Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] Small-Scale Farming: A Global Perspective

livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Healthy soil and sustainable growing

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Tradingpost" <tradingpost@lobo.net>
  • To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Livingontheland] Small-Scale Farming: A Global Perspective
  • Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 11:00:48 -0600


Small-Scale Farming: A Global Perspective - benefits of small farms greater
than those of large farms - Brief Article
Peter Rosset
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2465/is_4_30/ai_63699778

In 1998, the US Department of Agriculture's National Commission on Small
Farms published a landmark report on the importance of small-farms
agriculture, and the necessity of both preserving small farms and promoting
them for the future. Coming from one of the world's most pro-globalised
farming governments, the report, A Time To Act, was extremely significant.
Among the many benefits of small-farm agriculture, it listed:

* Diversity: small farms embody a diversity of ownership, of cropping
systems, of landscapes, of biological organisation, of culture and traditions.

* Environmental benefits: responsible management of the natural resources of
soil, water and wildlife on the 60 per cent of US farms below 180 acres in
size produces significant environmental benefits.

* Community empowerment: decentralised land ownership tends to produce more,
and more equitable, opportunities for rural people. Landowners who rely on
local people, business and services are likely to be more responsible.

* Personal connection to food: farmers' markets, community-supported
agriculture and other such schemes bring home to consumers where their food
comes from, and what effect its production has on landscape and environment.

* Economic foundations: in many areas of the US, small farms are vital to the
economy.

What is true for the US is true for much of the world. The fact is that,
despite the generalised assumption that large, capital- and
chemical-intensive farms are more productive and efficient than small farms,
this is often not the case. One reason for this is that, because conventional
methods of measuring 'productivity' and 'efficiency' are flawed, we are
receiving the wrong answers to our questions.

Farm productivity is generally measured in terms of 'yield' - the production
per unit area of a certain type of crop. Often, the highest yield of a single
crop is obtained by planting it in a monoculture in a large field - hence, in
these terms, large farms are often deemed more 'productive'. But while such a
monoculture produces high yields of certain crops, it provides nothing else
of use to either the farmer or the environment. When the total output of
farms - the sum total of everything they produce - is used as a measurement,
rather than yield, small farms often come out on top.

Even leading economists at the World Bank have now come round to the view
that the redistribution of land from large to small farmers would lead to an
increase in total productivity. Reasons for this include:

* Multiple cropping: small farmers are more likely to intercrop various crops
on the same field and integrate crops and livestock, making more effective
use of space and time than large mono cultures.

* Output composition: large farms tend to be land-extensive, while small
farms tend to emphasise more labour- and resource-intensive use of land.

* Input use: large farms tend to use purchased inputs like agrochemicals,
while small farms are more likely to use non-purchased inputs, like manure
and compost produced on the farm.

Productivity, of course, is not the only issue in farming. More bushels of
grain should not be the only goal of agriculture. And when considered in
other areas, small farms are seen to be often more desirable than large farms.

All over the world, in rural communities dominated by large corporate farms,
towns, small businesses and local amenities tend to die off. Often this is
because the income earned by agriculture drains off into cities where the
farm corporations are based, rather than circulating in the local economy.
Where family farms predominate in the US, for example, there tends to be
higher employment, more civic amenities, better services and more public
participation in local life.

All this is not even to begin to mention other obvious benefits of small-farm
agriculture, such as better environmental stewardship, more biodiversity, a
more patchwork landscape, often less intensive chemical use, etc, or benefits
that can accrue to general social welfare through land reform in favour of
many owners of smaller properties.

When taken in the round, then, it is clear that the case for small farms is a
strong one, and must be made loudly and persistently if the rural economy is
to change for the better.

Dr Peter Rosset is Executive Director of Food First, based in the USA.




  • [Livingontheland] Small-Scale Farming: A Global Perspective, Tradingpost, 05/02/2008

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page