Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Action Patterns of Organic Inspectors and their Importance for Saving the Integrity of Organic Farming

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Food Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Certification is a crucial part of the organic farming system to protect the integrity of the whole organic sector. Process-oriented on-site auditing by skilled inspectors is the central element of the certification procedure to protect the organic sector against fraud. However, little is known about the role of the inspectors in the certification scheme. In recent years, the requirements and challenges for the organic certification system have changed significantly. The aim of the present study is to get insights into strategies and action patterns used by organic inspectors and thus to better understand their behaviour. Due to the exploratory character of the study, a qualitative approach was chosen. Twenty narrative expert interviews with organic inspectors were conducted. The evaluation was carried out with the narration analysis, which was basis for a typology analysis. The results of the study show that all organic inspectors develop strategies and behavioural patterns, which can be structured in two levels: an interpersonal and a professional level. On the interpersonal level, the results indicate that the inspectors’ behaviour patterns lie between goodwill and demonstration of power. At the professional level, the organic inspectors work with a risk or a checklist-oriented control approach. A risk-oriented control is characterised by the intrinsic motivation of the organic inspector to maintain the integrity of the organic sector. Risk-oriented inspectors set a control focus on the detection of fraud. The aspect of personal ethical involvement and interpersonal actions in control systems should be included when considering improvements in the organic sector.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The EU-Eco regulation distinguishes between area of control A (agriculture), B (processing), trade with third countries (import), D (placing orders to third parties), and E (production of feed)

  2. “An attitude that includes a questioning mind, being alert to conditions which may indicate possible misstatement due to error or fraud, and a critical assessment of evidence.” [IAASB’s Handbook2014]

  3. Extracts of the transcript are recited in the text. The transcription was made according to the regulation by Rosenthal (2015). Directions to an easy understanding: Numbers in brackets = duration of the break in seconds; bold print = said with emphasis; equal sign (=) between two identical words = quick connection, square brackets [] = text or space filled in by the evaluator; double brackets (()) = comment by the transcribing person

  4. A subgroup of the operators are farmers

References

  • Albersmeier, Friederike, Holger Schulze, Gabriele Jahn, and Achim Spiller. 2009a. The reliability of third-party certification in the food chain: From checklists to risk-oriented auditing. Food Control 20 (10): 927–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albersmeier, Friederike, Holger Schulze, and Achim Spiller. 2009b. Evaluation and reliability of the organic certification system: Perceptions by farmers in Latin America. Sustainable Development 17 (5): 311–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albersmeier, Friederike, Holger Schulze, and Achim Spiller. 2010. System dynamics in food quality certifications: Development of an audit integrity system. International Journal on Food System Dynamics 1 (1): 69–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alleyne, Philmore, and Michael Howard. 2005. An exploratory study of auditors' responsibility for fraud detection in Barbados. Managerial Auditing Journal 20 (3): 284–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anders, Sven M., Diogo M.S. Monteiro, and Elodie Rouviere. 2007. Objectiveness in the market for third-party certification: Does market structure matter? International Marketing and International Trade of Quality Food Products 105: 651–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, Kenneth J. 1985. The economics of agency. Stanford University Ca Inst: Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences.

  • Beattie, Vivien, Stella Fearnley, and Richard Brandt. 2004. A grounded theory model of auditor-client negotiations. International Journal of Auditing 8 (1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, Herbert. 2013. Symbolischer Interaktionismus: Aufsätze zu einer Wissenschaft der Interpretation. Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • BÖLW. 2016. Zahlen Daten Fakten. Die Biobranche 2016. http://www.boelw.de/fileadmin/Veranstaltungen/BIOFACH/ZDF/BOELW_ZDF_2016_web.pdf. Accessed 28 June 2018.

  • BÖLW 2017. Revision der EU-Öko-Verordnung: Bewertung des Trilogergebnisses vom 28.6.2017.

  • Bravo, Carlos P., Indira V. Ramírez, Jochen Neuendorff, and Achim Spiller. 2013. Assessing the impact of unannounced audits on the effectiveness and reliability of organic certification. Organic Agriculture 3 (2): 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch, Lawrence, Deepa Thiagarajan, Maki Hatanaka, Carmen Bain, Luis G. Flores, and Mark Frahm. 2005. The relationship of third-party certification (TPC) to sanitary/phytosanitary (SPS) measures and the international agri-food trade: Final report. Washington, DC: Development Alternatives, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. 2011.Working document of the commission services on official controls in the organic sector. European Commission. https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/sites/orgfarming/files/docs/body/controls-working-document-20110708_en.pdf. Accessed 7 June 2018.

  • Eide, Erling, Paul H. Rubin, and Joanna M. Shepherd. 2006. Economics of crime. Foundations and Trends® in Microeconomics 2 (3): 205–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EU-Organic-regulation. 2007. Council regulation (EC) no 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing regulation (EEC) No 2092/91. Brussels: Official Journal of the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gambelli, Danilo, Francesco Solfanelli, and Raffaele Zanoli. 2013. Can the inspection procedures in organic certification be improved? Evidence from a case study in Italy. EAAE Conferece. http://orgprints.org/27768/1/Paper_Chania_30_05_13_DG_FS.pdf. Accessed 7 June 2018.

  • Gambelli, Danilo, Francesco Solfanelli, Raffaele Zanoli, Alexander Zorn, Christian Lippert, and Stephan Dabbert. 2014. Non-compliance in organic farming: A cross-country comparison of Italy and Germany. Food Policy 49: 449–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, Jenny. 2002. Auditors' conflict management styles: An exploratory study. Abacus 38 (3): 378–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurwitsch, Aron. 1964. The field of consciousness. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatanaka, Maki, and Lawrence Busch. 2008. Third-party certification in the global Agrifood system: An objective or socially mediated governance mechanism? Sociologia Ruralis 48 (1): 73–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschauer, Norbert, Sebastian Scheerer, and Stefan Zwoll. 2007. Einige Überlegungen zur Prävention von Devianz und Wirtschaftskriminalität im Ernährungssektor. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit 2 (3): 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, Beate, Rolf Mäder, Julia Meier, Jochen Neuendorff, and Helmut Weber. 2003. Entwicklung eines Anforderungsprofils für Kontrolleure im Rahmen des Kontrollsystems nach der EU-Verordnung 2092/91. http://orgprints.org/1946/1/1946-02OE381-ble-fibl-2002-kontrolleure-anforderungen.pdf Accessed 7 June 2018.

  • Hurtt, R. Kathy, Helen Brown-Liburd, Christine E. Earley, and Ganesh Krishnamoorthy. 2013. Research on auditor professional skepticism: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 32: 45–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IAASB’s Handbook. 2014. Handbook of international quality control, auditing review, other assurance, and related services pronouncements. International Federation of Accountants.

  • Jahn, Gabriele, Matthias Schramm, and Achim Spiller. 2005. The reliability of certification: Quality labels as a consumer policy tool. Journal of Consumer Policy 28: 53–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Michael C., and William H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3 (4): 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loch, Ulrike, and Gabriele Rosenthal. 2002. Das narrative interview. In Qualitative Gesundheits- und Pflegeforschung, ed. D. Schaeffer and Müller-Mundt, 221–232. Bern: Hans Huber Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makkawi, Bilal, and Allen Schick. 2003. Are auditors sensitive enough to fraud? Managerial Auditing Journal 18 (6/7): 591–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mead, George H. 1934. Mind self and society: From the perspective of a social Behaviourist. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Mark W. 2009. A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 28 (2): 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, Mark, and Hun-Tong Tan. 2005. Judgment and decision making research in auditing: A task, person, and interpersonal interaction perspective. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 24: 41–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorff, Jochen, and Achim Spiller. 2011. Die ÖLG-Kontrollstellen-Zulassungsverordnung: Ein Beitrag zum Schutz vor Betrug im Ökolandbau? AGRA-Europe 55 (124): 35–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oevermann, Ulrich. 2000. Die Methode der Fallrekonstruktion in der Grundlagenforschung sowie der klinischen und pädagogischen Praxis. In Die Fallrekonstruktion, ed. K. Kraimer, 58–156. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Østergaard, Edvin. 1998. One step Back and two steps forward. A phenomenological study of farmers in conversion to ecological agriculture. Ås: Agricultural University of Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pechlivanos, L. 2004. Self-Enforcing Corruption: Information Transmission and Organizational Response. In The new institutional economics of corruption, ed. Johann Graf Lambsdorff, Markus Taube, and Matthias Schramm, 93–119. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przyborski, Aglaja, and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr. 2014. Qualitative Sozialforschung: Ein Arbeitsbuch. München: Oldenbourg.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, M. Afzalur. 1997. Styles of managing organizational conflict: A critical review and synthesis of theory and research. Current Topics in Management 2 (61): 77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, Gabriele. 2015. Interpretative Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung. Weinheim: Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaack, Diana, Christine Rampold, Helga Willer, Markus Rippin, and Hellmut von Koerber. 2011. An analysis of imports of organic products with relevance for the German organic market. http://orgprints.org/19899/1/19899-09OE065-ami-schaack-2011-angebot_bioprodukte.pdf. Accessed 7 June 2018.

  • Schulze, Holger, Gabriele Jahn, Jochen Neuendorff, and Achim Spiller. 2008. Die Öko-Zertifizierung in Deutschland aus Sicht der Produzenten: Handlungsvorschläge zur politischen Weiterentwicklung. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 86 (3): 502–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schütze, Fritz. 1976. Zur Hervorlockung und Analyse von Erzählungen thematisch relevanter Geschichten im Rahmen soziologischer Feldforschung. In Arbeitsgruppe Bielefelder Soziologen, ed. Kommunikative Sozialforschung, 159–260. München: Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seppänen, Laura, and Juha Helenius. 2004. Do inspection practices in organic agriculture serve organic values? A case study from Finland. Agriculture and Human Values 21 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepalagul, Nopmanee, and Ling Lin. 2015. Auditor Independence and audit quality a literature review. Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance 30 (1): 101–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirole, Jean. 1995. Collusion and the theory of organizations. In Advances in economic theory, sixth world congress, vol. 2, ed. J.-J. Laffont, 151–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trompeter, Gregory. M., Tina D. Carpenter, Naman Desai, Keith L. Jones, and Richard A. Riley Jr. 2012. A synthesis of fraud-related research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 32: 287–321.

  • Valtl, Karlheinz. 1986. Erziehung zur Höflichkeit: Höflichkeit als Wertkonzept der Alltagsinteraktion, als Gegenstand empirischer Forschung in den Humanwissenschaften und als Aufgabe der Erziehung. Regensburg: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Kamp, Maarten. 2012. Inferring the unknown: Enacting organic standards through certification. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 20: 109–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernet, Andreas. 2000. Einführung in die Interpretationstechnik der objektiven Hermeneutik. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wiedemann, Peter M. 1986. Erzählte Wirklichkeit: Zur Theorie und Auswertung narrativer Interviews. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willer, Helga, and Julia Lernoud. 2016. The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2016. Bonn: Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, and IFOAM – Organics International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorn, Alexander, and Stephan Dabbert. 2013. Risikobasierte Zertifizierung im ökologischen Landbau: Ableitung verbesserter Strategien auf der Grundlage der Daten großer deutscher Kontrollstellen. Project of the Federal Programme of Organic Agriculture. Final report. University Stuttgart-Hohenheim. http://orgprints.org/24822/1/24822-10OE019-uni-hohenheim-dabbert-2013-risikobasierteZertifizierung.pdf. Accessed 7 June 2018.

  • Zorn, Alexander, Christian Lippert, and Stephan Dabbert. 2012. Supervising a system of approved private control bodies for certification: The case of organic farming in Germany. Food Control 25 (2): 525–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zorn, Alexander, Christian Lippert, and Stephan Dabbert. 2013. An analysis of the risks of non-compliance with the European organic standard: A categorical analysis of farm data from a German control body. Food Control 30 (2): 692–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Platz der Goettinger Sieben 5, 37073, Goettingen, Germany

    Theresa Bernhardt, Antje Risius & Achim Spiller

Authors
  1. Theresa Bernhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Antje Risius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Achim Spiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Theresa Bernhardt.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bernhardt, T., Risius, A. & Spiller, A. Action Patterns of Organic Inspectors and their Importance for Saving the Integrity of Organic Farming. Food ethics 3, 23–40 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-019-00041-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-019-00041-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation