3 reasons why I am an Organic Farmer

It’s all about the money, honey!

We all love organic food – it’s good for the environment and it’s good for our bodies.  But let’s face it; organic food is mostly accessible to the elite and the upper middle class. The average Joe and ordinary Jane like you and me still find it unaffordable because it is considered so ‘exotic’.

The irony is that ‘Organic’ and ‘Exotic’ are polar opposites. Exotic literally stands for something that is foreign, non-native, imported, alien, unnaturalized or comes from a far distance. In contrast, Organic literally means the basic, fundamental, native, inherent and inborn make-up of anything.

So let’s cut to the chase and get to the root of the situation. The real reason why organic food costs so much is the fact that demand for it far outstrips supply. That’s because organic farming is perceived to be a ‘lesser lucrative business’ compared to conventional or non-organic farming. From one farmer to another, “here are 3 big reasons why you should grow organic.”

Less is more!

Yield Productivity Versus Efficiency

For years farmers have believed that organic farming does not make business sense because yields are much lower. According to a widely published study ‘Many shades of gray—The context-dependent performance of organic agriculture’, by Verena Seufert and Navin Ramankutty, ‘numerous meta-analyses have concluded that yields under organic management are, on average, 19 to 25% lower than under conventional management.’

The study assessed the benefits and costs of organic agriculture across the following dimensions: (i) production, (ii) environment, (iii) producers, and (iv) consumers. It defines conventional agriculture as mainstream agriculture as dominantly practiced today and Organic agriculture as a farming system that follows organic certification guidelines (for example, avoidance of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides) and that is intentionally organic (that is, excluding organic-by-default systems that do not apply synthetic inputs due to lack of access).

The study points out that ‘most assessments of the productivity of agricultural systems focus on efficiency of production (that is, how much can be produced per unit area of land in a single year) but ignore the resilience of production (that is, can the same production be achieved over longer time frames).

Yield stability, one measure of the resilience of food production, matters not only for farmer livelihoods but also for food production under a changing climate. Organic agriculture is often said to be more resilient and have higher yield stability. A possible mechanism may be the use of organic amendments leading to higher soil organic matter, resulting in higher yields under drought conditions. In addition, more diverse crop rotations can increase yield stability.

According to reports, A UC Berkeley meta-analysis of 115 studies found that yields for organic agriculture are higher than previously thought when farmers use diversification techniques such as multiple cropping and crop rotation. In these cases, the yield gap shrinks to less than 10 percent!

Smoke & Mirrors

Risks & Input Costs

While crop diversification can improve yields, it also helps farmers diversify their risks reducing capital costs in the longer term. On the operational front too organic farming costs can be as competitive or even lower than mainstream farming.

Several studies conducted across the world have revealed that the total production costs of organic and conventional farming are similar. While organic farming has a higher labor cost it has lower input costs like land preparation costs, seed costs, fertilizers, plant protection, etc. when compared with non-organic farming. Other costs like Irrigation and harvesting are largely similar in both cases assuming the same farm size.

Experts say that the cost of marketing in the case of Organic farming too can be lower than conventional farming since several middle-men that are a part of legacy food chains are eliminated as buyers and sellers connect with each other more directly.  So apart from lower costs, farmers have more autonomy.

A study by the European Commission shows that one agricultural worker is needed for every 40 hectares of organic land versus 1 worker for 46 hectares in mainstream farming.The same data states that an organic farmer in Europe spends 860 Euro every year per hectare as compared to 960 euro in the case of conventional farming costs including fertilizers, seeds, fuel and oil consumption by agricultural machines.

From the apparent costs let’s move on to hidden costs, which are massive in the case of conventional farming. According to a United Nations FAO research on farming practices in over 40 countries accounting for 80% of production of four commodity crops (maize, rice, soybean and wheat) and four livestock commodities (beef, cow milk, pork and poultry), ‘Industrialized farming practices cost the environment some $3 trillion per year.’

The research revealed that the crop production alone costs the world $1.15 trillion per year in environmental damages, which was equivalent to 170% of its production value. Similarly livestock farming costs the environment $1.81 trillion per year, equivalent to 134% of its production value. In contrast Organic farming makes more economic sense as it adds to natural capital by preserving the environment, supports local rural development and generates more employment.

Net Result

Profitability & Goodness

Revenue and profit are not equal or comparable. They taught you this in school and it’s something you should never forget. Farming like any business or economic activity is ultimately about making profits. Assuming you don’t buy any of the arguments above, you can’t escape the fact that organic farming is much more profitable than conventional farming.

In fact several studies across the world including America, Europe and even India have established that organic farming is more profitable as it commands higher premium. This premium in pricing organic produce compensates for any weak link in the organic value chain; be it lower yields or higher input costs.

According to a study by FAO study titled Comparative analysis of organic and non-organic farming systems: A critical assessment of farm profitability, , ‘Organic agriculture is economically more profitable, and even though yields decrease in developed countries, higher premiums and lower production costs compensate for these losses’.That’s despite the fact that the playing field is not a level one. To date, non-organic agriculture relies on massive subsidies for fertilizers, seeds, irrigation etc.; there is much lesser research and allied extension services available for organic agriculture and the market place for organic produce is still not as well developed.

Despite this unfair competition, demand for organic produce has been rising exponentially across the world. And organic farmers are in a sweet spot to ask for greater value for their produce as it is more nutritious and has a limited supply as compared to non-organic food.

Whichever side of the debate you are on, there is no denying that in the end the organic cycle is a virtuous one for both the farmer and the environment. As a farmer one is better off understanding this sooner than later.