The ‘Conventionalisation’ of Organic Production
In the latest edition of the Ecologist Sir Julian Rose, pioneering organic farmer and owner of the Hardwick Estate, asks if organic farming has “sold out and lost its way”. Rose argues that organic production has gone from being the practical manifestation of an ecological and social movement to a marketing opportunity for the supermarkets and agribusiness:
“What ‘organic food’ and its localised market was in those days bears little resemblance to ‘the industry’ that it is today: an industry that is heavily and centrally policed, has a compendium of regulations and is ‘big business’ on a global scale.”
He goes on to describe how, despite rapidly growing demand for organic food over the last two decades, the area of land certified organic in the UK has remained pretty much static at around 3 or 4 percent. Rose believes that this is because the UK retail sector is now dominated by the supermarkets who care little where or how produce is grown or raised so long as it can be sold:
“Their green credentials include the import of some eighty percent of organic foods, shipped and flown in from all over the world and from farms that are often as big and as undistinctive as their conventional monocultural lookalikes.”
Rose’s argument is not new and represents one side of a perceived schism in the organic sector with those who are committed to the organic movement – a philosophical as well as practical position – suggesting that many new entrants see organic as no more than a collection of on-farm production techniques and supply chain assurance measures that, if applied and recognised, will attract a price premium.
Those committed to the organic movement bemoan what’s become cast as the ‘conventionalisation’ of organic production and supply systems and worry that this process erodes trust, compromises quality and limits access to markets for those ‘genuinely’ committed to organic production and so operating from a higher cost base. And it certainly is the case that the price premium has attracted new entrants to organic production, many of whom do apply organic standards to the same kinds of monocultural systems, supply chains and business practices as are used by ‘conventional’ producers. (Of course, agribusinesses and the big retails argue that they are democratising organic products – reducing prices and increasing access, whilst at the same time increasing demand and opportunities for producers: wherever they are in the world.)
Organic certification bodies have struggled to capture the economic and social elements that should complement the environmental aspects of organic production and supply in their standards. It is therefore perfectly possible for organisations and businesses with no real interest in the philosophy of organic production to produce food that meets a given set of standards, yet makes no contribution to a more generalised understanding of sustainability. Part of the problem is the difficulty of coming up with a set of practices and measurements that will consistently deliver and capture the sorts of social goods that the organic movement feels organic production should deliver. Another important factor is the time at which the first standards were written; in the 70s a technocratic approach to certification presented an opportunity for the older organisations to escape an at times slightly difficult history and once those standards had been written it proved hard to find space for anything that couldn’t easily be quantified.
Personally I have a lot of sympathy with Rose’s position, yet through my work for Provenance I’ve noticed that conventionalisation isn’t a one way street – or at least that the boundaries between organic and conventional systems are fuzzy.
A prime example is Home Farm Nacton, a 2500 acre estate on the Suffolk coast. The farm produces field scale vegetables and cereals for the conventional market and in the late 1990s it began a rolling process of organic certification to Soil Association standards – now over 300 acres are organic. As this has happened, far from the organic land becoming ‘conventionalised’ the rest of the farm has become much more organic: mechanical weeding and companion planting have almost completely eliminated pesticide and herbicide use in the conventional rotations whilst manure, compost and lay crops have significantly reduced the need for synthetic fertilizers.
Though much of Home Farm’s production still goes to the supermarkets (marketing 300 acres of organic vegetable production locally would be almost impossible at present), a significant trade with smaller shops, box schemes, caterers and wholesalers has begun to develop and continues to grow. Farm manager Andy Williams believes that organic production has made him think more about the rest of the land and “farm better”.
Unlike many of the really big vegetable producers (whose holding run into tens on thousands of acres here and on the continent), Home Farm Nacton is still family owned and is still very much part of the community and so, perhaps, is not open to the criticism of ‘conventionalisation’ in the first place. Nevertheless it does demonstrate that organic production can capture the spirit of the movement and effect wider change on larger farms where not all the land is certified.
