During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, it became evident that there is no agreement on whether soil-less crops should qualify for organic certification. “Clearly, this is not an easy subject to resolve,” remarked Tom Chapman, the board’s chairman. “It’s been on the agenda since 1995.” The panel, which advises the U.S. Department of Agriculture on matters related to certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly postponed decisions regarding hydroponics over the years. They have encountered various proposals that were discussed but never acted upon. A vote that was scheduled for April was postponed, with members indicating the need for more time, research, and feedback from the organic community.
The meeting was held via a web conference, allowing the public to listen to board members share their perspectives on potential proposals regarding hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were conducted, and no finalized proposals were presented. The board may consider taking action at its upcoming fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations regarding the organic 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 carrying the organic label, the USDA has allowed over 100 domestic and foreign growers to receive certification. In 2010, the NOSB recommended that “Hydroponics… certainly cannot be classified as certified organic growing methods due to their exclusion of the soil-plant ecology intrinsic to organic farming systems and the USDA’s regulations governing them.”
A motion to allow hydroponic crops to be recognized as organic was brought up during the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on, as its approval was deemed unlikely. Instead, members adopted a resolution favoring the prohibition of entirely water-based hydroponic systems. On Monday, Chapman expressed his inclination to support the 2010 recommendation, acknowledging that it does not entirely clarify what is prohibited. He raised questions about whether there are substances suitable for cultivating hydroponic crops and what might be permissible.
“We understand this is a contentious issue, so I’ve been trying to identify common ground for the entire NOSB and build from there,” said member Steve Ela. However, finding common ground proved challenging, with some board members expressing support for certifying hydroponic systems. When the conversation shifted to aquaponic systems—where fish coexist in the liquid used for crop growth—opinions were split. Some members argued that aquaponics should be prohibited due to untreated fish waste being introduced directly into the crops, which wouldn’t be allowed for soil-grown organic crops. Others countered that insufficient research exists on potential negative impacts, making it difficult to take a definitive stance.
Intense discussions also arose regarding the necessary soil or water content in container-grown crops. A proposed compromise from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested limits for organic crops: a maximum of 20% liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate like compost. Proponents noted that these limits were inspired by similar regulations in the EU, which has faced similar dilemmas.
Board members presented varied opinions. Some argued that a primary advantage of organic farming is its role in enhancing soil health over time—something that container farming may not achieve. Others warned that implementing strict limits on container farming could hinder flexibility, while another subgroup expressed concern that existing growers using these methods who are already certified organic could suffer economic repercussions. “There doesn’t seem to be a middle ground that’s acceptable,” Chapman concluded.
Members of the Crops Committee committed to reevaluating their proposals before the fall meeting, but there are no assurances that the issue will even be on the agenda, let alone voted on. Following the board’s inaction on hydroponics in April, many speculated that significant movement on this issue was unlikely this year.
In the context of these discussions, the board also touched upon the use of supplements such as calcium citrate for kids, emphasizing the need to consider the nutritional impacts of various growing methods. The dialogue surrounding hydroponics, aquaponics, and container gardening remains intricate, with stakeholders continuing to seek clarity and consensus.