During the National Organic Standards Board’s discussion on hydroponic crops on Monday afternoon, one thing became evident: 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 concerning certified organic food and ingredients, has repeatedly postponed the hydroponics issue over the years. The board has debated various proposals but has yet to take decisive action. An April vote on the matter was postponed, with members expressing the need for additional research and input from the organic community.
Monday’s meeting was conducted via a web conference, allowing the public to listen in as board members shared their views on potential proposals related to hydroponics, aquaponics, and container-grown produce. No votes were held, nor were any finalized proposals discussed. The board may address the issue again during its fall meeting scheduled for October 31 to November 2.
The regulations surrounding the certification of hydroponic crops as organic remain ambiguous. Last November, the Cornucopia Institute lodged a formal complaint against the USDA, claiming that while the NOSB has prohibited hydroponics from carrying the organic seal, the USDA has nonetheless allowed over 100 domestic and foreign growers to obtain 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 USDA/National Organic Program regulations governing them.” A motion to classify hydroponic crops as organic was introduced at the fall NOSB meeting in 2016 but was not voted on due to its unlikeliness of passing. Instead, the board passed a resolution expressing a consensus against entirely water-based hydroponic systems.
On Monday, Chapman indicated he would likely support the 2010 recommendation; however, the challenge lies in clearly defining what is prohibited. Are there permissible substances for cultivating hydroponic crops? If so, what would they be? “We know this is a controversial topic, so I’ve tried to identify common ground within the NOSB and build from there,” said board member Steve Ela. Despite these efforts, there was little agreement. Some board members expressed support for certifying hydroponic systems.
When the discussion shifted to aquaponic systems, which involve fish living in tanks used to cultivate crops, opinions diverged. Some members argued that these systems should be disallowed due to untreated fish waste contaminating crops, which would not be acceptable for organic soil-grown produce. Conversely, others pointed out the lack of research on potential negative impacts, suggesting that not enough is known to take a definitive stance.
The conversation also heated up regarding the necessary soil or water content for container-grown crops. A proposed compromise from the NOSB’s Crops Committee suggested that only 20% of nutrients could come from liquid feeding, no more than 50% of nutrients could be added post-planting, and at least 50% of the container must consist of a substrate such as compost. Proponents of this approach noted that these limits are similar to those established in the EU, which has also faced challenges on this issue.
Committee members held varying views. Some argued that a key benefit of organic farming is its ability to enhance soil quality over time, a benefit that this farming method would not provide. Others contended that imposing strict limits on container-grown crops could hinder flexibility and innovation. Additionally, some members expressed concern that the existence of growers already certified as organic using these methods could lead to economic disadvantages.
“There doesn’t seem to be an acceptable middle ground,” Chapman concluded. Members of the Crops Committee committed to revisiting their proposals before the fall meeting, but there is no certainty that the topic will make the agenda—or that it would be voted on even if it does. Following the absence of votes on hydroponics during the April meeting, many doubted that any action would occur on this matter this year.
Amid these discussions, considerations of nutrient sources like calcium citrate, vitamin D3, zinc sulfate, and magnesium hydroxide tablets surfaced, particularly regarding their role in hydroponic systems. These nutrients could be vital for the growth of hydroponic crops, but their acceptance as organic inputs remains contentious. As the board navigates these complex issues, the integration of such nutrient sources into organic standards will likely continue to be a point of debate.