{"id":11018,"date":"2011-04-04T12:45:39","date_gmt":"2011-04-04T17:45:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.sustainablog.org\/?p=11018"},"modified":"2011-04-04T12:45:39","modified_gmt":"2011-04-04T17:45:39","slug":"usda-biopreferred-label","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/usda-biopreferred-label\/","title":{"rendered":"The USDA BioPreferred Program: Consumer Empowerment… or Confusion?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"usda<\/a><\/p>\n

Got a particular label you look for when buying certain kinds of products? FSC<\/a> for wood and paper products? Green Seal<\/a> for other household products? USDA Organic<\/a> for food? A labeling system based on solid, well-researched and monitored standards makes for very effective “shorthand” for consumers concerned about the social and environmental impacts of their purchases.<\/p>\n

Of course, industries and manufacturers can also use that shorthand effect as a tool for greenwashing: we’ve seen green labeling schemes mushroom over the past decade, and while some of these new criteria work well to convey specific environmental attributes, others cast a greenish haze over products that don’t deserve it. Consumer Reports<\/em> has done an excellent job separating out some of the wheat from the chaff with its GreenerChoices.org eco-labels database<\/a>, but it only covers a few categories of products… and I’d guess finding the resources to keep up would be just about impossible.<\/p>\n

Now, however, there’s a new addition to the labeling\/certification mix that’s got a lot of us saying “Huh?”… mainly because it doesn’t really fit neatly into our parameters of reliable\/greenwashed standards. The USDA’s biobased label and Federal procurement program BioPreferred<\/a>, released in January after nine years of work, and designates products with certain amounts of biobased materials.<\/p>\n

Biobased? Yep, that’s a new one (at least for popular usage): the term, according to the program, means<\/a><\/p>\n

commercial or industrial products (other than food or feed) that are composed in whole, or in significant part, of biological products, renewable agricultural materials (including plant, animal, and marine materials), or forestry materials.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

OK, got that? Now add to it “biobased intermediate ingredients or feedstocks”… apparently the definition expanded between the 2002 and 2008 Farm Bills.<\/p>\n

On the surface, this probably seems like a good thing… especially after taking a look at some of the product categories included for consideration for the consumer label<\/a> and preferred Federal procurement<\/a>. A variety of mechanical fluids, for instance, were among the first product categories examined for the certification; since these products typically contain nothing but petrochemicals and other artificial compounds, it’s pretty easy to jump to the conclusion that Biopreferred standards requiring certain amounts of biobased materials are a good thing. Don’t we want to get as much oil,\u00a0derivatives\u00a0of it, and other chemical compounds not found in nature out of these products?\u00a0The same goes for the various categories of household products included in the program: aren’t cleaning products with a significant percentage of plant-based materials a good thing?<\/p>\n

So, What Does the BioPreferred Program Tell Us?<\/h2>\n

It’s the shorthand we see here that makes BioPreferred, and the biobased labeling scheme, problematic. Yes, we want to get various unnatural, and often unhealthy, chemical compounds out of products for both consumer and commercial use. But to go no further than noting that a product has biobased materials can create yet another situation in which that greenish haze comes into play: giving a product a thumbs up for containing a certain percentage of biobased materials (which may be as low as 25%) creates a perception of “good” that may not be warranted.<\/p>\n

\"biopreferred<\/a>
First round of certified biobased products<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In fairness, the BioPreferred program is not designed to serve as an “eco label.”<\/a> But I have no doubt that many consumers will view it as such. No, we’re not all linguists, but I’d guess that most people do have a sense that the prefix “bio” refers to living things… and that, in most cases, we associate the prefix with “good” and “green.” If BioPreferred certified based on sustainable agricultural practices, or took into account other issues with the use of biobased materials in products, consumers could make that assumption; unfortunately, it doesn’t. For instance,<\/p>\n