Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
more resources - land, labour, capital - thus facilitating consolidation. Finally, consolidation
allowed industrial organisations to achieve greater productivity through 'economies of scale'.
Industrialisation inevitably led to fewer, larger, specialised and standardised organisations.
These essential processes of industrialisation, if unchecked, eventually create direct con-
f flicts with the essential characteristics of healthy, living systems. Specialisation diminishes
differentiation, standardisation erases form and pattern, and consolidation destroys the
natural hierarchy found in healthy, living, organic systems. Industrial systems achieve their
greater productivity by removing anything that constrains the release of energy from matter,
thus accelerating the tendency toward entropy. The natural environment and society are con-
straints to maximisation of profits and growth, and thus, are removed. However, natural
organic systems have internal controls, which limit their rates of growth and reproduction and
define their healthy mature size or scope. Internal controls moderate the release of energy
from living systems, releasing surplus energy for external use or productivity, but retaining
sufficient energy for renewal and regeneration. Living systems are able to maintain their diver-
sity, form and hierarchy, and thus, to sustain both their health and productivity. The indus-
trial organisation, lacking natural internal controls, grows uncontrollably like a cancerous
tumour, until it depletes its energy supply and destroys the life of its host.
The productivity and regenerative capacity of organic systems depend upon an appropriate
balance between specialisation and diversity, between standardisation and individuality, and
between consolidation and devolution of control. Lady Eve Balfour, in commenting on the
definition of organic farming as opposed to conventional farming (Balfour 1977), said:
I prefer the term biological husbandry because of its emphasis on life, the short
answer is balance.
She talked about how organic farming is impossible without taking a 'positive and ecologi-
cal approach', which relies on balance and harmony, whereas conventional farming is 'negative,
narrow, and fragmentary, and consequently produces imbalance', because it relies on speciali-
sation and domination of nature.
The challenge to organics of increased demand
Unfortunately, in efforts to increase the productivity and profitability of organics, to make
organic foods more accessible to more people, organic agriculture is being transformed into
industrial agriculture. While the objectives may seem worthy, the fundamental purpose of
organic farming, its permanence, is being placed in peril by this transformation. As organic
farmer and writer, Elliott Coleman (Coleman 2004), has pointed out:
Since the 1930s, organic farming has been subjected to the traditional three-step pro-
gression that occurs with any new idea directly challenging orthodoxy. First, the orthodoxy
dismisses it. Then it spends decades contesting its validity. Finally, it moves to take over the
idea. The industrial food system has finally been forced to recognise a growing consumer
preference for organically produced foods, and thus, is now moving to take over organic
production.
The rapid growth in consumer demand for organic foods during the 1900s sparked
optimism among organic farmers that organic farming might soon displace conventional
farming. The patchwork of differing organic standards and certification organisations at the
time seemed an obstacle to moving organic foods into mainstream food marketing channels.
So, organic farmers initiated political movements to develop national organic standards and
then to harmonise organic standards among nations. National and global standards for organic
