The debate of organic versus conventional agriculture continues as a new study published by researchers at McGill U. and U. Minnesota concluded that while organic agriculture may not be able to produce enough food for the world, it will play an important role in minimizing environmental damage for the future.
The study found that certain crops like legumes and perennials, which include soybeans and fruits, have a similar output through both organic and conventional farming.
Overall, the study found that organic farming produces approximately 25 percent fewer crops than conventional farming. However, the study found that organic farms can produce just 13 percent less than conventional farms under the best circumstances.
Verena Seufert, one of the researchers from McGill U., said that perennial crops can do better organically because they grow more slowly and are less dependent than annual crops on external factors.
Conventional agriculture is seen as a threat because it can harm the environment by taking up water resources and by releasing greenhouse gases. People on the other side of the argument say organic farming on a large scale would be less productive because it would make food unaffordable for those with lower incomes around the world.
The world is currently producing enough food, Seufert said, but starvation continues because of distribution issues.
“The problems that we have today with so many people not having enough food is more a food access global system,” she said. “It does not depend on increased food production, but increased access to food.”
U. Oregon’s Urban Farm class educates students about the advantages of local farming and how they can get involved. The farm is led by Harper Keeler, a long-time advocate for organic food.
People need to be more connected to their food to understand where it comes from; Lane County residents only eat about four percent of their food from local sources, he said.
“There’s no appreciation for the problem,” he said. “We need people on the land to start understanding where it comes from. Until then, we won’t have the political willpower to make the changes that we need to make.”
Keeler spoke of the advantages of farming for the future health of the population.
“Working outside and growing stuff is going to have health benefits, mental benefits, environmental benefits,” he said. “All those things were lost with the unsettling of America upon industrialization.”
Tom Bettman, a longtime Urban Farm instructor, said organic farming could be plausible if there were a significantly smaller population.
“You need a population of about a billion. Right now, we’re feeding people on petroleum,” he said. “We’re burning fossil fuels to crank out enough food to feed about seven billion people.”
The study concluded that there should not be a mindset of either/or, but that a combination of organic and conventional farming will be the most beneficial for the world’s population.
“I think the solution that will feed the world more sustainably will not be only organic crops or conventional crops but will be a mixture of the two ideas,” Seufert said.