click to enlarge

I just read a blog arguing the problems versus benefits of organic food.  Though it covered the issue from different angles and had some interesting points, one part that I want to address is the idea that organic fields are 40% less productive than fields that use a bunch of chemicals. That isn't true of any organic farmer I know personally - I'm not sure where this statistic comes from and I have my doubts it is accurate in any context.

I can say with certainty it is not accurate if a farmer uses any of a number of different organic growing methods such as biodynamic, biointensive, polycropping or permaculture techniques, all of which can produce higher yields than traditional agriculture at lower costs.

The problem with conventional agriculture -- and the reason we have to import oil in order to grow corn -- is because the way we grow our food is extremely unnatural.  Think of this: We literally kill every living thing in the field before we plant our crops!  To prepare a new field to plant corn, we would have to remove all the plants already growing there, and plow the soil under, which kills even many of the soil microbes that are essential for fertile soil.  All that organic matter that was just removed is what created rich soils in the first place.  Then we import a bunch of chemical fertilizers to feed the plants, because we stripped the place.  One could call that flora and fauna genocide, you know?  Every living thing? Is that really necessary?

Only if you don't understand natural systems.  We have declared war against nature in order to eat, which is kind of silly, considering that nature would gladly and helpfully feed us on her own, if we would let her.

Permaculture farming uses powerful techniques of nature to increase yields, eliminate waste, and vastly reduce the need for any outside energy input.  Think about that - no costs for seed, chemicals, fertilizer, or irrigation.

A permaculture technique called polycropping (where more than one crop is grown in the same field) can increase yields 3-8 times over traditional agriculture with less expense and less use of resources such as water. It offers more economic stability because farmers are not subject to price fluctuations on a single cash crop and they can harvest crops throughout the year.

This is being done in shade grown coffee fields and in farm fields in Brazil.

This type of farming tends to be more labor intensive, but reduced costs and increased yields make it worth it - not to mention the reduced impact on the environment.  With unemployment rising in the US and plenty of people willing to work in other parts of the world as well, more labor intensive is not necessarily a bad thing.  When farms are designed well, and economics are fair, growing healthy, organic food and working with the land can be very pleasurable and rewarding work.

To truly assess the value of organic farming, one would have to calculate the true costs of conventional agriculture, including depleted soils, pollution, increased flooding, and many other disadvantages which cost communities billions of dollars. When one does that math, there is no doubt that organic and natural methods of farming are superior to conventional agriculture from many different angles, but that is a future blog.