McKenna Koon PS 400 December 5, 2010 United States Organic Food Policies and Public Opinion Do our countries

policies influence how often we buy organic foods?

Agricultural food policies in the United States cover a variety of sectors of the food industry. In recent history, the most popular sector being supported by the United States Department of Agriculture is the organic food industry. The growth rates of this area are increasing at a rapid rate, and the government is responding (USDA ERS, 2008). However public opinion on these policies has previously not been investigated. In doing this, data can be gathered on the topic and the government can become better informed about how the American people regard organic products and food policies. To evaluate public opinion on organic food policies in the United States, I will look to answer the following questions: what are the current policies for organic food production and farming in the United States? Why is the United States government making efforts to support organic food production? How does the general United States public feel about organic farming? And whether or not increased knowledge about organic food production and farming increases the organic purchases by the respondent. The first question can be researched using exploratory methods, the second can be looking at explanatorily, and the third is a descriptive question. However in order to gain a better understanding on this topic,

a literature review looking at previous information gathered about organic food policies and the public must be observed. Literature Review According to the United States Department of Agriculture National Organic Standards Board, organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity biological cycles and soil biological activity (Gold, 2009).Under this agricultural method, organic food production is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs as well as management practices that restore, maintain, and enhance ecological harmony (Gold, 2009). This means that organic meat, poultry, eggs and dairy products come from animals that are given no antibiotics or growth hormones, and other types of organic food (such as produce, grains, legumes, etc.) are produced without using most conventional pesticides, fertilizers made with synthetic ingredients or sewage sludge, bioengineering or ionizing radiation (Gold, 2009). These descriptions of organic agriculture come from the need to define the fastest growing food sector in the United States (Dettman & Dimitri, 2010). With growth rates in sales averaging at 17% per year, the reason behind the rapidly growing popularity has been most noticeably linked to either the environmental or health benefits from organic foods how they are produced. In Margot Pollans artice Bundling Public and Private Goods: The Market for Sustainable Organic , the New York University Law Review contributor states that conventional, modern non-organic agriculture is harmful to the environment

because the pesticides, fertilizers, and sediments in irrigation runoff are pollutants in surface and ground water (Pollans, 2010). In addition to direct pollutants, Pollans also points out that massive amounts of fossil fuels are burned in agricultural production (Pollans, 2010), and that single-crop farms are detrimental to biodiversity. By incouraging organic farming, these negative aspects can be avoided, resulting in improved soil tilth and productivity, lower energy use, and reduced pesticides (USDA Economic Research Service, 2009). While the environmental benefits or organic farming have been found, in actuality there is little scientific evidence proving the health benefits of organic foods over conventionally produced foods. However, in a survey from the National Center for Public Policy Research in 2000, researchers found that 85% of Americans believed that organic foods were safer, healthier, more nutritious, or better for the environment (Foyer, Avery, & Carlisle, 200). While it is possible that these opinions have changed over the past decade, the sales growth rates would prove that to mostly likely be false. The researchers from that study concluded that these perceptions were are due to first-rate marketing campaigns in which organic retailers are engaged in a well-funded and executed range of product disparagement and food fear promotions (Foyer, Avery, & Carlisle) where conventionally produced foods are criminalized. Regardless of lack of health benefits over conventional foods, the United States government has still taken into account the environmental advantages, and in the past two decades has built a solid foundation for the organic food industry to stand on through policies and regulations.

In the more distant past, the United States Government policies encouraged conventional agriculture. But twenty years ago, as a part of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990, Congress passed the Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA) of 1990. In addition to establishing a National Organic Program (NOP), the OFPA of 1990 established the standards for producers and processors or organic foods and created the ability of the organization to permit operations to label their product as being USDA Organic after being officially certified as such by USDAAccredited agents (Johnson, 2008). The purpose of the OFPA is to give American consumers confidence in the legitimacy of products sold as organic by ensuring that the USDA has inspected the products operations facilities. It also permits legal action against those who use the term organic fraudulently, and aims to increase the supply and variety of available organic products as well as facilitating international trade of organic foods. More actions supporting organic farming have also been implemented since the OFPA of 1990. For example, in 2002 Congress included provision in the Farm Act aiming to expand market opportunities for organic producers. This included initiating a national cost-share program to help defray the costs of certification incurred by organic crop and livestock producers (USDA ERS, 2008). The provisions also provided new research funding to determine desirable traits for organic products, policy constraints on the expansion of organic agriculture, and marketing. Following 2002, a number of states, like Iowa, offer state-subsidized certification programs for organic operations, making them more feasible (USDA ERS, 2008).

Most recently, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act (or the Farm Act) of 2008 includes a five-fold increase to twenty-two million dollars in mandatory funding to continue the cost-share program as described in the Farm Act six years earlier (USDA ERS, 2008). The Farm Act of 2008 also authorized five million dollars in mandatory funds and twenty-five million dollars in authority for appropriated funds over five years to support the collection and analysis of organic production and marketing data (Johnson, 2008) and seventy-eight million dollars over five years to support research in organic agriculture and funding for other new and existing programs (Johnson, 2008). It is clear that the United States government is making strides in regulations supporting organic agriculture in response to the environmental benefits as well as the growing popularity. With organizations like the Organic Consumers Association, a grassroots, non-profit 501(c)3 public interest group representing 850,00 members, and 3000 cooperating stores, it is no doubt that the American people are interested in organic foods. While the demographics or organic consumers have not been thoroughly researched, one study from the Journal of Food Products Marketing found that households with high levels of education were more likely to purchase organic vegetables and African-American and older households were less likely to buy organic foods (Dettman & Dimitri, 2010). Also, in a longitudinal study of American knowledge and feelings about agricultural biotechnology (the opposite of organic) looked at 1,200 adults selected through probability sampling and interviewed by phone, and found that people who have purchased organic foods in

the past are less likely to approve of genetically modified foods (Food Policy Institute, 2003). After reviewing the literature on the topic of organic food policies in the United States, it can be determined that organic farming and food production has a variety of benefits mostly in the environmental sector and possibly in the health sector as well. And the United States government has implemented a number of policies and programs to support organic food production and farming. However studies that directly link knowledge about these policies and an increase in the level of purchasing have not been published. For this reason, under this research design that correlation or lack there of is intended to be revealed. The first hypotheses to be tested for the purpose of this research is that as knowledge about organic food policy increases, level of consumption/purchasing increases. For this conjecture, its null hypothesis is that how informed someone is has no effect on whether or not they purchase and consume organic food products. For this hypothesis, the variables are the level of knowledge of the respondent and their level of consumption/purchasing. A second hypothesis looks at how the policies support sales, and states that United States government policies supporting organic food product help organic food sales. Its null hypothesis is that federal government policies in the United States do not help increase organic food sales. The variables for this are U.S. government food policies and organic food sales. Another hypothesis is that as policies supporting organic farming in the United States increases, public opinion on

organic foods improves. Its rejection hypothesis would be that the two variables, U.S. policies supporting organic farming and public opinion on organic farming, are unrelated. An additional hypothesis that can be made regarding the topics and theories of this research design implies that as benefits of organic farming related to the environment become more scientifically known, government policies supporting it increase. The null hypothesis for this would be that the two variables are unassociated. The variables for this then are relatively recent scientific evidence about organic farming related to the environment, and the number of recent U.S. policies supporting organic farming. A final hypothesis for the purpose of this research states that due to new scientific evidence that organic food benefits human health, public opinion about organic farming and food production increases, thus causing the United States government to create policies to support it. The variables for testing this would be scientific evidence supporting organic food consumption due to improved health, U.S. public opinion on organic food, and U.S. policy supporting organic food production and farming. Therefore the null hypothesis is while scientific evidence has proven that eating more organic food products is beneficial for human health, the U.S. public remains indifferent, and therefore the United States government is slow in acting upon support organic food production. For this example it is likely that the null hypothesis would be accepted due to lack of scientific evidence.

Research Methods Four questions that I was looking to research in an exploratory method can be answered in the literature review. These question topics are the current policies supporting organic production in the United States, the programs used to support organic agriculture, the benefits of organic farming and the health benefits of consuming organic products. The other two questions that I want to research require using a survey or interviews to be answered, and for this research design I choose to use one survey and have both questions on the survey. The first question asks how the general U.S. public feels about organic food, and whether the majority is in favor of, against, or indifferent to it. The second question asks if the public is more inclined to support organic farming and spend more money on the product is they are more well informed about what it is that they are supporting through their purchases. For this study, the research team will send out surveys to the U.S. population using a mail survey. To gather a sample, a sample size calculator can be used. The U.S. population is approximately 300 million people, so in order to have a confidence interval of 3% at a 95% confidence level, the research team will need to collect 1,067 surveys. This means that the sample size will be 1,067 people, and 3,000 surveys will need to be sent out in order to get a 50% response rate. To select the sample, the simple random sampling method will be used from a generated sampling frame database based off of U.S. citizens ages 18 and older that is created for the purpose of building a random sample of people. To answer the second

questions, an analysis can be completed and a correlation or lack there of can be observed. The unit of analysis for the survey is individuals, and there will be five questions concerning the level of knowledge, and a question regarding their level of consumption. The level of knowledge will be measured on a scale of 1= uninformed , 2= somewhat informed , 3= informed 4= well informed . These question will ask about the Farm Act, the Organic Food Productions Act and the benefits of organic framing and possible health benefits of eating organic foods. The respondents level of consumption or purchasing will be measured by the percentage if organic food the respondent purchases out of their total grocery purchases weekly. This will be in intervals of 0%-10%, 11%-20%, 21%-30%, 31%-40%, 41%50% and so on intervals of 10% of their weekly groceries up to 91%-100%. After gathering the surveys from the respondents, an index can be made for the responses and how they ranked on the uninformed to well informed scale and the percentage of the foods they buy that are organic. A correlation analysis can then be run to see if my hypothesis stating that as knowledge about these policies increases, the percentage organic products of weekly groceries that the respondents purchases increases as well can either be proved correct, or can be rejected and my null hypothesis will then need to be accepted. My null hypothesis is that there is no relation between the level of knowledge and the level of purchasing of organic foods. An ANOVA analysis could also be completed to see is this is true and check the different cells directed towards the respondents answers. This could further prove

or disprove my hypothesis as well, in addition to explaining the level of difference between the variables and determining if the data found is statistically significant. Conclusion Overall, the United States government has implemented numerous policies supporting organic agriculture and food production. After researching the benefits of organic agriculture for the environment, it appears that those benefits are what is fueling the increase in these supportive policies; the most influential being the Organic Foods Production Act. Currently, the organic foods market is the fastest growing sector in the food industry, meaning that these products are what the American people are looking for, and the government is supporting those wants with these policies. By conducting a survey with a sample based on the American population ages 18 and older, data can be used to generalize to the public and give researchers an idea of public opinion on our nation s organic food policies. In doing so, lobbyists can use the information to inform members of congress of what the American people know or do not know, and how often they are purchasing items from this food sector, and policies can be revised or improved, helping to give U.S. citizens what they desire regarding organic foods.