IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2021) 12-2

Research article
erd

Organic Agriculture Certification on Thai AgriculturalStandard in Upper Northeast Thailand
JIRAPHON CHOEICHIT
Office of Agriculture research and Development Region 3, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

CHULEEMAS BOONTHAI IWAI*
Integrated Land and Water Resource Management Research and Development Center inNortheast Thailand, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand
Email: chuleemas1@gmail.com

SANITPIM SIMMATUN
Office of Agriculture research and Development Region 3, Khon Kaen, Thailand

WARAPHON WONGSIRIWAN
Office of Agriculture research and Development Region 3, Khon Kaen, ThailandReceived 25 February 2020

Accepted 18 October 2021(*Corresponding Author)

Abstract Many countries have controlled measures for imported agricultural commodities.
The Department of Agriculture has taken responsibility for the organic agriculture
certification, including the quality control of agricultural commodities within the Thai
Agricultural Standards (TAS) in the upper-northeast region of Thailand (11 provinces). The
objective of this study was to report the factors involved in obtaining and maintaining organic
agriculture certification within the entire chain of production. Within our initial year in 2018,
there were 73 farms with organic certification (21.92%) and 260 non-certified farms(78.08%) from a total population of 333 farms. The 100% organic certifications consisted of32 certified farms (86.47%) and 5 non-certified farms (13.51%) from a population of 37
farms. A reassessment of 68 farms at the end of 2018 determined that 63 farms (92.65%) had
obtained organic certification versus 5 non-certified farms (7.35%). In the transition period
into 2019, 60 farms (28.17%) had obtained organic certification, whereas 153 farms werenon-certified (71.83%) from 213 farms. The 100% organic certification was achieved by 56
farms (94.92%) with only 3 uncertified farms (5.09%) from a population of 59 farms. Our reassessment produced 78 certified farms (98.73%) and only a single non-certified farm
(1.27%) from 79 farms. The trend of certifications over two years (2018 and 2019) showedthat certified organic agriculture production increased from 38.37 to 55.27%, whereas noncertifications decreased from 61.64 to 44.73%; from 438 to 351 farms, respectively. We
determined that there were six main reasons for non-certification of farms: the inability tosustain organic agricultural production within TAS; the lack of a buffer zone to deter
pollution from adjacent plantations; the lack of available recorded data for both traceability
and verification; the use of chemicals that did not follow TAS protocols; planting areas withinsome environments caused the contamination of hazardous substances; and, several farms
did not have the proper land-rights documents. Improvements and compliance within theseareas will, therefore, result in an environmental ecological balance, as well as increased foodsafety.
Keywords Thai agricultural standard, certification, organic agriculture

INTRODUCTION
Several interesting trends have emerged in the global food market, in which consumers have begun
to look for safer and better-controlled foods produced in more environmentally friendly, authentic,
local systems. Many countries have implemented controlled measures for the importation ofⒸ ISERD155

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2021) 12-2

agricultural commodities, resulting in the enhanced recognition of food safety and quality for
consumption, and further consideration of the environment and the worker’s health, safety, andwelfare. Organic agriculture production has expanded in Thailand, from 37,684 hectare planting
areas in 2014 to 2,791 farm 45,587 hectare areas in 2015; an increase of 20.97% (2,791 farms)(National Agricultural Development Strategy, 2017). Global food markets demanded that Thailand
adhere to various standards in farming, such as the Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) and organiccertifications.
The certification body within Thailand’s Department of Agriculture is responsible for theinspection and adherence to standards, resulting in organic agriculture certification. The organic
agricultural standards cover provisions instituted within the Thai Agricultural Standard (TAS) 9000:
Part 1-2009 determines the holistic production management systems which enhance and promote anagro-ecosystem, including biodiversity and biological cycles. It emphasizes the use of natural
materials and avoids the use of synthetic materials, plants, animals, or microorganisms derived fromgenetic modification. An organic production system is designed to handle agricultural products withcareful emphasis on processing methods, to maintain the organic integrity and vital qualities of theproduct at all stages. Accordingly, the organic production requirements for plants shall be usedthroughout the entire transition period of at least 12 months before the planting of annual crops, and18 months before the first harvest of organic produce of perennial crops. The producer’s transition
period occurs at the time organic practice and adherence to the prescribed standards begins, typicallywhen a farmer applies for certification (National Bureau of Agriculture Commodity and FoodStandards, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, 2009). However, farmers often lack theirknowledge and understanding of several TAS standards; such as the use of composts, croppingsystems, and the control of diseases and pests.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study, therefore, was to report upon the situation of organic farming practices
within the upper-northeast region of Thailand in the years 2018 and 2019 and to determine thefactors involved in obtaining and maintaining the organic agriculture certification within the entire
chain of production.
METHODOLOGYThis paper is based on the results from previous reports within this region, as well as the preliminary
results from an ongoing study. Our methodology consisted of the following elements:
1 . the Organic agriculture certification and the factors related to both obtaining and maintaining
certification throughout the entire chain of production, as well as within the 100% certification status,
2. the investigation and possible solutions for the prevention and recurrence of non-certification
within the transition from 2018 to 2019.
The area of study, the upper-northeast region of Thailand, included the following 11 provinces:
Kalasin, Khon Kean, Chiyaphum, Nakhon Phanom, Loei, Mukdahan, Sakon Nakhon, Nong Khai,
Bueng Kan, Nong Bua Lam Phu, and Udon Thani.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Our study identified 73 farms with organic certification (21.92%) and 260 non-certified farms(78.08%) from a total population of 333 farms. The 100% organic certifications consisted of 32
certified farms (86.47%) and 5 non-certified farms (13.51%) from a population of 37 farms. A
reassessment of 68 farms at the end of 2018 determined that 63 farms (92.65%) had obtained organic
certification versus 5 non-certified farms (7.35%). In the transition into 2019, 60 farms (28.17%) had
obtained organic certification, whereas 153 farms were non-certified (71.83%) from 213 farms. The
100% organic certification was achieved by 56 farms (94.92%) with only 3 uncertified farms (5.09%)Ⓒ ISERD156

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2021) 12-2

from a population of 59 farms. Our re-assessment produced 78 certified farms (98.73%) and only asingle non-certified farm (1.27%) from 79 farms. The trend of certifications over the two years (2018and 2019) showed that certified organic agriculture production increased from 38.37 to 55.27%,
whereas non-certifications decreased from 61.64 to 44.73%; from 438 to 351 farms, respectively.
Table 1 Inspection within the transitional period, certification and non-certification(2018 to 2019), 100 % organic certification, and re-assessment certification (TAS)
Inspection
Year/ inspections

20182019

TotalCertification

Non-certification

farms

Area(hectare)

farms

%

Area(hectare)

farms

%

Area(hectare)

Transition period

333

161.30

73

21.92

44.85

260

78.08

116.45

100 % organiccertifications

37

32.02

32

86.49

29.74

5

13.51

2.27

Re-assessment

68

114.6963

92.65

106.40

57.35

8.29

Transition period

213

110.54

60

28.17

42.18

153

71.83

68.37

100 % organiccertifications

59

41.06

56

94.9238.46

3

5.08

2.59

Re-assessment

79

116.9678

98.73

116.92

1

1.27

0.04

Transition period546

271.84

133

24.36

87.02

413

75.64

184.82

100 % organiccertifications

96

73.07

88

91.67

68.21

88.33

4.86

Re-assessment

147

231.6514195.92

223.32

6

4.08

8.33

The results of our study in 2018 identified several areas of responsibility for organic agricultural
non-certification including 19 fruit farms and 42 vegetable farms: the inability to sustain organic
agricultural production within TAS: the lack of a buffer zone to deter pollution from adjacent
plantations; the absence of any available recorded data for both traceability and verification; the useof chemicals that did not follow TAS protocols; planting areas within some environments caused thecontamination of hazardous substances; and, several farms did not have the proper land-rights
documents.
In 2019, non-certification farms were present in 108 integrated agricultural farming systems,
including four fruit farms, 34 vegetable farms, and 11 herb farms with the same reasons above.
CONCLUSION
The finding through the transitional period of 2018 to 2019 was farmers’ lack of understanding oforganic agriculture production (TAS certification). 133 certified farms (24.36%) encompassing anarea of 87.02 hectare and 413 non-certified farms (75.64%) covering an area of 184.82 hectare froma population of 546 farms (271.84 hectare). Eighty-eight farms were identified for 100% organic
certifications (91.67%) in an area of 68.21 hectare, as well as eight non-certified farms (8.33%) in
an area of 4.86 hectare for a total of 96 farms (73.07 hectare). The non-certifications were due
primarily to the framers’ conversion back to the use of non-organic chemicals for pest and diseasecontrol. Our re-assessment identified 141 farms (95.92%) in an area of 223.32 hectare and 6 noncertified farms (4.08%) in an area of 8.33 hectare from a population of 147 farms encompassing
231.65 hectare, due to the farmers’ lack of available recorded data for traceability and verification.
Further re-assessment resulted in an increase of certifications to 95.92%, demonstrating the farm’s
compliance to TAS standards, as well as the farmers’ acceptance of the required protocols, with anaverage score of 4.2, and an average application (TAS) score of 70.79 (Chawit, 2018).

Ⓒ ISERD

157

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2021) 12-2

Table 2 Analysis of non-certification farms from 2018 to 20192018
Noncertification

2019
Noncertification

ListListIntegratedsystem

333

No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No buffer zone to deter from pollution andadjacent plantations.
No available recorded data for traceability
and verification.
Chemical use did not follow TAS
standards.
Several environments caused thecontamination of hazardous substances onproduce.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

108No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No buffer zone to deter frompollution and adjacent plantations.
No available recorded data fortraceability and verification.
Chemical use did not follow TAS
standards.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

Fruit

19

No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No available recorded data for traceabilityand verification.
No buffer zone to deter from pollution andadjacent plantations.
Chemical use did not follow TAS
standards.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

4

No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No buffer zone to deter from
pollution and adjacent plantations.
No available recorded data fortraceability and verification.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

Vegetable

42

No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No buffer zone to deter from pollution andadjacent plantations.
Chemical use did not follow TAS
standards.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

34

No organic agriculture production
according to TAS.
No buffer zone to deter from
pollution and adjacent plantations.
No available recorded data fortraceability and verification.
Chemical use did not follow TAS
standards.
Several environments caused thecontamination of hazardous substanceson produce.
Planting areas had no land rights
documentation.

In addition to the six main obstacles to obtaining organic agriculture certification (TAS),
Chawit, 2018; determined that two primary obstacles existed in both obtaining and maintain organic
certification according to the Thai Agricultural Standard 9000, Part 1-2009. Firstly, organic fertilizers
were difficult to obtain; and secondly, farmers lacked the knowledge and experience to create a bufferline for soil, water, and pest control.
Our recommendations to farmers seeking organic agriculture certification and adherence to TAS
practices included: 1. Working proactively to obtain the knowledge and understanding of organic
agriculture production for TAS certification; 2. Learning to create barriers or ridges (buffer zone)
necessary to buffer against contamination through the soil, water, or air from adjacent plantations; 3.
Generate the fertility and biological activity of the soil needed to maintain the necessary organic
materials according to Jiraschayaporn, 2017; in which a prototype for the production andmanagement of organic fertilizer was capable of producing an increase in organic matter (Surin,Thailand); and 4. Pests, diseases, and weeds shall be controlled by the appropriate species andvarieties, including the appropriate rotation programs, mechanical cultivation, conservation ofnatural enemies of pests by providing favorable habitats, and maintaining the ecosystem. We notedin the above-mentioned research, that the average income per farmer was 193 USD per hectare.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSⒸ ISERD

158

IJERD – International Journal of Environmental and Rural Development (2021) 12-2

We wish to express our sincere gratitude to Mr. Chamlong Kokrum, Thesis Director in the Officeof Agricultural Development, Region 3, for his invaluable assistance and constant encouragement
throughout the course of this research. We are also grateful for the support provided by theAgricultural Research Development Agency, a public organization.
REFERENCES
National Agricultural Development Commodity. 2017. National agricultural development strategy 2017 to2021. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand.
Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. 2009. Thai agricultural standard: TAS 9000 part 1-2009: Organicagriculture. National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards, Plant Standard andCertification Division, Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand.
Ronruangrit, J. 2017. Research and development plant production on organic agriculture system in the Surinprovince. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand.
Sawatdisan, C. 2018. The study on organic plants production technology of farmers in the upper south. Ministryof Agriculture and Cooperatives, Thailand.

Ⓒ ISERD

159