Organic Farmers: Contributing to the Resilience of the Food System? - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 187

systems which all interact (Campbell and Rosin 2011 ;Lamine 2011 ), and that it is
better studied within that field where it can be compared and contrasted with other
management systems in the same field. All these systems fit within the food supply
chain (Friedmann and McMichael 1989 ; Friedland 2004 ). “Yet if the word organic
means anything, it means that all these things are ultimately connected: that the way
we grow food is inseparable from the way we distribute food, which is inseparable
from the way we eat food” (Pollan 2001 , p. 63).
The following quote is taken from the Royal Society ( 2009 ) report, Reaping
the Benefits: Science and the Sustainable Intensification of Global Agriculture ,
which was produced to promote the contribution the biological sciences could
make to food crop production in the face of global food insecurity. It was intended
to influence the U.K.'s research priorities in the future. It is reproduced here to
illustrate the role organics is seen to play in that future.
Past debates about the use of new technologies for agriculture have tended to adopt an
either/or approach, emphasizing the merits of particular agricultural systems or techno-
logical approaches and the downsides of others. This has been seen most obviously with
respect to genetically modified (GM) crops, the use of pesticides and the arguments for and
against organic modes of production. These debates have failed to acknowledge that there
is no technological panacea for the global challenge of sustainable and secure global food
production. There will always be trade-offs and local complexities [ ] No techniques or

technologies should be ruled out. Global agriculture demands a diversity of approaches,
specific to crops, localities, cultures and other circumstances. Such diversity demands that
the breadth of relevant scientific enquiry is equally diverse, and that science needs to be
combined with social, economic and political perspectives (The Royal Society 2009 , p. IX).

:::

Three things are notable about this quote. First, organic production is not seen
as playing a dominant role in future food production, but as part of the diversity of
approaches available. Second, the word organic used with respect to the use of an
organic management system in agriculture, only appears once in the whole report (in
this summary) and is never referred to again. (The other uses of it are to do with soil
organic matter). Finally, it suggests that social, economic and political perspectives
have a role to play in determining the future sustainability of the world's food
system, that is it is not just about science.
According to Campbell et al. ( 2009 ) there are three perspectives/groups of
proponents to the anti- and pro-organic debate: those who support mainstream
agriculture and the role of science and are against organics; those who support
commercially oriented organics - big organics - and also use science; and those
within the organic movement who feel that organic agriculture has sold out to
commercial interests. In promoting organics as a panacea for all ills the third
grouping has presented themselves as disciples in a social movement, saying this
is the only way to save the world and that all agriculture should use organic
practices. Others have questioned the role of organics as an exemplar of sustainable
agricultural practices as commercially oriented organic businesses moved into the
global arena (e.g., Pollan 2001 ;Trewavas 2001 ).
As indicated above, this is, of course, contested. There is debate about what is
real organics, whether an organic practitioner has to adhere to a certain philosophical