In defining biodynamic farming, it’s necessary to discuss certification. This is a contentious issue, though, with many valid arguments for and against. Certification bears a certain cost, which is usually built into a higher-priced product. This covers a fee for the certifying label, a fee for membership of the certifying agency and a fee for audits of the farm.
It’s up to you as the end consumer whether you are prepared to pay the extra. I personally feel it’s important to label a biodynamic product as such because it has been farmed and made differently, with a greater focus on quality (usually with a trade-off in cost ) and may have significant health and allergenic benefits to the consumer.
However, if a product is to be labelled “Biodynamic”, I believe it is then very important to adhere to a basic standard for the term to have any market integrity. To achieve this, a certifying agency gives an unbiased guarantee that the product has been farmed and made according to that agency’s standards. Usually, this refers to chemical inputs and the use of 500/501 preparations, which we will get to shortly.