Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) for India - … · Participatory Guarantee System (PGS) for India Proceedings of Workshop held in Goa 23-25 September 2006 November 2006

Participatory Guarantee

System (PGS) for

India

Proceedings of

Workshop held in

Goa 23-25 September 2006

November 2006

Acknowledgement This report consists a summary of the proceedings of the national level three day workshop on PGS held in Panjim, Goa. The preparation for the workshop was actively assisted and hosted by OFAI. Active collaboration and part financial assistance was provided by Chetna Organic facilitated by Solidaridad/ ICCO/ ETC Consultants. Active collaboration and part financial assistance was provided by CCD and Aharam. Assistance for the workshop proceedings was provided by Samanvaya. IFOAM Task Force on PGS facilitated the participation of Mr. Chris May from New Zealand. Other members of the Task Force, Mr Mathew John and Mr. Ron Khosla acted as resource persons in the workshop. The ministry of agriculture with active participation by Mr. Satish Chander, Joint Secretary, INM and Dr. Bhattacharya, Additional Commissioner, INM.

Documentation by

samanvaya www.samanvaya.com

Table of Contents Report of the Proceedings 1

Introductory Session 1

Presentations on Current PGS systems in Other Parts of the World 3

Presentation of Proposal for Indian PGS and discussion 9

Group Deliberations on the PGS system 11

Day 2 : Group Deliberations 17

Group presentations : Issues in Implementing PGS in India 22

Day 3 : Alternate Approaches to Certification Currently in Practice 27

Concluding Remarks 30

Recommendations 32

Participants List 35

Appendix 40

1 Proposed PGS Certified Organic – A Plan for India 40

2 Summary of Organic Standards – Based on Indian National Standard for Organic Products 47

3 PGS Farmer’s Pledge 48

4 Peer Inspection / Appraisal Worksheet 49

5 Non Compliance Guidelines 56

Proceedings Introductory Session Introductory Remarks: Mr. Ajay Rastogi, FAO This workshop has materialized through a serious process. Much preparatory work has been done for reaching this stage and workshop. It has also been an issue as to who will be the participants in the workshop. Many organisations have done considerable amount of work in the field of agriculture. We have more than 10,000 organisations that work in agriculture in India. It has been difficult to get a group together that could comprehend PGS and also work together. The people gathered here represent organisations that have been working for over 15 years in their areas and those who have at least 5000 farmers in their network. A comprehension of half a million Indian farmers’ views is represented in this gathering. We also have representatives from marketing, government, facilitating agencies and other stake holders. We do not want this to be yet another intellectual exercise. All ideological questions can be set aside for a moment. We should be practical and talk in terms of getting the idea of PGS furthered. Many large initiatives start with a small effort. JFM1 is an example. It is possible to make changes at the national level even if we start small. We may not have all the answers on certification by the end of this workshop, but, it would be good if we can work towards having them. We should be looking to moving forward. What Ministry and APEDA has done is good for the export move. There was a minor notification2 from the ministry of commerce which became the official recognition. Ministry of agriculture has agreed to put out a similar notification on PGS if we can provide them with a concrete plan. This is an exciting development and we need to leverage on this. I wish to thank IFOAM and FAO for hosting this programme. I am looking forward to how we can set-up an Indian PGS. Introductory Remarks: Mr. Chris May, IFOAM IFOAM works in various initiatives related to organic farming, and addressing small farmers through a peer certification process is a recent interest for IFOAM. Some years ago IFOAM in conjuncture with other people wanted to understand and address marginal farmers’ issues. Exploring the ideas of alternative certification was one of the initiatives. In 2004 there was a workshop held to discuss and explore these ideas. A small publication on such initiatives was an outcome of this workshop. A task force was also set-up to explore the ideas further. Few from IFOAM volunteer 20 days a year to be part of this task force. The task force has produced 2 posters based on case studies as an output of its efforts. The Philosophy of PGS is that community building has to be part of the focus areas of certification. Initially, this initiative was termed as alternate certification process, but, due to the focus being community building a new idiom was adopted, ‘participation’ was brought in and it

1 JFM – Joint Forest Management System was initiated by a few organisations way back and within a few years it became a national programme and with all the states participating 2 APEDA guidelines for the 3rd party certification are legitimized as the official government guidelines through this notification

National Workshop on Participatory Guarantee Scheme (PGS) for India, Goa, September 23 – 25, 2006 1

became ‘participatory process’. All the other larger moves including participatory research, participatory planning, etc. provide for a good associate value to this term adopted. This is an ongoing process. It is not sure how long the task force would be active. In the next meeting in November 2006 in Rome, the task force will be sitting alongside with the certification organisations. Exercise: Understanding the Participant Expectation Facilitator: Ron Khosla, PGS It is found that among the participants, more than half work on Organic agriculture and except 4 who don’t work in agriculture rest work in NPM (No Pesticide Management) and Organic. The participants are requested to put down their expectations on paper that is distributed to them. The main points that emerge from the audience are:

1. Learn & Understand about PGS 2. Support small marginal farmers 3. Cheaper certification methods for organic farming 4. Help with marketing of organic products 5. NPM – relationship to organic PGS

Introductory Remarks: Mr. Ron Khosla He has been involved with the design and spread of PGS initiative for the past 2 years in the USA. This initiative in India is unique. This is the first time in the world that PGS is being designed at a national level first; everywhere else it has been evolved in local communities only. India can draw lessons from what is already functioning, from Brazil, New Zealand, etc. A visit was made to different locations in the southern states for on-site consultation earlier. That led to the current workshop. A proposal drafted by Mr. Khosla has been circulated earlier and during this session PGS for India will be considered. The participants will arrive at a framework that can work in India. There will be gaps that will need to necessarily be addressed to get PGS going. India may be able to start it off faster than Brazil and US, particularly as there is a government participation.


Presentation on Current PGS Systems in Other Parts of the World PGS in the USA - Presentation by Ron Khosla In the US the organic farms are decreasing though the acreage under organic cultivation is

increasing. US programme was started in June 2002 just before the USDA took over the word ‘organic’,

thereby making it necessary for the third party certification for getting certified or even to be called organic

Only 20% of farmers were in a position to be certified as ‘organic’. The remaining couldn’t even legally call themselves as ‘organic’. State department inspectors have walked into local markets and made enquiries pretending to be consumers to ensure that farmers don’t call what they sell as ‘organic’.

In the Hudson valley region this scared lots of organic farmers. That was the genesis of PGS.

The design for the PGS was put up in the internet for farmers to agree / disagree and explore.

Today PGS is prevalent in 47 of the 50 states in the US, with hundreds of farmers practicing it.

Many of the farmers are connected to the internet. They read the application and sign it on-line. They do an on-line self-evaluation questionnaire, to determine for themselves whether they are organic or not. This means that there is no human interaction in this process. The transition period is also an issue. This results in fraud. The farmers are provided with in-conversion definition that provides them with the flexibility and legitimacy.

Inspection has been taken up by university extension workers and volunteers. This basic inspection report is scanned and is part of the farm and also displayed in the internet. This brings in the peer pressure from the local communities. This is unique to the PGS and doesn’t happen in the third party certification system, where the certifiers are not aware of the local reputation of the farmer.

A very small amount of testing is done, but, not very large or consistent or regular. This is more to keep the threat (of inspection) in the farmers’ mind.

Clarification from the participants on the practice of PGS in USA What is the difference in the payment that is got for the farmers (as returns by adopting PGS)? I don’t have much information on this. What about PGS and the organic farming? Publicly we are very careful to position ourselves as the ‘local only’ label. We couldn’t exist if there was a third party certification, it is in response to them. So, we call ourselves their partners. Who absorbs the cost of the testing? It is done at the point of sale, we cover the cost at the farmers’ market and in natural food stores. Some times there certainly is contamination when the produce comes from the farm to the market. What are the disadvantages of declaring of the word ‘organic’ being limited to third party certification?


We have about 100 3rd party certifiers in the US. They are all competing to certify the same farms and they want to promote products with their labels. We are dealing with the small farms that is a problem for them. We are taking a lot of load off their back. They also look at our farmers soon graduating to their level of certification. Urban Garbage as input in the compost. Where does PGS stand on that? The questions you are asking are directly related to the PGS that we are proposing here. When we started, we designed our own standards. Some parts of the US standards were too strict and others too lackadaisical. We presented this to the farmers, who appreciated this, but, they wanted to use the USDA as it is understood by the consumer. They wanted to have a lot of exceptions. We will definitely be doing this as part of our discussion later during this session. Certified Naturally Grown came up with farmers who were completely convinced. If we were to look at PGS as an alternate certification, we may leave out the opportunity for those who are not fully convinced. This is not an issue in the US, Brazil or in NZ. We need to address this in the next two days. This is a substantial but minor issue that needs to be addressed. How do we label in-conversion and how broad will be the meaning? The Gujarat experience on Cotton3. With the GE crops coming every where, some say that they are growing GE crops without pesticides. It is easy to say that there is no place for GE in the organic scene. We can have different levels of chemical input ones also accommodated, but, no to GE. Having said that, we need to build an inclusive system. How much flexibility do we allow, do we accept parallel production? There are also huge boundary issues. ICS for example has no farm for 8 kms. declared organic if there is a GE spinach in that area. We need to discuss that here. We work with small farmers...There is no way you can control the drift. Like the 3rd party certification became a impediment for the growth of organic farming, PGS may became a threat. Can PGS guarantee that the certification be ‘organic’. Can we look at the system legally backing it up here unlike in the US? The farmers who are naturally certified, is their any restriction on the selling of the seeds by them? We have different government agencies working different aspects of the farming issues. Very soon we will be having a legislation that would make it difficult for a farmer to sell an uncertified seeds. We don’t have these problems in the US. We have so many seed companies who source seeds from us and sell it in their catalogue. We work in the hilly terrain. We have a village map and have a entire village is certified organic. The one requirement made in the certification process is that we need to have individual farm map. That is difficult in our case. We will cover that issues, we will try to certify the individual as convenient as possible. Is PGS going to threaten NPM which has a far larger acceptance than Organic?

3 In the State of Gujarat a few years back, a back handed entry was given to GE cotton whereby the farmers were provided with spurious GE seeds by a seed company much before the State and Central Governments granted for the commercial planting of the same


We will certainly address these. We will look at the potential concerns and benefits of these. We will include sessions that will explore this issue. Is there a cost involved in the PGS certification. A small farmer who is growing organically, why he should pay an extra cost to prove himself. I am going to bye pass the question as we are going to address it later. It is time I make it very clear as to what is PGS to India.


PGS in Brazil – Presentation by Ron Khosla A summary of PGS in the Brazil model. At this point the output from PGS, 27% is sold through direct sales, 20% is sold to institutional buyers, 34% for supermarkets and close to 20% is being exported. They have integrated consumers also into the certification system. That has helped tie small farmers to consumers who were educated and were aware of why they should be buying organic. The other interesting thing about Brazil is that it is very much tied to the Catholic Church in implementation. In Brazil they have local markets and local cooperatives buying from PGS. There are dozens of cooperatives formed along with the spread of the PGS, there are consumer cooperatives and producer cooperatives. Clarification by participants on PGS in Brazil What is the official position in Brazil, how does the government participate? PGS was started in June 2002 in Brazil, in the US and New Zealand almost at the same time. The Brazilian practitioners rallied so fast that they stopped the government from declaring ‘organic’ within boundaries. Now you can be 3rd party certified organic or PGS certified organic in Brazil, it is legislated. It could be the same in other Latin American countries. The total volume is $15 million. There is no contamination or part-chemical.


PGS in New Zealand – Presentation by Mr. Chris May The interesting thing about PGS in New Zealand is that it is called ‘Organic Farm New Zealand. The seeds were sown during late 90s when the farmers were very unhappy with the cost of certification to reach their products to local markets. The problems were felt by farmers, consumers and retailers. The political climate being congenial, IFOAM was contracted by the government to research on the development of alternate certification methods. A team traveled across the New Zealand, discussed many ideas with farmers, developed the template and went another round testing the template. That is the process through which PGS was developed here. Affordable, good quality, no cost for certification were the objectives. The standards developed had 2 components, the farm practices and the compliance ideas. The NZ model has farmer groups called the pods, and a larger body that is a collection of pods and then they have a national level group. They wanted to evaluate each region independently. Within the local agency there is a certification manager who is responsible for the system. There were about 200-300 pods of NZ who are part of the system. The system has been highly successful in terms of the consumer response. The consumer awareness and acceptance has been very good. At first some of the larger shops were suspicious. But were convinced when they were invited to participate in the certification process, and saw the level of the farmer knowledge and awareness. There are changes yet to be made. NZ model is trying to learn the cost saving from the American experiment. The ECC is at the national level body which is very thin, then there is the regional level body which controls everything and then there is the individual farmer. In NZ we have organic labeling with ‘in-conversion year 1’, year 2, etc. given in the label itself. In NZ the retailers participating from the beginning itself in the certification process. They took the idea to the consumer. Clarification from Participants on New Zealand model of PGS How is the certification process in Brazil and NZ tackling the problem with purposeful contamination at the retail. PGS is a direct market system. But, in Brazil it has since then moved to be very less component. It was not that big an issue to be resolved there. There could be an intermediate role in the PGS, we have not been given as to what is the role This is important, we will discuss this. There is also a large amount of fraud in the US in the 3rd party certification. We need to accept that there will be a fraud regardless of the system, if we have the perfect programme to ensure that there is no cheating, then we get the worst system. Is there a PGS in China? There is a move in that direction. How does the government recognize PGS in NZ and Brazil?


In NZ the government was instrumental in setting it up; in Brazil it is accepted and acknowledged and US, PGS farmers are tolerated, but, accepting in US will take a long time.


Presentation of Proposal for Indian PGS and Discussion Presentation by Mr. Ron Khosla (Please refer to Appendix – 1 for the slide presentation) Discussion during the presentation On the structure of PGS I think the credibility should also be at the local level. Local people believe more about the PGS when they read about it in the national press. We need to have a district and state level, the regional level should be a state level committee. Organization Structure What is the difference between a local group and a farmers cooperative? In June when we visited all these farm based groups, we were impressed with the local groupings. We will overlay the existing structure on an existing structures, such as cooperatives, SHGs, etc… Certification Process Who will take care of the training? Volunteers. Is the American system being over-laid. Indian villages are already divided, so these have to be factored. When you start thinking of India, we also have the problem of numbers. This is not from the US, we have borrowed from the Brazilian system wherever applicable. But we do need to evolve our own system here. What is the time frame for getting the Identity No. (ID)? Annually, the ID is re-activated after the annual certification. What about the funds? That is for the regional council and the local group to decide. The regional council may decide that it wants to have a small fee for the cost covered. The NCC will have to have some kick-start funding. In the US it has been managed with volunteers. How can we know that we will not be sitting around waiting for another inspection? We have a lakh of farmers in this country, will they have to wait for the certification. The regional council will have to manage the issuing of certification on time. There is some flexibility in the US, because it is given for 16 months. As this is done locally, we don’t need to have to wait for someone to come from outside. Different local groups may have different standards and different documentation standards. How is the regional council going to check all this? This is unlike the national level standards. Decision on the actual standards will be decided at the national level standards. The local group doesn’t decide that this is what ‘organic means to me’. But, there could be additions. What is attendance worksheet? It is the total number of field days that the farmer has to attend in the local group. Comment by Ajay Rastogi: We have seen that there is some kind of such a documentation in AP and Maharashtra.


What appears new is the centralization at the NCC level. Unless the certification cannot be de-linked from the NCC it would lead to centralization and all its consequences in the future. The regional council could be accredited which would in turn be in a position to issue certification. The autonomy is with the regional council. There is a feeling of centralization, but, it is a very easy process. How does the system in the US function? What is the existing US institutional backing. In India; nothing can stand unless there is a plinth holding it. At the regional level, it is going to be NGOs. In times when the farmers will have their own capacity built in and would then demand to manage their own regional council. In India there is a case of two groups in the same state not talking to each other, then we get one person in-charge, he would not recognize the others. We will look into that. The group certification either as a community or a village and not as an individual farm. Market contamination at the point of sale, post production. There is also that in the most places the marketing is also done by the same who certify. How do we manage it? This conflict of interest is something that the 3rd party certification people have put into our heads. There is so much fraud in this system too, so it cannot be valid that there is a case for the conflict of interest. There is already an incentive for the regional NGO to get more farmers in as we are the market aggregators. So, there will be a conflict of interest. Here in India, you have 11 certifiers. They are all paid based on the basis of number of people / farms they have certified. There is no guarantee that if the consumers / buyers and the producers were to be separated then there will be no fraud. The regional group is also responsible to the market, if you can put your head on the block, then you are taking a very big risk. So, it would be difficult and each regional council has to be very careful. Is this for the small farmers as in America? We should decide that here. There is a need to have that discussed and decided here. Why restrict it to small farmers? There is a need to keep the small farmer to test whether this process will work. We cannot work with the large farmer as a target, it would be meaningless. The issues we are addressing are suicides, poverty and such problems, it is not of any use developing a system not addressing small farmers. That could be an ideological issue of one group, but, should such individual ideologies limit us? The small farmer as the focus could be used to validate the process rather than as an approach.


Group Deliberations on the PGS System Facilitated by: Mr. Ron Khosla How does the PGS address the credit, market, infrastructure at the local leve?l There is a strong growing market in the A & B category towns, the issues of organic food at the movement is certification and the price. The premium is a deterrent at the moment, if PGS can take care of the market issues, it would be good. The present market system has a built-in credit system. When you come up with another system in the village, then you are going to be asked by the farmer whether it will also be able to help the farmer with the credit. In terms of bio-mass building, labour, cattle, resources need to be channelised through these institutions, which are also doing procurement and processing. Farmer’s apex body must get some extra money and get some kind of farmer policy enabled whereby there could be some kind of subsidy for the farmer. It may be that some kind of social intermediary is required, unlike the US and NZ there is no local market here. So we need to have a marketing role. The role of aggregator is important. Who will be in a position to provide the capital to the aggregator? Investments for working capital and also continuous improvements at the operational level. Particularly as you have to buy the produce for an entire year many times. Banks do not give working capital requirements to NGOs. The local group has to take up the certification. The regional council is something that will own up to the overall issue, it will necessarily have the power to decide things, where it takes ownership, getting leadership. A structure has to evolve which ensures that there is a PGS marketing system in place. A marketing strategy necessarily needs to be evolved for the whole system to work. In Brazil, when the label was created, it created markets for them. They thought they were only getting some kind of better acknowledgement to their work. But, it did get them to improve their markets. How does PGS address share cropping and tenant farmers? The large number of farmers are tenant farmers, all these people will be excluded through this system. There are plenty of farmers, how do we address their issues through this system? How will they get certification? It is unfortunate that this is the problem. We should say what ‘small farming’ means. It may be ½ acre in West Bengal and 100 acres in New Zealand. We should be clear that we are talking about small or large or medium farmers. PGS is to ensure that there is organic to local markets; to ensure a kind of a quality assurance system. The system of 3rd party certification is agri-business friendly. A system should be farmer friendly rather than small or large farmer. Let us not make sweeping statements that the tenant cannot be accommodated, if PGS can address these location specific issues, then we can do the same. The PGS is giving a certificate


to a person or a family, plus on an annual basis, that this group or individual is cultivating this piece of land for this season through this process. 70% of all the tenancy registered in the country are in West Bengal. There will be some farmers who are operating their land and in other cases there are others where the labourers are involved, where there is a shared cropping, particularly the …it does not talk to farmers who do not have surplus, it is not for farmers who are going to not do regular farmers. Where the groups themselves are going to look at sharing things. PGS in itself is not merely a certification system, but, an entirely new approach of peer review and support. Is there a view on agri-companies, whether it is inclusive of them and exclusive of them? Is there a view on the very large farms? Nandyal town in Kurnool district of Andhra Pradesh has the largest supply of the certified seeds. This was initially taken up by the large farmers, but, 4 years down, the trickle effect has worked and today even small farmers are involved. Ajay Rastogi: We need to understand that we are not solving everything here. The more and more and standards we have, the more and more it is going to become bureaucratic and more control and capacity building. Are we going to go in that direction? It is the criteria that can be fixed by the regional council as to what will be the standards in the local level. Many of the farmers are aware for the pani panchayat, a farmer designed system that decided to provide share for everyone, but the government created similar pani panchayat and this was implemented in other states, but, only the rich farmers in the village got their share. So, we need to understand as to what we are getting into, who are the initial people, what are their priorities. Suppose tomorrow, water is the priority, then we will have to understand we can set the standards for that too. How does the PGS address the gender issue? One of the suggestions could be that 25% could be women, similar rules can be brought into the national and regional level. The issue of ownership is not really important. Whatever the factors, the legal ownership does not have to be given too much importance. The primary membership is the women (in the Timbuktu collectives) and the secondary member is one of the male members of the family. This membership can be followed for each unit of the membership. It can be that men and women jointly be members. The family could have both the members to participate. Who constitute the members at different levels? How does PGS promote organic practices? How does PGS ensure proper management of Common Property Resources? It would be best for us to leave it to the regional councils to decide. We cannot decide everything here.


We need to look at the context and the properties. Unlike the US or Japan, in India most of the common resources are owned by the state. How do we maintain the quality in this is one aspect? In WB we have been able to mobilize labourers to lease land from panchayats to grow some fodder. Whether such things will also come under certification, whether we are also including agro-forestry, whether we also include fish also, whether we will also include other things? This we need to leave the regional council to manage. But, these questions need to be listed down. Can PGS further simplify the paperwork? We need to also know what can be left to the regional level to decide. How is the Government going to recognize PGS? At this point there is an introduction to Dr. Bhattacharya from the Ministry of Agriculture who joins the deliberations. Dr. Bhattacharya: The basic question is why do we need this organic farming. According to recent reports, 1.73 lakh hectares are certified organic farms in this country. Orissa has the highest area certified by Eco-Cert. Within 10 years of starting certifying, we only have 11 certifying agencies and only this many farms. In eastern states there are no active certifying agency, in southern states there are many. The APEDA standards (from the government) when it was initially announced contained certificate standard document in 38 pages, now it is 200 pages long; if this trend persists, soon we will have a 1000 page 3rd party certification standards document. There is a global competition to increase the paper work in the organic agriculture certification. We need to come up with an alternative immediately and one that is accessible to all parts of the country. I am happy that there is a good discussion in this workshop, we need to increase at least 5 – 10 lakh hectares in the next 5 years, even that is low and looks like difficult with the existing certifying agencies. We need to increase the overall acreage under organic farming, towards that I see PGS as providing tools to the community, we need it to be a system, to evolve such a system should be the overall objective of this workshop. I am with you tomorrow and the day after to understand this process. How will be a regional council split in the process of growth avoided or addressed. How is the composition of regional council, NGOs / CBOs/ Coops / Private Limited/ Krishi Vigyan Kendras? Regional councils are whoever has the capacity to handle. Subjective reports to come up with objective summaries Conversion from paper based reports to computer based ones and the communication to NCC Time required for paper work, random testing and the time for approval. Depending on the effectiveness of the regional council. Testing – where will the lab for the testing be located? Regional / Local. Credibility of the testing. The 3rd party certifiers are consistently using some regular respectable labs and using them. Dr. Bhattacharya: There is a list of NAPL credible laboratory list with the government. Cost involved, book keeping, training of farmers, etc. The inspectors, are they going to be on voluntary basis or are they paid?


Payment for the inspectors is an issue that can be decided by the local groups. What will be size of the local group and the composition and homogeneity of the local groups? Single crop based groups, multi-crop based groups. We don’t want to stop people from working with each other. So, this can be left to be decided at the local level. Is there a local level of capacity to manage this system? Promotion of PGS idea among consumers. Can we put it with the media and communication tomorrow? We will spend some time on it. How PGS can help small farmers from competing with corporate farming? Dr. Bhattacharya: the 11th 5-year plan we are going to talk about certification. We need to know how much is assessed. For that there is a need for recognition mechanisms to be recognized by the government. Checks and balances to avoid corruption at all levels. How to handle non-compliances? Who is the driving force behind farmers to join PGS? Ideally and philosophically, the market. Practically and realistically? Who is the seed around whom the PGS is to develop in the village – NGOs, SHGs,…? First the question of the credibility of the system. A question is being raised here, some forces are missing. There are thousands of farmers who are not aware of the organic farming movement. Therefore the question. We know that the market is a important force today. Those who haven’t come in the ambit of organic, how to bring them into the organic? Throughout the country, the corporations and the municipalities there are food samples taken that are not released. If only these were released then we can have consumers to be more aware of the problems. Similarly, if we can know, half of the worlds’ malnutrition people are in India, we need to be aware that the need for organic food is more for our people and not as much as for outside (exports). Why can’t state governments acknowledge or accredit the PGS system? Dr. Bhattacharya: 3rd party system is a paper based system, we cannot do a similar exercise here. It should be different. Yes, the state level agriculture extension departments can do it. Once we have something concrete to present to them, central government can make the policy and we can have the state government to take control. Ron Khosla: In the US 7% are PGS certified. We don’t have any funds, it has grown the participatory process. People are drawn to this much more than the 3rd party system. PGS system once it is developed, it can be linked to the market. If we go by a survey, there is a great pull factor. The customers are waiting. What is required is the volumes. The volumes cannot be handled by the 3rd party certification methods. New generation entrepreneurship is coming up. We are going to have a growth in retail chain, there is a need for more supplies. There are four chain of shops opened in Bangalore, 500 people need to supply that. The growth of the supply chain is important.


What will be the legal form of the farmers groups and at what level? Ajay Rastogi: They have a formal recognition, the SHGs, the farmer groups are all recognized today and they can operate. There is a law that the SHGs can open a bank account. The primary SHG group can open an account. There are the Society Act and Producer Company Act in about 5-6 states. One thing are the self help groups; there needs to be a legal form that needs to be promoted. NABARD has the VVV; it will help if some such institution can be promoted. Consider this situation. Suppose as a farmer, I genuinely want to be recognised as an organic farmer, but, the PGS group does not deem me eligible and as a result I want to take the PGS group to court. In ICS there is a farmer contract that could stand legal scrutiny. What is to be done in such circumstances? In PGS there is the pledge document. How to motivate the peer group to maintain high level of ethical standards? It is consumer driven. In Brazil they form a local ethical commission, which also provides periodical inputs. This is not part of the current Indian system, we can discuss the same tomorrow. In AP the peer group guarantees provided, a mutual guarantees. There are all kinds of experiences with the SHGs, in AP many do marketing for MNCs and also those who have committed suicide have taken credit from the SHGs. In the absence of definite local market, is there going to be an assurance? Peer group certifier, who will train them and how? How is the PGS going to be started? Total private effort, govt. supported, national level, state level, what ministries will be involved. Dr. Bhattacharya: Government is always there, but, we will be able to respond when you come with a package Do we need to keep the government out of it? Government can just provide the funding support. There are also fears that PGS once in place that it will become more difficult than the 3rd party, how to make it such document ‘disease resistant’? Getting the Id at the farmer id, is it getting at the individual farmer level or farmer family level. Particularly if there are no boundaries, groups, communities and groups of farmers would have to be thought about. We never thought about doing this, PGS can be discussed easily, each individual farmer to get it. In the US, we have people who have certified 4ftx30ft of their farm alone. This small plot met all the criteria including the buffer zone. Forest land has been encroached in AP and Jharkand, what would be the implications if these were to be certified. Collective documentation and collective pledge. Mutual assurance as a method. Federation of the local groups, that can be facilitated by the NGOs. One concern was the paperless PGs. From the context of peer review, we need to take into account the social factors have to be addressed.


We need to see whether we see PGS is gong to be a process or whether this is going to be an institution. Concerns around the issue of PGS being evolved flat and not hierarchical. Credibility of the entry at various levels. The initial level there may be groups known to each other, how does one decide how to move forward? We need to look at the markets parallel. We need to look at the markets simultaneously. Otherwise it would be incomplete. Optimum size of the local groups. There might be a break away group that wants to develop another PGS, we need to understand what will happen. From the consumer point of view, this brings down the credibility. The consumers are looking at eco-labels. In the US, consumers are looking at 180 type of eco-labels. If the market dictates what kind of product it wants, then the product will happen. There are consumer organizations there, we don’t have them here.


Proceedings: Deliberations Continued on Day 2 Ajay Rastogi (beginning the second day’s deliberations): One issue is about semantics – language we are using is important, unlike NZ or USA. When we say small farmers, they are the majority here. Local markets could mean up to the national capital here. The regional councils will have their own criteria.

Maybe we will have to call ‘domestic’ rather than ‘local’. Much of the government and private sector activity in organic agriculture, based on subsidies and credit for inputs, shift for subsidies for earlier chemical will be used for organic. The earlier chemical input companies will be replaced by organic producers with similar subsidies being given. We cannot mix this into the certification process. We don’t know how to bring in all these. This will become a very costly affair, we cannot bring in to the level of a standards the issues related to subsidies. The earlier sections of the village that were benefiting through chemical farming will stand to benefit from such subsidies. But, this cannot be brought into the level of standards. We cannot for example say, that anyone who bought the farm inputs cannot be given membership in the local group. But, these can be left to the local groups. There was talk about the gender issue. Is there an instance that IFOAM has debarred anyone for not adhering to social justice? No. It is made out as a desirable. Similarly, we too can have a progress goals that could be developed by a working group independently. PGS as an alternative to 3rd party certification is another apprehension that has been raised. Any initiative has an objective, it could primary or secondary objective. PGS is a meaningful activity just as a knowledge sharing and participatory methodology, market access could be another objective, perhaps not primary, maybe secondary. Ravi has put together a purpose statement that we will be looking at. FAO representative and the chairman of the joint programme from the ministry’s side will come later today, he was the one who gave the idea that we come up with a note that the ministry can authenticate. The ministry of agriculture can only counter the ministry of commerce’s serious discussion on the ‘organic’ being reduced to the 3rd party certification. Chris May: Yesterday we discussed PGS framework for India. Today we will consolidate what the package will be. We want to firm up what we did yesterday. We will go through what we didn’t complete, documents that will support, then we break into sub-groups and look at the documents, give our comments and feedback. Then we move to addressing 5 key questions that came up yesterday and 5 groups will take up these questions and come up with answers. It is an organic process and we need to arrive at answers this evening. Ron Presentation on the role of key groups Slide on Farm Families


Open gate policy in other parts of the world – consumers and buyers should be able to visit the farm without it being inconvenient to the farm activity. So that there is a sense of participation and ownership. Questions on Farm Families In some cases the women herself is the farmer, not the family of the farmer. Changing the

definition to ‘individual farmer’? Pledge or the farm visit as the criteria. OFAI reinforces family as a unit and not the individual

farmers. Some people use 2 decision making members in the family for the watershed management.

The use of the word ‘appraisal’ rather than the word ‘inspection’ for the local visit. Local Group Is there a flexibility for the local group members not to be part of the PGS and still the group could be part of the PGS network? Yes, they can be. Can the panchayats also play a role? This can be left to the local farmers and it should be left to them. What is the optimum number for a group? This too should be left to the regional council. What is the minimum? Maybe 3 or 4. Regional Council There will be a representative from the NGO and not the NGO itself that will be in-charge of

the regional council. Can be replace the word ‘council’ with some other word, ‘association’ or ‘group’? The regional council will anyway be named in the local language. So, what is the reason for

the same to be named? We can have whatever name we want to call it. Summary information to NCC – it might just get too much. NCC could only restrict its work to

generating the ID, the regional council could handle the summary information and accreditation process.

Regional council can also provide the IDs. What is the ideal number for the providing the IDs? How do we limit the numbers to match the capacity to manage?

Ron: we need to be careful not to create too many rules based on the apprehensions. These things will work out on their own. We need to also understand the funding implications. What is the minimum number of farmers required in an inspection? Maybe 3. We have 15 member groups, 5 member sub-groups and 100 groups for a federation. Our experience has been that farmers are willing to pay the fee after the first year. So, we need to factor that in. We need to look at the marketing linkage. Can agricultural companies also become regional councils, can they be responsible towards the overall regional council?


Dr. Bhattacharya: When we are thinking of alternate system we need to know the existing

system. The system here seems to be complicated. How will the whole system be controlled?

Can we keep the role of NCC very simple to avoid the voting from the regional council? Can we make the NCC into a professional body and not a democratic body? Then can it be

a democratic body and be sensitive to the regional councils?

An Indian Example of Participatory Certification System -Handmade in India, presentation by Adarsh:

You need to say what is the qualification for you to be in the NCC and then also as to what is the criteria that you will use to look at things. I think, as an outsider, I see that this certification issue seems to be too many things for too many people. Is this about livelihoods or organic farming? We decided, when we sat together as a group to come up with some standards, we also wanted to involve private sector. Anyone can become a member. Your membership doesn’t guarantee the certification, we use 3rd party certification. We have a holding company that manages the trade mark. Once we create a foundation, then we can think of building the process.

Chris May: We need to have clear terms of reference for NCC, then we will shape the structure, you start defining what it does and then we can have the legal status and processes in place. Role of National Coordination Committee (NCC) At the national level we need to have a custodian role at the national level, these are our basic standards, that is what is required. The heavier NCC’s functional role, the more is the possibility of the changes. NCC could just be a facilitating forum. What is going to be a common label that is applicable towards the PGS. The NCC can be a custodian for the logo and the label. It should only provide accredit and at the national level don’t even collect the data. Who will be the holding person for the NCC? This will become important. The ministry, may not have people who are always interested. The legal mechanisms too will have to be looked at. Can we differentiate between the legal compliant roles and that of professional roles? Discussion on the dynamic nature of the BASIC standards review. It is better than to have a mechanism in place. Can there be a progress report or a information sharing system at the NCC level? After running through the slide Chris: Now we have seen the job description, we should now try to look at the kind of structure that would best suit this job description. Vasanth Sabarwal: There is a sense of discomfort. We seem to be rushing towards a 90% PGS in place by tomorrow. That there doesn’t seem to be a Yes or No, there is no complete


convergence. There is no complete understanding or agreement. We might choose, we can potentially use this next day to decide what we want out of this. I really get a sense of wanting to get PGS going in the next day, there is a considerable amount of grey area, we are not thinking of all issues adequately. We are focusing on the wrong end of the stick, if bulk of the groups are working on livelihood and not on organic farming. Response to Vasanth’s objection from other participants Response 1: We have come here with an understanding and an alternative and we have gone through the document on PGs and we also feel that there is an urgency to get on with it. Clarity will never come if we never get into the actually implementing this, we are coming from (uttaranchal organic farming issues) a place where we are addressing other issues. But, here we are all looking at social justice on ourselves, we should not be discussing everything here. Response 2: We are on the right path. Response 3: The scale of operation which we talk about, the existing structure that we are talking about cannot handle this scale, we need to discuss the alternative certification, we are clear. Dr. Panigrahi, member of the Planning Commission: I am not sure whether we can arrive at a solid structure. We (from the government) feel that we need to have a strong national level system, an organisation that will take PGS as its sole activity. I see Brazil as a ready fit, we will examine the Brazil model keenly and look at what we can learn from them. We look at this evolving process. We have a centre of excellence, an organisation is formulated on the society act or a trust where the NGOs can participate in a collaborative role. The government will be minimal, there will be participation from the government. Such model is also available, centre for environmental education in Ahmedabad. This institute received 2.5 crore grants every year, the minister is the chairman of the governing council. 2 professors are in the council and all the others are working members. Similar structure can be created for organic farming, this will be democratic system at the apex level. They will handle the problems and handle things. Kishore: What Dr. Panigrahi suggested is a valid point, there are 2 levels in which this is going to be active, grassroot level and at the professional level. I came with an expectation that there is a hope for many diverse kinds of people, I don’t know whether we have done enough discussion on the framework, we are already talking about the nuts & bolts. Recently I had an opportunity to look at other countries where it works. I can assure that it is going to work. We are here to create an alternative system for organic certification. PGS can be applied in anything. My caution is, if we want to move towards organic, then, we need to move in that direction. We may end up self defeating our efforts if we accommodate everything. Dr. Bhattacharya: We are looking at only organic, we have to be clear there. Claude: Tomorrow we may even include the Bt if NPM is permitted today. We cannot have NPM approved under PGS. Ron: We are here for only organic promotion. Vasanth: That provides a lot of clarity. We are having this as an alternative to 3rd party certification. I think we are still not answered the question as to who will buy the PGS certified food.


Ajay Rastogi: We are trying to see the need for an alternative system. If some of us feel that there is a possibility to integrate NPM on PGS / Organic, maybe we need to have another meeting for that. Chris May: A group is going to be working on the NPM – PGS relationship later in the day. We will discuss in the afternoon. We will have 5 groups working on 5 different forms, read them and discuss the form for content, complexity and provide general feedback. The purpose is to understand what PGS will look like and also how it would work. This will be the minimal requirement as this would be a national level forms. Should regional forms want to have additional requirements then they will have to work and create additional details. That can come later, this is only for the national level standards, so we have to agree on some minimal acceptance at the national level. Our experience in New Zealand was that what we thought was very good form was rather bad and had to be changed completely by the end of the feedback session. Groups deliberate on the forms and changes are directly incorporated by Ron (the farmer’s pledge with the changes suggested in Appendix 2). Seed treatment – chemically treated seeds, can they be accepted? Livestock population is declining, we need to increase the population for on-farm sources of

the farm inputs. Visual representation on the standards. If we have already followed the PGS and have documentary evidence, can we back date on

the certificate. Recommendations from the Non-Compliance NCC should have a list of minor and major violations. Regional council will guide the local groups on minor and major violations. Need for technical assistance to farmers. Repeated minor violation (for one year) will result in suspension. Using labeled packaging as a minor violation. If I don’t report non-compliance, then that adds up to violation.

Distribution of the form on Peer Inspection Worksheet Ron: Explaining the rationale behind the inspection worksheet. Q10,11: Can this be limited to the first year alone, no need to repeatedly get these questions answered? Q14: Should we have to ask the farmer about the plot? Can we break up the questionnaire into the informative, assessment and prescriptive 3 levels of forms. I don’t know whether farmers will be able to go and collect this kind of the information. Dr. Bhattacharya: We need to ensure that the form is counter signed by the farmer, and also that the crop at the time of the assessment be recorded. There may be places where we need more than one inspection through the year. In ICS we send the inspector to the farmer at each stage, here it seems to be that there is a once in a year inspection. In some cases, on the same form inspectors will be making further comments. Experience shows that the simpler the form, the more complicated it is going to be for filling it up. There are gaps, we are not talking of storage issues, post-harvest issues. Organic processing, livestock are not part of the inspection process.


Group Presentations : Different issues in Implementing PGS in India Presentation of the Government – PGS joint work Government will do everything to back-up PGS, and promote it like Agmark It will provide resource support to actualize It would put its weight behind promote PGS and ensure that the KVKs are utilized for this

purpose They will build PGS in the 11th 5-year plan The government will sanction up to 5 cr. Rupees up to 1 million hectares to implement the

PGS system The government wants the NGOs to do the work, and the government will support all the

efforts of the NGO sector The government has come up with the law from the 24th Sept. for mandatory certification if

there is a ‘organic’ label (Composite Food Law) It would not be an AGMARK logo. It would be a new logo that is under different certification

process and that which adheres to the process The only regulation from the government is on some of the organic inputs some months

ago, so as to ensure that quality is maintained Ministry of agriculture looks at organic farming as a voluntary option, it will be decided by the

economy. The government will address support systems of the organic farming, particularly for certification. It wants the system to be simple and it should not scare a farmer from practicing organic farming

Once an export standard has been put in place a domestic standard has to be put in place too.

Apprehensions

That the independence of the certification process of PGS cannot be compromised due to the government support

The funding cannot be controlled by a group of NGOs based on their access to the government, to form a coterie as such and corner all the government funds. Government agencies will have to ensure that there are processes in place whereby (a la watershed development programme) there is a method of credible access and provision of support from the government

The reservation for using the word ‘organic’


Presentation on National Level Branding and Marketing of PGS

One unified logo and label that everyone can be a part of – at the national level everyone should feel the ownership for this – create a logo that will go well with the consumer; strategy for the branding exercise

We are looking at what happens at the production level and there needs to be some method to ensure that the process post-production has to be put in place

Promotional activities at the national level have been planned Public awareness: research (consumer behavior), disseminating information and

communication at this level (targeting consumers). Policy support – constantly engage with the government, laws pertaining to the

agricultural policy, proactive policy for the government, resource and support mobilizing from the government, extension and research of the government and influence the policy level with the government

Leveraging markets – national level linkages to make marketing easier for the regional players, targeting public sector undertaking and army

Researching market trends Services that are provided at the national level – design and packaging, grading, sorting,

cleaning, logistics, supply chain management, provide services in capacity building Funds are required for the consumer awareness creation and consumer demand

creation Initially we will go by the non-conventional media, the branding and marketing strategy

Apprehension There is no funds access for the farmers The organic farming movement follows a different logic, there is no need for the

marketing and packaging to attract for funds It can be simply that the PGS logo becomes part of the existing associate logo The regional councils can take care of accrediting, even local farmers may need

marketing support The government can give support to the development of infrastructure, processing, etc.

at the regional council level We are concerned at the chain of custody The cooperative law is too complicated, the society is not meant for business,…if there

are many farmers and if they are share holders of a company, at present there is no simple structures that can promote such ventures – the Sec 9 company

Marketing has to be seen on a larger perspective, the farmer is not getting a good return. There is a company that is putting Rs. 25,000 Cr. In marketing alone. If organic food is good food then we should not have a problem with the marketing of the food


Presentation on the Management Structure & Institutions

Apprehensions Is there a role for panchayats?

There could be a good panchayat that could be part of the scheme, otherwise this scheme cannot be handed over to the panchayat

Mandatory council formation could work well in a panchayat In Japan there are cooperatives where the production and consumers are all part of the

same cooperative; if the consumers are involved at different levels, then it could bring in quite a bit of participating

Apprehension about using secretariat and facilitating agency; employing people on a long term basis has an implications

The facilitating agency is only an external agency and not a member of the group

How can the rural adolescent farmers be trained and certified for continuation of agriculture activity? We need to create a rural polytechnic.

Having a 40 members in the regional council may not be good idea and the un-manageable

How will the peer pressure be ensured? What are the levers of control? We shouldn’t feel shy about employing people are the regional council.

How will the regional council bring in the newer groups? What is the mandate for the regional council?


Presentation of the NPM - PGS Apprehensions & Comments

Can we use the financial institutions kind of graded certification methods? The case made out by this group is valid. The access to such a large group is very good. It also allows you to reach out to large number of consumers for providing them with the healthy food, we say, ’no chemical pesticide’ label used. NARS also recommends that we can get rid of pesticides and not fertilizers, so just like China we too can use have organic food and green food If NPM is not planned to get into organic at some point in time, then we need to have a

different approach. FAO view is that don’t have a weak organic, if there is a ‘green food’ that is different thing, we cannot have them both mixed up. PGS cannot have a watered down version of organic, that is the NPM. It would be the danger to the organic movement, if your objective, then we should have an organic standard, if it is some kind of a safe food, then it will be detrimental to the movement. The rationale also is (FAO) build up of micro-flora and fauna and the soil health; it is

easier for the farmer to manage with chemical fertilizers and then this brings in the issue Green food, the motivation for the farmer to go to organic farmer is market, most of them sell even if they will not have enough and have to later buy food from the market. The price of the market today to the farmer is not fair, so the organic provides a premium and in a sense a balancing things out How come that we are not talking of nitrogen leaching out of the farm is not mentioned in

the PGS, this has to be factored in Our overall fertilizer usage is very low. There is no concrete data on the reduction of the microbial activity. I think there is also the contamination of the organic input. Completely organic will get good price, 1st year conversion gets lower price, provide NPM even less, if you will not give permission to the farmer where will they go. It is all about extension, same NGOs do both the things on the field. Is the organic farming movement about poverty reduction or is it only looking at the larger ecological good? What restricts us in thinking of PGS processes and NPM as two exclusive certificates Why should the mainstream NPM come up and ask the PGS to play crutches?

The facilitating agency will also face confusion in this case. It doesn’t look like a very good idea to bring in two different perspectives. This seems to be happening at the international level also, the clash between NPM and Organic. The organic became costly only if we talk of certification; organic is the least cost consuming agriculture. So if we talk about bringing down the cost of agriculture, then organic is the least costly.

Concluding Remarks on the Group Deliberations Ron: My only objective is that farmers move towards organic. In our local group we have encouraged farmers using fertilizers to know about us. If there are two PGS running simultaneously then it would result in conflicts. If NPM is a transition phase that is time bound transition towards organic. Then we can use the same PGS or we should have two different systems.


Ardhendu: I have a word of caution, we need to understand as to who is controlling these definitions. How many times has the FAO has agreed on organic 20 yrs back? How many times has IFOAM actually come up with the a statement condemning GMOs? We need to think who controls the definitions and the changes in our dialogue.


Proceedings Day 3: Presentation on Alternate approaches to Certification already in practice in India that can be integrated into the PGS system Presentation on Keystone by Mathew John Approach: Documentation of the traditional knowledge and practice apart from conserving biodiversity, access to land, rights over the land, access to market led them to form a village – level – organic conversion plan. Market is local. The linkage between consumer and producer getting widened makes it difficult for the consumer to understand the producer. Method: PRA, questionnaire, guarantee Consumer: Guarantee based on questionnaire, reaching 18 different products currently Clarifications from the Participants Are you marketing yourself or are you also selling the products through others. We sell it ourselves through 3 shops, we also send it to others. We provide 3-4 promises to the dealers:

1. it is organic 2. collected / producer getting fair price 3. done through a community efforts

How far is the market? Farthest market is Chennai which is 500 kms away. Nearly 70% is sold within a 75 kms range from the producer area. How as a NGO do we manage this? We give the producers a 10% over the wholesale market rate as a premium, this across out with most products. This effort was started with a completely non-grant oriented route. This was started with a bank help from SIDBI. Are you paying any market cess if you are directly procuring from the producer? We have to pay tax only when you are the first seller in the state. WE have documentation on the purchase though the producer may not have any.


OFAI presentation by Mr. Claude Alvares OFAI does not accept 3rd party certification. The whole system came about with the organic farmers visiting other organic farmers and documenting the entire thing in the local language. The first examination that we have conducted, they said that they are very happy to be doing what they are doing. They are happy about the opportunity to express their understanding. We have completed the whole process now of set-up, we have got the logo, it is an in-house thing. Our system is based on personal knowledge. WE are interested in protecting the integrity of our own label. It is a system where the guarantee is provided by the organic farmers themselves. PGS is something the requires some recognition it is a very comic situation, the people who don’t do organic farming have to certify that you are doing organic farming. That is good PGS that we will innovate methods and tools of documentation. Get recognition for PGS is something ministry and others can do. Everyone will have to do what they are good in doing. It is important to learn from the NGO segment in this. Leave organic farming to organic farmers. Today the best farmers to produce turmeric or sugarcane are all organic farmers. It is in the interest of organic farmers we need to have legitimacy established for PGS. We are the majority and we are not going to accept 3rd party certification. Don’t you feel that the forms distributed here were complicated? Ron: Claude perhaps has created more appropriate forms, we can look and learn from each other. We can bring it all under one umbrella. Claude: How does the 3rd party certification deal with this problem? It is done in the local language, and the farmers visits the farmer, eats with him and it is a collaborative exercise. One party coming from outside may lead to other things. We need to have a questionnaire, particularly about livestock. With the new agricultural practices such as panchagavya, amrut pani, etc. we need the livestock. It is important that we have livestock. Can we have a easy method of recording, we can put it directly onto a CD even better. We have to move ahead and adopt other methods of media. Today most farmers say that they have the information in their heads. It is important for us to convince them to maintain the data. Tomorrow the corporate otherwise come and say that these people have no records. Our organic farming source book is maintained by the information given by the organic farmers. Clarifications from Participants Do you also take care of processing certification also? We do for whatever processing is done in the farm. The consumer too has to play a part in getting good food to their plate. Wont this bring down the volumes? We need to understand why we want volumes. If we talk about volumes our priorities are different, it is not organic farming. It is important to bring in the consumer to take some responsibility in getting to the produce.


Ardendhu: Japanese organisations have come up with a new approach, there they have done away with the model of wholesaler, retailer, producer relationship. There needs to be other methods and models designed and we cannot be stuck to this system. Concluding Remarks on the Presentation for India by Ron Khosla The documents you have seen is only as a guideline. PGS is just a process, the certificate is an organic certificate, it is an identity that we need to all join hands and come together under as a process. In the US and Europe we didn’t do anything like this, we were fighting the standards and meanwhile the government was working with the 3rd party certifiers and corporations. We are now realizing the mistake. But, it is late for us. It has destroyed the entire marketing. India has to do better than that. We need to unite behind some process. So that we can communicate to the government our stand. The NPOP is based on what is the international understanding of organic. It has been adopted, so we don’t have to negotiate that. We need to look at providing an alternate that seems to be unified so that it increases our power to dialogue with the government. We will only talk of certification up to the farm gate. This is only because we are talking about the immediate market. Chris May: I want an approval of the floor for us to move forward. Responses: Sonali: I think this is a shubh muhurth, we need to move forward. Dr. Bhattacharya: FAO, NGO and GO are all behind Organic. Because APEDA may not be able to accept it. But if we can get to make it acceptable for domestic market, we can get them on board also. Mary: I think this is important that local farmers should do the marketing, we cannot leave it to others. We buy 60% of organic processed food for our own people. It is important that the regional council should take care of the marketing. We all need to agree. We have been waiting for over a year for something like this to emerge, this is on time. This is the first time that I have come across a document that was so clear. We need to still on the marketing, but, I hope that will emerge.


Concluding Remarks Dr. Daniel Gustafson, FAO Representative in India It is not often that there is a move to grant legitimacy to a process that is working among the communities. With PGS, we are here to coordinate such a legitimacy. At FAO, our earlier work has been in addressing poverty and reduction of hunger. LIESA, pesticide reduction, etc. have all been initiated and managed over a period of time towards this. These initiatives have all been based on the requests from the government. We are not in a position to take this initiative of PGS forward beyond the current project. From here on our role would be dependent on what is the request we receive from the ministry of agriculture. This initiative on PGS, has to be driven by the national partnership of NGOs and some level of involvement of the government, department of agriculture. The way forward will be a lot difficult, the pilot phase is not going to be easy. But, with the experience available here (among the participants), in production, in marketing, etc., which is really rather high and that can ensure that PGS can be taken forward by this group and I am delighted to reach where we have reached in this workshop and I am keen that this initiative grows. Dr. P. Bhattacharya Director, National Centre for Organic Farming At least 14 people have come forward to pilot. I am glad and wish you all success. I am willing to be with you even after my retirement. That people here are very enthusiastic and energetic and passionate gives me lot of hope. If you visit any of the third party certifiers’ office, they are all filled with documentation. It is not our objective to reduce organic agriculture to mere documents. Our support is for sustainability and wherever some (initiative) one is working towards sustainability or for market acceptability, then we will support them. Mr. Satish Chander, Dept. of Agriculture Joint Secretary (INM), Ministry of Agriculture The workshop has been very educative, I have learnt much. The effort has been how to take things forward, the discussions I have seen have been very participative. The PGS model has to be calibrated now, to incorporate the levels and framework that will be followed. Though we have to get rid of regulations as much as possible, here we have to ensure that there are common standards accepted and systems are agreed upon. Subsequently, we will need to ensure that the system is in place and functions according to its objectives. The Ministry of Agriculture has not laid down any standards for domestic production. Whenever the government is involved we need to ensure that the money allocated is spent properly and support is made available. We had provided about Rs.57 Crore for the 10th five year plan on a pilot phase for support of organic agriculture. We have so far provided support for Agricultural Universities, NGOs and others through this programme. We have tried to give capital investment subsidy for various needs of organic farming. We have also provided an intervention on market development.


We are open to examine if PGS can be a part of NPOP. If the organic produce through PGS is acceptable to the international standards, that can be one big step forward. As far as NPM, the end produce can be called by any name. But, let there not be any confusion in the mind of the consumer. If something is called organic, it ought to be completely organic and certain other things cannot be called organic. At the government level, we need a firm and well articulated proposal for us to respond. Claude Alvares, OFAI Vote of thanks for the meeting. We will have to take this seriously. This is a watershed meeting if we let this thing down then the entire organic movement will go down and we can be back.


Recommendations This section outlines the key action steps that was decided and agreed upon by the participants at the end of the workshop. Action Step 1: Pilot Project It was agreed among the participants that the PGS can be best furthered through a series of pilot projects. It was also agreed that the pilot projects be based in different ecological areas with different socio-economic situations, etc. so as to test its validity across a very diverse agriculture practicing country like India. Fourteen organisations from over 10 states have agreed to pursue a pilot project. These are:

1. The Organic Farming Association of India (OFAI), Goa volunteered to identify and provide 10 different pilot groups from among its members across the country. The concurrence of the OFAI board will be procured before a formal commitment will be made.

2. The Covenant Centre for Development (CCD), Madurai - volunteered to be part of the

pilot project. The Aaharam producer company, a community owned and managed enterprise initiative of CCD will manage this initiative.

3. Timbuktu Collectives, Chitoor, Andhra Pradesh – was ready to launch the pilot initiative

in their region with immediate effect. They will anchor this programme through their organic farmers groups and associations.

4. Institute of Integrated Rural Development,(IIRD), Maharashtra - will organise pilot

programme in its work location in the Marathwada region of Maharashtra state. 5. INHERE, Uttaranchal – has volunteered to organise the pilot programme in their

operational areas in the Kumaon region in Uttaranchal. 6. Samoha, Karnataka – has also volunteered to conduct a pilot project in its work area in the

Uttar Kannada region of Karnataka. 7. Sambandh, (Orissa)- an organisation working among tribals through its watershed and

organic farming programme in Orissa, has volunteered to organise a pilot project for PGS in its work areas which has one of the largest tribal concentration in India.

8. Chetna Vikas, Wardha – will also volunteer for the pilot project, however, it would make a

formal confirmation later. 9. Chetna Organic working in the Karimnagar District of Andhra Pradesh has also volunteered

to conduct a pilot of PGS in its area. As many farmers had moved from chemical to organic and back to chemical farming in this region, it felt that this would be a good place to validate this system.

10. BMD in Rajasthan – will conduct a pilot in this region that is naturally dependent on rain as

the only source of irrigation for agriculture.


11. Kuchch Sajiv Kheti Manch - will conduct a pilot project with its farmer members in the Kutch region in Gujarat.

12. Keystone, Nilgiris, Tamilnadu – had already initiated quite a few efforts to implement

PGS. It will be involved with a pilot programme in Tamilnadu. 13. Janhit Foundation – will be involved in piloting among its farmer groups in the Meerut

region in Western Uttar Pradesh. 14. Service Centre, West Bengal – will be involved in the pilot, with particular emphasis on the

capacity building for the success of this programme. Duration of the pilot project The pilot phase would be conducted for a period of six months and the volunteering organisations will meet for a review in March 2007. This time line was agreed upon by all the members who had volunteered to be in the pilot project. The council of 14 that has volunteered to conduct the pilot project will also keep in touch regionally in exchanging their experiences in implementing the PGS. Action Step 2: Preparation of Basic documentation set for implementing the pilot project It was decided that a three member team consisting of Mr. Joy Daniel, Mr. Mathew John and Mr. Claude Alvares, will work on the basic documentation process required for the implementation of the system. These documents will be ready by mid-October so as to start off on the pilot projects. The council of 14 members will closely work with this group to ensure that the standards are agreed and finalized. Their report will be ready by the 25th October. Process of distribution of the material and the communication will be by email. An email list to enable the same will be created by OFAI. Action Step 3: Liaison with the Government One of the strengthening factors for the promotion of PGS has been the readiness of the agricultural department of the Government of India to consider PGS as an alternative certification system to third party certification, presently in vogue. It was decided that a group of participants would work towards drafting a proposal for submitting to the Government. The team consisting of Mr. Ajay Rastogi, Mrs. Mary Vattamattam, Mr. Joy Daniel and Mrs. Sonali Bisht volunteered to be part of this group. It was decided that this group will also be looking at the documentation system requirements for the institutionalization of the PGS system. Apart from the central documentation that would be prepared by this sub group, all the 14 organizations participating for the pilot project will draft a note on the application and benefit of PGS in their work; this will be forwarded to the documentation team. A time frame of one month has been decided for the team to finalise its submission. It was emphasized that the document on the institutionalization should represent the plurality and diversity of the diverse members participating in this programme. This team will finalize the


institutionalization documentation within two weeks of receiving the recommendations / suggestions from all the regional teams. Action Step 4: Creating an identity - common logo and certification label name A label name for the certification process and a logo that would graphically represent the idea of PGS will be evolved. Mr. Kishore will coordinate the efforts towards this on behalf of all the participants. All suggestions will be sent to him by email by the end of September. He would explore options acceptable to consumers and submit his findings to the larger team for their perusal. Action Step 5: Decision on The National Structure on PGS It was decided that the 14 organisations which had volunteered to conduct the pilot project for PGS will be considered regional councils for their respective regions to begin with. The national level coordination council will consist of all the 14 partners. After the review in March 2007, a national council will be re-constituted. This is subject to approval of PGS as an alternate certification system.


Participant List

Shri.Joy Daniel Institute fo Integrated Rural Development (IIRD) Nakshatrawadi, Aurungabad PIN 431 002 Maharashtra 0240 2376336, 2376828 [email protected] Shri.Rengarajan. R Aharam Traditional Crop Producer Co. Ltd. 18C/1, Kennet Cross Road Ellis nagar Madurai 625 010 TamilNadu 0452 2607762 9443314317 [email protected] Shri.Shailesh Vyas Kachchh Sajivkheti Manch Ground Floor, Arihant Darshan pt Opp. Lal Takeri Telephone Exchange, Hospital Road, Bhuj 370001 Gujarat 2832651779 [email protected] Shri.Ajay Rastogi FAO [email protected] Shri.Mathew john Keystone Grores Hill Road, Kottagiri 643217 TamilNadu mathew@keystone_foundation.org Shri.Ramasubramanian Chief, Samanvaya No.5, Plani Street, Perambur Chennai 600011 TamilNadu 9444957781 [email protected] www.samanvaya.com Dr.Tej Pratap ICCOA Bangalore Karnataka [email protected] Smt.Sonali Bisht INHERE


Masi Bazar, Masi 263658 Uttaranchal 011 22713469, 05966 257374, 257217, 246342 [email protected], [email protected] Shri.Kishore Rao genus.a.b A1215, Brigade Residency, BSK Stage 3 Bangalore 560061 Karnataka [email protected] Shri.Arun Chandra. A Solidaridad/ICCO-ETC Organic Cotton Program India Chetna Organic 12-2-416/34, 1st floor, Mohan nivas Ushodaya colony, Gudimalkapur, Hyderabad 500028 Andhra Pradesh 914023520021, 23511083,9440626144 [email protected] Shri.Mohan Tendulkar Vermiculture Training Centre Malkapan Malkarne, via Sanguem 403704 Goa 0832 2678286 Ms.Renuka Taiman FAO FAO/UN, 55, Lodi Estate New Delhi 110013 Shri.Ram Bajekal Traidcraft Exchange 3, Arunachalam Road, Kotturpuram Chennai 600085 TamilNadu [email protected] Dr.Claude Alvares OFAI G-8, St.Britto's Apartments, Feira Alta, Mapusa 403507 Goa 0832 2255913 [email protected] Shri.Bibhu Kalyan Mohanty Sambandh 2926/5198, Jaydev Nagar Lewis Road Bhubaneshwar 751002 Orissa 0674 2435550, 2436660 [email protected], [email protected] Shri.Govind Moreshwar Parsekar Parsekar Organic Farm


Mandrem 403527 Goa 0832 2247281 Shri.Anil Rana Janhit foundation D-80, Sashtri Nagar Meerut, Uttar Pradesh 0121 2763418 [email protected] Dr.Shrikanta.K.Panigrahi Director, E&F Planning commision D-5, Akash bharah Apartments, 24, Indraprastha Extentioin Delhi 100092 9891002711 [email protected] Ms.Niranjana Maru Alternative Agriculture Resource Centre Chetna Vikas P.O.Gopuri Wardha 442 001 Maharashtra 07152- 241931, 240806, 240004 [email protected] Ms.Kesang Tshomo Dept. of Agricuture Ministry of Agriculture Thimphu Bhutan, P.O.Box 855 Bhutan 975 2 323184 [email protected] Rev.Fr.Inalcio Almaida Pilar Nature Farm Pilar 403 203 Goa 9850610465 Mr.Adarsh Kumar AIACA Ground Floor D- 602Chittrayav Park New Delhi 011- 41603676 [email protected] Mr.David Gower Ambrosia Organic Farm House No:601, Baga Calangute, Bardez Goa 2279847 9822139967 Mr.A.Ravindra WASSAN 12-13-452, St.No:1, Tarnaka Secundarabad 500 017 Andhra Pradesh 040-27015295/96 9440621861


[email protected] Mr.N. Muthuvelayutham Secretary CCD, 18C/1 Kennet Cross Road Ellis Nagar, Madurai TamilNadu 0452-2607762 9443314300 [email protected] Mrs.Mary Vattamattam Timbaktu Collective C.K.Pally Village Ananthapur 515101 Andhra Pradesh 08559-240335,240339,240149,240337 9441417444 Mr.Daniel Anand Raj ETC India TCPCL(AAHARAM),Site1,2,Srinivasa Layout Yadhava farms,Chunchaghatta Banglore 560 062 Karnataka 080-26638120,26638112, 04344-223521(Res) 9443302413 www.etc-india.org/www.etcindia.org Mr.Raviprakash M.S. SAMUHA #12/3, Raghavakrupa,Bull Temple A' Cross Main Road,6th main Chamarajpet Banglore 560 018 Karnataka 080-26606532/33/28 9449694890 [email protected], [email protected],[email protected] Mr.Ardhendu Shekhar Chatterjee DRCSC, 58A, Dharmatala Road, Bosepukur, Kasba, Kolkatta 700 042 West Bengal 033-24427311 [email protected], [email protected] Mr.Vasant Saberwal Ford Foundation 55 Lodhi Estate New Delhi 110 030 011-24619441,24648401 [email protected] Mr.V.K. Madhavan CHIRAG Simayal village, Nathuwakhan P.O. Nainital PIN 263 158 Uttaranchal India 05942-285738 9412085732 [email protected]


Mr.Dhanpat Suthar CBMD First Floor Shir shakti Mandir Complex Sec-8,R.K.Puram New Delhi PIN 110022 India 011-26173512 9214404418 [email protected], [email protected]

Dr.Bhatacharya Director National Centre for Organic Farming (NCOF) Addl.Comm(INM),Ghaziabad, Krishibhavan New Delhi

Dr.G.Chakrabarthy Dy. Comm.(INM),Dept. of Agri & Corp ,Ministry of Agriculture New Delhi Dr.Daniel Gustafson FAO-UN [email protected] Shri.Satish Chander JS (INM) Ministry of Agriculture, Dept. of Agriculture and crop Krishi Bhavan New Delhi Mr.Ron Khosla Certified Naturally Grown [email protected]


Appendix 1: The Presentation ‘Proposed PGS Certified Organic – A Plan for India’ by Mr. Ron Khosla PGS in India - Key Indicators for Success Low Direct Cost. Affordable to families that may have low cash sales Minimal Paperwork Appropriate for Small Farmers Regionally Appropriate Standards. Peer Inspections Village, Regional and National Groups in a horizontal Network without hierarchies Build the Organic Movement, rather than just provide an expensive marketing label Mutual Recognition and Support between regional PGS Groups in India. TThheerree aarree aallrreeaaddyy iinnddiivviidduuaall llooccaall llaabbeellss bbeeiinngg ccrreeaatteedd iinnddeeppeennddeennttllyy,, bbuutt aa ssiinnggllee ssttrroonnggllyy

ssuuppppoorrtteedd nnaattiioonnaall llaabbeell wwiillll ddoo mmuucchh mmoorree ffoorr tthhee mmoovveemmeenntt aass aa wwhhoollee.. TThheerree iiss ssttrreennggtthh iinn nnuummbbeerrss aanndd mmoorree ccrreeddiibbiilliittyy ttoo tthhee pprrooggrraamm aass aa wwhhoollee iiss ccrreeaatteedd..

Inclusive of New and Transitioning Organic Farmers Subtext of support and training built into the system Empower the Small Farmer with skills and market power

Key Groups

ORGANIZATION LEVEL

Farm Family

Local Group

Regional Group

Nat'l

TThhee ssiizzee ooff tthhee llaabbeell bbooxxeess iiss pprrooppoorrttiioonnaattee ttoo tthhee lleevveell ooff rreessppoonnssiibbiilliittyy iinn PPGGSS cceerrttii ffiiccaattiioonn..

C R ED I B I L I T


PGS Organizational Chart

Regional Group

Local Group

Farm Family

National Regional Coordinating Farm Family Local Group

Committee GroupFarm Family

Local Group

Regional Group

CCeerrttiiffiiccaattiioonn PPrroocceessss:: BBuuiillddiinngg CCrreeddiibbiilliittyy

Farmer Joins Local Group Attends training on Organic

Standards Takes the “Organic Farmer’s Pl d ” Local Group

Collates pledge, inspection, Required attendance for each Local Group Peer Inspection (3+) Farmer.

Scripted Inspection/Peer Review Decides WHO will be certified (ensure physical checks of property Sends summary worksheet to and confirm farmer understands rules)

Reg Council

Regional Council

Checks for completeness of Summary Worksheet

Follows up on any Non compliance issues raised National Coordinating Committee Passes info to NCC (online or offline) Maintains “instant ID #” system

online Receives ID#’s from NCC Issues ID # to Local Group

Issues Certificates to each Farmer Registers the name of each Local

Group


FFoollllooww tthhee PPaappeerr

FARM LEVEL Pledge Document Inspection Worksheet Attendance Worksheet

LOCAL GROUP LEVEL

Roles and Responsibilities of Key Groups Role of Key Groups - Individual Farmers or Farm Families Develop an Understanding of Organic Standard Make sure their farm practices are compliant Make a pledge that they understand and adhere to Organic Standards Attend key field days identified by their Regional Council Participate in inspections/audits of other farmers Advise neighbors, share information, improve capacity of the group as a whole Allow consumer/buyer visits (encouraged) Participate in appraisal in neighboring villages

Role of Key Groups - Local Group

WHO – Farmers (and consumers) living in one or more villages o May be self-created, but more often group is facilitated by a local NGO or

government agency extension service

Summary Worksheet (of farms to be certified) Summarized Crop estimates for the Local Group as a whole

NCC Instant ID# System (automatic) SMS and Web traceability (automatic) Traceable only to the Local Group level If people want more, can contact Regional Council

REGIONAL COUNCIL 1) Reviews Local Summary Worksheet for completeness 2) Online/Offline transmission of summary data to NCC

REGIONAL COUNCIL Issues Local Group ID # (as provided by NCC) Issues and prints individual Farmer Certificates With ID#’s (as provided by NCC)


o Can be overlaid on an existing group – (i.e Self-Help Group, Farmer Field School group, Women’s empowerment group, etc)

ROLE

o First contact point for new farmers about Organic and PGS o Primary support/take responsibility for each other o Coordinate on-farm inspections o Apply defaults/non-compliance Guidelines (Regional Council) when necessary o Appoint a Local Group Leader/Representative with responsibility of ensuring:

Each farmer has completed all parts of the Organic guarantee (pledge, inspection, attendance at key field days)

Compilation of Local Group Summary Worksheet for Regional Council Role of Key Groups - Regional Council

WHO o NGO or district level government for Pilot Phase

Ultimately include Farmer Cooperatives/societies Local Groups can come together to form a new Regional Council

o Consumer Members invited

Certification Role o Register with National Coordinating Committee (discuss Fee) o Attend Training (paperwork/procedures) o Translate and Print paperwork in local language o Train Local Groups (procedures/paperwork) o Check for complete paperwork from Local Group o Send Summary information to NCC for each Local Group o Issue Organic Certificates to each member of the Local Group o Participates in a sampling of Local Group farm inspections o Issue Non-compliance/Default Guidelines

CAN’T choose to certify individual farmers

CAN suspend an entire Local Group Role of Key Groups - Regional Council

Non-certification Roles of the Regional Council o First point of contact for new farmer groups and consumers o Hosts training on standards and compliance at a Local Group Level to any

interested farmers, even if they are not interested in joining the PGS o Regional Level Marketing and Media (district level farmer’s market, consumer

coop, festivals, schools) o Apply for a voting seat on NCC after 1 year?????


Role of Key Groups – National Coordinating Committee

WHO o Representative from Ministry of Agriculture with Consumer Groups, appropriate

NGOs [and unlimited number of Regional Council Groups after the first 1-2 years]

ROLES

o YES Initially Coordinate Regional Council Training workshops o YES Accreditation of new Regional Councils o YES Guidelines to appropriate and updated “Organic Guarantee” and other

documents o YES Custodian of “Basic National Organic Standard” (based on production

standards of the NPOP) o YES Puts process in place to allow for update and revision standards o YES Coordinate and maintain national database of ID# for Regional Councils to

work with o YES Maintain SMS and Internet traceability for all Local Groups and Processors o YES Maintains a positive relationship with APEDA and 3rd Party Certifiers. o YES Coordinate random sample pesticide residue o YES Possibly coordinate state level Coordinating committees as program grows o (YES Include consumer and non-voting buyer groups in NCC) o YES Seek funding from Government and Donor organizations o YES Coordinate National Level outreach, education and marketing on Organic

and PGS Frequently Asked Questions I

Why not dictate that outsiders be included in “Peer Inspections” (Priest, members from another village, local Panchayat, Ag-Technicians, etc.)

How big is a Regional Group, what areas is covered, who can form a Regional Group, who must be included. Shouldn’t we specify these things?

How can you expect village farmers to exclude each other from a local group? (secret ballot, social control, example of two strikes…out for a year)

Aren’t 3rd Party Certification Agencies going to fight this. Does PGS “Compete” with 3rd Party Certification?

How do you keep distributors and processors from cheating? (Can you ever do this? EcoCert suggestions.)

From a farmer: This is a lot of work. I’d rather just pay my 100 rupees to the ICS and be done with it. How is this better?

From a Farmer: Is there a buyer for my PGS Certified Organic Wheat? Find me one first! Frequently Asked Questions II

What’s the Difference Between PGS and 3rd Party Certification o Paperwork (USA survey on paperwork cheating) o Regionally appropriate (and small farmer appropriate) Standards allow more

farmers to participate, increasing the organic base in the country.


o PGS is inclusive of new/transitioning Organic Farmers o Involvement of Consumer is encouraged o 3rd Party Certification has proven to be too easy to defraud because it’s based on

paperwork and an antagonistic relationship (think of income taxes) rather than join social control and peer support.

Frequently Asked Questions III

What’s the Difference Between ICS and PGS o In India, only the one crop is certified. Certified Organic cotton farmers in

Maharashtra are now seeking 2nd organic certification for Wheat… PGS Certifies the whole farm

o ICS requires a common point of sale. There is no freedom for farmers to explore other markets or to sell certified organic products in other markets

o Farmer basically becomes an indentured laborer – farmer can be taken advantage of (MH example again)

o Farmer not in control of standards and regulations. Results in less farmers being certified

o Farmers not in control of costs (Increasing with greater monitoring… and in Goa, pesticide residues BELOW acceptable organic standards were found in a UK grocery store (could even have been in the packing) but ICS GROUP is now required to pay for regular testing!)

o ICS doesn’t work because it starts with an antagonistic “prove it” relationship between farmer and the monitors. Farmers end up helping each other cheat after even one suffers being reported on by an outside monitor

o No empowerment/Capacity Building of farmers o Confidentiality more important than Transparency o Huge Amount of Paperwork requires assistance from NGO is not sustainable o ICS (like 3rd party labeling) is just a marketing tool. PGS requires more capacity

and involvement from farmers but it builds a MOVEMENT Local Groups - (Gaps and Discussion Points) Issues Documents Summary of Organic Standards - Based on Indian National Standards for Organic Products

1. Chemical fertilizers are prohibited. 2. Organic fertilizers must be used in an integrated manner and should utilize compost,

green crops and mineral inputs. 3. Chemical pesticides and herbicides are prohibited. 4. The use of botanical pesticides is allowed. 5. Farming equipment used for conventional farming must be cleaned before use on an

organic farm. 6. Seeds must not be treated with chemicals. 7. Bags and containers used to harvest and transport organic product must be clean and

clearly labeled ‘organic only.’


8. A suitable buffer area must be in place between organic and non-organic farms. 9. GMO seeds are prohibited. 10. Farmers must have measures in place to stop erosion. 11. Burning of green material and crop residues is prohibited except in the case of disease

control. 12. Livestock must be treated in a humane way. 13. Livestock living on organic land must be fed organic feed. 14. The conversion period to full organic production is 36 months from the last documented

use of a prohibited input. Other farms may be certified as “Transitional” 15. Each farmer maintains regular attendance in the PGS Organic meetings of their Local

Group. 16. Each farmer must take an Organic Pledge. 17. Each farmer must have successfully completed a peer-inspection of at least one other

farm, and have had a successful peer review of their own farm. What’s the Difference? - 3rd Party Group Certification and Participatory Guarantee Systems

Costs and paperwork requirements make it practically impossible for small farmers in India (as well as the rest of the world) to consider individual Third Party certification. As a result, Group Certification based on an Internal Control System (ICS) was created.

While it would be very simple for a PGS to get ICS group certification (for Local Groups that want to take advantage of international export opportunities for example) there are some extremely important differences between ICS and PGS that are important to highlight.

PGS Certification minimizes paperwork, which reduces the need for NGO or buyer facilitation in the Certification process and lowers certification costs.

PGS is more than Certification. Priority is given to networks and peer support systems for sharing of techniques, ideas and general farmer capacity building.

PGS is locally focused. ICS Certification is generally focused on commodity and export products (because most buyers are not interested in underwriting certification for crops they can’t easily export) discouraging development of local awareness and markets for other types of organic crops and depresses the building of the organic movement in India as a whole. PGS is a certification system for the whole farm only.

There is no "Common Point of Sale" requirement in PGS as there is in ICS, which means more market empowerment for the small farmers – they are free to sell their crops to whoever the highest buyer is.

PGS is more empowering for the farmer because they are in control and the decision-makers of who is and isn’t certified in their own local group. This means increased responsibility, but it is a stronger system than the somewhat antagonistic “farmers vs. certifiers” that is inherent in an ICS system.

Farmers control regionally appropriate alternatives to the rules. While basic organic requirements must be met, there is flexibility in key areas –farmers may decide that they can include transitioning farmers and even split operations.

PGS is the only way to certify hundreds of thousands, if not millions small Indian farmers in a short amount of time, bringing them into a system of committed organic production. There is no way to fund the time or resources necessary to do that within ICS.


Appendix 2: Summary of Organic Standards – Based on Indian National Standard for Organic Products

1. Synthetic chemical fertilizers are prohibited.

2. Only organic fertilizers may be used and can utilize animal wastes, plant residues, green crops and mineral inputs.

3. Synthetic chemical pesticides and herbicides are prohibited.

4. The use of botanical pesticides and approved raw minerals is allowed.

5. Farming equipment used for conventional farming must be cleaned before use on an organic farm

6. Bags and containers used to harvest and transport organic product must be clean and clearly labeled ‘organic only’ and should not have been used to store non-organic crops

7. All GMO’s are prohibited.

8. Farmers must have measures in place to stop erosion.

9. Burning of green material and crop residues should be minimized.

10. Livestock must be treated in a humane way.

11. The conversion period to full organic production is 36 months from the last documented use of a prohibited input. Other farms may be certified as “Transitional”

12. Each farmer maintains regular attendance in the PGS Organic meetings of their Local Group.

13. Each farmer must take an Organic Pledge.

14. Each farmer must have successfully completed a peer-appraisal of at least one other farm, and have had a successful peer review of their own farm.

This is NOT meant to be a complete organic standard for PGS in India, it is just a summary of key elements in Organic Production to make it easier for farmers and facilitators to have the basic elements of organic production in one page. PGS Certified Organic production methods are based on production methods listed in the existing Indian National Standard (though the NCC may decide to include a list of specific exceptions).


Appendix 3: PGS Farmer’s Pledge

I PROMISE THAT IN MY FARMING I WILL follow the organic standards to serve soil health, the environment my family and community.

1. I will not use synthetic pesticides such as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, fertilizers, chemically treated or genetically modified seeds.

2. I will work with our fellow farmers and attend meetings to expand and share my knowledge of the standards and organic production techniques.

3. I will check with the Local Group before using any product that I am unsure of.

4. I will work to build the soil through ecologically sustainable farming practices such as crop rotations, composting, cover crops and green manures.

5. I will care for my livestock in ways that ensures their well-being.

6. I will only use bags and containers that are clean and clearly labeled ‘organic only’ to harvest, transport and sell our organic products.

7. I will work to prevent contamination by suitable buffers and other means.

8. I will encourage biodiversity through my farming system.

9. I will sell products as Organic only when they are grown on certified land, and have been grown in accordance with organic practices.

10. I will ensure that on the farm during storage, processing, transport and sale there is no contamination or mixing of organically grown with non-organically grown.

11. I accept the decision of the Local Group in regards to my certification status.

12. I will participate in appraisals on other farms as per group norms.

13. I will report even minor or unintentional non-compliances to the organic standards on my farm to my Local Group

All information I have provided on the application and during my farm appraisal is correct and accurate, and I will keep my information up to date with any changes.

____________________________________________________ Printed Farmer Name(s) [Note: all decision making parties on the farm must sign]

____________________________________________________ Signature(s)/Thumb Impression ______________________ _________________________________________ Date Local Group ID# ________________________________________________ Printed Name of Witness(es) ________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________ Witness(es) Signature/Thumb Impression Date Witness Contact information


Appendix 4: Peer Inspection / Appraisal Worksheet

This worksheet is designed so that a "No" answer is a point of concern. Please be sure to explain "no" answers more completely in the space provided on the last page.

Applicant Details 1 Farmer Names (Include all family members who are actively involved in the farm

operation [*decision makers in the farm operation?]

2 Is the farm owner/manager(s) present during the inspection? (If not, this inspection can not proceed).

�Yes �N/A

�No

3 Contact Address:

4 Local Group Name/Number

5 Regional Council Name/Number

6 Inspection Type � New � Ren-ewal

�Con- version

7 What is the farmers’ relationship with the land �Own �Lease

�Share- Crop

Background Information 8 Is the farmer sure that prohibited chemical fertilizers, pesticides,

herbicides or fungicides have not been used on the land 36 months before the next harvest? (Check N/A for conversion properties).

�Yes �N/A

�No

9 Can the farmer tell you how he checks to see if an input is approved or not for organic practices?

�Yes �N/A

�No

10 Where did the farmer learn about Organic Farming?

11 What are the main reasons the farmer wants to grow organically?

12 Can the farmer show you a summarized form of the organic standards and practices?

�Yes �N/A

�No

Crop Production Details 13 What are the total number of plots that are being farmed?

14 What is the area of each plot?

15 What is the total area being farmed?

16 How big is the area the farmer wants to certify as organic? 17 How big is the area the farmer wants to certify as "in conversion" to


organic 18 How big is the area that will still be farmed conventionally (parallel

production)?

?? For parallel production properties, has the farmer provided you with a map of the farm clearly showing which areas are in organic production, which areas are still being farmed conventionally

�Yes �N/A

�No

19 List the primary crops grown for market and home use. Attach a separate sheet if

necessary. List crops grown under organic, conventional and NPM systems twice with relevant information specific to each cropping system (for example 5 acres organic cotton, 5 acres NPM cotton).

Name of Crop Area (or numer of plants)

Home/Market/Mixed use

Esti-mated yield

Management (organic/ conventional/NPM)

Seeds and Transplants Xx Does the farmer use organic seeds when available? �Yes

�N/A �No

20 Is the farmer sure that the seeds they grow are NOT Genetically Modified?

�Yes �N/A

�No

21 Is the farmer sure that the seeds they plant are NOT treated with a prohibited substance (OR if they are chemically treated, do they make sure to wash the seeds before planting). [*TO DISCUSS: This is not allowed under current IFOAM / India / EU / US Organic standards]

�Yes �N/A

�No

?? This question is applicable to annual crops only If the farmer buys transplants/planting stock, do they make sure they are organically grown --OR-- do they have permission to use non-Organically grown transplants from their Regional Council?

�Yes �N/A

�No

General Soil Health 22 How many instances of soil erosion do you see as you walk around the farm?


23 Can the farmer describe what they will do to minimize soil erosion next year?

�Yes �N/A

�No

24 Does they farmer understand the importance of crop rotations and do they use them?

�Yes �N/A

�No

25 Do the crops look healthy? �Yes �N/A

�No

25 List the main rotations system and indicate which ones can be seen right now.

Include intercropping systems Natural Resources 26 Is the farmer aware of the importance of biological diversity in

farming? �Yes �N/A

�No

27 Do you see examples where the farmer is encouraging biological diversity and wildlife habitat where practical (for example leaving hedge areas between fields and planting strips of beneficial plants?)

�Yes �N/A

�No

28 Through observation and discussion with the farmer, please list ways the farmer is encouraging biological diversity in the farm and cropping systems.

29 Does the farmer have a clear understanding of the importance of conserving water resources

�Yes �N/A

�No

30 If crop residues are burned, is the burning used only when absolutely necessary (for example to suppress disease or for ratoon crops like sugarcane)?

�Yes �N/A

�No

Nutrient Management and Inputs Relating to Soil Fertility 31 Check the items below which the farmer lists as important components of their nutrient

and fertility management � Green Manures � Crop Rotation � Cover Crops � Intercropping � On-farm manure � Foliar applications � Compost � Soil amendments � Off Farm Manure � Bio-dynamic preparations � Vermiculture � Incorporation of Plant Residues � Mulching


� Purchase Prepared Organic Compounds � Microbial Preparations � Other (please describe below) 32 Have the farmer list the external fertility inputs used.

If you don’t know whether or not the input is approved for organic use, put a ? in the space provided and list the input and label/ingredient information on the last page of this inspection worksheet so that it can be easily reviewed later.

Input name and description Crops on which it's used

Application Rate (amt +times applied Source

Organically Approved?

Weed Management 34 Working with the farmer, list the primary weed problems on the farm

35 Check the items below that the farmer uses for weed control

� crop rotation � mulching � stale seedbedding � hand pulling � weeding tool � Other (please describe below) Pest and Disease Management 36 Working with the farmer, list the primary pest and disease problems on the farm.

37 What preventative pest and disease control practices does the farmer use

� crop rotation � Intercropping � Timing of Plowing � Spacing � Planting Resistant Varieties � Other (please describe below) 38 Have the farmer list the amendments used for pest and disease control

If you don’t know whether or not the input is approved for organic use, put a ? in the space provided and list the input and label/ingredient information on the last page of this


inspection worksheet so that it can be easily reviewed later.

Input name and what pest/disease problem it’s used for

Crops on which it's used

Application Rate (amt +times applied Source

Organically Approved?

39 Is the farmer careful to use pest or disease control inputs only after

trying preventive practices? �Yes �N/A

�No

Buffers and split farm practices 40 Is the farmer aware of GMO and GM seed contamination

concerns? �Yes �N/A

�No

41 Have they checked/do they know if GM seeds are planted in nearby fields?

�Yes �N/A

�No

42 If neighboring farms are applying chemical sprays or using GM seeds, do buffers appear sufficient to avoid contamination of organic production areas and crops from chemical spray drift or GMO cross pollination?

�Yes �N/A

�No

43 If buffer crops are harvested, does the farmer store and sell them separately from certified organic crops?

�Yes �N/A

�No

44 If this is a split operation and prohibited chemicals are stored on the farm, have you checked to see that they are stored in a separate lockable cupboard from organic inputs?

�Yes �N/A

�No

45 If there are employees working on the farm, has the farmer explained the differences between prohibited and allowable materials and made it clear where each can be used?

�Yes �N/A

�No

46 From your observations of equipment and talking to the farmer, do cleaning methods appear sufficient to prevent contamination by prohibited substances (for example wash water of spray equipment is not draining into organic fields)

�Yes �N/A

�No

Post Harvest and Crop Storage 47 Does the farmer know that they have to use clean packaging to

pack their products? (For example they can not use fertilizer bags to pack their onions)

�Yes �N/A

�No

48 Does the farmer have a system to prevent the mixing of organic and non-organic crops?

�Yes �N/A

�No

49 Do storage areas appear to be clean, and free of insect, rodent, bird, or other pest infestation?

�Yes �N/A

�No

Marketing Details ?? Get a quick-summary idea of how the

farmer markets their main crops


Name of Product % Direct Sales Resellers Wholesalers

Inspection Summary

The Peer inspection worksheet is designed so that a "No" answer is a point for concern. Please be sure to explain "no" answers in the space provided below. ___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

Please list here the inputs and materials used by the farmer that you are unsure whether or not they are acceptable in organic practices.

Product and label/ingredient information:


Does the peer review team have recommendations for the farmer about things that could be improved, even if they do not keep him/her from being Certified Organic this year? (use back side if necessary)

The peer review team does not make the final decision on certification but now that the inspection is over, what would you recommend?

�Full Certification �In Conversion Certification �Farmer should make listed improvements and apply for certification next year.

Date of inspection _______________________ How long did the inspection take ____________ Who was responsible for filling in the inspection worksheet ______________________________

Printed Name, Signatures and Date of all peer-inspectors present at this inspection __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

This is not a final document, but a drafted example based on peer inspection documents from other PGS programs globally. This example includes some notation as to suggestions made by participants of the 2006 PGS Workshop in Goa, India.


Appendix 5: Non Compliance Guidelines

“Catalogue of Sanctions” Sanctions are given to farmers by the Local Group as a whole OR by the Local Group’s elected

Ethics Council (if one was created).

SITUATION SANCTION • Missing Attendance at a required

Field Day • Unsatisfactory production system

Verbal Warning

• Minor violations of the standards or regulations

• repeated written warning for similar problem

• not responding to approval conditions

Short Suspension of Certifcation Period determined by length of time it takes for the Grower to get a new peer inspection/consultation

• repeated minor violations • clear violation of the standards not

threatening the organic integrity of the product

Suspension for a fixed period after until farmer(s) take corrective actions.

• clear violation of the standards threatening the organic integrity of the product eg: use of prohibited pesticides or synthetic fertilisers.

Longer term suspension for 1 year Farmer may be moved back into “In Conversion” status

• repeated violations leading to penalties, suspension or withdrawal of approval.

• Obvious fraud • Intentional obstruction of the

inspection eg: denying inspector access.

• Refusal to respond to written requests for additional information

Termination of participation Farmer(s) banned from PGS membership either permanently or for a set period of time.

The Right of Appeal The farmer's can make an appeal to the Regional Council within 2 weeks of the date of notification of the sanction by the Local Group OR to the Local Group as a whole if there is an Ethics Council that implemented the sanction.

This is not a final document, just a drafted example from a similar document used globally. The NCC is expected to define a basic guideline of major and minor violations. Decision making for MINOR violations is left up to the Local and Regional Groups. Repeated minor violations after the first year generally results in suspension. Non-reporting of minor violation should result in more serious sanction.
