4 ms·

"Overall, organic farms tend to store more soil carbon, have better soil quality, and reduce soil erosion. Organic agriculture also creates less soil and water

"Overall, organic farms tend to store more soil carbon, have better soil quality, and reduce soil erosion. Organic agriculture also creates less soil and water pollution and lower greenhouse gas emissions." Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2016-02-agriculture-key-world-sustainably.html#jCp https://phys.org/news/2016-02-agriculture-key-world-sustaina...

exclusiv 9y ago
On the flipside it's not all rosy for organic and evidence points towards a blend of organic/conventional as a best practice. "The results show that organic farming practices generally have positive impacts on the environment per unit of area, but not necessarily per product unit. Organic farms tend to have higher soil organic matter content and lower nutrient losses (nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions and ammonia emissions) per unit of field area. However, ammonia emissions, nitrogen leaching and nitrous oxide emissions per product unit were higher from organic systems" [1] "In order to reduce the environmental impacts of farming in Europe, research efforts and policies should be targeted to developing farming systems that produce high yields with low negative environmental impacts drawing on techniques from both organic and conventional systems." [1] This research was included in Science Vs Organic podcast [2] which was a pretty good episode and discusses the hybrid approach at the end which is apparently more common than people realize. Most debate on the topic seems to flare as if we must be either completely organic or just go conventional as if a balanced, combined approach is not an option. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479712004264 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479712... [2] https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic-food/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic-food/
- strainer 9y ago
  A wide ranging organic system without areas of contention and without room for improvements is a practical impossibility - but there should not be any genuine argument that the major legislated systems of organic agriculture developed across the World, currently represent the most mature and well researched alternatives we have to legacy standards. To be dismissive of the biggest organised effort in the world to improve agricultural practice, and argue past it is really to miss out on the biggest opportunity to do so.
  - exclusiv 9y ago
    > there should not be any genuine argument that the major legislated systems of organic agriculture developed across the World, currently represent the most mature and well researched alternatives we have to legacy standards You just made an incredibly generalized statement which tries to shut down any criticism while conveniently ignoring research and data. I proposed valid research that says that per unit, organic farms leach more ammonia, nitrogen and oxide per product unit. That's a problem because you need to produce X units and your waterways could get disrupted and contaminated more than if you used a hybrid or straight conventional system. However, research shows a lot of good things from organic methods. It's certainly possible a hybrid approach is best. I don't know why you're so dismissive of research that suggests this.
    - strainer 9y ago
      I just recalled the overarching situation - there is no 'hybrid approach' there is your nations mandatory standards and your regions Organic standards. There are no other accessible alternatives which we can practically select between as consumers of agriculture. You can support organic standards and production, or focus on research critical of it. That research I referenced covered bythe phys.org article is a substantial metareview published last year. You responded with a small study published in 2012 and a list of links too diverse to use. your argument is very general "hybrid would be best" -- Recognise the wood amongst the trees.
      - exclusiv 9y ago
        > There are no other accessible alternatives which we can practically select between as consumers of agriculture. I'm not talking about consumers of agriculture. The vast majority of consumers will choose whatever is cheapest and looks good. I'm talking about best practices for farming as it relates to yield and environmental impact. If the truly best practice happens to be a hybrid method and that becomes the standard, well then consumers will be forced to support that best practice and won't have to think anymore. > your argument is very general "hybrid would be best" I never said that. I said it's quite possible that it is since there's research to suggest this and you must consider a lot of factors, one of which is yield. If organic had the lowest environmental impact on an area but yielded way less produce, thereby requiring more land to be used, which had a larger overall environmental impact - that's sensible to question and study. Do you not agree? We have a lot of farms already using some organic best practices alongside conventional methods. There's examples in the podcast I posted that use a hybrid approach. > You can support organic standards and production, or focus on research critical of it. Or, you could throw your agenda aside and support finding out the optimal way to farm these days and treat it as an ongoing process just like we usually do with technology. Bottom line: there's nothing preventing the new best practice from being a hybrid approach which includes organic and conventional methods.

exclusiv 9y ago

On the flipside it's not all rosy for organic and evidence points towards a blend of organic/conventional as a best practice. "The results show that organic farming practices generally have positive impacts on the environment per unit of area, but not necessarily per product unit. Organic farms tend to have higher soil organic matter content and lower nutrient losses (nitrogen leaching, nitrous oxide emissions and ammonia emissions) per unit of field area. However, ammonia emissions, nitrogen leaching and nitrous oxide emissions per product unit were higher from organic systems" [1] "In order to reduce the environmental impacts of farming in Europe, research efforts and policies should be targeted to developing farming systems that produce high yields with low negative environmental impacts drawing on techniques from both organic and conventional systems." [1] This research was included in Science Vs Organic podcast [2] which was a pretty good episode and discusses the hybrid approach at the end which is apparently more common than people realize. Most debate on the topic seems to flare as if we must be either completely organic or just go conventional as if a balanced, combined approach is not an option. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479712004264 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479712... [2] https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic-food/ https://gimletmedia.com/episode/5-organic-food/

strainer 9y ago
A wide ranging organic system without areas of contention and without room for improvements is a practical impossibility - but there should not be any genuine argument that the major legislated systems of organic agriculture developed across the World, currently represent the most mature and well researched alternatives we have to legacy standards. To be dismissive of the biggest organised effort in the world to improve agricultural practice, and argue past it is really to miss out on the biggest opportunity to do so.
- exclusiv 9y ago
  > there should not be any genuine argument that the major legislated systems of organic agriculture developed across the World, currently represent the most mature and well researched alternatives we have to legacy standards You just made an incredibly generalized statement which tries to shut down any criticism while conveniently ignoring research and data. I proposed valid research that says that per unit, organic farms leach more ammonia, nitrogen and oxide per product unit. That's a problem because you need to produce X units and your waterways could get disrupted and contaminated more than if you used a hybrid or straight conventional system. However, research shows a lot of good things from organic methods. It's certainly possible a hybrid approach is best. I don't know why you're so dismissive of research that suggests this.
  - strainer 9y ago
    I just recalled the overarching situation - there is no 'hybrid approach' there is your nations mandatory standards and your regions Organic standards. There are no other accessible alternatives which we can practically select between as consumers of agriculture. You can support organic standards and production, or focus on research critical of it. That research I referenced covered bythe phys.org article is a substantial metareview published last year. You responded with a small study published in 2012 and a list of links too diverse to use. your argument is very general "hybrid would be best" -- Recognise the wood amongst the trees.
    - exclusiv 9y ago
      > There are no other accessible alternatives which we can practically select between as consumers of agriculture. I'm not talking about consumers of agriculture. The vast majority of consumers will choose whatever is cheapest and looks good. I'm talking about best practices for farming as it relates to yield and environmental impact. If the truly best practice happens to be a hybrid method and that becomes the standard, well then consumers will be forced to support that best practice and won't have to think anymore. > your argument is very general "hybrid would be best" I never said that. I said it's quite possible that it is since there's research to suggest this and you must consider a lot of factors, one of which is yield. If organic had the lowest environmental impact on an area but yielded way less produce, thereby requiring more land to be used, which had a larger overall environmental impact - that's sensible to question and study. Do you not agree? We have a lot of farms already using some organic best practices alongside conventional methods. There's examples in the podcast I posted that use a hybrid approach. > You can support organic standards and production, or focus on research critical of it. Or, you could throw your agenda aside and support finding out the optimal way to farm these days and treat it as an ongoing process just like we usually do with technology. Bottom line: there's nothing preventing the new best practice from being a hybrid approach which includes organic and conventional methods.