So, after an initial read of all the interviews with the director of IFRA and the Guerlain noses I am left with this general picture;
Historically the makers of perfume have been rabid about secrecy of formulation and process and refused to enter into any kind of cooperative relationship with each other. As a result of this the natural leaders in the industry were unprepared for the concerted attack by the artificial/synthetic ingredients manufacturers.
Those companies have funded and supported legislation to ban some natural ingredients. They have funded and supported the (then) BFA (now) IFRA as a public face. In response to the legislation IFRA claims to be the supporter of the industry, in its work to proactively respond to concerns about ingredients and their effect on the consumer, by self regulating the use of such ingredients.
The stick they use to turn their "guidelines" effectively into statutes can be summed up by this quote,
"a side effect of the bad science is that if a perfumer has liability insurance, and they are sued, the insurer may say that they're in violation of "industry standards" and the insurance will be voided."
So they have manufacturers of the perfumes running scared from litigation. They have legislation in action to limit the use of naturals. They have created an artificial need for synthetic ingredients and the subsequent market value of their products. They have empowered a front for defusing any attempt by the perfume industry to regulate itself in a way that makes sense (ie by labeling).
Have I got that pretty much right?