Time to push for USDA standard of sustainable

09/14/2012 09:23:00 AM
Tom Karst

Tom Karst, National EditorTom Karst, National EditorThe long and grinding effort to find the value of “sustainability” in the market continues.

There seems to be no end to the effort to talk about the importance of sustainability and to create metrics to measure it on the farm.

But the value of investing in sustainable practices and the ultimate worth of creating a marketing message aimed at consumers is still under debate.

One active discussion in the Fresh Produce Industry Discussion Group was this question: What does everyone think about a sustainable growing produce label?

The discussion had 30 comments as of Sept. 12.

The premise of the question is this: Great progress has been made in reducing pesticide and fertilizer use over the years.

Why not create a label that trumpets those gains to consumers, while at the same time clearly stating that no organic claims are being made?

Several responses to the question said that creating a “environmentally friendly” label will be challenging. One member said, “Every farmer does it, but illustrating that to the consuming public with a label doesn’t translate into increased sales, only more informed customers.”

To that point, there is much truth. There is no identity for “sustainable” in comparison with the U.S. Department of Agriculture organic seal.

Consumers know the “organic” label, and for a variety of reasons they will pay more for USDA-certified organic food.

And the market continues to grow. For the second quarter of 2012, the United FreshFacts report show organic vegetable sales were up 14.6% compared with year-ago levels, while organic fruit sales were up 20.3% for the quarter.

While there is no government-sanctioned definition of “local,” that hasn’t seemed to make a difference to consumers. Consumers will buy locally grown foods. In my view, any attempt to certify such food should be deemed an ill-considered waste of money.

However, a more formal standard is needed for a “sustainably grown” label. Some have suggested the lines between conventional and organic produce will eventually blur.

Perhaps that day would come sooner with a USDA certification of “sustainable” growing practices.

Because of cost and confusion, retailers should not be involved in setting their own label standards for sustainable growing methods.

Retailers have created enough confusion already relating to food safety standards and third-party audits. There would be only skepticism and doubt if two to three rival retailers have competing “earth-friendly” labels.


Prev 1 2 3 Next All


Comments (2) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Fernando Heiderich    
New Jersey US / Leme Br  |  September, 16, 2012 at 03:08 AM

Yes I think it would add value to the whole chain and the final customer. On top of that it would help developing an aligned / appropriate educational concept about sustainably produced. As done with organic, a well scientificaly defined & accepted concept will help significantly the community and avoid false messages & promises.

Richard Leibowitz    
New Jersey/ Santa Cruz  |  September, 19, 2012 at 12:42 AM

We need to let customers know that when they are buying produce that comes from soil that breathes, not only will it be nutrient dense, it will also absorb and retain more carbon. This is a fringe benefit can actually resolve greenhouse gasses, if we embrace this as an industry. And what a marketing program it would make. Eat a potato save the world! Not a bad tag line. How about earth freindly soil or heirloom soil. Consumers will feel that they are part of the solution and understand exactly how they are helping.

Join the conversation - sign up for FREE today!
FeedWind
Feedback Form
Leads to Insight