Growing Trust
(Page 6 of 7)
June/July 2007
By Barbara Kingsolver
Furthermore, the paper trail of organic standards offers only limited guarantees to the consumer. Specifically, it certifies that vegetables were grown without genetic engineering or broadly toxic chemical herbicides or pesticides; animals were not given growth-promoting hormones or antibiotics. “Certified organic” does not mean sustainably grown, worker-friendly, fuel-efficient, cruelty-free or many other virtues a consumer might wish for.
RELATED CONTENT
Lifestyles Food Digest...
THE HEALTHY PLATE: Recipe for Spiral Pasta with Roasted Pumpkin and Plum Tomatoes...
Food Co-ops: Good Food and Good Prices September/October 1979 A "New Wave" of grocery outlets can g...
CITY FOOD/COUNTRY FOOD February/March 1998 By Joe Novara Maybe food really should be shrink-wrapped...
If passed, the 'National Uniformity for Food Act' will undermine approximately 200 state food safet...
The rising consumer interest in organic food has inspired most of the country’s giant food conglomerates to cash in, at some level. These big players have successfully moved the likes of bagged salads and hormone-free milk from boutique to mainstream markets and even big-box stores.
But low price has its costs. In order to meet federal organic standards as cheaply as possible and maximize profits, some industrial-scale organic producers (though not all) cut every corner that’s allowed, and are lobbying the government to loosen organic rules further. Some synthetic additives are now permitted, thanks to pressure from industrial organics. So is animal confinement. A chicken may be sold as “free range” if the house in which it’s confined (with 20,000 others) has a doorway leading out to a tiny yard, even though that doorway remains shut for so much of the chickens’ lives they never learn to go outside. This is not a theoretical example. The larger the corporation, the more distant its motives are apt to be from the original spirit of organic farming — and the farther the products will likely be shipped to buyers who will smile at the happy farm picture on the package, and never be the wiser.
The original stated purpose of organic agriculture was not just to protect the quality of foods, but also to safeguard farm environments and communities through diversified, biologically natural practices that remain healthy over time. This was outlined by J.I. Rodale, Sir Albert Howard, Lady Eve Balfour and all other significant contributors to the theory and practice of modern organic agriculture. Implicitly, these are values that many consumers still think they’re supporting with their purchase of organic products. Increasingly, small-scale food farmers like Amy feel corporate organics are betraying that confidence, extracting too much in the short term from their biotic and human communities, stealing the heart of a movement.
The best and only defense, for both growers and the consumers who care, is a commitment to more local food economies. It may not be possible to prevent the corruption of codified organic standards when they are so broadly applied. A process as complex as sustainable agriculture can’t be fully mandated or controlled; the government might as well try to legislate happy marriage. Corporate growers, if their only motive is profit, will find ways to follow the letter of organic regulations while violating their spirit.
Page:
<< Previous 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 | 6 |
7 |
Next >>
