Service Des Equivalence

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Cara Canellas

unread,

Aug 3, 2024, 4:10:02 PM8/3/24

to almajetria

Scope. This equivalence arrangement is limited to country-to-country trade. For U.S. exports to Japan, it is limited to products certified to the USDA organic regulations that are produced or have had their final processing occur within the U.S. For Japan exports to the U.S., it is limited to products certified to the Japan organic regulations that are produced or have had their final processing occur in Japan.

Exports of USDA Organic Products. Products exported to Japan that fall under the scope of the arrangement must be accompanied by a USDA Export Certificate, Form TM-11 (pdf), issued by a USDA accredited certifier. The export certificate must include the following statement:

Labeling. Products traded under this arrangement may use the USDA or the Japanese Agricultural Standard (JAS) organic seal and must meet the labeling requirements in the destination country. Labeling requirements: U.S. Japan

Use of the JAS organic seal. Any plant-based products, livestock products, and processed products containing plant and livestock ingredients sold or labeled as organic in Japan must be labeled with the JAS organic seal. See the Frequently Asked Questions document below for specific rules on using the JAS seal.

Peer Reviews. Since the establishment of the U.S.- Japan Equivalence Arrangement, the NOP and MAFF have conducted mutual peer reviews. These assessments verify that both markets are meeting the terms of the arrangement.

Technical requirements: A system of relevant laws, regulations, regulatory practices, standards, policies, and procedures that address the certification, production, and handling of organic agricultural products.

Conformity assessment system: All activities, including oversight, accreditation, compliance review, and enforcement, undertaken by a government to ensure that the applicable technical requirements for the production and handling of organic agricultural products are fully and consistently applied.

Foreign governments interested in organic equivalence with the U.S. must first contact the USDA to request an equivalence determination. At minimum, a country must have mandatory domestic organic regulations in effect to be eligible to request equivalence. To undertake an equivalence determination, U.S. NOP requires that an applicant country provide detailed information and supporting documentation on its organic system, the competent authority that leads the organic program, its organic standards, and the way it makes sure the standards are met to protect organic integrity (conformity assessment). The country also provides a description of the commodities and/or products for which equivalence is being sought (e.g., all agricultural products, livestock products, crop products). This information is provided in an application form and is designed to help organize the information required from an applicant country before a review for equivalence can begin.

Submitting an application does not guarantee an organic equivalence arrangement with the United States will be reached. USDA reviews requests for organic equivalence from foreign governments based on budget and resource availability. If USDA chooses to proceed, the foreign government is asked to provide a detailed side-by-side comparison between its organic system and the USDA system.

Regular organic working group sessions are also held between USDA and all equivalence partners to address any priority issues, upcoming regulatory changes, and general information-sharing and collaboration between organic regulators on certifier oversight, international investigations, and other surveillance and enforcement activities.

The USDA may terminate an equivalence determination if the terms or conditions established under the equivalence determination are not met; if NOP determines that the country's technical requirements and/or conformity assessment program are no longer equivalent; if NOP determines that the foreign government's organic control system is inadequate to ensure that the country's organic certification program is fully meeting the terms and conditions under the equivalence determination; or for other good cause.

When conducting a Natural Resource Damage AssessmentInvestigation performed by trustees to identify injuries to natural resources caused by oil spills, hazardous substance releases, and grounding incidents in National Marine Sanctuaries, and plan restoration activities. The goal of NRDA is to restore natural resources and compensate the public for lost recreational use., we often determine the amount of restoration required through a process called service-to-service scaling. We calculate the services lost from a natural resource injury, and develop restoration alternatives that will provide the same amount of services to the public. This approach directly scales restoration projects to replace the services that were lost. Unlike valuation methods, service-to-service scaling does not require quantification of lost services in monetary terms.

In order to determine how much restoration is required to compensate for habitat injuries, we may conduct a Habitat Equivalency Analysis (HEA). This method assumes that equivalent habitats will provide equivalent services, meaning that years of lost services can be compensated for by providing acres of additional habitat.

The basic unit of measurement for this approach is typically a discounted-service-acre-year (DSAY). A DSAY represents the value of all of the ecosystem services provided by one acre of the habitat in one year. Services for future years are discounted, placing a lower value on benefits that will take longer to accrue. Therefore, additional acres of habitat must be restored when restoration is delayed.

Contact: USDA Office of Communications (202) 720-4623

CHICAGO, June 17, 2009 -- Agriculture Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan today announced that a first-of-its-kind agreement has been reached between the United States and Canada that will expand opportunities for organic producers in both countries. The "equivalency agreement" follows a review by both nations of the other's organic certification program and a determination that products meeting the standard in the United States can be sold as organic in Canada, and vice versa. Merrigan made this announcement at the All Things Organic Trade Show and Conference in Chicago this morning.

"The production of organic foods is a vibrant growth opportunity for American agriculture, and by agreeing on a common set of organic principles with Canada, we are expanding market opportunities for our producers to sell their products abroad," said Merrigan. "Today's agreement between the world's two largest organic trading partners is an important first step towards global harmonization of organic standards."

Under a determination of equivalence, producers and processors that are certified to the National Organic Program (NOP) standards by a U.S. Department of Agriculture accredited certifying agent do not have to become certified to the Canada Organic Product Regulation (COPR) standards in order for their products to be represented as organic in Canada. Likewise, Canadian organic products certified to COPR standards may be sold or labeled in the United States as organically produced. Both the USDA Organic seal and the Canada Organic Biologique logo may be used on certified products from both countries. The COPR goes into effect on June 30.

Canada is the largest U.S. trade partner and largest estimated export market for U.S. organic products. USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service office in Ottawa estimates that more than 80 percent of Canada's organic consumption comes from imports, and approximately 75 percent of those imports come from the United States. Organic produce and processed foods are estimated to make up the majority of U.S. organic products exported to Canada. Estimates of the total market for organic products in Canada range from $2.1 to $2.6 billion; meanwhile sales of organic products in the United States totaled $24.6 billion in 2008. Actual trade flows are difficult to track because the United States has not developed international harmonized system codes for organic products.

Consumer demand for organic food has risen quickly over the past ten years, triggered in part by the development and success of USDA's organic regulatory program and label, according to a recent study by USDA's Economic Research Service. As consumer demand for organic products has widened, organic retail sales have spread far beyond the 'natural products' market niche in urban areas and college towns and into big-box stores across the country.

Since the late 1990's, U.S. organic production has more than doubled, but the consumer market has grown even faster. Organic food sales have more than quintupled, increasing from $3.6 billion in 1997 to $24.6 billion in 2008. More than two-thirds of U.S. consumers buy organic products at least occasionally, and 28 percent buy organic products weekly, according to the Organic Trade Association.

At present, there is no resource setting out how equivalent care should be defined, measured or compared within the secure setting to that in the wider community and importantly this has implications where there are or have been specific limitations or variations in the care being provided within the secure setting.

It must be recognised that there are aspects of care provision within secure settings that require a different approach or service model than would otherwise be available in the wider community. It must also be recognised that within the community setting there will be considerable variation in the provision and availability of services for a number of demographic reasons. It therefore stands to reason that on occasion the care provided in a secure settings may be at least equivalent to that available in the wider community.