The Soil Association today announced the appointment of Rob Haward, operations director at Riverford Organic Vegetables, as grower representative on its standards board, following an open recruitment process. This appointment completes the Soil Association’s new, independent standards board.

Rob Haward, operations director of Riverford Organic Vegetables, said “I am delighted to have been appointed. I hope my input will be of value to the Soil Association in enabling them to continue to lead the way on standards development. This process is essential in order to protect consumers, while balancing the technical constraints of growers.”

The Soil Association Standards Board is responsible for maintaining and developing all of the Association’s organic standards. Current issues under consideration include:

• airfreight and the possibility of linking this with ethical trade (to ensure airfreight really does benefit African, and other, farmers);
• the Soil Association’s response to the confusion likely to be caused by the new mandatory EU logo;
• the development of specific standards for glasshouse production;
• the creation of common international standards for health and beauty products.

Anna Bradley, chair of the Soil Association Standards Board, said “I welcome Rob to the standards board. With the new standards board complete, I hope all our stakeholders will be confident that their interests will be understood at the standards board table. We can now develop the Soil Association standards with the vigour, transparency and accountability expected of such an organisation and its public interest responsibilities.”

Kevin Rudd, Australia’s newly elected Prime Minister, has ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In doing so, Australia joins the growing list of countries getting serious about climate change. It’s refreshing to see a newly elected Government act on its election commitments as early as the Rudd Government has. And things are looking up for Australia’s organic industry too. The Rudd Labor Government has announced plans to fund changes to the way Australia’s organic certification system works. Finally it appears as though Australia’s burgeoning organic industry and the consumers it serves will benefit from a uniform domestic organic standard. Good news indeed!

Online surveys by professional market researchers like the AC Nielsen group provide only approximate insight into those factors influencing consumer behaviour in the market for organic goods and services. Experience shows that rapidly shifting views about health, environmental issues, and food safety can also precipitate abrupt shifts in consumer behaviour. In many such instances the most immediate economic effects are delivered prior to the distribution of relevant statistical data.

AC Nielsen’s most recent survey on organic consumer trends identified price and lack of credibility as two of the significant barriers against the purchase of foods promoting specific health benefits. From a large sample distributed across Europe, Asia Pacific, and the Americas, the survey reported that 47% of respondents considered organic foods too expensive. Whether this information offers some practical benefit to producers, manufacturers, or retailers of organic goods is uncertain. It obviously requires an appreciation of specific regional influences and some further engagement as a means of contextualisation. For example, what did respondents have in mind as the alternative when asked about their attitudes towards organic food items? Clearly, the diversity of social and cultural influences in the aforementioned regions would suggest that any alternatives to organic food would not necessarily be uniform or easily defined.

Similarly, concerns about credibility are not particularly useful unless they qualify the specific areas where problems are perceived to occur. The AC Nielsen survey finds 31% of respondents from the Asia Pacific region are skeptical that foods labelled organic are produced in the manner described. Consequently, it becomes imperative to know the history of food production scandals or other difficulties which might have resulted in those current attitudes. Similar questions might be raised in relation to varying levels of credibility afforded to individual examples of organic produce. In a given region, why would organic eggs be given a higher credibility rating than organic vegetables?

In each of these instances, the perception of affordability and credibility can alter dramatically within a brief period of time. There is also the potential for consumer behaviours to precede the distribution of statistical data relating to these (time sensitive) perceptions.

It’s great to see smaller countries, such as the Pacific Island nation of Samoa, embrace organic agriculture. Today, Samoa’s Prime Minister, the Honourable Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele Malielegaoi, announced the launch of two Pacific organic projects. The two projects include ‘building capacities on certification of organic agriculture in the Pacific’ as well as ‘developing regional organic standards and strategies for enhancing organic agriculture in Pacific Island countries’. Both projects are to be funded by the UN agency International Fund for Agriculture Developments (IFAD). The first project will be implemented by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) in conjunction with the Women in Business Development Samoa. The second will be implemented by SPC, under its Land Resource Division.

Samoa’s Prime Minister was invited to launch these projects in his capacity as Chairman of the Pacific High Level Organic Steering Committee. His personal commitment and interest in organic farming made him a natural leader for the projects. Other Pacific leaders have been asked to be part of this high-level committee as well as heads of a number of regional and international institutions.

The regional Organic Task Force for the Pacific involves leading individuals in the field of organics mainly from civil societies and government. They are to develop the Pacific’s own standards. University of the South Pacific’s School of Agriculture and Food Technologies have been closely engaged in this process.

After the formal launch of these two projects, CRGA delegates, agriculture representatives and other guests were invited to a special table loaded with Organically Certified Food prepared by Women in Business Development Samoa.

Locating a bottle of premium organic sake can be a difficult challenge, especially in regions where the value of this complex and historic beverage is defined in terms of its alcohol content and ability to shock the western palate. I’m far from experienced in the cultural intricacies of sake, but have gained some valuable insights through careful observation and listening. One of the most frequently repeated recommendations is to choose the best quality sake one can afford. Upon further questioning, this advice is sometimes refined by reference to the term “munouyaku” which means no agricultural chemicals.

In Japan, traditional varieties of sake rice have been selectively bred over many centuries. The best sake rice is characterised by its higher starch content which is concentrated towards the centre of the grain. The Japanese Agricultural Standards board (JAS) recognises the certification standards which ensure that selected rice harvests are grown without agricultural chemicals. Japanese food standards are exceptionally high by world standards and there is a high demand for rice of this quality.

While many brewers of sake routinely source organically certified rice, there are relatively few which maintain the stringent requirements for organic certification of foodstuff processing and manufacture. This is the second requirement for creating a sake product which can be organically certified. As Japanese and Western consumers become increasingly informed of the benefits of organic agricultural and food production techniques, there is greater incentive for brewers to undertake the challenging conversion towards organic certification.

The finest “munouyaku” and organically certified sake are noted for their subtlety and balance of complex essences. I won’t attempt to describe these flavours as they are strongly influenced by the combinations of food and savoury which are served in accompaniment. The flavour profile of premium grade sake is also highly dependent on the serving temperature. My knowledgeable friends assure me that premium grade sake is best enjoyed at room temperature or slightly chilled. Heating is sometimes encouraged to mask the faults or roughness of a less crafted product. This is even more likely to be the case for restaurant sake which is served over chilled. Kampai!

Preliminary data from the 4-year Quality Low Input Food (QLIF) study led by Professor Carlo Leifert of Newcastle University, is in. And in case you required further evidence of the nutritional benefits of consuming organic fruit and vegetables, the study has found that organic produce contains 40% more antioxidants compared to non-organic produce. The study also found there to be higher levels of other beneficial minerals such as iron and zinc in organic fruit and vegetables.

So, what’s the significance of the study’s preliminary results? Well, for a start, a higher intake of antioxidants is believed to significantly reduce the risk of heart disease and cancer. Prof Leifert said the health benefits were so striking that moving to organic food was the equivalent of eating an extra portion of fruit and vegetables every day. Looked at from a slightly different perspective, the study’s results may also pave the way for further research leading to the development of innovative solutions aimed at addressing the growing obesity epidemic facing much of the developed world.

As a result of the study’s key findings, the Soil Association has called for the United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) to reverse its position on the health benefits of organic food. Despite mounting evidence to the contrary, the FSA still maintains that organic food is no healthier than non-organic food. Given the history that exists between The Soil Association and The Food Standards Agency and, in light of the FSA’s reluctance to review their position despite the growing body of evidence clearly at odds with its stance, one might reasonably conclude that political bias on the part of the FSA is alive and well. And that’s unfortunate – not only for the organic industry, but also for consumers who rely on the impartiality of Government Agencies such as the FSA.

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?