China has gained a top position in the world of Certified Organic Agriculture (COA). This article briefly portrays the development and institutional nature of the Chinese success as an exporter of organic products in a process of globalization. It then reflects on possible lessons from this case of globalization, to be implied from the point of view of future development and integrity of the Danish organic sector

Egelyng, H.

English

Organic Eprints

3/2010 7By Henrik Egelyng, Ph.D., Senior  Project Researcher, Danish Institute for Agricultural Sciences and International StudiesChina is known as the world’s factory and symbol of globalization mainly in fields where – in the words of Harvard business scholars Zeng & Williamson (2007) - “Chinese Cost Inno-vation is Disrupting Global Competition”. China has now also gained a top posi-tion in the world of organic agriculture - in terms of area under COA management. It may be relevant to ask there-fore how this success came about and whether it may have implications for global competition, division of labor and economic as well as environmental sustaina-bility of organic farming in different regions. China eats “Green” food – export organicsThe large majority of Chi-nese consumers eat Green Food (GF) which is certified according to a longstanding Chinese product standard: GF has been analysed, veri-fied and labeled as “unpol-luted” and safe to eat (Fig 1). The pre-existence of this “green” label is perhaps one reason why the evolution of Chinese COA has been ex-port oriented. The institutio-nal set-up for COA in China has been analysed in detail elsewhere (Egelyng, Qiao & Li 2006). The Chinese environmen-tal administration (now ministry) SEPA and later the standardization bureau (CNCA) has recently issued a stream of circulars, rules, and guidelines for regula-tion of the market for COA products. The essence in this history is the emergence of a state guided and yet commercial certification system for organic products. The policy rationale is to improve compliance with all the increasingly complex and formal rules involved with internationally ac-cepted certification as “orga-nic”. China´s capacity to “deli-ver” on formal compliance is already high. In other words, it may well be that Chinese organic produc-tion bases are small green “islands” in high seas of background pollution, in some regions, and it may be that the (natural resource) transaction costs of trans-porting small amounts of “Biofertilizers” long distan-ces by small diesel trucks between these “islands” could trigger some green (including GHG) accounting issues. However, the Biofer-tilizers and the end produ-cts are usually very profes-sionally certified. The institutional founda-tion for certified organics in China, is not yet anchored enough to ensure inwards nationwide expansion of COA across the nation. It remains to be seen therefore whether and to what extent certification as organic can work as an institutional vehicle within China itself, to promote a more environ-mentally sustainable rural development trajectory to strengthen local livelihoods of Chinese producers, rural communities and safeguard local environments or help conservation of environ-ment and nature. It is also still an open question to what extent the export oriented COA sector has a direct farmer liveli-hood function, given that most Chinese COA exports are produced at socalled “production bases” meaning companies renting land and hiring workers to till, plant and harvest, rather than dealing with “farmers”. In the past few years, nevertheless, Chinese COA has evolved quickly, mea-sured in quantitative terms like numbers of producers, area and product value, prompting Chinas current position among the world’s big COA nations, exporting to Europe, Japan and USA, where the entry of large supermarket chains such as Walmart has introduced Chinese COA food produ-cts in the same shelves as American, European and Latin-American foods.Challenges and Perspec-tives for COA at national and local levels A few years ago, this author participated in an American conference on “Place, Taste and Sustenance – the Social Spaces of Food and Agricul-ture” at Boston University. I shall never forget the assem-bly of eminent US scholars essentially concluding that the US agricultural model had grossly failed to safe-guard development (env-ironments, local commu-nities and livelihood), and only succeeded providing (too) cheap volumes of food, obesity, urbanization and monetary streams up production chains. The as-sembly pursued a solution China has gained a top position in the world of Certified Organic Agriculture (COA). This article briefly portrays the development and institutional nature of the Chinese success as an exporter of organic products in a process of glo-balization. It then reflects on possible lessons from this case of globalization, to be implied from the point of view of future development and integrity of the Danish organic sector.   ArticleThe Chinese Organic Export Model, Globalization and a Danish Future Perspective3/2010 8by looking to Europe – par-ticularly to French concepts of terroir and geographical indications (GI) – i.e. for a new and different institu-tional environment to create real dollar value out of what had so far been non-market values and therefore appa-rently having had no value at all: biodiversity, cultu-ral diversity, small rural communities, local food cultures, environmentally benign production methods, local agro-environments and so on. Like the Ame-rican assembly, a Danish Professor (Kjeldsen-Kragh) argues – in Tidsskrift for Landøkonomi, June 2010 – that (conventional) Danish agriculture is on the wrong track – it failed to serve the policy goals of the society in which it is embedded.Challenged certiﬁcation As eminently shown i.a. by the American journalist Michael Pollan, in his ”The Omnivore´s Dilemma” pub-lished in 2006, the integrity of organic certification is challenged not so much by formal rule compliance issues perhaps, but rather by what American food system researchers refer to as bifurcation and by conventionalization. This has meant that in the USA a significant number of orga-nic producers have turned their back on the organic certification system, because they feel the organic label has been hijacked by the corporate sector, using “in-put substitution” to comply with formal rules (industry standards), rather than fol-lowing “genuine” organic principles. In the long run, of course, further travel along such a trajectory of bifurcation and conventio-nalization, will threaten the “brand value” of COA.  In Denmark, where COA has been a rising star for a full generation now, the “Green Growth” policy paper has presented a trian-gular public policy ambition of ensuring (market driven) growth, development and integrity of the organic sector - in addition to a new opening towards corporate ownership, as in China and the US. Mature stars can implode and if one adds the dimension of a globalized organic market and divi-sion of labor for COA (with China illustrating globa-lization and the US other challenges), one may con-clude that it may be relevant indeed to catapult Danish COA to a new and higher level. In the eyes and mind of this author, this new level may have to evolve around a concept of valorization and a policy discussion of what it is we - in our capacities as consumers, citizens, farmers, processors, sta-keholders and taxpayers – wants the organic label to valorize. Is it merely a matter of conformity to one industry standard (no che-mical inputs) among many similar technical standards, providing money value for participants in a value chain from competition in the global market as it presents itself in the supermarkets. Or is it also a discussion of national levels, conditions under and institutions by which the organic sector holds potential to capture or valorize a host of additional positive “externalities”. Institutional innovation neededTo build an even brigh-ter future on an already glorious past, institutional innovation is needed in several areas of COA. This innovation need to move beyond technical, produ-ction and (money) “value chain” issues and include a broader “contractual” and more (rural) developmental view of organic farming as involving a palette of public policy instruments (market conform of course) for con-serving Danish nature areas and their biodiversity, for keeping clean water, diverse landscapes, develop local gastronomic cultures and strengthen local livelihoods and employment in areas “threatened” by de-popula-tion, zoning restrictions and “structural reforms”.If successful, such a stra-tegy will help Denmark con-solidate or further valorize its agro-food system pro-ducts at home and abroad, in a world market generally blind to “externalities”, posi-tive as well as negative. In the case of China as the world’s factory, the world market is blind to the huge environmental and social cost polluting industries incurs on China, where local populations suffers the consequences. Chinese COA holds promise that this “brown” history need not repeat itself in the case of Chinese agriculture and certainly for Denmark COA is an institutional vehicle that has already helped Denmark add or reflect the high value of an agricultural sector providing high levels of sustainability and de-velopment - environmental and social safeguards. ReferencesEgelyng, H. Kina Spiser Grønt. 2008. I ”Kina i verden”. Tidsskrift for Internationale Studier. DIIS. København.Egelyng, Henrik, Qiao Yu Hui and Luping Li. 2006. The Institutional Environment for Certified Organic Agriculture in China: A review. Paper presented to the International Conference on Challenges Facing Chinese Agriculture and the West Development Strategy, Yangling, Shaanxi China.Zeng, M. and P.J. Williamson. 2007. Dragons at Your Door: How Chinese Cost Innovation is Disrupting Global Competition. Harvard Business School Press. Boston.Liu, Y., Langer, V., Høgh-Jensen, H., Egelyng, H. Energy use in organic, green and conventional pear producing systems – Cases from China.2010. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. Taylor and Francis. Volume 34, Issue 6.ArticleRead moreFind more information about the DARCOF III project GLO-BALORG on the webpage:  http://www.icrofs.org/Pages/Research/darcofIII_globalorg.html The project is funded by the Da-nish Ministry of Food, Agricul-ture and FisheriesJinling Hotel in Nanjing has it’s own production of organic vege-tables

The Chinese Organic Export Model, Globalization and a Danish Future Perspective

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Organic Eprints