Archive for ‘Organic Standards’

August 26th, 2010

Superstar Entrepreneurs

I don’t subscribe to many magazines but there is one I devour each month and reference back throughout the year — Inc.

A few days ago, their annual “Top 500″ issue arrived. This issue highlights the top 500 fastest growing, privately held companies according to Inc. magazine (based on revenue from 2006-2009 with a few criteria stipulated including a caveat of “subjective reasons”).

As I flipped through, I was reminded of what Better for Babies is, what it is not, and the plethora of traits entrepreneurs share regardless of their level of “success” (a word that means so many different things to so many different people).

Here are a few of the Top 500 highlights I found particularly inspiring, startling, and just down right fascinating:

Listed as number 2 is ModCloth (www.modcloth.com). I love them! And interestingly enough, they do not appear on the list of woman-run companies (their CEO is Eric Koger).

I have been watching ModCloth for quite some time now. (Thanks to Lauren!) I like to notice how they interact with their customers, ask for their opinion, and then publicize the heck out of it! They engage with customers and potential customers on Facebook and Twitter, try out quirky ideas, and move quickly.

There is a lot to learn there. But it also makes me wonder more about these top companies. A measure of revenue is hardly a transparent look into company values. Where are the clothes made, and by whom? How far does each piece travel and how often do they produce a garment made from organic fabric? (You can search ModCloth for organic items, and they do feature an upcycled vintage section, but these are not a majority of their offerings.)

I also noticed more than a few companies whose revenues are in the millions with 4, or even 1, employee! Wow. Sharing the profits can go far if there are only 2 or 3 of you. But, of course, I have to weed through that information and remind myself what I can do in my own community. I can give fair-wage jobs to 6 or 7 local women, with some speaking very little English, and this is really important to me, and to our world.

Obviously these are my interests, my tipping points, and Inc. magazine’s Top 500 isn’t a “Green Award”. So how do I extract from the examples, the leading entrepreneurs — and then make that knowledge, experience, and wisdom my own? Apply it to Better for Babies and our missions?

I’d love to hear about your inner processes as consumers, or business-owners, in the United States. What qualities are important for you to find in a company, what issues get you stuck, and what inspires your loyalty?

{Leah}

  • Share/Bookmark
August 15th, 2008

The new Global Organic Textile Standards, Part II

July 2008 has been a month of important fine tunings, clarifications, and dialogue regarding organic textile standards and environmental marketing claims. We will be discussing, the Version 2.0 of the Global Organic Textile Standards (GOTS), the Federal Trade Commission’s 3rd workshop, and the very interesting timing of a new NOP fact sheet “Labeling of Textiles Under National Organic Program (NOP) Regulations”, which despite its merits, appears in part to be a lack of dialogue with the FTC.

Recall that in “Hail the new Global Organic Textile Standard, Part I”, version 2.0 of the Global Organic Textile Standards became effective July 2, 2008. Bloggers writing exclusively about Version 1.0 with no follow-up will likely give an incomplete picture about companies using the term “organic” and “made with x% organic materials”. In version 2.0, we see that GOTS has very stringent criteria for the use of organic when referring to a product. In the previous version, GOTS certification appears to me be a viable possibility to Work-at-home-moms (WAHMS) and other small to medium sized sewing businesses without being a certified facility. If they manufacture products that meet the divisions and criteria as set out by GOTS for ‘organic’ or ‘made with organic’ and do so with certified organic fabrics according to GOTS standards, then they may label their products as ‘organic’ and ‘made in organic’ respectively. Version 2.0 is quite different is this regard. In “Hail the new Global Organic Textile Standards, Part I, I purposely left out a paragraph of Version 2.0 of the Global Organic Textile Standards (GOTS) that directly prefaces the subdivision of the two label grades a) “organic” or b) “made with organic”. It states: “Final products, that are produced and manufactured in compliance with these standards by an operation that has been certified by an approved certifying body may be sold, labelled or represented as … ” The new key words are “certified by an approved certifying body”.

In the last post, we spoke briefly about the FTC’s 3rd workshop held on July 15, 2008 which examined green claims about textiles in two of its five sessions. Session 1: Weaving Green Textile Claims – Cotton, Organic Cotton, and Bamboo; and Session 2: Tying-Up Loose Ends – Substantiating Green Textile Claims and the Need for FTC Guidance.

William E. Kovacic, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, in his welcome address, spoke “of a period of rejunivation, reinvention of the agency that transpired well over a decade ago throughout the ’90s and into this decade.” “Part of what we realized,” Kovacic said, “is that if we are going to remain current, if we’re going to stay as a state-of-the-art concerning these developments, we have to engage in a regular process of public consultation.”

The insights gained and judgements formed through the workshops, which includes preceding and follow-up public comments, constitute a major reason to convene. The judgements in turn inform the policy and the enforcement of policy. As Kovacic says, “my agency is part think tank, it’s part law enforcement body. We like to think of it in many ways as the thinking person’s approach to consumer protection and competition policy. Why? In part, we are a law enforcement agency and we’re quite willing to use our enforcement powers to ensure the claims relating to green products, green
services are indeed truthful.”

LaRhea Pepper, an organic farmer in Texas and executive director of the Organic Exchange, discussed both the USDA’s National Organic Program (NOP) and the FTC’s regulations regarding labelling textiles, pointing out: “All claims must be true. The wording of the labels can’t be misleading to consumers. The percentages the fiber content must be given. And the organic fiber must be certified by an accepted standard by the national organic program. And so regardless of where this cotton is grown around the world it has to be accredited by certification groups that [are] credited by the national organic program [if] it’s going to be sold here in the United States.” She goes on to speak of the differentiation between making a claim about the product and the fiber in the product.

Grace Gershuny, a consultant to the OTA regarding textile standards in general and most specifically their representive on the technical committee of the Global Organic Textile Standards (GOTS) for the past three to four years , elaborates on the above point explaining that ”the national organic program does not address process textile products. [It] only addresses raw fibers.” Likewise, in regards to labelling, the FTC allows “the word ‘organic’ to modify the fiber content on a label.”

Now, it is very ironic the Grace Gershuny goes on to say, “one of the things that we have requested is that the national organic program consult with the FTC. So when those folks from the other Ireland in the archipelago come over and talk to you about organic labeling claims, don’t shoot, they are your friends. (Island). Let’s see, there’s a real possibility about consumer confusion on a textile product that’s labeled organic. That we need to have a little bit of agreement, a mutual discussion about how to regulate that.”

At the time of writing this statement, recall that the NOP did not address certification of the textile product, only the raw fibers. Just seven days later, the USDA released a new NOP fact sheet “Labeling of Textiles Under National Organic Program (NOP) Regulations” which explicitly speaks of the certification of textile products:

Only textile products certified to the NOP production
AND processing standards are eligible to be labeled
‘100 percent organic’ and “organic.”

100 percent organic fiber content.

  • Only organic processing aids.
  • USDA Organic seal may be displayed on final
    product, in marketing materials, and in retail
    displays—in proximity to certified products only.
  • All operations producing, handling, processing
    and manufacturing the final product must be
    certified.

Organic

  • Minimum of 95 percent organic fiber content.
  • 5 percent nonorganic substances, as listed in
    Section 205.605 of the NOP regulation.
  • No non-organic fibers.
  • USDA Organic seal may be displayed on final
    product, in marketing materials, and in retail
    displays—in proximity to certified products only.
  • All operations producing, handling, processing,
    and manufacturing the final product must be
    certified.

Other Uses of the Word “Organic” in Textile Product
Labeling

The NOP does not restrict the use of the term “made
with organic …” in the labeling of textile products to
only those products manufactured in certified organic
facilities or containing a minimum of 70 percent
organic fibers. However, all fibers identified in these
textile products as “organic” must be produced and
certified to NOP standards.

Labels on textile products from non-certified handling/
processing/manufacturing operations:

  • May identify specific fibers as being organic if
    certified to the NOP crop/livestock standards.
  • May state the percentage of organic fibers
    contained in the final product.
  • May not use the USDA Organic seal.
  • May not imply or lead the consumer to believe
    that the final product is certified organic.

—-
The new NOP fact sheet has not adopted the Global Organic Textile Standard, but it definitely seems to be moving closer to the Global Organic Textile Standard.

We apologizing for not getting this post up sooner. We were finishing our comments to the FTC’s 3rd workshop.
Better for Babies, Inc., supports the revision of the Guides to provide guidance specific to textiles, which would include but should not be limited to organically labeled textiles.  This guidance, we believe, should involve collaboration between the FTC and the USDA National Organic Program (NOP) incorporating the Global Organic Textile Standards (GOTS).

(Bamboo was a hot topic in both sessions one and two. Ín short, our suspicions which we broached in earlier post were confirmed. It is processed like a rayon and should be labeled as a rayon. We speak more about Bamboo in our next post.)

  • Share/Bookmark
August 9th, 2008

The “Green Guides”

In 1992, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published “Guides for the Use of Environmental Marketing Claims”, commonly known as the Green Guides. They were subsequently updated in 1996 and in 1998.

The aim of the “Green Guides” is to help marketers avoid making deceptive or unsubstantiated, and thus unfair, environmental claims. Toward this goal, the Green Guides gives “the following general principles [that] apply to all environmental marketing claims”: “

(a) “Qualifications and disclosures … should be sufficiently clear, prominent and understandable to prevent deception.”

(b) “An environmental marketing claim should … [make] clear whether the environmental attribute or benefit being asserted refers to the product, the product’s packaging, a service or to a … component of the product, package or service.”

(c) “An environmental marketing claim should not … [overstate] the environmental attribute or benefit, expressly or by implication.”

(d) “Environmental marketing claims that include a comparative statement should be presented in a manner that makes the basis for the comparison sufficiently clear to avoid consumer deception.”

Next, the “Green Guides” provide guidance on specific green claims, such as biodegradable, compostable, recyclable, recycled content, and ozone safe.

The FTC is currently reviewing its Green Guides to ensure that they are appropriately responsive to changes in the marketplace and in consumer perception of environmental claims. Because of the proliferation of green claims in the marketplace, the FTC commenced the review in Novemeber 2007, over a year earlier than it originally planned, as part of its regulatory review program.

In 2008, the FTC held three public workshops to discuss various green marketing issues – all preceded and followed by requested public comment:

The 1st workshop, held January 8, 2008. and focused on the marketing of carbon offsets and renewable energy certificates. (A webcast and transcripts are available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/carbonoffsets/index.shtml. This is the main page. So, you will have to click on the webcast link).

The 2nd workshop, held on April 30, 2008, examined developments in green packaging claims and the consumer perception of such claims. The workshop focused more specifically on the range of claims marketers use to tout that their product packaging is “green,” such as recyclable, biodegradable, compostable, and sustainable.  (A webcast and transcript are available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/packaging/index.shtml. Again, click on the webcast link.)

The 3rd workshop, held on July 15, 2008, examined green claims about textiles, building products, and buildings. Workshop participants discussed, among other things, consumer perception of green claims about these products; substantiation for the claims; third party certifications or seals for green textiles, building products, or buildings; and, the need for new or updated FTC guidance in this area.   (A webcast and transcript are available at http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/buildingandtextiles/index.shtml. Again, click on the webcast link.)

Follow-up comments are still open to the 3rd workshop until August 15, 2008. Watch the video and/or read the transcript, then visit the above link for instructions on how to file your comments. (You may also be interested in reading our next post as it includes a discussion of GOTS and the 3rd workshop.)

Commission staff will then examine and evaluate the information garnered from all of these meetings combined with the public’s follow-up comments in drafting their suggested changes to the Commission ïn regards to creating an updated version of the “Green Guides”.

The Global Organic Textile Standards played a large part in the 3rd Workshop: Session 1: Weaving Green Textile Claims – Cotton, Organic Cotton, and Bamboo; and Sessopm 2: Tying-Up Loose Ends – Substantiating Green Textile Claims and the Need for FTC Guidance.

We discuss these sessions in more detail in the next post.

(some information taken from Reporter Resources: The FTC’s Green Guides)

  • Share/Bookmark
August 5th, 2008

Hail to the new Global Organic Textile Standards, Part I

We applaud the new Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS). After 6 years of collaboration and hard work, the International Working Group on Global Organic Textile Standard (comprised of 4 leading organic textile standard organizations*), has transformed itself, unequivocally, into the foremost organic textile processing standard.

“The aim of the standard,” according to GOTS, “is to define requirements to ensure organic status of textiles, from harvesting of the raw materials, through environmentally and socially responsible manufacturing up to labelling in order to provide a credible assurance to the end consumer.”

“These standards for organic textiles cover the production, processing, manufacturing, packaging, labelling, exportation, importation and distribution of all natural fibres. The final products may include, but are not limited to fibre products, yarns, fabrics and clothes. The standards focus on compulsory criteria only.” (”Global Organic Textile Standard: Version 2.0″, http://www.global-standard.org)

Consumers familiar with national organic food standards will quickly recognize how the textile standards “provide for a subdivision into two label-grades. The only differentiation for subdivision is the minimum percentage of ‘organic’ / ‘organic ‑ in conversion’ material in the final product. …” (Ibid.)

Now, I quote from the “Global Organic Textile Standard – General Description” as it provides a shorter more consise overview of the subdivisions. (In the second blog in this series “The new Global Organic Textile Standards, Part II”, I discuss changes made to this text in version 2.0 of the GOTS, and the questions the changes raise.)

“Final products that are produced and manufactured in compliance with all compulsory criteria of these standards are to be labelled ‘Global Organic Textile Standard’.”

a) “organic” or “organic ‑ in conversion”

95% or more of the fibres must be of certified organic (or in conversion) origin. The remaining balance up to 5% may be made of non-organic fibres including defined regenerated and synthetic fibres. Blending (= mixing the same fibre in organic and conventional quality in one product) is not permitted.

b) “made with x % organic materials” or ” made with x % organic ‑ in conversion materials”

70% – 95% or more of the fibres must be of certified organic (or in conversion) origin. The remaining balance up to 30% may be made of non-organic fibres. Regenerated and synthetic fibres are limited to 10% (resp. 25% for socks, leggings and sportswear). Again blending is not permitted. (http://www.global-standard.org)

The International Work Group recently premiered the new GOTS logo during the International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) World Congress on 17th June, 2008 in Italy.

GOTS Logo

Version 2.0 of the Global Organic Textile Standard, referenced above, was published June 6th, 2008 and become effective July 2, 2008. I will speak more about version 2.0 in next post, “The new Global Organic Textile Standards, Part II”.

*The International Working Group consist in International Association Natural Textile Industry (IVN), Germany; Soil Association (SA), England; Organic Trade Association (OTA), USA; and Japan Organic Cotton Association (JOCA), Japan.

  • Share/Bookmark