Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
and communicates the societal, intentional, and observational context of research, in order to
achieve good and valid communication and critique of the results. This communication is also
an important precondition for better cooperation between different kinds of science. In this
view, the different kinds of research have the same potential for doing good science, and this
view of science can, therefore, serve as a better platform for promoting cross-disciplinary
research cooperation.
The efforts toward more holistic approaches to research in organic agriculture can be
divided into four groups:
1 holistic methods such as picture creation by way of crystallisation;
2 systems research, including long-term crop rotation trials and farm system experiments;
3 participatory approaches that involve stakeholders in research, including on-farm research
and action research; and
4 cross-disciplinary research approaches that include 'non-agricultural' disciplines, social
sciences and the humanities in a comprehensive systemic research methodology.
Holistic methods
One exception to the rejection of Lockeretz (2000) of there being any difference between
organic and conventional research is in the controversial area of food quality from organic
production. Debate centres on whether there are qualities of foods, important to health and
wellbeing, that are not sufficiently well understood to permit appropriate quantitative meas-
urements to be made (Atkinson
et
al
. 2002). Recent discoveries such as the ability of antioxi-
dants to remove or protect against the impact of free radicals (Ramirez-Tortosa
et
al
. 2001)
suggest that there is still much to learn about the links between food and health. Scientists
working on organic production have focused on developing holistic methods that link food
quality and production systems, such as crystallisation methods based on the work of Pfeiffer
(1975) and others. Such concepts, however, continue to be ridiculed by the conventional science
community (e.g. Williams 2002).
These methods are only holistic in a certain, narrow sense that concerns the way food
quality is measured in the laboratory. The samples that are measured may come from tradi-
tional agricultural trials. Another example of a method that combines rigorous experimental
methods with a holistic measure is the experimental study of the inf luence of organic diets on
the health of rats (Lauridsen
et
al
. 2005). Many consumers expect organic food to be healthier
than conventional, but it is very difficult to test this hypothesis in a scientific way. Other factors
also inf luence human health so that they may hide the effect of organic diets, and it is difficult
to generalise from measurements of single components of organic diets to the holistic state of
health. However, Lauridsen
et
al
. (2005) did show that comprehensive measures of the effects
on health can be obtained from a study on rats under standardised experimental conditions,
and that in some respects, the rats benefited from eating organically grown food.
Systems research
The sustainability of organic farming in the long term is of major interest to policy makers.
Several long-term cropping system trials have been established to investigate this (e.g. Table
15.3, Table 15.4). There is a clear split in research approaches between studies that compare
organic and conventional systems (e.g. Mäder
et
al
. 2002, and further examples in Table 15.3)
and studies that compare different management systems within organic farming, in order to
improve the systems (e.g. Olesen
et
al
. 1999 and further examples in Table 15.4).
Considerable research effort and funding has been spent comparing and contrasting organic
and other types of farming systems. The trials listed in Table 15.3 mostly address rotations for
