During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is no consensus regarding the certification of soil-less crops as organic. “This is clearly a complex issue,” stated Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It has been on our agenda since 1995.” The board, which serves as an advisory body to the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters related to certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly moved the hydroponics topic from one meeting agenda to the next over the years. They have discussed and failed to take action on various proposals multiple times. An April vote on the matter was postponed, with members indicating that further time, research, and input from the organic community were necessary.
Monday’s meeting was conducted via a web conference, allowing the public to listen in as board members articulated their positions on potential proposals concerning hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were conducted, and no finalized proposals were presented. The board may revisit this issue during its fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations regarding the certification of hydroponic crops remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute filed a formal complaint against the USDA, arguing that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from using the organic label, the USDA has nonetheless authorized over 100 domestic and foreign growers to receive organic certification. In 2010, the NOSB recommended that “Hydroponics… should not be classified as certified organic growing methods due to their exclusion of soil-plant ecology, which is fundamental to organic farming systems and USDA regulations.” A motion to classify hydroponic crops as organic was presented during the fall NOSB meeting in 2016, but it was not voted on due to low chances of approval. Instead, a resolution was passed to express a consensus against entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman indicated his likely support for the 2010 recommendation, but he acknowledged that it does not clarify what substances are prohibited for hydroponic crops. Are there specific substances that could be used for cultivating hydroponic crops? If so, what would be permissible? “Recognizing this is a contentious topic, I have sought to find common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” remarked member Steve Ela. However, common ground proved elusive, as some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
When the discussion shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish reside in the water used for crop cultivation—opinions diverged. Some members argued that these systems should be banned due to the direct introduction of untreated fish waste into crops, which would not be acceptable for organic soil-grown crops. Conversely, others noted the lack of research on potential negative effects, suggesting that insufficient information exists to form a definitive position on the issue.
Debate also ensued regarding the necessary amount of soil or water for container-grown crops. A proposed compromise from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops, including stipulations that only 20% of nutrients could come from liquid feeding, no more than 50% could be added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Proponents claimed this approach was modeled after similar restrictions in the EU, which has faced its own challenges with this issue.
Board members expressed mixed sentiments. Some argued that a primary advantage of organic farming is its ability to enhance soil quality over time—something that this type of farming would not achieve. Others contended that imposing strict limits on the amounts permitted in containers could be harmful. Additionally, some panel members expressed concerns that allowing growers using these methods to already hold organic certification could inflict economic damage.
“There doesn’t seem to be an acceptable middle ground,” Chapman concluded. Members of the Crops Committee vowed to reassess their proposals before the fall meeting, yet there are no guarantees that the issue will be included on the agenda—or that it would be voted on, even if it is present. Following the lack of a vote on hydroponics during the April meeting, many speculated that any action on this topic might not occur this year.
In the context of these discussions, the inclusion of calcium citrate in liquid form was noted multiple times as a potential nutrient source for hydroponic crops. This substance, along with others, could play a role in future proposals on the certification of hydroponic systems as organic.