The Organic Standard

The AIT’s Agriculture Trade Officer will reportedly work with the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) on creating a standard USDA export certificate for Taiwan. This will allow US exporters to provide the information required by Taiwan’s Council of Agriculture (COA). Details on the import(cont.)

US NOP is now Taiwan equivalent

After its original announcement of the equivalency of its organic regulations in 16 nations earlier this year, the Taiwanese Government, through the American Institute of Taiwan (AIT), added the US National Organic Program to the list on 18 March (see TOS 94).

SKAL, the non-governmental organisation given governmental authority as the only certification organisation in the Netherlands, has published its annual summary of inspection and certification.
The number of operators certified by

SKAL is fairly stable, but the turnover of producers is quite large: 93 farmers left certification while 100 new applied, resulting in a net increase of just seven.
In total, 3,993 inspections were conducted, including some 15 (cont.)

Risk based inspections lead to more sanctions in the Netherland

       Although the Australian organic community was split over the development of an Australian Standard, as this Standard moves into its final stages for publication, differences within the sector now appear to have healed. Unlike the EU, USA and many other countries, the Aussies will regulate their organic sector without resorting to promulgating an organic law or by passing special detailed organic labelling legislation. Organic movements that called for regulations to help in fraud control, have painfully learnt that they come at a cost. A bureaucratic system usually follows the installation of a regulation and the opinion of the organic sector can be set aside in favour of other governmental considerations. In short, the organic sector loses its self-determination and is governed by people who may have little interest in organic agriculture development and who bend to other interests.
       As the saying goes, there is no such thing as ‘Regulation Light’. However, it appears there can be a light touch to regulating the organic industry. And from the account of Andre Leu, chair of Organic Federation of Australia (OFA), the Aussies may have got it right (see page 9).
        Why make more laws when existing ones serve? Under the Australian Trade Practice Act, the definition used by the Australian Standard for ‘organic’ can be

The Aussies got it right!

used by Federal, State and Territory regulatory agencies to determine whether an organic labelled product is false or misleading. Keeping away from detailed labelling legislation also keeps standard setting out of parliament, thus ensuring a more open, transparent and participatory process where input from organic stakeholders can hold its own.
Alongside the Australian Standard, procedures for the Certification of Organic and Biodynamic Products are also expected to be completed and published by mid year. All products labelled as organic or biodynamic must be certified. No surprises there. The wonderful and inspiring aspect of the procedures is that they will incorporate unilateral recognition of equivalence with other organic systems without complicated comparison mechanisms and measures. All rise and applaud!
The approach recognises imports as integral to supplying the Australian organic market and not a threat. Something we should all acknowledge as part of a global community and economy. The critical issue, as Andre identified, is to ensure products labelled as organic come from credible organic (cont.)