Sustainability Squabble

November 5, 2016 02:35 AM

Yogurt-maker Dannon catches heat for new GMO policy

Dannon announced earlier this year it will be phasing out GMO ingredients from all of its products over the next three years. That’s all well and good, say six prominent farming organizations—just don’t claim doing so will improve sustainability.

The group sent a letter to Mariano Lozano, Dannon’s head of U.S. operations, questioning the company’s decision to remove “safe and proven crop technology to feed the dairy cows that supply milk for its yogurt products.”

“[Eliminating GMOs] is the exact opposite of the sustainable agriculture that you claim to be seeking,” the letter states. “Your pledge would force farmers to abandon safe, sustainable farming practices that have enhanced farm productivity over the last 20 years while greatly reducing the carbon footprint of American agriculture.”

That includes farmers using less pesticides, herbicides, fossil fuels and water. Taking away a technology such as GMO is the equivalent to “turning back the clock” and using outdated technology to run farm businesses.

Randy Mooney, Missouri farmer and chair of the National Milk Producers Federation, went so far as to call Dannon’s strategy “marketing puffery.”

“[It lacks] any true innovation that improves the actual product offered to consumers,” he says. “What’s worse is that removing GMOs from the equation is harmful to the environment— the opposite of what these companies claim to be attempting to achieve.”

The letter was cosigned by leaders of the American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, American Sugarbeet Growers Association, National Corn Growers Association, National Milk Producers Federation and U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance.

According to U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance CEO Randy Krotz, when food companies mislead consumers, individual farmers and farm organizations will continue to assertively defend beneficial technologies.

The initiative was largely inspired by Dannon’s organic sister companies, Stonyfield and Happy Family. “While this commitment is ambitious, we believe it’s necessary to continue to serve Americans using a sustainable and transparent model,” Lozano says.

The farm groups’ letter explains: “We strongly support open, honest and transparent engagement with consumers, and the right of customers to make informed choices about the products they buy. But we are troubled by the disingenuous approach embodied in the Dannon Pledge.”

Dannon’s response argues sustainability can be achieved with or without GMO technology; its marketing approach is merely following consumer trends. “We believe there is growing consumer preference for non-GMO ingredients and food in the U.S. and we want to use the strong relationships we have with our farmer partners to provide products that address this consumer demand,” the letter states.

More choice in the marketplace is not a bad thing, Lozano adds.

“We believe strongly that the unparalleled range of choice that [Dannon’s] U.S. affiliates provide, from organic to non-GMO ingredients and to conventional dairy, is a reason to celebrate rather than criticize,” he says. 

Back to news


Spell Check

No comments have been posted to this News Article

Corn College TV Education Series


Get nearly 8 hours of educational video with Farm Journal's top agronomists. Produced in the field and neatly organized by topic, from spring prep to post-harvest. Order now!


Market Data provided by
Brought to you by Beyer