Organic	Promotion,	Research,	and	Information	Order

Room	3071-S,	STOP	0201

Agricultural	Marketing	Service

USDA

1400	Independence	Avenue SW

Washington,	DC 20250-0201

July	18,	2015

Submitted	electronically	to	amsadministratoroffice@ams.usda.gov

To	Whom	It	May	Concern:

On	behalf	of	Food	&	Water	Watch,	a	national	nonprofit	advocacy	organization,	please	

accept	this	partial	proposal	on	a	new	industry-funded	promotion,	research	and	information	

order	for	organic	products,	which	would	be	developed	under	the	Commodity	Promotion,	

Research,	and	Information	Act	of	1996. Food	&	Water	Watch’s	members	and	supporters	

are	strong	supporters	of	the	organic	standards	and	often	participate	in	the	standardssetting	process	to	ensure	that	the	organic	seal	remains	a	credible,	high-integrity	choice	for	

consumers	seeking	food	produced	with	practices	that	protect	the	environment	and	public	

health.

Food	&	Water	Watch	does	not	believe	that	a mandatory	USDA	checkoff	program	is	the	

correct	vehicle	to	address	the	organic	sector’s	need	for	marketing,	research,	or	increased	

domestic	organic	production.	While	these	areas	are	important	for	the	future	of	a	strong	U.S.	

organic	agriculture	sector,	a	USDA	Generic	Research	and	Promotion	Order	for	Organic	is	

not	an	appropriate	vehicle	for	meeting	these needs.	But	because	the	Organic	Trade	

Association has	applied	to	establish	such	a	program,	we	would	like	to	outline	the	areas	of	

the	proposal	that	should	be	changed to	improve	the	chances	that	a	new	organic	checkoff	

would	do	some	amount	of	good.	

Because	the	organic	market	has	grown	so	quickly	in	the	United	States,	with demand	for	

organic	products	far	outreaching domestic	supply,	the	program	objectives	should	first	and	

foremost	focus	on	bringing	new	farmers	into	organic	production	through	information	and	

technical	assistance.	The	secondary	program	objective	should	support	on-farm production	

research	to	ensure	that	organic	farmers	maintain	a	competitive	edge	in a	growing	

international	organic	market.	

We	are	disturbed	by	the	proposal’s	emphasis	on	promotion	activities	over	research	

programs.	While	we	agree	that	the	organic	label	is	competing	in	a	crowded	marketplace	

that	is	increasingly	confusing	for	consumers,	a	USDA	checkoff	program	is	uniquely	ill	suited	

to	addressing	that	problem.	Because	of	the	limitations	on	the	types	of	promotional	

messages	that can	be	funded	through	a	USDA checkoff,	primarily	the	prohibition	on	

promotional	activities	that	disparage	another	commodity,	the	promotion	efforts	that	could	
2

be	funded	through	an	organic	checkoff	would	necessarily	have	to	be	so	vague	that	they	will	

not	be	able	to	actually	differentiate	organic	from	other	claims	in	the	marketplace.	

The	way	consumers	will	be	able	to	see	the	value	of	the	organic	label	is	to	have	the

standards	and	practices	that	back	up	the	organic	label	presented	in	contrast	with	other	

labels	in	the	marketplace	that	have	weaker	standards.	But	such	direct	comparisons	are	

never	the	type	of	promotions	seen	in	USDA checkoff	funded	efforts.	We	believe	that	an	

organic checkoff	would	be	no	different and	that	money	spent	promoting	organic	under	the	

restrictive	guidelines	of	a	USDA checkoff	program	would	fail	to	address	consumer	

confusion.	Therefore,	we	recommend	several	changes	to	definitions	in	the	proposal	and	in	

the	overall	allocation	of	expenditures	to	eliminate	promotion	activities	and	instead	

emphasize	research.

Recommended	Changes

Sec.	12XX.50	Budget	and	expenses.	

The	allocation	in	the	proposal	allows	25	percent	for	promotion	activities	and	an	additional	

25	percent	for	information.	But	the	definition	of	information	in	the	proposal	includes	many	

activities	that	should	more	properly	be	considered	promotion.	Therefore	the	allocation	in	

the	proposal	essentially	allows	up	to	50	percent	of the	expenditures	to	go	to	activities	best	

described	as	promotional.	This	is	an	inappropriately	skewed	distribution	that	does	not	

meet	the	expressed	goals	for	the	program,	namely	addressing	the	supply	shortages	in	the	

organic	sector.	

A	program	that	devotes	up	to	half	of	its	expenditures	to	promotion	will	do	more	to	

stimulate	demand	for	organic	food	(which	the	proposal	makes	very	clear	is	already	

happening	without	a	checkoff	program)	and	do	very	little	to	stimulate	domestic	supply	of	

organic	commodities.	If	the	goal	of	an	organic	checkoff	program	is	actually	to	increase	

domestic	supply,	the	allocation	of	expenditures	should	be	adjusted	to	make	that	goal	more	

achievable.	Food	&	Water	Watch	recommends	the	following	language	for	the	allocation	of	

expenditures:

(3) A	summary	of	proposed	expenditures	for	each	program,	plan	or	project.	This	

shall	include	the	following	allocation	of	expenditures:

(i.) The	funds	shall	be	allocated	as	follows:	75	percent	for	research,	20	

percent	for	information,	and	5	percent	for	discretionary	funds;	and

(ii.)Of	the	funds	allocated	to	research,	no	less	than	half	shall	be	allocated	

to	producers,	farmers	or	ranchers who	want	to	carry out	organic

research,	demonstration,	and	education	projects	on	their	farms either	

individually	or	in	groups. This	research	should	take	into	account	

regional	differences	and	priorities	for	producer-oriented	research.		

Funds	should	be	allocated	equitably	to	reflect	regional research	needs.
3

(4) The	Board	will	not	accept	voluntary	contributions.	

(5) The	Board	may	not	expend	for administration,	maintenance,	and	the	

functioning	of	the	Board	an	amount	that	is	greater	than	10	percent	of	the	

assessment	and	other	income	received	by and	available	to	the	Board	for	the	

fiscal	year.	For	purposes	of	this	limitation,	reimbursements	to	the	Secretary	

shall	not	be	considered	administrative	costs.

(6) Any	program,	plan	or	project	receiving	funds	shall not	expend	for	

administration an	amount	that	is	greater	than	10 percent	of	the	total	funds	

allocated	to	the	program,	plan	or	project.

Definitions

Sec.	12XX.12	Information.

In	the	proposal,	the	definition	of	Information includes	several	items	that	should	more	

properly	be	considered promotion	activities.	Two	portions	of	the	definition	of	Information	

are	particularly	troubling:	

(a) Consumer	education,	advertising	and	information,	which	means	any	

effort	taken	to	provide	information	to,	and	broaden	the	understanding	of,	

the	general	public	regarding	organic	products;	and

(b)Industry	information,	which	means	information	and	programs	that	would	

enhance	the	image	of	the	organic	industry;

Both	of	these	sections	describe	activities	that	essentially	the	same	as	promotion.	But	by	

listing	them	under	the	Information	category,	these	activities	could	be	counted	against	a	

different	portion	of	the	program’s	funding.	Because	promotion	activities	could	be	counted	

under	both	Information	and	Promotion,	the	overall	balance	of	money	spent	would	be	

skewed	toward	promotion,	at	the	expense	of	research,	which	is	a	more	dire	need	in	the	

organic	sector.		

Food	&	Water	Watch	recommends	that	(a)	and	(b)	be	deleted	from	the	definition	of	

Information.	

Research

We	recommend	a	definition	of	organic	research	that	focuses	on	the	real	research	needs	of	

independent	producers.	This	would	help	to	close	the	gap	between	national	supply	and	

demand	as	well	as	keep	U.S.	producers	competitive	in a	growing international	organic	

market.	Food	&	Water	Watch’s	proposed	definition	for	research	is:
4

Research	means	any	type	of	investigation,	study,	evaluation,	or	

analysis	(including	related	education,	extension,	and	outreach	

activities)	designed	to	improve	organic	farm	production	systems	and	

practices,	increase	farm	profitability	and	productivity,	expand	organic	

farming	opportunities,	and	enhance	quality	of	life	for	farm	families	

and	their	communities;	enhance	plant	and	animal	breeding	and	

varietal	development	for	organic	systems	and	improve	the	availability	

of	other	production	inputs;	optimize	natural	resource	conservation,	

biodiversity,	and environmental	outcomes	of	organic	agriculture;	

advance	organic	farm	and	food	safety	objectives;	enhance	or	increase	

the	production	of	organic	products;	or	to	do	studies	on	nutrition,	

market	data,	processing,	environmental	and	human	health	benefits,	

quality	of	organic	products,	including	research	directed	to	organic	

product	characteristics	and	product	development,	including	new	uses	

of	existing	organic	products,	new	organic	products	or	improved	

technology	in	the	production,	processing	and	packaging	of	organic	

products.

		

Thank	you	for	the	opportunity	to	provide	input	on	this	important	issue.

Sincerely,	

Patty	Lovera

Assistant	Director