Abstract
Official organic regulation in Europe is based on the third-party certification system to guarantee organic products. Many critics and dissatisfactions have motivated the emergence of other guarantee systems, based on an intense implication of producers and, in some cases, consumers and other local actors, involved in localised agri-food systems. They are called Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS), and are not recognised as valid guarantee systems by the official organic regulation. In the present paper, we analyse the main differences between the PGS and the third party certification system, deepening on their differentiated social and political implications. We conclude that the procedures behind PGS generate numerous positive impacts in the territories related to local producers (and consumers) empowerment and localised agri-food systems drive, while their implications make them not considered as a substitute to third party certification system, unless certain conditions of social consolidated groups and agroecological and food sovereignty perspective of food system take place.
Highlights
The European Union (EU) began regulating the organic sector in 1991
Official organic regulation in Europe is based on the third-party certification system to guarantee organic products
We conclude that the procedures behind Participatory Guarantee Systems (PGS) generate numerous positive impacts in the territories related to local producers empowerment and localised agri-food systems drive, while their implications make them not considered as a substitute to third party certification system, unless certain conditions of social consolidated groups and agroecological and food sovereignty perspective of food system take place
Summary
The European Union (EU) began regulating the organic sector in 1991. Via a series of public regulations, the production and marketing of organic products were defined, standardised, and subject to inspection throughout the EU. The certifying body cannot disseminate any information on the producers it inspects or their production methods, which means that, in cases of non-compliance, the specifics of the evaluation are not made public The consequence of this state of affairs is that the organic sector displays certain characteristics typical of globalised agri-food systems, namely a concentration of power and the limited participation of important stakeholders, such as producers and consumers, in decision-making [8]. National conferences have taken place in countries such as China, South Africa, Lao PDR, the Philippines, Burma, and Spain In certain countries, such as Mexico [23] and Brazil [24,25], civil society has actively and successfully lobbied the government to include PGS-based certification in national regulations related to organic production. We suggest that this trend has important social and political implications because any organic producers who do not obtain third-party certification will not be officially recognised and will face major limitations as they seek to develop their businesses, whether in terms of marketing (they will be excluded from all officially organic certified supply chains, for instance) or in terms of public support (they will be excluded from public organic food procurement programs, for instance)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
