Sustainable food & agriculture

Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)

Practices applying available knowledge to the environmental, economic, and social sustainability of on-farm production and post-production processes, resulting in safe and quality food and agricultural products.

Established · Version 0.1

Definition

Good Agricultural Practices are "practices that address environmental, economic and social sustainability for on-farm processes, and result in safe and quality food and non-food agricultural products", as defined in the FAO's 2003 COAG paper. GAP rests on four pillars — economic viability, environmental sustainability, social acceptability, and food safety and quality — codified in numerous public and private codes, standards, and certification schemes.

References

Overview

What it means

GAP is both a broad FAO concept and a family of operational standards: voluntary farm-level practices covering soil, water, crop protection, worker welfare, and hygiene, operationalised through audit programmes (such as USDA GAP/GHP) and private certification (such as GLOBALG. A. P.) that buyers increasingly require as a market condition.

How it is used

Farmers adopt GAP to access markets and reduce food-safety and environmental risks; governments reference GAP in agricultural policy; and certification bodies audit farms against GAP-based standards.

Why it matters

GAP is the baseline vocabulary of sustainable farming practice — the level at which sustainability principles become checklists a farm can actually implement and be audited against.

Review

Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.

0
How people contribute

Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.

How comments are used

Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.

What gets published

Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.

No editor-accepted reviews yet

Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.

Contribute to this entry

Help improve this definition

Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.

How review works

Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.

Endorse this definition

Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.

v0.1

Sign-in supplies your email for necessary follow-up; it is not displayed publicly. We do not ask you to enter it again.

Sign in to your account before submitting.

Review board

Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.

1Separate reviewer cards

Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.

2AI comparison

AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.

3Editor synthesis

An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.

Text to reviewChoose the exact definition or overview paragraph.
Reviewer commentDraft only. Not public until editor accepted.
Definition
Reviewer identityYour signed-in account identifies the submission. We use its email only for verification and necessary follow-up, and never display it publicly.
Before you submit

This proposal follows the editorial and AI-assistance rules. The live definition will not change until an editor accepts it.

  • Add the proposed wording or note.
  • Explain why the change is needed.
  • Ready
  • Ready

Sign in to your account before submitting.

You can still save a draft, but completing these items makes editorial review faster. Multiple reviewers can suggest changes on the same text. Editors compare, merge, accept or decline them before any public change.