Italy’s organic law, passed in the Senate on 2.3.22, is being hailed by the usual people as a great achievement. The generalist press merely reported on the biodynamic method querelle, which affects barely 0.3 percent of certified operators.
Overlooked instead is the violation of the basic human rights of farmers, who are forced by law to be subjected to the decisions and even the gabelle that Coldiretti will be able to impose on non-members. Until Italic misdeeds are censured in the EU. (1)
We discuss this with our friend Roberto Pinton, for decades an executive of national organic organizations, now involved at the international level, who notes how ‘the legislation has dubious aspects.’
Organic farming, no longer an economic activity of national interest?
‘The original text of the bill designated organic farming as an activity of national interest with a social and environmental function. (2) But 13 members of the Agriculture Committee-with 7 separate but identical amendments down to the commas, evidently under dictation-have downgraded organic farming to the level of production declination, like raising rabbits or growing cabbage.’
The agribusinessestablishment could not tolerate that the system of agriculture better adjusted and controlled – to ensure the health and remuneration of the farmers themselves, as well as public health, animal welfare and ecosystems, in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) – and with the European strategy Farm to Fork Would receive this recognition. And so it was.
Is it possible to introduce and fund a brand for Italian organic?
‘The prediction of an Italian organic label denotes a worrying ignorance of European law on the part of deputies and senators, but also of those who now raise their glasses to the novelty. The label would not serve to increase transparency to consumers: for all organic products, the origin of agricultural raw materials is already indicated on the label. Its function, as enthusiastic comments point out, is to favor domestic products at the expense of those from other member states, which runs counter to the Treaty of the European Union and decades of union policies.
Identifying signs of territorial origin alone, disjointed from a found diversity of the product’s material qualities conflict with the rules of free trade between member states. Any public support for a national trademark that was granted according to the origin of the raw material or the location of the producer would constitute state aid, which is prohibited. And for Italy, the EU’s largest exporter of organic products, it’s a good thing that this is the case, protectionist policies hurt us’ .
National organic brands can only be proposed in Brussels if you can demonstrate the existence of a qualitative distinction of the products, as is the case with PDOs and PGIs; provenance is not enough: the European Commission will reject the Italian organic label. (3)
Is it necessary to train technicians on the organic method, as stipulated in the bill?
‘The new law stipulates that the state will promote the training of specialists in the organic method through the possibility of activating degree programs. This is an unnecessary provision: the Constitution and laws already grant universities and academies functional, teaching and scientific autonomy. Simply put, already now a university is free to run bachelor’s or master’s degree programs in organic agriculture, and the state certainly could not prevent it. This is already being done, for example, by the University of Bologna and the University of Parma with a master’s degree, jointly.
Instead, it is necessary not only to generamerntly ‘promote,’ but to really support, including financially, these courses, as well as to include organic farming in the teaching programs of agricultural technical colleges. By 2030, 25 percent of agricultural soils will have to be organic, and it is essential to concern ourselves with schooling to avert the risk of finding ourselves in a few years with a quarter of Italian agriculture without trained technicians. It is totally insufficient to merely provide pathways for upgrading teachers in agricultural technical colleges without putting a hand in the educational offerings’.
How does the representation of certified organic operators work?
‘The law establishes the Technical Table for Organic Production, which is also composed of a representative of agricultural cooperation, four representatives of professional agricultural organizations with a general vocation, and one representative from each of the most representative associations in the field of organic production.
The criterion for calculating representation is vague: associations whose members manage at least 20 percent of the sector’s economy are considered most representative. The only sure thing is that there can be no more than five nationwide. But there is no survey of the market value of grain rather than oil or eggs, there are only conservative estimates, and awarding representation based on estimates and the applicant’s statements is not the best. We will see what the subsequent decrees of the Ministry of Agriculture will indicate, without which there will be no framework agreements, interprofessional organizations, but not even the Technical Table for Organic Production’.
But the conclusion of the selection is predictable. (4) At the technical table that must discuss policies, criteria, and incentives, representation will be concentrated in the hands of conventional agricultural organizations, which have never been more vocal for organic.
Confagricoltura cheers for GMOs, Coldiretti for Campagna Amica markets with pesticides. Are they all friends of bio now?
‘Almost all farms adhere to a generalist organization, within which, however, organic farms still constitute a minority. The attitude of the generalist organizations, but I would say of the entire agricultural establishment toward the organic movement has been for years at least very cautious: if 90 percent of your members practice conventional agriculture, you think of these first.
The attitude of generalist organizations has improved, but it is hard to leave the comfort zone of “but it’s always been done this way” and stratified organizational models. Even recently, their European representation Copa-Cogeca has been working, fortunately in vain, to dismantle the European Farm to Fork strategy and shrink the space for organic farming, in concert with the GMO, pesticide and antibiotic lobbies’. (5)
Beyond diplomacy, we could translate that generalist organizations, after having rowed against each other for many years are now preparing to take control of a sector that is beginning to present itself as a source of economic opportunity and representation, hence power.
What will happen to organizations that have always been committed to organic?
Rete Humus, the social network promoted by a dozen ‘historic’ grassroots organizations working in Italian organic farming, expressed concern. The new law provides for the recognition of interprofessional organizations, representing at least 30 percent of the value of national production, or individual products or product groups. This threshold rises to 40 percent for regional or interregional organizations, but on the condition that they cover at least 25 percent of the value at the national level-impossible, in reality.
In essence, the pioneers denounce, local producer organizations, those generally most concerned with rural and territorial development and local short supply chain distribution systems, would be squeezed out of representation, which would remain the business of a few biggies.
The new law gives interprofessional organizations no small amount of powers, including production planning and the establishment of financial funds fed by mandatory contributions for both member and non-member operators, with penalties of up to 50,000 euros for a farmer who fails to pay them. To act as a collection agent on behalf of a private party, the law mandates the Central Inspectorate for Quality Protection and Fraud Repression of Agri-food Products of the Ministry.
The most representative national trade associations may enter into framework agreements with the processing industry and distribution that provide for payment of products at prices at least equal to average production costs.
It would seem to sound good, but it has nothing to do with the concept of fair price: it is one thing to provide for agricultural producers to achieve a decent income for themselves and their families, it is another to consider ‘covering costs’ sufficient, debasing their role and deeming it correct that they have to work for nothing, satisfied to break even, with no profits that they can invest to improve production, working and living conditions.
The fact that the interprofessional organization can ask the ministry that mandatory contributions imposed on member farmers to achieve its institutional purposes be extended to non-member farmers tramples on the constitutional right to freedom of association.
What role did the real representatives of the organic sector play in passing the bill?
Susanna Cenni, vice-chairwoman of the Agriculture Committee of the Chamber of Deputies, head of agriculture for the Democratic Party and first signatory of one of the bills has little trouble admitting that the text, whose process has dragged on for 13 years, was the result of arduous mediations to merge a dozen projects proposed by different political parties.
In order to gain approval of the text, the organic organizations put on a good face and now have to express satisfaction with a text that has significant critical issues.
The Piave line they chose was the advocacy of biodynamic agriculture (which, beyond some esoteric practices, is nonetheless certified organic, expresses passion and is committed to environmental practices, to the preservation of biodiversity and the protection of the ecosystem).
Their pressing until the last hour to the group leaders in Parliament did not help: a nod of dissent from the president of the Republic brought all the political forces that had also resisted Senator Elena Cattaneo’s dogged persistence to first scuttle the law as a whole, then any reference to the biodynamic method.
Lack of a representative producer base
Organic associationism has existed since the 1970s and began to give itself a stable organization in the 1980s, before EEC Regulation 2092/1991.
A curious aspect is that it is to a man from Coldiretti that the first informal organic states general are owed.
January 1988 Giovanni Zarro, Undersecretary of Agriculture (1987 to 1989) issued a circular in which he urged his branch offices to Take action against‘foods referred to as “organic”‘, a ‘Counter such infractions and take the necessary measures‘, which resulted in precautionary seizures of much of the merchandise on the shelves of natural food stores throughout Italy.
‘We felt we were treated like thugs or drug dealers of the worst kind,’ declared the manager of the Naturalmente store in Scordia, 40 km from Catania.
In that emergency, with no e-mails or cell phones, the first national meetings of the industry were self-convened, and it decided to give itself forms of organization to counter that attack. (6)
Since then, the organizations have grown and remain the only qualified reference. However, 40 years has not been enough to give itself an effective organization in the territories, risking having to give way to the usual familiar faces when it comes to proving that it is a real representative base of producers and not the willing good living room.
The production sector itself (think of big industry and its organic brands, but not only) has a profile that is in many ways distant from the philosophy that animated the original organic farming. And yet, these enterprises also need to be represented. Conversely, you are left saying the right things, but in the position of the white fly.
And for representation, beyond the cards that everyone may have in their pocket, you have to ask everyone what they think. It is the ‘flaw’ of democracy.’
#CleanSpades
Marta Strinati and Dario Dongo
Notes
(1) Dario Dongo. Italian organic, Coldiretti’s tailor-made bill on Senate vote. #CleanSpades. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade). 18.5.21, https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/idee/biologico-italiano-il-disegno-di-legge-su-misura-di-coldiretti-in-voto-al-senato-vanghepulite
(2) The original text of the bill read: ”Organic production is an activity of national interest with a social and environmental function, as an economic sector based primarily on product quality, food safety, animal welfare, rural development, protection of the environment and ecosystem, and preservation of biodiversity, which contributes to the protection of health and the achievement of the greenhouse gas emission intensity reduction targets set by Art. 7-bis, paragraph 2 of Directive 98/70/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of October 13, 1998, and provides in this context appropriate eco-system services, contributing to the achievement of the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, while respecting the constraints arising from the European Union system and the competences of the autonomous regions and provinces of Trento and Bolzano. The State encourages and promotes any initiative aimed at increasing the agricultural areas conducted by the organic method, including through interventions aimed at encouraging the establishment of organizations, points and platforms of product aggregation and organic supply chains‘.
(3) On trademark, see. http://dspace.crea.gov.it/bitstream/inea/385/1/1359.pdf , pp. 190 et seq.
(4) The law requires to have 30 percent of the value of national production to be nationally recognized. Those operating at the regional or multi-regional level must have at least 40 percent (more, to hinder potentially more autonomous local organizations), with the additional bar of still having to represent at least 25 percent of the national value. Thus a producer association in Basilicata, even if it had 70 percent of regional production, could not be recognized because it did not have at least 25 percent of national production. Theoretically, there could be 20 regional associations, each with 50 percent of the regional market, but not at least 25 percent of the national production: none could be recognized, while those at the national level who have 30 percent and in no region have a majority would be. It serves to exclude the “little guys” and give the scepter to national agricultural organizations. And indeed even less, since it refers to interprofessional organizations where processors and/or traders also participate, and it is enough that the total (not just the Coldiretti share) is 30 percent.
On the membership numbers of agricultural organizations, it is worth mentioning thecustom of inflating numbers. The three agricultural organizations boast 2.5 million members. But active, VAT-registered Italian farmers number far fewer than one million. The shortfall is due to union patronage activities. Many of their members do not participate in agricultural or related activities at all, but join to get services such as tax returns, pension paperwork, etc. at a discount. Since they are private organizations, they are not obliged to certify members, but certainly whole families, agricultural retirees, and taxpayers completely unrelated to farming belong to them. This is an improper affiliation system, which inflates the workforce out of proportion and attributes unfounded position rents
(5) Dario Dongo, Marta Strinati. Post-2020 CAP, environment and health at risk. Appeal to the EU Parliament. GIFT (Great Italian Food Trade). 10/16/20, https://www.greatitalianfoodtrade.it/consum-attori/pac-post-2020-ambiente-e-salute-a-rischio-appello-al-parlamento-ue
(6) Undersecretary of Agriculture Giovanni Zarro, DC, issued Circular No. 1 of 16.1.88 ‘stipulating that “food products of plant and animal origin” should not be allowed to be sold under the label of “organic products” because “traces of pollution may indirectly remain in such products due to possible soil, air and water pollution,” and that as a result of this circular, some operators were fined or had their products seized‘. See stenographic record of the question submitted to the 84th public session in the Senate on 24.2.88 (pages 58-59). https://www.senato.it/service/PDF/PDFServer/BGT/318308.pdf
Professional journalist since January 1995, he has worked for newspapers (Il Messaggero, Paese Sera, La Stampa) and periodicals (NumeroUno, Il Salvagente). She is the author of journalistic surveys on food, she has published the book "Reading labels to know what we eat".
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
Related posts:
Organic, slower but inexorable growth. FiBL and IFOAM’s 2023 Report.
Subsidized insurance, Coldiretti’s business on the backs of farmers
Report of the Court of Auditors on AGEA directed by Gabriele Papa Pagliardini. #CleanSpades
AIA, FEDANA and the golden calf, farmers in revolt. The example of ANARB
