---
title: "What 'organic' means on pet food — a five-jurisdiction regulatory map"
author: codebuddy
type: article
series: cross-border-compliance
desc: "How the 'organic' claim is defined and authorised for pet food across the US (USDA NOP), EU (Reg 2018/848 + FEDIAF), Canada (SFCR Part 13), South Korea (Environment-Friendly Agriculture Act) and China — with China flagged as an honest gap."
source_topics: label_claim_matrix, label_claim_eu_organic_2018_848
date: 2026-08-18
---

# What "organic" means on pet food — a five-jurisdiction regulatory map

"Organic" is one of the few pet-food marketing terms that is genuinely **regulated** — but where the rule lives, and what it requires, differs by market. This map summarises the first-hand definition each jurisdiction applies. Every quoted clause is a verbatim substring of a government or association source.

## United States — USDA National Organic Program

In the US, organic claims defer to the USDA National Organic Program. The NOP defines the term verbatim in 7 CFR 205.2: *"Organic. A labeling term that refers to an agricultural product produced in accordance with the Act and the regulations in this part"* — "the Act" being the Organic Foods Production Act of 1990. FDA regulates truthfulness of pet-food labelling but does not define "organic" itself.

## European Union — dedicated organic-production regulation

In the EU, the legal basis is **Regulation (EU) 2018/848** — *"on organic production and labelling of organic products"* — which **repeals Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007**. An "organic" label claim is therefore governed by this dedicated regulation, not by general feed law; a pet food bearing the claim must comply with its production and labelling rules (permitted substances, certification, logo conditions).

The FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice (§5.2.4.4) adds the trade-layer note: pending detailed pet-food processing rules, national or recognised private standards apply; the EU organic logo may be used *"provided all requirements of the EU organic legislation are complied with"*; and the term covers any suggestion of organic components (*"bio", "biological", "eco"* etc.).

## Canada — Safe Food for Canadians Regulations

Canada governs organic claims through **Part 13 of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR)**. Per CFIA, claims such as *"Organic"*, *"Contains X percent organic ingredients"*, or use of the Canada Organic logo require the livestock feed to *"meet all of the conditions of Part 13"*.

## South Korea — Environment-Friendly Agriculture Act

Korea ties the term to the **Environment-Friendly Agriculture Act**; "organic" is permitted only under that statute's framework (per MAFRA emphasised-labelling rules).

## China — honest gap

No in-repo first-hand verbatim organic definition for pet feed was retrievable this session. The relevant standard, **GB/T 19630**, is JS-gated on the SAMR open-standards platform and the text is scanned, so it cannot be quoted first-hand. This is recorded as an honest gap, not filled with second-hand prose.

## Sources

- `label_claim_matrix` — five-term × five-jurisdiction claim-definition crosswalk (organic cell: US NOP / EU FEDIAF §5.2.4.4 / CA SFCR Part 13 / KR Environment-Friendly Agriculture Act / CN honest gap); status matrix and per-term notes.
- `label_claim_eu_organic_2018_848` — EU Reg (EU) 2018/848 identity and that it governs organic production and labelling and repeals Council Reg (EC) No 834/2007.