Repackaging the organic revolution
Posted - August 15, 2009
Special Report
Repackaging the organic revolution
By Angela West
Consumers are changing. Growing concern for global warming, health related issues, the huge amount of waste still generated daily in the post-consumer society, and the current economic recession, are factors affecting consumer purchasing decisions and lifestyles. Products are now expected to reflect changing values. It is no longer enough to supply an organic certified product if it is not presented in a unique, eco-friendly, convenient and safe packaging. To meet consumer preference for more sustainable products, European and North American retailers from Whole Foods Market to Tesco, and manufacturers from Nature’s Path to ConAgra Foods’ Healthy Choice are switching to more sustainable and recyclable packaging.
As a recent Ipsos Marketing survey of 23,000 consumers in 18 countries suggests, consumers may be willing to ditch convenient packaging for ‘greener’ packaging, while the food itself should include fresh ingredients and contain health benefits. Awareness of greener packaging may be growing partly due to recent media attention, Ipsos says.
Examining a new packaging solution may make an impact on our bottom line that was never considered before. Glass may not be too expensive, recycled plastics may be cheaper than the virgin plastics you are using, and cans may end up being your solution of choice. After weighing each option, it is possible that your company can save a significant amount of money by choosing an alternative that is better for the environment as well.
In this and next issues, OWN will present different packaging options to consider: glass, PET, bioplastics and metal in this edition.There are other alternatives out there and other questions to be asked on a subject that customers have indicated matters to them very much. Many no longer trust plastics due to their proven potential to leach into food. Most are also wary of the environmental and other costs of corn-based bioplastics and the use of bisphenol A (BPA) in plastics.
Earthbound and Naked will use only post-consumer recycled packaging
Posted - July 27, 2009
Earthbound and Naked will use only post-consumer recycled packaging
O.W.N. News Network
This month, Earthbound Farm and Naked Juice announced their decision to only use packaging made with 100 percent post-consumer recycled (PCR) content.
Earthbound claims to be the first firm in the fresh produce sector to switch the plastic for all its clamshell packages to 100 percent Post-Consumer Recycled PolyEthylene Terephthalate (PCR PET). This initiative is part of the celebration of the company’s 25th anniversary.
Naked Juice is also the first firm in the juice product category to switch to the reNEWabottle PET plastic, identified by the resin code 1. In a release the company announced to have its entire product line transitioned to the 100 percent post-consumer recycled bottles in 2010, starting by converting all of its 32 ounce bottles this month.
The previous bottles were translucent, the Naked reNEWabottle is clear, in response to growing consumer demand for more transparency, which literally includes the wish to see the content of the product they are buying. With this transition Naked Juice will reduce consumption of 8.1 million pounds of virgin plastic per year.
According to its website, Earthbound estimates that by switching to only recycled plastic, it will conserve 424,000 million BTUs of energy and 68,307 gallons of water, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 16,191 tons and use 1.3 million pounds of post-consumer plastic per year.
PET is a strong but lightweight form of shatter-resistant, and recyclable clear polyester used to make containers for food and non-food products. The PET molecules consist of long chains of repeating units only containing the carbon (C), oxygen (o) and hydrogen (h) elements. While virgin PET is made primarily from natural gas, post-consumer recycled PET is made from previously used plastic containers, requires significantly less energy and water to produce, generates less greenhouse gases than virgin plastic, and diverts re-useable materials out of the landfills.
The commitment to 100 percent post consumer plastic initiated by Earthbound and Naked is of great importance. Although PET is the most-recycled plastic material, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, of the nearly 6 billion pounds of PET packaging waste consumers in the United States generated in 2007, only 23 percent was recycled into new products .If more organic firms embark in this initiative, a trend may start for consumers to push the larger conventional multinationals to take similar action.
Organic consumers prefer glass containers
Posted - July 24, 2009
Organic consumers prefer glass containers
O.W.N. News Network
Glass continues to be the first choice of packaging for most health-conscious organic shoppers, concludes a survey conducted by the University of Oklahoma and the Glass Packaging Institute (GPI), the trade association representing the North American glass container industry. According to the poll, most health-conscious organic shoppers believe glass keeps the true flavor and taste (79.8%) and purity (77.3%) of a food product. Glass also continues to be the first choice of the organic shopper by wide margins compared to other forms of packaging for health (77%), quality (67.7%), and preserving product shelf life (67.7%).
“Glass is the natural packaging choice for organic products, as like organic foods and beverages, glass bottles and jars contain no synthetic chemicals or toxins,” says Joseph Cattaneo, president of the Glass Packaging Institute. “Glass containers are 100% pure, and are made from natural minerals, which include sand, soda ash, and limestone.”
Glass is once again the primary choice when it comes to the superior packaging for the environment (50%), compared to paper (28.3%) and plastic (10.2%), and is also the first choice of consumers who say they care about the environment and their individual and family health.
“Glass containers can be recycled again and again without loss of quality or purity,” says Cattaneo in a release. “Every time you recycle a glass bottle or jar, you help to save energy and our planet. Glass is good for your health and for the environment.”
The survey was conducted by telephone on April 14, 2009, under the coordination of the Newton Marketing Research, Norman, Oklahoma, in conjunction with Professor Doyle Yoon, PhD Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communications, University of Oklahoma, with a Margin of error of +/- 3.7% (survey facts). The poll included a sample of 1,000 respondents.
The survey also found that in spite of the recession, consumer interest in organic foods continues, especially among younger consumers, with a 57.8 percent between the age of 18-to-34, reporting to purchase organic foods sometime during the year, compared to 38 percent of shoppers ages 55 and older. Consumers are better informed and are willing to pay a premium for products that are healthier and friendly to the environment inside and out.
After the bisphenol A scandals where it was proven that this and other chemicals contained in the plastic can leach out, demand for “pure,” “sustainable” packaging for foods and beverages has become stronger. Consumers want transparency and this literally applies to the possibility to see the product inside the package. Glass offers a cleaner look and the confidence of a material that has been safely used for over 4,000 years, even though its production also causes CO2 emissions and transportation of goods packed in glass may increase their carbon footprint because of their extra weight and potential to break that requires extra packaging.
For more information visit www.gpi.org
Canada Prepares National Regulations
Posted - September 9, 2008
Being “Canada Ready”
By Matthew Holmes, Managing Director of the Organic Trade Association in Canada
Like much of the world, the Canadian organic market is growing at a sometimes-breathless pace. With well over 20% annual growth, the Canadian organic market has been estimated at $1- to $3 billion per year. It is now more than a niche market, responsible for over 1% of all food and beverage sales in the country, and with a significant presence in national grocery chains and through private label product lines.
Considering Canada’s highly educated and environmentally-sensitive population, it is likely this market share will continue to grow. With the implementation of Canada’s Organic Products Regulations (OPR) on Dec. 14, 2008, the case for an upswing in consumer belief in organics is only stronger.
It is worth noting that Canada enjoys the strongest trade relationship with the United States of any country, powerful linkages to the rest of North and South America, an ever-growing Pan-Pacific and Asian trade, and strong traditional trading relationships with Europe’s biggest markets. Considering Canada is the fifth-largest agricultural importer in the world, no one in today’s global organic market should ignore this country’s potential.
This obviously begs the question: What are Canada’s new regulations all about, and what will you need to do to comply with them?
The answer to the first question is straightforward: Canada is in the final stages of implementing a mandatory, exclusive standard for all food and livestock feeds marketed within the country as organic. If your product is not certified to the new Canadian standards by an accredited certifier (one recognized by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency or CFIA), your product will not be allowed to enter the Canadian marketplace.
Which raises the second question: What do you need to do to meet the Canadian requirements?
First and foremost, speak with your certifier to make sure they will be able to offer certification to Canadian standards. A list of pre-approved certifiers active in the Canadian market has been published on the Organic Trade Association’s website.
In addition, all certifiers will need to be accredited by a recognized accreditation body that has agreements in place with CFIA. At this time, the Standards Council of Canada, CAEQ (Quebec), COABC (British Columbia), the International Organic Accreditation Service (IFOAM), and DAP (Germany) have all been audited by CFIA to provide services under the new Canadian regime.
The Canadian organic standards are unique, at times similar to either the U.S. or E.U. standards, though the fundamentals of all three are the same (i.e. third-party verification, inspection and audit trails, conversion, and other key points).
Canada has a positive materials list (the “Permitted Substance List”), which allows only specific uses for specific materials. If the material, input or processing aid you use is not on the list, it is not allowed in organic production or processing.
Once accredited and certified, products must be labeled according to the OPR. Canadian labeling requirements will be very similar to both the U.S. and E.U. A voluntary organic seal will be available, and products will be identified as “Organic” (95% or more), “Made with XX% organic ingredients” (70-95%), or, for products with less than 70%, the organic content may be identified on the ingredient panel (only). Unlike the U.S., Canada will not allow a “100% Organic” claim. Unlike the E.U., Canada does not have a labelling provision for “Transition to Organic” claims.
With the new mandatory regime coming into effect in December, there is an obvious need to phase in enforcement so that trade can continue smoothly. The Canadian industry sector has submitted a transition policy to CFIA allowing for “stream of commerce” flow-through of all products produced before the regulations were mandatory, and the sun-setting of certification. (The latter means one can become certified to the new requirements at the next scheduled annual inspection.) Other specific aspects of the transition policy, such as a voluntary compliance period and labelling options, will be determined in the coming months.
To stay up to date on Canada’s new organic regulations, standards, requirements and market reports, visit www.ota-canada.ca
Sustainably-Packaged German Snacks
Posted - July 30, 2008
Herr Foods Furthers Sustainably with Pump Retrofit
Germany’s Herr Foods has taken its sustainability to the next level by retrofitting a key part of its packaging line. The company plant’s 15 TNA machines, used to roll, film and seal its foods, are being retrofitted with P6010 vacuum pumps from PIAB.
The new system reduces noise, generates no heat and provides suction at extremely low pressures. Its compact size places it closer to the suction point, consuming less compressed air.
For 60 years, Herr has introduced innovative snack foods and packaging. The firm now offers 340 products, including potato chips, pretzels, popcorn, and onion rings.
“The most important environmental issue challenging Herr’s and other snack food manufacturers is with packaging materials,” states David Sexton, a firm electrical engineer for automation. The company leads in “modern and progressive manufacturing and packaging,” he says.
“The company started using automated cooking techniques as far back as 1952, and in the next decade began to revolutionize its packaging design and materials.”
Before the retrofit, the firm’s line was equipped with noisy mechanical pumps. This generated too much heat and required frequent maintenance.
“Reducing the noise and heat levels was very important to us,” remarked Sexton. “Not only did we want to improve the working environment in our facility, we wanted to reduce our maintenance and repair costs.”
Herr has a history of ecological awareness and conservation. For instance, it reuses water via irrigation and sludge as fertilizer. At Herr’s Angus Farm, sub-standard products get a second life as cattle feed.
The company has designed its manufacturing to be as environmental and efficient as possible. Steam-recovery saves fuel; exhaust filters prevent residues from being emitted; a heat exchanger uses manufacturing-generated hot water to heat the factory.
By creating fruitful and forward-thinking partnerships, this manufacturer and producer of tasty treats is sure to bring insight to the industry.
Organic Cosmetics Standards
Posted - July 15, 2008
Varied Requirements, Little Regulation Bring US Lawsuit
Organic-branded cosmetics and personal care products are coming under legal question in the US. A lawsuit was recently launched by soap and cosmetics firm Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps.
The firm filed a claim that says the many organic labels and messages on personal care products that do not meet the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program (NOP) standard are overly confusing to consumers.
Dr. Bronner’s makes various products that meet those strict standards. Its own packaging shows the green USDA organic seal.
Mislabelling through generic, non-NOP “organic” claims is “creating all kinds of organic noise,” said company President David Bronner. What “organic” means is unclear to consumers, he said: “In the personal care aisle, chances are it does not correspond at all to your basic expectation of what an organic label should be.”
Bronner’s filed the suit in California under a state law that considers what a “reasonable consumer” would expect a product claim to mean.
Petrochemical ingredients can slip into personal care because companies claim products are “organic” without certification. Little regulation exists. These firms place the word “organic” as large as they like on packaging. Certified firms must follow their standard’s packaging guidelines.
For now, the NOP is a reference point for companies wanting to do organic cosmetics “right”. Bronner’s and US natal-care products firm Earth Mama Angel Baby are two companies currently producing personal care products to that standard.
“There’s a huge controversy about the standards by which organic personal care products should be certified,” said Earth Mama founder Melinda Olson.
The NOP standard is meant for food, and thus bars some common personal care ingredients and processes that most manufacturers agree are safe.
“Asking personal care products to be certified to the NOP standard is like putting them against the wrong yardstick,” said Olson. Still, she said, Earth Mama will be following the NOP standard until a better one is developed.
Such development has been going on for years under NSF International. Bronner and Olson have both participated in the NSF process. Many insiders expect it to lead to a NOP personal care standard.
“It’s more or less done. The standard should be out the door later in the year,” Bronner said.
However, the OASIS standard recently announced by several firms (see story in OWN Summer 2008 print edition) raised alarm bells for Bronner. “OASIS is basically a breakaway from the NSF effort,” he said. Fearing this could create “organic” standards that allow ingredients and processes that Bronner feels should be barred, his firm eventually sued companies it felt were relevant.
Even firms named in the Bronner lawsuit are launching NOP products, suggesting demand for this category is growing. US Nature’s Gate launched a NOP Rainwater Lotions line late this Spring, with the 95% organic ingredient levels NOP requires.
“The line was developed for our customers who are increasingly seeking personal care products that mirror their commitment to organic agriculture and sustainable living,” said the firm’s Laura Setzfand.
The company “strongly supports the need for standards governing the use of the terms organic and natural,” she added. “We are currently evaluating the proposed standards.”
Garbage
Posted - May 1, 2008
Still Too Much Garbage!
By Sofia Garcia Cortes - as printed in O.W.N. Summer 2008
Ever wondered what happens to all the empty packaging, plastic and papers you put out to have “recycled”, and how the system makes it all work? Take the trade shows.
Walking at the end of the day through the aisles of an exhibition hall, even those for the eco-friendly sector, there are still too many cans full of garbage. Certainly some environmentally-concerned companies and fair organizers are working to minimize their impact and use less where possible. Fairs must generate some waste, from sampling and treats offered as part of the business. We wonder, though, how does broader society perform?
Germany is seen as a world leader in waste separation and recycling. Professor Engineer Vera Susanne Rotter, Director of the Department of Waste Management at the Technical University of Berlin said the average Berliner produces about 300-400 kg of garbage per year.
About 230-330kg of waste is recyclable, yet only 92kg (30%) gets separated. The rest mixes with unrecyclable waste, though waste-treatment plants may separate before incineration, where part of the waste material is turned into heat, which in turn is used to generate electric power.
All German states divide waste into organic matter, paper and cardboard, glass and light packaging materials, Prof. Rotter explains. 460,000 tons of scrap iron is recycled and reused annually, equivalent to 1.07 million tons of ore, while 7.7 million tons of paper is recycled and reused, worth 28 million tons of wood.
The average US consumer, meanwhile, produces about 726 kg of garbage per year, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency. New York City, with its extensive and efficient public transportation network used by millions of commuters every day, who also walk or bike more than in any other large US city avoids pollution-spewing cars. An impressive record. Yet more than 25,000 tons of garbage is collected in Manhattan each day!
While more items are recyclable than before, easing the landfill load, new goods always flood the market. And some unexpected products still cause headaches. Dyed paper cups, for instance, are not always recycled. The deep inks used to highlight logos and corporate identity can darken and dull a whole batch of recycled paper, hard to sell to reprocessors.
Even glass can be difficult, says Marvin Tucker, promotion and education coordinator with Canada’s Quinte Waste Solutions, an organization that handles waste reduction programs for a region in the province of Ontario. Some types of glass are valuable, yet others can be hard to get rid of.
“Glass and polystyrene are really low value materials for which markets disappear from time to time,” he says - glass partly because so much is available and quality and colour vary. Reusing the bottles directly, through return-for-deposit refund programs, is a better option, he says. Prof. Rotter agrees. The best environmental option, she says, is returnable glass bottles. Germany recycles and reuses 3.1 million tons of glass each year. But collecting, transporting and melting bottles consumes energy.
Even green initiatives can, at first, prove a pain in the neck. Biodegradable plastics have no clear identifying mark, the same in North America as in Germany. On both continents, they often become mixed with non-biodegradable plastics, when to biodegrade, they must go into the compost!
Quinte’s residents separate about 85% of recyclables from garbage, according to studies by the waste management firm. The remaining 15% of recyclables go out with the regular trash. About 4% of collected recyclables are too small, damaged or dirty to actually be recycled, says Rick Clow, Quinte’s general manager. Small difficult pieces include disposable cutlery, small yogurt containers and juice pouches.
Recycling still remains an environmental success story, saving landfill. Yet firms that wish to be sustainable and present that green image, whether at fairs, in the office, or in stores, and at home must carefully consider new alternatives to packaging and presentation. First, reduce and reuse as long as possible, before recycling. It’s the least we can do to help waste management companies keep control and to sustain the planet that supports us all.
TerraCycle
Posted - May 1, 2008
From Worms to Wealth
By Adrian Larose - as printed in O.W.N. Summer 2008
Making money from millions of empty juice pouches and drained-out pop bottles might sound like a difficult prospect, but that’s what TerraCycle is doing. TerraCycle works with mainstream companies like Wal-Mart, Home Depot and Kraft Foods. Working with these companies, says CEO and co-founder Tom Skazy, is exactly what is needed to move consumers towards environmentally-friendly products.
Skazy insists that discovering new ways to work with the mainstream in an eco-capitalist fashion is the only sustainable approach. Starting during Skazy’s university studies with an organic worm-poop compost product, his firm TerraCycle has grown from US $70,000 turnover in 2004 to $3.5 million in 2006, with $7 million likely in 2008.
Hungarian-born but raised in Canada, Skazy discovered that worm poop is a very effective fertilizer. He also realized that the main ingredient, garbage, is readily available - it’s “simply a commodity that people are willing to pay to get rid of,” he says. “Waste doesn’t exist in nature,” he adds: it’s a human-made problem.
With this ready supply of ingredients, Skazy obtained funding through business plan contests. Selling a product made from waste was not enough for the firm, though: soon, it also began to package its product in containers usually seen as waste.
“Since we make a product from garbage, why don’t we package it in garbage?” Skazy says of the group’s thinking. Visiting area recycling centers, TerraCycle learned that plastic pop bottles are standardized enough to be cheap, practical non-food packaging. The “world’s first and still only products made and packaged entirely out of garbage” were born, Skazy says. Remove the old labels from the bottles, wash them out and re-fill: you’re ready to roll. (TerraCycle is not packaging food, which would have different requirements.)
The company is built on three brand criteria for all products, such as the cleaners it now also makes. First, TerraCycle’s product must work better than the typical one it replaces. Second, the product must be made with the greenest ingredients - often items previously viewed as waste. Third, the product must cost less or not much more than typical offerings.
“It’s the price that’s the big issue,” Skazy says of environmentally-friendly goods. “Usually, eco-friendly products are more expensive and they don’t work as well. That’s what people think.” The solution: find ways to work within the system that let your firm save money while it helps the environment, so you can provide the consumer an affordable product. Working from waste is one option.
To get enough empty pop bottles for its fertilizer, TerraCycle began paying collection locations - schools and churches, for instance. These locations send in empties under a program called the “bottle brigade” that now has about 4,000 participating US locations. By returning empties, the groups earn money for charitable causes and save TerraCycle laborious collection work.
TerraCycle has partnered with firms like Clif Bar, Stonyfield Farm and Honest Tea to collect their empty, non-recyclable packages, and has a US $1 million deal to collect Capri Sun juice pouches for Kraft. As of writing, the firm was in the final planning stages of a $1 million deal with Oreo.
The basic business model for such deals sees the sponsor company cover all costs to get empty packages to TerraCycle’s factory, Skazy says, such as collection and publicity costs. Locations that offer to collect empty packages receive two to six cents a package towards a charitable cause. Meanwhile, TerraCycle receives free raw ingredients - the empty packaging. It can then manufacture pencil cases, bags and other goods out of the waste, selling the end products for as little as $2 retail for pencil cases. Each year, the brigade programs collects millions of Capri Sun juice pouches from 850 schools.
Good media coverage, and lots of it, is the main benefit for the sponsor, Skazy says. More and more firms are likely to sign up for such programs. “All these big companies are looking to embrace this right now, so we’re in a very fortunate position,” he says.
“Really where it has to happen is Wal-Mart,” he says of the shift towards environmental products. “I’m not an environmentalist. I think I’m very much the average person. I don’t drive a hybrid car. I don’t go out of my way to eat organic food,” Skazy adds. To get such people to choose environmentally-friendly products, those products must be better in every way than others.
The most important ingredient for environmentally-friendly products to succeed, what Skazy calls “the holy grail” , is not to try and make the customer care about your product’s values, but “to make them choose your product without having to care.” Choosing sustainable options must not feel like a sacrifice, but simply be the obvious, best, ordinary choice. Terracycle products have succeeded here.
Even many of the green-oriented people attending the Green Jobs Conference held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania this March admitted to Skazy that they sometimes choose price over environment. During his speech at the conference, Skazy asked audience members whether they bought organic bananas at the current premium cost, and only one third of the supposedly forward-thinking audience members raised their hands.
But if the price of organic vs conventional bananas was similar? Who would buy organic then? Everyone raised their hands.
US Campaign Against GMOs Targets Consumers
Posted - April 11, 2008
New Initiatives to Control GMO Products in the United States
GMOs will soon be off everyone’s table, if Jeffrey Smith has his way. His Institute for Responsible Technology is launching a major initiative that will have food companies racing to replace GM ingredients. The Campaign for Healthy Eating in America, Smith says, is designed to reach the tipping point of consumer rejection of GMOs before the end of 2009.
Ten years ago, virtually all major food companies committed to remove GMOs from their European brands within a single week. In the US, a response to Monsanto’s rbGH (GM bovine growth hormone) began two years ago, when Starbucks, Krogers, and 40 out of 100 top dairies removed these products. Wal-Mart declared their milk rbGH free this March. “The common link to these tipping points,” says Smith, “is that consumers became aware of the health dangers and were given choice. Since GMOs offer no consumer advantages, even a small percentage of consumers making brand choices based their non-GMO status will cause food companies to respond.”
Smith has traveled to 30 countries speaking on the health dangers of genetically modified foods. “Convincing consumers to shun GMOs has become easy,” says Smith, “since the evidence of problems is now overwhelming and irrefutable.” These dangers are compiled in Smith’s new book, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods. With input from more than 30 scientists over two years, Genetic Roulette presents 65 health risks of GM foods and why current safety assessments are not competent to protect us from most of them. Former UK environment minister Michael Meacher says the revelations in Genetic Roulette may “change the global course of events this century.” It’s presented in the same clear, accessible style that made Jeffrey’s first book, Seeds of Deception, the world’s best-selling and number 1 rated book on genetically engineered foods.
The Campaign for Healthier Eating is providing the compelling evidence on GMO dangers for health conscious shoppers. Natural food stores will feature Non-GMO Education Centers containing books, brochures, CDs, DVDs, and Non-GMO Shopping Guides to make it easy for shoppers to identify non-GMO products on store shelves.
The Institute and its coalition partners are helping to inspire the entire North American natural food industry to remove all remaining GM ingredients, providing ample choice for thoroughly educated non-GMO shoppers.
The first Non-GMO Shopping Guides should be available this Summer, with electronic and print circulation expected in the tens of millions. The Institute will also print the Guide in magazines and circulate copies to healthcare professionals, schools and parents and religious groups.
“Consumers are on the top of the food chain,” says Smith, “and together, we can move the marketplace.”
For more: http://www.responsibletechnology.org
Soil Association Textiles
Posted - February 1, 2004
Soil Association and SA Cert Launch Organic Textile Standards and Certification
By Lee Holdstock of the Soil Association - as printed in O.W.N. Spring 2004
There’s no escaping the fact that the textile industry is a heavy user of chemicals, particularly in the growing and production process. A quarter of the world’s insecticides are used to grow cotton and a further 8,000 chemicals are available to process fabric. According to the World Health Organization, 20,000 people die in developing countries each year from poisoning by agricultural pesticides used on crops - many of these can be attributed to cotton.
In response to this, the Soil Association has spent two years creating standards for organic textiles. Developed by a team of industry experts for all stages of organic textile processing and manufacturing, these standards are intended to compliment the Soil Association’s already well trusted organic standards for food and farming.
The textile standards require manufactures of organic textiles to use methods that minimize negative effects on humans and the environment. They also require that all inputs be assessed on their biodegradability and toxicity to aquatic organisms (fish, algae and water fleas). In addition, inputs are not allowed if they are suspected, or proven, to cause other illnesses or conditions such as cancer or allergies. As would be expected from a stringent organic textile standard, heavy metals, including AZO dyes are prohibited and companies are encouraged to use natural dyes in their place. Soil Association certified textiles are produced without the use of genetic modified organisms.
It is Soil Association Certification Ltd, a subsidiary of the Soil Association, that offers inspection and certification to these standards, tracing production from the raw material throughout the environmentally responsible manufacturing chain to the finished article. SA Cert is no newcomer to certification. As a non-profit making organization with more than 4000 existing licensees in other sectors and a 30 year track record, SA Cert can boast unrivalled experience in UK organic certification. Once certified textile manufacturers will be able to use the widely recognized Soil Association symbol, the ultimate mark of organic integrity, which is already widely referred to by UK consumers as the one they trust.
David Peace, Managing Director of SA Cert, said: “There is huge potential for organic textiles in the UK. Over the last two years, sales of organic and environmentally friendly textile products have increased by 20%. As the scheme gathers momentum, shoppers will have peace of mind from the knowledge that their organic clothes can be made from organic raw materials produced as naturally as their organic food”.
The launch of SA Cert’s textile certification scheme will allow businesses of all sizes to display the well-known and respected Soil Association Symbol on their products. Coming hot on the heels of the new standards for organic health and beauty care products, this is another step on the way to help consumers live a fully organic lifestyle.
Certification with SA Cert provides a range of benefits including over 30 professional inspectors working in 20 countries worldwide and an expert team of office-based staff providing a robust inspection and certification service.
“Our textile certification will be open to other markets. We will be certifying manufacturers in all parts of the world who wish to access the UK market”, said Peace. “Not many organic certifiers in the EU or globally have dedicated textiles programs, so we hope that there will be scope for us to reach further than our food & farming schemes”.
