Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
organizationalculturethatemphasizesdemocraticnormsandprocesses(transparency,
accountability,participation,etc.)(DingwerthandPattberg2009).A recentassessment
ofthe“accountabilitycapabilities”ofpowerfulglobalorganizationsidentiiedIFOAM
asthemostaccountableamongtheINGOs(Lloyd,Warren,andHammer2008).
The transnational organic foods movement thus derives its legitimacy, in no small
part, from its embrace of “democratic” practices of two different kinds: first, by giving
producers and consumers a choice about whether to make or buy “organic”; and second,
by operating internal democratic procedures that give members effective voice in the
continuous evolution of the meaning of “organic” and the methods used for certifica-
tion.17Ofcourse,thisdoesnotmeanthatIFOAMinparticularortheorganicfoods
movement in general are immune from criticism. One notable area of concern is in
regardstothediicultiesthatproducersfrompoorcountriesfaceininluencingthe
formulationoforganicstandards,aswellasincomplyingwiththem(Hatanaka2010;
Vandergeest2007).Smallholdersintropicalcountriesareparticularlydisadvantagedby
the expensive and bureaucratic certification regime that has been developed over the
past few decades, primarily with the conditions of Western Europe in mind (Raynolds
2004).
Conclusion
The transnational organic foods movement is today one of the most well-established of a
newcropofcivilsocietyorganizationsandnetworksthatseektodisciplineand“civilize”
states, corporations, and individuals wherever on the planet they happen to be located
(BowdenandSeabrooke2006).Howeversuccessfulithasbeeninthepast,anewglobal
context poses fresh challenges.
Whereas “organic” in the past few decades was fortuitously positioned, as a mat-
ter of definition, as the diametrical opposite of agricultural models that relied on
the heavy use of synthetic pesticides and transgenic seeds, “organic” as it is cur-
rently understood has a much more ambivalent relationship to the issues on which
IFOAM'smostrecentadvocacycampaignsarefocused: climatechange,biodiver-
sity,andfoodsecurity.Ifthepoliticalsalienceandurgencyoftheseissuescontinue
to grow in the years ahead, the organic foods movement may face a growing cred-
ibility problem. Although organic agriculture may very well have advantages over
“conventional” agricultural methods in terms of carbon footprints, biodiversity,
andimpactontheworld'smostmetabolicallyvulnerablepopulations,asIFOAM
asserts, it is not necessarily so. Whether it does is highly contingent on the con-
text.Themovement'spositioningoforganicasananswer,ifnot the answer, to these
global ills is rendered particularly vulnerable because certified organic standards do
not(asyet)differentiatebetweenorganicfarmingoperationsthat,allthingsconsid-
ered, have net beneficial effects on climate change, biodiversity, and food security,
and those that do not.18
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search