Framework for Re-thinking Ethics in the Organic Movement - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 273

organic is less a question of adherence to standards, but more a question of acting
responsibly and creating trust with consumers (see Hatanaka, Chap. 3 ) .
Processors must also meet specified organic regulations and rules for processing,
labeling and packaging (see Klonsky and Greene 2005 ; Luttikholt 2007 ). However,
in contrast to farmers, they do not receive processing subsidies, nor are they required
to respect a conversion period before offering organic products. To process or sell
both organic and non-organic products in the same business as long as they are
handled and stored separately. There is no obligation to continue with organic
processing, they are free to leave their organic business at any time.
Retailers and specifically wholesalers are relatively free from regulations for
selling organic products. They may offer both organic and conventional products
on the same shelf. They are free to discontinue selling organic products at any
time. Organic fruits and vegetables must be clearly labeled and displayed separately
from conventional products. Similar to processors, they are subject to no specific
obligations, except of course to fulfill their contracts with farmers or processors.
As noted earlier, consumers are the only actors in the organic agrofood chain free
to act independently of public, governmental regulations or standards (autonomy of
the individual to act without control and certification) (Fenner 2010 , p. 59). With
the exception of those who belong to organic purchasing associations, there are no
standards or even guidelines for ethical shopping. Consumers are free to choose to
pay a premium price for organic products, or simply to not buy organic.
Is this consumer freedom problematic for the relationships among other actors in
the organic system? What are the consequences for each of the other organic actors,
including the farmers, processors, wholesalers and retailers? Furthermore, does the
commitment to “buying organic” trump the commitment by other consumers to
“buying local” or “buying seasonal”? (Halberg et al. 2006 , p. 286). In other words,
is purchasing organic products regardless of their origin, more important or valuable
than purchasing products from a specified region? If consumers are not concerned
whether smaller organic producers in the global North or South are fairly and justly
remunerated for their labor, then is the value of social and economic justice simply
to be left aside (see Fotopoulos and Krystallis 2002 ; Hill and Lynchehaun 2002 ;
Onyango et al. 2007 ; Bellows et al. 2008 ; Hjelmar 2011 )?
Consumers are individually responsible for the rationale used to purchase
organic. For some, it might be a question of health. For others, eating (local) organic
(from smaller farmers) may represent a commitment to the social and economic
commitment. The role of the consumer as an actor in the organic system raises the
question about the forms of, or opportunities for responsible consumer engagement
in the organic system.
However, the formalization of consumer commitment through some type of
individual control and certification sounds rather preposterous. Yet, considering
the ethical responsibilities of the organic consumer does push us beyond purely
instrumentalist discussions and analyses of consumer purchasing behavior. If we
appropriate the neo-liberal mantra of “all power to the consumer,” then how can
we begin to explore the concrete and realistic opportunities for consumers to “vote
ethically” with their purchases?