Framework for Re-thinking Ethics in the Organic Movement - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 269

Certifying agents have become judges of a farmer's compliance, that is, policing
to assure that organic practices conform to the regulations. Yet, the certification
process creates opportunities for some flexibility in interpreting the regulations (see
Hatanaka, Chap. 3 ; see Loconto and Van der Kamp, Chap. 4 ) . In this way, the
certifying agent can be seen as exercising a value-based judgment and not simply
carrying-out a matter-of-fact application of a set of clear and unequivocal rules.
The organic control and certification system is not free of conflict with organic
values. Is this system “fair” and how can it be tested against the IFOAM Principles?
Certification assures that organic products are produced or processed according
to the guidelines. Certification also protects farmers against the abuse of product
standards or fraudulent practices. But how these certification requirements influence
an organic farmer's values is controversial (see Hatanaka, Chap. 3 ) . The IFOAM
Norms can be easily used for marketing based on notions of healthy and safe
food, just as standards, control and certification are key elements of modern
marketing practices. Since these control and certification processes measure the
largely technical aspects of production and processing regulations, they create the
conditions for using a largely bureaucratic approach to certification. In doing so, the
underlying IFOAM Principles are not only less apparent, but the process becomes
more susceptible to fraud.
There is increasing evidence that some certifying agencies find it more profitable
to work with larger organic farms, and not with smaller farms (Jahn et al. 2005 ;
Clarke et al. 2008 , p. 220; Zorn et al. 2013 ). In response, many certifiers have
been criticized for protecting or defending the economic interests of larger or
more corporate farms that rely on significant quantities of commercial, off-farm
inputs. Some suggest that these certifying agents are insensitive to local and cultural
realities, including the needs and conditions of smaller farms. Moreover, some argue
that certification is relatively more costly for smaller farms than it is for larger ones
using large quantities of off-farm inputs.
In principle, certifiers, as members of an IFOAM Accredited Certification Body
should adhere to a codex of conduct that covers at least two important requirements:
(1) “The body making or ratifying certification decisions shall be free from any
commercial, financial and other pressures that might influence decisions”; and,
(2) “Fee structures and other issues related to payment shall not compromise
objectivity” (IFOAM 2012 , p. 91). These requirements oblige certifiers to support all
classes of farmers, specifically including more economically vulnerable smallholder
for whom access to the organic market for their income is the key to food security.

13.2.1.3 The Philosophical Perspective on a Regulatory Framework

for Ethics

The message of the IFOAM Principles is one of sharing responsibility, and (eco-
nomic) risk as well as the benefits, for an ecologically, socially and economically
just approach to food production, independent of regulatory control or certification