关于新形势下中国有机产品发展的探讨

文章阐述了国内外有机产品的发展现状,指出了中国有机产品发展存在的问题,如社会公众片面地夸大了有机产品的健康功能,将发展有机产业与解决中国食品安全问题完全相联,有机产品流通、销售环节依然存在监管的漏洞等,列举了政府监管部门为保障有机产品认证的公信力而积极采取的应对措施,如规范有机产品流通市场,发布并实施新的有机产品法规和标准,在有机产品认证标志上使用有机码,提高认证信息透明度等。在上述措施的基础上,文章结合中国有机产品的发展现状,提出应从有机产业发展理念定位,有机产品国际互认体系建立,有机产业发展速度、结构与质量的关系统筹处理,诚信体系建设等方面,加强有机产品监管,以促进有机产品健康发展。     

论常用肥料类型与绿色食品的生产

详细阐述了常用的肥料类型,有机肥料、无机肥料和有机无机复合肥料的特点与绿色食品生产之间的关系。尤其是创新地把有机肥分为传统有机肥和现代有机肥两大类,并加以分类说明,明确尿素是一种合成有机肥。生产绿色食品必须在产地空气、水质和土壤环境达标的基础上,以优质无害的有机肥料、无机肥料相结合才能生产出相应的绿色食品,同时可使土壤的保肥、供肥能力和自净能力等得到相应提高。     

我国有机农业发展现状和存在问题

我国有机农业从20世纪90年代起步,到2007年我国有机农业面积已达358.6万hm2,居世界第3位。我国有机农业主要集中在东北和内蒙古等地,有机食品消费主要集中在沿海大城市,目前国内消费已超过7.5亿美元。有机农业存在的主要问题是缺乏适合本地的有机生产技术,在有机认证上不规范。另外,农民素质低、政府支持力度不到位等也制约了我国有机农业的快速发展。     

Producing the natural fiber naturally: Technological change and the US organic cotton industry

Organic cotton productionboomed in the early 1990s only to fall steeplymid-decade. Production is currently rising, butslowly, and has yet to reach previous levels.This is in marked contrast to the steady growthin organic food production during the 1990s.Why, when other areas of organic productionexperienced steady growth, did organic cottonexperience a boom and bust? A study of thecotton production and processing industryreveals a long and heavily industrializedproduction chain that has presented numerouschallenges to growers and processors trying tointroduce an organic product. In addition, muchof the surge in demand for organic cotton clothoriginated with clothing manufacturersresponding to increased consumer environmentalconcern and interest in improving theirenvironmental reputations. This demandevaporated when clothing companies encountereda lack of consumer awareness of theenvironmental costs of conventional cottonproduction and the benefits of organic cotton.Organic clothing lines were abandoned and manycotton farmers, left with no market for theirorganic bales, were forced to either store thebales or sell them on the conventional marketfor a loss. An examination of the social andtechnical aspects of organic cotton productionidentifies some of the critical variables, suchas the risks farmers face in agriculturalproduction, the organic standards, sources ofinnovation in technological change, and the roleof consumer demand in supporting moresustainable technology, all of which shape thecontinuing development of organic products.     

Non-GMO vs organic labels: purity or process guarantees in a GMO contaminated landscape

Since 2010, demand for non-GMO food products has grown dramatically. Two non-GMO labels dominate the market: USDA Organic and the Non-GMO Project Verified (the Project). However, the non-GMO status of Organic is not obvious from the label and many consumers are unaware of this. As sales of products carrying the Project’s non-GMO label have exploded, concern has increased among some Organic proponents that demand for non-GMO threatens the organic market. In response, both sides are seeking to build legitimacy and authority for their label by emphasizing the value of their standards for determining a food product’s non-GMO status within a GMO contaminated agrifood system. Drawing on in-depth interviews with key informants with knowledge of non-GMO standards and labels, we examine the knowledge systems, discourses and actors that proponents of the Project and USDA Organic privilege in their effort to legitimize their standards. Here, the Project emphasizes its application of technoscientific norms, especially thresholds and testing, which they argue provide the best means for preventing GMO contamination and helping consumers find (relative) non-GMO ‘purity’. In contrast, proponents of Organic favor a process standard that excludes GMOs, arguing that non-GMO ‘purity’ is unrealistic in today’s agrifood system that is widely contaminated by GMOs and where mandatory testing would unnecessarily harm organic producers. We conclude that tensions between the two groups are unlikely to be easily reconciled since these two distinct marketing labels rely on different knowledge and verification claims to vie for consumers and increase market share.     

Putting the farmer’s face on food: governance and the producer–consumer relationship in local food systems

Local food systems (LFSs) have grown in popularity around the world in recent years. Their framing often emphasizes the re-connection of producers and consumers against the “faceless” and “placeless” industrial agriculture. However, previous research suggests that such romanticized narratives may not keep up with reality. This relates to the transformative potential of LFSs and to whether they actually generate alternative modes of social organization that challenge problematic aspects of the food system. We place our focus on the practices and narratives that construct the producer/consumer relationship and show how these systems are governed. Our fieldwork was carried out in two LFSs in two distinct settings: community supported agriculture groups in NYC and responsible consumption communities in Catalonia, Spain. Three main types of practices and narratives are identified: sharing, negotiation and utilization practices, and narratives. Our findings reveal great heterogeneity between the two LFSs and show how intermediates participate in the producer/consumer relationship.     

Local or localized? Exploring the contributions of Franco-Mediterranean agrifood theory to alternative food research

Notions such as terroir and “Slow Food,” which originated in Mediterranean Europe, have emerged as buzzwords around the globe, becoming commonplace across Europe and economically important in the United States and Canada, Latin America, Africa, and Asia. Given the increased global prominence of terroir and regulatory frameworks like geographical indications, we argue that the associated conceptual tools have become more relevant to scholars working within the “alternative food networks” (AFN) framework in the United States and United Kingdom. Specifically, the Local Agrifood Systems (Systèmes Agroalimentaires Localisés, or SYAL) perspective, first articulated in 1996 by French scholars, seeks to understand the relationship between the development of local food systems and specific territories. We review the empirical and theoretical literature that comprises each of these perspectives, highlighting three areas in which SYAL scholarship may be relevant to AFN researchers. First, while AFN scholars tend to understand the “local” in terms of positionality, in a distributionist sense (vis-à-vis one’s relation to sites of food production or consumption or along commodity chains), SYAL studies frame local food systems as anchored within particular territories. Second, SYAL research places significant emphasis on collectivity, both in terms of collective institutions and shared forms of knowledge and identity. Third, although both perspectives are framed in opposition of the industrialization of the global food system, AFN scholars focus more on alternative distribution schemes (e.g., organic, fair trade, and direct marketing schemes), while SYAL researchers favor territorially anchored structures (e.g., geographical indications).     

Place,Taste, or Face-to-Face? Understanding Producer–Consumer Networks in “Local” Food Systems in Washington State

In an increasingly globalized food economy, local agri-food initiatives are promoted as more sustainable alternatives, both for small-scale producers and ecologically conscious consumers. However, revitalizing local agri-food communities in rural agro-industrial regions is particularly challenging. This case study examines Grant and Chelan Counties, two industrial farming regions in rural Central Washington State, distant from the urban fringe. Farmers in these counties have tried diversifying large-scale processing into organics and marketing niche and organic produce at popular farmers markets in Seattle about 200 miles away. Such strategies invoke the question, “How are ‘local’ agri-food networks socially and geographically defined?” The meaning of what constitutes “local” and/or “sustainable” systems merits consideration in the linking of these rural counties with distant urban farmers markets. Employing historical, in-depth interview and survey research, we analyze production and consumption networks and the non-market systems that residents in these counties access for self-provisioning and food security.     

中国有机产品认证与监管问题研究--基于云南省有机农业市场培育视角

基于有机认证与监管体系的研究以及云南省有机农业产业的调研基础上,认为中国有机认证与监管体系存在:认证机构违规现象普遍,认证与监管体系不完整,有机标识的违规使用,有机标准过严,认证成本过高,违法成本低,有机认证机构检查员的管理漏洞等问题。提出了地方政府相关部门对有机认证机构及认证信息等建立备案制,构建有机认证财政扶持政策体系,打造区域性特色农产品有机认证,以及在成立云南农业大学有机认证中心等建议。     

瑞典·荷兰有机农业及其对我国海南农业发展的借鉴作用

在对瑞典、荷兰有机农业发展情况进行实地考察的基础上,总结了瑞典、荷兰有机农业的发展经验,对海南发展有机农业提出了建议:提高农民发展有机农业的思想意识;完善法律法规的制约作用;加强龙头企业的领航作用;鼓励农业科研人员的积极参与;发挥政府的引导作用。