Farmers’ Perceptions of the Organic Product Certification Procedure: A Preliminary Investigation in North Greece ^†

Abstract

This paper examines farmers’ perceptions about organic certification procedures by focusing on the complexity and effectiveness of the procedures required. Also, this paper tries to shed some light on the challenges faced by farmers in implementing the certification specifications and looks for ways to improve the process. Overall, investigating farmers’ perceptions of the organic certification standards is an important step toward promoting and improving organic agriculture, as it helps to tailor the certification system to better meet farmers’ needs and concerns. The conducted analysis first provides some valuable insights into the general knowledge of farmers’ motivations and preferences for adopting organic farming. The analysis revealed the influence of concurrent agricultural activities (conventional and organic) on the perceptions and preferences of farmers. Thus, this study highlights the differences between organic and conventional growers regarding compliance issues and perceptions of specifications, adding depth and practical significance to this study. Overall, the research constitutes an important contribution to the understanding of organic agriculture, deepening the general knowledge of farmers’ motivations and preferences in this field.

1. Introduction

Τhe growing number of consumers demanding healthy and safe foods, free from pesticides and other toxic substances, is a significant driver of the expansion and development of organic farming [1]. More and more products now carry the label “organic product” on supermarket shelves, and an increasing number of consumers are willing to purchase organic products instead of conventional ones, even at a higher price. This rising demand is contributing to the development of a commercial network, where interest in the production of organic products has become a new reality [2] (Crowder & Reganold, 2015).

Organic agriculture is part of an integrated production model with an ecological focus, addressing all the factors that determine both the quality and quantity of the products. For those who love nature, recognize its demands, and are committed to producing goods without depleting its resources, organic farming represents more than just an innovative effort—it is an alternative production method [3]. Such a farming method respects nature and aims to operate in harmony with it. In this context, environmentally friendly soil treatment techniques are used, as well as crop protection and fertilization products that pose no environmental risks. Simultaneously, it leverages modern knowledge (to the extent that it aligns with natural processes) to produce products with exceptional biological characteristics [4].

The certification of organic farming plays a crucial role in ensuring the integrity, sustainability, and marketability of organic products. Certification involves a formal process where a third-party certifying body evaluates whether a farm meets organic farming standards, which are set by international or national regulatory frameworks. These standards typically cover soil management, pest control, the use of organic seeds, crop rotations, and restrictions on synthetic inputs like pesticides and fertilizers. Certification serves as a key element in maintaining consumer trust and supporting the growth of the organic farming sector. However, farmers face several challenges in complying with certification standards. Previous studies have identified several key issues that farmers face when engaging in the organic certification process (i.e., [5]). The complexity and costs associated with certification are frequently cited as major barriers. Farmers must navigate a series of technical, administrative, and financial hurdles to achieve and maintain certification. Farmers’ perceptions of these challenges vary, with smallholder and resource-constrained farmers being more likely to experience negative outcomes from certification [6]. These factors are widely considered as discouraging new entrants from adopting organic practices [7].

The purpose of this paper is to describe farmers’ perceptions of the complexity and effectiveness of organic certification standards and to utilize statistical analyses to highlight these various perceptions. The complexity of organic certification standards can be met with different reactions and perceptions from the farmers themselves, who are at the heart of the organic farming system. Therefore, it is essential to understand how farmers perceive the complexity of these standards, as well as the reliability and effectiveness that the certification process offers them.

2. Methodology

The objective of this study is to illustrate farmers’ perceptions regarding the certification process. A private certification company served as the source for the sampling population. For the sampling procedure, the method of simple random sampling was applied. More than 1700 farmers were registered in the company’s database located in seven prefectures in North Greece. The researchers randomly selected 200 farmers to respond to a questionnaire survey. When the total number of respondents reached one hundred responses the research ended. Then a questionnaire was developed based on an extensive review of the literature on organic farming and certification processes. The questionnaire included a variety of questions, such as closed-ended questions and Likert scale questions. The sequence of the questions was structured to encourage participation and facilitate the extraction of relevant research data. Therefore, the initial questions were straightforward, avoiding personal data or requiring significant reflection from the respondents. Subsequently, questions directly related to the research objectives followed. The questionnaire aimed to highlight the farmers’ views and concerns regarding organic product certification, and their motivations for accepting organic farming. The main research objectives were to identify the general attitudes of the organic farmers who participated in this survey along with their perceptions about the two main axes of the certification procedure: its complexity and its effectiveness.

3. Results

The results of the survey are presented in this section. The first section presents the demographic characteristics of the participants (see

Table 1. Demographic data of the participants.

Respondents’ Features	Count	Percentage
Gender
Male	53	53.0%
Female	47	47.0%
Age
<40	23	23.7%
40–60	58	58.0%
>60	19	19.0%
Full-time farmer	40	40.0%
Farming experience
<10 years	35	35.0%
10–20 years	18	18.0%
20–30 years	20	20.0%
>30 years	27	27.0%
Education
<9 years (basic)	20	20.0%
Up to 12 years (high school)	38	38.0%
12–14 years (college)	38	38.0%
15–16 years (higher)	4	4.0%
Type of agricultural production
Organic	61	61.0%
Conventional	39	39.0%
Grouping of agricultural orientation
Started as organic farmers now with only organic production (organic)	16	16.0%
Started as conventional farmers now with only organic production (turned to organic)	45	45.0%
Started as conventional farmers now with both organic and conventional production (conventional and organic)	39	39.0%

). The core results are presented in three axes: one about the general attitudes of the farmers in dealing with organic farming by presenting their motives and their difficulties in becoming organic. Additionally, there are two more axes presenting the participants’ perceptions about the complexity and effectiveness of the certification process.

For the demographic analysis, it is worth mentioning that the sample of the participants was grouped into three separate categories: farmers that started their agricultural activities as organic farmers (and insist organic); farmers who started as conventional ones and later became exclusively organic; and a third group that started as conventional and turned some of their activities into organic but not all. The demographic variable named “farmers’ orientation” will be used to identify and analyze more of the farmers’ perceptions.

The following tables present the results of a principal components analysis, one for the motives driving farmers to adopt certified organic farming (

Table 2. Principal components analysis of the farmers’ motives to adopt certified organic farming.

Motives to Adopt Certified Organic Farming	Communalities	Factors 1
		Mot_1	Mot_2	Mot_3
Protecting consumers’ health	0.889	0.933
Producing healthy/safety products	0.840	0.906
Protecting environment	0.440	0.625
Easy trading of organic product	0.805		0.877
Increasing demand for organic products	0.771		0.763
Higher prices for organic products	0.685		0.759
Protecting farmer’s income	0.774			0.865
EU subsidies	0.328			−0.513
Eigenvalue		3.112	1.386	1.033
Variance explained (%)		30.052	25.302	13.798
Total variance explained (%)			69.148
KMO measure of sampling adequacy			0.646
Bartlett’s test of sphericity		X2(df 28) = 313.556, p = 0.000

¹ Note: only factor loadings with values above 0.4 are present: extraction method; principal component analysis, rotation method; varimax with Kaiser normalization, rotation converged in five iterations.

) and one for the difficulties they encountered during this step (

Table 3. Principal components analysis of the farmers’ difficulties in adopting certified organic farming.

Difficulties in Adopting Certified Organic Farming	Communalities	Factors 1
		Dif-1		Dif-2
High prices of organic products (low demand)	0.638	0.799
Inefficient technical support	0.587	0.762
Production cost for organic products	0.507	0.698
Low subsidies amounts	0.493	0.693
Certification cost	0.654			0.804
Procedures to move to organic production	0.490			0.596
Low yields for organic production	0.328			−0.475
Eigenvalue		2.482		1.216
Variance explained (%)		34.708		18.123
Total variance explained (%)			52.831
KMO measure of sampling adequacy.			0.664
Bartlett’s test of sphericity		X2(df 21) = 122.336, p = 0.000

¹ Note: only factor loadings with values above 0.4 are present: extraction method; principal component analysis, rotation method; varimax with Kaiser normalization, rotation converged in three iterations.

). Briefly, three factors of motives should be mentioned: environment protection, trading opportunities and EU subsidies. These factors have also been identified in previous studies.

On the other hand, two groups of difficulties were revealed (economic difficulties and transition/certification procedures). These difficulties have been also identified in previous studies, confirming this way that the transition procedure from conventional to organic farming is a crucial burden restricting the expansion of organic farming.

The next two tables present the results of the crosstabulation between the farmers’ orientation as described before and the two questions revealing the farmers’ perception of the complexity of the certification procedure. The first question refers to the record keeping requirements for the certification. All the farmers state that the certification requirements are difficult and very difficult to follow (

Table 4. Certification procedures by farmers’ orientation.

Certification Procedures Are…		Group			Total
		Turned to Organic	Conventional and Organic	Organic
Very difficult to follow	Count	14	18	3	35
	% within Orientation	31.1%	46.2%	18.8%	35.0%
Difficult to follow	Count	11	11	10	32
	% within Orientation	24.4%	28.2%	62.5%	32.0%
Logical/expected	Count	12	8	2	22
	% within Orientation	26.7%	20.5%	12.5%	22.0%
Not difficult to follow	Count	8	2	1	11
	% within Orientation	17.8%	5.2%	6.3%	11.0%
Total	% of Total	45.0%	39.0%	16.0%	100.0%

Symmetric measures: phi value = 0.403, approx. Sig. 0.039.

) meaning that it requires time and metal effort to keep on track with the procedure. Probably this is the answer as to why the farmers declare in

Table 5. Keep records for certification by farmers’ orientation.

Keep Records for Certification Is…		Group			Total
		Turned to Organic	Conventional and Organic	Organic
…just a typical obligation	Count	23	14	5	42
	% within orientation	51.1%	35.9%	31.3%	42.0%
…only to help certification company	Count	4	0	7	11
	% within orientation	8.9%	0.0%	43.8%	11.0%
…to help farmer	Count	18	25	4	47
	% within orientation	40.0%	64.1%	25.0%	47.0%
Total	% of total	45.0%	39.0%	16.0%	100.0%

Symmetric measures: phi value = 0.513, approx. Sig. 0.000.

that record keeping is only for typical reasons. However, the majority of both conventional and organic farmers state that record keeping is to help the farmers themselves, probably due to their need for more information regarding their activities (see

Table 6. Certification requirements by farmers’ orientation.

The Requirements of Certification Are…		Group			Total
		Turned to Organic	Conventional and Organic	Organic
Oriented to production effectiveness	Count	19	6	10	35
	% within orientation	42.2%	15.4%	62.5%	35.0%
Oriented to certification effectiveness	Count	26	33	6	65
	% within orientation	57.8%	84.6%	37.5%	65.0%
Total	% of total	45.0%	39.0%	16.0%	100.0%

Symmetric measures: phi value = 0.513, approx. Sig. 0.000.

).

Moreover, the farmers were asked to state their estimation of their compliance with the certification requirements. It should be mentioned that farmers that started as conventional state that their compliance is satisfying, while organic farmers state that their compliance is average (

Table 7. Compliance characterization by farmers’ orientation.

Characterize Your Compliance with the Certification Requirements		Group			Total
		Turned to Organic	Conventional and Organic	Organic
On average	Count	12	11	7	30
	% within orientation	26.7%	28.2%	43.8%	30.0%
Satisfying	Count	30	28	5	63
	% within orientation	66.7%	71.8%	31.3%	63.0%
…to help farmer	Count	3	0	4	7
	% within orientation	6.7%	0.0%	25.0%	7.0%
Total	% of total	45.0%	39.0%	16.0%	100.0%

Symmetric measures: phi value = 0.381, approx. Sig. 0.006.

).

4. Conclusions

This paper illustrates farmers’ perceptions about the certification procedures of organic farming. The results suggest that the participants in this study consider the organic certification procedure to be complex, requiring extra effort to keep on track with the procedures and especially with record keeping among other issues. Thus, when it comes to examine the certification procedure effectiveness, most of the farmers state that such procedures are designed to facilitate the certification procedures and not the actual farming practices. Such remarks could direct efforts, on the one hand, to simplify the certification procedures and, on the other hand, to educate and train farmers to exploit and incorporate such procedures into their daily decision making. Future research could focus on making the certification more accessible and flexible, particularly for smallholder farmers. This could include the development of group certification schemes, simplified administrative processes, and financial support for the certification costs. Moreover, increasing the education of farmers, technical support in organic farming practices, and certification standards may help to alleviate some of the concerns related to the complexities of certification.