Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
revealed if the qualifications relating specifically to agriculture are examined i.e. more
conventional than organic farmers have a national certificate in agriculture.
Analysis shows that the organic farmers in the survey are very critical of pesticide use. This
contrasts with conventional farmers, who said they need to use pesticides to produce their
crops but, nevertheless, are aware of the dangers of over-use of such chemicals. One 54 year
old owner/tenant organic farmer said: 'If you read the magazine that the conventional
farmers read, the
Farmers Weekly
, you will notice that the magazine is paid for by pesticide
adverts. The biggest adverts saying this is the time to spray with this or that. This is the way
[conventional] farmers are being educated …' (OF5). Some conventional farmers agreed
with organic farmers that conventionally produced crops sometimes use high levels of
pesticides, which is an unsustainable method of seeking continual productivity gains to
mitigate food insecurity. Three
recent
independent studies, carried out in the USA, found
that children whose mothers are exposed to common agricultural pesticides are more likely
to experience a range of deleterious effects in their cognitive development, including lower
IQ, as well as impaired reasoning and memory (Eskenazi, 2011).
Many of the organic and conventional respondents perceive GM food production as an
integral part of conventional agriculture. This view is supported by Lawrence et al. (2010).
GM crops were investigated in two broad, but overlapping, categories: first; those
concerning environmental issues; and second, those which relate to public health concerns.
More conventional farmers have technocentric attitudes and a greater acceptance of GM
crops than the organic respondents in the survey, typified by organic farmers' comments: 'I
think it's tampering with nature …' (OF19). Most conventional farmers in the survey
seemed more accepting of GM technology, typically saying: 'I haven't a huge fear of them as
long as we observe the science …' (CF24). However, it may be unwise to believe that science
and technology are a panacea, as new technologies often raise further questions and
complications of their own (Frow et al., 2009). Conventional farmers are usually less critical
of GM crops than the organic respondents, and seem to place their main emphasis on the
potential environmental benefits to be gained from a reduction in pesticide usage. But, as
discussed earlier, greater use of GM technology is likely to further intensify the production
of monoculture crops and change some land use from food to fuel production, thereby
jeopardising food security.
Analysis reveals that more organic than conventional farmers have concerns about the
potential health risks associated with eating GM food. Other organic respondents have some
misgivings and perceive that there will be future public health concerns. However, a
number of organic farmers could not think of any health issues. Generally, the conventional
farmers seem to have fewer health concerns relating to GM food. A key finding is that more
conventional than organic farmers believe that GM farming will be necessary to feed a
growing world population. This could help alleviate problems of food insecurity, but with
the loss of some agricultural biodiversity and therefore sustainability. A number of organic
farmers have concerns about GM crops epitomised by the following: 'It's [GM] not
necessary [to feed a growing world population] - it's an argument used by the chemical
companies' (OF25).
Global climate change (with increasing frequency of extreme weather events) is a
particularly important issue to many UK farmers who perceive that their future livelihood
will be endangered by crop reduction/failure causing food insecurity. In July 2011, the
Energy Secretary Chris Huhne agreed: 'A changing climate will imperil food, water, and
Search WWH ::
Custom Search