Non-GMO vs organic labels: purity or process guarantees in a GMO contaminated landscape
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.
KeywordsGMO Organic Standards Labels Transparency Environmental governance Agrifood system
Genetically modified organism
National Organic Program Proposed Rule
National Organic Standards Board
Organic Food Production Act
Organic Trade Association
United States Department of Agriculture
This research was supported by the USDA-National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) under Grant No. 2013-68004-20374. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USDA. The authors would like to thank Hannah Fisher for her research assistance. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on an earlier version of this article. Finally, we wish to express our appreciation to all those who kindly agreed to participate in this research project.
- Bain, C., Ransom, E., and Worosz, M. 2010. Constructing credibility: Using technoscience to legitimate strategies in agrifood governance. Journal of Rural Social Sciences 25 (3): 160–192.Google Scholar
- Bartley, T., Koos, S., Samel, H., Setrini, G., and Summers, N. 2015. Looking behind the label. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
- Bunge, J. and Gasparro A. 2015. Organic vs non-GMO labels. Who’s winning? New York: Wall street Journal.Google Scholar
- Busch, L. 2011. Standards: Recipes for reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Charles, D. 2014. How American food companies go GMO-free in a GMO world. National public radio, The salt. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/02/04/269479079/how-american-food-companies-go-gmo-free-in-a-gmo-world. Accessed 14 Feb 2014.
- Charles, D. 2016. Organic food fights back against ‘non-GMO’ rival. National public radio, The salt. http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/08/03/487905333/organic-food-fights-back-against-non-gmo-rival. Accessed 15 Aug 2016.
- Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Wechsler, S.J., Livingston, M., and Mitchell, L. 2014. Genetically engineered crops in the United States. Washington DC: USDA.Google Scholar
- Guthman, J. 2003. Eating risk. The politics of labeling genetically engineered foods. In Enineering trouble: Biotechnology and its discontents, eds. R. Schurman, and D. D. Kelso, 130–151. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Guthman, J. 2009. Unveiling the unveiling. Commodity chains, commodity fetishism, and the “value” of voluntary, ethical food labels. In Frontiers of commodity chain research, ed. J. Bair, 190–206. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hennessy, M. 2014. Non-GMO not necessarily organic, and other GMO myths busted: OTA. FoodNavigator—USA. http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/Non-GMO-not-necessarily-organic-and-other-GMO-myths-busted-OTA. Accessed 22 Feb 2016.
- Jaffee, D., and Howard, P. H. 2015. Who’s the fairest of them all? The faractured landscape of U.S. fair trade certification. Agriculture and Human Values 1–14.Google Scholar
- Lloyd, K. 2015. Removing GMOs. Natural Products Insider. http://www.naturalproductsinsider.com/articles/2015/06/removing-gmos.aspx?pg=5#content. Accessed 22 Nov 2015.
- McEvoy, M. 2013. Organic 101: Can GMOs be used in organic products? USDA. http://blogs.usda.gov/2013/05/17/organic-101-can-gmos-be-used-in-organic-products/. Accessed 22 Nov 2015.
- Non-GMO Project. 2015. Non-GMO project standard (version 12). Bellingham, WA: Non-GMO Project.Google Scholar
- Office of the Federal Register. 2016. Organic production and handling requirements. Electronic code of federal regulations. http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text idx?SID=0264bfc54589f24cd0f2d9eecbee34e5&mc=true&node=se7.3.205_1200&rgn=div8. Accessed 3 March 2016.
- OTA. 2014. OTA position on the landing of USDA NOP certified products and “non-GMO” claims. http://www.ota.com/sites/default/files/indexed_files/OTA-Position-on-Labeling-Organic-Products.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2015.
- Pfoutz, A. 2015. Good earth natural foods: Safeguarding our organic & non-GMO food supply. The organic and non-GMO report (October). http://non-gmoreport.com/articles/good-earth-natural-foods-safeguarding-our-organic-non-gmo-food-supply/. Accessed 1 March 2016.
- Renard, M., and Loconto, A. 2013. Competing logics in the further standardization of fair trade: ISEAL and the Símbolo de Pequeños productores. International Journal of the Sociology of Agriculture and Food 20 (1): 51–68.Google Scholar
- Roseboro, K. 2015a. A tale of two labels: Organic and non-GMO. Organic connections. http://organicconnectmag.com/project/a-tale-of-two-labels-organic-and-non-gmo/. Accessed 22 Nov 2015.
- Roseboro, K. 2015b. New non-GMO certification programs emerging. http://non-gmoreport.com/articles/new-non-gmo-certification-programs-emerging/. Accessed 22 Nov 2015.
- Scott, J. C. 1998. Seeing like a state. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Silva-Castenada, L. 2012. A forest of evidence: Third party certification and multiple forms of proof- case study of oil palm plantations in Indonesia. Agriculture and Human Values 29 (3): 261–370.Google Scholar
- Strom, S. 2015. FDA takes issue with the term “non-GMO”. Manhattan: New York times.Google Scholar
- Szasz, A. 2007. Shopping our way to safety: How we changed from protecting the environment to protecting ourselves. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- Thottam, J. 2007. When organic isn’t really organic. New York City: TIME magazine.Google Scholar
- USDA National Organic Program. 2013. Can GMOs be used in organic products? http://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Can%20GMOs%20be%20Used.pdf. Accessed 3 March 2016.
- USDA National Organic Program. 2016. National organic handbook. https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/handbook. Accessed 3 March 2016.
- Watson, E. 2015. Pompeo bill would ‘create a competing non-GMO label with drastically lower standards’, says Non-GMO Project. Food Navigator. http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Regulation/Pompeo-non-GMO-scheme-would-confuse-shoppers-says-Non-GMO-Project. Accessed 1 March 2016.
- Wegmans. 2014. GMO FAQs. http://www.wegmans.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=775260&storeId=10052&langId=-1. Accessed 10 Feb 2016.