--- - |2 Abstract This article analyses debates on the difference between organic and conventional agriculture. Departing from earlier accounts on the subject, it is argued that rather than conceptualising the subject as a case of diminishing differences, research should also focus on examining the making of these differences. This latter approach is connected to the notion that organic agriculture, understood as an alternative to conventional forms of agriculture, needs to justify its position by showing how it is different from them. To examine this issue, the article analyses the case of the emergence of organic agriculture in Finland. By analysing guidebooks, committee reports, and research publications the article analyses the construction of differences between organic and conventional. The case study shows that the difference between organic and conventional agriculture has been at the core of the debate, necessitating advocates of organic agriculture to actively construct it in different ways. This boundary making has operated differently depending on the various registers according to which organic agriculture and food have been assessed. - 'Sociologia Ruralis, EarlyView. '