Organic farming

Organic farming is the form of agriculture that relies on techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, compost and biological pest controlto maintain soil productivity and control pests on a farm. Organic farming excludes or strictly limits the use of manufactured fertilizers, pesticides (which include herbicides, insecticides and fungicides), plant growth regulators such as hormones, livestock antibiotics, food additives, and genetically modified organisms.[1] Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations, based in large part on the standards set by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), an international umbrella organization for organic farming organizations established in 1972[2]. IFOAM defines the overarching goal of organic farming as: "Organic agriculture is a production system that sustains the health of soils, ecosystemsand people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversityand cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships and a good quality of life for all involved.." International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements[3] Since 1990, the market for organic products has grown from nothing, reaching $55 billion in 2009 according to Organic Monitor (www.organicmonitor.com). This demand has driven a similar increase in organically managed farmland. Approximately 37,000,000 hectares (91,000,000 acres) worldwide are now farmed organically, representing approximately 0.9 percent of total world farmland (2009) (see Willer/Kilcher 2011).

Contents
[hide]

1 History 2 Methods o 2.1 Soil management o 2.2 Weed management o 2.3 Controlling other organisms o 2.4 Genetic modification 3 Standards o 3.1 Composting 4 Economics o 4.1 Geographic producer distribution o 4.2 Growth o 4.3 Productivity and profitability 4.3.1 Profitability 4.3.2 Sustainability (African case) o 4.4 Employment impact 5 Externalities o 5.1 Pesticides o 5.2 Food quality and safety o 5.3 Clothing quality and safety o 5.4 Soil conservation o 5.5 Climate change o 5.6 Nutrient leaching

o 5.7 Biodiversity 6 Sales and marketing o 6.1 Distributors o 6.2 Farmers' markets 7 Capacity building 8 Controversy 9 See also 10 Citations 11 References 12 Further reading 13 External links

[edit] History
Main article: History of organic farming Organic farming (of many particular kinds) was the original type of agriculture, and has been practiced for thousands of years. After the industrial revolution had introduced inorganic methods, some of which were not well developed and had serious side effects, an organic movement began in the 1940s as a reaction to agriculture's growing reliance on synthetic fertilizers. Artificial fertilizers had been created during the 18th century, initially with superphosphates and then ammonia-based fertilizers mass-produced using the HaberBosch process developed during World War I. These early fertilizers were cheap, powerful, and easy to transport in bulk. Similar advances occurred in chemical pesticides in the 1940s, leading to the decade being referred to as the 'pesticide era'.[4] Although organic farming is prehistoric in the widest sense, Sir Albert Howardis widely considered to be the "father of organic farming" in the sense that he was a key founder of the post-industrial-revolution organic movement.[5] Further work was done by J.I. Rodale in the United States, Lady Eve Balfour in the United Kingdom, and many others across the world. The modern organic movement is a revival movement in the sense that it seeks to restore balance that was lost when technology grew rapidly in the 19th and 20th centuries. Modern organic farming has made up only a fraction of total agricultural output from its beginning until today. Increasing environmental awareness in the general population has transformed the originally supply-driven movement to a demand-driven one. Premium prices and some government subsidies attracted farmers. In the developing world, many producers farmaccording to traditional methods which are comparable to organic farming but are not certified. In other cases, farmers in the developing world have converted for economic reasons.[6]

[edit] Methods
Main article: Organic farming methods

Organic cultivation of mixed vegetables in Capay, California. Note the hedgerow in the background. "An organic farm, properly speaking, is not one that uses certain methods and substances and avoids others; it is a farm whose structure is formed in imitation of the structure of a natural system that has the integrity, the independence and the benign dependence of an organism" Wendell Berry, "The Gift of Good Land"

[edit] Soil management

Plants need nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, as well as micronutrients and symbiotic relationships with fungi and other organisms to flourish, but getting enough nitrogen, and particularly synchronization so that plants get enough nitrogen at the right time (when plants need it most), is likely the greatest challenge for organic farmers.[7] Crop rotation and green manure ("cover crops") help to provide nitrogen through legumes (more precisely, the Fabaceae family) which fix nitrogen from the atmosphere through symbiosis with rhizobial bacteria. Intercropping, which is sometimes used for insect and disease control, can also increase soil nutrients, but the competition between the legume and the crop can be problematic and wider spacing between crop rows is required. Crop residues can be ploughed back into the soil, and different plants leave different amounts of nitrogen, potentially aiding synchronization.[7] Organic farmers also use animal manure, certain processed fertilizers such as seed meal and various mineral powders such as rock phosphate and greensand, a naturally occurring form of potashwhich provides potassium. Together these methods help to control erosion. In some cases pH may need to be amended. Natural pH amendments include lime and sulfur, but in the U.S. some compounds such as iron sulfate, aluminum sulfate, magnesium sulfate, and soluble boron products are allowed in organic farming.[8]:43 Mixed farms with both livestock and crops can operate as ley farms, whereby the land gathers fertility through growing nitrogen-fixing forage grasses such as white clover or alfalfa and grows cash crops or cereals when fertility is established. Farms without livestock ("stockless") may find it more difficult to maintain fertility, and may rely more on external inputs such as imported manure as well as grain legumes and green manures, although grain legumes may fix limited nitrogen because they are harvested. Horticulturalfarms growing fruits and vegetables which operate in protected conditions are often even more reliant upon external inputs.[7] Biological research on soil and soil organisms has proven beneficial to organic farming. Varieties of bacteria and fungi break down chemicals, plant matter and animal waste into productive soil nutrients. In turn, they produce benefits of healthier yields and more productive soil for future crops.[9]Fields with less or no manure display significantly lower yields, due to decreased soil microbe community, providing a healthier, more arable soil system.[10]

[edit] Weed management

Organic weedmanagement promotes weed suppression, rather than weed elimination, by enhancing crop competition and phytotoxic effects on weeds.[11] Organic farmers integrate cultural, biological, mechanical, physical and chemical tactics to manage weeds without synthetic herbicides. Organic standards require rotation of annual crops,[12] meaning that a single crop cannot be grown in the same location without a different, intervening crop. Organic crop rotations frequently include weed-suppressive cover cropsand crops with dissimilar life cycles to discourage weeds associated with a particular crop.[11] Organic farmers strive to increase soil organic mattercontent, which can support microorganisms that destroy common weed seeds.[13] Other cultural practices used to enhance crop competitiveness and reduce weed pressure include selection of competitive crop varieties, high-density planting, tight row spacing, and late planting into warm soil to encourage rapid crop germination.[11] Mechanical and physical weed control practices used on organic farms can be broadly grouped as:[14]

Tillage- Turning the soil between crops to incorporate crop residues and soil amendments; remove existing weed growth and prepare a seedbed for planting; Cultivation - Disturbing the soil after seeding; Mowing and cutting - Removing top growth of weeds; Flame weeding and thermal weeding - Using heat to kill weeds; and Mulching - Blocking weed emergence with organic materials, plastic films, or landscape fabric.

Some naturally-sourced chemicals are allowed for herbicidal use. These include certain formulations of acetic acid(concentrated vinegar), corn gluten meal, and essential oils. A few selective bioherbicides based on fungal pathogens have also been developed. At this time, however, organic herbicides and bioherbicidesplay a minor role in the organic weed control toolbox.[14] Weeds can be controlled by grazing. For example, geese have been used successfully to weed a range of organic crops including cotton, strawberries, tobacco, and corn,[15] reviving the practice of keeping cotton patch geese, common in the southern U.S. before the 1950s. Similarly, some rice farmers introduce ducks and fish to wet paddy fields to eat both weeds and insects.[16]

[edit] Controlling other organisms

See also: Biological pest control Organisms aside from weeds that cause problems on organic farms include arthropods (e.g., insects, mites), nematodes, fungi and bacteria. Organic farmers use a wide range of Integrated Pest Management practices to prevent pests and diseases. These include, but are not limited to, crop rotation and nutrient management; sanitation to remove pest habitat; provision of habitat for beneficial organisms; selection of pest-resistant crops and animals; crop protection using physical barriers, such as row covers; and crop diversification through companion planting or establishment of polycultures. Organic farmers often depend on biological pest control, the use of beneficial organisms to reduce pest populations. Examples of beneficial insects include minute pirate bugs, big-eyed bugs, and to a lesser extent ladybugs (which tend to fly away), all of which eat a wide range of pests. Lacewings are also effective, but tend to fly away. Praying mantis tend to move more slowly and eat less heavily. Parasitoid waspstend to be effective for their selected prey, but like all small insects can be less effective outdoors because the wind controls their movement. Predatory mites are effective for controlling other mites.[8]:66-90

When these practices are insufficient to prevent or control pests an organic farmer may apply a pesticide. With some exceptions, naturally-occurring pesticides are allowed for use on organic farms, and synthetic substances are prohibited. Pesticides with different modes of action should be rotated to minimize development of pesticide resistance. Naturally-derived insecticides allowed for use on organic farms use include Bacillus thuringiensis (a bacterial toxin), pyrethrum (a chrysanthemum extract), spinosad (a bacterial metabolite), neem (a tree extract) and rotenone (a legume root extract). These are sometimes called green pesticides because they are generally, but not necessarily, safer and more environmentally friendly than synthetic pesticides.[8]:92[unreliable source?] Rotenone and pyrethrumare particularly controversial because they work by attacking the nervous system, like most conventional insecticides. Fewer than 10% of organic farmers use these pesticides regularly; one survey found that only 5.3% of vegetable growers in California use rotenone while 1.7% use pyrethrum (Lotter 2003:26). Naturally-derived fungicides allowed for use on organic farms include the bacteria Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus pumilus; and the fungus Trichoderma harzianum. These are mainly effective for diseases affecting roots. Agricultural Research Service scientists have found that caprylic acid, a naturally-occurring fatty acid in milk and coconuts, as well as other natural plant extracts have antimicrobial characteristics that can help.[17] Compost teacontains a mix of beneficial microbes, which may attack or out-compete certain plant pathogens,[18]but variability among formulations and preparation methods may contribute to inconsistent results or even dangerous growth of toxic microbes in compost teas.[19] Some naturally-derived pesticides are not allowed for use on organic farms. These include nicotine sulfate, arsenic, and strychnine.[20] Synthetic pesticides allowed for use on organic farms include insecticidal soaps and horticultural oils for insect management; and Bordeaux mixture, copper hydroxide and sodium bicarbonate for managing fungi.[20]

[edit] Genetic modification

Main article: Genetically modified organism A key characteristic of organic farming is the rejection of genetically engineered plants and animals. On October 19, 1998, participants at IFOAM's 12th Scientific Conference issued the Mar del Plata Declaration, where more than 600 delegates from over 60 countries voted unanimously to exclude the use of genetically modified organisms in food production and agriculture. Although opposition to the use of any transgenic technologies in organic farming is strong, agricultural researchers Luis Herrera-Estrella and Ariel Alvarez-Morales continue to advocate integration of transgenic technologies into organic farming as the optimal means to sustainable agriculture, particularly in the developing world.[21]Similarly, some organic farmers question the rationale behind the ban on the use of genetically engineered seed because they see it a biological technology consistent with organic principles.[22] Although GMOs are excluded from organic farming, there is concern that the pollen from genetically modified crops is increasingly penetrating organic and heirloom seed stocks, making it difficult, if not impossible, to keep these genomes from entering the organic food supply. International trade restrictionslimit the availability GMOs to certain countries.[citation needed] The dangers that genetic modification could pose to the environment and/or individual health are hotly contested.[23]

[edit] Standards

Main article: Organic certification Standards regulate production methods and in some cases final output for organic agriculture. Standards may be voluntary or legislated. As early as the 1970s private associations certified organic producers. In the 1980s, governments began to produce organic production guidelines. In the 1990s, a trend toward legislated standards began, most notably with the 1991 EU-Eco-regulation developed for European Union,[24]which set standards for 12 countries, and a 1993 UK program. The EU's program was followed by a Japanese program in 2001, and in 2002 the U.S. created the National Organic Program (NOP).[25]As of 2007 over 60 countries regulate organic farming (IFOAM 2007:11). In 2005 IFOAM created the Principles of Organic Agriculture, an international guideline for certification criteria.[26] Typically the agencies accredit certification groups rather than individual farms. Organic production materials used in and foods are tested independently by the Organic Materials Review Institute.[27]

[edit] Composting
Under USDA organic standards, manure must be subjected to proper thermophilic compostingand allowed to reach a sterilizing temperature. If raw animal manure is used, 120 days must pass before the crop is harvested if the final product comes into direct contact with the soil. For products which do not come into direct contact with soil, 90 days must pass prior to harvest.[28]

[edit] Economics
The economics of organic farming, a subfield of agricultural economics, encompasses the entire process and effects of organic farming in terms of human society, including social costs, opportunity costs, unintended consequences, information asymmetries, and economies of scale. Although the scope of economics is broad, agricultural economics tends to focus on maximizing yields and efficiency at the farm level. Economics takes an anthropocentricapproach to the value of the natural world: biodiversity, for example, is considered beneficial only to the extent that it is valued by people and increases profits. Some entities such as the European Union subsidizeorganic farming, in large part because these countries want to account for the externalitiesof reduced water use, reduced water contamination, reduced soil erosion, reduced carbon emissions, increased biodiversity, and assorted other benefits that result from organic farming.[citation needed] Traditional organic farming is labor and knowledge-intensive whereas conventional farming is capital-intensive, requiring more energy and manufactured inputs.[29] Organic farmers in California have cited marketing as their greatest obstacle.[30]

[edit] Geographic producer distribution

The markets for organic products are strongest in North America and Europe, which as of 2001 are estimated to have $6 and $8 billion respectively of the $20 billion global market (Lotter 2003:6). As of 2007 Australasia has 39% of the total organic farmland, including Australia's 1,180,000 hectares (2,900,000 acres) but 97 percent of this land is sprawling rangeland (2007:35). US sales are 20x as much. (2003:7). Europe farms 23 percent of global organic farmland (6.9 million hectares), followed by Latin America with 19 percent (5.8 million hectares). Asia has 9.5 percent while North America has 7.2 percent. Africa has 3 percent.[31] Besides Australia, the countries with the most organic farmland are Argentina (3.1 million hectares), China (2.3 million hectares), and the United States (1.6 million hectares). Much of Argentina's organic farmland is pasture,

like that of Australia (2007:42). Italy, Spain, Germany, Brazil (the world's largest agricultural exporter), Uruguay, and the UK follow the United States in the amount of organic land (2007:26).

[edit] Growth
Organic farmland by world region (2000-2008) As of 2001, the estimated market value of certified organic products was estimated to be $20 billion. By 2002 this was $23 billion and by 2007 more than $46 billion.[32] In recent years both Europe (2007: 7.8 million hectares, European Union: 7.2 million hectares) and North America (2007: 2.2 million hectares) have experienced strong growth in organic farmland. In the EU it grew by 21% in the period 2005 to 2008.[33]However, this growth has occurred under different conditions. While the European Union has shifted agricultural subsidies to organic farmers due to perceived environmental benefits, the United States has not,[34]continuing to subsidize some but not all traditional commercial crops, such as corn and sugar. As a result of this policy difference, as of 2008 4.1% percent of European Union farmland was organically managed compared to the 0.6 percent in the U.S.[32] IFOAM's most recent edition of The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2009lists the countries which had the most hectares in 2007. The country with the most organic land is Australia with more than 12 million hectares, followed by Argentina, Brazil and the US. In total 32.2 million hectares were under organic management in 2007. For 1999 11 million hectares of organically managed land are reported.[32] As organic farming becomes a major commercial force in agriculture, it is likely to gain increasing impact on national agricultural policies and confront some of the scaling challenges faced by conventional agriculture.[35]

[edit] Productivity and profitability

Various studies find that versus conventional agriculture, organic crops yielded 91%,[36] or 95-100%,[37] along with 50% lower expenditure on fertilizer and energy, and 97% less pesticides,[38]or 100% for corn and soybean, consuming less energy and zero pesticides.[clarification needed] The results were attributed to lower yields in average and good years but higher yields during drought years.[39] A 2007 study[40]compiling research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems has concluded that ...organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base. (from the abstract) Converted organic farms have lower pre-harvest yields than their conventional counterparts in developed countries (92%) but higher than their low-intensity counterparts in developing countries (132%). This is due to relatively lower adoption of fertilizers and pesticides in the developing world compared to the intensive farming of the developed world.[41] Organic farms withstand severe weather conditions better than conventional farms, sometimes yielding 70-90% more than conventional farms during droughts.[42] Organic farms are more profitable in the drier states of the United States, likely due to their superior drought performance.[43]Organic farms survive hurricane damage much better, retaining 20 to 40% more topsoil and smaller economic losses at highly significant levels than their neighbors.[44]

Contrary to widespread belief, organic farming can build up soil organic matter better than conventional no-till farming, which suggests long-term yield benefits from organic farming.[45]An 18-year study of organic methods on nutrient-depleted soil, concluded that conventional methods were superior for soil fertility and yield in a cold-temperate climate, arguing that much of the benefits from organic farming are derived from imported materials which could not be regarded as "self-sustaining".[46] [edit] Profitability The decreased cost of synthetic fertilizer and pesticide inputs, along with the higher prices that consumers pay for organic produce, contribute to increased profits. Organic farms have been consistently found to be as or more profitable than conventional farms. Without the price premium, profitability is mixed.[47]Organic production was more profitable in Wisconsin, given price premiums.[48] [edit] Sustainability (African case) In 2008 the UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) and UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) stated that "organic agriculture can be more conducive to food security in Africa than most conventional production systems, and that it is more likely to be sustainable in the long-term"[49] and that "yields had more than doubled where organic, or near-organic practices had been used" and that soil fertility and drought resistance improved.[50]

[edit] Employment impact

Organic methods often require more labor than traditional farming, therefore it provides rural jobs.[51]

[edit] Externalities
Main article: Motivations for organic agriculture Agriculture imposes negative externalities (uncompensated costs) upon society through land and other resource use, biodiversity loss, erosion, pesticides, nutrient runoff, water usage, subsidy payments and assorted other problems. Positive externalities include self-reliance, entrepreneurship, respect for nature, and air quality. Organic methods reduce some of these costs.[52]In 2000 uncompensated costs for 1996 reached 2,343 million British pounds or 208 pounds per hectare.[53]In 2005 in the USA concluded that cropland costs the economy approximately 5 to 16 billion dollars ($30 to $96 per hectare), while livestock production costs 714 million dollars.[54]Both studies recommended reducing externalities. The 2000 review included reported pesticide poisonings but did not include speculative chronic health effects of pesticides, and the 2004 review relied on a 1992 estimate of the total impact of pesticides. It has been proposed that organic agriculture can reduce the level of some negative externalities from (conventional) agriculture. Whether the benefits are private or public depends upon the division of property rights.[55]

[edit] Pesticides

A sign outside of an organic apple orchard in Pateros, Washington reminding orchardists not to spray pesticides on these trees. Most organic farms largely avoid pesticides as opposed to conventional farms.[56] Some pesticides damage the environment or with direct exposure, human health. Children exposed to pesticides are of special concern. According to the National Academy of Sciences: "A fundamental maxim of pediatric medicine is that children are not little adults. Profound differences exist between children and adults. Infants and children are growing and developing. Their metabolic rates are more rapid than those of adults. There are differences in their ability to activate, detoxify, and excrete xenobiotic compounds. All these differences can affect the toxicity of pesticides in infants and children, and for these reasons the toxicity of pesticides is frequently different in children and adults.[57] The five main pesticides used in organic farming are Bt (a bacterial toxin), pyrethrum, rotenone,[58] copper and sulphur.[59] Fewer than 10% of organic vegetable farmers acknowledge using these pesticides regularly[citation needed] ; 5.3% of vegetable growers will admit rotenone use; while 1.7% admit pyrethrum use(Lotter 2003:26). Reduction and elimination of chemical pesticide use is technically challenging.[60]Organic pesticides often complement other pest control strategies. Ecological concerns primarily focus around pesticideuse, as 16% of the world's pesticides are used in the production of cotton .[61] Runoff is one of the most damaging effects of pesticide use. The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Servicetracks the environmental effects of water contamination and concluded, "the Nation's pesticide policies during the last twenty six years have succeeded in reducing overall environmental risk, in spite of slight increases in area planted and weight of pesticides applied. Nevertheless, there are still areas of the country where there is no evidence of progress, and areas where risk levels for protection of drinking water, fish, algae and crustaceans remain high".[62]
[63]

[edit] Food quality and safety

Main article: Organic food

Many studies have examined the relative quality and safety benefits of organic and conventional agricultural techniques. The results are diverse. Some find no significant differences. Others disagree. An example of the "no differences" school stated: No evidence of a difference in content of nutrients and other substances between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products was detected for the majority of nutrients assessed in this review suggesting that organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products are broadly comparable in their nutrient content... There is no good evidence that increased dietary intake, of the nutrients identified in this review to be present in larger amounts in organically than in conventionally produced crops and livestock products, would be of benefit to individuals consuming a normal varied diet, and it is therefore unlikely that these differences in nutrient content are relevant to consumer health.[64] However, they also found that statistically significantdifferences between the composition of organic and conventional food were present for a few substances.[citation needed] "Organic products stand out as having higher levels of secondary plant compounds and vitamin C".[65] Organic kiwifruit had more antioxidants.[66] A review of potential health effects analysed eleven articles, concluding, "because of the limited and highly variable data available, and concerns over the reliability of some reported findings, there is currently no evidence of a health benefit from consuming organic compared to conventionally produced foodstuffs. It should be noted that this conclusion relates to the evidence base currently available on the nutrient content of foodstuffs, which contains limitations in the design and in the comparability of studies."[67] Individual studies have considered a variety of possible impacts, including pesticide residues.[68]Pesticide residues present a second channel for health effects.[69][70]Comments include, "Organic fruits and vegetables can be expected to contain fewer agrochemical residues than conventionally grown alternatives; yet, "the significance of this difference is questionable"[68]and "It is intuitive to assume that children whose diets consist of organic food items would have a lower probability of neurologic health risks", and pesticide exposure brought an increased risk for ADHD in one study. Nitrateconcentrations may be less, but the health impact of nitrates is debated.[citation needed] Lack of data has limited research on the health effects of natural plant pesticides and bacterial pathogens.[68]Consumption of organic milk was associated with a decrease in risk for eczema, although no comparable benefit was found for organic fruits, vegetables, or meat.[71] The higher cost of organic food (ranging from 45 to 200%) could inhibit consumption of the recommended 5 servings per day of vegetables and fruits, which improve health and reduce cancer regardless of their source.[68]

[edit] Clothing quality and safety

Main article: Organic clothing Recently, organic clothinghas become widely available. Although many consumers of organic clothing merely dislike synthetic chemicals, a significant portion of the organic clothing market comes from those suffering from Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, a chronic medical condition characterized by symptoms that the affected person says are adverse effects from exposure to low levels of chemicals.[citation needed]

[edit] Soil conservation

Main article: Soil conservation

In Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations, geomorphologist David Montgomery outlines a coming crisis from soil erosion. Agriculture relies on roughly one meter of topsoil, and that is being depleted ten times faster than it is being replaced.[72] No-till farming, which some claim depends upon pesticides, is one way to minimize erosion. However, a recent study by the USDA's Agricultural Research Service has found that manure applications in tilled organic farming are better at building up the soil than no-till.[73][74][75]

[edit] Climate change

Organic agriculture emphasizes closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management providing the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change.[76]Organic agriculture can decrease fossil fuel emissions and, like any well managed agricultural system, sequesters carbon in the soil. The elimination of synthetic nitrogen in organic systems decreases fossil fuel consumption by 33 percent and carbon sequestration takes CO2out of the atmosphere by putting it in the soil in the form of organic matter which is often lost in conventionally managed soils. Carbon sequestration occurs at especially high levels in organic no-till managed soil.[74] Agriculture has been undervalued and underestimated as a means to combat global climate change. Soil carbon data show that regenerative organic agricultural practices are among the most effective strategies for mitigating CO2emissions.[74]

[edit] Nutrient leaching

Excess nutrients in lakes, rivers, and groundwater can cause algal blooms, eutrophication, and subsequent dead zones. In addition, nitratesare harmful to aquatic organisms by themselves. The main contributor to this pollution is nitrate fertilizers whose use is expected to "double or almost triple by 2050".[77] Organically fertilizing fields "significantly [reduces] harmful nitrate leaching" over conventionally fertilized fields: "annual nitrate leaching was 4.4-5.6 times higher in conventional plots than organic plots".[78] The large dead zonein the Gulf of Mexico is caused in large part by agricultural runoff: a combination of fertilizer and livestockmanure. Over half of the nitrogen released into the Gulf comes from agriculture. This increases costs for fishermen, as they must travel far from the coast to find fish.[79] Nitrogen leaching into the Danube River was substantially lower among organic farms. The resulting externalities could be neutralized by charging 1 euro per kg of released nitrogen.[80] Agricultural runoff and algae blooms are strongly linked in California.[81]

[edit] Biodiversity
Main article: Organic farming and biodiversity A wide range of organisms benefit from organic farming, but it is unclear whether organic methods confer greater benefits than conventional integrated agri-environmental programs.[82]Nearly all non-crop, naturally occurring species observed in comparative farm land practice studies show a preference for organic farming both by abundance and diversity.[82][83] An average of 30% more species inhabit organic farms.[84] Birds, butterflies, soil microbes, beetles, earthworms,[85] spiders, vegetation, and mammals are particularly affected. Lack of herbicides and pesticides improve biodiversity fitness and population density.[83] Many weed species attract beneficial insects that improve soil qualities and forage on weed pests.[86] Soil-bound organisms often benefit because of increased bacteria populations due to natural fertilizer such as manure, while experiencing reduced intake of herbicides and pesticides.[82] Increased biodiversity, especially from beneficial soil microbes

and mycorrhizaehave been proposed as an explanation for the high yields experienced by some organic plots, especially in light of the differences seen in a 21-year comparison of organic and control fields.[10] Biodiversity from organic farming provides capital to humans. Species found in organic farms enhance sustainability by reducing human input (e.g., fertilizers, pesticides).[87] Farmers that produce with organic methods reduce risk of poor yields by promoting biodiversity.[citation needed]Common game birds such as the ringnecked pheasant and the northern bobwhite often reside in agriculture landscapes, and benefit recreational hunters.[citation needed]

[edit] Sales and marketing

Most sales are concentrated in developed nations. These products are what economists call credence goods in that they rely on uncertain certification. Interest in organic products dropped between 2006 and 2008, and 42% of Americans polled don't trust organic produce.[88]69% of Americans claim to occasionally buy organic products, down from 73% in 2005. One theory was that consumers were substituting "local" produce for "organic" produce.[89]

[edit] Distributors
In the United States, 75% of organic farms are smaller than 2.5 hectares. In California 2% of the farms account for over half of sales.(Lotter 2003:4) Small farms join together in cooperatives such as Organic Valley, Inc. to market their goods more effectively. Most small cooperative distributors have merged or were acquired by large multinationals such as General Mills, Heinz, ConAgra, Kellogg, and others. In 1982 there were 28 consumer cooperative distributors, but as of 2007 only 3 remained.[90]This consolidation has raised concerns among consumers and journalists of potential fraud and degradation in standards. Most sell their organic products through subsidiaries, under other labels.[91] Organic foods also can be a niche in developing nations. It would provide more money and a better opportunity to compete internationally with the huge distributors. Organic prices are much more stable than conventional foods, and the small farms can still compete and have similar prices with the much larger farms that usually take all of the profits.[92]

[edit] Farmers' markets

Price premiums are important for the profitability of small organic farmers. Farmers selling directly to consumers at farmers' marketshave continued to achieve these higher returns. In the United States the number of farmers' markets tripled from 1,755 in 1994 to 5,274 in 2009.[93]

[edit] Capacity building

Organic agriculture can contribute to ecologically sustainable, socio-economic development, especially in poorer countries.[94]The application of organic principles enables employment of local resources (e.g., local seed varieties, manure, etc.) and therefore cost-effectiveness. Local and international markets for organic products show tremendous growth prospects and offer creative producers and exporters excellent opportunities to improve their income and living conditions.[citation needed] Organic agriculture is knowledge intensive. Globally, capacity building efforts are underway, including localized training material, to limited effect. As of 2007, the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements hosted more than 170 free manuals and 75 training opportunities online.[citation needed]

[edit] Controversy
Norman Borlaug, father of the "Green Revolution", Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Prof A. Trewavasand other critics contested the notion that organic agricultural systems are more friendly to the environment and more sustainable than conventional farming systems. Borlaug asserts that organic farming practices can at most feed 4 billion people, after expanding cropland dramatically and destroying ecosystems in the process.[95][96][97] The Danish Environmental Protection Agency estimated that phasing out all pesticides would result in an overall yield reduction of about 25%. Environmental and health effects were assumed but hard to assess.[98] In contrast, the UN Environmental Programmeconcluded that organic methods greatly increase yields in Africa.[49]A review of over two hundred crop comparisons argued that organic farming could produce enough food to sustain the current human population and that the difference in yields between organic and non-organic methods were small, with non-organic methods yielding slightly more in developed areas and organic methods yielding slightly more in developing areas.[41] That analysis has been criticised by Alex Avery of the Hudson Institute, who contends that the review claimed many non-organic studies to be organic, misreported organic yields, made false comparisons between yields of organic and non-organic studies which were not comparable, counted high organic yields several times by citing different papers which referenced the same data, and gave equal weight to studies from sources which were not impartial.[99] The Center for Disease Control repudiated a claim by Avery's father, Dennis Avery (also at Hudson) that the risk of E. coli infection was eight times higher when eating organic food. (Avery had cited CDC as a source.) Avery had included problems stemming from non-organic unpasteurized juice in his calculations.[100][101][102] Urs Niggli, director of the FiBL Institutecontends that there is[103] a global campaign against organic farming that mostly derives from Avery's book The truth about organic farming.[100]

[edit] See also

Organic farming by country Agroecology Biodynamic agriculture Certified Naturally Grown Industrial agriculture List of organic gardening and farming topics Motivations for organic agriculture Organic clothing Organic food Organic movement Organic beans Permaculture Seasonal food Sustainable agriculture Wildculture Organic Farming Digest Australian Organic Farming and Gardening Society WWOOF Nayakrishi

Advantages and Disadvantages Organic Farming: Good Things, Barriers and Environmental Effects
Advantages and Disadvantages Organic Farming pro and cons organic farming Despite the good things about organic farming why do most farmers still operate by industrialized agriculture? Here we explore the pros and cons organic farming presents for consumers and producers, as well as examining the environmental effects of organic farming. Right>> An ecological organic garden where the vegetables sow themselves! Watch the video. GOOD THINGS ABOUT ORGANIC FARMING CONSUMER BENEFITS: Nutrition The nutritional value of food is largely a function of its vitamin and mineral content. In this regard, organically grown food is dramatically superior in mineral content to that grown by modern conventional methods. advantages and disadvantages organic farming Because it fosters the life of the soil organic farming reaps the benefits soil life offers in greatly facilitated plant access to soil nutrients. Healthy plants mean healthy people, and such better nourished plants provide better nourishment to people and animals alike. Poison-free advantages and disadvantages organic farming A major benefit to consumers of organic food is that it is free of contamination with health harming chemicals such as pesticides, fungicides and herbicides. As you would expect of populations fed on chemically grown foods, there has been a profound upward trend in the incidence of diseases associated with exposure to toxic chemicals in industrialized societies. advantages and disadvantages organic farming advantages and disadvantages organic farming

advantages and disadvantages organic farming advantages and disadvantages organic farming Take cancer for example. Representative data on the number of new cancer cases in New South Wales, Australia has been collected by the New South Wales Central Cancer Registry. Adjusted to take account of our aging population, their graph (above) shows that between 1972 and 2004 the incidence of new cancer cases per year (average for both sexes) has risen from 323 to 488 per 100,000 people. This is an increase of over 50% in just 32 years. advantages and disadvantages organic farming Food Tastes Better advantages and disadvantages organic farming Animals and people have the sense of taste to allow them to discern the quality of the food they ingest. It comes as no surprise, therefore, that organically grown food tastes better than that conventionally grown. The tastiness of fruit and vegetables is directly related to its sugar content, which in turn is a function of the quality of nutrition that the plant itself has enjoyed. This quality of fruit and vegetable can be empirically measured by subjecting its juice to Brix analysis, which is a measure of its specific gravity (density). The Brix score is widely used in testing fruit and vegetables for their quality prior to export. Food Keeps Longer Organically grown plants are nourished naturally, rendering the structural and metabolic integrity of their cellular structure superior to those conventionally grown. As a result, organically grown foods can be stored longer and do not show the latters susceptibility to rapid mold and rotting.

GROWER BENEFITS: advantages and disadvantages organic farming

A healthy plant grown organically in properly balanced soil resists most diseases and insect pests. <>

This was proven by US doctor and soil nutrition pioneer Dr Northern who conducted many experiments to test the hypothesis during the 1930s. Disease and Pest Resistance For instance, in an orange grove infested with scale, he restored the mineral balance to part of the soil and the trees growing in that part became clean while the rest remained diseased. By the same means he grew healthy rosebushes between rows that were riddled by insects, and tomato and cucumber plants, both healthy and diseased, where the vines intertwined. Northern observed that the bugs ate up the diseased and refused to touch the healthy plants! Weed Competitiveness Weeds are natures band-aids, placed by the wisdom of creation to heal and restore damaged soils. When farmers husband the life of the soil, as they do in organic agriculture, the improved conditions dissuade many weeds and favor their crops. The crops, being healthier, are also better able to compete with those weeds that are present. Lower Input Costs By definition, organic farming does not incur the use of expensive agrichemicals they are not permitted! The greater resistance of their crops to pests and the diseases save farmers significantly in expensive insecticides, fungicides and other pesticides. Fertilizers are either created in situ by green manuring and leguminous crop rotation or on-farm via composting and worm farming. Biodynamic farmers use a low cost microbial solution sprayed onto their crops. The creation of living, fertile soil conditions through early corrective soil re-mineralization and strategic Keyline chisel ploughing are significant establishment costs that, however, reap ongoing benefits to production at minimal maintenance. Drought Resistance Organically grown plants are more drought tolerant. This was dramatically illustrated to me several years ago when I was fortunate to attend a workshop with Australian organic gardening guru Peter Bennett. A slide he showed us has stuck in my mind ever since: it was a field of wheat, organically grown on re-mineralized soil. Bisecting the ripening green crop was a wide yellowed strip that had already finished growing and hayed off. He explained that the strip had been nourished using agrichemical fertilizer early in the growing period. Because chemical fertilizer is soluble, plants are forced to imbibe it every time they are thirsty for water. They can and do enjoy good growth as long as water is readily available. As soon as water becomes limited, however, the soluble nutrient salts in the cells of chemically fed plants are unable to osmotically draw sufficient water to maintain safe dilution. They soon reach toxic concentrations, and the plant stops growing, hays off and dies earlier than it otherwise would have. Added Value

There is a discerning market of consumers who recognize the greater food value of organic produce and are willing to pay premium prices for it. In an interview with me in 1998, the manager of Heinz-Watties in New Zealand explained how his company had been actively supporting and recruiting farmers to organic production in order to service large and lucrative markets in Japan and Europe. ORGANIC FARMING DISADVANTAGES Productivity Proponents of industrialized agriculture point to its superior productivity. In the short term, this yield is possible by expending massive inputs of chemicals and machinery, working over bland fields of a single crop (monoculture). However, over the longer time frame, productivity advantages dwindle. In my years working with broadacre farmers in the wheatbelt of WA, it was common for them to remark on how much richer pastures and crops were in their youth. Industrialized agriculture thrashes the land, and diminishes its soil life to the point where it can no longer function to convert available organic matter into soil fertility. Productivity begins to wane, and attempts to bolster it with increasing chemical inputs (common advice from farm consultants) has a similar effect to flogging a dead horse. Because it relies on living soil to build fertility, the benefits of organic farming for soil life is fundamental to its methods.benefits organic farming soil Organic farming benefits food production without destroying our environmental resources, ensuring sustainability for not only the current but also future generations. Cultivation While their conventional counterparts may sow by direct drilling of seed into herbicide treated soils, organic farmers are usually at least partly dependent on cultivation to remove weeds prior to sowing. In contrast to cultivation, direct drilling does not mechanically disrupt soil structure and removes the risk of exposed soil being lost to wind or water erosion. This is a valid argument where farmers are working marginal quality soils. However, the structure of agrichemically-deadened soils is weakened by the corresponding loss of soil life and thus unable to maintain its integrity under occasional cultivation. So its a circular argument! Structurally sound (life-rich) soils may be cultivated regularly without significant damage, particularly if protected appropriately by windbreaks and Keyline soil conservation measures. Even the need to cultivate may be questioned After noticing rice thriving wild amongst weeds on roadsides, Japanese alternative agriculturalist Masanobu Fukuoka succeeded in establishing crops by broadcasting seed coated in clay onto untilled land. GM Crops Organic growers do not use genetically modified or engineered food crops, some of which are engineered to tolerate herbicides (e.g. Roundup Ready Canola) or resist pests (e.g. Bollworm resistant cotton). Conventional growers, on the other hand, are free to take advantage of GM crops.

According to a report from the Directorate-General for Agriculture of the European Commission, productivity gains attributed to GM crops are usually negligible when growing conditions, farmer experience and soil types are factored in, and are often in fact negative. The main advantage farmers using such crops gain is convenience only. There are worrying indications that GM crops may be associated with harm to both human health and the environment. The main concern is that once they are released it is nigh impossible to un-release them. advantages and disadvantages organic farming Time Indeed, organic farming requires greater interaction between a farmer and his crop for observation, timely intervention and weed control for instance. It is inherently more labor intensive than chemical/mechanical agriculture so that, naturally a single farmer can produce more crop using industrial methods than he or she could by solely organic methods. Skill advantages and disadvantages organic farming It requires considerably more skill to farm organically. However, because professional farming of any sort naturally imparts a close and observant relationship to living things, the best organic farmers are converted agrichemical farmers. Organic farmers do not have some convenient chemical fix on the shelf for every problem they encounter. They have to engage careful observation and greater understanding in order to know how to tweak their farming system to correct the cause of the problem rather than simply putting a plaster over its effect. This is a bigger issue during the conversion period from conventional to wholly organic when both the learning curve and transition related problems are peaking (it takes time to build a healthy farm ecosystem that copes well without synthetic crutches). Organic farmers I have interviewed report that their most valuable remedies and advice come from other organic farmers.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ORGANIC FARMING Climate Friendly The synthetic inputs upon which conventional agriculture is so dependent are energy expensive to mine and manufacture. Today the embodied energy of industrial agriculture uses up 9 calories for every 1 calorie of food that it produces! Organic agriculture with its low input needs of naturally derived substances produces less greenhouse gas emissions and is considerably more climate friendly. Ecologically Friendly It doesnt use soluble fertilizers

Though rarely acknowledged, the chief source of the annual algae blooms that plague Perths major river (the Swan) is conventional agriculture. Farmers pour tons of phosphate and nitrogenous fertilizer on their cropping lands every year. Because it is soluble, much of this fertilizer is either washed off the soil surface and into waterways (especially phosphates) or leaches through the soil profile beyond the reach of plants and finds its way less directly into waterways (especially nitrates). Nitrate contamination of groundwater (indicated by >10 mg/L nitrate) in Australia is widespread in every state and territory, occurring over regional and local scales (LWRRDC 1999). In many areas, the concentration is greater than the recently revised Australian Drinking Water Guidelines level of 50 mg/L nitrate (as nitrate), resulting in groundwater that is unfit for drinking. In some of the more contaminated areas, the concentration is in excess of 100 mg/L (LWRRDC 1999). With fresh water reserves under increasing pressure from climate change this is a grave situation for humanity. The soluble nutrient pollutants that contaminate surface waters fuel the overgrowth of algae. What is not used up by algae in fresh waterways, spews out into the ocean where it supports the growth of algae on sea plants and coral reef systems. This blocks access to sunlight, causing whatever it smothers to die. Eighty percent of the seagrass meadows in Perths Cockburn Sound an important nursery habitat for wild fish stocks - have been decimated due to this process which is called eutrophication. It doesnt use pesticides or herbicides Another pollution disaster caused by agrichemical use is the contamination of groundwater reserves with poisonous nasties, particularly (in Australia) Atrazine and Simazine, but also Dieldrin, Chlorpyriphos, Amitrol, Metolachlor, Trifluraline and Diuron Dieldrin, Lindane, and Alachlor. While systematic monitoring of pesticide contamination of groundwater in Australia is limited, available tests have detected pesticides in at least 20% of samples, indicating significant contamination (Australia State of the Environment Report 2001). Groundwater studies in the US have found similarly significant contamination. In Carolina, for example, over 27% of wells sampled in 1997 were found to be contaminated with pesticides predominantly from routine agricultural usage. There is no economically viable method to clean up widespread contamination. Pesticide contamination poses a serious, unreasonable public health threat to current and future ground water users. advantages and disadvantages organic farming Synthetic agrichemicals (and most plastics widely used in our society) are derived from oil, and thus a source of endocrinedisrupting chemicals (especially xenoestrogens) in the environment. Distorted sex organ development and function in alligators has been related to a major pesticide spill into a lake in Florida, U.S.A. advantages and disadvantages organic farming

There is also evidence to link xenoestrogens to a range of human medical concerns, particularly reproductive problems such as reduced sperm count in men and breast cancer in women. Even the safest herbicides such as Roundup (glycophosphate) the second most widely used in the USA - are now known to pose a danger to wetland ecologies, and can totally decimate frog populations at routine contamination levels. ORGANIC FARMING AND PEAK OIL Agrichemical farming is extremely energy reliant, particularly in the extraction, manufacture and processing of the synthetic chemicals upon which it is so dependent. In a world of diminishing oil supplies the days of chemical agriculture are numbered! advantages and disadvantages organic farming One has only to study the experience of Cubato know this is so. In the early 1990s Cuba had the most industrialized agriculture in Latin America, fueled by cheap, readily available Soviet oil. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, this supply was cut, virtually overnight. At first Cuba was faced with dire food shortages, and despite rationing the average Cuban lost 10 kilograms in weight! Hungry people responded by becoming farmers lawyers, teachers, truck drivers everyone learned to garden! Under the community-focused direction of its socialist leadership, Cuba rapidly made a successful transition to organic agriculture and more labor intensive methods, including reintroducing the use of bullocks in the cultivation of crops. This is the near future that awaits us all. Do you believe our corporation-serving governments will so decisively lead us through it? Will you be ready for it? advantages and disadvantages organic farming advantages and

Benefits of Organic Farming for Small Farmers

User Poor Organic Farming Best
Rate

Rating: / 24

The various benefits of organicfarming for small farmers all over the world include high premium, low capital investment, ability to achieve higher premium in the market, and the ability to use traditional knowledge. According to a researchconducted by the Office of Evaluation and Studies (OE), International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD), small farmers in Latin America, China and Indiacan benefit drastically from organic farming and will help in alleviating poverty in thesecountries. Organic farming refers to means of farming that does not involve usage of chemicals such as chemical fertilizers and chemical pesticides. Numerous small farmers have been practicing organic farming; however, since they are unaware of the market opportunities they are not able to reap the benefits of organic farming. Given below are some of the advantages of organic farming for small farmers:

High premium: Organic foodis normally priced 20-30% higher thanconventional food. This premium is very important for a small farmer whose income is just sufficient to feed his/her family with one meal. Low investment:Organic farming normally does not involve capital investment as high as that required in chemical farming. Further, since organic fertilizers and pesticides can be produced locally, the yearlycosts incurred by the farmer are also low. Agriculture greatly depends on external factors such as climate, pests, disease. Further most of the small farmers are dependent on natural rain for water. Therefore in cases of natural calamity, pest or disease attack, and irregular rainfall, when there is a crop failure, small farmers practicing organic farming have to suffer less as their investments are low. (It should be noted that while shifting from chemical farming to organic farming, the transition might becostly) Less dependence on money lenders:Many small farmers worldwidecommit suicide due to increasing debt. Since chemical inputs, which are verycostly, are not required in organic farming, small farmers are not dependent on money lenders. Crop failure, therefore, does not leave an organic farmer into enormous debt, and does not force him to take an extreme step. Synergy with life forms: Organic farming involves synergy with various plant and animal life forms. Small farmers are able to understand this synergy easily and hence find it easy to implement the Traditional knowledge:Small farmers have abundance of traditional knowledge with them and within theircommunity. Most of this traditional knowledge cannot be used for chemical farming. However, when itcomes to organic farming, the farmers can make use of the traditional knowledge. Further, in case of organic farming, small farmers are not dependent on those who provide chemical know-how.