-
World Bank Study – Contract 7148617
A Pre-Feasibility Study: Would Product Certification Promote
Environmental Sustainable Beef Production in Developing
Countries?
Wataru Yamamoto
Muhammad Ibrahim Hein-Willem Leeraar
Haruo Yamane Claudia J. Sepúlveda L.
Mihoko Uramoto
Final Report
June 2009
RECS International Inc. in association with CATIE
-
Pre-Feasibility of product to
RECS International. promote environmental in association with
CATIE certification to sustainability
of beef system
ii
Abbreviations ARCDM: Afforestation and Reforestation Clean
Development Mechanism BSE: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy CARTV:
Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes valorisants CATIE:
Centro Agronomico Tropical de Investigacion y Ensenanza CDM: Clean
Development Mechanism COS: Canadian Organic Standards DFID:
Department for International Development, UK EUREGAP: European
Retail Produce Good Agriculture. Practices FAO: Food and
Agriculture Organization FAOSTAT: FAO Statistics FMD: Foot and
Mouth Disease GAP: Good Agricultural Practice GTZ: German Technical
Cooperation HACCP: Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point IFAT: The
global network of Fair Trade Organizations IFOAM: The International
Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements INAC: National Meat
Institute of Uruguay JAS: Japan Agriculture Standards LEAD:
Livestock Environment and Development Initiative, FAO LOHAS:
Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability NAFTA: North American Free
Trade Agreement NOP: National Organic Program of the USDA OFPA:
Organic Food Production Act of the USA REDD: Reduction of Emission
from Deforestation and Degradation SAG: Agriculture and livestock
service of Chile USAID: United States Agency for International
Development USDA: US Department of Agriculture UKROFS: United
Kingdom Register of Organic Food Standards WFTO: World Fair Trade
Organization WHO: World Health Organization WTO: World Trade
Organization Cover page photo: Silvo-pastoral system in Matiguas,
Nicaragua
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spongiform_encephalopathyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization
-
Pre-Feasibility of product to
RECS International. promote environmental in association with
CATIE certification to sustainability
of beef system
iii
Table of Contents Executive summary
.........................................................................................................................1
Chapter 1
Introduction.....................................................................................................................4
1.1
Background.................................................................................................................................
4 1.2
Objective.....................................................................................................................................
4 1.3
Methodology...............................................................................................................................
5 1.4 The structure of report
................................................................................................................
6
CHAPTER 2 Beef certification: General
considerationS................................................................7
2.1 Beef consumption trends
............................................................................................................
7 2.2 Beef trade between developed and developing
countries...........................................................
8 2.3 Criteria for beef certification
....................................................................................................
10 2.4 Beef certification in product
flow.............................................................................................
13 2.5 Types of existing beef
certification...........................................................................................
14
Chapter 3 Regulations and Market trends for Certified
Beef........................................................16 3.1
Organic beef
.............................................................................................................................
16 3. 2 Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) Certification
.....................................................................
28 3.3 Certification for natural and grass-fed
beef..............................................................................
28 3.4 Other beef certification labels in
Europe..................................................................................
31 3.5 Certification for other products
................................................................................................
31 3.6 Market
trends............................................................................................................................
35 3.7
Summary...................................................................................................................................
41
Chapter 4 Consumer Demands and
Perceptions............................................................................43
4.1
Methodology.............................................................................................................................
43 4.2 General characteristics of respondents
.....................................................................................
43 4.3 The popularity of beef
..............................................................................................................
44 4.4 Frequency of beef consumption
...............................................................................................
44 4.5 Beef purchase behaviour
..........................................................................................................
45 4.6 Beef selection criteria
...............................................................................................................
46 4.7 The perception of beef
production............................................................................................
46 4.8 Comparison of important criteria for certified
beef..................................................................
49 4.9 Voluntary payment for a better beef production
system...........................................................
50 4.10 Knowledge about imported beef and beef
certification..........................................................
51 4.11
Summary.................................................................................................................................
53
Chapter 5 Food Industry interest in Environmentally Sustainable
Beef Production..................55 5.1 Retailers in North America
.......................................................................................................
55 5.2 Retailers in
Japan......................................................................................................................
56 5.3 Retailers in the
Netherlands......................................................................................................
57 5.4 Two fast food
chains.................................................................................................................
58 5.5 Steak restaurants in Costa Rica
................................................................................................
60 5.6 A livestock cooperative in Costa Rica
......................................................................................
60 5.7
Summary...................................................................................................................................
61
Chapter 6 Concept and Criteria for Environmentally Sustainable
Beef Production .....................62 6.1 Beef certification for
environmental sustainability
..................................................................
62 6.2 Silvopastoral systems: a key component for environmental
sustainable livestock production 63 6.3 Criteria for
environmentally sustainable beef production
practices......................................... 66
Chapter 7
.......................................................................................................................................74
Pathway to environmentally sustainable beef production in
developing countries.......................74
-
Pre-Feasibility of product to
RECS International. promote environmental in association with
CATIE certification to sustainability
of beef system
iv
7.1 Constraints and potential
..........................................................................................................
74 7.2 Pathways promoting environmentally sustainable beef
production in developing countries .. 79 7.3 Recommendations:
Strategy for promoting environmentally sustainable beef production
in developing
countries.......................................................................................................................
85
References
.....................................................................................................................................88
-
Pre-Feasibility of product to
RECS International. promote environmental in association with
CATIE certification to sustainability
of beef system
v
List of Tables, Figures and Boxes Table 2.1 Global beef
consumption: 2002-07
(1,000mt).................................................................7
Table 2.2 Per capita annual beef consumption, 2002-07 (Unit: kg)
................................................8 Table 2.3 Beef
imports to USA by country (unit: ton)
....................................................................8
Table 2.4 Beef imports to Netherlands by country, 2003-2008 (Unit:
ton).....................................9 Table 2.5 Beef imports
to Japan by country (Unit: ton)
................................................................10
Table 2.6 Five criteria of beef certification
...................................................................................11
Table 2.7 Comparing types of existing beef
certification..............................................................15
Table 3.1 Four dimensions of Organic Agriculture principles
......................................................16 Table 3.2
Farms producing organic products, by certification status, Canada,
2006 ....................18 Table 3.3 Comparison of Organic
Standards
.................................................................................22
Table 3.4 Natural beef certification in Uruguay
............................................................................30
Table 3.5 Annual income and expenditure of MSC secretariat,
2006/2007 ..................................33 Table 3.6 Global
distribution of FSC-certified
forest....................................................................34
Table 3.7 Revenues and Expenses of the FSC secretariat, 2004
...................................................35 Table 5.1:
Beef exports by
Montecillos.........................................................................................61
Table 6.1. Influence of dispersed trees in pastures on animal
production.....................................64 Table 6.2 Impact
on environmental sustainability by each measure
.............................................67 Table 6.3 Criteria
for environmentally sustainable beef production
.............................................72 Table 7.1
Environmental standards, traceability, and market development of
beef certification
scheme
.......................................................................................................................................75
Table 7.2 Consumer perspectives in surveyed
countries...............................................................76
Table 7.3 Payment of Environmental Services and impact on land use
and emission..................80 of greenhouse gases in Esparza,
Costa
Rica..................................................................................80
Figure 2.1 Beef import to Netherlands from Latin America (except
for Brazil and Argentina) .....9 Figure 2.2 Beef import to Japan
from Developing countries (Unit Ton)
......................................10 Figure 3.1 Organic status
and organic products, Canada, 2006
....................................................18 Figure 3.2
Organic agriculture in Europe, 2006 (unit: thousand
ha).............................................37 Figure 4.1 Meat
preferences
..........................................................................................................44
Figure 4.2 Frequency of beef consumption
...................................................................................45
Figure 4.3 Place to purchase
beef..................................................................................................45
Figure 4.4 Place for beef
consumption..........................................................................................46
Figure 4.5 Selection Criteria for Beef purchase (Comparison with
Price =1.0) ...........................46 Figure 4.6 Problems
perceived in conventional beef production
..................................................47 Figure 4.7
Major concerns of Food Safety in conventional beef production
(comparison with Animal
Disease =1.0)
.............................................................................................................................47
Figure 4.8 Major criteria for Global Environment in conventional
beef production (Comparison
with Land use change =
1.0)......................................................................................................48
Figure 4.9 Major criteria for Animal Welfare in Conventional beef
production (comparison with
housing =1.0)
.............................................................................................................................48
Figure 4.10 Major criteria concerning Social Justice in
conventional
beef production (comparison with payment to farmers = 1.0)
..................................................49 Figure 4.11
Secondary criteria for certified beef in Canada and
Japan.........................................49 Figure 4.12
Selection criteria for certified beef in the Netherlands (the first
priority) .................50 Figure 4.13 Selection criteria for
certified beef in the Netherlands
..............................................50 (the second
priority by persons who chose Environment for the first priority)
............................50
-
Pre-Feasibility of product to
RECS International. promote environmental in association with
CATIE certification to sustainability
of beef system
vi
Figure 4.14 Willingness to pay premium price for certified beef
production ...............................50 Figure 4.15 Purchase
of imported
beef..........................................................................................51
Figure 4.16 Imported beef: countries of
origin..............................................................................51
Figure 4.17 Reasons for not purchasing imported
beef.................................................................52
Figure 4.18 Willingness to purchase beef from developing countries
..........................................52 Figure 4.19 Knowledge
about beef certification
...........................................................................53
Figure 5.1. Aspects of beef certification considered important by
restaurateurs in Costa Rica.60 Figure 6.1 Concept of product
certification for environmental sustainability
..............................63 Figure 6.2 Concept of
Environmentally Sustainable Animal Production
.....................................71 Figure 7.1: Concept of
Environmental Sustainable Cattle Farm Belt
...........................................85 Box 1 An economic
comparison between organic and conventional farms in the
Netherlands38 Box 2 Spring Festival on Terschelling
Island................................................................................58
Box 3 On farm investments for converting to environmental
sustainable production systems ....77 Appendices Appendix 1:
RESUMEN – MEMORIA TALLER: Pre- viabilidad para la certificación de
productos
cárnicos producidos con sistemas de conservación del ambiente
.............................................94 Appendix 2:
Questionnaire on Criteria of Eco Beef Certification
................................................98 Appendix 3:
Summary of consumer survey (Unit:
percent)........................................................103
Appendix 4 Results of consumer survey in Canada (Unit: percent)
...........................................104 Appendix 5: Results
of consumer survey in Japan (Unit: percent)
.............................................107 Appendix 6:
Results of consumer survey in the Netherlands (Unit: percent)
.............................110 Appendix 7: Results of consumer
survey in Costa Rica (Unit:
percent).....................................114 Appendix 8: Terms
of
Reference.................................................................................................117
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The livestock sector plays an economically and socially
significant role in the developing world, generating 1.4 percent of
the world’s GDP, growing in line with overall economic growth. On
the other hand, livestock production has a significant impact upon
the environment, upon land use and soil erosion, climate change,
water quality, and biodiversity.
The objective of this study is to determine the potential of
certification for beef produced in developing countries in
accordance with the demands of environmental sustainability.
Types of beef certification and market trends
Essentially four types of beef certification were found in the
market; certified organic, good agricultural practice (GAP)
certified, natural and grass-fed. The demand for these certified
beefs are growing globally:
• Sales and production of organic beef are increasing
dramatically in Europe, the USA, and Canada. In the US, the number
of organic beef cattle in 2005 grew 257% compared with 2003. In
Canada, organic beef herds increased 30% in 2005. In the
Netherlands, the sales of organic beef were 20 million Euro in
2007, with 17% annual growth. European retailers have started to
offer fixed contracts to organic meat producers in order to secure
supply over five years.
• GLOBALGAP, a certifier of good agricultural practice initiated
by retailers, is becoming a major certifier in Europe and has
expanded rapidly in the last few years. GLOBALGAP benchmarking
standards officially recognize the Certified Natural Meat Program
of Uruguay and ChinaGAP. GLOBALGAP is attempting to have its
standards adopted by small holders in Africa.
• Natural beef certifications are emerging from private sector
initiatives, particularly in the US, connecting consumer demands
with the interests of producers. The number of cattle certified by
Food Alliance as being raised as natural is growing dramatically,
29% annually by acreage between 2004 and 2008. The amount of
natural and grass-fed beef certified by the Uruguayan government
and targeted for export to the US is increasing rapidly.
• The grass-fed beef market is growing in the US. Approximately
2000 producers were raising grass-fed beef in 2008, worth nearly
US$350 million retail. Food Alliance launched grass-fed beef
certification in 2008. A new association, the Manitoba Grass Fed
Beef Association, was formed in the spring of 2008 in Canada,
targeting grass-fed demands in the US.
These certification schemes have criteria with regard to
environmental sustainability in their standards, but most of them
do not specify these criteria. Organic standards typically have
criteria that include a general description concerning Environment
(land use, biodiversity conservation, and manure management).
GLOBALGAP has criteria aimed at controlling the impact of farming
on the environment and on biodiversity, but the criteria are not
specified and enforced. Food Alliance has ecological standards
focusing on wildlife conservation, soil conservation, and water
quality protection.
Traceability is required by Certified Organic, except in the US
and Canada. GLOBALGAP and the Certified Natural Meat Program in
Uruguay have taken initiatives to develop a traceability
system.
The consumer’s perspective: preference, environmental concerns,
and voluntary payment
Consumer surveys carried out in Canada, Japan, the Netherlands,
and Costa Rica revealed that high percentages of respondents were
interested in purchasing beef from developing countries as long as
they obtain reliable quality at reasonable prices. Freshness and
price are more important criteria than brand, indicating that good
and
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
2
reliable quality beef can be imported and consumed in developed
countries. On the other hand, Food Safety, especially the
prevention of animal diseases, was considered the most important
issue by consumers in developed countries. In order to have Food
Safety, traceability is regarded as necessary, especially in the
wake of BSE incidents, particularly in Japan and Europe.
In the Netherlands 15% of respondents were more concerned about
Environment than Food Safety, suggesting that they trust public
inspection systems for food safety and have greater expectations
concerning certification schemes directed at environmental
sustainability.
Of all environmental concerns caused by beef production,
land-use change was regarded as the most important. This suggests
that sustainable land management for beef production in developing
countries is an important aspect of certification standards.
Respondents in the Netherlands who chose Environment as the first
priority selected Animal Welfare and Social Justice as the second,
suggesting that certification should include these criteria.
More than two-thirds of respondents were willing to pay a
premium for beef produced in environmentally sustainable ways.
However, the average premium is rather low; Japan and the
Netherlands (13 and 14%, respectively) were higher than Canada and
Costa Rica (8 and 11%, respectively. Certain populations were
willing to pay more than 30% for the premium (3 and 6 %, in Japan
and Netherlands, respectively). The niche market is found in single
young people in Canada (particularly women in their 20s and 30s)
and in middle-aged women (40-50s) in the Netherlands and Japan.
Members of this market are considered to belong to LOHAS
(Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability).
The interest of the food industry
The food industry, especially fast-food chains and supermarkets,
needs to develop a way to provide affordable products to consumers
while considering the aims of sustainability, engaging in equitable
trade practices, limiting the spread of agricultural diseases, and
having a positive impact upon local communities and the
environment. Several positive signs were found.
• Wal-Mart Stores has made several initiatives in the interest
of global sustainability. Wal-Mart has decided to buy produce,
meat, and seafood only from suppliers accredited by
private-inspection offices.
• McDonald’s is working toward developing a sustainable supply
chain with newly developed animal welfare guidelines.
• Supermarkets in Japan have started producing natural beef in
Australia and New Zealand.
• A butcher shop in Canada has shown interest in purchasing beef
from Latin American countries (Uruguay, Costa Rica, and Argentina)
if it is not restricted of quota, of good quality (brighter red in
color, soft in texture), and reasonably priced.
• The owners of steak restaurants for the upper class in Costa
Rica are interested in commercializing beef produced in
environmentally sustainable ways.
Feasibility of beef certification for environmental
sustainability
The premium price of certified beef (organically raised cattle
in the Netherlands cost 15-25 % more) is almost equivalent to the
potential premium the niche population is willing to pay in
developed countries. The domestic supply of organic beef is limited
in Europe because of the cost of organic feed and available lands.
It is noteworthy that the cost of converting conventional to
environmentally sustainable beef farms in developing countries is
much lower than in developed countries.
The cost and administrative burden associated with certification
can be considerable, particularly for smaller-scale producers. The
cost would be an even larger burden for producers in developing
countries paying international prices. There may also be production
risks associated with limiting management options or changing
production practices to comply with certification requirements.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
3
In order to develop a certification scheme for environmentally
sustainable livestock products, funding support is needed. The
Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) and Forest Stewardship Council
(FSC) are largely supported by donation.
Certification by itself rarely guarantees market access, market
benefits, or price premiums. Certification functions best as a tool
that supports marketing efforts. The provision of market access to
developing countries is the primary role of the certification
scheme. Additional skills and resources have to be consistently
brought to bear to leverage benefit from certification–and product
quality is always paramount.
Traceability is becoming more and more important in developed
countries, particularly in Japan and Europe. In order to sell beef
in developed countries with an environmental sustainability
premium, it is necessary to develop traceability systems.
Pathway to promoting environmentally sustainable beef production
in developing countries
Certification for beef trade
The first step to promoting environmental sustainable production
in developing countries is to subsidize such farm practices that
meet requirements for payment for environmental services (PES). It
is important to emphasize that the subsidies should be given to
farmers with activities intended to improve farm organization and
promote market development in order to connect with future
markets.
The second step is to form a value chain to connect producers
with processers, distributers, and retailers. The value chain can
exist for local markets or for international retailers in developed
countries.
A new certification scheme for environmentally sustainable beef
needs long-term planning. For sales in developed countries, LOHAS
should be a target population. Benchmarking with existing
certification schemes, as well as forming food industry
partnerships, should be sought in order to connect to the market.
In addition, environmentally sustainable beef production would
appeal to those seeking the reduction of carbon emissions, pointing
to the likely interest of consumers in developed countries. It is
important for planning to involve technical measures to guarantee
lower risks of the spread of animal diseases, as well as to promote
international trade dialogue for the establishment of special
quotas.
Certification for carbon credit
The silvopastoral project implemented by CATIE in Central
America showed carbon sequestration in pasturelands and reduction
of carbon emission from animals by better diets through the payment
for environmental services to farmers who commit to silvopastoral
systems. Unlike product certification for beef trade, the
certification for carbon credit can directly support farmers who
are engaged in silvopastoral systems without having the problems
related to the animal disease. The certification system can also
contribute to the reduction of emission from deforestation, the new
carbon credit mechanism (Reduction from Deforestation and
Degradation, REDD) that is in the process to be established after
COP15. A feasibility study for certification for carbon credit
together with a pilot project based on the results of the
silvopastoral project is recommended.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
4
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The livestock sector plays an economically and socially
significant role in the developing world, generating 1.4 percent of
the world’s GDP, growing in line with overall economic growth (FAO,
2006). The livestock sector contributes to 40 percent of the
agricultural GDP, with strong tendency to increase towards the 50
percent mark (FAOLEAD, 2006). Livestock provides a rural livelihood
for an estimated 987 million people (Livestock in Development,
1999), equivalent to 36 percent of the total number of poor in the
world (World Bank, 2006). Food products produced from livestock
contributed an average of 17 percent of the energy and 33 percent
of the protein content of total dietary intake in 2003 (FAOLEAD,
2006).
On the other hand, livestock production has a significant impact
upon the environment, upon land use and soil erosion, climate
change, water quality, and biodiversity. The livestock sector,
occupying 26% of the ice-free terrestrial surface, is responsible
for 18% of green house gas emissions (FAO LEAD, 2006). Large
natural forests have been destroyed for cattle ranching in Latin
America, leading to an increase in carbon emissions and a loss of
biodiversity. Subsistence livestock production has destroyed the
vegetation in upper watersheds in densely populated areas in Asia
and Africa, causing social conflicts.
Recently the demand for organic beef has increased globally
(Sawyer et al., 2007; Willer et al., 2008). One reason for this is
that consumers pay more attention to the quality of animal feed
because of the problem of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE, or
mad cow disease). However, consumers also voluntarily pay a premium
for environmental services, as well as better animal welfare and
social conditions of workers who are directly engaged in cattle
production in the developing countries.
A recent development in the food industry is the interest in
using beef that is produced in an environmentally sustainable way,
at lower costs in developing countries, thereby differentiating
products from those of competitors and produce higher profits.
Wal-Mart Stores and McDonald’s are leading retailer/hamburger shop
to consider environmental sustainability of their products to
create better relations with their customers as strategies of
corporate social responsibility (Goldberg and Yagan, 2007). When a
proper and reliable certification scheme is established, high
quality beef produced in environmentally sustainable ways in
developing countries is good for consumers and food industries in
developed countries, protecting the environment locally,
regionally, and globally, and supporting the rural poor.
The potential for importing such beef from developing countries
are not well documented on a global scale. Attitudes of food
industries are not described because the treatment of livestock
products is a sensitive subject owing to epidemic disease and the
protection of local industries. In addition, the actual criteria at
farm level for environmentally sustainable beef production systems
are not well established.
1.2 Objective
The objective of this study is to determine the potential for
beef certification in accordance with the demands of environmental
sustainability. The study carried out consumer surveys in Canada,
Japan, the Netherlands, and Costa Rica, representing developed
countries in North America, Asia, and Europe, and an advanced
developing country in Central America. Also, the study involved the
review of materials published by food industries, as
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
5
well as interviewing representatives of food industries.
Criteria for an environmentally sustainable cattle production
system were elaborated as a logical framework for certification
standards.
Livestock production is highly diversified: from the intensive
system based on heavy use of supplements to the extensive system
based on grazing on large rangelands, and from subsistence mixed
farming to commercial grazing. Livestock systems can be classified
as either intensive or extensive, and commercial or traditional
(Neely and Hatfield, 2007). Due to the heterogeneity of livestock
systems, it is impossible to identify general criteria for
environmentally sustainable livestock production (de Wit et al.,
1995).
Therefore, the study mainly focuses on production systems
classified according to the levels of intensity and
commercialization, climate conditions, and geographical areas:
- Extensive commercial system (ranching), where large impact on
the environment is found and enhancement is expected to be realized
through developing better trading systems;
- Humid tropics where the problems related to biodiversity
conservation, deforestation, climate change, water depletion caused
by excessive livestock production are more serious; and
- Geographical region of Latin America, the highest potential
area of beef export where the participation in trade in the organic
livestock products is predominant (Harris, 2003).
1.3 Methodology
The activities of the study can be broadly divided into six
parts:
1) Literature review of protocols and market trends of existing
beef certification
Recent studies showed that there is an increasing trend in the
demand for beef produced organically and/ or with environmentally
sustainable farming practices. General criteria for certified beef
and existing types of certification were classified. In this
report, criteria for certification are classified in five
categories: food safety with respect to human health, sustainable
production, environment, animal welfare, and social justice or the
issue of working conditions. Beef certification is generally of
four types: organic, good agricultural practice, natural, and
grass-fed. The study explored the potential of consumer markets for
each type in the different parts of the world.
2) Workshop with beef experts in Latin America
To obtain general information regarding the Latin American beef
market and potential certification, a workshop was held on November
14, 2008 at CATIE in Turrialba, Costa Rica with livestock experts
from Latin America.
3) Consumer survey on eco-beef products
Consumer surveys were carried out by questionnaire. General
information was sought concerning consumption of beef, perspectives
about beef production and the environment, willingness to pay for
certified beef, and types of beef for certification. The samples
were collected in Halifax, Canada, in Tokyo and Yokohama, Japan, in
Raerd, the Netherlands, and in San Jose and Turrialba, Costa Rica
between November 2008 and January 2009.
4) Survey of food industries regarding environmentally
sustainable beef products
In order to determine the potential for promoting certified
beef, the study reviewed published materials and surveyed retailers
in the food industry: supermarket chains, butcher shops, hamburger
restaurants, and steak restaurants. The survey asked questions
about current market conditions for beef, including certified beef.
It sought to determine interest in certified beef, the price
potential for certified beef, the criteria for accepting a
certification scheme, and the potential interest in helping to
develop a system to produce certified beef in developing countries.
Surveys were carried out in Japan, the Netherlands, Canada, and
Costa Rica.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
6
5) Development of criteria for beef certification in an
environmentally sustainable system
Based on the review of literature concerning sustainable
agriculture, the study has developed a framework for criteria for
sustainable beef production systems, combined with land use
(tree/vegetation cover, pasture management, use of legume plants,
etc.), production methods (animal health, feed, grazing, etc.),
environmental management (waste management, biodiversity
conservation), animal welfare, and social conditions.
6) Elaboration of the potential to promote environmentally
sustainable beef production in developing countries
Based on the literature review and on consumer and food industry
surveys, the study elaborated the obstacles and potential and
developed the pathways to promote environmentally sustainable beef
production in developing countries.
1.4 The structure of report
The remainder of this report is structured in the following way.
Chapter 2 presents general considerations regarding beef
certification. The classification of criteria for certification and
types of beef certification are described. Chapter 3 presents
regulations and market trends of each type of certified beef. The
standards and regulations for organic beef in United States,
Canada, the European Union, and Japan are described. The private
groups that organize natural and other types of beef certifications
are presented. Market trends for organic and natural beef in
USA/Canada, Europe, and Japan are described. Chapter 4 presents the
results of consumer surveys in Canada, the Netherlands, Japan and
Costa Rica. Chapter 5 presents the results of food industry surveys
concerning environmentally sustainable beef. Also presented are the
current positions of Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, information about
natural beef production by a Japanese supermarket chain, and trends
regarding organic beef in a giant supermarket chain in the
Netherlands. Interviews carried out at beef restaurants in a
tourist region of Costa Rica are also described. Chapter 6 presents
the criteria for environmentally sustainable beef production,
fundamental to which is the concept of sustainable agriculture.
Chapter 7 presents the constraints upon the development and the
potential of certification for environmentally sustainable beef.
The strategies of developing product certification are demonstrated
in line with provision of subsidies and value chains
development.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
7
CHAPTER 2
BEEF CERTIFICATION: GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The production of meat has increased 90% in the last quarter of
a century (FAOSTAT, 2006). This increase was realized by the
expansion of productive lands, as well as by the increased
productivity per hectare. Large areas of tropical forest have been
deforested and turned into pasture lands in order to produce
cattle. Technological change, including advanced breeding and
feeding techniques as well as increased crop production supported
by fertilization technology and improvements in mechanization, has
made the intensification possible (FAO LEAD, 2006). However,
excessive focus on increasing productivity have made production
systems less favorable to human health and to the environment.
Also, farm animals are treated in less natural ways in order to
realize higher productivity. Given these conditions, consumers are
increasingly concerned about health, the environment, the ethics of
animal welfare, and development issues (FAO LEAD, 2006).
2.1 Beef consumption trends
Global beef consumption has increased by 9 percent during
2002-2007 (Table 2.1. USDA, 2008). The increases are largely found
in advanced developing countries (China, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico,
India, and Pakistan) but slight increases are also found in USA and
EU.
During the period, per capita beef consumption has increased in
Argentine, Uruguay, New Zealand, and Brazil, while those in USA and
EU have been slightly reduced (Table 2.2)
Table 2.1 Global beef consumption: 2002-07 (1,000mt) Market/Year
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
USA 12,737 12,340 12,667 12,664 12,834 12,830 EU 8,416 8,596
8,582 8,550 8,649 8,674
China 5,825 6,281 6,712 7,041 6,967 7,404 Brazil 6,445 6,285
6,417 6,795 6,964 7,311
Argentina 2,364 2,430 2,519 2,451 2,553 2,673 Mexico 2,423 2,319
2,376 2,428 2,519 2,568 Russia 2,441 2,369 2,300 2,492 2,361 2,392
India 1,399 1,528 1,638 1,633 1,694 1,765 Japan 1,304 1,348 1,169
1,188 1,159 1,182
Pakistan 925 949 975 1,004 1,090 1,119 Rest of the World 10,598
10,907 11,261 11,505 11,921 12,067
Total 54,877 55,352 56,616 57,751 58,711 59,985 Source: USDA,
2008.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
8
Table 2.2 Per capita annual beef consumption, 2002-07 (Unit: kg)
Market/Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Argentina 61.6 62.7 64.4 62.0 63.9 65.9 Uruguay 49.4 49.7 56.5
55.6 53.6 56.0
USA 44.3 42.5 43.2 42.8 43.1 42.6 New Zealand 31.5 39.7 34.1
33.7 38.5 38.1
Brazil 35.8 34.5 34.9 36.5 37.0 37.3 Australia 35.6 40.9 38.7
37.8 36.9 37.0 Canada 31.1 32.9 31.5 32.9 32.8 32.6 Mexico 23.3
22.2 22.4 22.7 23.3 23.3
EU 18.0 17.7 17.7 17.6 17.6 17.5 Russia 16.7 16.2 15.7 17.1 16.3
16.8
Source: USDA, 2008.
2.2 Beef trade between developed and developing countries
Beef is largely imported to developed countries from developing
countries throughout the world, particularly from Latin American
countries. According to the statistics of 2006, 26% of beef is
imported to USA from Latin American countries (Uruguay, Brazil,
Argentina, Nicaragua, Mexico, Costa Rica and Honduras) (Table
2.3).
In the Netherlands, more than 90% of beef is imported from other
European countries. Along with USA and Australia that showed
overwhelming increase of beef export, South and Central American
countries showed significant increase in 2008 (62%, Table 2.4).
Argentine and Brazil are main beef exporters in Latin America, but
Brazil showed significant drop in 2008. The import from other Latin
American countries is increasing steadily in the last few years
(Figure 2.1).
Japan, the second importer in terms of values, is also importing
beef from Latin American countries (Mexico, Chile, Panama and Costa
Rica) (Table 2.5). In particular import from Mexico is
conspicuously increasing in the last few years (Figure 2.2).
Table 2.3 Beef imports to USA by country (unit: ton)
Country 2003 2004 2005 2006 % in 2006 increase in 2006 (%)
Australia 512,379 507,771 408,607 402,976 28.8 -1.4 Canada
335,990 482,339 495,926 383,150 27.4 -22.7 New Zealand 292,652
293,018 273,858 255,853 18.3 -6.6 Uruguay 46,931 182,916 252,901
138,653 9.9 -45.2 Brazil 93,627 99,604 97,317 124,037 8.9 27.5
Argentina 39,902 52,939 50,102 38,952 2.8 -22.3 Nicaragua 22,073
29,690 28,785 28,416 2.0 -1.3 Mexico 7,211 8,851 12,131 18,505 1.3
52.5 Costa Rica 13,743 10,729 11,676 8,797 0.6 -24.7 Honduras 102
2,253 2,132 701 0.1 -67.1 Other countries 73 262 288 399 0.0 38.5
Total 1,364,683 1,670,371 1,633,723 1,400,438 100.0 -14.3
Source: USDA statistics
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
9
Table 2.4 Beef imports to Netherlands by country, 2003-2008
(Unit: ton)
Figure 2.1 Beef import to Netherlands from Latin America (except
for Brazil and Argentina)
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Impo
rt (to
n)
Region/country 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 % in 2008
Annual increase in 2008
(%) Europe 234,618 234,879 221,460 265,902 282,792 314,894 91.3
11 USA 26 127 156 121 1,242 3,510 1.0 183
Canada 20 17 35 10 1 0 0.0 -100 Brazil 28,853 31,155 34,374
32,471 37,806 9,437 2.7 -75
Argentine 5,149 7,815 7,726 6,588 7,457 8,694 2.5 17 Other
Central/South America
1,564 1,507 1,669 3,537 3,336 5,388 1.6 62
Australia 3 23 0 0 1,069 2,477 0.7 132 Others 128 68 99 520 487
614 0.2 26 Total 270,361 275,591 265,520 309,148 334,191 345,013
100.0 3
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
10
Table 2.5 Beef imports to Japan by country (Unit: ton) Country*
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Australia 132,742 190,450 188,466
197,392 205,676 199,072
USA 153,194 1,276 0 2,232 16,333 22,967 New Zealand 14,221
29,780 33,424 32,322 27,529 25,023
Canada 5,199 0 0 364 1,200 2,680 Hungary 0 0 1.7 0 0 0 Norway 0
0 0.0 60.5 0 0 Sub-total 305,356 221,505 221,892 232,370 250,738
249,743 Mexico 0.2 1,127 4,209 3,781 5,516 7,959 Chile 0.5 665
2,924 483 451 122
Vanuatu 573 448 534 547 411 510 Panama 0 3 146 211 321 83
Costa Rica 0 4 196 98 157 119 Nicaragua 0 13 0 0 0 4
Sub-total** 574 2,261 8,009 5,120 6,855 8,797 Total 305,930
223,766 229,901 237,489 257,593 258,540
Source: Trade Statistics of Japan homepage Note: *All the
countries from which Japan imported beef between 2003 and 2008 are
listed. **Developing countries
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
Impo
rt (
Ton)
Mexico
Chile
Vanuatu
Panama
Costa Rica
Nicaragua
Figure 2.2 Beef import to Japan from Developing countries (Unit
Ton)
2.3 Criteria for beef certification
The criteria for beef certification can be classified into five
categories: food safety, sustainable production, effects on the
environment, animal welfare, and social justice. Food safety is
related to the health of consumers themselves, while environmental
concerns (over issues involving water and air pollution, carbon
emissions, and biodiversity) are long-term and affect future
generations. Sustainable production involves a commitment to
recycling and using renewable resources with an efficient use of
energy. Concerns about animal welfare and social conditions for
workers are ethical matters for consumers, who value the lives of
sacrificed animals and disadvantaged people.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
11
Table 2.6 Five criteria of beef certification Criterion Subject
of utility/concern Conditions
Food safety Health of consumer Meat does not cause disease for
consumers
Sustainable production
Self-sustaining Environmental management at local level
Production with low outside input, Efficient use of energy Use
of renewable resources and recycling Soil conservation
Environment Water, Air, CO2 and Biodiversity Water, air, and
biodiversity well protected for future generations
Animal welfare Animal Animals well treated, basic conditions met
Social justice Workers Fulfillment of basic human needs
2.3.1 Beef production and food safety Conventional mass beef
production systems, which rely on the factory farm, have been
criticized because of danger to public health and cruel treatment
of animals. In particular, the following ingredients commonly used
in such production systems create dangers for public health.
• Excessive use of grain-feeding
• Use of animal by-products for protein in feed
• Hormonal treatment for growth promotion
• Use of drugs and chemicals, including antibiotics and
anti-microbials
• Use of feed produced from genetically modified organisms.
In the United States, nearly all factory-farm cattle are
grain-fed before slaughter. Scientific evidence shows that
grain-fed livestock has a different fat structure. It was found
that livestock fed on grain have more omega-6 fat and less omega-3
fat. Omega-6 fat promotes heart disease, while omega-3 fat is
beneficial for cardiac health (Acevedo, 2006).
Animal by-products like bone meal can be risk factors in
transmitting bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), when healthy
animals consume tainted tissues from infected animals. In the US,
use of animal by-products in feed is prohibited. Over 16 million
tones of animal by-products are produced in the European Union each
year.1 In the EU, only materials derived from animals declared fit
for human consumption following veterinary inspection may be used
for the production of feed.
A consumer survey in Kansas, USA suggests that consumers are
more concerned about beef produced with the assistance of hormones
and antibiotics (Peterson, et al., 1999; Shelquist, 2002). Cows
raised on industrial farms are often fed antibiotics to keep from
getting sick in close quarters. Human beings who ingest the
antibiotics indirectly are often susceptible to antibiotic
immunities as a result. Antibiotics are routinely added to grain
feed to serve as growth stimulants. Cattle consume 70% of all the
antibiotics consumed in the United States. This practice widely
contributes to the rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, including
MRSA.
Growth hormones improve meat quality by increasing lean meat and
reducing fat contents and improving feed efficiency, but meat
produced by means of growth-hormone treatment may cause infertility
in humans, the early onset of puberty in girls, and some diseases
related to these problems. Growth hormones in beef production are
approved for use in Canada and the US but banned in the EU.
Genetically modified crops are widely used in feed for animals,
and genetically modified ingredients are commonly used in human
food. However, the use of genetically modified feed is
controversial. The major concern is whether modified DNA in plants
may be transferred into the food chain with harmful consequences.
It 1 European Union.
http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biosafety/animalbyproducts/index_en.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_spongiform_encephalopathyhttp://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/science/July-August/Grass-Fed-Beef-Better-for-Health--Environment-.html#4#4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRSA
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
12
has been pointed out that, unlike the human diet, animal diets
largely consist of single-plant products, and this may increase the
possibility of negative effects on animals (Friend of Earth,
2006).
2.3.2 Beef production and resource degradation
Beef production has significant impact on the environment: land
use and soil erosion, climate change, water quality, and
biodiversity in tropical countries. The livestock sector occupies
26% of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the earth (FAO LEAD et
al., 2006). Livestock can be a major source of land degradation
because of the exploitation of nutrient and organic matter in the
soil, and because of water pollution caused by the release of
pathogens and drug residues. Animals and their waste emit methane,
which contributes to climate change. Land use increases because of
the high demand for grain-feed and grazing land. It was estimated
that total deforestation in Central America was around 400,000
hectares per year in the late 1970s and 300,000 hectares in 1990,
mainly as a result of conversion to pasture (Hecht, 1992; Nicholson
et al., 1995; Kaimowitz, 1996).
Livestock grazing can severely degrade riparian zones, the
wetland environment adjacent to rivers or streams. Riparian zones
and rivers are the lifeline of ecosystems, making them more
productive and serving as homes to plants and animals. Damage by
periodic floods is mitigated by retaining trees in riparian
zones.
2.3.3 Beef production and animal welfare
Unnecessary suffering of animals should be avoided. The UK
government set up the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Committee in
1967, which became the Farm Animal Welfare Council in 1979. The
committee provided the first guidelines for animal welfare, known
as the Five Freedoms:
• Freedom from thirst and hunger
• Freedom from discomfort caused by inadequate living
conditions
• Freedom from pain, injury, and disease
• Freedom to express normal behavior for the species
• Freedom from fear and distress
2.3.4 Beef production and social justice
The criteria for social conditions in international trade have
been developed through Fair Trade, a social movement and
market-based approach that empowers producers in developing
countries and promotes sustainability through exports from
developing countries to developed countries. The movement advocates
the payment of a fair price as well as good working conditions and
prohibits discrimination by race, gender, age, religion and
social/political class. The main products traded through Fair Trade
include handicrafts, coffee, cocoa, sugar, tea, bananas, honey,
cotton, wine, fresh fruit and flowers.
The World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO, previously IFAT)
prescribes the following ten standards for Fair Trade
affiliates.
1) Creating opportunities for economically disadvantaged
producers
Fair Trade is a strategy for poverty alleviation and sustainable
development. Its purpose is to create opportunities for producers
who have been economically disadvantaged or marginalized by the
conventional trading system.
2) Transparency and accountability
Fair Trade means having transparent management and commercial
relations to deal fairly and respectfully with trading
partners.
3) Capacity building
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Farm_Animal_Welfare_Advisory_Committee&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Farm_Animal_Welfare_Advisory_Committee&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farm_Animal_Welfare_Councilhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_movementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicraftshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffeehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocoahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bananashttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cottonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
13
Fair Trade relationships provide continuity, which enables
producers and their marketing organizations to improve their
management skills and access to new markets.
4) Promoting Fair Trade
Fair Trade Organizations raise awareness of Fair Trade and the
possibility of greater justice in world trade.
5) Payment of a fair price
A fair price in the regional or local context is one that has
been agreed upon through dialogue and participation. It not only
covers the costs of production but enables production that is
socially just and environmentally sound. It provides fair pay to
the producers and takes into account the principle of equal pay for
equal work by women and men.
6) Gender Equity
Women are always paid for their contribution to the production
process and are empowered in their organizations.
7) Working conditions
Fair Trade provides a safe and healthy working environment for
producers.
8) Child Labor
Fair Trade Organizations respect the UN Convention on the Rights
of the Child, as well as local laws and social norms, in order to
ensure that the participation of children, if there is any, in
production processes of fairly traded articles does not adversely
affect their well-being, security, educational requirements and
need for play. Organizations working directly with informally
organized producers disclose the involvement of children in
production.
9) The environment
Fair Trade actively encourages better environmental practices
and responsible methods of production.
10) Trade Relations
Fair Trade organizations trade with concern for the social,
economic, and environmental well-being of marginalized small
producers and maintain long-term relationships without maximizing
profit at their expense.
2.4 Beef certification in product flow
Before reaching to consumers, beef is transferred from farms to
slaughterhouses, where they are processed, and from there the beef
is delivered to market and finally purchased by consumers. In the
five categories pertaining to beef certification conceptualized in
this project, food safety is relevant to all stages of production
(from farm to folk), but environment, animal welfare, and social
conditions are mainly relevant to producers and operators of
slaughterhouses. Sustainable production is immediately relevant
only to producers. Producers affect the environment in all stages
of production and are responsible for such environmental matters as
the conservation of biodiversity, the protection of water
resources, soil conservation, etc. But slaughterers affect the
environment only with regard to water contamination from their
operations. It should be noted that the certification scheme aiming
at adding value to the operation in order to secure a premium price
paid by consumers needs to cover “from Farm to Folk”, the entire
production systems.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
14
2.5 Types of existing beef certification
Essentially there are five types of beef in the market:
conventional, certified organic, certified as products being
produced by good agricultural practices, natural and grass-fed
(Table 2.7). As for the certification mechanism, certified organic
beef is regulated by official standards and regulations, while GAP,
natural and grass-fed beef are regulated by private bodies.
Conventional (non-certified) beef comes from cattle raised in
pastures most of their lives. Prior to slaughter cattle are moved
to a feedlot are kept on a high-energy grain diet for three to six
months. During the last grain-feeding period, producers are allowed
to use a wide variety of technologies, including fertilizers for
pastures and grains, synthetic herbicides, chemicals for parasite
control, hormonal treatment for growth promotion, and
sub-therapeutic antibiotics. In the US, approximately 800,000 beef
producers produce beef under this system.2
Certified organic beef is produced under the organic standards
of each country. For certified organic products, producers are
officially certified and periodically inspected by accredited
agencies. Organic standards are established for crops and livestock
in each country and therefore vary. The general criteria for
certified organic beef are summarized as follows.
• Animals are given no antibiotics or growth hormones except for
therapeutic reasons.3
• Organic products are produced without using conventional
pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, bioengineering,
or ionizing radiation.
• Cattle are fed 100% organic feed but allowed certain vitamin
and mineral supplements.
• Producers are encouraged to enhance environmental quality by
conserving soil and using renewable resources and energy-efficient
technologies.
• Cattle have access to sufficient pasture and space.
Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) certified beef is a private
certification scheme developed in Europe. The certification is
primarily designed to reassure consumers about how food is produced
on the farm by minimizing
2 The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, USA. 3 Under the US
National Organic Program, animals treated with antibiotics are
taken out from the program.
Producer Slaughter house
Supermarket Butcher shop
Consumer
Food safety Sustainable production Environment Animal welfare
Social justice
Food safety Environment Animal welfare Social Justice
Food safety
Processor
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
15
detrimental environmental impacts of farming operations,
reducing the use of chemical inputs and ensuring a responsible
approach to worker health and safety as well as animal welfare.
Natural beef is a private certification scheme developed in USA.
By official definition, natural beef is minimally processed,
without artificial ingredients and colors, and without
preservatives. However, in general responding to the consumer
demand in the market, natural beef is raised without antibiotics or
growth hormones and ionophores (Acevedo, et al., 2006).
Grass-fed beef4 is produced from cattle raised only on pasture
their entire lives. Antibiotics and growth promoters may be given
to the animals, but most producers restrict the use of antibiotics
and hormones.
Table 2.7 Comparing types of existing beef certification
Attributes Conventional beef Organic beef
Good Agricultural Practice Natural beef Grass-fed beef
Main market Europe/North America Europe USA USA
Certified scheme Public Private Private Private
Main Characteristics Profit driven Organic
production (non synthetic)
Retailer initiated Properly controlled
No use of antibiotic/ growth hormone in daily
feeds
Fed by grass only
Restricted to Organic crop for feed No Yes No No No
Antibiotics (therapeutic use) Yes No Yes Yes Optional
Antibiotics (subtherapeutics use) Yes No No No No
Hormones Yes No No No No Genetically modified feed source Yes No
Optional
1 Optional Optional
Ionophores Yes No - No No Pesticides Yes Restricted Restricted
Restricted Optional Herbicides Yes Restricted Restricted Restricted
Optional Synthetic fertilizers Yes Restricted Restricted Optional
Optional Vaccination Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Feedlots (grain) Yes
Restricted Restricted Optional No Modified from Acevedo, et al.,
2006. 1Compliance with Government legislation.
4 Since grain-fed cattle are fed with grain only at the
fattening stage, grass-fed is often said “grass-finished”.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
16
CHAPTER 3
REGULATIONS AND MARKET TRENDS FOR CERTIFIED BEEF
Four types of beef certification are described in Chapter 3:
organic, certified as good agricultural practice, natural, and
grass-fed beefs. Each certification scheme has different
requirements, and markets for these products vary in different
regions. This chapter provides a brief historical background of the
development of standards, the regulations related to importation,
and information concerning production and sales trends for
certified beef in North America (USA and Canada), Japan, and Europe
(the Netherlands).
3.1 Organic beef
3.1.1 Guidelines for International Organic Standards
There are two guidelines for international organic standards:
IFOAM Basic Principles and Basic Standards, developed by an
international Non Governmental Organizations (NGO), and Codex
Alimentarius, developed by an inter-governmental organization.
(1) IFOAM Basic Principles and Basic Standards
The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement
(IFOAM) is an international organization promoting organic
agriculture worldwide. IFOAM aims to harmonize standards developed
by private and voluntary organizations and has a major influence on
the development of national regulations related to organic beef
production (Harris, et al., 2003). IFOAM sets up minimum standards
that provide a basis for developing more specific production
standards by each local organization. IFOAM standards became a
basis for many NGO/private standards. Certifiers in Europe,
including Soil Association in the UK, Bio Suisse in Switzerland,
and KRAV in Sweden, to a certain extent rely on the IFOAM Basic
Standards for their approval of imports. IFOAM organic standards
are based on four principles or dimensions, namely health, ecology,
fairness and care.
Table 3.1 Four dimensions of Organic Agriculture principles
Dimension Description Health Sustain and enhance the health of the
soil, plants, animals, humans, and the planet as one and
indivisible. Ecology Work with, emulate and help sustain living
ecological systems and cycles Fairness Build relationships that
ensure fairness with regard to the common environment and life
opportunities Care Manage operations in a precautionary and
responsible manner to protect the health and well-being
of current and future generations and of the environment.
Adopted from Juma, M. A. 2007
(2) The Codex Organic Guidelines
The Codex Alimentarius commission, an international trade
commission, is operated under the auspices of Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO), and sets
food safety standards for 168 nations. The commission's main aims
are stated as being to protect the health of consumers and ensure
fair practices in international food trade. The Codex Alimentarius
is recognized by the World Trade Organization as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
17
an international reference point for the resolution of disputes
concerning food safety and consumer protection. At its foundation
in 1994, the WTO accepted the standards of the Codex, and by the
end of 2009, all member countries of the WTO will be required to
implement the Codex, “to harmonize the standards” for the global
trade of foods. The Codex Organic Guidelines serve as an
international reference for the development of regional organic
standards, and therefore foster harmonization of all the
standards.
3.1.2 Organic Standards and Regulations for importing organic
beef
Organic agriculture is legally defined in most developed
countries. Thus it is illegal to sell organic products with an
“organic” label that have not been properly certified. In order to
export “organic” beef to developed countries, products need to be
certified following the standards of each country. The regulations
of developed countries allow accredited certifiers to certify farms
in developing countries.
(1) United States
In the USA, the National Organic Program (NOP) was initiated in
2002 based on the Organic Food Production Act (OFPA) which passed
Congress in 1990. As a general rule the National Organic Standards
require that organic products to be sold are certified by an agent
accredited by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Farms whose
annual sales of organic products are less than US $5,000 are
exempted from USDA certification (and are allowed to use the term
“organic” without labeling). All natural substances are allowed to
be used, but no synthetic substances are allowed except for those
listed in the National List of Allowed Synthetic and Prohibited
Non-Synthetic Substances. The details of NOP standards are
described in Table 3.3.
Imported organic products may be sold in the USA if they are
recognized by USDA through certification by accredited agents in
the exporting countries. Accredited agents are recognized by USDA
when the foreign governments of the agents are able to assess and
accredit certifying agents as required by NOP.
As of 2008, there are 95 accredited certifying agents (domestic
55 and foreign 40). There are 19 countries that have certifying
agents recognized by NOP. Most of these countries are found in
Europe and Latin America: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium,
Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, Germany, Greece, Guatemala,
Israel, Italy, Mexico, the Netherlands, Peru, Spain, Switzerland,
and Turkey.
(2) Canada
In Canada, the National Organic Standards were developed in
1999. Originally the standards were voluntary rather than
mandatory, but in 2006, in order to obtain access to foreign
markets, mandatory standards were introduced.
The revised National Organic Standards, to be known as the
Canadian Organic Production Systems Standard, comprises
CAN/CGSB-32.310 Organic Production Systems General Principles and
Management Standards and CAN/CGSB-32.311 Organic Production Systems
- Permitted Substances List. The Canadian standards are based on
the guideline developed by the Codex Alimentarius commission for
the “Production, processing, marketing and labeling of organically
produced food”. The Standard Council of Canada uses ISO 65 for the
basis of accreditation.
Currently in Canada, organic products can be produced and sold
with or without certification. National Census results show 16,132
farms, or 7.0% of all Canadian farms, reported producing organic
products for sale in 2006 (Table 3.2). Seventy-four percent of
farms that produce or plan to produce organic products are not
certified. This percentage is particularly high in livestock
production, representing approximately 90% of producers (6,380
farms) (Figure 3.1). In Canada mandatory regulations for organic
products are expected to be in place by the middle of 2009. After
the enactment of the regulations, organic products traded
inter-provincially will need to be certified.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispute
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
18
Table 3.2 Farms producing organic products, by certification
status, Canada, 2006 Certification status Number of farms reporting
Percentage of all farms in Canada
Organic but not certified 11,937 5.2%
Certified organic 3,555 1.5%
Transitional 640 0.3%
Total 16,132 7.0% Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census of
Agriculture.
Figure 3.1 Organic status and organic products, Canada, 2006
After the enactment of the organic regulations, all organic
products for sale in Canada must be certified according to the
Canadian standards and accredited by an accreditation body
recognized by the Canadian Organic Office (COO). Canadian Organic
Standards are directly controlled by the organic sector. The
General Standards Board, and committees on organic agriculture and
industry representatives are arranging standards and regulations by
harmonizing with the national regulations, and clarify guidelines
within the standards. The contents of Canadian Organic Standards
include: regulation scope, import requirements, labeling
requirements, and the roles and responsibilities of certifying
bodies, accreditation bodies, and the Canadian Organic Office.
(3) European Union
Organic farming (called biological farming in Europe) is a large
movement throughout Europe based on the extensive use of natural
processes, including the partial or total substitution of chemical
fertilizers and insecticides. Most EU countries have organic
farming on more than a few percent of the total of cultivated lands
(Figure 3.2).
In the EU, production certification for organic beef is governed
by Regulation (EEC) 2092.91 (Table 3.3). Non-EU countries can be
legally registered as granted third-country status (Article 11) in
order to operate production rules and systems of inspection
equivalent to those within the EU. As of 2008, these countries
include Argentina, Australia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Hungary,
India, Israel, New Zealand, and Switzerland, but
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
19
organic livestock imports are allowed only from Argentina,
Switzerland, and New Zealand. Import authorization must be obtained
for each importing country; however, once imported, organic
products may be re-exported to other EU countries without further
authorization.
Traceability is required for any organic food by having proper
documentation and records of the products. Any stage of packing or
processing if the products are mixed with other products, the
operation is subject to further inspection as required for the
primary production. In the UK, certification bodies aiming to
achieve higher standards must be approved by UKROFS (United Kingdom
Register of Organic Food Standards).
Political agenda for organic agriculture in the Netherlands
The political agenda to increase availability of organic
products is in progress. In the Netherlands, in order to strengthen
the organic food chain, the 3rd Covenant Market Developments of
Organic Agriculture5 was agreed between the government and the
representatives of trade and industry in the beginning of 2008. The
contents of the agreement include the recognition of 10% of market
share for organic products, collective promotion, reduction of the
cost of conversion for producers, stimulation of exports and
imports, research, product innovation, and the interaction between
members of organic sector and those with sustainable development
initiatives. The management of organic chain to match supply and
demand as well as promotion has already started. The covenant
covers the period until the end of 2011.
Labels and requirements for organic beef in the Netherlands
In the Netherlands there are two organic labels: the EKO-Label
and the Demeter-Label. The EKO-Label designates official
certification recognized by the EU and the Dutch government. The
Demeter-Label is a private certification that has stricter
standards than the EKO-Label. Thus, products with the Demeter-Label
are always sold with an EKO-Label.
EKO-Label
The most well known eco-labelling in the Netherlands is the
EKO-label. This label belongs to SKAL, an organization that
provides official certificates for farms with organic agriculture.
The production protocols are as follows.
• The switching period for permanent grassland is 2 years. For
cows meant for meat production, a switching period of 1 year is
maintained. For dairy cattle: ½ year.
• Cattle must always have free access to grassland if weather,
soil, and health-conditions allow. Stock-rate should prevent
overgrazing. For bulls > 1 year grazing is not compulsory, but
they must have an individual space of at least 30 m² per
animal.
• Animals brought into the farm must be of organic origin.
Animals at the beginning of the switching-period can stay after
permission from SKAL. For breeding, males can be brought in, on
condition that they are kept organically afterwards.
• In stables, enough daylight and natural ventilation has to be
available. Half of the total surface must be fully closed. Every
animal must be able to lie down dry and clean on a bed of natural
sawdust.
• All feed has to be of organic origin. Nutritional calculations
have to be based on dry matter content. Calculations take place
over a period of a year. A minimum 60 % of a daily ration has to be
silage. Silage from traditional farms can never be used. Natural
milk is fed to calves.
• Homeopathic medicaments are preferred. Under guidance of a vet
a traditional medicine can be used. Preventive use of
synthetic-based medicines and antibiotics is forbidden, just as
growth hormones and the like. After using medicine a waiting period
of twice the legal period is demanded or at least 48 hours, before
any product is delivered to consumers. Twice a year antibiotics can
be used. Vaccinations and obligatory treatments are not counted as
such, nor is treatment against parasites.
• Manure has to be of organic origin. Manure from traditional
farms is allowed. Liquid manure has to be fermented, diluted,
aired. No more animals are allowed than the equivalent to produce
170 kg N/ha. However, more animals
5 Often called Biological agriculture in Europe.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
20
are allowed if the manure is transported to an organic farm.
Demeter-Label
A less common label is the Demeter-Label. The production
protocols are as follows.
• Maximum livestock: 2/hectare. Maximum livestock rate allowed
is as high as the equivalent of 112 N/hectare. • Sawdust needs to
be of organic origin. • Minimum 25 Lux of stable daylight is
required. • No cutting of horns. • Bulls born from
embryo-transplantation are not allowed to be used.
(4) Japan
In Japan, a Guideline for organic agricultural products was
issued in 1992, and Organic JAS (Japan Agriculture Standards) was
introduced in 1999. Upon the establishment of Organic JAS, all
agricultural products to be labeled “Organic” are obliged to be
inspected and certified by designated organizations.
Following the BSE incident in 2001, food safety became a major
issue in Japan. The modification of the JAS Law in 2005 was aimed
at reinforcing the Traceability Law put in force in December 2003,
focusing on the dissemination of information on beef during the
production process. The Traceability Law covers not only the
production process, but also distribution and retailing. The new
stipulation on organic livestock products was introduced in 2004 in
response to rising consumer awareness about healthier food and
international initiatives represented by the establishment of the
Codex Guideline on organic livestock products in 2001.
The JAS label can be accorded to foreign products as long as
they fulfill the standards required and are certified by designated
organizations. The JAS Law’s stipulation on labeling demands that
all food products indicate the name of the product, the raw
materials, the ingredients, and the place of origin.
There are fifteen registered certifying organizations for
organic beef in Japan, and nine of them can certify producers in
foreign countries. The developing countries that have registered
certifying organizations include Ukraine, South Korea, Chile,
Vanuatu, and Mexico.
(5) Argentina
ARGENCERT is a private company established in Argentina in 1991
with inspection and certification as main objectives. ARGENCERT was
recognized as an organic certifier by a number of government
programs and private organizations, including the EEC, the National
Organic Program of the United States, Japan Agricultural Standards,
CARTV (Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes
valorisants) of Québec, Canada, SAG (Agriculture and Livestock
Service) of Chile, KRAV of Sweden, Soil Association of UK, and
IFOAM.
ARGENCERT certifies a wide range of products (apples, pears,
oils, beef, grains, wine, honey, etc.) that are traded worldwide.
ARGENCERT carries ISO 65/EN 45011 accreditation, granted by DAP,
2002. ARGENCERT certifies products produced in Argentina, Chile,
Paraguay, Portugal, Nepal, and Vietnam, and products it certifies
are sold in the European Union, Russia, Greece, USA, Canada, Japan,
Australia, Israel, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Ecuador, Chile,
Malaysia, and South Africa.
(6) Costa Rica and Nicaragua
In Costa Rica regulations for organic beef were prepared in 1999
but never approved, owing to difficulties in farm operations. In
Nicaragua, the organic beef project initiated by USAID (2003-2006)
also was not successful, owing to a lack of demand and incentives
for farmers.
3.1.3 Comparison of Organic Standards
Organic standards regulate the details of farm activities for
animal husbandry, including conversion, breeding, health
management, facility and general management, soil amendment
methods, pest/weed control, feed, housing conditions for animals,
and so on (Table 3.3).
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
21
The regulations are changeable through political dialogue
between consumers and producers. In order to encourage trade of
organic products, harmonization of standards is expected. In
general, embryo transfer, hormonal treatment for reproduction, and
use of genetically modified products are not allowed. The
distinctive characteristics are summarized as follows.
• US NOP standards have exemption for small farms with sales
less than US $5,000 • Categories of percentage of organic contents
for above 95%, between 70-95% are found in US, Canadian,
and IFOAM standards • Environmental considerations provide only
general description about ecological balance, biodiversity
conservation, soil conservation, etc. • Only IFOAM standards
have a minimum farm supply of 50% (at least 50% of animal feed
needs to be
supplied from the source in the farm. • Embryo transfer is not
mentioned in US standards • Compost is required in US and Japanese
standards • Social justice is mentioned in IFOAM standards but not
in others.
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS International.
promote environmental sustainability in association with CATIE of
beef system
22
Table 3.3 Comparison of Organic Standards Item CODEX Third
Edition EU REG 834/2007 USA NOP Title 7
Chapter 94 2007 Canada
32.310-2006 Japan IFOAM Basic
Standards Objective/Description Guideline by commission
for international trade and harmonization
Official Standards by EU council
Official Standards by USA Federal government
Official Standards by Canadian Federal government
Official Standards by Japanese government
Guideline by international NGO for harmonization and to develop
own standards worldwide
Categorization of Labeling
Not mentioned At least 95% organic
100% organic, 95% organic, 70-95% organic, 70% organic
ingredient
95% organic, 70-95% organic, >70% for organic ingredient
At least 95% is certified organic, 70% contents (organic may
appear in ingredient list)
Exemption Smaller farm annual sales less than US$ 5,000 (use
word “organic” as non certified (no label)
Conversion Conversion of land/pasture
3 years (12 months with decision of authority)
12 months (generally two years for annuals and three years for
perennials, with some exceptions)
3 years 3 years 2 years before seeding (3 years before harvest
for perennial crops)
Simultaneously with animal’s conversion
Conversion, Cattle 12 months, at least 3/4 of life span
organically managed
12 months Managed organically from last trimester of
gestation
For dairy cattle 12 months. (80% organic first 9months, 100%
organic last 3months )
Managed organically from last trimester of gestation
12 months (breeding stock)
For dairy cattle 12 months. (80% organic first 9months, 100%
organic last 3months )
12months, at least 3/4 of life span organically managed
Meat 12 months, Dairy 90 days
Breeding Breeding general Adaptation to local
conditions. Adaptable choice for environment
Traceable Conventional up to
Purchased not in the last third of gestation period
Adapted to local conditions
Mother Organically managed 6 months before gestation
Less than 12 months old, lighter than 300-340kg varied
Adaptable choice for environment
Traceable organic farms; conventional
-
Pre-Feasibility of product certification to RECS
International