# Organic farming is financially sustainable worldwide



## beast (Nov 1, 2014)

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/The-

Bite/2015/0610/Organic-farming-is-financially-sustainable-

worldwide-study-finds

Organic farming is financially-sustainable worldwide, study

finds

Organic agriculture occupies just 1 percent of cropland

across the world. While organic sales continue to grow, a

study has found that organic farming is economically-feasible

in many countries. 
By Emily Nink, Food Tank June 10, 2015

Jeff Barnard/AP/File
View Caption

A recently published meta-analysis of 44 scientific studies

shows that organic farming is not only environmentally

sustainable, but also financially competitive when compared

to conventional farming. Organic sales grew 170 percent to

US$63 billion from 2002 to 2011 worldwide, but the analysis's

authors note that organic agriculture currently occupies only

1 percent of global cropland. The good news is that there is

room for organic agriculture to continue to spread, and the

authors predict that profitability of organic farming will

continue to outpace conventional models.

According to David Crowder, a co-author of the study, other

meta-analyses of organic agriculture have focused mostly on

yields. "But yields are really just one component of the

actual economic performance of an organic-farming system,"

Crowder says. Crowder jointly designed the research with a

colleague, John P. Reganold, at Washington State University.

M. S. Swaminathan of the Centre for Research on Sustainable

Agriculture and Development in Madras, India, reviewed the

paper.

Through a literature survey and data analysis, the study

appraised the financial performance of 55 crops grown in 14

countries on five continents. The data included in the review

spanned 40 years of production, representing a long-term

analysis of the financial sustainability of organic farming.

According to the authors, many factors can affect the

profitability of organic farming, including crop yields;

labor costs; price premiums for organic products; potential

for reduced income during a transition period from

conventional to organic production; and potential cost

savings from the reduced use of nonrenewable resources and

purchased inputs. The cost-benefit analyses incorporated all

of these factors, and the authors concluded that organic

agriculture is more profitable than conventional agriculture.
Recommended: Doughnut quiz: Think you know Homer Simpson's

favorite food?

Organic price premiums are part of the reason that growth in

sales has outpaced growth in organic land area. In the United

States, consumers of organic produce pay a typical premium of

32 percent over conventionally grown produce. But the

researchers found that even if premiums fall to lower levels

as sales continue to grow, organic agriculture will likely

keep its competitive edge due to consumer demand.
Test your knowledge Doughnut quiz: Think you know Homer

Simpson's favorite food?
Photos of the Day Photos of the day 06/10

The authors note that the labor costs of organic farming are

higher than conventional farming due to the need for

mechanical pest control, creative approaches to marketing and

selling of organic products, and labor-intensive practices

such as weeding. However, the cost-benefit analyses provided

by the study show that the economic benefits of farming

organically offset these costs, such that organic farming is

more profitable overall-the price premiums and the lowered

need for costly pesticide and fertilizer inputs make up for

these higher labor costs around the world.

Furthermore, the authors contend that the labor-intensive

nature of organic farming has the potential to revitalize

rural economies, providing an added economic benefit outside

of the farm-level scope of the analysis. Organic farming can

redistribute resources in rural areas and promote economic

stability through job creation, according to the authors'

conclusions.

The study separately analyzed diverse farming systems,

because many organic farmers depend on more than one crop for

a steady source of income. The review therefore went beyond

past analyses in examining the effects of diversity on farm

profits by looking at the whole cropping system, rather than

individual crops.

However, the study was not able to examine the economics of

ecosystem services, which may favor organic models over

conventional models as well. Organic models are more likely

to utilize ecosystem services such as biological control of

pests and nitrogen mineralization, which may add to the

intrinsic value of organic crops. Therefore, the overall

economic value of organic farming systems may be even higher

than the authors estimate when the true values of all aspects

of the system are considered. Price premiums may serve as a

proxy for the valuation of ecosystem services, but are

unlikely to make up for the full costs of producing

conventional crops.

Finally, the study revealed that a three-year transition from

conventional to organic farming represented the most risky

period for a farmer financially. The authors found lack of

price premiums during this period the most significant

limiting factor of profitability. One important takeaway from

the analysis is the need to support beginning farmers and

farms transitioning from conventional to organic.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Too long, did not read. I hope the people promoting organic farming also promote crop rotation and natural fertilizer or it'll ruin the land.


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

The small farmers doesn't have the time to document all the processes required to declare the crop as "organic". Without the documentation you can't put an organic label on it.

If you use lime (organic or not) to control the PH of your soil it is not "organic". If you use steer manure as fertilizer you have to document that the steer was fed an organic diet or it is not "organic".

The big corporate farms keep track of every penny spent so it is a lot easier to document that the sources are all organic. It is just too expensive for the little guys to provide the paper trail. Do you keep those kinds of records for your crops?


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

The small or Family owned, Family run farms are falling by the wayside. The just can't compete with the corporate farms. Is this a good thing?


----------



## pheniox17 (Dec 12, 2013)

It takes years.... If not decades to prove your certifiable organic...

And the hoops.... There was a report not long ago (source is berried) of a Australian farmer suing their neighbor, for loosing his organic certification because that neighbour planted a gmo crop.... And seeds from that crop "invaded" his farm....

Its just gone too far.....


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

It is if you want people to starve


----------



## Spice (Dec 21, 2014)

Organic farmers are all about crop rotation, not monocropping, and compost. It's in their own self-interest after all.

And from a prepper point of view, those same kinds of approaches are important for long-term success without big inputs from commercial agriculture. 

I would suggest to preppers to learn to garden this way Now. I've found there's a bit of a learning curve. My output's better every year, but I'm very glad I was not needing to try to survive on my first attempts. And there's no need to jump through the stupid hoops the USDA has put up to favor the big producers in awarding the Organic label. Plus, at least around here, you can go to a farmer's market and some local groceries and sell or buy stuff as 'naturally produced' (which we use to mean no chemical pesticides and fertilizers, but hasn't gone through the USDA Certified Organic inspection process). Many people around here treat that the same as stuff labeled organic.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

I don't understand all the hype on organic farming. It's just going back to the way it was done for thousands of years. People just get stupid and don't realize how it was done 50-75 years ago. What's old is new again.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

The "hype" is based in the public's aversion to food co raining unhealthy amounts of chemical and antibiotic residue not intended for human consumption, and genetic manipulation without concern for human safety. Big farms and ranches aren't concerned with safe quality product, just output and return.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Go back to 40 bushel to the acre corn and see how much it cost you and how many won't get food. Modern day farming when done right is 100% safe. We know far more toady about the products we use than ever. Field testing and sample to insure no over use is done is simple now and done all of the time.
Here is an example of crop rotation Corn year one Beans year two then back to corn we see a 30-40 bushel increase over corn several years in a row. And lower nitrogen products needed. But Anyone that thinks we can fed this world with mother earth news farming needs to the them medical pot down .


----------



## Spice (Dec 21, 2014)

Crop rotation is an ancient practice, and still an excellent idea. Nor is modern farming 100% safe -- this little thing called 'antibiotic resistance' is in large part due to widespread low-dose agricultural usage. The Mississippi Delta region causes a dead zone where it washes into the Gulf of Mexico due to all the agricultural run-off:








On the other hand, the yields from organic farming currently aren't good enough to produce all the food we need.

On the large scale, I think keeping the best of modern agriculture but being more careful about what we use and integrating more organic methods to reduce needed inputs is the best course for long-term sustainability.

But from the prepper viewpoint, I want to be able to grow what I need year after year without depending on buying a bunch of stuff from the farm store &#8230; and that means I need to learn efficient organic permaculture.


----------



## Michael_Js (Dec 4, 2013)

Costco is trying to be the world leader in selling organic items. They have really been stocking and selling more and more each time we go. We've read a news article about it also. Hopefully, it's all above board...I'm sure you could search for plenty of articles...

here's just one - claiming organic doesn't promote better health; (this is not the one I had read originally): Apparently, Costco Sells More Organic Food Than Whole Foods


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

Spice said:


> Crop rotation is an ancient practice, and still an excellent idea. Nor is modern farming 100% safe -- this little thing called 'antibiotic resistance' is in large part due to widespread low-dose agricultural usage. The Mississippi Delta region causes a dead zone where it washes into the Gulf of Mexico due to all the agricultural run-off:
> View attachment 11521
> 
> 
> ...


 Our fields are so closely watch when it comes to chemicals it would blow your mind. The fields are sampled. The grid is loaded to a computer on the application equipment how much of every thing applied is control and tailored to each part of the filed to ensure no area gets any more than needed. Farming has change in the last 20 years in ways no one could have dreamed of. The GPS controls the application and in some fields even different verities of seed are planted depending on soil types.
Growing enough food to feed your self is simple and you can do it without any modern farming. Feeding the world is another game.
Organic and green two of the words the come just before scam.


----------



## Spice (Dec 21, 2014)

Look at the anoxic dead zone in the river deltas. Look at the concentration of nitrates in wells - wells and runoff water streams are undrinkable in our county without nitrate removal. Look at the concentrations of E.coli in those same water sources, whose strains match the nearest feedlots.

I know farmers have no interest in poisoning people; most of my neighbors are justifiably proud of how many people they feed. Nor are they interested in applying more chemicals than they need, for economic reasons. But these outcomes are still present. The nitrates and E. coli are there, herbicide and pesticide residues end up where you don't want them sometimes. It happens. Writing off alternative approaches as scams overlooks an opportunity to improve.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

After the nitrates scare in the 80-90's it was found and proven that the big cause here was natural. caused by nature it self from leaves and the like enter water supply a process that has gone on long before we were here.
Lot of this stuff is routed in out come based science . First state what you want to find then create the science to back it up. Just like when the city of Milwaukee blamed farmers for Ecoli in the water . Turns out that the city was dumping it's waste over flow in the water . To this day they still do and most still are 100% sure it is caused by farmers. Public school system still teachers it is caused by farms. 
Funny part was not one case of a person on a farm being infected but a lot of them in Milwaukee.
Yes 40 years ago we figured out how much to apply mixed a tank and sprayed the whole field at the same rate. If a tip went bad and over sprayed we had no way of knowing unless we happen to see it. Now the sprayer shuts off and all the warning bells go off. Then the next year we plowed it a did it again. That has long sense be over. There has not been a plow on this land in 30 years. Weed control is targeted to areas needed adjusted by type and control needed.
People spraying their lawns are a much bigger issue than a farm today.


----------

