Organic food production is a topic involving various variables that are complex to articulate. In theory, organic production offers consumers foods free from pesticides and harmful products, as well as a sustainable form of production that respects natural resources, promotes ecological balance, and conserves biodiversity. Internationally, the classifications and certifications of organic foods differ from country to country and region to region, using different criteria and certifying bodies.
In this context, differences in international criteria have already sparked much controversy, as the high circulation of edible goods and the more lenient or stricter standards for being labeled organic are perceived as unfair competition depending on the region where they are produced.
The European Union is one of the regions that has promoted a gradual transition in production, with the ambition that almost all production will become organic. This does not represent a simple transition. For example, in recent days, it was announced that the French government will provide an emergency rescue fund of 90 million euros to organic food producers, who have suffered a 5% drop in sales this year. This is partly due to widespread inflation in food prices across Europe, but also to the underlying issue of organic foods: due to their price and availability, they have become niche products accessible to only a few.
The controversy also lies in how the State promotes conversion through its policies, not only announcing the rescue via monetary funds, but also aiming to legislate that school cafeterias and health establishments have 20% of their supply represented by organic foods. The French government's goal is that by 2027, 18% of agricultural production will be organic.
The challenge is not only to convert production, but also to ensure that consumers access these foods in a way that is perceived as "simpler."
Studies on the subject have found that the higher price is clearly an obstacle for many. There is also a general sense of fatigue among consumers—a "fatigue" of having to read labels, worry about the names of ingredients that might be harmful, plan food purchases, fit them into the family budget, have the necessary foods to prepare a dish, ensure the meal is liked by those who will eat it, worry about the origin and production methods, meet medical criteria, and fit into their daily routines.
This context serves as an example of the different ways macro and microsocial sectors articulate to promote or discourage change, in this case, in food production. Although the intention on paper is good, State intervention must also consider the consumer sector to ensure that the changes promoted benefit all sectors of society, setting aside political agendas that, for example, seek the support of the entire producer guild.
— This article was originally published in Spanish by Liliana Martínez Lomelí. Translation generated with AI from the original text.
Read in El Economista →