IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v34y2017i4d10.1007_s10460-017-9776-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Bain

    (Iowa State University)

  • Theresa Selfa

    (SUNY ESF)

Abstract

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

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Bain & Theresa Selfa, 2017. "Non-GMO vs organic labels: purity or process guarantees in a GMO contaminated landscape," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 805-818, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:34:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-017-9776-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-017-9776-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10460-017-9776-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-017-9776-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robin Roff, 2007. "Shopping for change? Neoliberalizing activism and the limits to eating non-GMO," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(4), pages 511-522, December.
    2. Daniel Jaffee & Philip Howard, 2010. "Corporate cooptation of organic and fair trade standards," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(4), pages 387-399, December.
    3. Magnus Boström & Mikael Klintman, 2006. "State-centered versus Nonstate-driven Organic Food Standardization: A Comparison of the US and Sweden," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(2), pages 163-180, June.
    4. David Goodman, 2000. "Organic and conventional agriculture: Materializing discourse and agro-ecological managerialism," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 215-219, September.
    5. Timothy Vos, 2000. "Visions of the middle landscape: Organic farming and the politics of nature," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 245-256, September.
    6. Robin Roff, 2009. "No alternative? The politics and history of non-GMO certification," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 351-363, December.
    7. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Livingston, Michael J. & Mitchell, Lorraine & Wechsler, Seth, 2014. "Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States," Economic Research Report 164263, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Carmen Bain & Tamera Dandachi, 2014. "Governing GMOs: The (Counter) Movement for Mandatory and Voluntary Non-GMO Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-21, December.
    9. Patricia Allen & Martin Kovach, 2000. "The capitalist composition of organic: The potential of markets in fulfilling the promise of organic agriculture," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 221-232, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carmen Bain & Sonja Lindberg & Theresa Selfa, 2020. "Emerging sociotechnical imaginaries for gene edited crops for foods in the United States: implications for governance," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 37(2), pages 265-279, June.
    2. Douglas H. Constance, 2023. "The doctors of agrifood studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 31-43, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erin Nelson & Laura Gómez Tovar & Rita Schwentesius Rindermann & Manuel Gómez Cruz, 2010. "Participatory organic certification in Mexico: an alternative approach to maintaining the integrity of the organic label," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(2), pages 227-237, June.
    2. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.
    3. Alessandra Arcuri, 2015. "The Transformation of organic regulation: The ambiguous effects of publicization," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 144-159, June.
    4. Sini Forssell & Leena Lankoski, 2015. "The sustainability promise of alternative food networks: an examination through “alternative” characteristics," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 63-75, March.
    5. Daniel Jaffee, 2010. "Fair Trade Standards, Corporate Participation, and Social Movement Responses in the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 267-285, April.
    6. Carmen Bain & Tamera Dandachi, 2014. "Governing GMOs: The (Counter) Movement for Mandatory and Voluntary Non-GMO Labels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-21, December.
    7. David Goodman, 2000. "Organic and conventional agriculture: Materializing discourse and agro-ecological managerialism," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 215-219, September.
    8. Julianne Busa & Leslie King, 2015. "Corporate takeover? Ideological heterogeneity, individualization, and materiality in the corporatization of three environment-related movements," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 251-261, September.
    9. Erin Nelson & Steffanie Scott & Judie Cukier & Ángel Galán, 2009. "Institutionalizing agroecology: successes and challenges in Cuba," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(3), pages 233-243, September.
    10. McCaffrey Sara Jane & Kurland Nancy, 2014. "Who defines “local”? Resistance to harmonizing standards in ethical markets," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 191-219, April.
    11. Daniel Jaffee & Philip Howard, 2010. "Corporate cooptation of organic and fair trade standards," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(4), pages 387-399, December.
    12. Mrill Ingram, 2007. "Disciplining Microbes in the Implementation of US Federal Organic Standards," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(12), pages 2866-2882, December.
    13. Henk Renting & Terry K Marsden & Jo Banks, 2003. "Understanding Alternative Food Networks: Exploring the Role of Short Food Supply Chains in Rural Development," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 35(3), pages 393-411, March.
    14. Elizabeth A. Bennett, 2018. "Extending ethical consumerism theory to semi-legal sectors: insights from recreational cannabis," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 295-317, June.
    15. Robin Roff, 2009. "No alternative? The politics and history of non-GMO certification," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(4), pages 351-363, December.
    16. Amaranta Herrero & Fern Wickson & Rosa Binimelis, 2015. "Seeing GMOs from a Systems Perspective: The Need for Comparative Cartographies of Agri/Cultures for Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-24, August.
    17. Laura DeLind & Philip Howard, 2008. "Safe at any scale? Food scares, food regulation, and scaled alternatives," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 25(3), pages 301-317, September.
    18. Ryan Gunderson, 2014. "Problems with the defetishization thesis: ethical consumerism, alternative food systems, and commodity fetishism," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(1), pages 109-117, March.
    19. David E. Winickoff & Kendra Klein, 2011. "Food Labels and the Environment: Towards Harmonization of EU and US Organic Standards," Chapters, in: David Vogel & Johan Swinnen (ed.), Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Amanda Green & David Martin & Gracie Ghartey-Tagoe, 2020. "Is the College Farm Sustainable? A Case Study from Davidson College," Working Papers 20-06, Davidson College, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:34:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s10460-017-9776-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.