IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Variation in Organic Standards Prior to the National Organic Program


  • Fetter, T. Robert
  • Caswell, Julie A.


Interest in establishing nationally uniform certification, labeling, and management standards for organic products grew out of concern that the existence of multiple standards led to consumer and supply chain confusion about, and lack of confidence in, these products. The National Organic Program Final Rule, issued in December 2000, is the result of this interest. We analyze the certification system that was in place prior to the new national rule to evaluate the extent of differences between certification standards and how the national rule is likely to impact the market for organic products. Our analysis suggests that most differences among US certification standards were minor. Also, the most important impacts of the national standard may be in facilitating trade in ingredients and products certified by different certifiers, increasing buyer confidence, and facilitating exports. However, the national rule may decrease the ability of organic certifiers and consumers to place differing emphasis on the multiple goals of organic production and may decrease the flexibility of organic standards to respond to changing market conditions, including new technologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Fetter, T. Robert & Caswell, Julie A., 2002. "Variation in Organic Standards Prior to the National Organic Program," Research Reports 25151, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25151

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Neumann, Manfred & Bobel, Ingo & Haid, Alfred, 1985. "Domestic concentration, foreign trade and economic performance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Martha Field & Emilio Pagoulatos, 1998. "Foreign trade elasticities and import discipline," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 105-111.
    3. Robert C. Feenstra, 1996. "U.S. Imports, 1972-1994: Data and Concordances," NBER Working Papers 5515, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Levinsohn, James, 1993. "Testing the imports-as-market-discipline hypothesis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 1-22, August.
    5. Eric J. Bartelsman & Wayne Gray, 1996. "The NBER Manufacturing Productivity Database," NBER Technical Working Papers 0205, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. de Ghellinck, Elisabeth & Geroski, Paul A & Jacquemin, Alexis, 1988. "Inter-industry Variations in the Effect of Trade on Industry Performance," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 1-19, September.
    7. Geroski, P. A., 1982. "Simultaneous equations models of the structure-performance paradigm," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 145-158.
    8. Sanjib Bhuyan & Rigoberto A. Lopez, 1997. "Oligopoly Power in the Food and Tobacco Industries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 1035-1043.
    9. Stalhammar, Nils-Olov, 1991. "Domestic market power and foreign trade : The case of Sweden," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 407-424, September.
    10. Haubrich, Joseph G. & Lambson, Val Eugene, 1986. "Dynamic collusion in an open economy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 75-78.
    11. Marvel, Howard P, 1980. "Foreign Trade and Domestic Competition," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 103-122, January.
    12. Appelbaum, Elie, 1982. "The estimation of the degree of oligopoly power," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 287-299, August.
    13. Pagoulatos, Emilio & Sorensen, Robert, 1986. "What determines the elasticity of industry demand?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 237-250, September.
    14. Catherine J. Morrison, 1990. "Market Power, Economic Profitability and Productivity Growth Measurement: An Integrated Structural Approach," NBER Working Papers 3355, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Chou, Tein-Chen, 1986. "Concentration, Profitability and Trade in a Simultaneous Equation Analysis: The Case of Taiwan," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 429-443, June.
    16. Esposito, Louis & Esposito, Frances Ferguson, 1971. "Foreign Competition and Domestic Industry Profitability," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 53(4), pages 343-353, November.
    17. Ianchovichina, Elena & Binkley, James & Hertel, Thomas, 2000. "Procompetitive Effects of Foreign Competition on Domestic Markups," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(1), pages 134-148, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Batte, Marvin T. & Hooker, Neal H. & Haab, Timothy C. & Beaverson, Jeremy, 2007. "Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 145-159, April.
    2. Timothy Simcoe & Michael W. Toffel, 2012. "Public Procurement and the Private Supply of Green Buildings," NBER Working Papers 18385, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Daniel Jaffee & Philip Howard, 2010. "Corporate cooptation of organic and fair trade standards," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(4), pages 387-399, December.
    4. Deaton, Brady J., Jr. & Hoehn, John P., 2003. "Information As A Double-Edge Sword: Implications For Food Standards And Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22235, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Katie Abrams & Courtney Meyers & Tracy Irani, 2010. "Naturally confused: consumers’ perceptions of all-natural and organic pork products," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(3), pages 365-374, September.
    6. Simcoe, Timothy & Toffel, Michael W., 2014. "Government green procurement spillovers: Evidence from municipal building policies in California," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 411-434.
    7. Mojduszka, Eliza M., 2004. "Private And Public Food Safety Control Mechanisms: Interdependence And Effectiveness," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 19987, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uconnr:25151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.