Fools gold

In the last few weeks I have outlined the causes of limited progress towards a green future as a result of individual perception, economic and political barriers. The recent momentum of sustainable development having overcome these barriers, is however what most climate optimists are hanging on to to stay within our environmental threshold. This optimism is entirely based on the idea that our perception of clean energies and sustainable developments are as environmentally sound as one is lead to believe. But are they? At the heart sustainability comes our need for food production and organic farming has recently been targeted.

An article published last week in New Scientist claimed that those wishing to care for the planet should refrain from supporting organic food production. It's predominant reasoning for slating the farming system was based on the argument that organic farming is less productive per hectare and thus more responsible for GHG emissions. In addition it boasts that if you care about GHG emissions then GM foods are the way forward. Looking towards a sustainable future, if this accusation was true, it would be a worrying dilemma. The article was accompanied by the below video summary.

Massive debate exists around the misinforming publication which has been well debunked here. Whilst I promote more sustainable farming methods over conventional, I have my concerns about the growing industrialisation of organic farming. Rigby & Bown (2003) describe the misconceptions in public opinion of what organic farming really means and investigated the sustainability of today's organic agriculture. Sustainability is predominantly questioned the context of 'food miles' as demand and free trade agreements allow for mass importation of organic produce at cheaper prices than locally produced. This directly conflicts with the idea that prices are premium for more environmentally friendly developments because the price is not bared by the environment. By contractually sealing farmers into supermarkets supply agreements, the risks associated with a variable crop yield due to climatic and natural factors are borne by the farmer and not by the corporate giants responsible for emissions. The domination of the organic market by supermarkets has also lead to the resignation of small family run organic farms in favour of large monocrop organic systems, the westernisation of farming methods and an associated loss of cultural diversity. To the best of my knowledge, no peer review literature exists on the environmental implications of organic monocropping but the effect under traditional monocropping systems is well known to include decreased microbial richness, evenness and diversity, decreased production and increased disease. So whilst organic farming certainly is more beneficial in terms of its impact on soil fertility and food security, I worry that the ecological integrity previously associated with organic farming is being undermined by trade agreements and corporate control. 

An excerpt from Rigby & Bown (2003) demonstrating the effect of the Free Trade Agreement on food miles. 

The recent development of organic megafarms seems to be lending weight to the claim by Robert Rodale (1989) that "Sustainable was just a polite word for organic farming".

Would food mile labels in the future put more pressure on supermarkets to source more locally? I believe so, although this in itself is a challenge as transport means are not all globally accounted for in carbon emissions with that from ships and boats omitted from calculations (the lack of which questions sustainable global carbon targets). Makatouni (2002) found that environmental concern was only a secondary cause of choice for organic produce after perceived health benefits. "Put[ting] your money where your mouth is" seems ever more important and political pressure needs to be placed on governments by consumers to ensure that our movement towards sustainability remains transparent, honest and not masked by false facades, in all areas of sustainable development. This is paramount to achieving a green future.

Over the next couple weeks I aim to address further controversies about green developments that question their support in drawing to the conclusion of whether or not achieving a green future is possible. 

Ecotourism gives people a chance to explore natural habitat to appreciate what we need to conserve and financially justify its existence. But is it playing a role in habitat destruction?