Organic food

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Organic foods are produced according to certain production standards, meaning they are grown without the use of conventional pesticides, artificial fertilizers, human waste, or sewage sludge, and that they were processed without ionizing radiation or food additives.^[1] Livestock are reared without the routine use of antibiotics and without the use of growth hormones. In most countries, organic produce must not be genetically modified.

Organic food production is legally regulated. Currently, the United States, the European Union, Japan and many other countries require producers to obtain organic certification in order to market food as organic.

Historically, organic farms have been relatively small family-run farms^[2] — which is why organic food was once only available in small stores or farmers' markets. However, since the early 1990s organic food has had growth rates of around 20% a year, far ahead of the rest of the food industry, in both developed and developing nations. As of April 2008, organic food accounts for 1-2% of food sales worldwide. Future growth is expected to range from 10-50% annually depending on the country.

Contents 1 Identifying organic food 1.1 Legal definition 2 Environmental impact 2.1 Yield 2.2 Energy Efficiency 2.3 Pesticides and farmers 2.4 Pesticide residue 3 Taste and nutritional value 4 Cost 5 Related movements 6 Facts and statistics 6.1 North America 6.2 Europe 6.3 Caribbean 7 See also 8 References 9 Further reading 10 External links

[edit] Identifying organic food

See also: Organic farming for information on the production of organic food.

Processed organic food usually contains only organic ingredients, or where there are a number of ingredients, at least a minimum percentage of the plant and animal ingredients must be organic (95% in the United States^[3] and Australia). Any non-organically produced ingredients must still meet requirements. Foods claiming to be organic must be free of artificial food additives, and are often processed with fewer artificial methods, materials and conditions (no chemical ripening, no food irradiation, and no genetically modified ingredients, etc.).

They may also be required to be produced using energy-saving technologies and packaged using recyclable or biodegradable materials when possible.^{[citation needed]}

Early consumers interested in organic food would look for non-chemically treated, fresh or minimally processed food. They mostly had to buy directly from growers: "Know your farmer, know your food" was the motto. Personal definitions of what constituted "organic" were developed through firsthand experience: by talking to farmers, seeing farm conditions, and farming activities. Small farms grew vegetables (and raised livestock) using organic farming practices, with or without certification, and the individual consumer monitored. As demand for organic foods continues to increase, high volume sales through mass outlets such as supermarkets are rapidly replacing the direct farmer connection. However, for supermarket consumers, food production is not easily observable, and product labelling, like "certified organic", is relied on. Government regulations and third-party inspectors are looked to for assurance. A "certified organic" label is usually the only way for consumers to know that a processed product is "organic".

[edit] Legal definition

Main article: Organic certification

See also: List of countries with organic agriculture regulation‎

To be certified organic, products must be grown and manufactured in a manner that adheres to standards set by the country they are sold in:

• Australia: NASAA Organic Standard
• Britain: Organic Farmers and Growers Organic Standards and the Soil Association
• Canada: Canada Gazette, Government of Canada
• European Union: EU-Eco-regulation
  • Sweden: KRAV
• India: NPOP, (National Program for Organic Production)
• Japan: JAS Standards.
• United States: National Organic Program (NOP) Standards

[edit] Environmental impact

Several surveys and studies have attempted to examine and compare conventional and organic systems of farming. The general consensus across these surveys^[4][5] is that, in the short term, organic farming is less damaging for the following reasons:

• Organic farms do not consume or release synthetic pesticides into the environment — some of which have the potential to harm soil, water and local terrestrial and aquatic wildlife.
• Organic farms are better than conventional farms at sustaining diverse ecosystems, i.e., populations of plants and insects, as well as animals.
• When calculated either per unit area or per unit of yield, organic farms use less energy and produce less waste, e.g., waste such as packaging materials for chemicals.

However, many critics of organic farming methods believe that the increased land needed to farm organic food could potentially destroy the rainforests and wipe out many ecosystems.^{[6] [7]}

[edit] Yield

One study found a 20% smaller yield from organic farms using 50% less fertilizer and 97% less pesticide.^[8] Studies comparing yields have had mixed results.^[9] Supporters claim that organically managed soil has a higher quality^[10] and higher water retention. This may help increase yields for organic farms in drought years. One study of two organic farming systems and one conventional found that, in one year's severe crop season drought, organic soybean yields were 52% and 96% higher than the conventional system and organic maize yields were 37% higher in one system, but 62% lower in the other.^[11]

One study from the Danish Environmental Protection Agency found that, area-for-area, organic farms of potatoes, sugar beet and seed grass produce as little as half the output of conventional farming.^[12] Findings like these, and the dependence of organic food on manure from low-yield cattle, has prompted criticism from many scientists that organic farming is environmentally unsound and incapable of feeding the world population.^[13] Among these critics are Norman Borlaug, father of the "green revolution," and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, who asserts that organic farming practices can at most feed 4 billion people, after expanding cropland dramatically and destroying ecosystems in the process.^[14]

However a recent study ^[15] compiling research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems has concluded that

organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base (from the abstract)

The researchers also found that while in developed countries, organic systems on average produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture, organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms in developing countries, because the materials needed for organic farming are more accessible than synthetic farming materials to farmers in poor countries.

[edit] Energy Efficiency

Some studies are also consistent in showing that organic farms are more energy efficient.^[16] However, alternative views hold that this may be deceptive, based on fossil fuel usage but ignoring energy costs of plowing and other laborious practices used on organic farms to maintain yields^{[citation needed]}.

[edit] Pesticides and farmers

There have been many studies on the health effects of pesticide exposure to those who work on farms.^[17] Even when pesticides are used correctly, they still end up in the air and bodies of farm workers. Through these studies, organophosphate pesticides have become associated with acute health problems such as abdominal pain, dizziness, headaches, nausea, vomiting, as well as skin and eye problems.^[18] In addition, there have been many other studies that have found pesticide exposure is associated with more severe health problems such as respiratory problems, memory disorders, dermatologic conditions,^[19][20] cancer,^[21] depression, neurologic deficits,^[22][23] miscarriages, and birth defects.^[24] Summaries of peer-reviewed research have examined the link between pesticide exposure and neurological outcomes and cancer in organophosphate-exposed workers.^[25][26]

Imported fruits and vegetables from South America are more likely to contain high level of pesticides,^[27] even pesticides banned for use in the United States.^[28] Migratory birds, such as Swainson’s hawks, have wintering grounds in Argentina where thousands of them were found dead from monocrotophos insecticide poisoning.

[edit] Pesticide residue

A study published in 2002 showed that "Organically grown foods consistently had about one-third as many residues as conventionally grown foods."^[29][30]

Monitoring of pesticide residues in the United States is carried out by the Pesticide Data Program (part of USDA, which was created in 1990. It has since tested over 60 different types of food for over 400 different types of pesticides - with samples collected close to the point of consumption. Their most recent results found in 2005 that:

“	These data indicate that 29.5 percent of all samples tested contained no detectable pesticides [parent compound and metabolite(s) combined], 30 percent contained 1 pesticide, and slightly over 40 percent contained more than 1 pesticide.	”
—USDA, Pesticide Data Program[31]

Several studies corroborate this finding by having found that while 77 percent of conventional food carries synthetic pesticide residues, only about 25 percent of organic food does.^{[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41]}

A study published by the National Research Council in 1993 determined that for infants and children, the major source of exposure to pesticides is through diet.^[42] A recent study in 2006 measured the levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure in 23 schoolchildren before and after replacing their diet with organic food. In this study it was found that levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure dropped dramatically and immediately when the children switched to an organic diet.^[43] Food residue limits established by law are set specifically with children in mind and consider a child's lifetime ingestion of each pesticide.^[44]

There are controversial data on the health implications of certain pesticides. For example, the herbicide Atrazine has been shown in some experiments to be a teratogen, causing demasculinization in male frogs exposed to small concentrations. Under the effects of Atrazine, male frogs were found to have greatly increased occurrencesof either malformed gonads, or testicular gonads which contain non-degenerate eggs.^[45] Effects were however significantly reduced in high concentrations, as is consistent with other teratogens affecting the endocrine system, such as estradiol.

Organic farming standards do not allow the use of synthetic pesticides, but they do allow the use of specific pesticides derived from plants. The most common organic pesticides, accepted for restricted use by most organic standards, include Bt, pyrethrum, and rotenone. Some organic pesticides, such as rotenone, have high toxicity to fish and aquatic creatures with some toxicity to mammals. It causes Parkinson's disease if injected into rats.^[46]

The United States Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies periodically review the licensing of suspect pesticides, but the process of de-listing is slow. One example of this slow process is exemplified by the pesticide Dichlorvos, or DDVP, which as recently as the year 2006 the EPA proposed its continued sale. The EPA has almost banned this pesticide on several occasions since the 1970s, but it never did so despite considerable evidence that suggests DDVP is not only carcinogenic but dangerous to the human nervous system — especially in children.^[47]

[edit] Taste and nutritional value

The biggest study ever of organic food was completed in 2007 (which has neither been peer-reviewed nor published yet ^[48]) and found that organic fruit and vegetables contain up to 40% more antioxidants than conventional equivalents, and that the figure was 90% for organic milk. The 4-year study was funded by the European Union and was the largest of its kind ever undertaken.^[49]

A 2001 study by researchers at Washington State University concluded, under judgement by a panel of tasters, that organic apples were sweeter. Along with taste and sweetness, the texture as well as firmness of the apples were also rated higher than those grown conventionally. These differences are attributed to the greater soil quality resulting from organic farming techniques compared to those of conventional farming.^[50]

Some studies have shown higher nutrient levels in organic fruit and vegetables compared with conventionally grown products. However, due to the difficulty with designing such experiments, the evidence was not considered conclusive(^[51]) until the release of the University of Sheffield study in 2007 (see above).

A 2002 meta-analysis (a review of all past studies on the subject) found no proof that organic food offers greater nutritional values, more consumer safety or any distinguishable difference in taste.^{[52][53][54][55]}

A new report published in March 2008 by The Organic Center, which promotes organic food, claims that organic food is on average 25% more nutritious than conventional food.^[56]

[edit] Cost

Organic products typically cost 10 to 40% more than similar conventionally produced products.^[57] Processed organic foods vary in price when compared to their conventional counterparts. An Australian study by Choice magazine in 2004 found processed organic foods in supermarkets to be 65% more expensive, but noted this was not consistent. Prices may be higher because organic produce is produced on a smaller scale, and may need to be milled or processed separately. Furthermore, there is an increase in shipping costs from more centralized production in otherwise regional markets. In the case of dairy and eggs, the animal's requirements such as the number of animals that can be raised per acre, or the breed of animal and its feed conversion ratio affects the cost.

[edit] Related movements

Various alternative organic standards are emerging. They generally bypass formal certification, which can be expensive and cumbersome, and provide their own definition of organic food. One such, the Authentic Food standard, proposed by leading US organic farmer Eliot Coleman, includes criteria that are incompatible with current agribusiness: =

• Fresh fruits and vegetables, milk, eggs and meat products are produced within a 50-mile radius of their place of their final sale.
• The seed and storage crops (grains, beans, nuts, potatoes, etc.) are produced within a 300-mile radius of their final sale.
• Only traditional processed foods such as cheese, wine, bread and lactofermented products may claim, "Made with Authentic ingredients."^[58]

Some are also implementing new approaches to defining and buying food. Community-supported agriculture (CSA) is one such approach, that cuts out all the middlemen by having consumers partner with local farmers. CSA members prepurchase "shares" in a season's harvest, and pick up their weekly portions from distribution sites. Thus, consumers provide direct financing for farms, participate in the risks and rewards of annual growing conditions, and participate with farmers in distribution networks.

CSA is one example of "buying locally," which is often valued by both the organic food consumer and producer. Generally speaking, locally-grown seasonal food can be brought to market more quickly than food that has to be transported long distances, and therefore can be better tasting and to some degree more nutritious by virtue of its freshness. Additionally, the act of buying foods that are locally-grown benefits local farmers and other employers. This local food approach is seen as a direct investment in one's own community and a way to reduce economic dependence.

Organic food is also often linked with the fair trade movement, based on the principle that social and environmental sustainability are inextricably interdependent.

The "buy local" movement is also related to the organic movement. Michael Pollan, author of “The Omnivore's Dilemma”, notes that in the whole chain of food production and distribution, only one-fifth of the energy is used on the farm, the rest in distribution. Yet a report published by DEFRA, Britain's environment and farming ministry, concluded that shifts toward a local food production and distribution system, as advocated by many organic food proponents, would actually increase the amount of energy being invested in food due to the a higher level of small-scale transport systems, which suffer from inefficiencies compared to standard large-scale supermarket systems.^[59]

As highlighted by a recent New York Times article, food supply is a global issue that will become increasingly prominent in the near future. "Everywhere, the cost of food is rising sharply. Whether the world is in for a long period of continued increases has become one of the most urgent issues in economics. ... Farmers the world over are producing flat-out. American agricultural exports are expected to increase 23 percent this year to $101 billion, a record. The world’s grain stockpiles have fallen to the lowest levels in decades. 'Everyone wants to eat like an American on this globe,' said Daniel W. Basse of the AgResource Company, a Chicago consultancy. 'But if they do, we’re going to need another two or three globes to grow it all.'"^[60] Given the debate around Organic's ability to match the yields of conventional methods and the rising global demand for food, this debate is likely to see increased scrutiny in the future.

[edit] Facts and statistics

While organic food accounts for 1–2% of total food sales worldwide, the organic food market is growing rapidly, far ahead of the rest of the food industry, in both developed and developing nations.

• World organic food sales jumped from US $23 billion in 2002^[61] to $40 billion in 2006.^[62]
• The world organic market has been growing by 20% a year since the early 1990s, with future growth estimates ranging from 10-50% annually depending on the country.

[edit] North America

United States:

• Organic food sales have grown by 17 to 20 percent a year for the past few years^[63] while sales of conventional food have grown at only about 2 to 3 percent a year.^[64]

• In 2003 organic products were available in nearly 20,000 natural food stores and 73% of conventional grocery stores.^[65]
• Organic products account for 2.6% of total food sales in the year 2005.^[66]

• Two thirds of organic milk and cream and half of organic cheese and yogurt are sold through conventional supermarkets.^[67]

Canada:

• Organic food sales surpassed $1 billion in 2006, accounting for 0.9% of food sales in Canada.^[68]
• Organic food sales by grocery stores were 28% higher in 2006 than in 2005. ^[69]
• British Columbians account for 13% of the Canadian population, but purchased 26% of the organic food sold in Canada in 2006. ^[70]

[edit] Europe

In the European Union (EU25) 3.9% of the total utilized agricultural area is used for organic production. The countries with the highest proportion of organic land are Austria (11%) and Italy (8.4), followed by Czech Republic and Greece (both 7.2%). The lowest figures are shown for Malta (0.1%), Poland (0.6%) and Ireland (0.8%)^[71]

Austria:

• 11.6% of all farmers produced organically in 2007.^[72] The government has created incentives to increase the figure to 20% by 2010.^[73]
• 4.9% of all food products sold in Austrian supermarkets (including discount stores) in 2006 were organic.^[74] 8000 different organic products were available in the same year.^[75]

Italy:

• Since 2005 all school lunches must be organic by law.^[76]

Poland:

• In 2005 168,000 ha of land were under organic management. 7 percent of Polish consumers buy food that was produced according to the EU-Eco-regulation. The value of the organic market is estimated at 50 million Euros (2006).^[77]

UK:

• Organic food sales increased from just over £100 million in 1993/94 to £1.21 billion in 2004 (an 11% increase on 2003).^[78]

[edit] Caribbean

Cuba:

• After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, agricultural inputs that had previously been purchased from Eastern bloc countries were no longer available in Cuba, and many Cuban farms converted to organic methods out of necessity.^[79] Consequently, organic agriculture is a mainstream practice in Cuba, while it remains an alternative practice in most other countries. Although some products called organic in Cuba would not satisfy certification requirements in other countries (crops may be genetically modified, for example^[80][81]), Cuba exports organic citrus and citrus juices to EU markets that meet EU organic standards. Cuba's forced conversion to organic methods may position the country to be a global supplier of organic products.^[82]

[edit] See also

[edit] References

[edit] Further reading

• Organic Food at the Open Directory Project