Organic Goes Industrial

[Guest guest]

Organic Goes Industrial -- by Rich Ganis, Center for Informed

Food Choices

http://www.ascribe.org/cgi-bin/d?asid=20021104.135129

 

OAKLAND, Calif., Nov. 4 (AScribe Newswire) -- On October 21, a

new law codifying federal standards for organic food and agriculture

came into effect in the U.S.

 

Many food industry analysts are hailing the U.S. Department of

Agriculture's National Organic Rule (NOR) as a long overdue reform

that promises to lend some coherence to what has so far been an

inconsistent set of guidelines governing the composition of organic

foods and the methods used to produce them. They welcome its clear

definition of organic (no genetically modified raw material,

irradiation, synthetic chemicals, hormones, or antibiotics are

allowed), and its straightforward rules for classifying products as

either " 100 percent organic, " " certified organic, " or " made with

organic ingredients. "

 

Some leaders in the organic movement are not so sanguine,

however. They worry that the new law is not stringent enough, and

that it may be a boon to large food producers bent

on " industrializing " organics, moving it in a direction far afield

from its founding ideals.

 

Since gaining notoriety in the 1970s, when it was embraced by

the " counterculture, " organic agriculture has been concerned with

safeguarding the ecological integrity of local bioregions; creating

social justice and equality for both growers and eaters; and

cultivating whole, healthful foods.

 

Fears that NOR will bring us closer to a future in which neon-

orange snack foods become the new face of organic appear to be

justified. The government's official organic label will now be

affixed to a large and growing list of processed foods -- everything

from H.J. Heinz Company's organic ketchup to organic Cheetos,

Tostitos, and Sun Chips, produced by PepsiCo's Frito-Lay unit.

 

And this is only the beginning. Eager to exploit the marketing

cachet of the USDA's Good Housekeeping-like organic seal, food

conglomerates are currently pumping loads of capital into the

research and development of similar products.

 

Major produce distributors are also poised to boost sales with

the help of the government's official organic imprimatur. The label

will now appear on organic fruits and vegetables grown by huge

produce distributors like Dole and Earthbound Farms. Sold at major

grocery chains such as Whole Foods Market and Safeway, much of this

organic mega-produce is designed to attract convenience-minded

consumers with " value-added " features. Earthbound, for example, sells

precut carrots packaged with single-serve containers of ranch dip

dressing.

 

While these innovations promise to reward manufacturers with

fantastically high profit margins, they are an affront to the basic

precepts of traditional organic agriculture.

 

Big Food's efforts to assume control of the organic market

should surprise no one. Sales of organic foods are soaring. They're

expected to top $11 billion this year, with a rate of growth five

times greater than other sectors of the food economy.

 

Clearly, large food makers are not about to cede such enormous

profit potential to small farmers producing whole, healthful, locally

grown foods. Instead, they've opted to channel consumer demand for

more healthful and ecologically sustainable foods in a direction that

poses no threat to the industrial foundations upon which modern food

empires have been built.

 

Supporters of big organics point to its potential to reduce

the amount of land farmed with agricultural chemicals while making

organic produce more affordable and accessible to those with lower

incomes. While not discounting these possible benefits, critics

maintain that the large-scale organic model entails social costs that

industry is not as eager to publicize.

 

For example, operations like Earthbound pose a serious threat

to the livelihoods to small organic farmers, who lack the resources

and capital to compete with agricultural giants that have designs on

their customers and their farms. Regrettably, the new organic

guidelines, with their complicated rules and extensive paperwork

requirements, will likely put them at even more of a competitive

disadvantage.

 

Big organics can also be criticized on an environmental level.

Adding organic Twizzlers to the Safeway snack aisle may result in a

little more acreage being put into organic production, but those

modest ecological benefits would be offset by the tremendous amount

of fossil fuel, packaging, and other resources expended in the

production and distribution of these products. Much the same can be

said for big organic farms, which are highly resource-intensive

operations set up to produce a limited variety of crops and

distribute them over great distances. This approach is far removed

from the original organic movement's emphasis on diversity,

localness, and sustainability.

 

Also, the " greening " of the junk food market will probably do

little to improve the nutritional well-being of consumers -- an

objective that's especially pressing in light of recent studies

showing that one-third of all American adults are now clinically

obese and at risk of developing diet-related health problems such as

heart disease and diabetes.

 

Sadly, big corporations' efforts to portray industrial

organics as a foretaste of a brave, new, healthier, ecologically

viable tomorrow will no doubt resonate with citizens whose ideas

about food have been shaped by a social and political climate

dominated by the technological discourse and prescriptions of

industry.

 

It's incumbent upon those who know better to expose these

products for what they really are: the creations of profit-driven

corporate elites with a vested interest in greenwashing their image,

not in fundamentally restructuring the massive agri-industrial

complex. That's a task for social movements, organizations, and

concerned citizens -- not corporations. And it must be undertaken if

we are to put an end to Big Food's efforts to co-opt and subvert the

meaning of organics in the service of its own profit-driven ends.

 

Rich Ganis is coeditor of Informed Eating, a newsletter of

food politics and analysis published by the Center for Informed Food

Choices, a nonprofit organization based in Oakland, California.

 

-30-

 

AScribe - The Public Interest Newswire / 510-653-9400

www.ascribe.org