Safe pesticide use and traceability are becoming new trends, driving the upgrade of the agricultural management industry

On June 15, the GAP label officially exits the market. The Council of Agriculture has rolled out multiple subsidies and channel assistance, hoping to guide the 6,600 hectares that have not yet transitioned into certification systems such as Traceable Agricultural Products (TAP), organic agricultural products, or CAS Taiwan Excellent Agricultural Products as soon as possible; however, transitioning from the GAP label to the Traceable Agricultural Products label is not just a matter of swapping a sticker, it also means the management approach must be upgraded accordingly.

In the past, the GAP label was criticized because it was issued on a production-and-sales group basis, making it difficult to trace the actual producer. The current traceability label, in terms of application procedures, not only offers individual verification but also retains group verification. The benefit of group verification for farmers is that verification costs can be shared and economies of scale in production can be achieved, and sales also become easier, but management risk is higher. As long as a certain proportion of random inspections fail, the label cannot be applied. Verification bodies have found that some farmers transitioning from the GAP label to the traceability label choose to go independent because they do not want to be dragged down, thereby reducing management risk. A cooperative that transitioned from GAP to traceability independently established a "traceability transition period," requiring new members to first obtain individual verification before they can join the cooperative and participate in group verification, enjoying the benefits of stable sales.

More than 30 years ago, in order to reduce the excessively high proportion of pesticide residues in the market, the Provincial Department of Agriculture and Forestry introduced the GAP label based on safe pesticide use standards. Because it did not require a third-party verification body to issue the label, cases of forged labels were often reported, and because applications were made on a production-and-sales group basis, there was also the problem of difficulty in tracing the actual producer. The Traceable Agricultural Products (TAP) label, on the other hand, combines Taiwan Good Agricultural Practice (TGAP) and a traceability system, so not only must field management such as pesticide use and fertilization comply with regulations, but information such as the names of producers and processing units must also be disclosed, in the hope of achieving the benefit of allowing consumers to hold parties accountable in real time.

Third-party verification bodies guard the gate Obtaining the traceability label is not easy

Huang Nai-yun, technical director of a verification body that began engaging in traceability certification in Year 95 of the Republic of China (2006), explained that according to her company's procedures, this traceability verification sticker is not easy to obtain, and even getting it to stay stuck is not that easy. From confirmation of land data, entry of field data, and on-site random inspection by the verification body, the label can only be issued after evaluation by an external verification decision committee. After the label is issued, the verification body will not only conduct random on-site inspections in the fields, but also purchase products from sales channels for testing, and confirm that the information stated on the label matches the registered data. If testing fails after obtaining the label, the verification body will register a "temporary suspension" on the platform, and the label sticker cannot be printed until the farmer clarifies and improves the problem and the verification body confirms it, after which the temporary suspension status can be lifted. In serious cases, the right to use the label may also be suspended. "It is a concept of preventive management, guarding the health of our citizens." "Verification bodies are not sticker sellers; they also play the role of controlling labels and tracking the flow of products."

Currently, traceability verification label applications include group verification and individual verification. Because group verification randomly selects a certain proportion of products for verification, management risk is higher. Huang Nai-yun said that some production-and-sales groups have looser binding force, and many farmers leave the group to do certification on their own to reduce uncertainty. This also means that the direction of agricultural management must move from simply meeting low standards in the past toward refined management.

Cooperatives set an internal "traceability transition period" Reducing group verification management risk

You You-jia, who has been involved in agriculture for more than 10 years, used to hand leafy vegetables to a centralized broker for unified sales. After three years of plummeting vegetable prices, she resolutely stopped selling through the broker and in Year 102 of the Republic of China (2013) invested in the traceability system, starting from her own 52 greenhouses to figure out verification standards and negotiate sales channels. Now the cooperative has 7 members, a scale of more than 400 greenhouses, and can produce about 3,000 to 5,000 kilograms of leafy vegetables per day, supplying more than 3,000 restaurants domestically throughout the year.

To stabilize production quality within the cooperative, control points are set up in the greenhouses managed by each farmer. In addition to unified pesticide use, everything from field management and post-harvest handling to logistics and transportation must be controlled. For example, in production records, members must note items such as the refrigeration temperature of cold storage, whether logistics vehicles are regularly cleaned, and whether pesticide containers are uniformly recycled. In addition, without waiting for verification bodies to require it, the cooperative conducts irregular sampling and sends samples for testing as internal self-inspection.

At present, the cooperative has about 7 hectares under group verification and 4 hectares under individual verification. As for why there is still area under individual verification, You You-jia explained that some farmers proactively approached them upon hearing that GAP was exiting, hoping to join. But in order to control quality, "at the beginning we ask farmers to do individual verification, and only after one year, when there are confirmed to be no problems, do we let them enter group verification. It is like the concept of an organic transition period; we set our own 'traceability transition period.'" Within the cooperative, for older nearby farmers who are willing to join, they also assist them in overcoming technical barriers such as data entry. "We all ask the older fellows, can you use LINE? If you can, you can log in," said You You-jia.

You You-jia, who has been involved in the traceability system for 6 years, believes that the cooperative has been able to reach its current scale because it has actually put a lot of effort into management. "Source control is more important than advanced processing and sorting equipment. Only when farmers upgrade will there be good products." Cutting corners may not cause problems in 1 or 2 years, but problems will emerge in long-term operation. Therefore, obtaining the traceability label is only the foundation; only by continuously refining management and production methods can one avoid being eliminated by the market.