Why Should We Promote Organic Farming and Foods - Case Study Example

Introduction Organic foods are those which do not contain chemical addition. According to Lotter, “the ingredients of organic foods are mainly derived from plants such as fruit trees, vegetables as well as animals”. (125). These are processed with minimal artificial preservation techniques. They include eggs, meat, fruits and such items. Natural preservatives such as sun drying and honey are normally used. The technologies adopted for the production of the organic foods are usually focused on saving energy such as the use of solar energy for cooking, and environmental friendly packaging materials that are biodegradable. Winter and Davis observe that “pesticides and other synthetic chemicals are not used in organic farming” (120). Before the modern technology of producing chemically prepared foods, Winter and Davis further state that “many communities globally were used to organic foods” (123). This was mainly due to the fact that developments in chemical production were not advanced as it is in the current day. The major source of organic foods is direct from farmers. Supermarkets and other dealers in food usually use preservatives in order to allow them to deal with large quantities of supplies that can remain in stock for long. Wheeler states that “the chemicals used for preservation usually have adverse effects on the body functioning” (146). More over, those that are used to produce the foods are also associated with the enhancement of various ailments. This paper is a critical evaluation of the significance of organic foods, and the reasons why organic farming and consumption of organic foods should be promoted. The impacts of organic foods on the environment as well as on the body have been discussed. Environmental Impact It is important to promote organic farming mainly because of its environmental friendly nature. Wheeler observes that “organic farming helps in avoidance of the impact of synthetic chemicals released in to the environment through spraying crops” (148). These are mainly used for the purpose of pest and weed control. More over, continued use of these chemicals is known to generate the acidification of soil, thereby lowering farm productivity after a period of usage. They lead to the elimination of the important soil micro-organisms that would otherwise improve the soil fertility. The use of pesticides and herbicides on farms bordering water bodies, as Terry states, “Usually leads to pollution through accumulation of chemical pollutants deposited in the water through soil erosion” (356). Ground water is also polluted through leaching of the chemicals. With polluted water, aquatic biodiversity is vulnerable to extinction. More over, terrestrial wildlife that consumes the water is endangered. The chemicals significantly interfere with terrestrial ecosystems. In contrast, Kent et al observe that, “organic farming helps in maintaining biodiversity and the normal processes that naturally occur to create a balance in these ecosystems” (121). For example spraying flowering crops such as potatoes with toxic chemicals reduces the population of bees and other agents of pollination that could be used to other plants such as wild fruits. In a different perspective, the solid waste that emanates from the use of inorganic practices is usually a major contributor to environmental pollution. This waste mainly emanates from the packaging non-biodegradable materials such as cans and polythene materials. Organic farming usually does not require the use of such containers. The industries that produce the synthetic chemicals used for inorganic farming usually are major sources of pollutants. Chavas observes that, “they emit green house gases in to the atmosphere as well as release of effluents that end up in water bodies (289). In terms of the contribution of the waste that is released in to the environment organic farming is the best way to minimize environmental pollution. However, there are some drawbacks that make it seem as an undesirable option. Roger states that, “the area required in order to produce the same amount of food compared to convectional farming is larger” (268). This is mainly due to the fact that modern farming methods that use synthetic chemicals are designed to ensure that large quantities of food are produced in the minimum area possible. Organic farming therefore generates the need for further bush clearing in order to satisfy the rising demand for food. This has led to the clearing of forests that are important in carbon sequestration, thereby leaving the earth vulnerable to global warming. More over, it leads to the reduction of biodiversity due to bush clearing. If the benefits are weighed against those of the convectional farming in regard to environmental conservation, Roger believes that “the environment neither loses, nor does it gain (264). Value for the Body and Health Safety Kent et al observe that “organic vegetables and fruits have a higher nutritive value compared to the inorganically produced foods” (150). It has been established through research that “the amount of antioxidants in vegetables surpasses that of the inorganic foods by more than 40%, while organic milk contains the highest value, exceeding by more than 60%” (Greene and Dimitri 89). Organic fruits are also known to be sweeter, which makes people to consume more leading to improved health. This is mainly due to the fact that people, especially children do not like eating sour fruits. Organic apples are known to have a good texture, which makes them appealing and appetizing. Mike et al argue that “they help the body to generate the desire to feed, and therefore they are recommended especially for the ailing” (55). Lack of chemical additives in the organic foods makes them friendly to the health of consumers. The convectional products that contain chemicals such as food color, and taste additives usually accumulate in the body after prolonged use, which is associated with many problems that occur as people approach old age. They help consumers to avoid the risks associated with consumption of foods that have been produced through the use of synthetic chemicals. Winter and Davis “Some of these chemicals are left as residues on the food and can be detrimental to the body if ingested” (118). Many are carcinogenic and are known to have had adverse impacts on the health of many people. Studies indicate that “the inorganic foods in the U.S. food market that contain residues of pesticides comprise close to 70% of the total quantity” (Greene and Dimitri 71). This is an indicator of the dangers posed to the people due to the high consumption of the convectional products. Children are believed to be the most vulnerable in regard to pesticide exposure. The accumulation of residues in the body may lead to body complications at a relatively early age. According to Roger, “potato farming is known to have adversely affected the intellectual ability of farmers in North Ecuador due to their exposure to pesticides”. (271). Organic farming can help in reducing this exposure. Williams observes that “organic methods of growing livestock are important in avoiding the impacts of the hormones that are used in the convectional livestock farming” (22). The development of genetically modified food production has been attracting a lot of criticism due to their impact on the growth of the body. These hormones are usually administered to the animals to facilitate growth. On the other hand, the convectional livestock farming is highly dependent on the use of antibiotics. Williams further argues that prolonged consumption of animal products that have been exposed to too much of these chemicals may have an impact on health due to bioaccumulation (23). On the other hand, Allen and Cole argue that “Organic production adopts methods that reduce the necessity of using antibiotics” (135). It also allows natural growth to take place in order to avoid the use of growth hormones. This enhances the safety of consumers of livestock products Financial Benefits According to Greene and Dimitri, “the inputs for convectional farming have continuously been increasing, leading to a rise in cost of farming”. (83). Fertilizers are currently unaffordable for small scale farmers and therefore their farm’s productivity has deteriorated. The same case applies to pesticides and other chemicals that are used for farming. Organic manure can be prepared by any farmer who practices small scale farming without much expenditure (85). Other natural pest control techniques are helping farmers to save money. Animal and farm wastes can be utilized to improve the farm’s productivity. This is important in ensuring that the farmer uses any waste that would otherwise pollute the environment. Through disposal by burning or putting it in garbage heaps where green house gases are generated. Williams observes that, “organic farming usually has lesser yields than convectional farming” (22). However, the cost involved in convectional farming is usually high, which makes the net benefits equivalent to those of organic farming. The indirect economic benefits of organic farming are many. Maintenance of soil structure, and improved rain water percolation is important in the long run. The deterioration of soil fertility necessitates for treatment with more chemical fertilizers, thereby increasing the cost of production. Farmers adopting organic farming are saved from these costs. Williams further notes that such farmers do not consider their labor as part of the farm expenditures, simply because they believe that they are producing for themselves (65). If they could count themselves and other family members as part of the paid labor pool, the cost would increase. According to Lipson, the established organic crops are usually capable of persevering draught (121). This ensures that organic farmers do not lose so much due to natural calamities. Conventionally produced crops are known to be adversely affected by these occurrences even when they are close to maturity. This difference can be attributed to the ability of soils that have been under organic farming to withhold more rain water which acts as reserve during times of drought. More over, Mike et al observe that intercropping that is practiced in organic farming is significant in ensuring that all crops are not damaged in case of a disease or pest outbreak (45). This is because crops are usually affected uniquely by these occurrences. The convectional farming methods usually focus on one crop, which in case of attack by pests or diseases may cause enormous losses. On the other hand, the farm inputs for organic farming are usually from within. Compared to convectional farming methods whereby all farm inputs are purchased, Terry observes that “the organic farmers usually do not experience enormous losses in case the crops fail” (358). It is therefore economically viable farming. Apart from serving as a buffer to the adverse effects of cross failure, Mike et al argue that the crop diversity in organic farming usually helps in preventing losses due to market failures of a particular crop (56). For example if the market for maize is unfavorable, beans can help in sustaining the farm for another farming season, contrary to the convectional farming where farmers plant many hectares of a single plant such as maize. In case the price of that crop in the market falls, the farmers incur enormous losses. Terry observes that since different crops usually have different planting seasons, the farm inputs for example machinery can be used at different times in a year to produce different crops in organic farming (360). For example the tractors can be used for preparing the farm during the season for beans, and also be used for preparing land for maize in the next season of the same year. This helps in utilizing the machinery maximally. Terry further argues that not only does diversity of crops in organic farming help in the utilization of machinery, but also the available labor (361). Nevertheless, it is important to note that management of organic farms is usually demanding compared to the convectional farms. Kenneth et al observes that, “it is characteristic of organic farmers to borrow less than the convectional commercial farmers” (34). This is because one crop can provide funds for planting the other crops. This significantly helps in the avoidance of extra costs due to interest on loans. However, it is usually disadvantageous especially when farmers are planning to expand their production capacity. They are usually faced with problems in proving their credit worth to financial institutions due to the diversity of crops. There is increased awareness amongst consumers globally on the importance of organic food in promotion of good health and according to Mike et al, “organic farming remains a potential income earner for farmers, as consumers continue deviating to buying organic produce” (43). Another major reason behind supporting organic farming is that as Kent et al state, “the fact that it is usually affordable for the small scale farmers who can not afford capital to practice the commercial convectional farming” (78). This is one major aspect of maintaining food security amongst the poor. It is important because for development to take place in a society, the people need to be fed. Many governments are struggling to feed their population. Promotion of organic farming at house hold level may assist in these efforts. This is achievable because the major requirements are labor, which is readily available. On the other hand, Williams argues that organic farming helps in reducing the health related costs which are brought about by prolonged consumption of pesticides (23). The funds saved from these unnecessary expenditures can be used for the improvement of infrastructure and other development projects. In terms of saving energy, Kent et al observe that, “organic farming usually plays a significant role through ensuring that human labor is utilized maximally in farming” (87). This reduces the amount of fuel spent through the use of machinery. It is usually beneficial in two ways; first, it helps in saving money since the fuel costs, as well as the maintenance costs of machinery are reduced, more over, the use of human labor is environmental friendly since emission of green house gases is avoided. According to Kenneth et al, “mechanization of agriculture has been the major consumer of the total energy used in the United States since 1990”. (119). People have turned out to be highly dependent on the use of farm machinery, which necessitates intensive use of fossil fuels. On the other hand, Mike et al observes that, “the industries that manufacture the chemical fertilizers and pesticides are major consumers of energy” (55). They burn large quantities of fossil fuel, while on the other hand they emit green house gases in to the atmosphere. Organic farming can save them from these costs and also save the environment from global warming caused by these gases. Conclusion The role played by organic farming in supporting the existence of human beings and animals can not be ignored. It has helped people to move from the use of large amounts of synthetic pesticides and growth hormones to induce plant growth to a more healthy and environmental friendly method of crop and animal production. It has also helped the people in the avoidance of the ingestion of foods with residues of the health threatening pesticides. Organic farming should be promoted in order to assist in biodiversity conservation, as well as reduction of the pressure exerted on the environment through the emission of green house gases as well as other pollutants that are undesirable. Organic foods have also been proofed to be of high nutritive value and therefore are capable of maintaining the health of the population. This kind of farming is economical and reliable in terms of both inputs and output. It involves intercropping, crop rotation and several other farming techniques that are significant in the maintenance of soil fertility. It is important that efforts be made in order to accomplish the benefits of organic farming. Bibliography 1. Allen L. and Cole S. “Strategies and Goals for Wildlife Habitat Restoration on Agricultural Lands”. Transactions of the Forty-sixth North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 46 (1981): 130-136. 2. Chavas J., Posner J., and Hedtcke L. and Agron. J. Organic and Conventional Production Systems in the Wisconsin Integrated Cropping Systems Trial: II. Economic and Risk Analysis 1993–2006. Agronomy Journal, 2009; 101: 288-295. 3. Greene C. and Dimitri C. Organic Agriculture: Gaining Ground, USDA Economic Research Service 2003. 4. Kenneth J., Warnken P., and Schneeberger S. The Economics of Organic Crop Production in the Western Corn Belt. University of Missouri, Columbia, 1979. 5. Kent D., Heady E., and Langley J. A National Model of Agricultural Production, Land use, Export Potential, and Farm Income under Conventional and Organic Farming Alternative. Center for Agriculture and Rural Development, lowa State University, Ames, 1980. 6. Lipson E. M. The Organic Foods Sourcebook, McGraw-Hill; 1 edition, 2001. 7. Lotter, D. Organic Agriculture. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 21.4 (2003): 120-155. 8. Mike B, DeVault G, Zahradnik F, Crame C, and Ayers L. Profitable Farming now. The Regenerative Agriculture Association, Emmaus, Pa, 1985. 9. Roger B. Barriers to Conversion to Organic Farming Practices in the Midwestern United States. Environmentally Sound Agriculture, (1983): 263-278. Praeger, New York, N.Y. 10. Terry C. Organic farming: the other Conservation Farming System. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 39 (1984):357-360. 11. Wheeler S.A. What influences agricultural professionals' views towards organic agriculture? Ecological Economics 65 (2008): 145-154. 12. Williams, C. M. “Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green?” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 61.1 (2002): 19-24. 13. Winter, CK and SF Davis, "Organic Foods" Journal of Food Science. 71.9 (2006): 117-124. Read More