Martin, one of the founders of Diversity Honeys, was the general secretary of the global umbrella association of Fair Trade label initiatives during its formative years in the 1990s. At that time, the criteria for Fairly Traded honey were developed and written literally ‘in his office’ – and he freely admits today that in that Fair Trade starting period he had no clue just how important this issue would become. However, until today, all Fairtrade labelling initiatives have totally overlooked the issue of Asian honey bee species, their criteria are only relevant for A. mellifera honey (mostly from South and Central America, where these bees originally did not occur). The Fairtrade minimum prices and Fairtrade premiums are significantly below those paid by Diversity Honeys Ltd. for our Asian speciality honeys (we pay up to 2-3x the Fair Trade minimum price) – and, as is often the case in Fair Trade, paying a modest Fair Trade premium often is less relevant than providing market access.
It is rarely easy to break new ground. Neither those who make the EU rules, nor those who apply them seem to be aware of the fact, that there are other (Asian) honey bees that produce honey beside Apis mellifera. Over a period of six years we have tried time and again to import honeys from Asian honey bees from Vietnam and India. More than half a dozen of these were either held back by local authorities, or prevented from entering the European Union and the UK. At times the reasons were valid (missing documentation courtesy of inexperienced exporters), at times the rejections were the result of narrow minded and scientifically wrong interpretations of official definitions of what a ‘honey bee’ is.
On two occasions shipments were destroyed in Europe – and we had to pay for the destruction. On other occasions honeys were held back in the country of origin, because tests brought to light contamination with agrochemicals. All honeys sold by Diversity Honeys are tested and comply with all relevant aEU standards.
Our honeys are intensely tested for residues from agrochemicals, heavy metals and other parameters. These tests are necessary, because worldwide, industrial agricultural practices require the application of large amounts of pesticides, which harm beneficial insects such as bees too, and contaminate their honeys.
A wonderful honey from Vietnam (from the blossoms of litchis) had to be rejected, because the bees had fed from a water source close to an intensive chicken production unit – where antibiotics had been applied to the chicken. In another instance miticides showed up in a unique honey from a rubber plantation, which caused the rejection of this particular honey (in this instance we are confident that we have now found a reliable new supplier partner and are making a second attempt to import honey from a rubber plantation – a very special taste experience). We are also still looking for a litchi honey.
A wonderful honey from Vietnam (from the blossoms of litchis) had to be rejected, because the bees had fed from a water source close to an intensive chicken production unit – where antibiotics had been applied to the chicken. In another instance miticides showed up in a unique honey from a rubber plantation, which caused the rejection of this particular honey (in this instance we are confident that we have now found a reliable new supplier partner and are making a second attempt to import honey from a rubber plantation – a very special taste experience). We are also still looking for a litchi honey.
However, when a European laboratory finds C4 in a honey from India, the sample ‘fails’ in all likelihood because of an inappropriate marker, not because of adulteration.
There are further parameters, which are inappropriate when applied to topical and subtropical honeys. However, after milk and olive oil, honey has become the third most adulterated food globally. Claiming that ‘exotic honeys’ from ‘exotic locations’, and from ‘exotic foraging’ are ‘fake honeys’ is often an easy but at times also a wrong and discriminatory conclusion.
The largest impediment for the import of Asian honeys into Europe (and the UK) remains the EU Honey Directive (adopted without change for the UK), which in 2001 introduced a scientifically untenable ‘definition’ for ‘honey’. According to Brussels (and London), ‘honey’ may only be called ‘honey’ (and sold as ‘honey’), if it has been produced by A. mellifera, the ‘European’(!) honey bee. By contrast,, the Codex Alimentarius, i.e. the reference document of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) specifies correctly: “Honey is the natural sweet substance produced by honey bees …”
It is simply wrong (and discriminating) to make honeys from other Apis species ‘illegal by definition’.
