No Butz about it: organic farming is making big inroads

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 12/02/2016 (3012 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The late Earl Butz, a politician who served as the U.S. secretary of agriculture in the early 1970s, was boisterous to the point of being a bully about the future of farming as he saw it. 

Many of the philosophies he preached, such as growing “fencerow to fencerow” and “get big or get out” continue to drive commodity agriculture even today. 

Butz didn’t have much time for organic farming, which he characterized as being ideologically driven and outdated. 

“Before we go back to organic agriculture in this country, somebody must decide which 50 million Americans we are going to let starve or go hungry,” Butz reportedly said in 1971.

It’s taken a long time for the organic sector to rise above the mentality that growing food without chemical inputs is backward. The system has languished under the “never going to feed the world” mantra, with feeble research budgets making that prognostication self-fulfilling. 

But it seems times have changed. Registrations already exceed the 198-seat capacity for the Prairie Organics: Think Whole Farm conference taking place at the University of Manitoba Feb. 18 and 19, one of several signs lately there is a new momentum behind this style of agriculture. 

Recent research suggests some of the ideologies driving commodity agriculture are facing a rethink. 

In a paper titled Organic Agriculture in the 21st Century, appearing in the latest journal Nature Plants, University of Washington researchers John P. Reganold and Jonathon M. Wachter reviewed 40 years of studies analyzing organic and conventional farming systems against four sustainability benchmarks: productivity, economics, environment and community well-being. 

Organic production systems compare favourably on three out of the four. Organic systems yield an average of eight to 25 per cent less. However, those yield gaps have continued to shrink as farmers gain access to better seed, growing conditions and management strategies.

The argument goes the yield gap will force more of the world’s lands into agricultural production. In reality, that pressure on land continues at a relentless pace under high-yield agricultural systems through prices both high and low. These researchers note producing more yield isn’t solely the answer to world food security. Reducing food waste is also important. 

Naysayers also point to the higher cost of organically produced foods. 

The question that never gets asked, however, is whether the conventional systems accurately reflect the full cost of production. There are environmental costs to crop inputs, such as nitrogen fertilizer, that aren’t reflected in grocery store prices. As well, deficits in farmers’ incomes due to low commodity prices are routinely subsidized by taxpayers. 

The fact there is a growing subset of the consuming public willing to pay more to eat should be celebrated in agriculture, not scorned. Demand for organic foods continues to grow faster than the supply. This study noted sales of organic foods and beverages increased five-fold to US$72 billion between 1999 and 2013 and they are expected to double again by 2018. 

According to these researchers, the evidence shows the organic model ranks higher in resiliency, delivering healthier soil with better water-holding capacity. The system uses less energy and emits fewer greenhouse gases. 

Farm organizations have been lobbying governments for more than a decade for policies that reward farmers for delivering environmental goods and services. Organic farmers are already being rewarded — through the marketplace.

Earl Butz, may you rest in peace. 

Laura Rance is editor of the Manitoba Co-operator. She can be reached at laura@fbcpublishing.com or 204-792-4382