fried, consequently they rate low in the unhealthy saturated fats. Better brands depend on natural ingredients like seaweed, spices, and herbs to provide flavour. Try to purchase organically certified crackers made with wholemeal rice and definitely avoid the cheaper substitutes which rely on artificial flavours and colouring agents.

Raw nuts and seeds are consistently rich in protein, essential fats, and minerals. Consider a selection of Almonds, Walnuts, Pumpkin Seeds, Brazil Nuts, Cashews, and Sesame Seeds. When purchased from good health food suppliers, these are vastly superior to the roasted and processed nuts which overload the salt, saturated fats, and artificial flavours.

Why not replace sugar-based confectionery with small quantities of dried fruit such as Apple, Apricots, Raisins, Pawpaw slices, Banana, Currants, and Figs? Certain fruits may be difficult to obtain in their dried form and this is indicative of the fact that only premium grade produce is suitable for selection. The colour of dried fruit can sometimes provide an indication of the variety and preservation process. Bright orange apricots might have been treated with sulphur dioxide or artificial colouring agents. The brown and darker coloured ones can appear less attractive but may be much closer to the natural product.

I haven’t got around to thinking about Christmas gift shopping yet. Like many people, I tend to leave shopping for gifts until the last minute. For some seasonal gift giving ideas and inspiration, you might like to check out the Alternative Consumer’s recent post on Green Holiday Gifts.

This weekend Australians will vote in the 2007 Federal election. A vote for the status quo – John Howard’s conservative government – will ensure Australia continues to ignore the global imperative to reduce carbon emissions and its need to behave in an ecologically responsible manner. It was only a matter of months ago that John Howard publicly challenged the notion and validity of climate change and global warming. Not surprisingly the Howard Government will, if re-elected, continue with its plans to mine and export uranium. They have also signalled their clear intention to build nuclear power stations within Australia. Perhaps most alarmingly, the current Government’s policies, which clearly favour large multinationals, have the potential to turn Australian agriculture into one of the world’s largest GMO experiments. Is this the type of leadership sought by those keen to ensure the continued viability of organic agriculture in Australia?

Fortunately we have choices. Both The Australian Greens and the Australian Labor Party present with clear alternatives to the current Government. The Australian Greens website and also the Labor Government’s Kevin 07 website are worthwhile checking out. I found the blog post detailing conversations with voters turning to Kevin 07 to be interesting. However, of particular relevance to those of you interested in the future of organic agriculture in Australia will be the Green’s policy on genetically engineered organisms in Australian Agriculture.

Does Australia need leadership that goes beyond myopic self-interest? I think so. If you checked out Bob Brown’s speech above, which was delivered at the recent Walk Against Warming held in Sydney, I think you’ll gain a sense of why we need the Greens to play a more prominent role in Canberra this time around. However, Bob’s right of course – it’s a seismic change that’s needed. But we can do it.

As a dedicated organic consumer I like to play my part in minimizing the impact our species has on the planet. There are numerous “big” environmental issues, which I don’t have direct control over, and then there are the smaller ones over which I enjoy at least a degree of control. Naturally enough, rather than depressing myself with my inability to alter the course of global issues, I tend to focus my efforts and attention on the day-to-day things I can do to contribute to a better, cleaner, greener society. That’s why I pay particular attention to the packaging of organic produce. I have an expectation – and I don’t believe it to be unreasonable – that organic products should be packaged in an environmentally responsible manner. I extend this expectation to the packaging options provided at the checkout.

Last week, while visiting with friends in Boston – and feeling inclined to express my gratitude for the most gracious hospitality that had been bestowed upon me – I had cause to visit a local specialty organic store. The store, which I won’t name, was fantastic apart from one major shortcoming. They expected me to leave with my items packaged in single use plastic bags. “What”, I said to the cashier. “You can not be serious”. Although not said with the John McEnroe inflection that you’ve probably just ascribed to my comments – I have to admit – I was shocked. How can anyone sufficiently inspired to open a store dedicated to selling organic produce routinely provide customers with single use plastic bags? And worse still, provide no alternatives.

Some of you may be scratching your head and wondering why I’d bother to upset myself over a few plastic bags. After all, I was partly to blame. Clearly I had entered the store without my own shopping bags. And you’re right to ask – I’m big on consumer responsibility too. Normally I do present at the checkout with my own multi-use, hand-stitched organic cotton bags. But on this occasion I was traveling light. However, even though I hadn’t brought my own bags to take my produce home from the store, I still feel there should have been environmentally friendly packaging options made available.

What was I expecting? There are many alternatives to single-use plastic bags, but my two personal favorites would have to be:

• String bags – these are reusable and convenient. However, while string bags are excellent for bulky items such as the larger varieties of fruits and vegetables, they can prove awkward for holding smaller items.
• Calico bags – these reusable cotton bags are easy to wash. They fit into a pocket (or handbag) for portability and they hold more items than your average single-use plastic bag. They last for about a year and look great when a little bit of color and imagination is applied to them.

The irony is, it would have made sound business sense for this particular store to offer me an alternative to the single-use plastic bag packaging they were pushing. And here’s why:

• Cost savings – supplying plastic bags is a business expense to them with no financial return;
• Lost advertising opportunities – a reusable packaging option would likely have had the store’s logo emblazoned on it in a prominent position, thus ensuring the store’s brand was constantly visible and in the minds of both current and potential customers.
• Customer loyalty – most consumers are aware of the need to protect the environment for future generations. Providing alternatives to single-use plastic bags represents an opportunity to ensure customers remain loyal.

It might seem like a small and insignificant issue, but single-use plastic bags spoil our parks and beaches, block our drains, harm our wildlife and take over 1000 years to break down. Fortunately, steps are being taken. Many cities, including Boston in the United States, and indeed many countries throughout the world are starting to take this issue seriously. It’s important that organic storekeepers show some leadership in this area. 

Large scale agriculturalists and primary producers have recently become interested in measuring their carbon profiles. This may be accounted for in terms of sound economic management, and the type of foresight which anticipates the introduction of government policy and other compliance imperatives. Within this analytical environment, there is renewed demand for comparative studies which measure the approximate carbon profiles of organic and conventional agricultural technologies.

In a field-based trial organised through the University of Nottingham, researchers concluded that organic weed control required almost double the amount of energy per hectare of wheat production compared with conventional control methods. In terms of carbon dioxide emissions, they estimated between 49 and 59 kg per tonne of grain as a consequence of organic weed control. Compare this with the 16.5 kg per tonne estimated from the conventional approach to weed management. The question then arises, to what extent might the elevated carbon profiles of organic weed control be offset by advantageous conditions within the productive supply chain?

It is for example, advantageous to alleviate the additional energy expenditure associated with herbicide manufacture, and the other synthetic inputs required by a conventional production model. Once the energy expenditure is balanced to include fertiliser, pesticide, and similar treatments the carbon dioxide emissions rise dramatically from 16.5 kg to approximately 39 kg per tonne of grain production.

Of course, the anticipated advantages of organic production relate specifically to consumer safety and a wider spectrum of ecological practices which promote sustainability and stability of important food resources. It also needs to be clarified that specific unit energy studies are disadvantageous to smaller operations. Once organic farming units increase in scale so that yields approach those established through conventional cropping, these variations in carbon profile are likely to be revised.    

Okay – only four sleeps left until Halloween 2007 blows into town. If you read Bev’s earlier post, your pantry may already be chock-a-block full of store-bought organic treats to give those hungry, menacing, night-prowling monsters. But if you’re like some of our readers and you’re not overly keen to hand out treats containing too much sugar – whether organic or not – you might want to consider some alternative Halloween approaches.

Here’s a quick organic Halloween suggestion that is not only low in sugar but should keep most monster’s at bay – popcorn! Homemade organic popcorn – you can’t beat it. Popcorn’s fun, nutritious and it’s really easy to prepare. Simply start with some good quality organic yellow popcorn kernels such as those available from Purcell Mountain Farms and start cooking.

3 Tablespoons oil (canola oil, coconut oil, or olive oil may be used)
4oz. Organic yellow popcorn
1 Popcorn Popper or Large Sauce Pan
1 Large Serving Bowl

Here’s how – start by preheating the oil on high in the bottom of a popcorn popper (or a large saucepan if you’re coming up short with the popcorn popper) for approximately 1 minute. Add the popcorn kernels to the popper and cover. Lower the heat slightly. Agitate the popper until the popcorn ceases to pop. Pour the popcorn into a large serving bowl to cool. Sprinkle with salt to taste. Place the popcorn into paper bags so that each monster is able to have their own bag. Depending on how many monsters will visit, you may need to make several batches.

If this idea won’t work with your monsters at this time of year, then you might want to check out some:

Alternative green Halloween ideas from the site dedicated to alternative consumers (and monsters too!).

Spooky trick or treat ideas from the Tree Hugging Family.

Eco-friendly Halloween suggestions from Nature Moms

Whatever you decide to do – act fast. I know of at least two little monsters that are getting their tricks ready right now!

An animated debate has recently been playing out, particularly in the United Kingdom, around the subject of air freighted organic imports. Those opposed to the importation of air freighted organic foodstuffs site the irreparable environmental damage caused by the release of green house gases brought about by the unnecessary burning of aviation fuel. Those in favour appear to have adopted the stance that source (country of origin) organic certification should be the only determinant used to assess whether an item should be allowed to present as organic in its destination market. They also site the fact that the vast majority of airfreighted organic foodstuffs, which routinely make their way to so-called first world nations, are generally sourced from developing nations which, were it not for their capacity to generate this revenue stream, might otherwise be unfairly penalized in world markets. It’s an interesting dilemma.

It’s reported that there has been an 800% increase in air freighted organic foodstuffs in the past five years. Clearly, this outstrips the already significant growth in global demand for organic produce. So, what’s driving this increase in demand for air freighted organic foodstuffs? The answer is simple. Developed nations are comprised of wealthy individuals who are demanding the highest quality organic produce irrespective of whether its in-season or not. This is exacerbated in countries such as the United Kingdom where the climate is not conducive to growing many of the types of fruits and vegetables that consumers have grown accustomed to. In short, developed nations are seeking out counter-seasonal organic produce from around the world and flying it in to ensure it arrives as fresh as possible.

Unfortunately, while the source of the problem is relatively easy to identify, the solution is somewhat more complicated. You see, consumers in developed nations have developed a taste for the good life. We want to know that we can walk into Tesco’s or Sainsbury’s in mid-December and pick up a fresh organic pineapple. Previous generations, unless originating from very wealthy families, wouldn’t have dreamt of doing anything of the sort. But now we’re all relatively well off, so we can make these choices.

What does it all mean? At this point, it might be useful to revisit what I see as being the main arguments both for and against the importation of air freighted organic foodstuffs.

Arguments in favour of air freighted organic foodstuffs

Most air freighted organic foodstuffs are sourced from developing nations whose farmers, generally speaking, have very small carbon footprints in comparison to their developed nation counterparts. It is often the case that farms in developing nations use greater amounts of human labour. This means that they tend to rely less on equipment (such as tractors and trucks) which require the burning of fossil fuels.

Export trade in organic foodstuffs provides an opportunity for farmers from developing nations to sell their produce at prices higher than would otherwise be the case if they were forced to sell into their own local markets. Arguably, this opportunity has the capacity to raise the standard of living in developing nations by providing the much-needed funds to facilitate projects in areas such as healthcare and education. However, the truth of this argument depends of course on how equitable any distribution of realised benefit is between the global supermarket chains (who are ultimately the ones sourcing airfreighted organic produce from distant location) and the farmers from those developing nations. Like me, you may have a view as to where the majority of any pricing differential ultimately resides in situations such as this where an obvious power imbalance exists. Accordingly, this would appear to lessen the validity of the “benevolence” argument.

Arguments against allowing air freighted organic foodstuffs

Fossil fuels, particularly high-octane aviation fuels, destroy the planet. Arguably, reducing green house gas emissions should be something that those aspiring to lead an organic lifestyle should be actively involved in.

Our own local organic farmers often struggle to make ends meet. Sure, there are the exceptions. We’ve all heard of the millionaire organic farmer, but generally speaking, our own local farmers can do with all the support they can get. After all, they have children to send to school and repairs they need to undertake to ensure their farms remain operational.

Increased reliance on food imports, which appears to be happening in other sectors within the food industry right now – in all developed nations – means that we risk losing control of one of the basic requirements for maintaining self-sufficiency. That is, the ability to feed ourselves. Arguably, if we keep on squeezing our small local farmers until there is nothing left, they’ll stop doing what they’re currently really good at. We may ultimately pay much higher prices for our food than we’re anticipating. After all, cars imported from Japan to the United States during the 1970s were sold at a significant discount in comparison to locally made vehicles. If you’re in the United States, what sort of discount would you expect now on a new Toyota in comparison to an equivalent locally made vehicle? Ask someone in Detroit!

Am I sitting on the fence on this one? No. That’s not my style. I think that we, as organic consumers, owe it to our local farmers to source – at least where possible – our produce from them. And just maybe, if you reside in the United Kingdom, you’ll need to hold off on purchasing that organic pineapple this Christmas!

The number of political and social movements seeking popularity through their advocacy of environmental or green causes has increased markedly over recent years. While their growth expands to encompass wider segments of the population, environmental awareness can easily become watered down to express positive sentiments while failing to address the complexity of genuine participation. The overall benefits of adopting a green perspective tend to be elaborated at the expense of balanced and honest accountancy. There are of course inherent deficits associated with the green approach and proper documentation of these is essential for growth and development into the future.

A significant percentage of consumers have adopted various lifestyle measures which are designed to reduce their utilisation of essential resources like oil, coal, water, and timber. Because the focus is generally toward efficiencies delivered through singular and domestic applications, there is often minimal awareness of the infrastructure required to support commercial or industrial applications of any scale. Included in a recent survey of alternative energy sources were the applications of solar, wind, geothermal, atomic, and tidal. With the possible exception of atomic and to a very limited extent geothermal, these alternatives remain impractical in terms of their overall cost efficiency.

For a variety of reasons, consumers may choose to purchase organically certified foods and manufactured products. To meet current levels of demand for organic products, agricultural and niche manufacturing enterprises have taken advantage of generous incentive programs which facilitate the transition towards organic production. While these are commendable and deserve to be supported by further stages of government policy, there is little understanding or sympathy for the large-scale operations which depend upon the conventional inputs of synthetic fertilisers, pesticides, and pharmaceutical treatments for stock. Understandably, this position is complicated with the continual advancement and distribution of genetic technologies.

It is an unfortunate reality that many examples of organic and sustainable husbandry are only practical on a small to medium scale where additional labour costs can be offset through access to government subsidies and opportunities for value promotion and niche marketing. This is particularly apparent when organic production methods are transferred to isolated and developing regions without the benefits of a strong local market for these products.

Have you noticed when purchasing certified organic products that the packaging used tends to be lighter and more economical than the packaging used in equivalent conventionally produced items. I have. Prior to switching to an organic lifestyle, my trashcan would be full to overflowing on an almost daily basis. It wasn’t that I was constantly eating, it’s just that – like most people in the United States – I had become accustomed to discarding tonnes of plastic, styrofoam, paper and cardboard each year. I’m happy to report that, more often than not, my trashcan now remains empty for several days in a row. The compost heap out the back ensures that very little goes to waste.

But not all organic products are created equal. Sure, that’s a given you’re saying. Some are better than others! But what I mean to say is that not all organic food items are packaged as responsibly as others. Some organic food manufacturers seem to go the extra mile by ensuring their products are packaged economically and conservatively. In doing so, at least in my opinion, these manufacturers are embodying the true spirit of the organic movement. Rather than adopting a mere compliance approach to organics, as some manufacturers seem to be doing, they are looking to improve not only their bottom line, but also the state of the planet.

So, I recently took it upon myself to find out whether there was any imperative, voluntary or mandated, that requires organic food producers to package their products in an environmentally friendly manner. Here’s what I’ve discovered.

The International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movement (IFOAM) is generally recognized as the source from which country-specific organic principles are derived. IFOAM publish a series of norms and principles to guide organic production and processing. Within the current (Version 2005) IFOAM Norms For Organic Production, section 6.5 deals specifically with packaging. In relation to packaging the following applies:

General Principle
Organic product packaging has minimal adverse impacts on the product or on the environment.
Recommendations
Processors of organic food should avoid unnecessary packaging materials.
Organic food should be packaged in reusable, recycled, recyclable, and biodegradable packaging whenever possible.
Standards shall require that:
6.5.1 Packaging material shall not contaminate organic food.
6.5.2 Packaging materials, and storage containers, or bins that contain a synthetic fungicide, preservative, or fumigant are prohibited.
6.5.3 Organic produce shall not be packaged in reused bags or containers that have been in contact with any substance likely to compromise the organic integrity of product or ingredient placed in those containers.

Accordingly, while there exists an overarching recommendation that organic producers package their products in an environmentally responsible manner, there does not appear to be any legislative imperative for them to comply with this recommendation.

While initially I was quite surprised by my findings, upon reflection, they’ve started to make sense. After all, a product doesn’t cease to be organic merely because it has been over-packaged. In a manner consistent with the principles laid out by IFOAM, a product would cease to be organic only if it had been contaminated as a consequence of its packaging being constructed with, or exposed to, a prohibited substance. Indeed, the task of determining whether a particular product’s packaging was or was not environmentally friendly would be a fairly subjective undertaking, and would likely fall beyond the scope of those called upon to conduct organic production facility audits. Accordingly, it seems reasonable, and indeed more sensible, that a general recommendation approach is adopted by standard setters.

Fortunately, the vast majority of organic processors stay true to the spirit of the movement rather than merely complying with its minimum requirements. However, I believe there’s room for some manufacturers of processed organic food items to improve their act. About a week ago, my wife wanted to purchase some organic cookies. Actually, so did I – so much for my diet! Anyway, I won’t mention the brand, save to say that you’ve very likely seen them on the shelf of your favorite organic and whole food retailer. By any reasonable assessment, the packaging of these cookies was excessive. In fact, there was more packaging than there was cookie. Having been raised by Scottish parents, that’s a trigger for me at the best of times. So, even though the cookies looked good, as I’m sure they were, we decided not to purchase them. Don’t worry, I’ve made the company responsible aware of our concerns. I sent them a polite letter outlining much of the above. I’m yet to hear back, but I’ll be interested in their response.

So, if like me, you’re keen to ensure that our planet is maintained for future generations, you might want to take a good look at the packaging of processed organic food items prior to making a purchase. As a consumer, if you feel that the packaging of an organic item is unnecessary or inappropriate, why not let the manufacturer know. After all, if those dedicated to the organic movement can’t get it right, what are the chances of conventional manufacturers, who tend to be less environmentally conscious, going the extra yards to save the environment?

The principle of care is one of the tenets underpinning organic agriculture. IFOAM indicate that Organic Agriculture should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations as well as the environment. Most organic consumers I speak to are keen to extend this fundamental principle into other areas of their daily lives. Saving energy in the home is one of the surest ways we, as individuals, can reduce the load we place on our precious planet. Choosing energy efficient lighting sources can result in significant reductions in household green house gas emissions. So, having some understanding of energy efficient lighting tends to be useful for most organic consumers. But what exactly is energy efficient lighting?

Energy efficient lighting is an approach to lighting that seeks to minimise energy usage while simultaneously delivering upon required functionality. Why is it important? Well, it’s estimated that a 13% reduction in household greenhouse gas emissions is possible merely by choosing appropriate lighting technology. Lighting technology has come a long way in the past ten years. In the past, virtually every household in the United States used incandescent globes. Nowadays, households are able to choose between the older style incandescent globes and the more modern compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL).

What’s the difference? I’m glad you asked. Compact fluorescent light bulbs use around 80 percent less electricity and last around 9 times longer than incandescent light globes. Instead of using between 40 and 100 watts, common in incandescent globes, compact fluorescent light bulbs generally use between 9 and 20 watts. Given that energy consumption and the cost of lighting is directly proportional to a globe’s wattage, it’s fairly easy to see why the newer compact fluorescent light bulbs have the capacity to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and save you money.

Are there any drawbacks? Compact fluorescent light bulbs are generally more expensive than incandescent globes. However, when their increased lifespan and the cost savings associated with lower energy usage are taken into account, compact fluorescent light bulbs are actually a much less expensive option. In fact, the payback period associated with them, which is the time that elapses before you cover your initial investment, is generally less than a year.

Where can I get them? Compact fluorescent light bulbs are generally available wherever conventional light bulbs are sold, with most hardware stores and major supermarkets stocking a good range. Most will fit straight into your existing light sockets, whether they are the conventional bayonet or screw fitting light sockets. And the good news is, with their increased popularity, the range of colours, shapes, sizes and functions has broadened in recent times. So, whether you’re after a ‘warm white’ colour, similar in appearance to an incandescent globe for use in living areas, kitchens, and bedrooms, or whether you need a ‘cool’ white colour suitable for use in bathrooms, toilets and for outdoor use, you should be able to find something to suit.

If you want to play your part, seriously consider switching over to compact fluorescent light bulbs in favour of the less efficient incandescent globes of yesteryear. In the interim, here are some additional lighting tips that will not only save you money, but will help you to reduce your carbon footprint:

• Use natural lighting as much as possible. If you’re building a new home, look for opportunities to utilise natural light by incorporating skylights and sky dome lighting.
• Turn all lights off when they are not in use.
• Replace any incandescent globes with energy saving compact fluorescent globes.
• Choose globes with the lowest wattage required for each particular area of your home.
• For outdoor settings, choose solar-powered lights.

None of these steps are particularly difficult. And believe me, they can make a difference.

With a few notable exceptions, the history of surf culture is generally associated with a laid back lifestyle, health and sustainability. Indeed you’d be hard pressed to find too many surfers that didn’t have at least a passing interest in environmental matters. Well, at least that’s the perception most people have. Until recently, the unstated reality behind this myth was more likely to be one of overt consumption, toxic materials, and unnecessary pollution. What?

But, it’s true when you give it some thought. Since the sixties, surfboards have been routinely manufactured with synthetic polymers. Tough on the environment. How many chunks of resinated polyurethane float haphazardly around the Southern Pacific these days? Wetsuits, waxes, legropes, and grip tape are all manufactured from chemical and oil based polymers. Then there’s the travel. In the tradition of Laurie Martin and Richard O’Sullivan, incredible wave experiences must be gathered in a never ending quest of international flights, extended road trips, and cross country excursions. The dependence on fossil fuels is frequently overlooked but cannot be easily dismissed.

After years of denial, companies at the forefront of consumer surf culture are beginning to reflect the wider shift towards organic and ecologically sustainable products. Look at this season’s surfwear displays. Quicksilver, Patagonia, O’Neill, Billabong, Body Glove, and others have cleaned up their production cycles to reduce excess plastic packaging, synthetic fibers, chemical bleaches and toxic dyes. The new benchmark is established by popular lines manufactured from entirely organic and recycled materials. It’s no surprise that the smaller, niche labels have opted for organic surfwear. Brands like Pelikan and Iroquest are increasingly keen to differentiate themselves with organically certified products.

In the near future, it’s also possible that organic surfwear may be accompanied with an entirely different type of surfboard. Innovative designers from California are now prototyping biodegradable fibre foam cores and natural resinous alternatives to fibreglass. There’s every chance that manufacturers and surfers themselves will appreciate these efforts to improve the safety and environmental credentials of their sport. After all, individuals who surf regularly tend to become passionate about the ocean, and wish to ensure its integrity for those who follow.

Our children are reaching the age where Christmas takes on special meaning. We were talking between ourselves last month and agreed on a few basics. We definitely wish to free ourselves of the consumer drive to hand out elaborate and expensive presents. I received those as a child and, quite frankly, they probably didn’t do me a whole lot of good. What we would like to focus on are the simple joys of being together as a family. This involves plenty of scrumptious food, good stories, wishes, laughter, and some time for serious reflection as well.

To achieve that kind of Christmas, you need symbols and the obvious one which inspires so many cultural traditions is the decorated tree. I’m not speaking of those wire and plastic structures so easily overdone with flashing stars and fluorescent baubles. No, I was hoping to return somewhat to the natural world where a tree looks and smells like it grew from healthy soil, with the necessary help from sunshine and rain. Isn’t this is the tree of childhood dreams.

I haven’t mentioned it yet, but I’m planning to make this an Organic Christmas. I hear this gets a decent run across California and parts of Europe where entire communities embrace the organic lifestyle. I’m afraid that hasn’t really occurred in my neck of the woods, but hey, somebody has to start the ball rolling! Why not me?

So far I’ve got a few ideas about getting the food supplies together. I’m going to order an organic turkey, and it’s easy enough to purchase the cake’s ingredients from our neighbourhood health store. There’s a local farmer’s market which sells organically grown berries in time for Christmas and I will probably order some certified wine from an online distributor. That was the easy part.

Christmas is about giving and sharing and I believe the most important thing to share is your ideas and hopes for the future. At the risk of sounding philosophical, I’m expanding this to encompass my ideas and hopes for the future of our planet. This is not as corny as it sounds. There’s plenty of self-interest to stabilise things. After all, my family has to live here for who knows how long?

No more last minute shopping for this boy. It requires much thought and love to create the small yet significant presents I’m hoping to distribute on the special day. I’d like to focus as much as possible on sustainable and recycled materials. I’m using the internet for ideas but it’s all a bit secretive at the moment.

Now, back to the tree of childhood dreams. There’s a forestry block out the back of my town which raises conifers for their softwood. Every year they sell a few of their immature trees and the money is given to worthy charities across the country. That fits in with my concept for Christmas so I’ve ordered one of those. Every year, our children make Christmas decorations at pre-school and kindergarten. Instead of admiring profusely before politely discarding, these will take pride of place this year. Even the angels with the moustaches. Don’t ask, it’s a long story. If there’s empty room on the branches, I’d like to adorn them with little sachets containing dried organic lavender and other aromatic herbs. This is an idea I discovered during my research. It all adds to the richness of the sensory experience. Beeswax candles are also lovely at night but you’ll need to be very careful if your house becomes somewhat chaotic like ours.

The last thing I need to remind myself is to get involved with community issues. My wife is so much better than me in this regard. She’ll volunteer here and there and knows how to get enthusiastic about a project. I tend to procrastinate and then worry whether those committee things should be handled a better way. Of course the idea is you grow wiser every year and hopefully more cooperative, so let’s see what can be done.

I’m still young enough to enjoy leaving the organic Christmas cake and home made ginger beers on our porch for Santa. Don’t forget the bowl of water for his reindeer.

As a keen organic gardener, I try to emphasise the importance of basic recycling. The obvious example where everyone can succeed is the recycling of organic materials into compost heaps. But what about the endless amounts of paper, wood, metal, glass, and plastic which pass through our lives every day of the year? Well some of these can be recycled as an industrial proposition. Most neighbourhoods have good schemes for collecting our unwanted glass, paper, and plastics. Next time you visit one of your gardening friends; ask them if they can recycle any of these materials by using them directly in their garden. Here are a few ideas which have been gathered around the traps.

Cardboard egg cartons make excellent trays for establishing seedlings. They enable delicate seedlings to be raised indoors during the cooler months of the year and transplanted directly to the garden after several months’ growth. One dozen plants can then be transplanted at once in a neatly spaced arrangement. A good watering will enable the recycled cardboard to break down, providing the roots with additional depth.

Instead of discarding nylon pantyhose, keep a supply available for a number of applications in the organic garden. Fashion them into handy collection sacks to cover the valuable flower heads of seeding plants. When protectively attached and tied to the stems, these nylon sacks will enable the seeds to ripen with a natural exchange of air and moisture. As the seeds drop, they will be gathered within. Strips of nylon are suitable for staking ties and as support ties for juvenile trees.

Nowadays, one can purchase some very elaborate and expensive watering systems. When a friend or colleague describes one, I’m often very attentive because I enjoy learning about new technologies and have always felt an obligation to control some of the demand placed on local water supplies. Having said that, I’ll now confess that my own watering system consists of nothing more than a collection of recycled plastic containers. Take one of those two litre milk cartons and drill a small hole in the base. Now fill it to the top and place it base down somewhere near the roots of your plants. They will now be watered on a slow feed until the carton empties itself. I’ve used this basic system around my shrubs and vegetable gardens for years.

That’s just three of my garden recycling ideas. There must be thousands out there so why not ask at your next club meeting or practical demonstration. If you get some good ones drop us a line at Organic Guide and we’ll do our best to share them around.

I’m continually reflecting upon opportunities for commercial investors and here’s one which needs to be made public. Vending machines provide a convenient service to a large population of transport system commuters and individuals attached to many sectors of the workforce. They’re also installed in schools, universities, hospitals, and accommodation facilities. Now recollect the last time you dropped some change into one of these. You probably received a salty snack food, one overly high in saturated fat content with lots of chemical additives. Does it really have to be this way? Of course it doesn’t. Surely the time is ready for a new competitor on the vending machine circuit. Consider the possibility of units containing wholesome, organically certified snacks.

The Department of Health publishes a list of dietary recommendations for young people between twelve and eighteen years. At last glance, there was no comment upon the possibility that organically certified foods might be healthier or less damaging than the conventional items. There was, however, some clear indications that foods high in sugar, fat, and salt should be avoided. Given such advice, it would be most unfortunate if educational providers and recreation centres failed to support the installation of machines distributing a higher quality range of organically certified snack foods.

Assuming investors are prepared to speculate on a collective desire to improve childhood health, we might expect to see the new machines installed within a reasonable period. But now consider just three of the barriers which will undoubtedly confront our positive initiative.

For too many teenagers, organic food is fringe territory and definitely something to be avoided against risk of ridicule and expulsion from their peer structures. Conformity is often the course of least resistance and life can be hard enough without making waves and being perceived as too “organic”. Of course, these attitudes can change with life experience but in the meantime there are enormous advertising and marketing budgets which work to ensure stability and status quo within our patterns of consumption.

Yes, all of the above statements are worthy of investor consideration. There is little doubt that organic food and lifestyle concepts encounter significant resistance amongst the age categories defined here. In terms of health and well-being, teenagers frequently fail to consider the long term consequences of their unhealthy diet. In response, health warnings and blunt advertising campaigns have been routinely delivered by the proponents of positive change. This, however, may be the wrong approach. According to the Burroughs Institute, any marketing angle which concentrates exclusively on these negative aspects is likely to fail. In most cases organic retailers will accomplish more by focusing on the short term and enjoyable benefits of their healthy snack food alternatives.

Organic foods of any description are more expensive and provide fewer options in terms of sensory appeal. Now this is not my perception, but it rings true for many investors considering their options within the snack food and beverages sector.

In reality, the perceived expense and lack of options are symptoms of a distribution failure. Compared to the successful snack food companies, organic products are typically manufactured by small organisations with limited expertise in market development, distribution, and cost control. It is worth proposing that any well-capitalised vending machine operation might provide an effective platform for establishing a competitive alliance of widely distributed organic food manufacturers. Under such arrangements there should be additional opportunities for developing attractive and cost effective products.

Organic consumers have separated themselves from the mainstream and are too snobbish to consider purchasing their snacks from vending machines. In any case, they are fussier than the average consumer and always challenging to please. Once again, this is a sentiment which is frequently held by potential investors.

There are many levels of organic consumer. Clearly, the vending machine approach is not for all. Consumers, when given the choice, prefer to purchase their food and beverage items from a shop or kiosk. The vending machine exchanges personalised service for convenience. Given the size and congestion of our major cities, it appears likely that vending machines will play an ever-increasing role in our lives. This is true for banking, ticket purchases, and many similar transactions in addition to the most basic ones like food and beverage provision. Rather than resist this reality, the organic sector should realise this opportunity to feed more of us more frequently with their tasty and healthy products.

Most of us can agree, the times they are a changing. And much of that change is being brought about by average people living seemingly ordinary lives. Take my cousin’s dwelling for example. Beyond the facade of its traditional Victorian exterior his family have created an oasis of environmental sustainability. I’m referring to something beyond the latest urban trend of fashionability.

Andy has been enthusiastic about organic products and sustainable living since his teenage years. Upon leaving high school he traveled the world, exploring his passion cross culturally. Beginning on a Kibbutz in Israel, he also explored the importance of sustainable living and community values in Egypt, Pakistan, Tibet, and Mongolia among others. He deeply embraced these cultural and material traditions to arrive at the reflective position he currently holds. As a consequence of these ideas and experiences, the house he shares with his family has evolved and continues to evolve.

Their house incorporates a substantial number of ecological features. There are solar panels to generate electricity and hot water from the sun’s radiant energy. There are tanks for collecting rainwater and recycling grey water from the kitchen. Structural improvements to the house’s interior have been undertaken with recycled building materials. Most of these are natural products like stone and untreated timbers. You will find very little plastic in Andy’s home although there are some water wise buckets and detachable hose fittings in the garden.

The evolution has continued into the next generation. His ten year old son, Phoenix tends his own vegetable and herb gardens using organic principles like crop rotation, companion planting, and the encouragement of beneficial insect species. Most of the backyard has been developed to support around fifty types of vegetable and herb. Many of these are traditional varieties which thrive under organic cultivation methods. Andy’s wife is a fantastic cook and rarely chooses anything but the freshest organic ingredients for her meals. A lot of their fresh produce is direct from the garden although they supplement this with regular visits to their organic cooperative and local farmer’s markets.

Andy doesn’t use soap like everyone else and you won’t find a conventional cleaning product in his laundry cabinet. They use a selection of household items like vinegar and baking soda to wash their floors and tiled surfaces. Their clothing is basically handmade using raw fabrics such as hemp, organically certified cotton, and fine merino wool. The kids have a few synthetic sports items but most of their everyday gear is entirely natural.

There’s no question that Andy’s heart’s in the right place. One of his favourite issues is transportation. Nowadays he chooses to avoid driving whenever he can. He admits that he once depended heavily on his car and never considered the environmental impact of additional carbon emissions. They still own a small vehicle and are considering the purchase of a hybrid.

There’s definitely a sense of transformation in the air, which no longer depends on individuals who seem isolated or unique from the majority. Andy is a pretty ordinary guy with kids and a mortgage. He doesn’t really stand out from the crowd because there’s an increasing number of individuals who agree with his values. Andy has a favourite quote which reveals his commitment to human endeavour and community spirit. Quite simply he says, “No individual can achieve everything but every individual can achieve something.”

Most Governments throughout the world, albeit reluctantly in many instances, are beginning to accept the fact that adverse climate change, brought about in large part by green house gas emissions, has the capacity to seriously erode the quality of life we currently enjoy. But as an individual, it’s sometimes difficult to know what practical steps to take in order to minimise the impact our actions have on the planet. Faced with the problem of where to begin, we thought it might be worthwhile considering a few practical steps that we can all take to ensure the survival of our planet for future generations.

One of the best places to start is to gain some sense as to the magnitude of your current carbon footprint. Carbon what? Carbon footprint. For those who’ve never heard the term used before, let’s start with a definition.

A carbon footprint is the impact human activities have on the environment in terms of the amount of greenhouse gases produced, measured in units of carbon dioxide. In essence, your carbon footprint is a measure of the extent to which your lifestyle choices contribute to carbon emissions. If you’re keen to work out what your own personal carbon footprint is, check out the calculators at CarbonFootprint.com.

By making choices that emphasise the principles of sharing, economy and mutual obligation, we can all make a significant difference. As an organic consumer, you’ve already taken a really important step. Organic production systems emphasise the use of renewable energy sources, recycling, and the maintenance of biological diversity. But what else can we do? Here are five simple steps that can make a difference.

Cycle and walk – Simply jumping on a bike or choosing to walk when you would otherwise have chosen to drive can have a huge impact on your carbon footprint. Over the course of a year, the cumulative impact of a decision to leave your car at home can prevent tonnes of carbon dioxide entering the atmosphere.

Share the ride – If the distance you need to cover makes cycling or walking impractical, aim to catch some form of public transport. Jump on the train, bus or ferry. Apart from spreading the burden of emissions across numerous users, public transport is often less stressful – it provides a great opportunity to zone out by reading a book or listening to your favourite music. If you must use your own personal vehicle, see if it’s possible to car pool or share with others.

Grow your own – Growing your own organic fruit and vegetables is a great way to reduce your footprint. In fact, growing and planting activities can help to offset carbon emissions produced elsewhere. It’ll also mean fewer trips to the local shops, will save you money, provide you with exercise, and enhance your intake of nutritionally optimal food.

Buy local – Food grown locally has generally travelled much shorter distances than food that’s brought in from interstate or overseas. Food that comes from distant locations requires significant quantities of aviation or diesel fuels to be expended before it reaches your kitchen. This adds to the quantum of greenhouse gas emissions. Besides which, food grown locally tends to be fresher.

Become energy smart – If you’re not already with a sustainable energy supplier, consider switching to a company that specialises in renewable (for example, wind, solar or hydro) energy sources. And always turn off lights, computers, and other electrical appliances when not in use.

None of these steps are overly difficult. Even by introducing one or two of them into your lifestyle you can help to ensure that our planet remains viable for future generations.

Sustainability is a term that conjures up a range of meanings, dependent on one’s perspective. Gordon Conway makes this point in ‘The Doubly Green Revolution’, which considers the political and practical dimensions of international food production and distribution. While his text does not address the perspective of the organic sector in general or the organic agriculturalist in particular, it would be reasonable to consider these fitting within both the environmental and socially responsible categories.

For the majority of cases, organic growers perceive sustainability as an approach which enables sufficient food production without degrading the fertility and integrity of natural resources. At the same time sustainability is linked to the promise of minimal disruption to traditional (social) values and institutions. While these examples are evidently well intentioned, there are some failings in practical application, particularly when organic systems are applied to subsistence and developing economies.

Conway describes sustainability as one of the four principal indicators of performance for agroecosystems. The remaining three are productivity, stability, and equitability. Because of their complex interrelationship, it is beneficial to consider their effects for communities involved in organic production.

Productivity is perhaps the easiest yet most deceptive component to evaluate. It is described as the output of product per unit of resource input. The optimum productivity goal for any organic farming system is to establish a sufficient harvest with minimal dependence on external resources. In addition to the financial cost, a high dependence on external resources tends to threaten the natural stability of ecosystems along with social and political institutions. The history of industrial development in the west can be described as a continuous drive to obtain external resources. On the broadest scale, productivity has increased through colonisation and hegemony, often at the expense of environmental and social cohesion.

Stability of an agricultural system is a measure of consistency. In most agricultural environments there is an expectation that variable factors contribute to the growth or decline of productive resources. These include changes in climate, soil fertility, insect populations, and the level of technical applications. Most organic farming systems aim to accommodate some of the variability which is inevitable and important for natural ecosystems.

Equitability refers to the fairness of resource distribution. It is largely dependent on social and political systems which determine ownership and access to natural resources. In many instances, organic agricultural systems promote equitability through positive practices like resource stewardship, knowledge dissemination and the promotion of social capital and fair trade associations.

According to Conway, sustainability is the ability of an agricultural system to maintain productivity when subject to a stress or shock. This clear and specific definition at first appears tangential to the commonly perceived definition of producing enough food without hurting the environment. Conway’s sustainability is closer to our understanding of resilience, or an ability to recover from various types of adversity. Within a typical agricultural system examples of adversity might include the arrival of new species of insect pest or the introduction of disease pathogens.

Under ideal circumstances, the development of organic agricultural systems offers an increased level of environmental resource protection and integrity. Intuitively, this leads to the conclusion that organic agriculture promotes higher levels of resilience compared to conventional agricultural methods. In practice, there are however sufficient examples of organic agriculture with inherently low resilience and sustainability. Many of these will be associated with subsistence and developing economies, usually within the poorest regions of the world.

For the economically disadvantaged, there are numerous reasons why organic agriculture might suffer from low sustainability. Consider, for example, the rice grower who makes a decision to raise crops without the assistance of chemical treatment. Unlike the organic grower in developed nations, the third world farmer has fewer options to establish a zone of protection surrounding the crop. This introduces levels of external vulnerability, which are rarely encountered or tolerated in developed nations. Even when behaving correctly from the perspective of sound organic agricultural practices, the inherent sustainability will often depend upon factors beyond immediate control or influence. These might include widespread water contamination or failure to identify and control the regional spread of recently introduced disease and pest species.

Similar arguments apply to the other properties used to describe an agricultural system although these are less likely to be obscured by any descriptive association with organic farming.