Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Chapter 1
Oeriew of organic agriculture
Paul Kristiansen*, University of New England, Australia and Charles Merfield, Lincoln University,
Canterbury, New Zealand
*Dr Paul Kristiansen, School of Rural Science and Agriculture, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales
2351, Australia. Tel: +61 2 6773 2962, Fax: +61 2 6773 3238, Email: paul.kristiansen@une.edu.au
The most important factor that will enable organic agriculture to usefully
contribute to food security is the attitude of decision-makers. Organic agriculture
must be discussed with an open mind, with the advantages and disadvantages
being clearly considered. (Wynen 1998)
The search for sustainability
The acquisition of food, textiles and other resources from plants and animals has been a major
concern for human societies, from the earliest days as hunter-gathers, through pastoral and
swidden phases, to agrarian societies, with an associated trend away from nomadic to seden-
tary lifestyles. Yet as agricultural production intensified and expanded, the negative effects on
the underlying resource base have also increased. The history of environmental damage caused
by agriculture is well documented; impacts include air pollution from greenhouse gases such
as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide; land degradation as a result of clearing, cultivation
of sloping land and salinity; water pollution from fertilisers, pesticides, overuse and wetland
draining; and the loss of biological and ecological diversity (Norse and Tschirley 2003). In the
area of conventional weed science, for example, considerable attention has been placed on her-
bicides but this has not achieved a long-term decline in agricultural weed populations. Instead,
farmers have become dependant on herbicides as widespread resistance in a range of weed
species has emerged (Gill 2002).
Although the extent of the damage may be disputed by some, the seriousness of these agri-
cultural sustainability issues is ref lected in the formal policies implemented in many countries
to reduce those impacts, and in the financial benefits available for (verified) good environ-
mental performance (OECD 2001). Policies designed to improve the environmental sustaina-
bility of agriculture include bans on increasing numbers of pesticides such as the fumigant
methyl bromide, financial incentives to revegetate, penalties for water pollution and funding
for research into efficiency improvement (e.g. fertiliser applications) or damage abatement
technologies. The various policy tools may be applied in an
ad hoc
way or, preferably, in a stra-
tegic manner that integrates the tools and creates a supportive milieu for adoption and
improvement. In regard to measuring performance, environmental management systems
(EMS) for agriculture have recently become popular with some farmers, government agencies
and consumers. EMS are relatively new and suffer from several limitations including credibil-
ity, complexity, financial risk, uncertain consumer demand and patchy evidence of environ-
mental improvement (Chang and Kristiansen 2006).
1
