Jump to content

Organic farming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 168.229.4.3 (talk) at 19:26, 7 January 2004 (Impersonalization using different tone.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


The neutrality of this article is disputed.

Organic farming is a way of farming that avoids the use of synthetic chemicals and genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and follows the principles of sustainable agriculture. In many countries, including the US and in the EU, organic farming is also defined by law.

Methods of organic farming vary. Each farm develops its own organic production system, determined by factors like location, crop selection, local regulations, and the preferences of the individual farmer. However, all organic systems share common goals and practices:

In many parts of the world, organic certification is available to farms that choose to formally declare their "organic" status. Depending on the country, certification is either overseen by the government, or handled entirely by private certifiction bodies. Where laws exist, it is usually illegal for a non-certified farm to call itself or its products "organic".

Organic farming can be broadly contrasted with the large commercial operations that currently produce much of the world's food. These differences account for most of the controversy and claims surrounding organic food and agriculture.

  • organic farms are usually relatively small-scale, independent operations (eg: the family farm)
  • conventional farms are usually large-scale operations, often owned by or economically tied to major food corporations
  • organic farming is characterized by low use of purchased inputs (synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, antibiotics for animals, etc) and low mechanization and automation of the growing and harvesting process
  • conventional large growers typically rely on intensive chemical programs and mechanized production and processing, using specialized equipment and facilities
  • organic operations often sell locally, direct to the consumer, through on-farm stands and farmers' markets (see also local food)
  • large conventional growers sell wholesale, with products distributed across huge territories (estimates of average travelling distance for US supermarket produce range from several hundred to several thousand miles)

The contrast is as much economic as it is between methods of production: today, organic farming is typically small business, and conventional farming is big business. However, the situation is also in the process of rapid change.

Organic Farming Methods

Organic farming is not "new". In fact, it is a reaction against the large-scale, chemical-based farming practices that have steadily dominated food production over the last 80 years. In that sense, it is really "traditional" farming, based on knowledge and techniques gathered over thousands of years of agriculture. It is easiest to describe by contrasting it with modern commercial techniques.

In general terms, organic farming involves natural processes and a holistic approach, while chemical-based farming focusses on isolated effects and reductionist strategies (some would argue that this reductionism is greedy reductionism). For fertilization, organic farming relies heavily on the breakdown of organic matter, using techniques like green manure and composting to replace nutrients taken from the soil by previous crops. This process provides a range of essential nutrients, supports insects and microorganisms that in turn contribute to pest control, and so on. In chemical farming, individual nutrients, like nitrogen, are synthesized in a more or less pure form that plants can use immediately. Pest control is addressed by different specific chemicals. Each farming requirement is isolated and addressed separately.

The production of chemical fertilizers and pesticides relies on large amounts of cheap energy (mostly petroleum today) thus making conventional farming extremely vulnerable to disruptions or price increases in the petroleum supply. Organic farming reduces the dependence on non-sustainable energy sources.

Differing approaches to pest control are equally notable. In chemical farming, applying a specific insecticide may quickly kill off a particular pest. Chemical controls can dramatically reduce pest populations for the short term, yet by killing (or starving) natural predator insects and animals, cause an ultimate increase in the pest population. Organic farming tends to tolerate some pest populations while looking to the long haul. Good organic techniques include a thorough understanding of pest life cycles and interactions, so that they can be knowledgeably held at economically tolerable levels rather than by disrupting whole ecosystems. (Note that Integrated Pest Management also uses some of these techniques, while not abandoning some chemical control methods.)

Organic pest control involves the cumulative effect of many techniques, including:

  • encouraging predatory beneficial insects to flourish and eat pests;
  • planting companion crops that discourage pests;
  • using row covers to protect crops during pest migration periods;
  • rotating crops to different locations from year to year to interrupt pest reproduction cycles;
  • allowing for an acceptable level of pest damage.

Each of these techniques also provides other benefits - soil protection and improvement, fertilization, pollination, water conservation, season extension, etc - that are also cumulative.

Crop diversity is another distinctive characteristic of organic farming. Conventional farming focusses on producing large quantities of one crop in one location, a practice called monoculture. This makes apparent economic sense: the larger the growing area, the lower the per unit cost of fertilizer, pesticides and specialized machinery for a single plant species. Particularly in vegetable production, the reverse holds true for organic farming, where smaller tends to be more manageable. Planting a variety of vegetable crops supports a wider range of beneficial insects, soil microorganisms, and other factors that add up to overall farm health, but managing the balance requires close attention and expertise. In large commercial operations, sophisticated machinery does most of the work, and operators' feet may seldom touch the ground. It can take several organic farms to provide the same output as one large-scale, chemical-based farm, but the comparison goes beyond simple numbers: the day-to-day activities and required skill sets are quite different.

Raising livestock and poultry, for meat, dairy and eggs, is the other traditional farming activity. The same concept of inclusion versus exclusion holds true. Organic farms attempt to provide animals with "natural" living conditions and feed. Ample outdoor access, for grazing and exercise, is a distinctive feature, and crowding is avoided. Healthy living produces healthy animals, is the basic idea. By contrast, large-scale, intensive animal farming meets the minimum requirements to produce a saleable product at the lowest cost. Animals are often kept indoors in a minimum of space, fed a variety of synthetic feed that provides essential nutrients, and given a steady dose of antibiotics to prevent disease. In its most intense form, this approach is often called factory farming.

There are also different organic farming systems. Biodynamic farming is a comprehensive approach, with its own international governing body. The Fukuoka method focusses on a minimum of mechanical cultivation and labor. There is the French intensive method, biointensive farming, and other approaches. A farm may choose to adopt a particular method, or mix and match useful techniques.

History of Organic Farming

The history of organic farming is largely the history of the organic movement, which got started, probably in England, around the 1920s, as a reaction against large-scale agriculture. Individuals began to speak out against a variety of agricultural "innovations". Things really got moving after World War II, when two chemicals developed for warfare, were found to have agricultural uses. Ammonium nitrate, used in munitions, became a cheap source of nitrogen, one of the main plant nutrients. And DDT, used to control disease-carrrying insects, became a general pesticide.

At the same time, farm machinery became increasingly powerful and sophisticated, allowing a single farmer to work larger areas of land. Field sizes became larger, and agribusiness as we know it today was well on its way. The Green Revolution, launched in 1944 with US private funding, encouraged the development of hybrid plants, chemical controls, large-scale irrigation, and heavy mechanization around the world.

Critical observers predicted problems with the scaling up of farming, with its increased reliance on chemical inputs. Sustainable agriculture was a topic of study, but science in the 1950s tended to concentrate on the new chemical approach. As framing grew, so did the organic movement.

In 1962, Rachel Carson, a prominent scientist and naturalist, published Silent Spring, chronicling the effects of DDT and other pesticides on the environment. A bestseller in many countries, including the US, and widely read around the world, Silent Spring was instrumental in the US government's 1972 banning of DDT. The book and its author are often credited with launching the worldwide environmental movement.

As the distinction between organic and conventional food became clear, one goal of the organic movement was to encourage consumption of locally grown food, which was promoted through slogans such as "Know Your Food, Know Your Farmer".

Since the early 1990s, the retail market for organic farming in developed economies has been growing by about 20% annually due to increasing consumer demand. Concern for the quality and safety of food, and the potential for environmental damage, are apparently responsible for this trend.

Today, organic farming is the focus of much public attention and agricultural industry debate. The rise of what has been called organic farming over the last century has been driven by small, independent producers. Over the last decade, explosive growth in demand for organic foods has encouraged the participation of large agribusiness interests, and they may soon dominate the organic market. As the volume of production and range of "organic" products increases, the definition of organic farming as an agricultural method is easily confused with the related areas of organic food and organic certification.

Organic Farming Issues

Intense and fascinating debate currently surrounds all aspects of organic farming and organic food. Enivronmentalists, food safety advocates, various consumer protection, social justice and labor groups, small independent farmers, and a growing number of food consumers - among others - are ranged against agribusiness and many existing and proposed government agricultural policies.

This is not surprising. Organic farming is popularly regarded as the "opposite" of modern, large-scale, chemical-based, vertically integrated, corporate food production. And, after all, food is central to human existence. This fact is easily forgotten, the further one moves away from observable food production. Stroll through any urban mall or shopping district, and "food" seems like just another item for sale, when, in fact its usually the only thing in sight that people simply can't live without. Many people, particularly in developed nations, where most of the world's wealth and consumption are concentrated, are not aware that food, like energy, is not unlimited. If the methods we use to produce our food are rapidly destroying our capacity for continued production, then sustainable farming - organic farming - is at least as critical a topic as renewable energy, and right up there with drinkable water and breathable air. This proposition is at the center of most organic farming issues.

In terms of the debate, it is useful to make a distinction between organic farming and organic food. Farming refers to a agricultural practice, while food is a consumer product. The two are often lumped together, but this only serves to complicate an already complex issue. Whether organic food is tastier or safter or more nutritious than conventionally produced food is irrelevant if the topic is, for example, health and environmental damage from overuse of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. And, most food dollars are spent on processed food products, the manufacture of which is beyond the scope of farming. Combining food and farming issues only makes it harder for people to understand what's going on, and to make reasonably informed decisions.

There are two general areas of organic farming debate. It's interesting to note that all issues exist only in light of conventional, chemical-based agriculture: no chem-ag, no organic farming debate...

  • Environmental issues: The basic argument: organic farming is good for the environment, and chemical agriculture is very bad, easily summed up by what organic approach doesn't do, like make extensive use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, which pollute and also place farm workers at risk; practice large-scale monoculture; raise limited varieties of individual crops; and engage in factory farming.
  • Social issues: A little less clear-cut than the environmental argument, this area of debate condemns agribusiness practices for putting small, independent farmers out of business, destroying rural communities in the process, and indirectly causing the "art of farming" to be lost. Small-scale organic farming encourages local economies, and provides social and employment alternatives to concentrated, energy-dependent urban living, thus improving the quality of life for everyone.

Of course, the issues, particularly the social ones, will shift if agribusiness fully adapts to and dominates organic farming. Then, large-scale, certified organic farms would probably operate much more like conventional farms today. Environmental benefits may accrue from a change in types of pesticides and fertilizer used, more crop diversity, and the like, but if the overall agribusiness philosophy remains essentially unchanged, "organic farming" could become the norm, without any great environmental or social improvements.

In any case, here are a number of specific topics, argued from both sides.

Pesticides: Organic farming does not result in the release of chemical pesticides into the food supply or the environment, nor the leaching of artificial fertilizer. Critics claim that many synthetic pesticides are improvements on natural pesticides, with the goal of making them less dangerous to humans and more environmentally friendly. Organic advocates in turn respond that they use natural pesticides as a last resort, rather controlling pests through growing healthier, disease-resistant plants, using cover crops and crop rotation, and encouraging beneficial insects and birds. Organic pesticides include Bt, petroleum oil, soybean oil, pyrethrum, and rotenone. A new non-toxic insecticide based on kaolin clay, that forms a physical barrier to pest insects is rapidly increasing in use in both organic and conventional farming.

Productivity: Proponents of conventional farming argue that organic farms are less productive, requiring more land to be used to produce the same amount of food. The research of Maeder et al (Science 296 1694-1697) which summarized a twenty-one year Swiss study into organic farming showed an average yield loss of 20%. These results have been contradicted by at least one editorial by Liebhardt which claims that over 154 growing seasons' worth of data on various crops, organic crops yielded 95% of crops grown under conventional conditions.

Government subsidies: Some organic farming advocates believe that, even if yields are currently lower, these results are obtained without the huge subsidies paid to conventional farmers, and expect yields to be equivalent or higher if organic farming were subsidised to the same level.

Soil conservation: Some organic farming practices are claimed to do more damage than conventional practices – for instance, the practice of ploughing (see tillage) to prepare soil for planting is claimed to increase soil damage compared to using Roundup, a herbicide.

Pest control: Another argument against organic farming is that while it works acceptably at present because pests are kept under control in surrounding conventional farms and thus do not spread into organic farms, if it became universal the "islands" they operate on would disappear and pests would become a severe issue. (This also works in reverse, as organic farms can be islands of safety for predator insects and pollinators.)

Cross-contamination: Organic farms often use manure from livestock fed "non-organic" grain. This is sometimes cited as a de facto movement of chemical fertilizer from non-organic farms to organic farms.

Food safety: Some critics point out organic food could be less safe than non-organic food : some people argue that organic food increases one's exposure to biological contaminants, with greater risk of food born diseases. In particular concerns are related to the use of manure, well known for carrying human pathogens and presence of mycotoxins from molds. In a large French study carried out by Inra, Coopagri Bretagne and ESMSA in 1999-2000, it has been shown for example that the patuline (produced by Penicillium expansum and some Aspergillus) in apples and DON in wheat had to be strongly watched for [1].

See Also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Organic_farming&oldid=2114326"