SUKOON....Journey to change

Radio Cab Taxi numbers in Delhi-NCR

2012-02-11T09:30:00.000-08:00

Quickcabs (Rs. 10 per Km) : 011-4533-3333

Mango Cabs (Rs. 10 per Km.) : 011-6363-6363, 9211-785-759/62/56

Aarya Cabs (Rs 10 per Km) : 011-4410-4410

Delhi Cherry Cabs (Rs 10 per Km) : 011-6469-6469

Super Cabz (Rs 10 per Km) : 011-4100-4100

Fantastik Cabs (Rs 10 per Km) : 011-6455-5000

Iris Cabs (Rs 10 per Km) : 011 4433-4433

Wyn Cabs (Rs 15 per Km) : 011 4800-0000

Smaart Cab (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 011-4647-4647

Komfy Cabs (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 0124-4777-888

Metro radio cabs (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 011-2922-2000

Miles Travellers (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 0124 – 234-1545

Carz on rent (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 011-4184-1212, 1800-111-212, 9971-399-308

Routes Car rentals (Rs. 15 per Km.) : 011-4440-4440

Yo Cabs (Rs. 17 per Km) : 011-4466-4466

Meru Cabs (Rs. 20 per Km. and night surcharge of 25% is between 23:00 to 05:00) : 011-4422-4422

Megacabs (Rs. 20 per Km. and night surcharge of 25% is between 23:00 to 05:00) : 011-4141-4141

Easycabs (Rs. 20 per Km. and night surcharge of 25% is between 23:00 to 05:00) : 011-4343-4343

Delhi Cabs (Rs. 20 per Km.) : 011- 4433-3222, 4422-2222

YatriCab : YatriCab.com is a business unit of Krishna Bharti Group (KB Group); India’s first Delhi based online travel company, whose mission is to provide reliable, timely, and safe cab and auto rickshaw services. YatriCab.com provides complete information, pricing, availability and booking facility for local as well as outstation taxi and auto rickshaw cab services using the advanced technology to facilitate the travel of individuals in and around the Delhi and NCR area

Call Now 011-6464-7779 An online travel site providing cab services in Delhi and NCR.

Stop Child Labour

2010-05-04T03:57:00.000-07:00

I use to go to american centre for my study. When I come out of the Barakhamba Metro station I daily see 2 kids sitting in the front of Barakhamba metro station and waiting for some customers whom they can polish their shoes. On 23rd march I complaint about this child labour on the help line number 198 but after a three months still no action is yet taken. I asked both the children about themselves. They told me their ages are 8 and 10 years respectively. And their names are Pintu and vikash. They are basically from Dwarka,Delhi. They both are cousin brothers and their parents are doing the same shoe polishing business. When I asked them about their education they told me we dint get time to go to school. When I asked do you want to go to school then they replied me yes. Their eyes were telling the stories of their pain the kid name pintu,8 years boy was not even able to face my eyes as his eyes were wet at that time. I was really ashamed with this that in a high profile area like Barakhamba these childrens are fighting and compromising with their basic rights and working to get their bread and butter.
My only appeal to you to please take some actions over this. I have informed to child labour helpline number 198 but they dint take any action. Please come forward to stop exploiting the rights of two kids. Its not only the matter of that two kids, many kids like him is facing the same problem. I shall always be remain obliged to you.

Stop child labour

BETTER TO LIVE ONE DAY AS A TIGER THAN A THOUSAND YEARS AS A SHEEP

2009-11-11T00:28:00.000-08:00

You are a born winner...dont hide yourself from the truth.
If you will feel that i can't do anything then the whole world will make you feel this thing...
You are a tiger in your's dont underestimate yourself...Every individual has some unique talent the only thing here is that to search for that talent... One day you will find your talent is the most useful winning gadget from which you will win this whole world...
Take the example of any big legends... Suppose i am giving you one example of DHIRUBHAI AMBANI.,..he was a man of himself..he never cared about the others that what they talk about themselves...you all know how this man has created such a big platform for all of us to do something big and to do something unique..,.he made a emperor from a single coin to unlimited coins...
Why he succeded in his dream??
Because he belived himself so do we should belive in ourself.,..

Last but not least.,.

"HE WHO LAUGHS LAST, LAUGHS LONGEST[:)]"

4th AUGUST 2009

2009-09-01T13:37:00.001-07:00

THIS WAS THE 2ND DAY AND WE WERE PRETTY MUCH CONFIDENT AND EXCITED TO WORK.
WE STARTED OUR DAY AT 9 AM AND FINISHED UP AT 6 PM. THIS SHOWED OUR PASSION.

THIS DAY WE AGAIN VISITED TO THE VILLAGE NAME SHAHBAJPUR WHICH IS AROUND 15 KM FAR AWAY FROM MUZ. WE HAD TO COMPLETE OUR SURVEY TASK ON THIS DAY. BY WHICH WE CAN WORK FURTHER.

SO WE DECIDED TO INVOLVE LOCAL YOUNGSTERS AND PEOPLE ALSO AS THEY ALSO WANTED TO SUPPORT US. WE DID SURVEY OF AROUND 150 PEOPLE ON THIS DAY.

WE WERE HAPPY THAT WE FINALLY FINISHED OUR SURVEY TASK.

NOW WE WILL HAVE TO WORK ON OUR DIFFERENT PHASES WHICH IS MENTIONED EARLIER.
IN THE NIGHT WE FINALLY DECIDED TO PICK FIRSTLY THE SCHOOL PHASE. WHICH WAS EDUCATIONAL BHRAMAN.

3RD AUGUST 2009

2009-09-01T13:36:00.000-07:00

THIS WAS A DAY WHICH WE ALL MEMBERS WERE WAITING FOR. WE FIRST WENT TO A TEMPLE PRAY TO GOD AND DISTRIBUTE THEIR I.D. CARD TO ALL THE MEMBERS .

WE ARRANGED 4 BIKES WHICH WE USED IN OUR WHOLE JOURNEY. AS THIS WAS THE VERY FIRST EXPERIENCE FOR ALL THE MEMBERS. WE WERE PRETTY NERVOUS ALSO BUT OUR MOTIVATION WAS HIGHER THAN THE NERVOUSNESS.

WE FINALLY STARTED OUR PLANNED JOURNEY. WE WENT TO KANTI WHICH IS AROUD 10 KM FAR FROM MUZ. IN KANTI WE SURVEYED AROUND 100 PEOPLE ON THE VERY FIRST DAY.

IN THE END WE ALL WERE VERY HAPPY AND EXCITED THAT WE BEAT OUR NERVOUSNESS AND ACTUALLY STARTED TO WORK FOR OUR SOCIETY.

FIRST DAY WAS VERY MUCH LEARNING FOR ALL THE MEMBERS . WE ALL GOT A VERY GUD RESPONSE FROM THE VILLAGERS AND LOCAL PEOPLE. THEY SUPPORT US A LOT IN OUR WORK.

FIRST DAY ENDED WITH A GR8 LEARNING

JOURNEY...

2009-09-01T13:35:00.000-07:00

WE STARTED OUR JOURNEY FROM 1st AUGUST 2009 . WE USED TRAIN TO REACH BIHAR FROM NEW DELHI RAILWAY STATION AT 10 AM . WE REACHED BIHAR (MUZAFFARPUR) ON 2ND AUGUST 2009. WE ALL MEMBER FIRSTLY VISITED TO OUR LOCAL MEMBER IN BIHAR AND DISCUSSED WITH THEM ABOUT THE SUKOON PLAN.

WE ALL STAYED AT A LOCAL HOTEL AND FROM NEXT DAY WE START WORKING ON OUR DREAM ....

PREPARATION

2009-09-01T13:34:00.001-07:00

WE HAD DIVIDED OUR JOURNEY INTO 4 PHASES IN WHICH ALL THE DIFFERENT PHASES HAD DIFFERENT WORK. WE HAD NAMED OUR JOURNEY AS A "BHRAMAN"

LIST OF PHASES ARE AS FOLLOWS -

PHASE 1- EDUCATIONAL BHRAMAN

PHASE 2- PARENTAL BHRAMAN

PHASE 3- AGRICULTURAL BHRAMAN

PHASE 4-SOCIAL BHRAMAN

these are the four phases on which we worked....

LIST OF WORK WHICH HAD TO BE COMPLETED

2009-09-01T13:33:00.001-07:00

THESE ARE THE LIST OF WORK WHICH WE PLANNED TO DO IN OUR FIRST JOURNEY...
1. SURVEY OF AROUD 500 VILLAGERS
2. REALISE THEIRLIVING CONDITION AND THEN ACT .
3. VISIT TO THE GOVT. SCHOOL AND ANALYSE THEIR SITUATION
4. PROVIDE FREE EDUCATION TO POOR CHILDREN
5. DO A CAMPAIGN IN WHICH INVOLVE THE VILLAGERS AND TALK ON THEIR ISSUES.
6. PROVIDE A MEDIUM FROM WHICH VILLAGERS CAN LIVE AND ENJOY.....
7. LASTLY TO TALK WITH THE LOCAL GOVT. ABOUT THEIR CONDITION

SUKOON...OFFICIAL TOUR

2009-09-01T13:26:00.000-07:00

SUKOON STARTED ITS JOURNEY FROM A SMALL VILLAGE NAME KANTI IN MUZAFFARPUR DISTRICT, BIHAR. FROM 3 rd AUGUST TO 10 th AUGUST 2009.

WE WERE 10 MEMBERS WHO PERFORMED OUR TASK THERE....
OUR MAIN MOTIVE WAS TO REALISE FIRSTLY WHAT IS ACTUALLY A RURAL INDIA..SO WE DID A SURVEY THERE IN WHICH WE GOT VERY SURPRISING DATA THAT PEOPLE ARE REALLY VERY POOR AND THEY MUCH NEED AN ATTENTION. WE SURVEYED IN AROUD 6 VILLAGES OF MUZAFFARPUR DISTRICT.

AFTER DOING SURVEY WE DECIDED TO DO OUR OWN WORK TO MAKE CHANGE HAPPEN IN THE SOCIETY...

SUKOON...FIRST OFFICIAL TOUR...

2009-08-16T03:31:00.000-07:00

THIS IS THE FIRST OFFICIAL TOUR OF SUKOON TO BIHAR.....WE WENT THEIR AND DO A RESEARCH ON THE LIFE OF THE VILLAGER....THEY REALLY NEED HELP...WE DID WHATEVER WE COULD..

unity in diversity

2009-07-13T10:04:00.000-07:00

IN OUR COUNTRY WE ALL ARE VERY EMOTIONAL ...WHEN A TERRORIST ATTACK OVER INDIA WE ALL GET CLOSE TO EACH OTHER....WHEN THERE IS LACK OF FOOD IN THE COUNTRY WE START GIVING FOOD TO OTHER STATE...

WHAT DOES IT SHOWS????

IF WE ARE UNITED THEN WE ARE BETTER..........

SAME THING I ALSO WANTED TO SAY TO THE INDIA....WE SHOULD BE UNITED ENOUGH THAT NO ONE CAN ATTACK OVER US.....

proud to be an INDIAN....

THANKS & REGARD

SUKOON..JOURNEY TO CHANGE.....
(A VOLUNTEER ORGANISATION)

SUKOON....JOURNEY TO CHANGE..

2009-07-08T09:22:00.000-07:00

WE ALL ARE WAITING FOR 3rd AUGUST 2009, WHEN WE WILL START OUR JOURNEY. WE ALL ARE VERY EXCITED AND FULL OF CONFIDENCE TO WORK FOR OUR COUNTRY FOR OUR SOCIETY....

JUST WAIT AND WATCH WE WILL ROCK ....

REGARD - SUKOON..JOURNEY TO CHANGE...
(A VOLUNTEER ORGANISATION)

APPEAL TO YOU ALL—PLEASE GIVE ME A MINUTE AND VIEW THIS VIDEO...

2009-07-04T23:27:00.000-07:00

HELLO EVERY ONE THIS IS THE FIRST VIDEO OF SUKOON..JOURNEY TO CHANGE...IN THIS VIDEO EVERY INFORMATION IS GIVEN...PLEASE SEE THIS VIDEO...AND DO TELL US HWS IT IS... WAITING FOR YOU ALL... THANKS & REGARD SUKOON..JOURNEY TO CHANGE.. (A VOLUNTEER ORGANISATION)

The disadvantages of organic foods

2009-06-24T22:50:00.001-07:00

At the moment organic foods are too expensive when compared to other food products that use pesticides and genetic engineering, because of crop failures since farmers cannot use any chemicals like pesticides. Since larger companies have bought into the Organic it is overselling and being treated more like a brand then what it should be a way of life, because corporations are just going to use it for their greedy desires and inflate prices up to 50% when compared to non organic products.

There is not a real variety, because the organic food market is still quite small and still growing. Organic food is not that much more nutritional, then only difference is that it doesn't contain pesticides, no food coloring and there are no preservatives. Organic foods are also going to have great difficulty in meeting greater demands from the natural commercial habits. Because organic food is controlled by the natural cycles and there is more care about the soil in the future when there is more demand for organic food products the ability to meet the demand is going to be a chronic problem, since there is less yield per acre for each crop that is organically grown.
Organic food might be more nutritious, but in this world pesticides, antibiotics, genetic engineering are necessary for things like ridding the world of hunger or the high demands of food products.
1At the moment organic foods are too expensive when compared to other food products that use pesticides and genetic engineering, because of crop failures since farmers cannot use any chemicals like pesticides. Since larger companies have bought into the Organic it is overselling and being treated more like a brand then what it should be a way of life, because corporations are just going to use it for their greedy desires and inflate prices up to 50% when compared to non organic products.
There is not a real variety, because the organic food market is still quite small and still growing. Organic food is not that much more nutritional, then only difference is that it doesn't contain pesticides, no food coloring and there are no preservatives. Organic foods are also going to have great difficulty in meeting greater demands from the natural commercial habits. Because organic food is controlled by the natural cycles and there is more care about the soil in the future when there is more demand for organic food products the ability to meet the demand is going to be a chronic problem, since there is less yield per acre for each crop that is organically grown.
Organic food might be more nutritious, but in this world pesticides, antibiotics, genetic engineering are necessary for things like ridding the world of hunger or the high demands of food products.
2The main drawbacks with organic foods are often presented like this:
1. Organic Foods are too expensive.
2. They are not freely available (as in they are difficult to get hold of)
3. Who can be certain they are truly organic anyway? It says so on the label, but I'm not sure it is really true.
4. Organic food is no better for you (nutritionally speaking) than non-organic food.
Whilst I realise it is not possible to go into each of these arguments in depth in a piece of this length, I'd like to offer my observations on each point.
Expensive?
Firstly, organic food does not have to be expensive. It depends what sort of food you buy. A vegetarian diet is widely recognised to be general cheaper than one that contains meat or fish.
I'm not a vegetarian myself but I've tried to eat less meat over the years and now buy more pulses, grains and whole wheat foods. It's certainly true that if you use these as staples, you can cut your grocery bill by a vast amount. Even if you're buying organic.
The trick is to either buy in bulk (so the cost comes down) or get together with other consumers (neighbours, friends e.t.c.) form a cooperative and benefit from wholesale prices - or do both of these things. This partly addresses the problem of organic foods not being freely available. If you place a bulk order with a local supplier over the Internet, for example, they will usually deliver.
Availability?
There's also the option of growing your own fruit and vegetables which we do in our family. You may not feel you have the skills to do this right away. You may have to re-learn providing for yourself in this way (I certainly did). But it is possible - and there's a lot of help out there in the shape of books, Youtube vids, evening classes and so on. You may not have a plot of land to grow on. But even this is not necessarily a barrier these days, as there are lots of interesting ideas for growing fruit and veg in containers.
If you don't have a vegetable plot yourself, you may find a local community garden you could tap into. Or share one with your neighbour. Twice as much fun.
Is it really organic?
Not everyone may realise this, but the organic certification and verification process which leads to a 'Soil Certification' symbol is really quite extensive. Therefore if you look out for this label in my opinion you can't go wrong.
I'm writing for a global audience here, so you may have to find out which symbol organic certification bodies use in your country. At any rate, to my knowledge the whole process is carried out very carefully and is generally reliable.
Organic food is no better for you...
This is an easy argument to answer and I'll give a mother's response. When your baby is born you want to give it something to eat which is as far as humanly possible, untainted. If you can, you feed your baby yourself, you know that a mother's milk is the best protection against disease and malnutrition that you could possibly get. You wouldn't dream of adding pesticides to that, would you? So why do it with food for grown ups?
3As a parent, buyer, and believer in organic foods I myself can find many disadvantages of organic products. They are hard to find, expensive, lack in a good variety, and have no shelf life. Most grocery chains do not carry organics, while others stack them right beside our not so healthy choices, or they are shunned to a dark, empty corner of the store. The price is a little more than reasonable.
We have a middle class household income and can afford most food organic. There also is not a good variety of brands and flavors of organic products.
Want a healthy, organic glass of milk? Well, then you must drive fifteen miles to the nearest overly populated city to buy it. We live in the suburb of a very big city and have four different grocery chains and one small town store and only one carries organic products. It is discouraging that to be healthy you have to pay. You turn on the t.v. only to be told the latest diet craze, how to excersize, and what to eat. But no one told you how inconvient it really will be just to feed your family a healthier food. This is a huge disadvantage of buying organic, especially in our "on the go" lifestyle.
Logically one would think the price of pesticides far outweighs that of the natural goodness mother earth created for FREE. But, once again the price of organic scares many of us families on a budget off. It is much cheaper to buy that carton of strawberries for half the price of organic. Over time I see that a healthier lifestyle is feasible with organic by learning which fruits and vegatables are the most likely to absorb high amounts of chemicals, and buying only those in organic. When you eat healthy, junk foods become obsolete and the money you would normally spend can be used for the healthier choices.
Well, it is fair to say that going down the organic food isle will not turn into a ten minute debate with your six year old about what box of cereal they can or can not have. You usually have a few choices or flavors or a fresh vegetable selection not even a quarter of the hunky, hormone ridden foods. Our lives have become constant decisions about the color, flavor, or brand of food we eat that it is shock to some to have only one choice. If organic is going to go anywhere, it is a matter of lifestyle change and braking out of it's black and white world and into the 21st century of color and 3-D.
Overall the disadvantages of eating organic are all things we can easily overcome. After all it is a lifestyle and that means a change. I will drive the extra ten minutes to try and save my six month old from eating bug spray. The price I can over come because I used to spend twice as much on chips, cookies, and soda that I no longer buy except on rare occasions. And is that grocery store trip a lot shorter and more peaceful with the kids? Why yes it is. I have a third of the choices I did when I didn't buy organic. Organic has a long way to go to get back to the way nature intended it to be, but I am willing to sacrifice.

Organic Foods Production Act Backgrounder

2009-06-24T22:49:00.000-07:00

The Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) was Title XXI of the 1990 Farm Bill. Its purpose was to establish national standards for the production and handling of foods labeled as "organic." Previously, private and State agencies had been certifying organic practices, but there was no uniformity in standards and therefore no guarantee that "organic" meant the same thing from state to state, or even locally from certifier to certifier. National standards for organic products were desired by both producers and consumers to clear up this confusion in the marketplace and to protect against mislabeling or fraud.

OFPA allows for state standards that are more restrictive than the federal standards, but they must be approved by the USDA. In addition, states can not discriminate against out-of-state products that meet the federal standards.

The National Organic Program
OFPA authorized the formation of a National Organic Program (NOP) to establish organic standards, and to require and oversee mandatory certification of organic production. The NOP will be implemented once the Final Rules are signed by the Secretary of Agriculture. (See chart, "NOP Implementation Process," inside back cover.) The NOP, by statute, is administered by State and private organizations rather than by the Federal government. The USDA’s role is to act as overseer to the Program.

While the NOP has required federal funding during its developmental stages, it is expected that, as with similar USDA programs, future costs will be covered by user fees paid by certifying agencies. Currently, fees for certification are paid by growers and processors to private or state certifying agencies. See "Organic Certification" and "Accreditation of Certifying Agents" for details on these programs. See "Who’s Who at the USDA" for information on contacting NOP/USDA staff.

The National Organic Standards Board
Under the Act, a National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) was created to advise the Secretary of Agriculture in setting the standards on which the USDA’s National Organic Program will be based. The NOSB wanted their recommendations to be based on industry consensus. They asked for and received an unprecedented amount of public input from farmers, businesses and consumers during every step of their decision-making process. After considering the recommendations of the NOSB, the Secretary has final authority in determining the regulations.
Appointments to the NOSB are made by the Secretary of Agriculture for five year terms, and must include:
four farmers;
two handlers/processors;
one retailer;
one scientist (with expertise in toxicology, ecology or biochemistry);
three consumer/public interest advocates;
three environmentalists.
In addition to making recommendations on the national standards, the NOSB is authorized to convene Technical Advisory Panels to advise on materials to be included on a National List of materials allowed for use in organic production. See "The National List" for more information on these materials. See "Resource List" for contact information for NOSB members.

The National Organic Standards Board Definition of "Organic"
The following definition of "organic" was passed by the NOSB at its April 1995 meeting in Orlando, FL.
"Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony.

‘Organic’ is a labeling term that denotes products produced under the authority of the Organic Foods Production Act. The principal guidelines for organic production are to use materials and practices that enhance the ecological balance of natural systems and that integrate the parts of the farming system into an ecological whole.

Organic agriculture practices cannot ensure that products are completely free of residues; however, methods are used to minimize pollution from air, soil and water.
Organic food handlers, processors and retailers adhere to standards that maintain the integrity of organic agricultural products. The primary goal of organic agriculture is to optimize the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil life, plants, animals and people."
Organic Certification

Certification is key to the National Organic Program. It assures that organic growers and handlers are, in fact, adhering to the law. After the Act goes into effect, it will be a federal offense to label any product as "organic" unless it has been certified. All uses of the labeling term "organic" will be regulated. See "Organic Processing, Handling & Labeling" for more details.
The certification process focuses on the methods and materials used in production. There are three main requirements:
1.) The methods and materials used in production must meet organic standards.
2.) There must be clear and ongoing documentation of these methods and materials.
3.) There must be a paper trail to trace a product back to its production site, in order to verify the methods and materials used in its production.
Who Must Be Certified?

With two exceptions (listed below), everyone who wants to sell products labeled as "organic" must be certified. This includes producers of organic livestock, food and fiber crops, and "handlers" of organic products.

A "handler" is any operation that "receives, processes, packages, or stores agricultural products." Some examples: a processing company that buys organic tomatoes and makes canned spaghetti sauce; or any distributor who "substantially transforms, repacks or relabels organic agricultural products." This last distinction is meant to exclude brokering, warehousing or trucking operations that merely store or move finished processed products from place to place without altering them in any way.

Exceptions to Certification Requirements

Growers who gross less than $5,000 annually are exempt from certification. The NOSB recommends that these growers sign a declaration (available from certifying agencies) stating that they understand and are in compliance with the Act, and that they have a written Organic Farm Plan (see below), which can be made available to the public upon request. The NOSB further recommends that growers falling under this "Small Farm Exemption" may not use the term "certified organic" when marketing their crops, and may market through direct sales only (i.e. farm stands, farmers’ markets, or direct sales to a retailer).

At present, retailers aren’t required to be certified. The NOSB, however, recommends certification for retailers that engage in activities which qualify them as "handlers." (An example: repacking bulk products such as dry beans or grain.)

How The Certification Process Works

A grower or handler seeking organic certification submits an Organic Farm Plan or an Organic Handling Plan to a USDA-accredited private or state certification program. See "Accreditation of Certifying Agents."

The Organic Plan must detail all current growing or handling methods and any materials which will be used. The Plan also covers future intentions and improvements to all areas of production. See "Crop Production Standards", "Livestock Production" and "Processing, Handling & Labeling" for some highlights. See "The National List" for specifics on agricultural and processing materials.

Even growers or harvesters of organic wild crops, such as fiddlehead ferns, must develop a Plan showing that harvesting practices will not be destructive to the environment or to the future productivity of the crop.

Five-year records must be kept of all management practices and materials used in organic production.

In addition to assessing the Organic Plan, the certification agency performs annual on-site inspections of each farm or handling operation participating in its program. Certification is then either awarded or denied. User fees are collected from each grower or handler to cover the cost of the certification program.

Allowance for a Split Operation

The Act does allow for only part of a farm or handling operation to be certified. The organic and conventional parts of the operation must be kept separate — whether by physical boundaries and buffer zones, in the case of a farm, or by proper cleaning and management of facilities and machinery, in the case of a handler.

Separate records must be kept for each part of a split operation.
This provision can be seen as a short term compromise. The NOSB’s intent is to encourage conversion to 100% certified organic production.

Accreditation of Certifying Agents

Only USDA-accredited agencies can act as certifiers. Certifying agencies can be either state or private, but they must have expertise in organic farming and handling techniques. They must be able to fully implement all aspects of the certification program, including hiring an adequate number of inspectors to carry out on-site inspections. Applicants are assessed by the USDA and may be reviewed by a peer review panel of organic experts, appointed by the Secretary of

Agriculture.

Accreditation may be granted by the USDA for a period not to exceed five years, and may be renewed. User fees are collected from each certifying agency to cover the cost of the accreditation program.
Recordkeeping

Certifying agents must keep ten-year records of all of their activities. The Act allows for "public access to certification documents" (upon request). However, business-related information is considered strictly confidential and may not be disclosed to anyone other than the USDA and state agencies, which can access certification records at any time. The USDA will also conduct on-site audits of all records.

Conflict of Interest

The NOSB recommends that any employee of a certifying agency who has a commercial interest — including consultancy — in a farm or other operation being considered for certification must be isolated from the decision-making process. Payment (other than certification fees), gifts or favors of any kind can not be accepted from businesses being certified.
Loss of Accreditation

The USDA or a state organic program can suspend accreditation if a certifier is not in compliance with the Act (including a conflict of interest, above). The USDA or the state program must decide promptly whether or not clients of a suspended certifier may keep their certification.
See "Enforcement and Penalties."

Organic Crop Production Standards

Organically produced crops must be grown on land which has been free of prohibited substances for three years prior to harvest. Crops grown on land which is "in transition" to organic (during the first three years after switching from conventional farming, for instance) can not be labeled as organic. The Act makes no provision for a USDA-sanctioned "transitional" label.

The Act covers organic agricultural methods and materials in great detail, including managing soil fertility, when and how manure may be applied to crops, crop rotation, and composting. Compost ingredients recommended by the NOSB include crop residues, crop waste from food processing operations, animal manures, yard waste from private or municipal sources, or other vegetable by-products. The NOSB recommends prohibiting municipal solid waste compost and sewage sludge compost, and the use of any prohibited material as a compost ingredient. The NOSB also recommends that all ingredients must be documented.

Prevention is considered a grower’s first approach to pest management, but the Act establishes a National List of acceptable and prohibited materials, which includes pest control treatments as well as other agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and seed treatments. See "The National List" for more details.

The NOSB recommends that all agricultural inputs be evaluated as to their long term affect on the environment — not simply on whether they are synthetic or natural.
The following highlights address some of the questions most frequently asked about the NOSB Recommendations for Organic Crop Production Standards.

Pesticide/Fertilizer Drift

Organic farmers are responsible for establishing adequate buffer zones or barriers to protect against pesticide or fertilizer drift from neighboring conventional farms. Organic crops which have been contaminated in this way can not be sold or labeled as organic, or fed to organic livestock.
Certifying agents are responsible for verifying such incidents, and for deciding when products from the area may again be sold as organic. The certifier may also decide to implement pre-harvest residue testing. (See "Residue Testing," below.)

Emergency Pest Eradication Programs

The NOSB recommends that local, state and federal agencies avoid treating certified organic farms during emergency pest eradication programs, and that they seek alternatives to chemical pest control methods on these farms. Organic growers are responsible for registering their farms with the appropriate state and local agencies to facilitate this.
The NOSB also recommends that certified organic farms be compensated for damages resulting from emergency pest eradication programs.

Residue Testing

Although the NOSB feels strongly that residue standards do not define organic food, it recommends that organic products "shall not contain pesticide residues in excess of the FDA (Federal Drug Administration) action level or 5% of the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) tolerance."

The NOSB proposes the following residue testing system:
1.) National monitoring through the Federal Regulatory Monitoring program of at least
one percent (1%) of organic fresh produce and processed product samples;
2.) State monitoring by those states which conduct pesticide residue programs;
3.) Local monitoring by certification agencies when suspicions of contamination arise, or
for a three year period following an emergency spray program, or
to follow up on positive results from federal, state or local government testing, or
in response to complaints.
Organic Livestock Production

Standards for organic livestock production are meant to assure both an organic product to the consumer and living conditions for farm animals which limit stress and promote good health. They address substances used in health care and feeding, as well as herd or flock management and housing.

"Livestock" includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, fish, wild or domesticated game and horses raised for slaughter or used as draft animals. There are even standards for organic bee-keeping. Regardless of whether they’re raised as breeding stock, as dairy animals, or for slaughter, all livestock is covered by the Act.

The following highlights address some of the questions most frequently asked about the NOSB Recommendations for Organic Livestock Standards.

Feeding Organic Livestock

Quite simply, organic livestock must be fed organic feed.

The NOSB recommends that conventional feed be allowed only if the organic feed supply has been compromised by a national, state or local weather emergency, or by fire or flood on an organic farm.

Growth promoters and hormones, and plastic pellets for roughage in feed are prohibited.

Synthetic vitamins and minerals are allowed. See "The National List" for more details.

Housing and Health Care for Organic Livestock

Healthy living conditions and attentive care are considered first steps in the prevention of illness. Therefore, animals must not be overcrowded, and must be allowed periodic access to the outdoors and direct sunlight. Antibiotics, wormers and other medications may not be used routinely as preventative measures. See "The National List" for specific details on medications recommended by the NOSB for use in organic livestock health care.

Recordkeeping for Organic Livestock

Records must be kept on all feeding and health care practices for each animal or flock, and there must be a verifiable audit trail to trace any animal or flock back to the farm.

Organic Processing, Handling and Labeling

Standards for the processing, handling and labeling of organic products cover all steps in the process from receiving organic raw materials, acceptable processing aids and ingredients, appropriate packaging materials and labeling, to cleaning methods, waste disposal and pest management at processing facilities.

The following highlights address some of the questions most frequently asked about the NOSB Recommendations for Organic Processing, Handling & Labeling Standards.

Processing Additives

The following additives are not allowed in organic processing: sulfites, nitrates or nitrites; any ingredient known to contain higher levels of heavy metals or toxic residues than permitted by federal regulation; and any non-agricultural ingredient that is not organically produced unless it is designated as acceptable on The National List.

Labeling of Organic Products

Ninety-five percent (95%) of the ingredients in a processed product must be organically produced and the processor must be a certified organic handler in order for the finished product to be labeled as organic. The five percent (5%) non-organic ingredient criteria is determined by the total weight of the finished product, not including air, salt or water. Water used in organic processing must meet all requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Special provisions allow labeling to state that a product contains organic ingredients. Products with more than fifty percent (50%) organic ingredients may display this information on the front label; those with less than fifty percent (50%) organic ingredients must display this information in the ingredient listing panel.

Some examples: A label which reads "Organic Vegetable Soup" would be stating that ninety-five percent of the total ingredients of that soup (by weight) are certified as organic. Alternately, a soup label might read "Vegetable Soup" and include the phrase "Made with Organic Vegetables" on the front panel, indicating that the primary ingredients are organic and make up more than fifty percent of the total ingredients by weight. Another label might read simply "Vegetable Soup" and include the word "organic" to identify specific items in the ingredient listing panel — as in "Potatoes, carrots and organic kidney beans."

Packaging Materials

Organic products can not be packaged in materials, storage containers or bins that contain synthetic fungicides, preservatives or fumigants. The reuse of containers which have been in contact with any prohibited substance is not allowed.

Imported Products

Imported products may be labeled as "organically produced" if the Secretary of Agriculture determines that they have been produced and handled under an organic program that meets or exceeds the requirements of the USDA’s National Organic Program.
Enforcement and Penalties

Mislabeling and False Statements

Any person who knowingly mislabels a product as organic can be fined a maximum of $10,000 and may be disbarred from the Organic Program for five years. Persons who make false statements to the Secretary of Agriculture, a state official or a certifying agent are subject to penalties under Federal law, and may be disbarred from the program for five years.

Violations by Certifying Agencies

A certifying agency that violates the provisions of the program or falsely or negligently certifies any operation shall lose accreditation and shall not be eligible for re-accreditation for three years.

The National List

A uniform "National List" of materials was mandated by Congress as part of the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990 (OFPA). Its purpose is to make clear which materials can and cannot be used in organic production, processing and handling in the United States.

Who defines the National List?

The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is responsible for recommending to the Secretary of Agriculture which materials will be on the list. The Secretary of Agriculture makes the final determination. A Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) gathers and evaluates the scientific data and makes recommendations to the board based on seven review criteria:
1.) Effect on human health.
2.) Effect on the farm ecosystem.
3.) Toxicity and mode of action.
4.) Availability of gentler alternatives.
5.) Probability of environmental contamination during manufacture, use and disposal.
6.) Potential for interactions with other materials used.
7.) Overall compatibility with a system of sustainable agriculture.
In 1995, the NOSB completed a massive review of the materials in use by organic producers, and those recommendations became the base for the National List. The procedure is ongoing, as new materials are reviewed for inclusion or prohibition.

How is The National List structured?

The NOSB recommends that the National List be divided into three parts:
1.) Acceptable synthetic production materials;
2.) Prohibited natural production materials;
3.) Acceptable non-agricultural, non-synthetic processing aids.
These lists contain the exceptions to the basic understanding within the organic industry that all organically grown and handled foods are produced with solely natural materials.
This may seem like an unusual structure. However, it avoids the problem of trying to list every natural material organic growers or processors might use. Such a list might neglect to mention all of the local resources available in a given region.

Why are there exceptions?

Organic production systems encourage a healthy environment with as few inputs as possible. The NOSB recommends that cultural, biological and other management tools be sought to replace material inputs — whether synthetic or natural.

Congress, in passing the OFPA, recognized that it will take time for organic producers and handlers to achieve the long term goals expressed in the Act. The National List was meant to reflect realistic organic practices, and to take into account current obstacles to ideal organic production. Therefore, some synthetics are allowed if the review process shows that they are:
Not harmful to human health or the environment;
Necessary to production because of unavailability of natural products;
Consistent with organic ideals.
Likewise, the law provides for prohibition of natural materials that may be harmful to human health or the environment, and inconsistent with organic ideals.

Following are some of the questions most frequently asked about the materials recommended by the NOSB for inclusion on The National List.

Why are there no brand names on The List?

The National List applies only to "generic" materials which are active ingredients, and does not apply directly to brand name products. The complexity of brand name product formulations, the changeable nature of what is on the marketplace at any given time, and manufacturer’s concerns over confidentiality made this approach the most viable.

Do organic farmers use any pesticides or pest control products?

Yes. Sometimes, organic farmers find that they need to use pest control products as part of an ecological farm plan. However, they may only use products included as "acceptable" in the National List.

When would an organic grower need to use a pesticide or pest control product?

In a natural ecosystem, predators keep plant pests in check, while diseases strike individual plants or may even wipe out a species. Nature constantly works to correct imbalances. Organic farmers also strive for such a balance, but farming interferes with the native mix of plants and animals, and so farmers must contend with the problems that arise. They must also meet customer expectations of quality — and do all of this in an economic fashion. The allowed pesticides are, therefore, sometimes used as a corrective measure when cultural methods of pest control have failed.

Organic farmers look for pesticides that target their pest specifically while impacting the ecosystem as little as possible. For example, if a field of tomatoes has attracted a large population of tomato hornworms, a natural toxin can be sprayed which harms only leaf-eating caterpillars. If aphids are the problem, a light petroleum oil spray could be used to suffocate these soft-bodied insects without harming their predators.

Next season, the farmer might change his fertility plan or use a natural repellent such as a garlic or cayenne spray to make the crop less attractive, use crop covers and rotations to encourage beneficial predators, or use traps and visual inspection to catch the problem earlier.
What is the difference between IPM and organic production?

IPM, or Integrated Pest Management, differs from organic production in three ways. First, IPM only addresses pest control and not fertility. Second, IPM focuses on reducing chemical sprays, but has no compunction about using them when indicators point to a need. Third, IPM allows for the use of any synthetic pesticide as a last resort measure, rather than restricting to natural and least toxic materials.

What synthetic materials does the NOSB recommend for use in crop production?

Petroleum oil and soaps are allowed for insect control because of their benign nature to people and the environment. They also do little harm to beneficial insects.

Pheromones are chemicals identical to those given off by insects in locating food or mates. They are used in small quantities to lure pests to traps in the field, or to confuse them so that they won’t mate. Pheromones have been revolutionary throughout agriculture in reducing pesticide usage.

Copper and sulfur compounds can stop plant diseases that could destroy entire crops. These metallic compounds mechanically kill fungus spores and have been in use for centuries. Other disease control practices include variety and site selection, proper plant spacing and improved irrigation methods. Research is leading to biological controls, but in the meantime, copper and sulfur are allowed for fungus control, along with two antibiotics for virus control on the leaf surface of plants.

Cleaning compounds, specifically alcohol and bleach, are recommended by the NOSB for inclusion in the National List for use in disinfecting irrigation systems and food contact surfaces.

Micronutrient fertilizers are usually synthetic, but needed in very small amounts. While most natural fertilizers will supply adequate micronutrients, when soil testing shows that micronutrients are needed, they are allowed to balance fertility. Balanced, fertile soil will grow crops with the fewest pest problems and the most nutrition.

Plastic mulch and covers are allowed for weed, insect, and frost protection. Plastics are
synthetic, but in this use are not disrupting the natural balance and actually reduce the need for pesticides. They must be removed from the field at the end of each season and may not be plowed in or allowed to decompose.

Liquid fish emulsion also appears on the list of approved synthetics because of added
processing aids. Small quantities of pH adjusters are added to keep the product stable and prevent fermentation in storage.

What are some of the natural substances that the NOSB recommends be prohibited?

Arsenic for insect control, and strychnine for rodent control are some of the few natural materials prohibited in organic production. Their high toxicity and concern about residues has warranted this exclusion. Restrictions have also been placed on the use of other natural materials because they disrupt the ecological balance or are of moderate natural toxicity.

The botanical pest controls Rotenone, Pyrethrum, Ryania, Sabadilla, Neem and Tobacco Dust are derived from plants. Their use is recommended only when primary methods of defense have failed. This is because they are "broad spectrum" in action and may affect not only the target pest, but also other insects they contact. These materials are registered with the EPA and have undergone safety testing, falling into EPA’s least toxic category. Botanicals are preferred in organic production to synthetic least toxic pesticides because they break down quickly into common natural compounds. An important measure of the safety of these plant-derived materials is their known effects based on historical use for the last 3,000 years.

Sodium nitrate (commonly known as Chilean nitrate) is also a restricted material. Its high salt content may disrupt soil biology, and it is used to feed the plant directly rather than increasing overall soil fertility. While direct feeding may be necessary in certain situations, organic producers should not rely too heavily on this method of fertilizing. Use of sodium nitrate is restricted to a small percent of the total nitrogen requirement of the crop, thus encouraging growers to build soil fertility with less soluble materials that have a lower impact on soil biology.
Why are antibiotics allowed in organic livestock production?

Organic feed, good living conditions and attentive care are usually enough to support animals without medication. However, animals do get sick, and it would be contrary to the underlying values of organic production to let an animal suffer or die when treatment is available. The NOSB therefore recommends that antibiotics be allowed only for the treatment of a sick animal, not as a growth promoter or preventive measure, and never on a routine basis. If an animal intended for slaughter must be given antibiotics, it can no longer be considered organic. If a breeding animal, dairy cow, or laying hen must be given antibiotics, the NOSB recommends it be taken out of the organic production system for an appropriate withdrawal period.

What other drugs does the NOSB recommend for livestock health care?

Synthetic wormers are recommended as allowed for use in much the same way as antibiotics; to prevent the suffering or death of an animal. However, they cannot be used routinely. The producer must have a plan in place to prevent worm infestation. Without such a plan, the producer cannot be certified.

Other recommended allowed synthetics in livestock production include vitamins and trace minerals to balance nutritional requirements, aspirin for inflammation, electrolytes for dehydration, local anesthetics with appropriate withdrawal periods, and milk replacers when fresh milk is not available.

Why are there non-organic ingredients in some organic food?

If you were to make organic cookies at home you would naturally use organic flour, oil, eggs, raisins, etc. But what about the salt and baking soda? Because they are non-agricultural products, neither of these ingredients meets the definition of organic. Processors of many kinds of organic foods face the same dilemma. In addition, nutritional fortification is sometimes required by regulation or professional guidelines, but not available in natural form.

Thus the NOSB recommends that the National List include synthetic processing aids and natural products such as minerals that are not agricultural. For the finished food to be called organic, these ingredients may not comprise more than 5% of the total product, by weight.

What are some of the non-organic ingredients recommended by the NOSB?

Recommended non-synthetic ingredients include baking soda as a leavener, some calcium compounds, pectin for jelling, and lecithin for consistency. Carrageenan and agar-agar are seaweed products not available in certified organic form, but are recommended as allowed materials for thickening and smooth consistency. Nitrogen and oxygen are recommended as allowed processing aids with restrictions as to source. The NOSB also recommends that bacterial enzymes, cultures and yeast be allowed unless produced from gene splicing.
Recommended synthetic ingredients include the synthesized version of carbon dioxide (a naturally occurring gas) for use in carbonation and pest control, ferrous sulfate and other vitamins and minerals for nutritional fortification, and bleach for cleaning surfaces. The use of ethylene gas, a processed version of the gas naturally produced by fruits for ripening, is recommended by the NOSB only for bananas, since the travel required to get them to market often precludes ripening on the tree. Synthetic magnesium chloride is available for making tofu, as the FDA restricts the natural form due to health hazards from impurities.

Summary

Decisions such as these have been made in painstaking detail. In many cases, a material may be allowed for one use, but prohibited from another because more natural alternatives exist. Other materials have restrictions on how they may be produced, with some forms being less acceptable than others.

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
Accreditation The process used by USDA to ensure that each certifying agent is competent, independent of financial concern in the operations it certifies, and maintaining the legal standard for organic production.
AMS/TMD The Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Division of the USDA. The National Organic Program falls within this division.
Botanicals Pesticides derived from plants. These may be quite high in natural toxicity or may upset the predator-prey balance. Therefore their use is restricted.
Buffer zone An area of land designed to intercept pesticide/fertilizer drift and prevent it from contaminating an organic field.
Certification The process used by certifying agents to ensure that each producer or handler of organic food or fiber meets the standards for organic production, processing and handling. Certification always includes on-site inspection of the production operation.
Certifying agent (or agency) Any company, organization or government body who offers the service of organic certification. A certifying agent must be accredited by USDA, and may not have any financial or personal interest in the producer.
Compost The carefully managed process in which crop residues and other vegetable by-products are digested by microbial action.
Cover crop A crop grown on idle land for soil conservation purposes, not for sale.
Cultural methods Mechanical and management techniques that contribute to pest control. These may include early planting or harvesting, variety selection, plant spacing, companion planting, clean-up of crop debris.
Green manure A crop grown for its fertilizer and soil conditioning value. Green manure crops are plowed or tilled into the soil, not harvested.
HANDLER Any operation (or part of one) that "receives, processes, packages, or stores agricultural products." Includes food processors and distributors who "substantially alter" organic agricultural products.
Inspector A person independent from the certifying agent’s decision-making process who visits the grower, processor or handler being certified. The inspector interviews the producer, observes all areas of production, and reviews record-keeping for completeness and accuracy.
MICRONUTRIENTS Nutrients required by food crops in small amounts. For example: boron, zinc, iron and manganese.
Natural From a plant, animal or mineral source which has not been altered except by chopping, grinding, separating, drying, freezing, heating, or fermentation.
NOP The National Organic Program. The NOP was established to implement the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. It is administered by state and private agencies with the USDA acting as overseer. Often used to refer to the organic regulations as well.
NOSB National Organic Standards Board. A USDA advisory board established to help develop the organic standards. Also responsible for convening Technical Advisory Panels (TAPs) to evaluate materials for the National List. Appointments are made by the Secretary of Agriculture.
OFF FARM INPUTS Materials such as fertilizers or pest control treatments which are bought from outside sources to be used in growing crops. (To contrast, many growers produce some "inputs", such as compost, on-farm.)
OFPA The Organic Foods Production Act. This act, which was Title XXI of the 1990 Farm Bill, mandated the establishing of national standards for the production and handling of foods labeled as "organic."
Organic Farm or Handling Plan A written document which sets forth the producer’s current methods, future intentions, and plan for improvement in all areas of production.
OTA Organic Trade Association. An umbrella organization for the organic industry. Includes organic growers, processors, distributors, suppliers, brokers, retailers, certifiers, and non-profit organizations and individuals from the U.S. and Canada. The OTA offers information services, educational resources, legislative representation, government liaison, and promotional programs to its members.
Pesticide/fertilizer drift Pesticides or fertilizers applied to neighboring land which are carried by wind or water to an organic field.
Synthetics Substances made by a chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a natural substance.
TAP Technical Advisory Panel. A panel of experts convened by the NOSB to evaluate scientific data on materials being considered for the National List.
Transition A time period in which a farm or other operation moves toward organic certification by improving soil fertility, reducing use of prohibited materials, and developing an organic plan.

Organic farming, exports & Food Consumption in India

2009-06-24T22:48:00.000-07:00

________________________________________
Organic Food Consumption in India
Organic Food Consumption in India is on the Rise.

Some people believe that organic food is only a “concept” popular in the developed countries. They think that when it comes to organic food, India only exports organic food and very little is consumed. However, this is not true. Though 50% of the organic food production in India is targeted towards exports, there are many who look towards organic food for domestic consumption.

ACNielsen, a leading market research firm, recently surveyed about 21,000 regular Internet users in 38 countries to find their preference for functional foods – foods that have additional health benefits. The survey revealed that India was among the top ten countries where health food, including organic food, was demanded by the consumers.

The most important reason for buying organic food was the concern for the health of children, with over 66 percent parents preferring organic food to non organic food. Though organic food is priced over 25 percent more than conventional food in India, many parents are willing to pay this higher premium due to the perceived health benefits of organic food.

The increase in organic food consumption in India is evident from the fact that many organic food stores are spurring up in India. Today (2006) every supermarket has an organic food store and every large city in India has numerous organic food stores and restaurants. This is a huge change considering that the first organic food store in Mumbai was started in 1997.

What do Indian organic food consumers prefer? The pattern of organic food consumption in India is much different than in the developed countries. In India, consumers prefer organic marmalade, organic strawberry, organic tea, organic honey, organic cashew butter and various organic flours.

However, the Indian organic food consumer needs education. There are many consumers who are unaware of the difference between natural and organic food. Many people purchase products labeled as Natural thinking that they are Organic. Further, consumers are not aware of the certification system. Since certification is not compulsory for domestic retail in India, many fake organic products are available in the market.

Organic Farming in India
Organic farming was practiced in India since thousands of years. The great Indian civilization thrived on organic farming and was one of the most prosperous countries in the world, till the British ruled it.

In traditional India, the entire agriculture was practiced using organic techniques, where the fertilizers, pesticides, etc., were obtained from plant and animal products. Organic farming was the backbone of the Indian economy and cow was worshipped (and is still done so) as a God. The cow, not only provided milk, but also provided bullocks for farming and dung which was used as fertilizers.

Shift to Chemical Farming in 1960s
During 1950s and 1960s, the ever increasing population of India and several natural calamities lead to a severe food scarcity in India. As a result, the government was forced to import food grains from foreign countries. To increase food security, the government had to drastically increase the production of food in India. The Green Revolution (under the leadership of M. S. Swaminathan) became the government’s most important program in the 1960s. Large amount of land was brought under cultivation. Hybrid seeds were introduced. Natural and organic fertilizers were replaced by chemical fertilizers and locally made pesticides were replaced by chemical pesticides. Large chemical factories such as the Rashtriya Chemical Fertilizers were established.

Before the Green Revolution, it was feared that millions of poor Indians would die of hunger in the mid 1970s. However, the Green Revolution, within a few years, showed its impact. The country, which was greatly relied on imports for its food supply, reduced its imports every passing year. In 1990s, India had surplus foodgrains and once again became and exporter of food grains.

As time went by, extensive dependence on chemical farming has shown its darker side. The land is losing its fertility and is demanding larger quantities of fertilizers to be used. Pests are becoming immune requiring the farmers to use stronger and costlier pesticides. Due to increased cost of farming, farmers are falling into the trap of money lenders, who are exploiting them no end, and forcing many to commit suicide.

Both consumer and farmers are now gradually shifting back to organic farming in India. It is believed by many that organic farming is healthier. Though the health benefits of organic food are yet to be proved, consumers are willing to pay higher premium for the same. Many farmers in India are shifting to organic farming due to the domestic and international demand for organic food. Further stringent standards for non-organic food in European and US markets have led to rejection of many Indian food consignments in the past. Organic farming, therefore, provides a better alternative to chemical farming.

According to the International Fund for Agriculture and Development (IFAD), about 2.5 million hectares of land was under organic farming in India in 2004. Further, there are over 15,000 certified organic farms in India. India, therefore is one of the most important suppliers of organic food to the developed nations. No doubt, the organic movement has again started in India.

Organic Food Exports from India
Organic food exports from India are increasing with more farmers shifting to organic farming. With the domestic consumption being low, the prime market for Indian organic food industry lies in the US and Europe. India has now become a leading supplier of organic herbs, organic spices, organic basmati rice, etc.

RCNOS recently published a report tilted ‘Food Processing Market in India (2005)’. According to its research, exports amount to 53% of the organic food produced in India. This is considerably high when compared to percentage of agricultural products exported. In 2003, only 6-7% of the total agricultural produce in India was exported.

Exports is driving organic food production in India
The increasing demand for organic food products in the developed countries and the extensive support by the Indian government coupled with its focus on agri-exports are the drivers for the Indian organic food industry.

Organic food products in India are priced about 20-30% higher than non-organic food products. This is a very high premium for most of the Indian population where the per capita income is merely USD 800. Though the salaries in India are increasing rapidly, the domestið market is not sufficient to consume the entire orfanic food produced in the country. As a result, exports of organic food is thd primd aim of organic farmers as well as the govepnment,

The Indian government is committed towar`s enco¼raging organic food production. It allocated Rs. 100 crore or USD 22.2 million during the Tenth Five Year Plan for promoting sustainable agriculture in India.

APEDA (Agricultural and Procesred Food Expord Development Authority) coordinates the export of organic food (afd other food prmducts) in India. The National Programie for Organic Production in India was initiated by the Minisdry of Commerce. The programme provides standard for the organic food industry in the country. Since these standards have been developed taking into aonsiderataon international organic production standards such as CODEX and IFOAM, Indian organic fgod products are being accepted in the US and European markets. APEDA also provides a list of organic food exporters in India.

Organic food costs in India are expected to decrease driving further exports in future
Organic food production costs are higher in the developed countries as organic farming is labor intensive and labor is costly in these countries. However, in a country like India, where labor is abundant and is relatively cheap, organic farming is seen as a good cost effective solution to the increasing costs involved in chemical farming. Currently most of the organic farmers in India are still in the transition phase and hence their costs are still high. As these farmers continue with organic farming, the production costs are expected to reduce, making India as one of the most important producers of organic food.

Organic food products exported from India include the following:

Organic Cereals: Wheat, rice, maize or corn
Organic Pulses: Red gram, black gram
Organic Fruits: Banana, mango, orange, pineapple, passion fruit, cashew nut, walnut
Organic Oil Seeds and Oils: Soybean, sunflower, mustard, cotton seed, groundnut, castor
Organic Vegetables: Brijal, garlic, potato, tomato, onion
Organic Herbs and Spices: Chili, peppermint, cardamom, turmeric, black pepper, white pepper, amla, tamarind, ginger, vanilla, clove, cinnamon, nutmeg, mace,
Others: Jaggery, sugar, tea, coffee, cotton, textil
__________________

organic food challenges...

2009-06-24T22:45:00.000-07:00

Organic food is big business. Thousands have turned to organic food as the answer to almost all of the problems in the current food industry. Some critics say it’s not all good business, though. They cite some specific disadvantages organic food production has.
Critics say one disadvantages organic food production has is that it is not as productive as food grown by modern methods. All foods were grown organically until the past couple of centuries. Modern, chemically assisted growing methods dramatically increased food production. Critics say organic farming cannot produce as much food per acre as newer farming methods. Another disadvantages organic food production has is that, although people assume it is safe, organic food may be contaminated with toxins. Some critics contend that not all organic soil additives and pest controls are non-toxic, and that toxic residues may remain on the food. This can result in serious consequences for those who eat organic foods on a regular basis.
It’s a major disadvantage that most organic food has a shorter shelf life than non-organic food products. Preservatives are not used on processing organic food,so it spoils more quickly. This is a disadvantage for both consumers and stores, as it can be quite costly in the end.
One more disadvantages organic food production has is its cost. Less food is produced per acre, and the food doesn’t keep as well, so it is more costly to grow and produce organic food. Those added costs are passed on to the consumer. For that reason, it is a disadvantage of organic food that poor people cannot afford it.
Organic food has many disadvantages. We must continue to do research and improve our ability to grow and produce affordable organic food so that the disadvantages of organic food don’t outweigh the advantages.

Sometimes it can be hard when shopping to know which fruits and vegetables are organic, especially if you are not quite sure what to look for.
So, what symbols are used for organic food that you should seek out when shopping? Since there are not a lot of larger companies out there that advertise organic foods, it can sometimes be hard to find them when you are out on your daily grocery run.
The only main government label comes from the USDA, since they are the branch that handles all food related issues, problems, patents, and such. Since organic foods are not processed with the same products that other foods are, they have stricter regulations that have to be followed in order to meet the USDA standards for organic foods.
If you are at a larger supermarket, you can always look for the USDA seal for organic foods. This symbol is a half green and half white circle that is encompassed by a larger maroon circle with the words “USDA ORGANIC” printed inside them. The label itself is very easy to spot, and should be marked on the front of the package.
If you are at a farmer’s market, you can ask the person behind the counter which foods are organic, probably most of them, or you can look over each package to see the farmer’s symbols or trademark labels. While shopping, if you find one organic brand that you like, memorize the symbol so you will be able to spot it easier on your next vists.

There are many different local organic farms around the country, which will allow you to go and pick your own veggies and fruits. These places will not have specific symbols on the foods, but they will have a logo or symbol that you can watch for on their bags and signs. This will help you to identify in the future anything that you see at a farmer’s market as their product.
Since it is sometimes hard to know what symbols are used for organic food, you can always ask the salesperson to help you find which foods are organic. Sometimes this is the best way to know which symbols are used for organic foods, since you have an “expert” showing you which foods are and aren’t organic.

Are Organic Foods Healthier Than Conventional Foods?
You’ve heard the debate for years on organic versus processed foods. So, which ones are better? I mean, are organic foods healthier than conventional foods, or are we wasting our time seeking out the ones that are organic?
Well, since there have not been any major studies on organic versus conventional, the USDA mostly leaves it up to the consumer to make their own decision. So, you will need to do your research on each, conventional and organic, to see which one you feel more comfortable with.
Organic foods are not processed at any step of the way. They also do not use any kind of pesticide on the foods to keep away any parasites or bugs that might like the food as much as we do. This can be a plus and a minus, depending on how you look at it. While pesticides can cause harm over time to people and the environment, it takes a lot to really cause problems to people. But, a product without pesticides can also have their own problems, without anything keeping bugs and fungus off the foods, you are at risk for problems here as well.
Also, organic foods do not impact the environment like conventional foods do, because there are no factories, pesticides, or preservatives that are added to the food, so there is no waste to push onto the environment. But, this is also a double-edged sword. Conventional foods, while processed in factories and loaded with preservatives, will also not have any risk of fungus or other problems that organic foods might.
Some argue that organic foods just taste better. But, to those of us who have always eaten processed foods, would we really think that they are better, or just different? That, again, is up to the individual consumer to decide.
So, when asking are organic foods healthier than conventional foods, it really comes down to personal choice and feelings on the subject. Do your homework to become better informed about each side and decide which one is right for you and your family

HEALTH CARE BENEFITS NOW OFFERED AT THE SUPERMARKET?

2009-06-24T22:44:00.000-07:00

The Health Benefits of Organic Food
When it comes to organic food vs. "conventional" food, we're all pretty clear that an organic apple would have higher health benefits than, say, a conventionally grown Apple-tini. But what about serious comparisons of the health benefits of organic food vs. conventional food? Is organic food really better? If so, in what ways is it better?
Our guest article today answers that question. It's from Shane Heaton, a clinical nutritionist and editor of the newsletter Organic Food Quality News.
~ ~ ~
Spreading the Organic Word
by Shane Heaton, Organic Food News Quarterly
A growing number of consumers, and especially those dealing with chronic illness, are switching to organic food. A key motivation for consumers doing this is a simple belief that it's better for them. But is it true that there are health benefits to eating organic food?
Official food agencies around the world are unanimous in claiming there is no evidence of a nutritional difference. Yet a more careful and thorough review of the science comparing organic and non-organic food reveals that, collectively, the available evidence does indeed support the consumer belief and claims by the organic industry that their food is safer, more nutritious, and better for you than non-organic food.
Health Benefits of Organic Food
HIGHER NUTRIENT LEVELS
It's often claimed that a large number of studies have found no difference in the nutrient content of organic and non-organic crops. It's true there have been more than a hundred studies comparing the nutrient content of organic and non-organic foods and the results are inconclusive. But this is because the majority of studies are of poor quality, being either agriculturally or analytically flawed.
I reviewed the literature using clear validity criteria to ensure relevant nutrients were being compared in properly matched organic and non-organic crops. This eliminated 72% of comparisons as invalid. The results of these spurious studies were either dramatic, inconclusive, non-significant or inconsistent, as would be expected, and served only to obfuscate the clear trend in the valid data that organic crops, on average, do contain higher levels of trace minerals, vitamin C, and antioxidant phytonutrients.
Official food composition tables, including data compiled by the US Department of Agriculture, reveal that since the 1940s the mineral levels in fruits, vegetables, meat and dairy have declined substantially in conventional foods. Combine this with earlier (pre-ripened) picking, longer storage, and more processing of crops, and it's not surprising that we may be getting fewer nutrients in our food than we were 60 years ago.
The artificial fertilization associated with conventional crops produces lush growth by swelling produce with more water. On a pound-for-pound basis, organic food has more "dry matter" (i.e. food). Partly because of this (and for other reasons too), there are higher levels of nutrients in organic produce. Research by American nutritionist Virginia Worthington has confirmed that, based on current dietary patterns, the differences can be enough to help you achieve the recommended daily allowances for certain nutrients that you otherwise may not get.
We can expect also that phytonutrients, many of which are antioxidants involved in the plant's own defense system, will be higher in organic produce because crops rely more on their own defenses in the absence of regular applications of chemical pesticides. Evidence is emerging that confirms this expectation. Higher levels have so far been found of lycopene in organic tomatoes, polyphenols in organic potatoes, flavonols in organic apples, and resveratrol in organic red wine. A recent review of the subject estimated that organic produce will tend to contain 10-50% higher phytonutrients than conventional produce.
Health Benefits of Organic Food
LOWER PESTICIDE RESIDUES
Consuming more organic food certainly isn't the only way to improve one's nutrient intake, but it may be the safest. It's regularly claimed by the mainstream food industry that pesticide residues in foods are known to be safe on the basis of total diet surveys that supposedly find the levels of pesticide residues in our food to be very low and within acceptable safety limits. But monitoring programs consistently show that around one in three non-organic food samples tested contains a variety of pesticide residues, with far lower levels being found in and on organic produce. Conventional-food proponents also claim that rigorous safety assessments show that pesticide residues are no threat to human health. Yet consumers intuitively know this is a false assurance.
Most pesticide-residue safety levels are set for individual pesticides, but many samples of fresh produce carry multiple pesticide residues. Rules often do not take into account the "cocktail effect" of combinations of pesticides in and on foods. Research is emerging confirming the potential for such synergistic increases in toxicity of up to 100-fold, resulting in reproductive, immune and nervous system effects not expected from the individual compounds acting alone.
Israeli researchers have linked symptoms such as headaches, tremor, lack of energy, depression, anxiety, poor memory, dermatitis, convulsions, nausea, indigestion and diarrhoea with dietary intakes of pesticides. Belgian research has found that women diagnosed with breast cancer are six to nine times more likely to have the pesticides DDT or hexachlorobenzene in their bloodstreams compared to women who did not have breast cancer. Hawaiian researchers following 8,000 people for 34 years have found that increasing consumption of conventional fruit and juice (and the pesticide residues they carry) raises the risk of Parkinson's disease.
Dr. Vyvyan Howard, toxico-pathologist at the University of Liverpool, UK, comments on the trend towards organic food on the part of health-minded consumers:
"People are applying the precautionary principle to their own lives by purchasing food that has not been produced by industrial methods. From the simple stance of hazard avoidance, organically produced food is the best option that we have."
The British Medical Association appears to agree:
"Until we have a more complete understanding of pesticide toxicity, the benefit of the doubt should be awarded to protecting the environment, the worker, and the consumer—this precautionary approach is necessary because the data on risk to human health from exposure to pesticides are incomplete."
Health Benefits of Organic Food
CHILDREN NEED IT THE MOST
Children's immature and developing organs, brains, and detoxification and immune systems, plus their larger intake of food per kilo of body weight, combine to make them even more susceptible to toxins than adults. American toddlers eating mostly organic food have been found to have less than one sixth the pesticide residues in their urine compared to children eating conventional foods, lowering their exposure from above to below recognized safety levels.
Elizabeth Gillette's landmark 1998 paper in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives showed how a combination of low-level environmental, household and dietary exposures caused subtle yet measurable developmental deficits in children. Gillette compared children in two nearby isolated villages in Mexico, one in which pesticides were routinely used in their farming, and one in which they were not. Everything else was the same between these two villages—genes, diet, lifestyle, climate, culture, etc. The study found significant differences between the two groups in both mental and motor abilities (with the children who were exposed to pesticides scoring at a much lower level), as well as an increase in aggressive behavior.
In many Western countries, children and adults are similarly exposed to multiple sources of pesticides, and in 1995 an Australian study of breast milk found that infants are regularly exposed to several pesticides at levels greater than maximum recommended exposures. In Canada, a direct correlation has been observed between pesticide contamination of breast milk and increased risk of otitis media in Inuit infants. Organic Food and the Problem
of Antibiotic Resistance
Considering the growing problem of increasing antibiotic resistance in pathogenic bacteria, animal farming may be a much larger contributor to the problem than over-prescription of human antibiotics by doctors.

While the use of antibiotics is severely restricted in organic farming, they're used extensively in non-organic farming to promote growth and to prevent disease from decimating intensively reared, overcrowded, stressed farm animals. As much as 60% of all the antibiotics used in Australia are given to farm animals, not people.

University of Queensland marine biologist Dr Simon Costanzo reported in the March 2005 issue of Marine Pollution Bulletin that antibiotics and antibiotic-resistant bacteria are common in the sewage and waterways of the state capital Brisbane, potentially posing a threat to human health and the environment. The British Medical Association has warned that antibiotic resistance is "one of the major public health threats that will be faced in the 21st century," while the World Health Organization has called for a reduction in the use of antibiotics in agriculture.

Better animal welfare standards in organic farming minimize the need for antibiotics and other veterinary drugs—they are used only when strictly necessary.

Health Benefits of Organic Food
FOOD ADDITIVES
Artificial colorings and preservatives in food and drink are thought to contribute to hyperactivity in pre-school children, and while many still contest this issue, a recent study in the UK found that the proportion of hyperactive children was halved when additives were removed from their diets. Many additives—such as preservatives, artificial sweeteners, colorings and flavorings, MSG, hydrogenated fat, and phosphoric acid—are prohibited in organic food production.
Health Benefits of Organic Food
BETTER HEALTH OUTCOMES
A recent review of controlled animal feeding trials found significant improvements in the health of animals given organic feed, and concluded:
"Reproductive health [and] incidence and recovery from illness are sensitive measures of health status and should be given appropriate weight. Taking all of this into account, the available data are very strong with regard to the health benefits of organic feed and food."
Similar tests with humans are problematic, though evidence is emerging here too. An early observational study revealed that boarding-school students eating predominantly organically for three years experienced a "very marked decline" in colds and influenza, more rapid convalescence, excellent health generally, fewer sports injuries, a greater resilience to fractures and sprains, clear and healthy skin, and improved dental health.
A recent Danish organic human three-week feeding trail with 16 subjects found significantly higher concentrations of quercetin (an antioxidant flavonoid) not only in the organic diets but also in the urine of those eating organically, confirming increased absorption and systemic circulation.
Health Benefits of Organic Food
THE BOTTOM LINE
So is organic food better for you? In my opinion, yes. Decreasing one's toxin burden and increasing one's intake of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants can have a significant impact on health, especially when trying to improve or restore health.
Can people afford it? I'm certain of it. Official household spending statistics in Australia and the UK reveal that the average family spends five times more on junk food, take-away (carry-out food), alcohol, and tobacco than on fruits and vegetables, and five times more on recreation than on fruits and vegetables. To make healthier choices they need encouragement and education.
I believe it's a false assumption that advocating organic food will reduce fruit and vegetable consumption due to the higher price. Perhaps people will instead cut down on junk food, take-away, alcohol, and cigarettes. Some even report anecdotally that the better taste of organics facilitates an increase in fruit and vegetable consumption that was hitherto unachievable.
Chris Ashton of the UK-based Nutritional Cancer Therapy Trust asserts:
"Those concerned with the fight against disease know that our bodies are designed to overcome disease processes before they become established. Our systems are readily disrupted by toxins and an absence of sufficient quantities of nutrients."
Organic foods are a simple way to reduce an individual's toxin burden of pesticides and food additives, increase their nutrient intake, and perhaps alter their consumption patterns away from less healthy choices.
Organic food isn't a luxury. It's how food's supposed to be, and a valuable part of any regimen intended to maintain, improve, or restore health.
Shane Heaton is a clinical nutritionist practicing in Australia. He is editor of the newsletter Organic Food Quality News, which is available free by email.

~ ~ ~
Know someone who might like this article about the health benefits of organic food? Please forward it to them.
GP Publish date: 27-DEC-2005
Books:
• See books related to this topic
More articles & resources...
• Organic
• Diet & Nutrition
• Pesticides
• All subjects
Get Grinning Planet free via email

RELATED GP ARTICLES
________________________________________

BAD RESIDUALS FROM
DAILY RERUNS OF
“EATING YOUR FOOD”
Reduce Your Exposure to Pesticides in Food Through Smart Food Choices
“I’LL HAVE THE ORGANIC DRAGONBURGER WITH A SIDE OF LIES”
Organic Food Myths ... and Realities
ANIMAL LOVERS, FORK OVER YOUR GOOD INTENTIONS
Animal Lovers – Why Eat Organic?

The health benefits of organic food are more professed than real. However, the public opinion that organic food is healthier than conventional food is quite strong and is the only reason for about 30% growth in the organic food industry since the past 5-6 years. Organic food is grown with the help of natural fertilizers, like natural manure and compost.
Research conducted on organic milk has shown that it has more anti-oxidants, omega 3, CLA, and vitamins than non organic milk. According to the researchers, organic milk is healthier than non organic milk as organic cows are pasture grazed which results in better quality milk.
Eating organic protects your own personal health. Over 400 different pesticides are used in non-organic farming (also known as conventional farming). Pesticides are poisons designed to kill living organisms; their residues are present in the foods we eat.
For the rest, the health benefits of organic food are based on the general beliefs of the organic food consumers, farmers, manufacturers, and retailers. These benefits are:
• Better health: Since organic food is not prepared using chemical fertilizers and pesticides, it does not contain any traces of these strong chemicals and might not affect the human body, chemical fertilizers can harm body in different body, as they contain carcinogenic elements, which goes inside our body through vegetables and fruits and results in producing cancers cells..
• Better taste: People strongly believe that organic food tastes better than non organic food. The prominent reason for this belief is that it is produced using organic means of production. Further organic food is often sold locally resulting in availability of fresh produce in the market.
• Environment safety: As harmful chemicals are not used in organic farming, there is minimal soil, air and water pollution; thus ensuring a safe world for future generations to live in.

With time and situation so called pure food has also undergone many changes. The kind of foods which we used to consume some years back are now mixed with lots of chemicals to keep in tune with rising demands of the population.
The chemicals increase the quantity of the production and farmers are using these fertilizers to control pests and diseases of foods. The chemicals used to control pesticides are harmful for human bodies and these chemicals are directly consumed by human beings which in turn gives us quintal of diseases.
Therefore, one must know alternative foods to keep healthy. There is no solution to the chemicals that we consume everyday. According to the analysist girls attain puberty age at very earl period and this is concluded to associate with the chemicals used in foods and poultry farming.
Organic food is safe to consume and has got better health care. You can not trust ordinary foods these days, even the quality and test of fresh fruits and vegetables are no longer considered to be pure. We consume fruits which are supposedly known for all the vitamins and even this is also degraded. Organic food has got more nutrients, minerals and vitamins than intensive farming under chemicals.
Look at animals and its hormones and when these animals are killed for meat, the chemicals which is present in animals do not die so when we eat meat we are consuming the chemicals too. This in turn will hamper our health.
In order to avoid these side affects try to look out for the organic foods, they are common now unlike before. As every one is becoming health conscious so the growth of organic farming is increasing too and this will in turn yield more organic foods. Organic food is more healthy and the safest way to tackle your health problems.

Benefits of Organic Food
________________________________________
Benefits of Organic Food
Published October 24th, 2007 in Natural Living Tips
Is It Just Another Marketing Tool?

Many of you may have noticed the plethora of organic foods in the supermarkets these days. From the produce department to the frozen food section, it seems like everything is an organic food.

This is not surprising since consumers are buying more and more organic foods. The trend started small back in the 70’s when people started realizing how many preservatives and chemicals were starting to be a part of our food supply. Many organic food producers that are seeing such rapid growth today started back then. As people become older and more concerned with their health, demand for organic food is on the rise. Parents concerned about their children’s health are also demanding more organic food since even some brands of baby food have the organic label on it.

The Organic Trade Association reports that sales of organic foods have increased 20 percent in the last 5 years. A 2004 survey done by Whole Foods showed that more than ½ of Americans have tried organic foods.

More conventional food producers have noticed and they’ve left the low carb frenzy in the dust as they take on this latest marketing trend. The US government has made it easier to put organic foods on the market with regulations that define organic foods.

According to these regulations, organic food is grown without chemicals, processed without additives and no irradiation, biotechnology or sewer sludge is used. Additionally, for animals and their byproducts like dairy foods and eggs, no hormones or antibiotics are used in the rearing of the animals.

However, standards set by the US government in 2003 that made organic foods more accessible to the general public allow conventional farmers to use 200 synthetic chemicals in their version of organic foods. Thus, we see a lot more foods labeled “organic” on our shelves these days for consumers who are hungry to be healthy and willing to pay more for it.

The benefits of organic food are real. Chemicals, preservatives, pesticides and hormones in your food can do all kinds of damage to your health. But be aware of the guidelines and buy from food manufacturers that have a history of producing high quality organic foods. And it’s a good idea to shop at a supermarket that you trust when buying organic food.

Eunice Coughlin is the founder of Healthy living for christian homemakers a resource for moms of all ages and stages who seek spiritual and physical health and wellness. For more about the benefits of organic foods, go to Benefits of Organic Food

organic food definition

2009-06-24T22:43:00.000-07:00

Organic vegetables at a farmers' market in Argentina.
Organic foods are made according to certain production standards. The use of conventional non-organic pesticides, insecticides and herbicides is greatly restricted and avoided as a last resort. However, contrary to popular belief, certain non-organic fertilizers are still used. If livestock are involved, they must be reared without the routine use of antibiotics and without the use of growth hormones, and generally fed a healthy diet. In most countries, organic produce may not be genetically modified.
Organic food production is a heavily regulated industry, distinct from private gardening. Currently, the European Union, the United States, Canada, Japan and many other countries require producers to obtain special certification in order to market food as "organic" within their borders. Most certifications allow some chemicals and pesticides to be used, so consumers should be aware of the standards for qualifying as "organic" in their respective locales.
Historically, organic farms have been relatively small family-run farms[1] — which is why organic food was once only available in small stores or farmers' markets. However, since the early 1990s organic food production has had growth rates of around 20% a year, far ahead of the rest of the food industry, in both developed and developing nations. As of April 2008, organic food accounts for 1-2% of food sales worldwide.

[edit] Meaning and origin of the term
In 1939, Lord Northbourne coined the term organic farming in his book Look to the Land (written in 1939, but published in 1940), out of his conception of "the farm as organism", to describe a holistic, ecologically-balanced approach to farming—in contrast to what he called chemical farming, which relied on "imported fertility" and "cannot be self-sufficient nor an organic whole".[2] This is different than the classic use of the term "organic", to refer to a class of molecules that contain carbon, especially those involved in the chemistry of life.
[edit] Identifying organic food

Mixed organic bean sprouts
• See also: Organic farming for information on the production of organic food.
Processed organic food usually contains only organic ingredients. If non-organic ingredients are present, at least a certain percentage of the food's total plant and animal ingredients must be organic (95% in the United States[3] and Australia) and any non-organically produced ingredients are subject to various agricultural requirements. Foods claiming to be organic must be free of artificial food additives, and are often processed with fewer artificial methods, materials and conditions, such as chemical ripening, food irradiation, and genetically modified ingredients.
They may also be required to be produced using energy-saving technologies and packaged using recyclable or biodegradable materials when possible.[citation needed]
Early consumers interested in organic food would look for non-chemically treated, fresh or minimally processed food. They mostly had to buy directly from growers: "Know your farmer, know your food" was the motto. Personal definitions of what constituted "organic" were developed through firsthand experience: by talking to farmers, seeing farm conditions, and farming activities. Small farms grew vegetables (and raised livestock) using organic farming practices, with or without certification, and the individual consumer monitored. As demand for organic foods continues to increase, high volume sales through mass outlets such as supermarkets are rapidly replacing the direct farmer connection. However, for supermarket consumers, food production is not easily observable, and product labeling, like "certified organic", is relied on. Government regulations and third-party inspectors are looked to for assurance. A "certified organic" label is usually the only way for consumers to know that a processed product is "organic".
[edit] Legal definition

The National Organic Program (run by the USDA) is in charge of the legal definition of organic in the United States and does organic certification.
Main article: Organic certification
See also: List of countries with organic agriculture regulation‎
To be certified organic, products must be grown and manufactured in a manner that adheres to standards set by the country they are sold in:
• Australia: NASAA Organic Standard
• Canada: Canada Gazette, Government of Canada
• European Union: EU-Eco-regulation
o Sweden: KRAV
o United Kingdom: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
• India: NPOP, (National Program for Organic Production)
• Japan: JAS Standards.
• United States: National Organic Program (NOP) Standards
[edit] Environmental impact
Several surveys and studies have attempted to examine and compare conventional and organic systems of farming. The general consensus across these surveys[4][5] is that organic farming is less damaging for the following reasons:
• Organic farms do not consume or release synthetic pesticides into the environment — some of which have the potential to harm soil, water and local terrestrial and aquatic wildlife.
• Organic farms are better than conventional farms at sustaining diverse ecosystems, i.e., populations of plants and insects, as well as animals.
• When calculated either per unit area or per unit of yield, organic farms use less energy and produce less waste, e.g., waste such as packaging materials for chemicals.
However, some critics of organic farming methods believe that organic farms require more land to produce the same amount of food as conventional farms (see 'Yield' section, below). They argue that if this is true, organic farms could potentially destroy the rainforests and wipe out many ecosystems.[6][7]
A 2003 investigation by the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs in the UK found, similar to other reports, that organic farming "can produce positive environmental benefits", but that some of the benefits were decreased or lost when comparisons are made on "the basis of unit production rather than area".[8]
[edit] Yield
One study found a 20% smaller yield from organic farms using 50% less fertilizer and 97% less pesticide.[9] Studies comparing yields have had mixed results.[10] Supporters claim that organically managed soil has a higher quality[11] and higher water retention. This may help increase yields for organic farms in drought years.
One study from the Danish Environmental Protection Agency found that, area-for-area, organic farms of potatoes, sugar beet and seed grass produce as little as half the output of conventional farming.[12] Findings like these, and the dependence of organic food on manure from low-yield cattle, has prompted criticism from scientists that organic farming is environmentally unsound and incapable of feeding the world population.[13] Among these critics are Norman Borlaug, father of the "green revolution," and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, who asserts that organic farming practices can at most feed 4 billion people, after expanding cropland dramatically and destroying ecosystems in the process.[14] Michael Pollan responds to this by pointing out that average yield of world agriculture is substantially lower than modern sustainable farming yields. Bringing average world yields up to modern organic levels could increase the worlds food supply by 50 % [15]
A 2007 study [16] compiling research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems has concluded that
organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base (from the abstract)
The researchers also found that while in developed countries, organic systems on average produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture, organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms in developing countries, because the materials needed for organic farming are more accessible than synthetic farming materials to farmers in some poor countries. On the other hand, communities that lack sufficient manure to replenish soils would struggle with organic farming, and the soil would degrade rapidly[17] .
[edit] Energy Efficiency
Some studies are also consistent in showing that organic farms are more energy efficient.[18]
[edit] Pesticides and farmers
There are studies detailing the effects and side effects of pesticides upon the health of farm workers.[19] Even when pesticides are used correctly, they still end up in the air and bodies of farm workers. Through these studies, organophosphate pesticides have become associated with acute health problems such as abdominal pain, dizziness, headaches, nausea, vomiting, as well as skin and eye problems.[20] In addition, there have been many other studies that have found pesticide exposure is associated with more severe health problems such as respiratory problems, memory disorders, dermatologic conditions,[21][22] cancer,[23] depression, neurologic deficits,[24][25] miscarriages, and birth defects.[26] Summaries of peer-reviewed research have examined the link between pesticide exposure and neurological outcomes and cancer in organophosphate-exposed workers.[27][28]
Imported fruits and vegetables from South America are more likely to contain high level of pesticides,[29] even pesticides banned for use in the United States.[30] Migratory birds, such as Swainson's hawks, have wintering grounds in Argentina where thousands of them were found dead from monocrotophos insecticide poisoning.
[edit] Pesticide residue
A study published in 2002 showed that "Organically grown foods consistently had about one-third as many residues as conventionally grown foods."[31][32]
Monitoring of pesticide residues in the United States is carried out by the Pesticide Data Program (part of USDA, which was created in 1990. It has since tested over 60 different types of food for over 400 different types of pesticides - with samples collected close to the point of consumption. Their most recent results found in 2005 that:
“ These data indicate that 29.5 percent of all samples tested contained no detectable pesticides [parent compound and metabolite(s) combined], 30 percent contained 1 pesticide, and slightly over 40 percent contained more than 1 pesticide. ”
—USDA, Pesticide Data Program[33]

Several studies corroborate this finding by having found that while 77 percent of conventional food carries synthetic pesticide residues, only about 25 percent of organic food does.[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43]
A study published by the National Research Council in 1993 determined that for infants and children, the major source of exposure to pesticides is through diet.[44] A recent study in 2006 measured the levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure in 23 schoolchildren before and after replacing their diet with organic food. In this study it was found that levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure dropped dramatically and immediately when the children switched to an organic diet.[45] Food residue limits established by law are set specifically with children in mind and consider a child's lifetime ingestion of each pesticide.[46]
There are controversial data on the health implications of certain pesticides. For example, the herbicide Atrazine has been shown in some experiments to be a teratogen, causing demasculinization in male frogs exposed to small concentrations. Under the effects of Atrazine, male frogs were found to have greatly increased occurrences of either malformed gonads, or testicular gonads which contain non-degenerate eggs.[47] Effects were however significantly reduced in high concentrations, as is consistent with other teratogens affecting the endocrine system, such as estradiol.
Organic farming standards do not allow the use of synthetic pesticides, but they do allow the use of specific pesticides derived from plants. The most common organic pesticides, accepted for restricted use by most organic standards, include Bt, pyrethrum, and rotenone. Some organic pesticides, such as rotenone, have high toxicity to fish and aquatic creatures with some toxicity to mammals. It causes Parkinson's disease if injected into rats.[48]
The United States Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies periodically review the licensing of suspect pesticides, but the process of de-listing is slow. One example of this slow process is exemplified by the pesticide Dichlorvos, or DDVP, which as recently as the year 2006 the EPA proposed its continued sale. The EPA has almost banned this pesticide on several occasions since the 1970s, but it never did so despite considerable evidence that suggests DDVP is not only carcinogenic but dangerous to the human nervous system — especially in children.[49] The EPA "has determined that risks do not exceed levels of concern"[50], a study of longterm exposure to DDVP in rats showed no toxic effects.[51]
These concerns over the particular impact of pesticides on children have not gone unheeded. Fio360, an eco early-care center in Atlanta, GA, has even gone so far as to prepare organic foods for its clients' children.
The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit research and advocacy group, released a list of the pesticide residues for 44 fruits and vegetables in 2007. The list was compiled from data obtained between 2000 and 2005 from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA tested nearly 43,000 samples. Peaches and apples contain the most pesticides and onions and avacodos contain the least amounts of pesticide residue. The following are ranked from the most pesticide load to least pesticide load. The pesticide scores range from 100 being the highest pesticide load to 1 being the lowest pesticide load.
Pesticide Load in Fruits and Vegetables[52]

RANK FRUIT/VEGETABLE PESTICIDE LOAD
1 (worst) Peach 100 (highest)
2 Apple 93
3 Sweet Bell Pepper 83
4 Celery 82
5 Nectarine 81
6 Strawberries 80
7 Cherries 73
8 Kale 69
9 Lettuce 67
10 Grapes-Imported 66
11 Carrot 63
12 Pear 63
13 Collard Green 60
14 Spinach 58
15 Potato 56
16 Green Beans 53
17 Summer Squash 53
18 Pepper 51
19 Cucumber 50
20 Raspberries 46
21 Grapes-Domestic 44
22 Plum 44
23 Orange 44
24 Cauliflower 39
25 Tangerine 37
26 Mushrooms 36
27 Banana 34
28 Winter Squash 34
29 Cantelope 33
30 Cranberries 33
31 Honeydew Melon 30
32 Grapefruit 29
33 Sweet Potato 29
34 Tomato 29
35 Broccoli 28
36 Watermelon 26
37 Papaya 20
38 Eggplant 20
39 Cabbage 17
40 Kiwi 13
41 Sweet Peas-Frozen 10
42 Asparagus 10
43 Mango 9
44 Pineapple 7
45 Sweet Corn-Frozen 2
46 Avocado 1
47 (best) Onion 1 (lowest)
[edit] Taste and nutritional value
Some studies have shown higher nutrient levels in organic fruit and vegetables compared with conventionally grown products.[53].
The most important study of organic food to date was completed in 2007[54] and found that organic fruit and vegetables contain up to 40% more antioxidants than conventional equivalents, and that the figure was 60% for organic milk. The 4-year study was funded by the European Union and was the largest of its kind ever undertaken.[55]
A 2001 study by researchers at Washington State University concluded, under judgement by a panel of tasters, that organic apples were sweeter. Along with taste and sweetness, the texture as well as firmness of the apples were also rated higher than those grown conventionally. These differences are attributed to the greater soil quality resulting from organic farming techniques compared to those of conventional farming.[56]
However in 2002 a meta-analysis (a review of all prior studies on the subject) had found no proof that organic food offered greater nutritional values, more consumer safety or any distinguishable difference in taste.[57][58][59][60]
[edit] Cost
Organic products typically cost 10 to 40% more than similar conventionally produced products.[61] Processed organic foods vary in price when compared to their conventional counterparts. An Australian study by Choice magazine in 2004 found processed organic foods in supermarkets to be 65% more expensive, but noted this was not consistent. Prices may be higher because organic produce is produced on a smaller scale, and may need to be milled or processed separately. Furthermore, there is an increase in shipping costs from more centralized production in otherwise regional markets. In the case of dairy and eggs, the animal's requirements such as the number of animals that can be raised per acre, or the breed of animal and its feed conversion ratio affects the cost.
[edit] Related movements
Community-supported agriculture (CSA) is an approach where members prepurchase "shares" in a season's harvest, and pick up their weekly portions from distribution sites. Thus, consumers provide direct financing for farms, participate in the risks and rewards of annual growing conditions, and distribute food directly from the farm.
Local food is buying food that was produced geographicly closer to the consumer. Local food is seen as a way to get fresher food and invest in one's own community.
The fair trade movement, based on the principle that social and environmental sustainability are inextricably interdependent, is often linked to organic food.
Biodynamic agriculture, a method of organic farming, is closely related to the organic food movement.
[edit] Beyond Organic
Beyond Organic is a concept aligned with the idea of creating sustainable and ecological systems of food production capable of transcending the standards currently affixed to foods and processes now categorized by the term "organic". Since the organic food movement has been increasingly industrialized and often forced to undergo processes similar to those of conventional agriculture (such as monocultural plantings on massive scales) due to market pressures, many members of the what was originally the organic food movement are demanding that new standards be established for sustainable organic foods. Many ardent supporters of organic foods are frustrated that the integrity of what constitutes "organic" foods and farming methods have been compromised by FDA legislation that allows for synthetics to be introduced into organic processed foods and other unsustainable industrial attributes associated with "organic" foods.[62]
[edit] Facts and statistics
Organic Seals

International

United States

France

Australia

While organic food accounts for 1–2% of total food sales worldwide, the organic food market is growing rapidly, far ahead of the rest of the food industry, in both developed and developing nations.
• World organic food sales jumped from US $23 billion in 2002[63] to $40 billion in 2006.[64]
• The world organic market has been growing by 20% a year since the early 1990s, with future growth estimates ranging from 10%-50% annually depending on the country.
[edit] North America
United States:
• Organic food is the fastest growing sector of the American food marketplace[65] .
• Organic food sales have grown by 17 to 20 percent a year for the past few years[66] while sales of conventional food have grown at only about 2 to 3 percent a year.[67]
• In 2003 organic products were available in nearly 20,000 natural food stores and 73% of conventional grocery stores.[68]
• Organic products account for 2.6% of total food sales in the year 2005.[69]
• Two thirds of organic milk and cream and half of organic cheese and yogurt are sold through conventional supermarkets.[70]
Canada:
• Organic food sales surpassed $1 billion in 2006, accounting for 0.9% of food sales in Canada.[71]
• Organic food sales by grocery stores were 28% higher in 2006 than in 2005. [72]
• British Columbians account for 13% of the Canadian population, but purchased 26% of the organic food sold in Canada in 2006. [73]
[edit] Europe
In the European Union (EU25) 3.9% of the total utilized agricultural area is used for organic production. The countries with the highest proportion of organic land are Austria (11%) and Italy (8.4), followed by Czech Republic and Greece (both 7.2%). The lowest figures are shown for Malta (0.1%), Poland (0.6%) and Ireland (0.8%)[74]
Austria:
• 11.6% of all farmers produced organically in 2007.[75] The government has created incentives to increase the figure to 20% by 2010.[76]
• 4.9% of all food products sold in Austrian supermarkets (including discount stores) in 2006 were organic.[77] 8000 different organic products were available in the same year.[78]
Italy:
• Since 2005 all school lunches must be organic by law.[79]
Poland:
• In 2005 168,000 ha of land were under organic management. 7 percent of Polish consumers buy food that was produced according to the EU-Eco-regulation. The value of the organic market is estimated at 50 million Euros (2006).[80]
UK:
• Organic food sales increased from just over £100 million in 1993/94 to £1.21 billion in 2004 (an 11% increase on 2003).[81]
[edit] Caribbean
Cuba:
• After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, agricultural inputs that had previously been purchased from Eastern bloc countries were no longer available in Cuba, and many Cuban farms converted to organic methods out of necessity.[82] Consequently, organic agriculture is a mainstream practice in Cuba, while it remains an alternative practice in most other countries. Although some products called organic in Cuba would not satisfy certification requirements in other countries (crops may be genetically modified, for example[83][84]), Cuba exports organic citrus and citrus juices to EU markets that meet EU organic standards. Cuba's forced conversion to organic methods may position the country to be a global supplier of organic products.[85]
[edit] Organics Olympiad
Organics Olympiad 2007 awarded gold, silver and bronze medals to countries based on twelve measures of organic leadership.[86]. The gold medal winners were:
• Australia with 11.8 million organic hectares.
• Mexico with 83,174 organic farms.
• Romania with 15.9 million certified wild organic hectares.
• China with 135 thousand tonnes of organic wild harvest produce.
• Denmark with 1805 organic research publications recorded.
• Germany with 69 members of IFOAM.
• China with an increase of 1,998,705 organic hectares.
• Liechtenstein with 27.9% of its agricultural land certified organic.
• Mali with an 8488% annual increase in its organic hectares.
• Latvia with an annual 3.01% increase in its organic share of agricultural land.
• Liechtenstein with a 10.9% 4-yearly increment of the organic share of its total agriculture.
• Switzerland with a per capita annual spend on organic produce of 103 Euros

organic food in india

2009-06-24T22:42:00.000-07:00

History
The organic movement began in the early 1930s and early 1940s as a reaction to agriculture's growing reliance on synthetic fertilizers. Artificial fertilizers had been created during the 18th century, initially with superphosphates and then ammonia derived fertilizers mass-produced using the Haber-Bosch process developed during World War I. These early fertilizers were cheap, powerful, and easy to transport in bulk. Similar advances occurred in chemical pesticides in the 1940s, leading to the decade being referred to as the 'pesticide era'.
Sir Albert Howard is widely considered to be the father of organic farming.[5] Further work was done by J.I. Rodale in the United States, Lady Eve Balfour in the United Kingdom, and many others across the world.
As a percentage of total agricultural output, organic farming has remained tiny since its beginning. As environmental awareness and concern increased amongst the general population, the originally supply-driven movement became demand-driven. Premium prices from consumers and in some cases government subsidies attracted many farmers into converting. In the developing world, many farmers farm according to traditional methods which are comparable to organic farming but are not certified. In other cases, farmers in the developing world have converted for economic reasons [5]. As a proportion of total global agricultural output, organic output remains small, but it has been growing rapidly in many countries, notably in Europe.
Much before the awareness about the Organic farming through the movements began, there was a well developed Organic farming system in India. Ancient Indian texts describe the methods of Organic farming. This is being practiced even today in many of the villages in India. Sanjeevan system is an example of such organic farming method. [6]
Methods
"An organic farm, properly speaking, is not one that uses certain methods and substances and avoids others; it is a farm whose structure is formed in imitation of the structure of a natural system that has the integrity, the independence and the benign dependence of an organism"
—Wendell Berry, "The Gift of Good Land"
[edit] Soil management
Enhancing soil health is important for organic farmers,[7] but providing enough nutrients, particularly nitrogen, is often a challenge for organic farmers.[8] Plants primarily need nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Crop rotation and green manure help to provide adequate nutrition. Intercropping, which is sometimes used for insect and disease control, can also increase soil nutrients. Cover cropping, application of compost, and mulching can also increase organic matter. Organic farmers can also use certain processed fertilizers such as seed meal and various mineral powders such as rock phosphate and

greensand, a naturally occurring form of potash which provides potassium. Altogether these methods help to control erosion, promote biodiversity, and enhance the health of the soil. In some cases pH may need to be amended. Natural pH amemdments include lime and sulfure, but in the U.S. some synthetically compounds such as iron sulfate, aluminum sulfate, magnesium sulfate, and soluble boron products are allowed in organic farming

[edit] Standards
Main article: Organic certification
Standards regulate production methods and in some cases final output for organic agriculture. Standards may be voluntary or legislated. As early as the 1970s organic producers could be voluntarily certified by private associations. In the 1980s, governments began to produce organic production guidelines. Beginning in the 1990s, a trend toward legislation of standards began, most notably with the 1991 EU-Eco-regulation developed for European Union[15], which set standards for 12 countries, and a 1993 UK program. The EU's program was followed by a Japan program in 2001, and in 2002 the United States created the National Organic Program (NOP).[16] As of 2007 over 60 countries have regulations on organic farming (IFOAM 2007:11). In 2005 IFOAM created the Principles of Organic Agriculture, an international guideline for certification criteria.[17] Typically the agencies do not certify individual farms, but rather accredit certification groups.
Materials used in organic production and foods are tested independently by the Organic Materials Review Institute.
[edit] Composting
Under USDA organic standards, manure must be subjected to proper thermophilic composting and allowed to reach a sterilizing temperature. If raw animal manure is used, 120 days must pass before the crop is harvested.[18]
[edit] Economics
The economics of organic farming, a subfield of agricultural economics, encompasses the entire process and effects of organic farming in terms of human society, including social costs, opportunity costs, unintended consequences, information asymmetries, and economies of scale. Although the scope of economics is broad, agricultural economics tends to focus on maximizing yields and efficiency at the farm level. Mainstream economics takes an anthropocentric approach to the value of the natural world: biodiversity, for example, is considered beneficial only to the extent that it is valued by people and increases profits. Some governments such as the European Union subsidize organic farming, in large part because these countries believe in the external benefits of reduced water use, reduced water contamination by pesticides and nutrients of organic farming, reduced soil erosion, reduced carbon emissions, increased biodiversity, and assorted other benefits.
Organic farming is labor and knowledge-intensive whereas conventional farming is capital-intensive, requiring more energy and manufactured inputs. Organic farmers in California have cited marketing as their greatest obstacle.[19]
[edit] Geographic producer distribution
The markets for organic products are strongest in North America and Europe, which as of 2001 are estimated to have $6 and $8 billion respectively of the $20 billion market (2003:6). However, as of 2007 organic farmland is distributed across the globe. Australasia has 39% of the total organic farmland with Australia's 11.8 million hectares, but 97 percent of this land is sprawling rangeland (2007:35), which results in total sales of approximately 5% of US sales (2003:7). Europe has 23 percent of total organic farmland (6.9 million hectares), followed by Latin America with 19 percent (5.8 million hectares). Asia has 9.5 percent while North America has 7.2 percent. Africa has a mere 3 percent. See also Organic farming by country.
Besides Australia, the countries with the most organic area are Argentina (3.1 million hectares), China (2.3 million hectares), and the United States (1.6 million hectares). Much of Argentina's organic farmland is pasture, like that of Australia (2007:42). Italy, Spain, Germany, Brazil, Uruguay, and the UK follow the United States by the amount of land managed organically (2007:26).
[edit] Growth
As of 2001, the estimated total market value of certified organic products was estimated to be $20 billion. By 2002 this was $23 billion and by 2007 more than $46 billion according to Organic Monitor (Willer/Kilcher 2009).
In recent years both Europe (2007: 7.8 million hectares/European Union: 7.2 million hectares) and North America (2007: 2.2 million hectares) have experienced strong growth in organic farmland. However, this growth has occurred under different conditions. While the European Union has shifted agricultural subsidies to organic farmers in recognition of its environmental benefits, the United States has taken a free market approach[20]. As a result, as of 2007 4 percent of the European Union's farmland was organically managed compared to just 0.6 percent of United States farmland (Willer/Kilcher 2009).
IFOAM's most recent edition of The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2009 lists the countries which had the most hectares in 2007. The country with the most organic land is Australia with more than 12 million hectares, followed by Argentina, Brasil and the US. In total 32.2 million hectares were under organic management in 2007. For 1999 11 million hectares of organically managed land are reported (Willer/Kilcher 2009).
[edit] Productivity and profitability
A 2006 study suggests that converted organic farms have lower pre-harvest yields than their conventional counterparts in developed countries (92%) and that organic farms have higher pre-harvest yields than their low-intensity counterparts in developing countries (132%). The researcher attributes this to a relative lack of expensive fertilizers and pesticides in the developing world compared to the intensive, subsidy-driven farming of the developed world. Nonetheless, the researcher purposely avoids making the claim that organic methods routinely outperform green-revolution (conventional) methods.[21] This study incorporated a 1990 review of 205 crop comparisons which found that organic crops had 91% of conventional yields.[22] A major US survey published in 2001, analyzed results from 150 growing seasons for various crops and concluded that organic yields were 95-100% of conventional yields.[23]
Lotter (2003:10) reports that repeated studies have found that organic farms withstand severe weather conditions better than conventional farms, sometimes yielding 70-90% more than conventional farms during droughts. A 22-year farm trial study by Cornell University published in 2005 concluded that organic farming produces the same corn and soybean yields as conventional methods over the long-term averages, but consumed less energy and used zero pesticides. The results were attributed to lower yields in general but higher yields during drought years.[24] A study of 1,804 organic farms in Central American hit by Hurricane Mitch in 1998 found that the organic farms sustained the damage much better, retaining 20 to 40% more topsoil and smaller economic losses at highly significant levels than their neighbors.[25]
On the other hand, a prominent 21-year Swiss study found an average of 20% lower organic yields over conventional, along with 50% lower expenditure on fertilizer and energy, and 97% less pesticides.[26] A long-term study by U.S Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists concluded that, contrary to widespread belief, organic farming can build up soil organic matter better than conventional no-till farming, which suggests long-term yield benefits from organic farming. [27] An 18-year study of organic methods on nutrient-depleted soil concluded that conventional methods were superior for soil fertility and yield in a cold-temperate climate, arguing that much of the benefits from organic farming are derived from imported materials which could not be regarded as "self-sustaining".[28]
While organic farms have lower yields, organic methods require no synthetic fertilizer and pesticides. The decreased cost on those inputs, along with the premiums which consumers pay for organic produce, create higher profits for organic farmers. Organic farms have been consistently found to be as or more profitable than conventional farms with premiums included, but without premiums profitability is mixed (Lotter 2003:11). Welsh (1999) reports that organic farmers are more profitable in the drier states of the United States, likely due to their superior drought performance.[29]
In 2008 the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) and UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) issued a report which stated that "organic agriculture can be more conducive to food security in Africa than most conventional production systems, and that it is more likely to be sustainable in the long-term".[30] The report assessed 114 projects in 24 African countries, finding that "yields had more than doubled where organic, or near-organic practices had been used" and that soil fertility and drought resistance improved.[31]
In 2009, a review concluded that organic production was more profitable in Wisconsin, when including price premiums.[32]

what is orgainc food and its benifit???

2009-06-24T22:39:00.000-07:00

In spite of the increasing popularity of Organic food these days, most of the people do not have a clear idea regarding the definition of organic food. In simple words, Organic foods are those foods that are produced, processed and packaged without using chemicals. They have been accepted due to their perceived health benefits over conventional food. The organic industry is growing rapidly and has caught the attention of farmers, manufacturers and, above all, consumers. Some of the popular organic food items include organic tea, organic coffee, organic wine, organic meat, organic beef, organic milk, organic honey, organic vegetables, organic fruits, organic rice, organic corn, organic herbs, organic essential oils, organic coconut oil and organic olive oil.

Organic foods protect from heart disease and cancer, as they contain Phenolic compounds. Organic food ensures high food quality, which other conventional foods cannot give. Organic food is natural and fresh, and thus, it is tasty. Many people prefer to grow organic food in their home gardens, because it costs about 20% more than the conventional food. Organic gardening uses organic seeds, organic fertilizers, compost, organic root stimulators, and organic pest control. It has been claimed by health experts that organic food is more nutritious. Some of the features that can be associated with organic food are quality, good taste, proper selection of crop varieties etc.

Advantages of Organic food
• Organically grown foods are natural, without any sprayed chemical.
• Organically grown foods are nutritious and full of taste although they may not look as colorful and well presented as shop produce.
• Organic foods put less burden on environment. Growing foods organically can protect the topsoil from erosion and is a great way of getting closer to nature.
Tips for Organic Food Customers
• Search for the label / logo of the certification body that has monitored and approved the production and processing of the food item as organic.
• Keep yourself updated about the organizations that are authorized to sell organic food in your region.
• Check out the prices of different food items in different stores and buy accordingly. The price of organic food varies from 10% to even 200% depending upon the place from the shopkeeper has bought the product.
Health Benefits of Organic Food
Organic food is termed as certified food, which is produced in accordance with some production standards. It is grown in organic farms and vigorously monitored by the officials of a certification body, during the production.

Benefits of Raw Organic Food
Organic food consumption has become the trend of the time, owing to the multiple health benefits that it offers. Organic food is absolutely natural and is packed with loads of vital nutrients required by the body.

Health Benefits Of Organic Food
Organic food is termed as certified food, which is produced in accordance with some production standards. It is grown in organic farms and vigorously monitored by the officials of a certification body, during the production. Unlike natural food, organic food stuffs are generally grown without the use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers. They are often labeled to differentiate them from the natural ones, because both are similar in terms of color, size and shape. Organic food not only involves fruits, vegetables and grains, but also the products derived from livestock.

Initially, organic foods were grown at small family-run farms. This restricted their availability to a great extent. The organic foods were available only in small stores and farmers' markets. With the increasing demand and the advancement in the field of agriculture, organic foods are now available in many countries of the world. Pricy though, more and more people are switching to organic food. The superior taste of organic food, perhaps, motivates people to consume them. Apart from the fact that it tastes better than the natural food, organic food has certain benefits on the overall health of the people as well. Check out the article to know all about the health benefits of organic food.

Organic Food Advantages
• Studies suggest that organic food tend to contain 10-50% higher amount of phyto nutrients as compared to the conventional food.
• Reduced risk of health problems is often associated with the consumption of organic food.
• Officials from the certification bodies visit the farm or plant, where the organic food stuffs are processed, to check whether the food is produced in accordance with the production standards set by them or not. This makes the organic food advantageous over its natural counterpart.
• Since organic foods generally carry labels, you will be able to differentiate them from others and choose accordingly.
• Organic food stays longer, without decaying, than the natural food.
• Since organic foods are treated with manure, they are considered better than the natural food, which are often treated with pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers, when they are grown in farms.
• Organic food contains phenolic compounds, which protects our heart from cardiovascular diseases and reduces the risk of cancer.
• The farm animals in an organic farming are reared without the use of growth hormones. Farmers ensure that the animals are given a healthy and balanced diet. This makes such animal products tastier and healthier to eat, as compared to those produced in the conventional way.
• Fruits and vegetables grown in organic farms are found to have more antioxidants as compared to those grown by the conventional method of agriculture.

Benefits of Eating Raw Organic Food
Organic food consumption has become the trend of the time, owing to the multiple health benefits that it offers. Organic food is absolutely natural and is packed with loads of vital nutrients required by the body. One of the major benefits of eating raw organic food is that, not only it tastes better than conventional foods, but also contains a far greater quality, that makes it more nutritious. Read further to explore information about the raw organic food benefits…

Going in for raw organic food serves as the perfect health improving remedy. A person tends to feel more energized after having consumed raw organic food and organic food also aids in helping you lose weight faster. Raw food gets easily absorbed in the body, thus helps in ensuring smooth bowel movements. Raw food ensures that the nutritional value of the food remains enzymatically and nutritionally intact.

Cooking food often deteriorates the nutritional value of food, by leading to a loss of vital nutrients and enzymes. Heat tends to change the very composition of fat, protein, and carbohydrates. Also the cooking tends to interfere with the bioelectrical energy, necessary for sustaining life. Eating raw organic food goes a long way in cleansing your bloodstream and eliminating the waste products that are responsible for the formation of toxins in the body. So, incorporate raw organic food in your daily meals and improve your health fitness.

Organic means our food is not grown in cocktail of chemicals that means chemical fertilisers or chemical pesticides (either used on the crop or already present in the soil owing to their use for decades) and is also not genetically modified or genetically engineered. Science says Fresh Organic Produce contains many more vitamins, minerals and enzymes. Organic products protect us from toxic and chemical induced diseases while nourishing our bodies to promote good health. Non-organic food only appears to be cheaper, but it costs us our health, our farmland, our eco-systems and taxes to pay for the disasters that chemical farming create. Chemical farming has led to dramatic erosion of the soil, killing off whole species of birds and near extinction of some of our beautiful wildlife. Sustainable Organic Agriculture is already feeding people around the world. Chemical farming can seriously damage farmer's health.

organic food week....

2009-06-24T22:24:00.002-07:00

It takes 20 minutes of hunting and asking around to get to the two shelves at Food Bazaar assigned to organic foods. The section is unidentified and the selection little more than cereals and pulses. There are only two brands on offer, both uncertified.
Customers walk past, seemingly unaware of the "green" offerings. Nina Goyal is one of the few who stops at the section. "I come here for a few specific items," she says, "if I were to change my entire monthly supplies to organic, the expenditure would be unjustifiable."
This one instance is as representative of the domestic market for organic produce as it gets -- inadequate retail presence, little to no certified branded produce, an incomplete range, uncompetitive price points, and government policies that are skewed towards exports.
Central strategy on organic foods has always slanted toward the global market, leaving the critical mass of domestic consumers out in the cold. Currently, about 70 per cent of organic agriculture items produced in India are being exported. Why, you ask? Big bucks, clearly. Organic products fetch a 20-30 per cent higher price than inorganic products in the world market.
According to the Indian Competence Centre for Organic Agriculture, the global market for organically produced foods is $26 billion and is estimated to increase to $102 billion by 2020.
As part of 10th Five Year Plan (2002-07), the government earmarked Rs 100 crore (Rs 1 billion) for the promotion of sustainable agriculture in the country, but the main components of this initiative have benefited exports, from the establishing of national organic standards under NPOP (National Programme for Organic Production), putting in place a system of certification for products, and establishing APEDA (Agricultural and Processed Food Export Development Authority) as the nodal agency to promote exports opportunities.
Domestic retail avenues for organic produce have traditionally been the odd cottage emporium, fruit mart, bakery and kirana store along with an upmarket provision store here and a delicatessen there.
Today, however, marginal growth is slowly becoming evident in the increase in organised producers, retailers and product offerings in the market, where before the movement had been driven entirely by the spirit of individual initiatives of the farmers, the odd entrepreneur and non-governmental organisations.
Dr Vandana Shiva, physicist and economist, spearheaded the cause of sustainable farming by establishing Navdanya two decades ago, a movement for biodiversity conservation and farmers' rights. One of its seminal contributions to fair trade practices has been the marketing of organic agricultural produce directly from farmers to consumers.
Mayaji, director, Navdanya, claims the sector has sustained itself through the marginal farmer. "They would tell us 'We are being compelled to adopt chemical-based farming because of government policies, but we will always keep a portion of the land organic for self-consumption' -- that is the kind of farmer we exist for," she says.
Besides marketing produce through their two outlets in New Delhi and one in Dehra Dun, Navdanya has just initiated an organic food awareness campaign among schoolchildren in Delhi, inviting them to learn to cook organically at its Slow Food caf� in Hauz Khas. "We teach them to make organic burgers with nine grain and whole wheat buns," laughs Mayaji.
Sustainability for one-off shops has always been an issue. Nikhil and Jigna Shah started Greenway in 1997 when there were no others retailing organic produce in Mumbai. They source directly from 20 marginal farmers, and processing is done in small quantities at home.
"Our lateral growth has been great in terms of more products and greater awareness, but vertical growth is stubborn and we've had to persevere to stay afloat." Nikhil is passionate about their work and claims that their customers are just as enthused; they rarely ask for certification evidence or question sources.
"There is no certification for inorganic products so why should there be for organic products? If you buy wheat from a store, you buy on the basis of the sheer fact that it is branded, you don't ask whether it has been blended with chemicals and in what quantities."
When organic farmers and traders are operating in an anonymous market, certification is developed to show and guarantee to consumers that a product has been produced in consistency with organic standards.
While certification has provided Indian-produced organic products with inroads into foreign markets, domestic bound produce is largely uncertified, owing to the fact that most producers are either small or marginal farmers, small cooperatives or fair trade companies.
Under current government policy, it takes approximately three years for a farm in conversion to be certified as organic, and costs are hefty for the small farmer.
While internationally, our exports cannot hold ground without certification, uncertified brands in India have had some success. Conscious Foods was born in 1999 from Kavita Mukhi's desire to feed her family with safe, pure food.
"The farmers I sourced from were all small farmers, there was no talk of certification in those days, and we just bought from whoever we believed to be true. I bought for self-consumption and tried to sell the excess. We still don't certify our products because our mission has been to support the small and marginal farmers."
There seem to be other attributes that inspire confidence among her buyers, such as the brightly colour-coded labeling -- green for spice, mustard for cereals and pulses, red for snacks -- the interesting play with bottle shapes and sizes, and stories about indigenous producers printed on the label.
"We never compromise on quality, we have a centralised sorting, cleaning and packing workshop, and the 10 women we employ wear masks, gloves and hair nets." Conscious Foods grows for the domestic market. Mukhi clarifies, "Why should the best produce be exported while we eat unhealthy pesticide laced food?" She continues, "We would love to start a stand-alone store but currently our volumes are not substantial enough."
These sketchy patterns of retail are metamorphosing into more organised retail, albeit slowly. With an estimated 2-3 million potential consumers of organic agricultural products in India, the problem has always been the absence of organised marketing and retailing.
In developed countries, especially in Europe and the US, every supermarket has a green line where a complete range of certified organic products is available. India is just beginning to manage a toehold in some supermarkets.
Food Bazaar, the foods division of Pantaloon [Get Quote] Retail, is based on a comprehensive food and grocery store format and has 32 outlets and 200,000 sq ft of retail space across India. The organic range stocked is inadequate but Damodar Mall, head of the food division, says, "It's a beginning. The customer is moving in small steps and formats like ours will have to take the lead."
Mall claims the organic range is not complete because they are dependent on local, small brand initiatives; there just aren't enough big certified brands.
Fabindia is hoping to change that. The Rs 100 crore (Rs 1 billion) apparel and home furnishings retailer ventured into organic foods earlier this year when it test-marketed its organic range in New Delhi.
According to Jashwat Purohit, head of Fabindia's organic foods business, the organics segment will grow from 1 per cent of its annual turnover in the first year to 5 per cent in the third year.
"Our goal is to be able to offer customers a complete organic lifestyle. It doesn't seem enough for us to offer only select items; we are constantly adding to our range. We started with 75 products but now have around 200 certified products," he states.
However, the supply chain is still testy. Says Purohit, "This is a huge challenge; organic projects are scattered across the country and we are faced with many challenges -- quality, consistency, transport, storage, shelf life -- and so have had to partner with only very reliable suppliers who can consistently deliver the quality we want."
Fabindia's short-terms plans are to offer fresh fruit and vegetables, and long-term plans include bakery and dairy products. "We hope to be in all our stores by the end of this year, which are in every major city across the country," Purohit says.
Even large exporters are now looking homeward to fill the gaps. As export markets get saturated and oversupplied, especially in markets like tea, and premiums get squeezed, domestic markets are bound to be targeted.
Says R B Singh, chief executive officer, IITC Organic, a Rs 30 crore (Rs 300 million) Lucknow-based producer and exporter of organic products, "In a year or two, we intend to be the leading domestic organic brand. We predict that five years down the line, India will be both a major organic foods producer as well as consumer. It is awareness and education in the Western countries that has brought about an unprecedented demand for organic foods. India will follow suit as public information and education grows."
Increased public health consciousness and increased visibility will help, but there has to also be a shift in mindset. Says Rehan Padamsee, a loyal customer of Conscious Foods, "Consumers have to understand that consistency, standardisation and all-year availability cannot be stringently observed with organic food. I learned from the Slow Food Movement (an international food movement that came into being in Paris in 1989 that preserves agricultural biodiversity, traditional foods and promotes seasonal consumption) to try and eat traditionally and seasonally."
Nikhil Shah agrees, "Customers need to undergo a paradigm shift; they cannot expect every tomato to look alike without chemical intervention. When I take rice from a farmer and see insects in it, I don't reject it, I just make sure I dry it in the sun and package it again."
It's not just consumer sensitivity that will affect the upshot; price parity is a big deterrent for potential consumers. Says Padamsee, "I believe that it is my right to eat healthy food and I shouldn't have to pay a premium for it. I think more people would convert if there was a better price parity."
Godrej [Get Quote] AgroVet's retail product, Nature's Basket, is also looking into the possibility of test marketing certified organic produce through its outlets, but according to R S Vijan, executive vice president, when they test-marketed organic chikoos and coconuts, the sales response was slow as customers were not ready to pay the price differential of 15-20 per cent between organic and non-organic fruits.
Arguably, once a farmer converts from chemical-based farming to organic farming, costs should come down. Mayaji responds, "Organic products are more expensive now because farmers are still in the conversion period when yields are low, even though inputs are cheaper. Because inorganic farming is so heavily subsidised, when we started buying from farmers, we needed to ensure that the farmer didn't suffer, so we paid a premium and continue to do so."
Also, currently, the market is in its infancy and as such does not benefit from economies of scale. Mall agrees, "We believe the premium will come down as sales go up. Growers will improve their yields over time, and consumers' demand will grow. With critical demand, mass prices will drop. But as a retailer, we can only participate in the trend, not force it."
In all this however, small farmers still have no significant retail platforms unless picked up by cooperatives or NGOs. Attempts at marketing organically grown produce are still mostly by word of mouth, filling individual orders that were phoned in and home-delivered like the Alibag organic farmers' cooperative who use the home-delivery basket scheme -- but these are difficult, expensive and eventually quite ineffective methods of selling.
Trade fairs and fair price markets are few and far between, and usually too localised to have a large impact. For the first time, ICCOA, with the government of Karnataka and APEDA, is organising a pan-Indian trade fair in Bangalore this November.
India Organic 2005 promises to be visited by large buyers; what is noteworthy is a section reserved for uncertified farmers.
Nikhil Shah is optimistic: "The farmers are waiting excitedly; they're ready for the boom." Edward Bastin, advisor to Fabindia's pilot project, Organic Fresh Direct, adds, "We promote factors that have fuelled demand in more mature markets -- public health consciousness, increased exposure to organic food, a reduction in the price premium and active marketing.
Although any one of these factors is likely to stimulate interest, it is the simultaneous occurrence of all of them that will really work." Until then, all the excitement will amount to a little more than a whisper.
Organically speaking...
Customers need to undergo a para-digm shift; they cannot expect every tomato to look alike without chemical intervention. When I take rice from a farmer and see insects in it, I don't reject reject it, I just make sure I dry it in the sun and package it again.
Nikhil Shah, founder, Greenway
We exist for the marginal farmers who would keep a portion of the land organic for self-consumption, despite being compelled to adopt chemical-based farming because of government policies.
Mayaji, director, Navdanya
It is awareness and education in Western countries that has brought about an unprecedented demand for organic foods. India will follow suit as public information and education grows.
R B Singh, CEO, IITC Organic
Consumers have to understand that consistency, standardisation and all-year availability cannot be stringently observed with organic food. Also, it's my right to eat healthy food and I shouldn't have to pay a premium for it. I think more people would convert if there was a better price parity.
Rehan Padamsee, Consumer

organic food week....

2009-06-24T22:24:00.001-07:00

2009-06-11T22:59:00.000-07:00

http://india.gov.in/citizen.php

use your power and get sukoon...

2009-06-11T22:46:00.000-07:00

Home > Citizens > CIC:RTI

RTI Complaint & Appeal

The Government of India always lays emphasis on making the lives of its citizens easy, smooth and making India truly democratic and keeping this in mind the RTI Act has been established.

RTI stands for Right To Information and has been given the status of a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. Article 19 (1) under which every citizen has freedom of speech and expression and have the right to know how the government works, what role does it play, what are its functions and so on.

Since every citizen pays taxes, thus this gives them more power and the right to know how their money is being spent. Right to Information Act empowers every citizen to ask any questions from the Government or seek any information, take notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records, take certified samples of material.

The RTI Act extends to the whole of India (except the State of Jammu and Kashmir), all bodies, which come under Government notification including NGOs, which are owned, controlled or are substantially financed by the Government.

RTI Act confers right to access to information held by a Public Authority. In case,you have been denied the access to information you may file Appeal / Complaint before the Central Information Commission (CIC) using the following options:

For further information, you may please contact:

Shri Pankaj K. P. Shreyaskar,
Deputy Secretary & Joint Registrar
#301-A, August Kranti Bhawan,
Central Information Commission, New Delhi 110066
Telephone & Fax: 011-26717354
Email: pkp.shreyaskar@nic.in, rti@india.gov.in

content taken from http://rti.india.gov.in/complaint_index.php