Institut für Agrarsoziologie und Beratungswesen der Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen ECO-FRIENDLY AND ORGANIC FARMING IN BANGLADESH – INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND LOCAL PRACTICE Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrads im Fachbereich 09 Agrarwissenschaften, Ökotrophologie und Umweltmanagement der Justus Liebig Universität Gießen Eingereicht von: Md. Nazmul Hoque Betreut von: Prof. Dr. Hermann Boland Prof. Dr. Günter Leithold Giessen, Mai 2012 i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am thankful to ALMIGHTY ALLAH who bestowed upon me His blessings and gave me the knowledge, strength, and ability to accomplish this huge task with an objective to serve humanity around the world. I am highly grateful to my supervisor Professor Dr. Hermann Boland, whose consistent supervision, motivation, useful suggestions, and critical comments helped me to improve my work from time to time and finally it is published as a book in its present shape. His keen interest in my research work and new ideas proved the torch of success for me while working under his supervision. I am also thankful to Professor Dr. Günter Leithold, my second supervisor who read my work and gave me useful suggestions on the last draft of my thesis. I am also thanking to Prof. Dr. Hammadur Rahman, my local supervisor who supervise and gave me suggestion about data collection. I am highly indebted to Dr. Kazi Farooq Ahmed, President, Proshika, Director (Natural Resource) Kazi Khaze Alam, Mir Mahbubur Rahman, Director, Proshika, Dipok Kumar Gosh, Proshika, Deputy Director for his logistical support and advice during my data collection in Bangladesh. I am highly indebted to Farida Akter, Executive Director, UBINIG, Mr. Abdus Sobahan, consultant, UBINIG, Dr. Monirul Haque Nakvi, Director, Integrated Horticulture Management Project, BADC, Dr. Shamsul Alam, Dr. Abdul Momen, Mr. Monirul Haque, DAE, Dr. Nazim Uddin, BARI, Mr. Sajjad Hossain, Kazi and Kazi Tea est., Prof. Dr. M. A Momen Miah for their extreme support on me that helped me to achieve PhD in Germany. I am also grateful to Dr. Henrike Rieken, Stephanie Hoy for their useful suggestions in the analysis. I am extremely grateful to my relatives Taneeza (Michigan, USA) and Samir Islam (Washington, USA) who read and checks the mistakes of my work as native speakers. Thanks go to my beloved friend Phillip Musyoka for his proof reading of the work despite his own time limitation. I am very much thankful to my dear friends and colleagues Tyseer Omer, Huong Kiew, Khalid Siddig, Tarig Gibreel, Manjunath Arhali, Puran Mal, Asif Reza Anik, Sonam Wangchuk, Abdelatief, Martha Oumer, Ujjal Tiwari for their appreciative mental and positive support. They helped me whenever I needed, without arranging any scheduled time. I am highly indebted to the inhabitants and respondents of the study area who helped me to get proper information, continuously supporting and appreciating me as a researcher. I have no words to express the greatness of my beloved parents (Md. Abul Kashem Sharker & Shamsun Nahar) who gave effort and sacrificed a lot to educate me. I am greatly indebted to my brothers Advocate Shamsul Alam, Md. Robiul Karim Selim, Shafiul Alam who always encourages me for my higher study. I am grateful to my wife Dr. Sadika Haque whose patience, mental support and sacrifice enabled me to complete my PhD work. I extend special words of affection and thanks to my daughters Shafia and Sadia who missed my love and care during my very busy study period. Finally I am thankful to all of my friends and colleagues in Giessen for their cooperation and help during my stay in Germany. I am also grateful to Frau Lotze and Dr. Evelina Budjurova for their full sincere help and support. The friendship and moral support of Md. Anisur Rahman, Mrs. Beate Rahman, Mrs. Meera Chakrabarty, Mr. Bernd Klose and Mrs. Sigi Klose are worth mentioning. Thanks are also extended to Mr. Humayun Kabir, Mr. Salauddin Palash, Shameema Akter, Arefa Bhabi, Sadia Bhabi, Mrs. Mukta Khan, Mr.Nesar Uddin, Mr. Shimul and all other friends for their help and nice company in Giessen. Last but not least, all those individuals and organizations that supported this work in any way that I cannot memorize now are also acknowledged. Md. Nazmul Hoque Giessen, Germany March, 2012 ii Dedicated to my parents iii Table of Contents Acknowledgement i Dedication ii Table of Contents iii List of Tables vi List of Figures vi List of Appendices vi Acronyms and Abbreviations vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background and problem statement 1 1.2 Justification of the study 5 1.3 Questions addressed in this research 6 1.4 Objectives of the study 6 1.5 Outline of the study 7 CHAPTER 2 DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 8 2.1 History of organic farming 8 2.2 Organic farming 10 2.3 Current status of organic agriculture 11 2.4 Certification of organic product 13 2.5 Standard and regulations of organic farming in the world 14 2.5.1 IFOAM Basic standards 15 2.5.2 EU regulation on organic agriculture 16 2.5.3 The Codex Alimentarius Guidelines 17 2.5.4 National Organic Programme (NOP) of USDA 18 2.5.5 Japanese Agricultural Standard 19 2.5.6 Organic standards of Australia 20 2.5.7 Organic standards of China and India 21 2.6 When certification is important 22 2.7 Does organic agriculture provide lower yield and return? 22 2.8 Who are the consumers of organic products? 26 2.9 Relationship between natural disaster, biodiversity and organic farming 27 2.10 Conclusion 28 CHAPTER 3 POLICIES AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFORT TOWARDS ORGANIC MOVEMENT IN BANGLADESH 29 3.1 Agriculture in Bangladesh: at a glance 29 3.2 Brief review of agricultural Policies in Bangladesh 31 3.3 Agricultural Extension Services in Bangladesh 34 3.4 NGOs Participation in extension services 37 3.5 Participation of the private sectors 38 3.6 The problematic issues of extension services 38 3.7 Effort of GO and NGOs towards organic farming 39 3.7.1 Effort from government level 40 3.7.2 Efforts on organic farm management from NGO level 42 3.7 Marketing status of organic products 48 3.8 Previous relevant available literature in Bangladesh perspective 48 3.9 Conclusion 49 iv CHAPTER 4 DATA AND METHODOLOGY 50 4.1 Research design and rationale 50 4.2 Qualitative research method 51 4.3 Research process 52 4.3.1 The role of the researcher 52 4.3.2 Data 53 4.3.3 Sampling key informants 53 4.3.4 Data sources and collection 58 4.3.4.1 Document data 59 4.3.4.2 Interview data 59 4.3.4.3 Observation data 60 4.3.5 Data analysis 62 4.4 Conclusion 65 CHAPTER 5 CLASSIFICATION OF ORGANIC AND ECO-FRIENDLY FARMING 66 5.1 Similarities and dissimilarities among international standards 69 5.1.1 Choice of crops and varieties 70 5.1.2 Length of conversion period 70 5.1.3 Diversity in crop production 71 5.1.4 Soil fertility and fertilization 71 5.1.5 Pest, disease, weed and growth management 73 5.1.6 Avoiding contamination 74 5.2 Organic and eco-friendly practices in Bangladesh 76 5.2.1 Practices followed in eco-friendly or organic farming in Bangladesh 78 5.2.1.1 PROSHIKA 78 5.2.1.2 UBINIG’s principles and Nayakrishi farmers’ practice 81 5.2.1.3 Community Development Association 83 5.2.1.4 Kazi and Kazi tea farm, only certified organic farm in Bangladesh 84 5.2.1.5 Dhamrai Dairy, an integrated farm 85 5.2.2 Initiatives from government level 85 5.3 Comparing the local and international standards 90 5.4 Conclusion 93 CHAPTER 6 BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN THE WAY OF ORGANIC PRACTICE IN BANGLADESH 94 6.1 Introduction 94 6.2 Barriers to promote organic farming 94 6.2.1 Barriers from policy level 94 6.2.2 Input related problems 96 6.2.3 Problems of marketing of organic products 101 6.3 Possibility and opportunities of organic farming in Bangladesh 103 6.3.1 Organic farming and food security 103 6.3.2 Cost-return- profit-benefit-yield issues 107 6.3.3 Crop diversification in Bangladesh 109 6.3.4 Role of research organizations 109 6.3.5 Increasing price of chemical fertilizer 110 6.4 Analytical suggestions to implement organic/ eco-friendly farming 110 6.4.1 Promotion of local varieties 110 6.4.2 Use of less chemical pesticides 111 v 6.4.3 Increase soil fertility 112 6.4.4 Develop proper marketing system 113 6.4.5 Consumers’ awareness 115 6.4.6 Proposed adoption process for organic farming 115 6.4.7 Policy option regarding agricultural extension 116 6.5 Conclusion 117 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION OF THE STUDY AND POLICY RELEVANCE 119 7.1 Background and problem statement 119 7.2 Research design 119 7.3 Results and findings 120 7.3.1 Classification arrangement of organic and eco-friendly farming 120 7.3.2 Practices followed in eco-friendly or organic farming in Bangladesh 121 7.3.3 Barriers to promote organic practice in Bangladesh 122 7.3.4 Possibilities of organic farming 123 7.4 Policy Implications 123 CHAPTER 8 SUMMARY (ENGLISH AND GERMAN) 126 8.1 Summary (English) 126 8.2 Zusammenfassung (German Summary) 128 REFERENCES 136 APPENDICES 155 vi Lists of tables Table 2.1 Continent wise area, no. of producers and leading countries of organic farming 12 Table 3.1 Basic facts of Bangladesh Agriculture 30 Table 3.2 Utilization of land in Bangladesh for the production of different crops and groups of crops in 2010-2011 30 Table 3.3 Public sector organizations extension and advisory services 36 Table 4.1 Steps followed in inductive coding process of qualitative data 63 Table 5.1 Difference between organic and eco-friendly farming 68 Table 5.2 Comparison and special features of different international standards of organic practices 75 Table 5.3 Comparison of different local standards of organic practices 92 Table 6.1 Probable benefits of organic agriculture 103 Table 6.2 An example of two brothers (one of them is practicing Nayakrishi 108 Lists of figures Figure 1.1 Vicious circle of food production in conventional system 3 Figure 1.2 Systematically process of sustainable development 3 Map 2.1 Land under organic management by region 2007 12 Figure 3.1 Organizational structure of DAE 37 Figure 3.2 Framework depicting public, private and NGO partnership 39 Figure 4.1 Snowball sampling of selection of key informants 57 Figure 4.2 Information about Data Sources 61 Figure 4.3 Steps of data analysis procedure 64 Figure 4.4 Categorization of data to compare organic and eco-friendly standards 65 Figure 5.1 Classification of organic agriculture 66 Figure 5.2 Simplified classification of different types of farming regarding environmental compatibility 67 Figure 5.3 Organizational structure of eco-friendly farming in Bangladesh 77 Figure 5.4 Main crop production practices of Proshika and UBINIG 83 Figure 6.1 Major barriers of organic farming 95 Figure 6.2 Influence of govt policy on farmers’ decision to use hybrid seed 97 Figure 6.3 Vicious circle of imbalanced fertilizer application and decrease in production 98 Figure 6.4 A way to food security through organic farming (farm family will get all necessary items whole of the year) 106 Figure 6.5 Proposed activities of different actors of pesticides (to stop chemicals) 112 Figure 6.6 Quality control system to develop consumer trust on organic/ eco food 114 Figure 6.7 Example of local organic product marketing system 114 Lists of appendices Appendix 1 Key Informant Interview Guide for GO/ NGO Officials 157 Appendix 2 Interview Guide for Community Leader/Influential Farmers 159 Appendix 3 Name, description and coding of key informants 161 Appendix 4 Transcriptopn of raw data 162 vii Abbreviations and explanation of terminology Abbreviations Acronyms ADCs Area Development Centres AFSP Agriculture and Food Security Project AGÖL Arbeitsgemeinschaft Oekologischer Landbau (League of Organic Agricultural Associations) ANOG Arbeitsgemeinschaft fuer naturnahen Obst-, Gemuese- und Feldfrucht- Anbau-(1962); At the beginning, its member farms are of vegetables, fruit, and crops, but now there are animal farms joining in it. Although the number of member farms grows slowly, the average area of member farms has increased most quickly ASPS Agricultural Sector Programme Support BADC Bangladesh Agricultural Development Corporation BARC Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council BARCIK Bangladesh Resource Center for Indigenous Knowledge BARI Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute BBS Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics BFA Bangladesh Fertilizer Association BPH Brown Plant Hopper BRRI Bangladesh Rice Research Institute BSFB Brinjal Shoot and Fruit Borer BWDB Bangladesh Water Development Board CAP Common Agricultural Policy CARE Cooperative for American Relief Everywhere CCPR The Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues CDA Community Development Association Codex Alimentarius Developed as a common instrument of FAO und WHO in 1962 with the aim of protecting consumer health and ensuring honest practices in food international trading by working out international food standards. DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane DFID Department for International Development DoF Department of Fisheries EAP Ecological Agricultural Program ECRRP The Emergency 2007 Cyclone Recovery and Restoration Project EPA Environmental Protection Agency ETL Economic Threshold Level EU European Union FAO Food and Agricultural Organization FFS Farmers’ Field School FFS Farmers' Field Schools FGD Focus Group Discussion FiBL Forschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Switzerland) FTs Farmer Trainers GAP Good Agricultural Practices GDP Gross Domestic Product GDR German Democratic Republic GMO Genetically-Modified Organisms GNP Gross National Product viii Abbreviations Acronyms GoB Government of Bangladesh GTZ German Society for Technical Cooperation and Development, Germany GTZ Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit Ha Hectare HACCP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point HDRA Henry Doubleday Research Association HYV High Yielding Varity ICM Integrated Crop Management ICS Internal Control System IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development IFDC International Fertilizer Development Centre IFM Integrated Farm management IFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IMF International Monetary Fund IMO The Institute for Market ecology (IMO) is your specialist in quality assurance of eco-friendly products, organic agriculture and management systems. IOAS International Organic Accreditation Service IPM Integrated Pest Management IROCB International Requirements for Organic Certification Bodies of the ITF IRRI International Rice Research Institute ISO International Organization for Standardization ISOFAR International Society for Organic Farming Research ITC International Trade Centre, Geneva, Switzerland ITF International Task Force JAS Japan Agricultural Standard KRAV KRAV is a key player in the organic market in Sweden since 1985. We develop organic standards and promote the KRAV-label. LEISA Low-external-input and-sustainable-agriculture MDG Millennium Development Goal MLE Maximum Likelihood Estimator MLIs Multi Lateral Institutions MoA Ministry of Agriculture MOAN Mediterranean Organic Agriculture Network, Italy MP Murate of Potash MPO Master Plan Organisation MRL Maximum Residual Limit NAP National Agricultural Policy NAP National Agriculture Policy NARC National Agricultural Research Centers NARS National Agricultural Research System NASAA The National Association for Sustainable Agriculture Australia NEAP New Agricultural Extension Policy NGO Non-government organization NOGAMU National Organic Agricultural Movement of Uganda NOP National Organic Program of the United States NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation NORSOK Norwegian Research Institute for Organic Agriculture NOSB US National Organic Standards Board (USA) ix Abbreviations Acronyms OA Organic Agriculture OCIA Crop Improvement Association Oekosiegel Oekosiege Although Oekosiegel has only 16 member farms in the Northern Germany; it is a well-organized organic agricultural association. OFA The Organic Federation of Australia OMRI organic materials Review Institute PCCS Producer- Consumers’ Cooperative Society PGR Plant Genetic Resource PGS Participatory Guarantee System PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper RFLDC Regional Fisheries and Livestock Development Components SARE Sustainable Agricultural Research and Education SGS SGS S.A. (formerly Société Générale de Surveillance) is a multinational company headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland which provides inspection, verification, testing and certification services. SOEL Stiftung Oekologie und Landbau SÖL Stiftung Ökologie & Landbau SPPS Strengthening Plant Protection Services sq km Square kilometres Standards Controllable, binding minimum norms TOT Training of Trainers TPC Third Party Certification TSP Triple Super Phosphate UBINIG Policy Research for Development Alternatives UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development UNDP United Nations Development Program UNEP United Nations Environmental Program UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization USA United States of America USDA United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, US, www.usda.gov WB World Bank WSDA The Washington State Department of Agriculture WTO World Trade Organization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_corporation� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inspection� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verification_and_validation� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_test� http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certification� INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background and problem statement Bangladesh is officially known as the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. The country is situated in the southern part of Asia, bordered on the west, north and east by India, on the southeast by Myanmar, on the south by the Bay of Bengal. Geographically the land of the country is an exceedingly flat, low-lying, alluvial plain where 230 rivers and rivulets have passed through (with a total length of 24,140) and has a coastline of about 580 km along the bank of the Bay of Bengal, 7% of its land which is permanently lies under water, (BBS, 2007; CIA, 2008 in Haque, 2011; Rahman and Schmitz, 2007). It occupies the eastern part of the former Bengal province of British- ruled Indian subcontinent (1757-1947) and was subsequently East Pakistan until 1971. It achieved independence from Pakistan in 1971 following a bloody liberation war, (Rossette, 2006; Islam, 2003 in Haque, 2011). Bangladesh is one of the most densely populated countries in the world with more than 155 million people. Due to its very small territory (147,570 square kilometers), the amount of additional land available to be brought into cultivation is very limited (BBS, 2006). The country has 8.20 million hectare arable land against the huge population (Hassan, 2011). The land area is steadily decreasing due to its population growth, rapid industrialization and infrastructural development. As a result, the amount of per capita land declined from 0.13 hectare in 1960 to 0.06 hectare in 2000. However, agriculture plays a pivotal role in overall economic development of the country. More than 70% of the population depends on agriculture (Jensen, 2000). To ensure food for the giant population, ‘green revolution’ was appeared in 1960s with the concept of ‘producing more food’ and within very short period, it was implemented in Bangladesh like other Asian countries. It has created a terrible stress on limited land resources. New crop varieties (HYV), as well as chemical fertilizers, pesticides and groundwater irrigation were introduced. As a result, urgent need of more grain production has achieved, especially rice production has increased by many times and Bangladesh has achieved food self sufficiency within a very short period. A suicidal policy of just extraction of soil was followed, while soil fertility conservation issue was totally ignored (Charkarborty, 2008). Before the introduction of chemicals, Bangladesh agriculture was fully dependent on the organic sources of fertilizers (animal manure, crop residues and domestic wastes) to fertile the land. In 1960s, with the introduction of green revolution, to follow former agricultural policy - to meet the demand of food for increasing population, some farmers started to use chemical fertilizers. Some of them used both chemical and organic fertilizers and some of them didn’t adopt chemicals fertilizers due to conservativeness or lack of infrastructural facility (Hossain, 2001). Within a decade, farmers, scientists and environmentalists felt that though rice production has increased, but continuous application of synthetic fertilizers and other chemicals had INTRODUCTION 2 created many problems such as topsoil depletion and degradation, reduced soil microbial activities, groundwater contamination. The use of chemicals is increasing over the years in Bangladesh but farmers are not getting as much production as they should have. In 1996, a total of $16 million (U.S.) in pesticides and $6 million in herbicides were sold in Bangladesh, and in 1999, a total of 13 million tons of chemical fertilizers were used (IRRI, 2007). During the green revolution, for example, 1 kg of added nitrogen fertilizer would produce 20 kg of grain, but now it only produces 8 to 10 kg (FAO, 2004). The recovery of nitrogenous fertilizers is only 50 to 60% and often as low as 15%. The unrecovered fertilizers and pesticides are often leached to groundwater supplies or transported in runoff to surface water. Declining productivity due to soil degradation is now a major constraint. It is said that a good soil should have an organic matter content of more than 3.5%, but in Bangladesh most soils have less than 1.7%, and some soils have even less than 1% organic matter (BARC, 1997). Thus, the indiscriminate uses of chemical inputs has been considered as the foremost reason for stagnating or declining crop productivity, loss of bio-diversity and have threatened the sustainability of agriculture, affecting the quality and safety of produce and health and well being of humanity. Different scientific researches and developments in the field of conventional agriculture were initiated. The findings reveal that to cope with the ever-growing food demand, most of the farmers meet their immediate needs but at the expense of external costs (degradation of many kinds, environmental, social and economical). The unequal access to food and the whole system is falling on as vicious circle of food production (Fig. 1.1). At the same time, because of increased use and price of agricultural inputs, costs of production have increased and, agriculture becomes currently a non-profitable enterprise (Rasul and Thapa, 2004). As a result, the number of family farms is declining. It seems that the system of conventional agriculture is anti-nature and cannot sustain for long time. Since 1990s, the issue of sustainability became an important concern in agriculture due to yield stagnant and many other negative effects. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), "Sustainable agriculture is the successful management of agricultural resources to satisfy changing human needs while maintaining or enhancing the quality of environment and conserving natural resources". This concept emphasizes on the present needs without sacrificing the needs of future (Brundtland Commission, 1987). The sustainability of organic farming depends on the incorporation of the elements such as social, economic and environment (Lampkin, 1994; GOI, 2001; Michelsen, 2002 in Singh 2004). Bell and Morse (2003) defined sustainable development as a process which is respectful to the environment, technically appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable to meet the need for present generations without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs (Fig. 1.2). If natural resources for instance, soil INTRODUCTION 3 nutrients, water etc. are used up at a rate faster than the stock, then farming system is unsustainable. Economic growth Private profit Market expansion Externalize costs Carrying capacity Sustainable yield Resource conservation Biodiversity Community economic development Basic human needs Equity Participation Social accountability Appropriate technology Sustainable development CConservationism Deep ecology e Economic development Community development Ecological development INCREASING PRODUCTIVITY Use of chemicals, massive irrigation, excessive mechanical operation, monoculture VICIOUS CIRCLE Land degradation, soil erosion, decreased quality, loss of biodiversity, wildlife habitats destruction, disconnection of production and consumption, pollution DECREASING PRODUCTIVITY Figure 1.1 Vicious circle of food production in conventional system (Source: Aubree, 2006) Figure 1.2 Systematically process of sustainable development (Source: Bell and Morse, 2003 in Aubree, 2006) INTRODUCTION 4 The people all over the world are expressing great concern over the indiscriminate use of chemicals. Therefore, emphasis is now focussed on the use of organic and other by products of agriculture and industries (Mishra, 2005). Scientific researches have proved that the reduction or non-use of synthetic chemicals can reduce environmental hazards and possible adverse effects. In contrast to synthetic fertilizers, organic fertilizers could improve the physical, chemical and biological properties of soil, and its use is important in sustaining soil productivity in the long term (Rahman, 2007; Banglapedia, 2004). Reflecting on excessive, unscientific and imbalance use of chemical inputs, agricultural scientists, environmentalists and policy makers are now advocating the introduction of low input sustainable agriculture, ecological farming, eco-friendly agriculture and integrated intensive farming system – those are mainly based on the-principle of integration of both organic and inorganic farming systems so as to acquire the target of agricultural production without causing severe environmental problems (Buddhibhuvaneswari, 2005). Eco-friendly agriculture may be a good choice as cost-effective method that can trim down rural poverty and curb pollution. It is also the need in the present day context of serious threat to our ecology and environment (Patil et al., 2010). The farming method is the best means to make sure air, water and soil unpolluted leaving the environment safe for the present and future generations (Peter, 2004). For a sound future, organic farming offers a dynamic interaction between soils, plants, humans, ecosystem and environment (IFOAM, 1996). The objectives of the eco-friendly farming in Bangladesh are mainly to protect natural and agricultural resource bases from further degradation and to ensure long term sustainability in agricultural system. While there exists internationally recognised standard of organic farming in the developed countries of the north and in many developing countries, there is no such standard in Bangladesh. Therefore, the understanding of organic movement in Bangladesh from the part of international standard and classification is necessary to encourage any systematic development of the movement. Local concepts of organic farming in Bangladesh The meaning of organic farming to farmers of Bangladesh is a practice in which farmers manage their farm based on natural resources and avoiding synthetic compounds. In the organic management system to supply essential plant nutrients, farmers of Bangladesh usually use cow dung; different composts; legumes; green manure (GM); crop residues; bio-fertilizer (Azolla, Rhizobium, Azotobacter, etc.); ash; rice barn and husk; poultry litter; biogas-slurry; and slaughter house wastages etc. For weed management, farmers apply mechanical practices instead of herbicides. For controlling insects and diseases, they use different non-chemical measures such as: Integrated Pest Management (IPM); mechanical measures (e.g. hand net, light trap etc.); biological control (e.g. rearing of beneficial insects and pathogens); and bio- pesticides (e.g. Nimidicide, Tobacco powder, Bishkanthali (Polygonum hydropiper) extract, chilli dust etc). Organic farmers and consumers in Bangladesh rely on INTRODUCTION 5 different natural inputs rather than toxic hormones and preservatives for ripening fruits and storing their seeds and other harvested crops (Sarker, 2010). 1.2 Justification of the study For climatic disasters and the change from subsistence to commercialization, farmers are now heavily dependent on input oriented agriculture. Many researchers also recommended that organic agriculture is effective in poorer countries and it can give socio-economic and ecologically sustainable development. It can overcome the harmful impacts of the green revolution (IFOAM, 2008). As organic farming has recognized as sustainable farming method, this can perhaps give the best answer to provide sustainability in production. Farmers of Bangladesh are conscious about environment but they are illiterate, resource poor and highly dependent on purchased inputs. A small portion of farmers realise the importance of ecological agriculture and there are some farmers who never use synthetic fertilizer or pesticide. They are struggling for their survival and even don't know the meaning of organic farming. Some have adopted this approach on their homestead land. However, they are not practicing it on major farming land because of the unavailability of organic inputs, lack of getting proper price and consumers’ trust. So, standards need to be followed for which local consumers can trust the products, farmers can sell their products domestically as well as earn foreign currency from exporting organic food items. With the outcome of this research, it would be possible to find out what Bangladeshi farmers are practicing, what are their obstacles, how to convert their land into organic, how farmers and other stakeholders could be conscious about sustainable agricultural practices without trade-off between yield and profit. In one word, this study is a modest attempt to find a way of sustainability in agriculture. A number of undesirable costs of modern agriculture, in terms of loss of' soil fertility, loss of biodiversity, increasing health hazards, environmental pollution and other socioeconomic problems have been identified and described by Rahman (2001). But, no study is available on what the farmers of Bangladesh are practicing in order to put forward to sustainable agriculture in the country. INTRODUCTION 6 1.3 Questions addressed in this research ‘….. We cannot find the answer until we formulate the question well, often we do not know what would be the question is until we know the answer’ (March and Olsen, 1989). So, research question is important. This study is trying to find out the answer of the following research questions: i) How the local eco-friendly practices are far from international organic standard? ii) What are constraints exist in the policy level and what kinds of problems farmers face? iii) What are the ways of supporting farmers to practice eco-friendly farming? 1.4 Objectives of the study However, when we think about organic or ecofriendly farming in Bangladesh, question arises what Bangladeshi farmers are practicing guided by some government or non-government organizations. As a basis, it could be compared with international standard. Whether the standard followed or not, to save the farmers from conventional agriculture, we need to influence them to follow ecofriendly practices. Based on the above mentioned situation, the specific objectives of the study are: i) To study the standards of eco-friendly and organic farming in international perspective. ii) To identify the status of organic and eco-friendly farming in Bangladesh. iii) To look for the constraints and possibilities of eco-friendly farming in Bangladesh. iv) To assess the needs of farmers in relation to using eco-friendly practices and to find out the way of supporting farmers. The study is based on the following hypotheses: i) Currently Bangladeshi farmers are not practicing organic farming but to some extent, they are following eco-friendly practices. ii) Farmers cannot produce organic product due to unavailability of inputs. iii) Government policy towards input is the obstacle to organic input availability. iv) Lack of farmer’s awareness is also the constraint to eco-friendly practices in Bangladesh. INTRODUCTION 7 1.5 Outline of the study The outline of the thesis initiates the brief orientation about the contents of each chapter. The whole thesis is segregated into eight chapters. Each chapter of the thesis has several topics. Chapter 1 of the thesis comments with the general issues of the dissertation. This chapter introduces background of this study. In this chapter, the researcher has given the highest priority on stating the research problems and setting the objectives of the study. Chapter 2 briefly introduces about a clear idea about the international standards of organic and eco-friendly farming. This chapter is also presenting the controversies about the role of organic agriculture on livelihood outcomes (household food security, household income and well-being). Chapter 3 describes agricultural policy and the extension systems of Bangladesh. This chapter covers both public and private extension services especially the NGO led extension services that are promoting organic agriculture in Bangladesh. The chapter also introduces the role of GO and NGOs to eco-friendly farming in Bangladesh. Chapter 4 briefly describes the general research design and methodologies that outlined the methodological approaches used in this study. The chapter also describe data collection and analytical procedure of the study. Chapter 5 and 6 are the result and discussion part. The earlier one is about analytical discussion of classification of organic and eco-Friendly Farming in international and local Perspective; while the later one illustrates the barriers, opportunities and suggested measures. Finally, chapter 7 summarizes all the findings. This chapter also draws some recommendations for policy implication as well as for further research work. Chapter 8, the final chapter, provides English and German summary of the major findings of the study. The references cited in the different chapters of the thesis are separately presented alphabetically in the reference section. Some important explanations and transcription of raw data have been presented in the appendix. Generally, each chapter of the study is projected to explain and fulfil the objectives of the study. DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 8 CHAPTER 2 DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING Although organic or traditional farming is the older form of agriculture in the world, interest in these methods has appeared again in recent years. Post-war technologies in the 1940’s organized agriculture in a way that made possible to produce large quantity of food. Unfortunately, environmental and social costs appeared with these technologies. In response to this kind of development and industrialization, importance was given on returning to more sustainable farming both in Europe and the United States. Rudolf Steiner was the pioneer of biodynamic farming while Lord Northbourn named the term ‘organic’ – that was used to express sustainable farming systems which were dynamic, balanced and relied little on external inputs (Tikofsky, 2005). 2.1 History of organic farming Farming without the use of chemicals (fertilizers and pesticides) was the only option for farmers until post-World War II. The split between industrial and organic farming dates back to the start of the 19th century when it was discovered that mineral salts contained in humus and manure that plant absorbed, and not organic matter. Sir Humphrey Davy and Justus von Liebig were the key founders of this theory and published their ideas in Elements of Agricultural Chemistry (Davy 1813) and Organic Chemistry in its Application to Agriculture and Physiology (von Liebig, 1840). Their argument was: inorganic mineral fertilisers could replace manures and bring agriculture into the scientific fold, with resulting inverses in production and efficiency. The agriculture revolution began in the 1840 with producing commercial inorganic fertiliser. Like many revolutions, it was not without mistakes and significant uptake of fertilisers did not occur until the start of World War II (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006; Grigg, 1989). Organic farming is the outcome of theory and practice in the early 20th century involving combination of various production methods primarily in northern Europe. European Commission (2000) mentioned about 3 central movements: (i) Biodynamic agriculture, originated in Germany under the inspiration of Rudolf Steiner, (ii) Organic farming, initiated in England based on the theories developed by Albert Howard and (iii) Biological agriculture, which was build up in Switzerland by Hans- Peter Rusch and Hans Müller. Tate (1994) pointed out some giant personalities who inspired the movement: Rudolf Steiner from Austria, Hans Müller, the German- Swiss, Lady Eve Balfour in Britain; J.I Rodale in the United States; and Masanobu Fukuoka in Japan. “In 1924, Rudolph Steiner, the founder of the Philosophy of ‘Anthroposophy’ gave his agricultural lecture. That lecture and other Steiner’s teachings were the foundation of ‘biodynamic agriculture’, which differs from ‘organic agriculture’ principally as it has spiritual, mystical and astrological aspect. But they were prophetic in their criticism of industrial agriculture and in plotting an alternative course. The first organic certification and labelling system ‘Demeter’ was established in 1928 because DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 9 of Steiner’s actions” (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006; Rundgren, 2002; Tate, 1994). In the 1920s, Sir Albert Howard, a highly proficient scientist, was working in India on an experimental agricultural research institute. He undertook many activities including a highly successful plant breeding program and observed the effects of how forage was grown on the health of farm animals. His believes and experiences on ‘the linkages between the health of the soil and the health of the plants and animals’ were distilled into his book ‘The Waste Products of Agriculture’ (Howard, 1931) and the message was spread across many continents (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006). Hans Müller (1891-1988) was farmers’ leader. He wanted to end what he saw as the exploitation of farmers by middlemen, by forging a direct link between producers and consumers. Müller established BIO Gemüse AVG, a Swiss cooperative of small farmers using organic-biological methods in 1946. In 1971, German practitioner of the Müller-Rusch farming techniques founded Bioland, the organic-biological farming group. Bioland was the German organic group with the largest hectarage and the greatest number of certified organic producers by 1990. Lady Eve Balfour (1899- 1990) was the moving force behind the foundation in 1946 of the soil Association, Britain’s leading organic organization. She published her best selling work, The Living Soil, in 1943. Her principle was: the health of the soil and the health of men are inseparable. She conducted Haughley Experiment into organic farming on her farm in Suffolk between 1938 and 1970 (Tate, 1994; Balfour, 1976). In the late 1930, in rural Pennsylvania, USA, J.I Rodale was keen to learn about and practice organic farming. He realised the importance of restoring and protecting the natural health of the soil to preserve and improve human health. He established the Soil and Health Foundation that later become ‘The Rodale Institute’ in 1947 (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006). Rodale’s work was continued by his son Robert Rodale, who coined the term ‘regenerative’ agriculture, until his death in Moscow in 1990 (Tate, 1994). “Masanobu Fukuoka developed a very different approach to organic farming, both philosophically and practices, and is best known to a western readership through his book One Straw Revolution in Japan” (Tate, 1994). Mokichi Okada began practicing ‘Nature farming’ includes spiritual and well as agronomic aspects with a view to improving humanity. He established the Sekai Kyusei Kyo organisation and continues to promote ‘Kyusei nature farming’ with experimental farms. Okada, Fukuoka’s farming approach also had a spiritual underpinning (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006; Fukuoka, 1978) Though many researches on environment and modern organic farming would be quite alien, the paper of ‘Silent Spring’ by Rachel Carson (1962) was a key turning point for modern organic and eco-friendly movements. The paper opened the world’s eyes to the spoil that pesticide and other toxins were doing to the global environment (Kristiansen and Merfield, 2006). However, formal scientific research was begun in the 1970s. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements was established in 1972. Some important research institutes were established within a very short period of time: DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 10 FiBL, Switzerland (1974), USA (1974), Austria (1980); England (1982); and the Norway (1987). In the 1980s, various farming and consumer groups world wide began pressing for government regulation of organic production. By the late 1980s, there were a variety of state and private certifying agencies that certified farms as organic, providing assurance to the consumers that the organic products were produced legally (Niggli and Willer, 2000). First standards for organic agriculture were started in the year 1989 in India (Raj and Sharma, 1996). The Organic Foods Production Act was enacted in 1990 to control fraud instances in the organic product marketing. This act directives the creation of the National Organic Program (NOP) and the creation of identical standards. The IFOAM Regional Group of German- speaking Countries (Austria, Germany, Luxembourg and Switzerland) was founded in 1991. Europe and the USA are leading in the movement of organic agriculture, but it has also found as a useful alternative to meet the difficult situation of agriculture in the developing countries (Niemeyer and Lombard, 2003; Amaditz, 1997). 2.2 Organic farming Government, NGOs, speeches of leaders, columnists of newspaper as well as agricultural scientists - all are using the word organic farming. “The method of organic farming is not a new technology at all. Some principles of organic farming were followed since the cultivation of crops in most ancient civilizations. The origin of practices of such as shifting cultivation, crop rotation, mixed cropping, the use of manures, raw animal dung, oil cakes and many others farming practices can be traced to enrichment of soil fertility, which is the aim of organic farming” (Joshi and Prbhakarasetty, 2005). Numerous concepts are interchangeably used to refer the concept of organic farming: ‘ecological farming’, regenerative agriculture, biodynamic farming, alternative farming, organic biological farming. Usually all of these terms are mentioned under the notion of organic farming (Chang et. al., 2003). Organic farming has been explained in a number of documents. Some of the important definitions are as follows: “Organic Agriculture is an agricultural classification that promotes environmentally, socially and economically sound production of food, fibre, timber etc. In this system, maintenance of soil fertility is considered as the key to successful production…. “It avoids the use of chemo-synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and pharmaceuticals. It also includes social considerations” (IFOAM, 2005b). The US Department of Agriculture defines organic farming as “Organic farming is a production system which avoids or largely excludes the use of synthetically compounded fertilisers, pesticides, growth regulators and livestock feed additives. To the maximum extent feasible, organic farming systems rely on crop rotations, crop residues, animal manures, legumes, green manures, off- farm organic wastes and aspects of biological pest control to maintain soil productivity and tilth, to supply plant nutrients and to control insects, weeds and other pests” (Lampkin, 1990). DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 11 The definition of Codex Alimentarius Commission is as follows: “Food described using the term organic are products of organic farming, which is a system of farm design and management practices that seek to create ecosystems, which achieve sustainable productivity and provide weed and pest control through a diverse mix of mutually dependent life forms, recycling plat residues, crop selection and rotation, water management, tillage and cultivation, which optimises soil biological activity as the means to supply a balanced nutrient for plant and animal in addition to conserve soil resources. Pest and disease management is attained by means of encouragement of a balanced host/ predator relationship, augmentation of beneficial and cultural control and mechanical removal of pests and affected plants” (FAO, 2001; European Commission, 2000). Fukuoka (1984) indicated in his book ‘One-straw Revolution’ about four basic principles of natural farming. These are: no ploughing, no chemical fertilisers no weeding and no plant protection. 2.3 Current status of organic agriculture According to the latest FiBL/IFOAM survey (2009) on certified organic agriculture, there are 37.2 million hectares of organic agricultural land (including in-conversion areas) in 160 countries. In terms of area, Oceania (12.2 million hectares) covers the highest amount of land, followed by, Europe (9.3 million hectares), and Latin America (8.6 million hectares). Development of the organic industries in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Islands has been strongly influenced by quick growing overseas demand. On the other hand, Australia, Argentina, and the United States have the most organic land area. At present, 0.9 percent of the world’s agricultural land is organic. Growth is strongest in Europe, where the area increased by almost one million hectares. The countries with the largest increases are Argentina, Turkey, and Spain (Willer and Kilcher, 2011). The land under organic management in the world has been shown in Map 2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 12 Map 2.1: Land under organic management by region 2007 Source: FiBL/IFOAM Table 2.1 Continent wise area, no. of producers and leading countries of organic farming Continent Area in million hectares (% of total agricultural land) % of total world agricultural land No. of producers Leading countries Europe 9.3 million hectares 1.9 percent 250,000 producers Spain, Italy, Germany Liechtenstein, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, and Estonia Asia 3.6 million hectares 10 percent 731,315 producers China and India Latin America 8.6 million hectares (23 percent) 1.4 percent 280,000 producers Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay North America 0.7% of total area 7 percent USA, Canada Oceania 12.2 million hectares (2.8%) 33 percent 8'466 producers Australia followed by New Zealand Source: Willer and Kilcher, (2011) Among all producers in the world, Forty percent of them live in Asia followed by Africa, and Latin America. The countries with the most producers are India (677,257), Uganda (187,893), and Mexico (128,862). Most of this category of land is used for cereals including rice, followed by green fodder from arable land and vegetables. Permanent crops account for approximately six percent (2.4 million hectares) of the organic agricultural land. The most important crops are coffee, followed by olives, cocoa, nuts and grapes (Willer and Kilcher, 2011). DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 13 International trade in organic products The growing demand for organic produce has led to the development of international trade. Countries which have less internal demand, but a favourable climate, are producing to satisfy export markets. Europe is the world’s leading market for organic produce, a considerable amount of which is imported from outside. Large volume of cereals and soya are exported from North America (USA and Canada) into Europe. Israel is also anther important supplier. Other sources are Turkey (figs, nuts and dried fruits), Morocco (oranges), the West Indies and Canary Islands (bananas), India (tea) and Bangladesh (tea). Within Europe there is considerable cross-frontier trade in cereals, wine and fresh organic vegetables. The most important direction is from south to north because northern Europe needs Mediterranean citrus fruits, grapes and other delicate fruits and early vegetables. The countries with the largest deficit in fresh organic produce as a whole are Germany and the UK, while the two with the greatest surplus are France and the Netherlands (Tate, 1994). 2.4 Certification of organic product Certification programme consists of standard, inspection and receiving certificate. Standards describe which products can be labelled and sold commercially as ‘certified organic'. The system includes farm inspector who check the farm record). Certification is primarily an acknowledgement that the products have been produced according to organic rules. There are three main categories of certification systems: Third party certification (TPC), Group Certification and Participatory Guarantee Schemes (PGS) (Willer and Kilcher, 2009; Herberg, 2007). TPC is the only accepted form of certification in most developed countries. Third party means the whole certification process is performed by an external and independent organisation, not by either the grower (first party) or the buyer (second party). The farmer’s role is to comply with the set rules or standards of the certification body (IFOAM, 2006c; Herberg, 2007). They provide necessary information on their production techniques, e. g; land use patterns, management plans for future farming, field history etc. The skilled inspector checks every farm one time a year and inspects the entire production process and all farm records. The auditor’s task is to ensure whether or not the farm is managed according to the relevant organic standards. In TPC, inspection and advice are strictly separated, which means the auditor is not allowed to give any advice to the farmers during the inspections. The records kept by the farmer and the auditor’s report are then cross-checked by the certification body, which will then decide about the granting of the final certificate (IFOAM, 2000b). Group Certification has been approved by some developed countries for the farmers of developing countries. In this system, farmers are certified as a group and export their products at a premium price. They share the costs for certification and the final certificate. The group is formed on the basis of geographical location and follow identical production method and markets their products together. Therefore, these DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 14 systems are well adapted to the local situation. The external certification body only inspects the efficiency of the internal control system (ICS) and carries out a few spot checks of individual smallholders (IFOAM, 2000a, 2003; Kalus, 2004; Fonseca, 2004). Unlike TPC, ICS schemes can be linked to the extension and advice system within the group (IFOAM, 2006a; Wilhelm and Fürst, 2002). Participatory guarantee systems (PGS) are categorised as non-certified initiatives using their own standards, which are based on the IFOAM basic standards. The inspection of the organic standards is carried out by the farmers themselves in peer reviews and sometimes by appointed staff (Herberg, 2007). In the formation of a new PGS, people who will use the system have a crucial role. PGS are localized and diverse (different products and production systems) in their nature and often link to local and alternative marketing approaches (IFOAM, 2006b). The marketing of the products is not necessarily centralized for the group. The certificate does not belong to the group but to the individual farmers. Until now, it is legally accepted only for the local market. Similar to the Group Certification, inspections are based on peer reviews and social control (Khosla, 2006). Like Group Certification schemes, PGS have a strong focus on training everyone involved in the system: farmers, workers and consumers (Fonseca, 2004). 2.5 Standard and regulations of organic farming in the world Organic agriculture can be separated from conventional, modern and other types of sustainable farming by standards, regulations and the certification (Stone, 2006). Regulation plays key role in Organic product marketing. Certification bodies maintain high ethical organic standards to uphold consumers’ confidence and to encourage and support true organic farmers (Tate, 1994). Organic certification is mostly determined for consumers and therefore, producers have to follow their regulations. As majority of the consumers of the world live in EU countries, USA and Japan, so they are controlling the organic market and maintaining standards of organic farming (Willer et al., 2008; Herberg, 2007). Most certification bodies are located in the EU, USA, Japan, South Korea, China, Canada and Brazil. Most of the listed certification organizations are based in developed countries, but also offer their certification services in developing countries. Very few operate in several developed countries. For example, no EU-based certification body offers its services in the US. Very small number of certifiers works on several or all continents. Seventy-four countries have home-based certification organization. Asia has 147 certification bodies; most are based in South Korea, China, India, and Japan While there are only eight certification bodies in Africa that are located in South Africa, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Egypt (Willer et al., 2008). At the widest international level, organic regulations have been made initially by the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) that was founded in 1972. All the major national European organic certifying associate and many European non-certifying organic associations and institutes belonged to IFOAM (Tate, 1994; IFOAM, 1992). The first governmental regulations were DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 15 introduced by some European countries, Austria and France, in the 1980s. In 1991, the EU approved the ‘Organic Regulation 2092/91’ and set standards with major propositions for international trade. Different countries in Europe, Latin America and Asia introduced legislation in the 1990s. In 1999, the Codex Alimentarius approved the first guiding principles for organic plant production. At present, 160 countries involved in the production of organic products and most major economies have established regulations for organic production (Willer and Kilcher, 2009). This section is an attempt to describe the important international organic rules and standards: 2.5.1 IFOAM Basic standards IFOAM is ‘the umbrella organization’ of world agricultural movement. Basically, IFOAM set minimum production standards for primary organic produce to its members. The mission is to lead and assist the organic movement whole over the world; and works for the adoption of sustainable agriculture systems that will be based on ‘principle of organic farming’. IFOAM maintains ‘a basic standard’ and ‘an accreditation service’ – together they constitute the IFOAM Norms, which symbolize a framework for certification bodies (Willer and Kilcher, 2009). The Basic Standards illustrate how organic products are produced, processed and handled. Four principles (health, ecology, fairness and care) have been followed to identify organic agriculture to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment (IFOAM, 2005a). The IFOAM Basic Production Standards are discussed under six major points. Those are as follows: • Appropriate varieties and qualities of organic seed and/ or plant materials shall be used. Conventional materials could be used when these are not available, but to treat the seeds or seedlings with pesticides is not permitted. • To be a farm truly organic, a farm needs to maintain conversion period to establish an organic management system through building soil fertility. For the production of annual crops, the farm must maintain a conversion period of at least 12 months, while in the case of perennial crops, the time period is at least 18 months. • Diversity in plant production shall be assured by minimum crop rotation and/ or variety of plantings. Operators need to manage pressure from insects, weeds, diseases and other pests, while maintaining soil organic matter, fertility, microbial activity and soil health. • Organic matter must be added or supplemented by crop rotations, planting green manure and nitrogen fixation plants etc. at the same time, nutrient losses from the farm to the natural environment should be reduced. Mineral fertilizers shall only be used in a program that address long-term fertility needs together with other techniques mentioned before. • Pest, disease and weed should be managed with the products that will be prepared at the farm from local plants, animals and micro-organisms. Physical or DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 16 mechanical methods are permitted. In severe cases, only IFOAM approved ingredients can be applied. Recommended managements include physical barriers, use of different sound and light, temperature control etc. • The operator must maintain buffer zones to avoid probable contamination. Tools used in conventional farming systems shall be carefully cleaned before using on organically managed plots. Source: IFOAM (2005a) 2.5.2 EU regulation on organic agriculture The history of organic movement clearly tells that the root of organic farming lie in Europe. From its origin time, Europe leads the movement. Austria was the first country in the world to set official rules for organic farming (Pohl, 2002). However, it was in 1991 when the Council of the European Communities published the EEC Regulation No. 2092/91. The common EU regulations are in principle similar, in line with IFOAM standard. The Regulation maintains that agricultural products may only be marked as organic, if they conforms the requirements of EU Regulation 2092/91 (Willer and Kilcher, 2009). The regulations protect both producers from unfair competition, and consumers from non-organic products. However, according to the common EU standards for organic plant production, (i) Seed or planting materials must be originated from organic sources. (ii) The farm unit must exceed a conversion period before marketing the products as organic. For annual or biennial crops, the period is 24 months before the sowing; and for perennial crops, 36 months before harvesting of the products. (iii) Soil fertility must be maintained through the cultivation of legumes or green manures or deep-rooted plants, along with crop rotation and fertilization with organic fertilizers. Inorganic or mineral Fertilizers and the substances that are mentioned on the positive list of EEC Regulation 2092/91 may be used, when the situation demand it. (iv) Pests, diseases and weeds must be controlled through the selection of appropriate varieties and species, adequate program of crop rotation, mechanical means of cultivation, protection and encouragement of the natural enemies of parasites and burning (Herberg, 2007). The regulation was started to enact from 1 January 1993. It had a major impact on the number of approved certification bodies: in France and Italy the number was fallen to five, in Ireland it was risen to three and in Germany it has increased from six to over 50 (Tate, 1994). In 2000, EC introduced an organic logo for the producers of the EU, who produced their products at the level of the EU regulation. Farmers or producers could use the logo only, if 95 percent of their inputs were from organic sources, originated in the EU, product processed in the EU or on imported from any country with an equivalent inspection system (Herberg, 2007, Kilcher et.al, 2006). In the conclusion of the ‘European Action Plan’ 2004, the European Council requested for the revision of ‘the EU Regulation 2092/91’ in order to achieve a simplified, more logical and less detailed regulation. In 2006, the EU published new regulations concerning import DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 17 procedures that introduced an approval system for inspection bodies operating in countries outside of the EU. The rules were amended in 2007. The new regulation was completely restructured and rephrased and came into force on January 1, 2009 (Willer and Kilcher, 2009). The organic guidelines of EU Regulation set minimum standards concerning the production, processing, storage and trade of organically produced products for the whole of the European Union. But each country in Europe is responsible for its own enforcement, monitoring, inspection, to interpret the rules of organic production and to execute those rules in national context. Therefore, every country follows their own rules, established or approved by their ministry of Agriculture. For example, the organic farms in Germany are following Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2092/91. Standards for the processing of organically produced products have been developed by ‘AGÖL’ and ‘the Federation of Producers of Organic Products’. In several respects, AGÖL standards are stricter than the EU regulation. Both private standards (AGÖL 1996) and state standards are inspected according to the inspection system as described in Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2092/91(Haccius and Lünzer, 2000). France developed Organic standards in the 1980s. France was the first European country to introduce an official label (AB) for organic cereals, fruit and vegetables. The state logo is AB-Logo (Agriculture Biologique). The logo can be used when they contain more than 95 percent organic components, are produced or processed within the EU, and is certified by one of the inspection bodies according to EN 45011. Consumers of organic products have been classified under three main categories: the politically or ideologically motivated who are aware about the environment; the health conscious; and the switchers, who are influenced by the media and premium price (Reynaud and Schmidt, 2001). From the 1950s, conscious farmers, consumers, medical doctors, processors and traders were working very hard in the front for spreading organic farming in Italy (Santucci and Pignataro, 2002). In 1990, four certifying organizations were working in Italy. AIAB was the largest association, grouping together many local-regional grassroots associations. Suolo e Salute (1969) and the Biodynamic Association were the historical cultural/ producers’ groups, while CCPB was a co-operative (1988) that was supported by processors and large cooperatives (Compagnoni et. al., 2002). In 1993, more than 20 association, were evaluated as suitable for market produce under their logo in Italy (Tate, 1994). Some of the major organic producing and consuming countries have developed national standards for organic certification. 2.5.3 The Codex Alimentarius Guidelines Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) responded to the growth of the organic sector and the need for certification for international organic standards as part of the FAO’s Codex Alimentarius Commission (FAO, 1991). It was commenced in 1963 to develop food standards, guidelines and related texts such as ‘codes of practice’ under the ‘Joint FAO/ WHO Food Standard Program’ (FAO/WHO, 2011). The guidelines http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp� DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 18 has drawn up a set of standard on EC and United States legislation, as well as national codes from Australia, Canada and Austria, and the IFOAM standards (Tate, 1994.p.19). It considers that the international rules are the great instruments for consumer protection and facilitating trade. Therefore, establishing the guidelines for the production, processing, labelling and marketing of organically produced foods is very important. From IFOAM's perspective, the Codex Guidelines are an important step towards the harmonization of international rules that serve to build consumer trust. In terms of developing market, these Guidelines provide guidance to governments in developing national regulations for organic food (Willer and Kilcher, 2009). The Commission approved crop production guidelines in 1999 and animal production guidelines in 2011. In many aspects, the rules of Codex guidelines are in line with the IFOAM basic standards and the EU regulation (EEC) 2092/91; but in some issues, there are differences (Kilcher, et. al.; 2011; Willer and Yussefi, 2006). However, these guidelines are shortly described here (FAO and WHO, 2001): In CODEX rule, conversion period is not less than two years for annual crops, and no less than three years, in the case of perennial crops except grassland, before the first harvest of products. If whole farm is not converted, land must be divided into organic and conventional units. Seed or planting material should be collected from plants grown organically at least one generation for annual crops or, two growing seasons, in the case of perennial crops. If these are not available, seeds can be treated with the recommended materials. Like IFOAM standards, soil fertility should be maintained by cultivation of deep- rooting plants, legumes, green manures or any appropriate multi-annual rotation programme. But it is mentioned that by-products from livestock farming may be used if they come from organic livestock holdings. The recommended substances may be applied only if adequate supply of nutrition is not possible by these methods” (FAO and WHO, 2001). Diseases, pests, and weeds should be controlled by any one, or with the combination of the following events: selection of appropriate species and varieties; crop rotation programs; mechanical measures; protection of predators and natural enemies of pests, for instance hedges and nesting sites, ecological buffer zones that helps to maintain pest-predator ratio; diversified ecosystems. These techniques vary between geographical locations (Thai Agricultural Standard, 2008). In 2009, the discussion about deleting or restricting substances for pest control (in particular, Rotenone) and concerning the use of ethylene other than for bananas and kiwi fruits will continue (Kilcher, et al.; 2011). 2.5.4 National Organic Programme (NOP) of USDA Legislation defining organic food production was introduced in the United States in 1990 with the approval of the organic food production Act (OFPA) at US Congress. OFPA mandated creation of the National Organic Program (NOP) under the umbrella of USDA‘s Agricultural marketing Service (AMC). The NOP rules include the National Organic Standard for production and processing that was approved and DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 19 implemented in 2002. It addresses what can or cannot be done or used in organic production and processing. It requires that certified organic farms must prepare and submit a farm plan that details all practices and inputs to show how they will comply with the national standard. Farmers must also keep records to prove that they are the following the approve plan. If anybody wants to be an organic producer and expect to sell more than $5,000 of organic products, he/she needs to certify (Kuepper, 2007). Otherwise, it is considered as violation of the National organic Standard. Certification can only be conferred by USDA-accredited agents (Willer and Kilcher, 2011). The key issues in assessing whether any farm is organic include land use status, use of fertilizers, manure, compost and pesticides, seed selection, growing practices, and prevention of contamination (Kuepper, 2007). We will discuss very briefly in the following: According to US standard, farmer needs to wait for three years to convert the farm organic, if he plants treated seed or a genetically engineered variety. Like other international standards, seed and seedling must come from organic sources including cover crops and transplants. Seeds coated with prohibited synthetic fungicides or insecticides are not allowed under any circumstances. Genetically engineered varieties are prohibited. Farmers must use a wide selection of practices to maintain soil fertility, control insects, diseases and weeds; including cover cropping, using traps and barriers, proper crop rotation, and timing planting to outwit pests. It is not allowed to burn crop residues in the field. It could only be done to control disease and to stimulate seed germination if necessary. Organic growers can apply materials or fertilizers; those are listed in the USDA standard to improve their soil. If farmers use manure during the growing season, it must be thoroughly composted using a high temperature process (131- 170 degree F) for at least 3 days if they use it in static aerated piles; 15 days for, for using a frequently – turned window system. Application is not allowed within 90 days of harvest for fruits and vegetables whose edible portion does not touch the ground, while it is 120 days, whose edible portion touches the soil, applications may not be made within of harvest. Like IFOAM standard, establishing buffer zone is necessary if neighbours use prohibited chemicals. If farmer spray conventional pesticides in his non-organic areas, he need to use a separate sprayer to use for organic production and clearly label it for organic use only. If he also uses any equipment for conventional production, he needs to be certain to clean it thoroughly before it is used on organic crops and soils (Kuepper, 2007). 2.5.5 Japanese Agricultural Standard Japan is the largest organic market in Asia. Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries developed rules of standard for organic agricultural products in 2001. The standards were based on EU organic guidelines ” (MAFF, 2007). At the same time, organic logo (JAS) was introduced, although organic agriculture started much earlier. The purpose of these standards is to establish the criteria of production DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 20 methods for the organic agricultural products. The rules of ‘conversion period’ and ‘use of seed and planting materials’ are similar to EU guidelines. The productivity of the farmland shall be preserved and promoted only by applying the compost derived from the residue of the agricultural products produced in the same fields, and methods effectively utilizing biological functions of the organism inhabiting and growing in the fields. Where the productivity of the farmland cannot be preserved, the recommended fertilizers and soil improvement materials could be utilized. Noxious animal and plants must be controlled by appropriate selection of crops and varieties, adjusting cropping time, or by using physical method (using light, heat, sound) or manual or mechanical or, biological method or an appropriate combination of these methods (JAS, 2005). In cases of critical or seriously risky for the agricultural products and being impossible of effectively controlling, use of the recommended agricultural chemicals is allowed. In the post harvested activities, farmers must be careful from mixing organic and inorganic agricultural products. In case of emergency, one farmer can use the recommended agricultural chemicals” (MAFF, 2007) Japan approved some countries whose organic rules and standards as equivalent with the JAS (As of March 2007). These are: Ireland, the United States of America, Argentina, Italy, the United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, Netherlands, Greece, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Germany, New Zealand, Finland, France, Belgium, Portugal, and Luxembourg. 2.5.6 Organic standards of Australia Although biodynamic farming was organized in the before 1980, the National Association for Sustainable Agriculture, Australia (NASAA) was formally inaugurated in 1986, and incorporated in early 1987. In the late 1990s, the Organic Federation of Australia (OFA) came into existence to unite all stakeholders in organic agriculture, who make policy decisions, lobbies government and other bodies on behalf of the organic sector, and represents the sector where appropriate (Wynen, 2008). According to the standard, “farmers should maximize the percentage of pasture, the use of legumes and deep rooted plants in the rotation, minimize tillage and maximize opportunities to preserve crop residues (NASAA organic standard, 2004, p.32). No annual crop of the same species shall be planted more than 2 years in a given field. Appropriate variety and quality must be selected. Seeds or plant material shall be propagated under organic management – one generation, in case of annual crops, and two growing periods, for perennials. Conventional materials may be treated with recommended substances, when materials from organic sources are not available (NASAA organic standard, 2004). Fertilizers and nutrients, those are not threat to the soil and water quality as well as biodiversity – may be used. If farmer needs to use raw animal liquid waste, that must be collected from organic sources. Mulch materials from non-organic sources are not permitted as sometimes those are placed in touch with the edible segment of the crop. The use of gypsum produced as a manufacturing by-product, wood ashes from treated DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 21 timbers etc are prohibited. Mineral fertilizers can be applied in the form in which they are naturally composed and extracted and shall not be rendered more soluble by chemical treatment. Approved pest, disease and weed management method include quarantine and hygiene, use of appropriate crop varieties, crop rotations, mulching, biological control, mowing and grazing, companion planting, competitive crops, and different mechanical means of cultivation . Recommended fertilizers and soil improvement materials, treatment with allowed substances can be used very limitedly only as a last resort (NASAA organic standard, 2004). Organic and non-organic products may not be transported together unless they are packaged and sealed (NASAA organic standard, 2004). 2.5.7 Organic standards of China and India Although both China and India have a considerable amount area and number of producers under organic agriculture, like most developing countries, their agricultural policies are not in favour of organic farming. However the situation is quickly changing due to awareness at the government level (IFAD, 2005c). The first organic tea was certified for export in 1990. At present, more than 200 organic products have been certified in China. As China is producing export oriented organic products, they have to maintain the standards USDA, JAS and EU regulations. It is estimated that 1100 companies and farms have been certified or going to be certified and about half are locally certified (IFAD, 2005b). India has a rich history of agriculture and continues to adapt technologies like biodynamic and other systems of organic practices. India's organic farmers are also at the forefront of developing field based technologies to improve soil fertility. In May 2001, Indian ministry of commerce established the National Programme on Organic Production (NPOP) in line with IFOAM basic standards. Different regions or states of India also have established their own local or regional systems for ecological agriculture like as agnihotra and panchakavya, those are now gather under one umbrella ‘Jaivic Krishi’(IFAD, 2005). With the help of USAID, “zero-tillage,” has been largely adopted across northern India. The method reduces the need for farmers to engage in high-priced and time-consuming tilling and ploughing, save farmers’ time and valuable natural resources. When planting, they use seeders to drop seeds directly into the soil (IFAD, 2005c). Chand and Pabbi (2005) reported that peoples of India are telling eco-friendly farming practices as organic farming. Improved soil management, use of less chemicals, locally produced inputs, and harmonizing with nature – are the main practices of those farmers. Recognizing that India's rain fed agriculture (that accounts for 60 percent of planted area and potentiality to good use of organic methods), the Government has taken a number of steps to promote and regulate organic production and marketing. Several state governments have also formulated their own organic policies and guidelines for programme implementation. For India, the primary destination of export markets is the USA, Europe and Japan (IFAD, 2005b). http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/public_html/eksyst/doc/thematic/organic/chap1/1.htm� DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 22 2.6 When certification is important Organic farming had developed long before certification developed by the farmers’ movement in Europe. Standards, inspection and certification were introduced in order to enhance credibility and to protect consumers from abuse in the growing lucrative market. It is true that no certification is required to attain better soil fertility and yield stability with organic cultivation methods. Certification is a market instrument that only becomes interesting when new marketing channels can be opened up and higher selling prices are achieved. IFOAM President Rundgren (2001) stressed that “there is no incentive for certification, if production is for personal consumption. In this case, certification would be nonsense, useless and a waste of money and energy. It is not an issue when it comes to food security of hungry people and smallholders producing for their own consumption”. It makes sense if an end-consumer is to be given convincing evidence of an organic product's special features, especially if this buyer is not in direct personal contact with the producer owing to great distances (Johansen, et. al; 2005). The spatial and cultural distance between a banana-grower in Ecuador and a European banana buyer necessitates certification for both sides. The customer requires a safeguard that ecological and quality standards have been observed, which is guaranteed by the organic label and the banana-grower can protect his produce with labelling against free-riders seeking to enjoy the advantage of higher selling prices with a lower effort. But if no such distances are involved (as is the case, for example, in direct marketing), no certification is required to replace trust in organic farming and compliance with certain standards (Johansen, et. al; 2005). In order to facilitate organic movement, all stakeholders for example, governments, standard setting and certification bodies should concentrate their focus on the crucial dissimilarity between organic and conventional, rather to struggling with ‘differences within the movement’. It is the time to rethink that whether the accreditation and certification is really an instrument to strengthen the organic development. Considering the aforesaid factors, certification should be designed to support the reliability of the organic system, not to put it in danger by burdening it with more and more details. The organic movement is still trying to attain harmonized international basic standards acknowledging the reality of its practical restrictions (Willer and Yussefi, 2006). 2.7 Does organic agriculture provide lower yield and return? There are many examples exist that due to conversion to organic farming, farmers have received better yield, on the other hand, many examples show that in conversion period, producers receive lower yield. Many studies have also shown that, in the long term, organic farming methods can work to increase farmers’ yields. For instance, significant amount of yield increases in crops and fruits in the context of organic agriculture projects those have been found in many developing countries. Key to these achievements are different soil fertility management practices such as effective DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 23 composting systems, introduction of green manure, cover crops, legumes, crop rotation, use of organic fertilizers, ash and manure and other soil conservation methods (Zundel and Kilcher, 2007). According to reports from staple food projects, organic potato and maize production also increases income in mountain agro- ecosystems in Bolivia and Nepal (Zundel and Kilcher, 2007; Pretty, 2002). In the Philippines, rice yields falled during the first years after conversion from conventional to organic agriculture. But after four years, production increased from 4.5 to 5 tonnes per hectare, about the same as conventional rice farms (Zundel and Kilcher, 2007; Lina, et al., 1999). In some cases, farmers involved in organic methods received double yields per hectare (Sclalabba and Hattam, 2002). Higher yields from organic farming not only bring higher incomes, but also receive premium prices, consequently reducing poverty and hunger pressures (Onduru et al., 2002; Parrot et al., 2006). Pretty, (2002) and Parsons (2002) attributed the higher organic yields to cautious management of weeds, pests and diseases. In addition, Parson (2002) noted that the small acreages typically managed by organic producers allow for more intensive monitoring of crops, resulting in implementation of management measures in a more timely fashion, thereby reducing yield losses. The findings of research reviewed by Vasilikiotis, (2000) and Setboonsarng (2006) also show that conversion to organic farming can lead to higher yields than conventional farming. The Farming Systems Trial at Rodale Institute likewise provides supporting evidence revealing that there was no difference in overall yields of corn, soy bean, and other crops (Pimentel, et al., 2005a, 2005b; Setboonsarng, 2006). Lyngbaek, et al. (2001) found, mean yield dropped 22 percent on organic coffee farms compared to the conventional farms. Pülschen and Lutzeyer (1993) also found mean yield reductions of 28 percent on an organic coffee farm compared to an adjacent conventional farm in Mexico. Yield reductions were recognized as the problem of replacing inorganic nitrogen fertilizers by organic nitrogen sources (Van der Vossen, 2005). Organic banana production in the Caribbean is said to have much lower yields at higher production costs than conventional production, mainly due to reduced nutrient input which has to be replaced with labour-intensive green manure (Polius, 2000; Lotter, 2003). In Costa Rica, yield of organic cacao production decreased at more than 50 percent. The significant reason was the diseases monilia and witches’ broom and black pod (Zundel and Kilcher, 2007; Slingerland and Gonzalez, 2006). However, diverse forest system with extensive cacao production may reduce cacao yields but simultaneously it will produce other food stuff and goods such as root crops, fruits, animals (protein), medicine, spices and timber/ building materials (Daniels, et al., 1999; Rice and Greenberg, 2000). DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 24 In general, lower organic yields are compensated by relatively higher producer prices. Thus, farm gate prices are important determinants of organic farm profitability. On the other hand, price premiums tend to negatively affect organic consumer purchases (Misra et al., 1991). It has been found in California, the net financial returns (without premium prices) of organically grown tomatoes, beans and maize to be lower than conventionally grown crops, due to high costs in management of seedlings (tomatoes), weed control and cover crop management (Clark, et al., 1999). Yields of organic agriculture do not exceed conventional yields if the comparisons are made in a systematic and controlled way, as is the case in the field experiments of the studies of Rasul and Thapa (2004) in Bangladesh, and Lyngbaek et al., (2001) in Costa Rica. In the Rodale trial, after two years of transition and learning, net returns were similar in both systems, with the conventional system spending more on fertilizers and pesticides and the organic system having higher machinery costs due to mechanical weed control and additional cover crop/ green manure planting. The net returns of the organic system were more stable over the years. However, when the transition period was included in the calculation and if family labour was remunerated, organic returns falled by 10 percent below the conventional returns (Pimentel, et al., 2005a). A case study conducted in the cotton belt of central India found that organic net returns on seed cotton were significantly higher than conventional net returns, because of 10-20 percent lower production costs (Eyhorn et al., 2006). The south Brazilian network EcoVida offers new sources of income and livelihoods for the growers. They sell directly to the consumers through cooperative shops and fairs. Organic products (produced according to the network standards) are given a special seal, certified by a participatory guarantee system (EcoVida, 2007). Eco-Vida is a good example of how producers have developed local markets by building strong relationships with consumers (Sahota, 2006). Due to declining commodity prices, countries are choosing organic products. These products have export opportunity and at the same time, provide way to sustainable agriculture. Many Asian countries are now in the process of formulating national policies for organic farming. For example, Thailand announced the first organic agriculture policy in 2001. Bhutan declared its National Strategy on Organic Agriculture in 2006. In Cambodia and the Philippines, the promotion of organic agriculture is led by Ministry of Trade (Setboonsarng, 2006). Many examples are also exist in the literature that the poor farmers of marginal areas are getting benefit from organic agriculture by improving productivity and incomes, and promoting environmental sustainability. In Thailand, contract organic rice farmers of marginal areas has gained significant livelihood improvements (Malhan DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 25 and Rao, 2007; Setboonsarng, 2006; Setboonsarng, et al., 2005). In Kandy, Sri Lanka, an organic tea project for resource poor farmers has led to favourable environmental outcomes in an area where tea had almost been abandoned (Haldberg, et al., 2006). It has been argued that since organic farming is labor intensive, it could empower women by providing them more earning opportunities. IFAD’s study (2005b) on organic farming in China shows, women’s ability to earn from organic farming provided them a greater feeling of worth for their role. In many organic farming certification bodies in Asia, women are preferred as farm inspectors. But it is necessary to remember that though organic farming may increase women’s income; this increase may not be sufficient to compensate for so many burdens that women have to carry. It is also possible that, women will shift some of the household burden on to other members of the family specially the children and other female household members who are already burdened with work (Dolan and Sorby, 2003). But Rosegrant et al., (2005) expressed different view: “due to increasing income, women are empowered, self-confident, and more likely to attain education and send their children to school. The more diversified diets bring better nutrition and reduce the risk of mortality and illness for themselves and their children”. Overall, organic production systems offer lower yields compared to conventional system. Some literatures also inform that yield varies depending on the phase of conversion to organic production (Gad, 2008; Bonti-Ankomah and Yiridoe; 2006; FAO, 2002). Some studies report yield loss after changing from conventional to organic production, depending on factors such as the previous management under conventional system, features of the land, and experience of the farmer (FAO, 1999). In intensive areas, conversion to organic farming usually decreases yields in the first year, but by the third year, yields typically stabilize and can be almost identical to conventional yields (IFAD, 2005a). A team of scientists led by Badgley et al., (2007) at the University of Michigan has disproved the general fallacy about organic agriculture. Organic agriculture gives yield almost similar to conventional agriculture in developed countries and much higher in developing countries. It is possible to fix enough nitrogen in the soil by using legumes, green manure and cover crops. The research team compared yields from organic and conventional agriculture in 293 cases, and estimated the average yield ratio (organic: non-organic). With the average yield ratios, they modelled the global food supply. The results show that organic agriculture is able to produce adequate food to feed the whole world. The report concluded as: “These results indicate that organic agriculture has the potential to contribute quite substantially to the global food supply, while reducing the detrimental environmental impacts of conventional agriculture” (Catherine et al., 2007). By nature, organic agriculture is an DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 26 adaptation policy that can be targeted to improve the livelihoods of rural people and vulnerable parts of the society societies who are expected to face the adverse effects of climate change and variability—for instance, the rural population in sub-Saharan Africa (Eyhorn 2007). Goal 1 (eradicate extreme poverty) and Goal 7 (ensure environmental sustainability) of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals could also be achieved by OA (Muller, 2009). 2.8 Who are the consumers of organic products? Several Europe-based studies assessed the environmental and resource use impacts under different farming systems. Results have shown that organic farming performs better than conventional farming (Setboonsarng, 2006; ISP, 2003; Stolze, et al., 2002; Shepherd, et al., 2003). Some studies reported that younger consumers are more likely to purchase organic products due to their preference for chemical free products and interest in environmental quality (Hay, 1989; Buzby and Skees, 1994). For example, Hay (1989) reported that younger Canadian consumers tended to have higher preference for chemical free products and therefore showed a higher preference for organic products, whereas older consumers were less concerned about the complete removal of chemicals. In general, younger consumers tend to have a lower purchasing power than older consumers. Some studies reported that women are more likely to purchase organic food more regularly than men (Groff et al., 1993; Buzby and Skees, 1994; Byrne et al., 1994; Davies et al., 1995; Govindasamy and Italia, 1997; Menghi, 1997; O’Donovan and McCarthy, 2002), this may be partly because women are usually the primary grocery shoppers in most households, and consequently are more informed about nutrition and food safety. Other studies (Wandel and Bugge, 1997) suggest that men were more willing to pay a higher premium price for organic products than women. It is difficult to explain the contrasting result without controlling various economic (household income), demographic (number of children in family), and other (knowledge of organic) variables. Consumer concerns with food safety is highlighted in a study comparing interest in organic products across four European countries (Germany, Denmark, Britain and France) (Wier and Calverley, 2002). The study found that German consumers were the most interested in organic food, followed by Danish, British and then French consumers. Wier and Calverley (2002) further reported that German consumers were also the most concerned about food safety among the four countries studied, followed by Danish and then British consumers, consistent with the previous conclusion. Several studies also reported that high premium price, lack of knowledge and unavailability of organic product were the most important reasons that influence non- buyers not to purchase organic food (Gad, 2008). Davies et al. (1995) and DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 27 O’Donovan and McCarthy (2002) reported that product availability and price as key inhibitors to consumers’ demand for organic foods in Ireland. 2.9 Relationship between natural disaster, biodiversity and organic farming Organic farming can play important role in mitigating the impacts of land degradation and climate change. Organic farming increases the elasticity and stability of the production, decrease the risk of small producers resulted by natural disasters and others disturbances (Altieri, 2002). For example, after Hurricane Mitch hit the lands of Central America, farmers who used traditional cropping methods suffered less damage than their neighbours who use conventional techniques (Jimenez, 2007; Holt-Gimenez, 2002). In addition, organic farming also ensures environmental sustainability. The environmental benefits has broadly been documented (Hansen et al., 2002; Stolze et al., 2002; Scialabba and Hattam, 2002; Dabbert et al., 2004) and include the provision of protection of ecology, lower resource use, environmental protection, landscape values, and reduced energy use. Organic agriculture also contributes to ensuring biodiversity as in organic farms, weeds and pests are generally controlled through manual or mechanized removal, crop rotation, intercropping (Liebman, 1995), using competitor plants, relying on wild or domesticated animals to consume unwanted species (Altieri, 1999), and rotational grazing to prevent infestation and contagion. These practices limit the impact of pest outbreaks and the resulting loss of production. The contribution of natural predators like spiders and carabid beetles also helps reduce and mitigate the incidence and damage of insect pest-related problems (Lavelle and Spain, 2001). In China, market-incentive processes have been the general catalyst for farmers converting to organic. Small farmers are often encouraged by export trade companies to convert to organic in order to take advantage of premium market prices on certain crops (e.g. tea). Farmers expand the land allocated to traditional methods of cultivation (organic), thus improving the environmental sustainability of the region (Haldberg et al., 2006). This example highlights a clear and direct relationship between market incentive processes and environmental sustainability. DEVELOPMENT OF ORGANIC FARMING 28 2.10 Conclusion Though organic or traditional farming is the older form of agriculture, those concepts appeared as the outcome of theory and practice in the early 20th century involving combination of various production methods primarily in northern Europe. Formal scientific research was begun in the 1970s. In 1963, Codex Alimentarius Commission was established to develop standards, and guidelines for organic food under the ‘Joint FAO/WHO Food Standard Program’. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements was established in 1972. After that many international, regional as well as local standards, certification authorities, accreditation services evolved. Still the movement is continuing. Numerous concepts are interchangeably used to refer the concept of organic farming: ‘ecological farming’, regenerative agriculture, biodynamic farming, alternative farming etc. But in all cases, the ultimate goal of farmers is sustainable agriculture – to maintain or improve the natural resource base, protect the environment, ensure profitability, conserve energy, increase productivity, improve food quality and safety, and create more viable socio-economic infrastructure for farms and rural communities. Organic agriculture can be separated from conventional, modern and other types of sustainable farming by standards, regulations and the certification. Organic certification is mostly determined for consumers and therefore, producers have to follow their regulations. As majority of the consumers of the world located in the EU countries, USA and Japan; they are controlling the organic market and maintaining standards of organic farming. There are many standards, but five important standards have been recognised as most important like IFOAM, CODEX guidelines, EU regulations, USDA NOP and Japanese standards. The regulations protect producers from unfair competition, and consumers from non-organic products. In all standards, there are some similar issues and also there are some dissimilar points. But the factors that influence to classify as organic, depend partly on local situation in terms of needs and availability of resources. For instance, conventional seed or seedlings may be used on temporary basis, in a position, where organic items are not available. There is no technology available that verify whether organic standards have been followed. Therefore, certification of the farm level production process is chosen to ensure that organic products are grown with following standards. But the certification pro