139
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    2
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Organic Agriculture, Food Security, and the Environment

      1 , 1 , 2
      Annual Review of Resource Economics
      Annual Reviews

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Organic agriculture is often perceived as more sustainable than conventional farming. We review the literature on this topic from a global perspective. In terms of environmental and climate change effects, organic farming is less polluting than conventional farming when measured per unit of land but not when measured per unit of output. Organic farming, which currently accounts for only 1% of global agricultural land, is lower yielding on average. Due to higher knowledge requirements, observed yield gaps might further increase if a larger number of farmers would switch to organic practices. Widespread upscaling of organic agriculture would cause additional loss of natural habitats and also entail output price increases, making food less affordable for poor consumers in developing countries. Organic farming is not the paradigm for sustainable agriculture and food security, but smart combinations of organic and conventional methods could contribute toward sustainable productivity increases in global agriculture.

          Related collections

          Most cited references100

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Farming and the fate of wild nature.

          World food demand is expected to more than double by 2050. Decisions about how to meet this challenge will have profound effects on wild species and habitats. We show that farming is already the greatest extinction threat to birds (the best known taxon), and its adverse impacts look set to increase, especially in developing countries. Two competing solutions have been proposed: wildlife-friendly farming (which boosts densities of wild populations on farmland but may decrease agricultural yields) and land sparing (which minimizes demand for farmland by increasing yield). We present a model that identifies how to resolve the trade-off between these approaches. This shows that the best type of farming for species persistence depends on the demand for agricultural products and on how the population densities of different species on farmland change with agricultural yield. Empirical data on such density-yield functions are sparse, but evidence from a range of taxa in developing countries suggests that high-yield farming may allow more species to persist.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Soil fertility and biodiversity in organic farming.

            An understanding of agroecosystems is key to determining effective farming systems. Here we report results from a 21-year study of agronomic and ecological performance of biodynamic, bioorganic, and conventional farming systems in Central Europe. We found crop yields to be 20% lower in the organic systems, although input of fertilizer and energy was reduced by 34 to 53% and pesticide input by 97%. Enhanced soil fertility and higher biodiversity found in organic plots may render these systems less dependent on external inputs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: land sharing and land sparing compared.

              The question of how to meet rising food demand at the least cost to biodiversity requires the evaluation of two contrasting alternatives: land sharing, which integrates both objectives on the same land; and land sparing, in which high-yield farming is combined with protecting natural habitats from conversion to agriculture. To test these alternatives, we compared crop yields and densities of bird and tree species across gradients of agricultural intensity in southwest Ghana and northern India. More species were negatively affected by agriculture than benefited from it, particularly among species with small global ranges. For both taxa in both countries, land sparing is a more promising strategy for minimizing negative impacts of food production, at both current and anticipated future levels of production.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Annual Review of Resource Economics
                Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ.
                Annual Reviews
                1941-1340
                1941-1359
                October 05 2018
                October 05 2018
                : 10
                : 1
                : 39-63
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development, University of Goettingen, 37073 Goettingen, Germany;
                [2 ]Center of Biodiversity and Sustainable Land Use (CBL), University of Goettingen, 37073 Goettingen, Germany
                Article
                10.1146/annurev-resource-100517-023252
                4a720d5b-0e36-48bf-9cca-07209af66a57
                © 2018
                History

                Earth & Environmental sciences,Chemistry,Engineering,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Economics,Life sciences

                Comments

                Comment on this article