Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - [permaculture] Farming as a permaculture system. Re: [SANET-MG] yield of conventional vs organic farms

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Lawrence F. London, Jr." <venaurafarm@bellsouth.net>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [permaculture] Farming as a permaculture system. Re: [SANET-MG] yield of conventional vs organic farms
  • Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 20:54:31 -0400

On 5/11/2012 2:05 PM, Toby Hemenway wrote:
I had begun to despair that anyone would begin to look critically
at the current “Can organic agriculture feed the world” focus,

This was exactly my response. What the cited study said to me, seeing
that organic has lower yields than chemical farming, was that in
order to have a less damaging agriculture, we need to accept lower
<>
food yields as one of its corollaries. At my talks, I often get asked
if permaculture can feed the world, and I answer that the only thing
I know of that can feed 7 billion is a lot of cheap oil.
<>

Scott Pittman said once that permaculture is an umbrella discipline under which agriculture (all of it) falls. I completely agree with this.

Ideally a farm (any size) should exist as a planned, complex collection of integrated permaculture systems with diverse elements all representing a whole-farm ecosystem with all components working together synergistically. True to permaculture it should and can provide living environments for all who own and or work on that farm. It should seek to reduce off farm inputs. Natural, mined phosphate and other minerals will likely be needed from time to time as crops deplete levels of nutrients needed for healthy livestock and plant production. If enough acreage is available the other major nutrients can for the most part be generated on site and later recycled. As a natural farm functions as a permaculture system its productive capacity will likely increase year to year until a point where it levels off and remains stable in output. This productive capacity depends completely on the type and quality of the soil on the land. Marginal farmland will have a hard time competing with US black prairie loam regardless of the method employed to farm it. Nevertheless, marginal farmland can feed many people and its productive capacity can be dramatically increased from unfarmed, fallow status to the point where its output becomes stabilized.

The ancient Asian rice terraces were not farmed using fossil fuel inputs so I would have to say that permaculture could go a long way toward feeding the world, all 12 billion or more people. Part of that has to do with mandatory dietary changes and adaptation, made easier through consumption of naturally-grown, nutrient-rich foods, devoid of pesticide residues and man-made chemicals. Most people, including those who do strenuous physical labor (and the red meat can be reserved for them) need very little red meat, if any at all, and can meet all their dietary requirements with fish, plant, milk and poultry products.

I am completely convinced that farms should be complex permaculture systems with the integrity of those systems and the integrated ecosystems therein an overriding concern. Through a natural course of events this will lead to abundant crop and livestock production, at some point stabilized from year to year.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page