Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

livingontheland - [Livingontheland] How Organic Agriculture Can Feed the World

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] How Organic Agriculture Can Feed the World
  • Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:40:39 -0700


How Organic Agriculture Can Feed the World
Witnessing a Shift in the Worldview of Agriculture
http://www.counterpunch.org/gray03102010.html
March 10, 2010 By HEATHER GRAY and K. RASHID NURI

Recent research indicates that organic farming can feed the world, and is
actually making a significant difference everywhere. In the United States and
Europe, universities are reporting that organically produced food will
address the problems of hunger and poverty facing the world’s growing
population. This is not a surprising finding for organic farmers and
advocates of organic agricultural production. The American worldview of
agriculture is, in fact, making a radical shift.

In 1990 sociologists Curtis Beus and Riley Dunlap wrote a fascinating
description of paradigms in agriculture in an article entitled “Conventional
versus Alternative Agriculture: The Paradigmatic Roots of the Debate”. The
authors define conventional agriculture in the 20th century as:
"Capital-intensive, large-scale, highly mechanized agriculture with
monocultures of crops and extensive use of artificial fertilizers, herbicides
and pesticides, with intensive animal husbandry". They go on to say that the
“discussion of conven tional agriculture as presented in this paper will
include the agri business suppliers of farm inputs and the marketers of farm
output. This is done because of the integral interdependence between the
production sector and the supply and marketing sectors of modern
agribusiness”. It is often referred to as industrial agriculture.

In describing dominant worldviews, reference has to be made to physicist
Thomas Kuhn. In 1970 his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” Kuhn
describes how science inquiry changes overtime. When change is eminent he
says that those holding the dominant worldview in science will cling to and
fight for their dominant position. Kuhn’s analysis has subsequently been
adapted to understanding changes in worldviews whether in science or in
society overall. In agriculture, the struggle of conventional versus
alternative worldviews is right out of Kuhn and the differences have been so
acute that even discourse between the various parties has often been
impossible.

In general, the American dominant social paradigm, the authors say, is
described as the “most fundamental and pervasive worldview”. It is a “belief
in progress, growth and prosperity, faith in science and technology,
commitment to a laissez faire economy and private property rights, and a view
of nature as something that must be subdued and made useful”. All of the
above concepts became part of the paradigm of corporate/conventional
agriculture described above. It has also been aligned with corporate America,
Congress, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the
executive branch. All of them have had controlling factions that have held
this view and as a result the subsequent farm policies have been devastating
in the United States and around the world.

As a result of these conventional practices we’ve witnessed the loss of
family farmers throughout the world, degradation of topsoil, pollution of
water tables and fresh water generally and ocean dead zones from chemical
pollution and run-offs, lack of important diversity in agriculture and
intense mono-crop production, less nutritious food, loss of family farmers
and rural jobs, poorer health of consumers due to ingestion of chemicals in
food, in the water and in the air. The list goes on and on.

In the 1970’s the environmental movement took hold with a new paradigm that
challenged the dominant paradigm of conventional agriculture above. Rachel
Carson’s influential “Silent Spring” (1963), for one, described the
devastation of chemicals and huge agriculture ventures. Her critique began to
take hold on the American psyche that set the stage for an intense battle of
views in agriculture circles. The core values of the new movement challenged
the prevailing views of “economic growth and domination of nature, the free
market economy, hierarchical political structure, centralized social
organization, large scale technological development, and the legitimacy of
scientific knowledge as the basis for social decision making” (Beus and
Dunlap). From this an alternative view of agriculture began to take shape.

Beus and Dunlap define alternative agriculture as follows:“At the heart of
any definition of alternative agriculture is an em phasis on organic or
near-organic practices. Essentially, all alternative agriculturalists favor
significantly reduced use of synthetic farm chem icals. Most alternative
agriculturalists, however, see their goals as much broader than merely
reducing agricultural chemical use. Ad ditionally, alternative
agriculturalists advocate smaller farm units and technology, reduced energy
use, greater farm and regional self-suf ficiency, minimally processed
foodstuffs, conservation of finite re sources, and more direct sales to
consumers. This is not an exhaustive list, nor does it completely define
alternative agriculture, but it does illustrate some of the fundamental
differences between alternative and conventional agriculture.”

After reviewing the writings and actions of leading proponents of
conventional agriculture and alternative agriculture, Beus and Dunlap
identify six “dimensions” of the competing paradigms and they are: “1)
centralization vs. decentralization, 2) dependence vs. independence, 3)
competition vs. community, 4) dom ination of nature vs. harmony with nature,
5) specialization vs. diversity, and 6) exploitation vs. restraint.”

One of the prevailing views not referred to by Beus and Dunlap, however, is
the belief among proponents of industrial agriculture that the world needs
industrial agriculture if the world’s poor and hungry are to be fed. In fact,
former Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz under the Nixon administration once
said, "We can go back to organic agriculture in this country if we must....
However, before we move in that direction, someone must decide which 50
million of our people will starve" (Beus and Dunlap).

The paradox is that there is already enough food to feed the world but people
are still hungry – why is this? One of the many reasons for this is poverty,
and industrial agriculture might be the culprit here as well as it focuses on
quantity and is known to exacerbate poverty. Antithetical to
industrial/conventional agriculture is locally owned sustainable food
production, job creation and an independent farming sector which are some of
the hallmarks of the alternative agriculture model.

Conventional and alternative models of agriculture have been addressed in the
debates and in competing farm policies in America and around the world. In
fact, in 2006 and in 2007 the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) met in Rome to discuss international food security and the
paradoxes of industrial versus organic production and the findings were
striking. The findings? The FAO stated “States should integrate organic
agriculture objectives within national priorities”.

With the world’s population to reach 9 billion by 2050 the FAO has been
trying look at how best to feed the world in an environmentally sound and
sustainable way.

The FAO reported that while it dominates in the world’s food production
"industrialized food systems have environmental and social costs that
threaten food security, e.g., occupational deaths through pesticide
poisoning, farmers' suicides due to debts, and loss of millions of jobs in
rural areas." The FAO also expressed concern about the impact of industrial
agriculture on vulnerable populations, the environment and climate change
issues.

So what’s best for our communities? The FAO reported that organic production
is one of the best routes toward food sovereignty. Through rural development
and rural revitalization locally owned and controlled organically focused
production creates jobs, is environmentally sound, has a fairer trade system,
has fairer wages, it’s locally based emphasis helps people have more control
over their own local resources, and is non-exploitive generally. Some of the
other benefits of organic production are that because no chemicals are used
there is more water security and less erosion as organic production
prioritizes healthy and alive soil that helps to retain water. Importantly,
organic production also helps to maintain plant diversity for generations to
come.

In addition to all of the above, organically produced food can also produce
enough food for the world!

In a 2007 report from the University of Michigan, it states, “Organic farming
can feed the world”. The University researched the differences in performance
between conventional and organically produced food. The press release begins
by stating: “Organic farming can yield up to three times as much food on
individual farms in developing countries, as low-intensive methods on the
same land—according to new findings which refute the long-standing claim that
organic farming methods cannot produce enough food to feed the global
population.”

Ivette Perfecto, professor at the University of Michigan’s School of Natural
Resources and Environment, and one the study's principal investigators said
"the University of Michigan found that in developed countries, yields were
almost equal on organic and conventional farms. In developing countries, food
production could double or triple using organic methods.” She said further
“the idea that people would go hungry if farming went organic is
‘ridiculous’”.

The press release stated further that: "We were struck by how much food the
organic farmers would produce," Perfecto said. The researchers set about
compiling data from published literature to investigate the two chief
objections to organic farming: low yields and lack of organically acceptable
nitrogen sources.

Their findings refute those key arguments, Perfecto said, and confirm that
organic farming is less environmentally harmful yet can potentially produce
more than enough food. This is especially good news for developing countries,
where it’s sometimes impossible to deliver food from outside, so farmers must
supply their own. Yields in developing countries could increase dramatically
by switching to organic farming, Perfecto said.”

Other research in Europe and others in the United States have concurred with
the University of Michigan findings. (See the Worldwatch Institute’s “Can
Organic Farming Feed Us All?”).

Moving toward organic and sustainable agriculture production throughout the
world is not really an alternative but is, in fact, a necessity for us all.
All the data is now in place showing that there has been a shift toward a
natural, organic and sustainable agriculture model in communities throughout
the world, including here in the United States, which is also being
implemented. It needs to continue. The dominant worldview in agriculture is
also changing and what has been referred to as alternative is now becoming
the dominant view in most countries. We are also witnessing this worldview
shift in agriculture circles here in the United States. On the implementation
side, organic production needs to replace industrial/conventional practices
everywhere. Let’s do it.

Heather Gray is the producer of "Just Peace" on WRFG-Atlanta 89.3 FM covering
local, regional, national and international news. She has been involved in
agriculture advocacy and communications for 20 years in the United States and
internationally. She lives in Atlanta, Georgia and can be reached at
hmcgray@earthlink.net

K. Rashid Nuri is an organic urban farmer and agricultural educator in
Atlanta, Georgia. He brings forty years of experience to this work. Rashid
has lived and worked in over 30 countries around the world. He has managed
public, private and community-based food and agriculture businesses. Rashid
served four years as a Senior USDA Executive in the Clinton administration.
He is a graduate of Harvard College, where he studied Political Science, and
has a M.S. in Plant and Soil Science from the University of Massachusetts. He
can be reached at admin@trulylivingwell.com. His website is
http://www.trulylivingwell.com/






  • [Livingontheland] How Organic Agriculture Can Feed the World, Tradingpost, 03/11/2010

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page