Organic yield gap shrinking? Study actually shows it’s less sustainable than conventional ag | Genetic Literacy Project

Different sectors

Marc Brazeau doing a great job to start a real dialogue at GLP:

Last month, The Proceedings of the Royal Society published a study entitled “Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap” . The paper is the largest meta-analysis of comparative conventional farming to organic farming studies done to date. They put together a large data set and compared the yields between the two approaches and the effects of a wide range of variables. 

The paper was met with a wide round of applause among foodies and organic activists. The idea of organic farming is very appealing, and many people hope that evidence that there is little difference in yields versus conventional agriculture, particularly where GMOs are grown, will lead to wider adoption. The problem in all this is that the study’s conclusions don’t match the findings–and the coverage of the study completely missed this salient fact.

This is unsurprising, (though not excusable) given the way it was presented to the press, who then ran with it–as an uncritical comparison between organic and conventional. As a result, in distorting the public debate over ‘what is sustainable agriculture,’ the flawed study has become a major distraction from the very real challenge of increasing the sustainability of modern farming....more

Full article @ Organic yield gap shrinking? Study actually shows it’s less sustainable than conventional ag | Genetic Literacy Project:

KEY QUOTE:

In the U.S., organic production makes up for .8 of cropland and .5 of pasture. In 2011, there were 5.4 million acres in organic out of 914 million total acres, or .6 percent. Farms of over 500 acres made up 70 percent of agricultural lands, while farms smaller than 500 acres made up the remaining 30 percent. Within the organic sector the split was 60/40 with farms of over 500 acres making up 60 percent and under 500 acres making up 40 percent.

Sectors drawn to scale

So when the authors of the study opine:

Our study suggests that through appropriate investment in agroecological research to improve organic management and in breeding cultivars for organic farming systems, the yield gap could be reduced or even eliminated for some crops or regions.

The question becomes, “Why?”.

What the study showed, was that it is methods that matter, not the ideology or the growing system per se. When we look at the chart above, it doesn’t make much sense to spend even more time and resources trying to figure out how to make that tiny sliver on the bottom right more productive when we could be trying to promote more diverse rotations, intercropping, polycultures and the rest of Conservation Agriculture throughout more of the 99.4 percent of the acreage that Full Toolbox ag currently occupies?

Research into cover crops, mulches, composts, diverse rotations and IPM would benefit everyone, organic and full toolbox alike. But instead of focusing on the false promise of closing yield gaps, we could preserve and extend yields while bringing Conservation Agriculture to the masses.

It’s good old fashioned Willie Sutton logic. “That’s where the farmers is.”

Marc Brazeau is a writer and agriculture editor for the Genetic Literacy Project. He blogs at Food and Farm Discussion Lab. Follow Marc on Twitter @realfoodorg.