The Global Influence on Organic Farming Development

When you pick up a product labelled “organic” at your local market, have you ever wondered who decides what that label actually means – and whether a farmer in India, Brazil, or Germany is following the same rules as one in France? The answer lies with a handful of international organizations that have quietly but powerfully shaped the global standards for organic farming over the past five decades. Three of the most influential are IFOAM – Organics International, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the World Health Organization (WHO). Together, they have built the regulatory and philosophical backbone that makes the global organic sector function as a credible, trusted system.

How IFOAM became the world’s organic authority 🔗

IFOAM – Organics International (formerly the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements) was born out of a simple but urgent idea: the growing organic farming movement needed a unified global voice. On 5 November 1972, in Versailles, France, five representatives from different countries came together at an international organic agriculture congress organized by the French organization Nature et Progrès. The founding members included Lady Eve Balfour of the UK’s Soil Association, Roland Chevriot of Nature et Progrès, and representatives from Sweden, South Africa, and the United States.

Their shared goal, as described in IFOAM’s own historical records, was to create a unified, organized voice for organic food and the diffusion and exchange of information on the principles and practices of organic agriculture across nations. What began with five founding members has grown into a worldwide network with over 700 member organizations across more than 100 countries.

The IFOAM Basic Standards: a foundation for global consistency 🔗

One of IFOAM’s earliest and most significant contributions was the development of the IFOAM Basic Standards (IBS). These standards gave countries a common framework to build their own national organic regulations on. As the FAO notes, the IFOAM Principle Aims are used as guidelines for setting standards for organic agriculture in individual countries. If any national standard diverges fundamentally from IFOAM’s framework, that country’s certification may not be recognized by international traders – a powerful incentive for alignment.

The standards cover an extensive range of areas: crop production, animal husbandry, wild-crafted products, food processing, fiber processing, and aquaculture. They set strict limits on synthetic pesticide and fertilizer use, mandate wide crop rotation, and enforce an absolute prohibition on genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The GMO ban was formally adopted in 1998 when, at the 12th Scientific Conference of IFOAM in Mar del Plata, Argentina, more than 600 delegates from over 60 countries voted unanimously to exclude GMOs from organic production.

Today, the IFOAM Standard – the updated successor to the Basic Standards – serves as a global platform for organic standard-setters to discuss and harmonize standards at the international level. It also operates within the IFOAM Accreditation Program, which evaluates and recognizes certification bodies worldwide, helping traders verify which schemes are genuinely organic.

The four principles that guide IFOAM’s work 🔗

Beyond standards and certification, IFOAM has articulated four core principles that define what organic farming stands for:

• Health: Organic agriculture should sustain and enhance the health of soil, plant, animal, human, and planet as one and indivisible.
• Ecology: It should be based on living ecological systems and cycles, working with them, emulating them, and helping to sustain them.
• Fairness: It should build on relationships that ensure fairness with regard to the common environment and life opportunities.
• Care: It should be managed in a precautionary and responsible manner to protect the health and well-being of current and future generations and the environment.

These principles are not just philosophical statements – they inform how standards are written, how certification bodies are assessed, and how IFOAM engages with policymakers and international institutions around the world.

The Codex Alimentarius: when FAO and WHO set the rules for organic trade 🔗

IFOAM laid the philosophical and technical groundwork for organic standards, but it is a non-governmental organization. For organic products to cross borders freely and safely, governments needed a shared reference point. That is where the Codex Alimentarius comes in.

The Codex Alimentarius – Latin for “Food Code” – is a collection of internationally recognized standards, guidelines, and codes of practice established jointly by FAO and WHO. It held its first meeting in 1963, and its central body, the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), now has 188 member states plus the European Union as a member organization. As the World Trade Organization (WTO) explains, both the SPS (Sanitary and Phytosanitary) Agreement and TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) Agreement specifically cite Codex standards as the international benchmark for food safety, meaning that national food regulations aligned with Codex are automatically considered compliant with WTO obligations.

The 1999 organic food guidelines: a landmark for global trade 🔗

In July 1999, at its 23rd session in Rome, the Codex Alimentarius Commission approved its landmark “Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labelling and Marketing of Organically Produced Foods.” As the FAO/UN press release from that time noted, the guidelines were prepared by the joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme and clearly define the nature of organic food production and prevent claims that could mislead consumers about the quality of the product or the way it is produced.

The livestock provisions were finalized at the 24th session in 2001, making the guidelines comprehensive across the full spectrum of agricultural production. The Codex organic guidelines align closely with IFOAM’s Basic Standards, ensuring that the two frameworks reinforce rather than contradict each other.

What do these guidelines actually cover? According to the Codex Alimentarius Commission documents, they address production rules, permitted and prohibited substances, labeling requirements (including for products in conversion to organic), certification systems, and import controls. They also cover special situations such as products in transition – a critical detail for farmers moving from conventional to organic systems who need market access during the multi-year conversion period.

Why the Codex guidelines matter for developing countries 🔗

The Codex guidelines are not just relevant for wealthy food-exporting nations. As a FAO food standards expert explained at the time of the guidelines’ approval, they are especially valuable for governments in developing countries and Eastern Europe wishing to establish national regulations – many of which lack the resources to develop organic standards independently. When a country’s national standards align with Codex, its producers can access international markets more easily, because buyers and governments in importing countries can trust the framework behind the certification.

The Codex guidelines are technically voluntary – they do not automatically become law. However, as Food Navigator explains, the WTO’s sanitary and phytosanitary agreement specifically identifies Codex standards as the international benchmark, meaning that if countries want to set stricter standards, they may be asked to provide scientific justification. This gives Codex standards real teeth in international trade disputes.

FAO’s broader role: research, policy, and capacity building 🔗

FAO’s contribution to organic farming goes well beyond co-authoring the Codex guidelines. The organization has actively supported developing countries in building the infrastructure needed for organic agriculture – from legislation to certification to marketing.

In 1999, FAO launched a cross-sectoral programme in organic agriculture, with the intent to help member countries make informed choices about organic management. This included providing assistance for national legislation development, building certification capabilities, supporting research and extension facilities, and promoting knowledge exchange between countries.

FAO has also made an important projection that carries significant weight in policy circles: a broad-scale shift to organic agriculture could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to feed the world’s population over the next 50 years. This is a remarkable statement from the world’s leading food agency, and it has helped legitimize organic farming as a mainstream rather than niche agricultural approach.

The FAO collaborates with national organic programmes, NGOs, and international research institutions to assist member countries in the following areas:

• Institutional and regulatory frameworks: Helping countries design policies that support organic farming within national agricultural plans.
• Certification and accreditation: Building local inspection systems so that developing countries are not wholly dependent on expensive foreign certifiers.
• Production technologies: Promoting improved practices adapted to local conditions.
• Market access and consumer awareness: Connecting organic producers with value chains and helping consumers understand what organic means.

How these organizations work together – and why it matters 🔗

IFOAM, FAO, and WHO do not operate in silos. There is a clear and deliberate alignment between their frameworks. IFOAM’s Basic Standards have directly influenced the international Codex Alimentarius guidelines developed by FAO and WHO – meaning that the technical detail worked out by organic farmers and researchers found its way into the treaty-level framework that governs international food trade. This top-down and bottom-up connection is one of the most effective examples of how civil society expertise can shape intergovernmental policy.

For farmers, this alignment has practical consequences. A smallholder in Uganda certified under a national programme based on the IFOAM framework, for example, can potentially access the same international markets as a large organic operation in Germany – because both are operating within a mutually recognized standards ecosystem. The IFOAM Accreditation Programme evaluates certification schemes and assists both traders and certified operations in verifying legitimacy, reducing fraud and confusion in the marketplace.

That said, challenges remain. As IFOAM acknowledges in its own historical reflection, despite increasing success, certified organic agriculture has not yet reached 1% of global agricultural land. Awareness and market size have grown dramatically since the 1970s, but uniform implementation across diverse economies remains a work in progress. This is why both IFOAM’s “Organic 3.0” vision – which seeks to position organic as a modern, innovative system – and FAO’s continued policy support are so critical to scaling the movement responsibly.

The standards behind the label you trust 🔗

Every time a consumer reaches for a product marked “certified organic,” they are, often without knowing it, benefiting from over 50 years of work by these international bodies. IFOAM built the standards and the certification architecture. FAO and WHO translated those principles into globally negotiated guidelines through the Codex Alimentarius. And together, they have created a framework that allows organic farming to grow from a grassroots movement of five founding members in 1972 into a global sector worth well over EUR 100 billion in annual sales – practiced in 187 countries and managed by at least 3.1 million farmers worldwide.

The work of these organizations is not just about labeling. It is about trust – trust between farmers and consumers, between exporting and importing countries, and between the agricultural sector and the natural world it depends on.

What do you think? Given that certified organic farming still covers less than 1% of global agricultural land, do you think international standards bodies like IFOAM and the Codex Alimentarius Commission are doing enough to lower the barriers for smallholder farmers in developing countries? And as new technologies like blockchain-based traceability and digital certification emerge, how should these organizations update their frameworks to stay relevant for the next generation of organic producers?

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IFOAM_-_Organics_International
2. https://www.fao.org/4/ac116e/ac116e02.htm
3. https://www.ifoam.bio/our-work/how/standards-certification/organic-guarantee-system/ifoam-standard
4. https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/en/
5. https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/coher_e/wto_codex_e.htm
6. https://press.un.org/en/1999/19990706.sag44.html
7. https://www.fao.org/4/a0369e/a0369e00.pdf
8. https://press.un.org/en/1999/19990628.sag43.html
9. https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2025/03/28/codex-alimentarius-explained/
10. https://www.fao.org/4/y1669e/y1669e0o.htm
11. https://www.fao.org/platforms/green-agriculture/areas-of-work/natural-resources-biodiversity-green-production/organic-agriculture/en
12. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/20073257643
13. https://www.infonet-biovision.org/animal-husbandry/organic-norms-ifoam
14. https://ifoam.bio/about-us/our-history-organic-30