All farmers need good seed, irrespective of their agronomy or their markets. The diversity of companies in the sector provides almost all the seeds needed by farmers. Organic farmers have three choices: a) obtain seeds from suppliers that are fully organically certified, b) suppliers that have a certified organic product line next to their conventional seeds, or c) they can produce it themselves or get some from colleagues. If good organically grown seeds are not available, organic producers are allowed to use conventionally produced seed as long as it is not chemically treated.
Without having precise data, because the organic certification agency in the Netherlands does not keep such records, I dare to say that Plantum-members provide over 95 per cent of the seeds to Dutch organic farmers for all or almost all crops. Plantum has a productive collaboration with the organic value chain organisation Bionext; on some fields we support each other and on others we need to put energy to understanding each other’s positions.
We don’t have direct contacts with IFOAM, the global industry organisation for organic agriculture and food. What strikes me is the overriding influence that they have in various policy debates. What IFOAM seems to be capable of is to effectively line up the organic sector behind its positions. The only way for them to do that is to position the voice of the loudest faction within their very diverse constituency, i.e. often the biodynamic members, as the position of the whole sector. Fully organic seed companies can be a member of IFOAM; those that have a large market share, but which also serve a significant conventional seed market, cannot.
It is those biodynamic parts of the organic sector that are most interested in local conservation varieties participatory population breeding, which both by definition are geographically restricted in their varietal adaptation. It is fine that they get their space in the organic seed regulations, but it should not provide opportunities for cowboys in the seed market to provide unidentifiable and poor-quality seed to farmers. If there is a strong personal connection in a village between farmer and seed supplier, seed quality problems can be dealt with locally, and the law and national seed quality authorities may not need to step in. The main exception is of course seed health, which may also affect all neighbouring fields. However, as soon as seed supply is professionalised and distribution occurs over longer distances such as in large conservation networks, then organic farmers need to be provided with the same protection that all farmers have. It is the guarantees for farmers about identity and quality that was and still is the basis for the PRM regulations.
I would dare to say that the large majority of organic producers want, like any farmer, the best yield of quality product from their land, given the requirements of their value chains, and the very best seed that delivers these.
It is high time for the seed companies that provide the large majority of varieties and the bulk of seeds to the organic sector to make their voice heard in the political arena. This should not necessarily be to oppose the role of IFOAM; I think that the organic sector has taught conventional agriculture a number of very important lessons. But it is to jointly stress the importance of good quality seed and represent the first link in the value chain in its entirety. That there are different views about organic breeding and breeding for organic, different views about seed companies large and small and maybe some other issues, that’s all fine, but let’s together represent the whole organic sector in all its diversity.
The goal should be, in my view, to carefully balance which rules need to be set by law, and which can sufficiently be organised in the value chain certification rules of the different organic sub-sectors. The Danish organic sector gave an interesting example on this thought in the NGT debate. They clearly said that at this moment they may not be ready to use NGTs, but they don’t rule out that useful products come out of this research. They thus suggested to leave the ban on the use of NGTs in the organic sector out of the EU-law. That view has not reached the IFOAM view on the issue.
The first step is to have the organic seed producers duly represented in all national seed associations, and to voice their wishes and concerns in discussions with policy makers and politicians. This may likely lead to constructive discussions with organic value chain organisations like IFOAM on the various seed policy issues. And if not constructive, then it will at least provide policy makers with the diverse opinions that exist in the organic seed sector on which they can make up their mind. We do represent the organic sector at a very important link of their value chain: the seed!
