Organic Philosophy Impacts U.S. Food System

By Courtney Quinn and Charles Francis

From the advent of the cotton gin to use of pesticides and transgenetic plants, farming practices have evolved to produce increasing yields with less labor. Despite the obvious benefits, farmers and consumers are increasingly concerned with the ethical implications of these same agricultural advancements.

The environment, animal welfare, human health, social justice for farm laborers and low-income communities, food safety and local and global economies are central issues for consumers. Also high on the list is providing adequate incentives and profits to farmers who grow crops and animals. Given these many concerns, how can a consumer, far removed from agriculture, possibly know which ethical issues were considered in the growing, processing, shipping and selling of a food product?

One way to communicate agricultural practices is labeling. Hundreds of eco-labels exist worldwide (www.ecolabelindex.com). Certification standards and labels connect producers with consumers who have specific concerns or desires. With the lack of face-to-face interaction in food sales the current norm, labels are one way to communicate a set of shared values about food products in a global marketplace.

In the January 2011 issue of Prairie Fire, Justin Van Wart and Charles Francis asked, “Does the word organic mean anything?” Their article examined the most widely seen eco- label in U.S. grocery stores, USDA Organic. Although they concluded that the USDA standards support holistic processes, they also note the best way to know about your personal food supply is to have face-to-face interactions with a farmer.

Given that over 50 percent of organic food purchases take place at a large supermarket where consumers must rely upon labels, the question we must examine more deeply is which ethical concerns are addressed in current regulated organic standards. In this article we ask, “What ethical issues are addressed in certified organic agriculture?” In this first of two articles, we review organic philosophy from the 1800s to today, from early direct sales to nearby consumers, to health stores and farmers’ markets, to the current focus on large-scale retailing of organic food. In a future issue, we will take a closer look at the USDA National Organic Program standards to examine which ethical issues are included in the rules and regulations.

Early Advocates: Traditional Organic Philosophy

Organic agriculture was, by default, the only method of growing food from the time humans transitioned from hunting and gathering and began to cultivate plant communities. The Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries influenced agricultural practices just as it did factory production. For some, these rapid changes were cause for concern. During this time, the organic movement emerged.

Sir Albert Howard (1873–1947) is regarded as the founder of the organic movement. Howard’s primary ethical concerns were environmental and human health. In his book “An Agricultural Testament” (1940), his principle environmental issue was soil health.¹ His stated purpose was to “draw attention to the destruction of the earth’s capital—the soil” from industrial food production methods. The effect of soil on the health of plants was a central ethical issue for Howard.

Albert Howard considered the health of humans inseparable from the health of soil, linked through food consumption. He questioned the negative health effects of humans eating food produced from “an impoverished soil.” In Howard’s second book, “The War in the Soil” (1946), he makes apparent his concern for the effects of agriculture on humans, harshly criticizing agribusiness suppliers of chemical fertilizers:²

“The war in the soil is the result of a conflict between the birthright of humanity—fresh food from fertile soil—and the profits of a section of Big Business in the shape of the manufacturers of artificial fertilizers and their satellite companies who produce poison sprays to protect crops from pests and who prepare the various remedies for the diseases of live stock and mankind.”

J.I. Rodale (1898–1971) was an early convert after reading Howard’s work. He began publishing “Organic Farming and Gardening” magazine in 1942 and popularized organic concepts to a wide audience in the United States. Rodale also connected human health directly to soil health.³ “This low status of American health is directly related to the condition of the soil in which we raise our foods.”

While animal welfare was not expressed explicitly in Rodale’s writings, he does hint at a concern for animals. Rodale discusses the Big Business of poultry and uses the term “egg machines.” While describing the lives of commercial chicken flocks, Rodale discusses their lack of access to the outdoors and the terrible conditions of batteries and individual cages. He terms the lives of broiler chickens as reduced to the “lowest common denominator.”

Traditional organic philosophy also encouraged eating foods that were local, in season and minimally processed. An early letter from a reader of “Organic Gardening,” a publication started by Rodale, illustrates this philosophy. The letter begins noting that as a child in Kansas, no one in the author’s community was ever sick. Continuing,

“No canned, pickled, denatured, or chemically preserved foods. No white flour. Only whole grain corn and wheat, ground without processing, plenty of vegetables, wild game of many kinds, and later an abundance of home sun-dried apples for winter use.”

In its earliest days, the philosophy of organic food production was focused on human health though soil health. Soon, the ethical sphere of organic producers and consumers expanded to include other environmental and social concerns.

World War II to the 21st Century

Throughout the later half of the 20th century, pockets of farmers and consumers paid increased attention to organic methods. Ethical concerns expanded from soil and human health to include nature and economics. The larger public awakened to the negative effects of agricultural practices when Rachel Carson published “Silent Spring.”⁴ Her writing, combined with her activism, led to stronger pesticide regulations. In “The Botany of Desire,” Michael Pollan (2001) notes that in the 1960s and ’70s a “countercuisine” grew based on whole grains and unprocessed ingredients.⁵ Organic philosophy became more than just food, it was “an edible dynamic that promised to raise consciousness about the economic order, draw critical lines of connection between the personal and the political.”

Until the late 20th century, there was no formal process to certify food as organic in the United States. During the environmental movement of the 1970s, a burgeoning international organization took root in France, The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). Their accepted definition of organic agriculture expanded concerns about soil health to include a larger ethical sphere. More recently, their “Principles of Organic Agriculture” include health, ecology, care and fairness (http://ifoam.org).

Early in the organic movement, face-to-face interactions served to assure customers of a product’s organic status. As interest in organics grew and consumers sought organic products from stores, the need for formal certification emerged. The United States government began the process of creating a certification and labeling standard for organic products in 1990. By 2002 final rules had been implemented that allowed qualifying products to use the official USDA “organic” label. However, what is included in organic regulations may or may not address the ethical concerns of any given consumer. Therefore, let us examine the ethical concerns of today’s producers, processers and consumers of organic products. In a future issue we will look specifically at the USDA National Organic Program standards to examine the regulation details and see which ethical issues are addressed.

Expanding Ethical Concerns: Modern Organic Philosophy

Environmental health remains a key tenet of modern organic philosophy. However, the ethical sphere continues to expand. Concerns for water quality, air quality and biodiversity are now central to consumers and farmers. Meat and dairy products from animals raised in humane and healthy conditions are a consumer imperative. Additionally, the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is hotly debated. Some consumers are also concerned about the distance food products travel. Barbara Kingsolver notes in “Animal, Vegetable, Miracle” that most food we consume in the United States has traveled farther “than most families go on their annual vacations.”⁶

The connection between environmental health and human health remains an important ethical consideration. The IFOAM principle of health states, “the health of individuals and communities cannot be separated from the health of ecosystems—healthy soils produce healthy crops that foster the health of animals and people.” Many organizations focus on the detrimental effects pesticides have on human health, particularly children. A report by the Environmental Working Group (1999) concludes that “multiple pesticides known or suspected to cause brain and nervous system damage, cancer, disruption of the endocrine and immune systems, and a host of other toxic effects are ubiquitous in foods children commonly consume at levels that present serious health risks.”⁷ Rachel Carson wrote that mixtures of pesticides, even at or below the legal levels of tolerance, have shown much greater biological activity than individual traces of single pesticides. These are continuing worries.

Consumers are increasingly concerned with the financial welfare of farmers. Through the later part of the 20th century, the work structure on farms changed drastically. Farming changed from a way of life to a business. In light of economic hardships, farmers increasingly struggled to make ends meet and had to find additional work. Many consumers of organic products want to know that the farmer who grew their food can financially support their family through farming.

Successful models of directly marketing organic products are growing and becoming increasingly important. Farmers’ markets, community-supported agriculture subscriptions and farm stands are among the most popular. In some schemes, the customers participate in care of crops and harvesting. This model extends an earlier philosophy of small-scale local food systems. Food purchased here may or may not have an organic label, but the personal interactions in these local systems allow consumers to witness the production of their food to ensure their ethical concerns are met, organic label or not.

Industrial Organic

With the growing interest in organic food products, another “model” of organic production and sales has developed. The large-scale nature of much of current organic production is a departure from the more holistic organic philosophy described above. The philosophy of large-scale organic production focuses on agricultural practices while largely ignoring other philosophical tenets such as small-scale food systems and social justice.

Large corporations are increasingly involved in the production, processing and distribution of organic foods. Moreover, organic companies are increasingly becoming national and international corporations. For example, Kraft Foods, the number one food processer in North America, owns the organic brand Back to Nature. Contrary to focus on local production within a traditional organic philosophy, industrial organic food is increasingly imported from other countries. A 2002 Newsweek article concluded that “the new organic is all about bigger farms, heartier crops, better distribution and slicker packaging and promotion.”⁸

The traditional organic philosophy would, by its nature, preclude the mass marketing and sale of prepackaged products. There is much debate among organic producers and consumers about the ethical implications of large-scale organic food systems. Questions are raised about which values—environmental health, animal welfare, personal health and social justice issues—are prevalent in this large-scale organic production system, if any.

The introduction of highly processed products, manufactured in a single step in corporate supply chains, has signaled the shift away from the traditional organic ethical philosophy that encouraged the consumption of whole foods circulated through local supply networks, which support social sustainability and promote materials feedback to soil and human health. For supporters of contemporary holistic organic philosophy, it is incomplete to label a food product “organic” merely based on its ingredients. However, others argue that large corporations can take advantage of economies of scale to lower the price consumers pay and increase the number of people who can afford such products.

Organic production has evolved from practices concerned primarily with soil health to a multi-billion dollar industry and at the same time a holistic philosophy concerned with the environment, animal welfare, human health, social justice for farm laborers and low-income communities, and local economies. Given the many concerns consumers have today, it is important to know which areas are addressed in the federal government’s USDA organic regulations that many consumers rely upon. The term “organic” does have a legal definition. In our next article, we will explore the USDA Organic Standards to discover which ethical issues and organic philosophies are included in our country’s legal standards for organic production.

Endnotes

1. Howard, Albert. “An Agricultural Testament.” Emmaus, Penn.: Rodale Press. Publ., 1940.

2 .Howard, Albert. “The War in the Soil.” Emmaus, Penn.: Organic Gardening. Publ., 1946.

3. Rodale, Jerome Irving. “Pay Dirt.” New York: The Devin-Adair Company. Publ., 1945.

4 .Carson, Rachel. “Silent Spring.” Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin. Publ., 1962.

5. Pollan, Michael. “The Botany of Desire.” New York: Random House. Publ., 2002.

6. Kingsolver, Barbara. “Animal Vegetable Miracle.” New York: Harper Collins. Publ., 2007.

7. Todd, Ken Cook, Richard Wiles, Chris Campbell. Environmental Working Group. “How ’bout Them Apples? Pesticides in Children’s Food Ten Years after ALAR.” Environmental Working Group, 1999. http://www.ewg.org/reports/apples.

8. Cowley, Geoffrey. “Certified Organic.” “Newsweek” (Sept. 30, 2002). www.newsweek.com/2002/09/29/certified-organic.html#.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Delicious  •   Digg  •   StumbleUpon  •   Facebook  •   Yahoo