Organic Farming Trumps Conventional in 30-year Study

Unlike many organic and con­ven­tional farm­ing com­par­i­son stud­ies, the Farming Systems Trial is sci­en­tif­i­cally rig­or­ous to ensure an accu­rate rep­re­sen­ta­tion of farm­ing prac­tices. The study includes four repli­ca­tions (repeat­ing the study using the same meth­ods but with dif­fer­ent researchers) for each of the four dif­fer­ent man­age­ment sys­tems: organic manure, organic legume, con­ven­tional syn­thetic (the major­ity of the grain farms in the U.S.) and no-till systems.

The study’s con­ven­tional plots are imme­di­ately adja­cent to the organic plots, so both expe­ri­ence the same soil types and weather pat­terns. Also, the now-organic plots began as con­ven­tional and have been reme­di­ated over time. To dis­pel any organic bias, Ingham said the farm­ers involved in the study are vet­er­ans of farm­ing with chem­i­cals, and the study’s advi­sory com­mit­tee con­tains mem­bers who are strongly entrenched in chem­i­cal agriculture.

Over three decades, the study has yielded eye-opening results for con­ven­tional farmers:

• An organic farmer can expect to earn dou­ble (on less land) than a chem­i­cal farmer, whose money goes mostly into the pocket of the chem­i­cal com­pa­nies upon which he or she is depen­dent. “That diver­gence is only going to get big­ger,” Ingham said, as the demand for organic grows. Plus, it’s a myth that GM means using fewer pes­ti­cides, she said. The study showed GM crop farm­ers typ­i­cally ended up using more her­bi­cides, mak­ing it more expen­sive to go GM than if they had stayed with her­itage crops.

• Organic and con­ven­tional crop yields were equiv­a­lent through­out the trail, except organic corn yields were 31 per­cent higher than con­ven­tional in years of drought. Ironically, the GM “drought-tolerant” corn only increased 7 per­cent to 13 per­cent over its con­ven­tional (non-drought resis­tant) varieties.

• Organic farm­ing uses 45 per­cent less energy than con­ven­tional sys­tems, while con­ven­tional sys­tems pro­duce 40 per­cent more green­house gases. The largest con­trib­u­tors to green­house gas emis­sions on con­ven­tional sys­tems are nitro­gen fer­til­izer pro­duc­tion and fuel use, while organic sys­tems that build—rather than deplete—soil qual­ity are more effi­cient to man­age, lead­ing to less fuel use.

Charles Benbrook, PhD, chief sci­en­tist at The Organic Center in Boulder, Colo., said the study “already has a big impact on what sci­en­tists think about sus­tain­able and organic crop­ping sys­tems. Whether it’s had a big impact on draw­ing con­ven­tional farm­ers into organic is in the eye of the beholder.”

While the study may not shift the mind­set of those already invested in Big Ag, Ingham hopes it will change con­sumers’ minds. “What we’re really doing this work for is to change the mind of the indi­vid­ual who eats food,” she said. “As a con­sumer, you vote with your dol­lars. What are you going to choose to buy? That’s where we’ll make the difference.”

Click here to read the rest of this story at NewHope360.com.