Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
crop yields and production costs. These researchers realized that “we cannot
predict the performance of modern organic farms simply on the basis of
yields obtained three decades ago or from older historical plots” (Lockeretz
et al. 1978, 130). So they set out to compare fourteen pairs of organic and
conventional farms in the Midwest and found that even with no organic
price premiums, organic farms' economic performance was equal to that
of conventional farms over three growing seasons, 1974, 1975, and 1976.
In addition, the organic farms had the benefit of less dependence on off-
farm inputs, fewer external energy supplies, less soil erosion, and higher
soil organic matter. This early study must have been quite a surprise for
many people who considered organic farming a hippie throwback to prein-
dustrial times. It actually showed that commercial organic production was
economically viable and offered advantages over conventional farming.
More work was published a few years later by the same authors (Lock-
eretzetal.1981). This time they investigated both the social context and the
field methods employed by organic farmers in the Corn Belt region. Mailed
questionnaires from 174 organic farmers indicated that 80 percent of them
had started in conventional farming, as opposed to being newcomers to
agriculture. Their most common reason for shifting to organic methods
was concern about chemical use (including health of humans, livestock,
and the soil and the ineffectiveness of the chemicals). The farmers also
described clear barriers to organic methods: difficulty finding markets, lack
of information sources, weed problems, and being shunned by conventional
farmers. The farming practices of 363 organic farmers in the region were
generally similar to conventional farmers, minus the agrichemical use. In-
stead, they employed crop rotation (planting different types of crops in a
specific order) for insect control and fertility. Farm types included a mix
of crops and livestock, so manure could be applied to build soil fertility.
Organic farmers tended to have a higher number of crops in their rotations.
But overall, this early research disproves the stereotypes of that time and
shows that organic farms were not drastically different from their conven-
tional neighbors.
Ten years later, a follow-up study showed that most of the original group
of farmers was still in business and still using organic methods (Lockeretz
and Madden 1987). These farmers had sound financial standing with very
lowdebt comparedwith conventional averages in the region. This is particu-
larly remarkable given the severely depressed Midwestern farm economy of
the time. The farmers still mentioned the health benefits of organic farming
and felt there was little change in the lack of institutional support for organic
production. These initial studies paved the way for other research of organic
[41],
(2)
Lines: 60 to 64
———
0.0pt PgVar
———
Normal Page
PgEnds: T
E
X
[41],
(2)
