Tài liệu Organic Farming in Austria: Idealism vs. market realism in the organic farming movement docx

Organic Farming in Austria:

Idealism vs. market realism in the
organic farming movement



Authors:
Christian R. Vogl
Rainer Haas
Susanne Kummer


Contact:
Institute for Organic Farming
University of Applied Life Sciences, (BOKU) Vienna, Austria
/>
Corresponding author:

Contents

1. A story of the organic farming movement in Austria
Hans Mader ……………………………………………………………………………2
Michael Maier…………………………………………………………………… 4
2. Background 6
2.1. What is organic farming? 6
2.2. The worldwide organic farming movement 6
2.3. Philosophy and legal background 8
2.4. Organic farming in Austria 9
2.5. Perspectives for organics in Austria 11
3. Images of the Austrian agriculture 11
4. Discussion questions 14
5. References 14

Hans Mader
Hans closed the door behind him and drew a deep breath of fresh air in the night. He felt
relieved that he now could leave behind the discussions and sort out his thoughts calmly. He
already had heard so much about the new organization, and of course it was one of the most
important topics in every meeting of the local organic farmers association that he had recently
joined. No doubt, it was important to talk about the new challenges facing the ecological
movement and every organic farmer in Austria, but he already felt tired of discussing the pros
and cons of ‘Bio Austria’ – the new nationwide organic farming association. It seemed to him
as if – in spite of the arousing discussions of his colleagues – the whole thing had already
developed a life of its own. Someone else, it seemed, was taking control of the ‘organic
future’ in Austria. Hans had the impression that at the moment there was little understanding

of the impact, problems and ideas of the organic farmers themselves.

Too much emphasis, Hans felt, was being placed now on economic issues and information for
consumers. In the past, discussion had focused more on values, on ideas that expressed how
the advocates of the organic movement were at the same time proponents for an alternative
way of production and living. But this period seemed long ago. Bio Austria – this new organic
association – clearly was striving to become the ‘locomotive of ecological agriculture’ and to
start a new period of organic farming in the country. Hans acknowledged his yearnings for
earlier times when each of the eleven organic farmers associations, who both competed and
worked together, could be heard and distinguished. Now they all were expected to melt
together to “Bio Austria”. Those critical voices that warn sooner or later the identity of these
small associations is going to be assimilated and blurred seem to be right, Hans lamented.


2
When Hans Mader changed to organic farming back in 1980 he had been called a ‘Bio-freak’
– a man focused on developing alternatives for the future of agriculture. His main reason for
converting had been the unpleasant feelings that were aroused in him when he used chemical
fertilizers, pesticides and huge machines on his farmland. At that time he had noticed that the
fertility and vividness of the soil diminished more and more. When he had recognized these
changes it became essential to re-establish natural cycling systems on his farm and to feel the
basic but subtle connections in life and nature again. So he made his decision. From now on
he would never return to any kind of intensive or industrial agriculture. This decision had
been firm and comprehensive, the result of intellectual as well as emotional considerations.

Hans had not been the only one. In his region he had found a group of people with the same
attitude. Together they had founded a small, local organic farmers association. During many
years a lot of ideas had been born and discussed. Some of them had taken shape and had been
put into practice. One of the most important projects had been the implementation of a local
marketing network, consisting of farmyard shops (Hofläden), green shops and farmers

markets. On an informal, occasional basis they also worked together with restaurants and
large kitchens/canteens in the region. Besides the marketing activity, periodic courses and
excursions were arranged to enable further training. The effort for organizing these activities
was considerable, and it put additional strain on the farmers.

An important platform for discussions and new ideas were the meetings of the association. It
often happened that such a meeting turned into an informal chat that kept going until late in
the night. Like tonight, when Hans was just leaving one of those nocturnal talks. As he
walked home thoughtfully he realized, that these changes had been evolving for quite some
time now. The official formation of Bio Austria was only the most visible sign of these
processes. There had been a progression of concrete changes during the past ten or fifteen
years. The organic movement nowadays was no longer lead by a handful of alternative
thinking persons who wanted to highlight the problems of the conventional farming system
and offer a sustainable farming method. By now organic farms accounted for a good 10
percent of total cultivated farmland. Organic produce had reached a sizable market share and
was now well known to the consumers. Important milestones for this growth had been the
first government subsidies for organic agriculture, which had been paid out in the early 1990s.
In 1994 direct payments had been made available for all organic farmers. Also in 1994, the
first supermarket chains had begun selling organic products using their own organic labels,
and sales began increasing rapidly.

This boom had also caused a conventionalisation of the initial principles. For some years now
Hans had been missing the treatment and further development of the ideals of the organic
movement. Economic concerns had become more and more prominent. Sometimes it seemed
to him as if the ideals of organic farming were step by step replaced by marketing and sales
strategies. Ideals and values seemed to matter only so long as they served to promote sales.
Hans also noticed that the newer organic farmers seemed to be applying only those measures
that are required by law, and did not invest in organic quality beyond this requirement. The
pioneering beginners went beyond these measures in their search for excellence. It saddened
him to think about it.

When Hans had attempted to talk about his apprehensions in meetings, his colleagues were
increasingly critical of him. They pointed out that things had changed a lot. It was necessary

3
to adapt to the needs of market and to be more consumer oriented. Nowadays people were not
interested in moral preaching. It took some effort for the organic movement to leave behind
the ascetic image of the “muesli freak”. The consumption of organic products increasingly
was being associated with enjoyment and convenience. Hans didn’t oppose enjoyment; his
generous body measurements were an obvious sign for this fact. For him though, this
argumentation was not valid. He was even more able to enjoy his meal, when he knew that
there was more behind the food on his plate than romantic pictures. In the organic farmers
association, Hans was said to be old fashioned, a diehard. His colleagues couldn’t understand
that he was much more interested in the crop rotation of his fields than in a homepage for his
farm.

Hans heard the door of the pub open again. When he turned around he saw that Michael was
just leaving the meeting. Michael Maier was quite new in the association. He had converted to
organic farming only three years ago. He was one of the innovative ones, a good
businessman. Hans didn’t believe that Michael had a lot of practical agricultural know-how.
For sure he was convinced that Michael followed the legislative regulations for organic
farming. He liked Michael, but it seemed that his own reality and Michael’s were far apart.


Michael Maier
When Michael arrived at the organic farmers’ meeting his thoughts were still revolving
around the telephone conversation he had had some hours ago. He had called a sales manager
of a supermarket chain this afternoon, to speak about his supply contract. Michael still
remembered his euphoric feelings when they had signed his contract only two month ago. A

number of tough negotiations and difficult decisions had been necessary to finalize business
with this retail company. The final price that they settled on just barely provided a profit.
Michael had given in to the lowest limits of his profit margin. Nevertheless this business deal
appeared to be his best so far.

Two weeks later, he wanted to see how his products had been placed in the shops. When he
checked one of the branch shops he was not at all satisfied with what he found. Some of the
articles had not even been put on to shelves by then. The branch manager confronted with this
issue seemed to be quite indifferent. With an unpleasant feeling Michael had left the shop.

Today Michael called the responsible sales manager to fix the quantity of the next supply.
Bad news; the retail company did not want to renew the supply contract with him. His
products had not met the expected sales figures. Furthermore the retail company was realizing
that the handling costs for being supplied by single farmers are too high. This hadn’t been
what Michael expected, although nobody ever had guaranteed him another contract.

Michael did not dare to tell his colleagues in the meeting what had happened. Two month ago
he had told them enthusiastically about the conclusion of the supply agreement. He had
noticed the envious looks of some of the people present. In this past evening he had tried to
convince them to start business with supermarket chains. In his opinion this would be the
future of marketing for organic produce. Some of his colleagues had agreed, but he also had
been confronted with refusal. Of course Hans Mader had argued against his proposal most
intensively. In Maders’ opinion this could only lead to a total dependence of farmers on the
big retail chains. In addition, Mader couldn’t stand the exploitation of the prefix ‘eco’ in the

4
supermarkets any more. He said that he did not trust organic products in the supermarkets. He
even doubted the ecological and sustainable production methods of some of their suppliers.

That was Hans: A hopeless idealist who seemed to live in the past. His arguments were quite

nerve-racking and his comments seemed to repeat themselves all the time. But Michael knew
that Hans was right in important respects. That was the reason in fact, why it was so hard to
discuss with him. It was unrealistic for Hans to try to hide from the needs of the present
though. The best ideals for organic products have no worth, if you cannot sell them.
Nowadays, who had the time to do shopping in four different shops or on five distinct farms
to buy local, sustainably produced food that had its own, individual identity? And who was
actually interested in this?

Consumers suffered from information overload and time pressure. Obviously they were
looking for convenient and time saving ways of shopping, one-stop shopping with the car was
becoming more and more the successful concept. In a supermarket you could buy everything
you needed within a short time. Right there, organic products should be offered.

In Michael’s opinion, the recent development – to offer organic products on shelves of big
retail chains – was not negative. To the contrary, the more consumers bought these products,
the better it was. Organic products have become especially well known to the consumers,
because they are now also sold in supermarkets. Today the consumers know organic farming,
and are were positive about it. This familiarity enables an extension of the market: In recent
years, organic food increasingly was being offered in restaurants and large kitchens/canteens.
The use of organic products was even embodied in resolutions of the different federal
governments of Austria. Depending on the specific resolution, organic food had already
reached a share of twenty to fifty percent in the kitchens of public institutions like schools,
hospitals, homes and barracks.

The more farmers converted to organic farming, the better it was for the whole country.
Because of this, a voluntary “ecologisation” (Ökologisierung) of agriculture could be reached.
In addition, the organic movement became more diverse and colourful with every new
protagonist. Hans argued the converse. He didn’t see a movement from conventional farming
towards the ecological farming system, but rather a ‘conventionalisation’ of the organic
movement. This pragmatic view of organic farming is evident in the fact that the Annex II of

the European Council Regulation on Organic Farming, which lists all allowed pesticides and
fertilizers, is now of major interest to recently joined organic farmers. The introductory, basic
chapters of the decree, which address the principles and basic conditions of organic farming
are losing their importance. Just today Hans had emphasized that “Bio” had become a
marketing strategy for supermarkets and politicians to improve their public image. Nowadays
you could hardly call the organic movement a sustainable, pioneering way of living with a
critical spirit of innovation.

Michael objected that if critical voices could not be heard they could not achieve anything.
Only when consumers got into contact with ‘Bio’, could they also be open to the background.
From that point of view, Michael also supported the foundation of ‘Bio Austria’. A big, strong
organisation that could appear as the unified voice of the organic scene should have much
more market influence than the previously existing small professional associations. He
noticed this in his own organic farmers association. Few plans could be carried out, because

5
the multiple strains on the members were too big. In addition, nobody really was competent in
marketing. This small organisation could not be a weighty negotiating partner. Capital
resources were too restricted. And anyway, the number of members had been shrinking
continuously over the past few years, because more and more organic farmers had joined the
biggest organic farmers association called “Ernte” (means “harvest”). This organisation had
much more influence than the small ones. As a consequence competition among the
previously existing organic farmers associations was weakening. In the near future there
would be only one common organisation: ‘Bio Austria’. Then it will be possible to share
responsibilities more efficiently and represent interests more explicitly. Michael was very
positive about this new development. In contrast, Hans stressed the negative effects of
centralization and of a hierarchy in the movement, which was initially characterized by
diversity and democratic contradiction. Hans seemed a hopeless idealist.

The next day Michael Maier read in the newspaper that in two weeks there would be a

presentation of a national action plan for organic farming in the Austrian parliament. He was
really curious what this plan would look like. Some intense discussions with Hans Mader
were already predictable.

2. Background
2.1. What is Organic Farming?
Organic farming is an approach to producing food and fibers that is intended to overcome the
negative impacts of the Green Revolution on soil, air, water, produce, landscape, and humans
worldwide. Organic farming methods are continuously being developed by farmers, scientists
and concerned people all over the world. A central element of the organic farming approach is
the efficient use of on-farm and local resources such as farmyard manure, indirect crop
protection and local seed. Organic farming pursues a course of promoting the powers of self-
regulation and resistance which plants and animals possess naturally. Organic management
relies on developing biological diversity in the field to disrupt habitat for pest organisms, and
the purposeful maintenance and replenishment of soil fertility. Organic farmers are not
allowed to use synthetic pesticides or fertilizers
. (Organic Farming Research Foundation,
2005). Organic agriculture is not just for more affluent countries but is applied in every
climatic region. In poorer countries especially, it can contribute to purposeful socio-economic
and ecologically sustainable development (Kilcher 2002, Mc Neely and Scherr 2002, Willer
and Yussefi, 2004).

In recent years public discussion on the use of antibiotics in animal foodstuffs, on Mad Cow
Disease (BSE), and on Foot and Mouth Disease has focused the interest of the civil society
and of European governments on the capacity of organic farming. It is being discussed as one
possible solution for a wide array of problems in agriculture (e.g. Watson and Redman 1999,
Mc Neely and Scherr 2002). Organic farming therefore has become an issue of public
concern, but it has also become a big business. This business is being supported by legislation
and governmental standards on organic farming which include rules for processing, trading,
monitoring, and certifying agricultural produce (e.g. European Council Regulation on Organic

Farming No. 20292/91, IFOAM Basic Standards, US Organic Food Production Act).


6
2.2 The worldwide organic farming movement
During the last decade, many countries of the European Union, the United States, and also
countries in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Oceania have experienced a significant increase
in certified organic farms. Almost 23 million hectares are managed organically worldwide.
According to the International Trade Center, annual sales grew from 17.5 billion $ USD in
2000 to up to 21 billion $ USD in 2001. Growth rates for 2003-2005 are estimated from
5-15%. About ninety developing countries (of which about 15 are less developed) export
certified organic products in commercial quantities, namely tropical and off-season
commodities (Willer and Yussefi, 2004).

The chart below depicts estimated retail sales for organic produce in 2003. As the figures
indicate, other continents (Africa, Asia, Latin America, Oceana) have still to be developed.
Retail Sales Estimate 2003 Million U.S. $
USA
52%
Europe
44%
Others
4%
13,000
1,000
11,000


The graph below depicts sales per capita ($). Switzerland is leading worldwide with $117,
followed by Denmark ($73) and Austria ($49). The US with $45 ranks fifth. Japan at $4 per

capita shows again that Asia is further behind the US and Europe in consumption of organic

7
products. .
Per Capita Organic Sales US $
117
73
49
47
45
40
32
31 30
28
26
23
13
4
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
S
witzerl
a
nd

De
nmark
Au
stria
Swe
d
en
USA
Ge
rm
a
ny
Canada
Nethe
r
l
a
nds
UK
Be
l
gium
Ita
ly
F
ra
nc
e
I
r

e
l
a
nd
J
a
pa
n
US $ per year


2.3. Philosophy and legal background
Organic agriculture is based upon traditional sustainable agriculture, farmers’ innovations and
the results of scientific research. Organic farming practices are embedded in local cultures and
their ethical values and beliefs. Therefore organic farming movements around the globe are
diverse and colorful. Most initiatives began in the absence of private standards and legal
norms. In many developing countries, traditional sustainable agriculture has been applied for
centuries and still today provides a pool of locally adapted solutions for agriculture.

Also in Europe, organic agriculture originated on the basis of local farmers’ knowledge and
experience. Farmers’ groups led by Rudolf Steiner and Hans Müller were important pioneers
of organic farming in the 1920’s and 1930’s. Until the 1970’s, organic farmers organized
themselves step by step in associations in many places throughout the world. They began
setting their own private standards, which were binding for the members of the organic
farmers’ associations and controlled directly by the standard-setting associations. Organic
agriculture until the beginning of the 1990’s was based completely on private standards that
documented trade practices. Organic farmers defined what organic agriculture was in a
democratic process. Private standards, e.g. the IFOAM-standards (International Federation of
Organic Agriculture Movements,
www.ifoam.org), were originally laid out on the basis of

common sense about organic agriculture. In a second step, standards like those of the farmers
associations Bio Suisse, Demeter, Naturland and Ernte, were used as “expert witness
statements” to help to decide whether the organic label of a certain product is in accordance
with these expectations (Vogl & Hess 1999).

Today millions of small farmers worldwide practice organic farming without being certified.
Some call this “organic by default” (Scialabba 2000). Often this term refers to the fact that
they do not use synthetic inputs, which are forbidden in organic farming. Some do not use the
term organic but other terms that express the sustainable manner of these traditional practices.
Altieri (2000) refers to these farmers as the agroecology movement.

8

Independent of the term used, one has to consider the contribution of those many small
farmers to what organic agriculture is today. Small farmers of traditional agriculture practice a
farming system that includes, in many cases, practices that are promoted in organic farming or
included in its standards (e.g. crop rotation, organic fertilization, use of legume species, mixed
cropping) when working under environmentally and socially appropriate and stable conditions
(Wilken 1987, Altieri 1990, Inglis 1993, Pichón 1999).

Parallel to the growing market in the 1990’s, organic farming became an issue of public
discussion. Justified expectations are protected in most legal systems by laws against
fraudulent trade practices. This is the main objective of government regulations on organic
agriculture. The first one, still a model for many governmental regulations, is the Council
Regulation 2092/91 in Europe (BOX 1) (set into force in 1991). The US Organic Food
Production Act 1990 was set into force in 2000, and subsequent legislation in Japan, the
Japan Agricultural Standards for Organic Agricultural Products and their Processed Foods,
was set into force in 2001. To date, 60 countries have governmental regulations on organic
farming or are in the process of adopting them (Willer and Yussefi, 2004). The main
objectives of governmental regulation are to protect consumers and producers against fraud,

and to regulate international trade and certification.

Council Regulation 2092/91:
• Protects producers from unfair competition,
• Protects consumers from pseudo-organic,
• Protects labels such as “organic“, and “biologic“,
• Sets rules for production, processing and trade,
• Sets rules for monitoring and certification,
• Sets rules for import.
BOX 1: CONTENT OF ORGANIC FARMING EUROPEAN COUNCIL REGULATION 2092/91

The discussion on the impact of globalization on standards and regulations in organic farming
is highly controversial. Willer and Yussefi (2001:33) believe, that of considerable importance
for further growth of the organic market “is the implementation of harmonized worldwide
standards for organic agriculture“. In opposition to this, Singh (Singh 2001:2) believes, that
“Globalisation, as it is currently practiced, will undermine organic farming by forcing
farmers, processors, and certifiers to submit completely to the inexorable forces of the so
called free markets; homogenization and the dictates of the market will erode both
biodiversity and the diversity of cultivation, which is so vital for organic produce; … The
essential variations dictated by local ecosystems and cultures, will be eliminated by the push
for uniformity”. Evidence and examples for both can be found easily.

2. 4 Organic farming in Austria
Based on the percentage of land area under organic management, Austria with 11,3% is
number two among the top ten worldwide (see below).

9


Organic farming has a long history in Austria. Rudolf Steiner, the founder of the bio-dynamic

farming movement was an Austrian. In 1927 Austrian ecological farming began with two
pioneer farms. In 1962 the first organic farmers’ cooperative was established, and training and
extension took on a more formal structure. In 1962 the country’s largest organic farmers’
association, Ernte, was founded. In 1989 the standards for several lines of organic production
were codified into the
Austrian Codex Alimentarius.

In 1994 supermarkets began selling organic produce. Two years later the marketing agency
“Ökoland” (means “eco-land”) was established to combine the produce from the individual
farms, thereby strengthening the farmers’ bargaining position when dealing with large chains.
According to AMA Marketing, which publishes Austria’s official statistics on agricultural
markets and prices, organic produce has reached a sizable market share. This is partly due to
the fact that supermarkets account for 70% of organic sales.

With the availability of the first government support schemes for farms in conversion in the
early 1990s, the number of certified organic farms increased rapidly, increasing from about
2,000 farms in 1991 to 6,000 farms in 1992. Starting in 1994, direct payments were made
available for all organic farms through the introduction of the Agri-Environment Programme
in preparation for the EU accession of Austria in 1995. The growth in the number of organic
farms reached its peak in 1998 with more than 20,000 farms. Since then the number is
declining slightly, falling to about 18,600 farms in 2003. Currently approximately 10% of
Austrian farms are certified organic, the highest percentage in the EU.

The strong organic movement in Austria can be attributed to:
a) government subsidies which provide incentives to organic farmers and
b) widespread acceptance of organic products and their brand names by large food chains
and supermarkets.


10

The first retail chain began about ten years ago to sell organic food. All organic products in
this retail chain are offered under one common brand name (“Ja natürlich”, which means “Yes
naturally”). Nowadays more than 600 products are sold in more than 13 commodity groups
(milk, milk products, meat, sausage, fruits …). The mentioned retail company sells in Austria,
which has 8 M. inhabitants, organic products worth 200 M. Euro. Seventy percent of this
value are bread and cone products, 20% yoghurt products and 10% organic milk products.

2.5. Perspectives for organics in Austria
The number of organic farms in Austria can be taken as an indicator of the fact that, after the
rapid expansion in the late 1990s, organic farming is currently facing a plateau phase. The
domestic market seems to be saturated in most product groups and additional production is
mainly exported. Because of this, new approaches and concepts must be found if organic
farming is to grow further.

As far as organic institutions are concerned, currently re-structuring is taking place. Indeed,
the organic farmers’ associations, which used to represent an ‘alternative’ and were at the
centre of a dynamic development, are now evolving into an established partner for both actors
in the market and in the agricultural policy. The various institutions involved with the organic
movement, such as the Ministry of Agriculture and the farmers’ cooperatives, are currently
striving for unification. The new organization ‘Bio Austria’ is now representing all Austrian
organic farmers and cooperatives.

3. Images of the Austrian agriculture


Photos courtesy of BMLFUW, Austrian Ministry for Agriculture (www.lebensministerium.at)



11

Austria is mainly characterized by and famous for its mountain landscape.
The farmers in the alps work under difficult conditions to produce high-quality food and
maintain the landscape.
It is less known that there are also extensive lowlands in the country. In these eastern regions
of Austria grain crops are grown such as wheat, rye, barley and oats.

12
Fields with corn and vegetables dominate the flat part of the country.
Austria’s landscape has a long history. Tradition is still important; it is evident in the culture
landscape and in diverse rites and customs. On the other hand, there are big changes going on.
The mountains and hills make sure that Austria’s agriculture is characterized by small and
diverse structures. Nevertheless, the production becomes more and more intense in favorable
areas. In regions that are difficult to cultivate (e.g. in the mountains or on poor ground), a lot of
farmers stop their work and woodland is coming up.


13
3. Discussion Questions

The rapid development of organic farming (synonym: ecological agriculture) in Austria
causes high expectations for the further development, but also unexpected tensions within the
movement about the following issues.
3.1. Is organic farming compatible with neo-liberal economy and globalization or does it
need an alternative economic approach? What should this alternative approach look like, if
needed?
3.2 Which steps need to be undertaken to ensure the further expansion of organic farming?
Can they be supported better by forces of the market or do they need political and public
financial support?
3.3 Does an expansion of organic farming need institutional diversity, “multi-voice” and
individual approaches or a single strategy of all members of the movement?

4. References

Altieri, M. 1990. Why study traditional agriculture. In: Agroecology - Biological Resource
Management. A series of primers on the conservation and exploitation of natural and
cultivated ecosystems (Caroll, C.R., Vandermeer, J.H. and Rosset, P., eds.) pp. 551-564,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York/USA.
Altieri, M. 2000. Enhancing the productivity and multifunctionality of traditional farming in
Latin America. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol., 7, 1-12.
Inglis, J.T. 1993. Traditional ecological knowledge-concepts and cases. International
Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge. International Development Research Center.
Canadian Museum of Nature; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Kilcher L. 2002. Production and Trade Constraints for Organic Products from Developing
Countries. In: Proceedings of the 14
th
IFOAM Organic World Congress, August 2002, pp. 23
Krautgartner, R. 2004. Organics in the United States. Presentation at BOKU, University of
Applied Life Sciences Vienna.
Mc Neely, J.A. and S.J. Scherr. 2003. Ecoagriculture - strategies to feed the world and save
wild biodiversity. Island Press; Washington, USA.
Organic Farming Research Foundation, 2005.
Pichón, F.J., J.E. Uquillas and J. Frechione. 1999. Traditional and modern natural resource
management in Latin America, University of Pittsburgh Press; Pittsburgh.
Scialabba, N. 2000. Factors influencing organic agriculture policies with a focus on
developing countries. Paper presented 29 of August at the IFOAM (International Federation
of Organic Agriculture Movements) Scientific Conference, Basel, Switzerland, 28 – 31
August 2000.
Singh, G. 2001. Challenges to Organic Farming in the 21
st
Century. Keynote speech at
Malaysian Organic Farming Seminar 2000 on 26

th
of November 2000 at Seri Kembangan,
Malaysia.
Vogl, C. R. and J. Hess. 1999. Organic Farming in Austria. American Journal of Alternative
Agriculture. 14, 3: 137-143.

14
Vogl, C. R. and I. Darnhofer (2004): Organic Agriculture in Austria. The Organic Standard,
34: 2-5.
Watson, S J. and M. Redman. 1999. BSE – Counting the costs of a crisis. In: Ecology and
Farming; No. 21:20-21.
Wilken, G.C. 1987. Good farmers. Traditional agricultural resource management in Mexico
and Central America. University of California Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles, USA.
Willer, H. and M. Yussefi, 2004: The world of organic agriculture: Statistics and Emerging
Trends. Revised Edition, Feb. 2004. www.ifoam.org


Online Links:
European Council Regulation on Organic Farming No. 20292/91, consolidated version
/>www.prolink.de/~hps/organic/consolid-en.html

IFOAM Basic Standards
www.ifoam.org
Foreign Agricultural Service USDA


The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources and Rural America
/>
Organic Trade Association
/>

US National Organic Program
/>
Organic Center for Education and Promotion
/>
For further details about the US and international organic market
see also the presentation by
Roswitha Krautgarnter “Organics in the United States”, December 9, 2004, BOKU, Vienna
(US organics.pdf). (in the Global Seminar blackboard-webpage, Cluster 2)



15