Agroecology within your reach; the myth of low "bio" profitability.

By Sergio Ferrari - For decades, the debate about the present and future of agriculture has pitted two almost antagonistic visions against each other. On the one hand, the conventional model, focused on maximizing yields, which combines technology, agrochemicals, and immense monocultures. On the other hand, organic or agroecological proposals, considered interesting but questioned for being "less productive." Behind both visions lie large-scale agro-export production and the ecological alternatives advocated, among others, by social movements in the rural world.

A rigorous 47-year field study across 97 organic farms in Therwill, Switzerland, jointly sponsored by the Research Institute for Organic Agriculture (FiBL) and the Federal Centre for Agricultural Competence (Agroscope), concluded that organic farms achieved, on average, a yield level equivalent to 85% of that of conventional farms, and that this difference largely depends on the type of crop analyzed. For example, organic soybeans reached similar levels to conventional soybeans, and small differences were recorded in forage crops such as clover and silage corn, while the difference was greater in the case of organic wheat and potatoes.

According to this study, known as DOC (D for bioDynamic, O for bioOrganic, and C for Conventional), the major gap separating organic production from conventional production has to do with the environmental impact of each. In fact, organic farming uses 92% less pesticides and 76% less mineral nitrogen than conventional agriculture. In organic farming, the reduction in the use of nitrogen fertilizers is the main factor in a much smaller climate impact. Excess nitrogen in fertilizers is converted into nitrous oxide, a gas with negative consequences that have a major impact on the climate.

As stated in this study, it is true that reducing the use of fertilizers and pesticides produces more variation in yield in organic systems than in conventional ones, resulting in less stable productivity. However, the risk of water and food contamination (for humans and animals) with harmful substances is significantly lower.

Prestigious organic farming certificationConventional crops, also known as industrial or traditional agriculture, incorporate the intensive use of external inputs, such as synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, as well as improved seeds to maximize production. These crops are the essential pillar of the agro-export model of transnational companies, particularly those in the food and agrochemical industries. This model relies on efficiency and high productivity through modern technologies applied to large areas dedicated to monocultures, that is, the planting of a single type of species in a huge area. For example, among others, soybeans, eucalyptus, oil palm, pine, corn, or sugarcane.

Besides the large number of researchers dedicated to the DOC project, its importance lies in its almost half-century of comparative studies and its systematic accumulation of data. These are essential elements in this type of research because the effects resulting from the conversion of a conventional agricultural system to a biodynamic or organic one only become evident after a long time. This long "waiting" period is due, among other factors, to the slowness of soil transformation processes, such as the accumulation of stable organic matter. To date, approximately 140 specialized scientific publications, as well as numerous master's and doctoral theses, have been fueled by the systematic results of the DOC.

This study provides other conclusions that are no less relevant. In organically cultivated soils, for example, approximately 16% higher humus levels were identified, along with up to 83% more activity from the soil's own organisms, than in conventional plots. Undoubtedly, this is a particularly positive effect for the soil, now in better condition to store more water and reduce the impact of erosion.https://www.fibl.org/fr/infotheque/message/depuis-deux-generations-essai-doc-compare-rentabilite-agriculture-biologique-agriculture-conventionnelle).

Theses confirmed in the Global South

The DOC research inspired similar initiatives in Switzerland, such as the FAST and Burgrain projects (promoted by Agroscope), as well as in other nations. For example, several comparative trials of long-term cropping systems (or SysCom, for "System Comparison"), such as those carried out by FiBL in Bolivia (cocoa cultivation), India (cotton) and Kenya (a wider range of staple foods, mainly maize and potatoes). Other practical experiences in Africa confirm the optimistic conclusions of the DOC study on organic production. The Swiss Non-Governmental Organization SWISSAID, together with its local counterpart in Tanzania, launched a research project that strongly confirmed the benefits of the economic mechanisms identified by the study in Therwil (https://www.swissaid.ch/fr/articles/une-etude-demontre-les-effets-positifs-de-lagroecologie/).

In a recent article, SWISSAID concluded that "after five years of transition, farmers participating in the CROPS4HD project have massively reduced their spending on external inputs." This project aims to improve food quality and overall agricultural resilience through the use of "orphan" crops, or underutilized crops, which nevertheless respond very well in marginal environments and also have high nutritional value.

Economic analysis reveals that, paradoxically, conventional farms have the highest production costs per hectare due to their reliance on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, confirming the economic trap of excessive agribusiness profits. SWISSAID explains that organic production redistributes profits among farmers, not among shareholders of transnational corporations and agricultural companies investing in the stock market. In the case of Tanzania, the farms that have progressed most in the agroecological transition process result in lower costs and higher net income, confirming that the relatively lower yield of 15% is largely offset by the benefits left in the hands of the producers. This economic reappropriation is accompanied by strategic diversification: the project develops "orphan" species, that is, with little or no plant improvement and no current export prospects, but very important for local food sovereignty, such as amaranth, millet, fonio, and Bambara peas. In this way, new locally controlled value chains have been created.

This relative productive independence not only represents an advantage for the environment; it also constitutes a fundamental lever for a different form of economic power at the service of direct farmers. In the conventional system, farmers are often the weakest link in a value chain larger than themselves. As a result, they are subject to the volatility of fertilizer and pesticide prices, a market controlled by a handful of multinationals, while suffering pressure from supermarkets on the selling prices of their own products. Much of the value these farmers generate is captured by their suppliers, processors, and distributors.

In a world grappling with climate change, biodiversity erosion, and volatile markets, the promoters of this project in Tanzania believe that the resilience and autonomy of farmers are no longer options, but imperatives. This is especially true in the most vulnerable countries of the Global South, where every disruption to supply chains exacerbates food insecurity for the population.

The misconceptions are melting away. The myth that organic products require higher costs is beginning to disappear. And organic products are designed not only to be healthy and environmentally friendly, but also to be affordable for the average person.

Translation: Rose Lima