I don't think that organic agriculture alone can fulfill the growing demands of the people and also can feed the world population.

Please have a look at these links

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/4060

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/organic-farming-yields-and-feeding-the-world-under-climate-change/

https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_your_opinion_can_organic_farm_satisfy_the_need_of_food_of_the_increasing_world_population

Dr Agegnehu , an intelligent question . My answer will  be point blank NOT POSSIBLE. 

Dear Getachew,

Great to hear from You!

Coming to your question, let alone today, it was the inability of organic agriculture which led to discovery and uses inorganic/chemical fertilizers since more than a century ago. Imagine, 100 years ago the world population has been just 1 billion. In 60's it has grown to 3 billion. in 80's and 90's it has grown to 5 billion and now we are more than 7 billion. In feeding all these people the role of fertilizers has been immense and as far as I am concerned fertilizers account for more than 50% of the world food production. And fertilizers will remain the major and key inputs to world food production in the future too. Nothing can replace this role of fertilizers.

 By the way there is  nothing  wrong with fertilizer use. Whatever wrong that may happen to environment and food quality is due to our ignorance on ways we use fertilizers in the courses of crop or agricultural production. I mean that if we use fertilizers with scientific knowledge and skills, no damage to the environment and no compromise on the quality of food will happen. So let use fertilizers with proper  management skills and knowledge such as the 4R's, precision agriculture techniques etc. if so fertilizers will be important not only for food production but also for quality food production, they will be important for increasing carbon sequestration etc..

Lastly, I would like to quote Sanchez saying "PLANT DON'T HAVE MECHANISM TO DISTINGUISH WHETHER NUTRIENTS COME FROM ORGANIC OR INORGANIC FERTILIZERS"  I fully agree with him even if I am not sure that I have correctly quoted him.

Dear Dr. Getachew,

Organic agriculture will not be able to meet the food requirement of spirally growing population of the developing countries. Due to fast growing population, rapid urbanization and industrialization, area under cultivation is decreasing fast. To meet the food requirement of these regions, crop yield per unit area has to be increased by several fold. To achieve the required food production, use of chemical fertilizers will be essential since the required quantity of plant nutrients can not be obtained from all the available organic sources alone.  

Your question is a good one. The problems we are facing today are how to feed a growing population with respect to the environment protection, say two conditions to be satisfied simultaneously. Conventional agriculture has shown through time its incapacity to preserve environment, even if it has increased the yield of several crops. In this case, one thinks that “Ecological agriculture” (agro-ecology) and “Organic agriculture” can satisfy simultaneously these two conditions. But, after analysis, we can remark that ecological agriculture can be more sustainable than organic agriculture. For, ecological agriculture combines more usefully the three dimensions of sustainability (economic, social and environmental) than organic agriculture. The ecological agriculture is seriously focused on the ecosystems services mobilization than organic agriculture. I think organic agriculture is particularly focused on human health, but not on a strategic use of the ecosystems. That’s why a monoculture for example can be accepted as organic, but it cannot be recognized as an interesting agricultural practice in the ecological agriculture. The higher cost and labor, and the specific techniques needed in organic agriculture practice cannot allow producing rapidly a great quantity of food for a growing population. That’s why organic agriculture is seen as a luxury agriculture which cannot be practiced by a large number of farmers. Organic agriculture seems to be more theoretical than realistic. Then, according to me, ecological agriculture is the main way to fulfill the growing demands of the people and feed the world. Organic agriculture which is difficult to practice and conventional agriculture which destroys ecosystems are not suitable for that.  

Dr N Emile Houngbo (Benin) has said almost everything that I want to say.  I can only add that ecological agriculture (also called agroecology) is much more productive per hectare than less intensive cultivation.  Such cultivation would include "slash and burn" or "plough up and plant", where unmanaged fallows are followed by a good year or two; then a few years of decreasing fertility; and then fallowing again.  Green/animal manuring, multilayer cropping (permaculture), mulching, utilising contours, and water management are the sort of things that make a difference--and of course readers will add some other techniques.

I agree to all your interesting comments. Yes, organic agricultural production system alone can't satisfy the needs of the growing population as over 2.5 billion additional new mouths will appear on this planet by 2050. That means the agricultural productivity should increase by 50% to feed the additional population and to satisfy the current deficiency of food for over 1 billion  people according to the World Bank Report.

I think integrated soil fertility and plant nutrient management, including inorganic and organic plant nutrient sources will be a solution in terms of improving soil health, sustaining agricultural productivity and  and protect the environment. But organic agriculture may contribute to agriculture in certain areas of crop and livestock production.

Interesting discussion , already peaked up. This is infact such an issue, there will always be dichotomy in ideas, one favoring organic , others staunchly believing in inorganics , while both having the same objective raising the productivity bar and later sustaining it with better combination of soil fertility/water  management backed up by suitable  varietal selection ( i think Dr Kirti has rightly pointed out about this issue), so keep soil biologically active . While doing so , we can use either microbially loaded organic manures or adopt a cropping sequence having some legumes or even green manures ( unfortunately in a concept of intensive cropping , green manuring is gradually getting extinct  , despite well proven records of maintaining better soil fertility ). We also need to differentiate between exclusive organic and exclusive inorganic and   by no mean , integrated soil fertility management , could be called as organic . At the same , you cant overlook the utility of organic practices , not to feed the plant , lets feed those soil  microbes  , so that these microbes act  as a nutrient sink , they could finally  add to the labile nutrient pool of soil.  Some thoughts , friends... 

Fruitful discussion, everyone.  As always, the answer lies somewhere in between.  Don’t we all agree that following every organic practice can preclude some productive agro-ecological elements, and that applying agrochemicals indiscriminately can pollute land and water?

• To be pedantic, nearly all herbicides and pesticides are organic chemicals (complex carbon-containing compounds)!  Why don’t we use a translation of the French term “agriculture biologique”?

Yes, herbicides and pesticides including urea contain carbon, which are commonly used in crop production, as a package of agricultural intensification. These products are synthetic industrial products. But in this discussion we need to focus on different sources of organic wastes, including crop residues, manures, green manures, inclusion of nitrogen fixing legumes in cropping systems, etc. The same applies to animal production, including beef, and dairy poultry products.

Let me initiaite some discussion on a subject , which need so intense redressal. Dr Getachew needs  to be complimented   for that . Conservation agriculture is nearly the same format of organic agriculture , how does two concepts click together..?

The question raised by Dr. Annop is very pertinent which invites further discussion. I think conservation agriculture can be a component of organic agriculture or the integration of both organic and conventional agriculture. The minimum disturbance of the soil through tillage and retention of crop residues in the field may contribute the restoration and enhancement of soil organic matter.

Thanks Dr Getachew.  The basic premise of conservation agriculture is somewhere the  central theme of organic agriculture  , especially when we talk about the recycling farm waste , and with the basic objective of  developing resilience against any possible loss in soil fertility by improving the organic matter content of the soil. 

Conservation agriculture, if works with conservation of water This will have a dual impact. After all the cost is important to control in irrigation practices.  The minimum disturbance of the soil through tillage and retention of crop residues in the field may contribute the restoration and enhancement of soil organic matter and also save water in root zone

I am not a proponent of 'organic agriculture' because its definition is arbitrary. As we learn more about agricultural systems and what is/isn't sustainable, organic agriculture does not evolve in response to this understanding. It is too narrow and idealistic. I am interested in agriculture that is ethical, sustainable, rational, and developing, that can incorporate good ideas from all sources, including organic agriculture. The agriculture that will continue to feed the world will be science based, not ideology based. 

David , as  an academician in  agriculture ,  let us not be a proponent of any form of agriculture as long as , it is scientifically not sound. Or a science whose roots are not so  well grounded. What is the factual realisation in the context of on-going discussion , we must express. I endorse your comments , let us follow  a form of agriculture , which could  stand on the test of time to feed the population first... 

The question... "Can organic agriculture fulfill the growing needs of the people and feed the world?"

By the view of current academia, industrial complex and corporate farming it is not possible . However, there is a plethora of what is viewed as archaic systems that are negated as there is no money to be made through them.

Don't get me wrong. The aforementioned entities, academia, industrial complex and corporate farming retain viable knowledge that can be utilized within organic systems. Yet, the question posed is far more complex then a simple premise.

The whole concept of feeding the global population needs to be redressed. In producing for commercial markets we only sell the best looking of produce while tons of visually unappealing produce is sent to waste.

Just some food for thought.

W.D. Noganosh

Dear Getachav

i am for with the organic agriculture. All conventional agriculture practice involves non renevable energy . It may exaust in future. So organic Agriculture sustains soil to naturaly rejuvinate by utilizing available natural resoursces in the visinity of the farm. It doesnot need costly inputs to be brought from outside. Organic agriculture aims at self sustainability. After stabilization organic  farmers are getting better productivity than conventional farmers.

Dear Chandrashekara,

We know the multiple benefits of organic agriculture very well in addition to those you have  stated above in your writing. However, the problem is that organic agriculture was unable to produce enough food the world population in the past and it will never produced enough food the ever growing population in the  future especially in developing countries. Thus, we should increase inputs especially fertilizers with the knowledge skill that maximize their efficiency at the same time decrease the adverse effects on the environment.           

Yes I agree with Anil kumar singh

Mear avoiding chemical fertilizers and fertilizers will not bring successful organic farming. But it should be viewed ecologically and sound sustainable principles 

I think the problem with organic agriculture is that even though there is a possibility to apply the required amount of organic fertilizers it is not possible to avoid nutrient imbalances. Because of most organic fertilizers rich in their nitrogen content compared to other essential macro-nutrients (exchangeable cations, P, etc). This may affect  the nutrient ratios within the soil solution during uptake and within the plant system. So to correct such imbalances supplemental inorganic fertilizer application is required to maintain the appropriate amount and balances of nutrients in both soil and plant systems.

Dear Anil, nice feedback.  As mentioned above my worry is that the entire reliance on organic nutrient resources may not fulfill in addition to its limitation in terms of availability in sufficient amount, nutrient balances and satisfaction of the needs of humans in the current population growth trend. I think the integration of both inorganic and organic resources appear feasible.  

I agree with discussions of Anil singh and Getachew 

Slow mineralization and microbial population build up takes some time for stablization.  Thats why 3 years are considered as conversion period from conventional to organic conversion. But one should use well decomposed organic manures like FYm. vermicompost is the one technique which can convert non available nutrients from organic matter availabe form. Most of the farmers are using vermicompost as top dressing source. Another technique colled as Bio digester which can convert all sorts of farm wastes in to readily available liquid source of nutrients, which can be used to soil along with surface or drip irrigation. It can be used along with sprinker. It also acts as growth regulator and bio pesticide. Orgnaic manurer supply most of the nutrients required by plants.  Where as in conventional agril. we have to use different sources for supplying different nutrients. I hope there will be fortune to organic agriculture in view of dwindling resource base.

Yes Dear Singh 

i agree with your concern. It may not ful fil the full demand. But can play an important role in the ecological balance and sustainable agriculture

Yet the discussion is progressing very well. Has really the preference of people to organic foods increased? If increased what could be the main reason food safety, environmental protection or both?

Dear Singhji

You are rightly pointed out the benefits and regulations of IFOAM.

One can get safer and healthy food and environment will also protected through organic farming practices.

I think so; but yet it needs a good agronomic management that can increase the yield.

For me when we say food it has to be bounden with the necessary nutritional quality and the side effect of it for life. If we consider the heath contribution not only feeding organic agriculture become not an option but mandatory for healthier life. So there must be a horizontal analysis that can deal with stabilizing the population growth, innovating organic methods that can increase yields to feed the open mouth, minimizing food wastage in developed countries, more fund should be allocated to scientist to innovate methods organic agriculture yield increment etc.

The best thing is organic food are healthier, more nutritive, environmental friend. If human are healthier then they will have the capacity to innovate, to think smartly and so many .....so that organic food are our base to solve our future and present problems!!  

In a large populated developing country like India, commercial production of  staple food  is not feasible under organic farming  practices. Organic farming  neither profitable nor yields sufficient foods.  For detail about economic viability of organic farming in Haryana, India, following link can be used.   https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274062933_Economic_Viability_of_Organic_Farming_in_Haryana

Technical Report Economic Viability of Organic Farming in Haryana

Some excellent feedbacks friends. This debate will  never come to  a conclusion  , Dr Getachew , and we will continue to  receive some outstanding arguments , in favor of either of the two most promising concepts of agriculture  . We need to implement cluster approach for organic farming , especially in hilly areas where accessability of inputs is so difficult. For example , you have perennial crop orchards on slopy terrain, mechanisation is again  an issue to be addressed first like  applying  insecticides /fungicides etc . Such fields need to be advocated for organic practices including the conservation practices..?

Thanks Dr Anil Kumar . And , we also need to identify certain crops which perform the best under organic farming set up , not all crops and every crop. 

I agree with Drs. Annop and Anil. But other issues may arise within the context of organic agriculture, for instance: (1) can application of organic fertilizer generate the required crop residues that are needed to optimize the nutrient availability and yields of crops, and (2) can organic resources be used to restore poor and less responsive soils and make these responsive to crops? I think sufficient residues need to be produced to meet both farm household demands for food and feed and the management needs of the soil in terms of organic inputs and surface protection of the soil from erosion.

Thank you all for the very lively discussion.  I don't think chemical fertilizers can restore poor or degraded soils; they rather may fulfill or supplement the required nutrients to improve plant growth and optimize yield. I believe integrated soil fertility and plant nutrient management (combining both organic and inorganic sources)  will improve soil quality and sustain agricultural productivity. But as per our previous discussions organic agriculture can be yet applicable to a certain extent where it is visible and necessary. Overall, a discussion like this may help to identify the weak and strong  side of the field.

Well said Getachew , thats  the best course , one should follow the combination of all the three sources of nutrients supply , inorganic fertilizers , organic manures and biofertilizers/microbial inoculants. But , every time this course is not possible. Many of the countries are exclusively relying on chemical fertilizers with their productivity on par with best possible productivity level. Because their input-output is perfect , there is hardly any nutrient mining , or the loss in soil fertility , therefore , there is hardly any decline in productivity over  long course , besides their crops have much higher nutrient density . Its your dynamism and robustness of nutrient application , organic or inorganic/chemical , but i strongly believe , instead of fulfilling the nutrient requirement through organic manures/composts, we need to nurture the indigenous population of microbial diversity of the soil to swell in number , where they can effectively dictate the soil fertility transformation , to the extent to be able to maintain the productivity on a long term basis. 

Dr. Anoop, very interesting explanation. Yes, I am also in favor of ISFM to enhance soil quality, maximize nutrient use efficiency and sustain agricultural productivity. Use of inorganic fertilizer not only increase the grain yields of high yielding varieties of crops but also their entire biomass whose residues can be utilized as feed and soil fertility management.

 Thanks Dr Singh and Dr Getachew  , both of you for generating some interesting discussion . Somewhere , you will agree with me Getachew , our conventional varieties also suit to this kind of fertilization policy using predominantly inorganic fertilizers , especially in annuals . There could be a better prospects for perennials using organics , simply by the virtue of longer growth period  . If you do not have the sandwitching of legumes in your cropping system , what could be the other ways to keep the microbial load of a soil at a population to moderate any remotest possibility of nutrient mining ..?  

Interesting discussion, but in my opinion it is too abstract. The fact of the matter is that, in most countries, individual farmers decide on the management practices they use to manage their land and farming enterprise. There are plenty of examples that demonstrate viable alternatives to mainstream farming practices that deliver similar output with less external inputs and lower environmental footprint. Wasteful consumption in western countries is another important issue - so, if you go deeper, a very broad issue. However, to come back to the main question - I think both conventional and organic farming (or ecological or conservation or ....... farming) and many things between are viable and have their place, depending on circumstances. In the end, individual farmers will decide about how they want to run their operation. However, our job as researchers is to provide farmers with the best available information for making a well-informed decision as to what is the best way of farming in their specific circumstances. And I think there has been, and largely still is a huge gap of relevant information when it comes to organic......farming practices. And this is where some of the arguments made previously come into play: lack of money for R&D that support non-mainstream agriculture.

The following quote by an (Australian) organic farmer stuck in my mind: 'we don't want to feed the world - we want to make a decent living'. 

I wonder all above discussion is going around agriculture productivity, forgetting water productivity. In water stress countries countries we shall also consider water saving technologies, while not compromising the agriculture yields.

The points raised by Johannes are very relevant for this discussion. I also agree  that a new soil management approach that can integrate both conventional and organic farming will sustain the productivity of both soil and crops.

Dear Qazi, when we are discussing about soil health it is not only about soil chemical properties it is all about bio-physical and chemical properties of soils. That means when the soil organic matter content increases the water holding capacity of soils is also improved. so it is interrelated.

Getachew , let me compliment you for triggering such a wonderful discussion . i do agree with Johannes , Qazi and you , all three . A sustainable production system  should never propogate any philosophy of agriculture practices like a hardliner. The feasibility of such practices also depends upon the resources availability with a defined  geographic unit . Whether , you adopt , exclusive organic devoid of synthetic sources , or exclusive inorganic full of chemicals or a combination of the two , the underlying principles  in terms of input-use-efficiency ( Benefit : cost ratio as an indicator of production economics, unfortunately changes in soil health related l properties are difficult to quantify , unless evaluated through crop response)   ) will never change . But , the bigger question is the magnitude delivery of crop response of one philosophy over other(s)... when you have to rate them on a comparative scale... 

Organic agriculture alone may not adequately meet the increasing demand  for food; it is not widely practiced probably due to certification process among other reasons.   However, it increases access to food and meet the food requirement of "health conscious" people and should therefore be promoted.

Thank you all for your informative responses and comprehensive discussions on this important area. Just a follow-up to this discussion:  No question one of the advantages of organic produces are owing to their healthiness to humans. But are organically produced foods  more nutritious than the conventionally produced one? 

Dear Dr. Getachew,

Results of the studies conducted by Matt et al (2011) indicated certain advantages in nutritional quality of organic food compared with conventional. Organic plant products contain generally more phenolic compounds and vitamin C. An elevated content of bioactive substances, desirable from a health point of view, in organic raw materials allows the conclusion that such food can contribute to better health. In case of cereals, organic grains contain less but higher quality of protein than conventional grains. The presence of pesticide residues in conventional food is the main difference between organic and conventional food. Organic methods of farming and processing can significantly improve the quality of agricultural products. Consumption of organic foods may also prevent many health problems.

I hope you find this input interesting and useful.

I endorse the statement of Getchew and Kithi 

The people who are health cautious are looking organic farming and organic produce. The quality of orgnaicaly produced products are superior and keeping quality is too. Apart from product the the OF practices, keep soil and environment healthy.

Dr Getachew and other friends, it is claimed ,  crops raised on organic farming possess much higher nutrient density than on chemical farming ...?? The post-harvest shelf life of crops , especially fruit crops is also claimed to be comparatively  lengthier with organically grown crops..?  

I think that it's worth making the difference between organic farming and ecological farming. We have also to take into account the questions of population growth and that of small farmers. OF does not garantee systematically ecological health and is generally expensive to apply. The small african farmers cannot apply. OF is then less sustainable than the ecological farming. That's I think that the EF is the best way to face ecologocal protection and the need of a growing population.

Any system operating with true organic principals well produce superior produce. Yet, what produce is sought for production? Wheat, corn? Is the view of organic or heirloom produce? If one is producing a GMO what's the point? Additionally, one must consider their location and what naturally grows within that environment or region. Answers to these questions would bring better light to this discussion.

I think demand and profitability are very important parameters to be taken into consideration to produce organic food.

I think , demand and profitability will always be realised,   preferably in favor of organic produce  over inroganically/conventionally grown produce, but the question to maintaining that constant supply level , which i feel , this is where , we will faulter with exclusive organic culture. Addressing ecological issues will also be a point of greater concern ( Houngbo is right , i agree with him).  this issue will also better addressed with organic culture , but then , why are  most agriculturally advanced countries not adopting it...?

I just got some material with respect of organic versus inorganic vegetable production system , let me add it here for the sake of better discussion: 

Organic produce commands a premium in price compared to conventional produce, yet from a sensory perspective (i.e. evaluating visual quality, texture taste and odour) no differences have been found between conventional and organic produce (e.g. with tomato, Zhao et al., 2007), or between organic, hydroponic and conventional (e.g. with lettuce, Murphy et al., 2011). Earlier reviews (e.g. Woese et al., 1997) summarizing many studies in both fruits and vegetables draw a similar conclusion to Zhao et al. and Murphy et al. This should be no surprise since the ionic form in which plants take up nutrients is identical whether the source is from mineral fertilizers (as in conventional or hydroponic production) or organic sources as in organics. As might be expected, though, nitrate levels are generally lower in organic leaf, root and tuber vegetables as a consequence of lower concentrations in the soil (Lester and Saftner,2011). Oliveira et al. (2013) argue that because organic crops are subjected to a greater degree of mineral stress than conventional systems, fruit size (e.g. of tomato) is reduced and concentrations of vitamin C and phenolic compounds are higher. It is on this basis that organic fruits and vegetables are promoted; since they are not consumed for energy supply, any factor that improves gustative and micronutrient quality is of importance. Organic produce is also promoted on the grounds that it contains no or minimal contamination with pesticides; but nowadays (with the exceptions note dearlier) residue levels are low or mostly below detectable limits in conventional fruit and vegetable produce.

Intensive vegetable.

Hope , it will be useful...

This can help.

Chapter Organic Livestock Farming: Challenges, Perspectives, And Str...

Dr. Annop you put a nice summary regarding organic and inorganic nutrient sources. Yes, as you mentioned, "since the ionic form in which plants take up nutrients is identical whether the source is from mineral fertilizers or organic sources as in organics." What is important is that organic agriculture may fulfill specific requirements but not the entire needs of the growing population. I advocate for the integrated one which is efficient, productive, sustainable and environmentally friendly.

I endorse your views Dr Getachew , there is absolutely no doubt , whatsoever...integrated farming is by far the best ...Another pressing limitations that we have today , there is no defined premises of organic farming with regard to different land uses or farming systems. This is the reason,  Conservation Agriculture is considered so close Organic Farming , and many of the researchers also believe Integrated Farming is another version of Organic Farming , since we address those core issues come under the domain of  organic farming ....

Thank you sincerely Dr Getachew. It will be good if the question is endorsed as a book and let contributions be drawn from global scientists. In the current world of over 6 billion citizens and projected over 9 billion by 2050 most in South of the Sub Saharan Africa, Asia and Latin America that fall in regions of intense global warming, climate change, intense rainfall, high loss in soil organic matter through wash-off by rainfall and excessive geobiophysicochemical cycling; it may be difficult for tropical agriculture that depends on organic agriculture to meet the world food problems. Traditional agriculture is beset with several problems: drudgery associated with manual sourcing and incorporation of organic manure, apathy towards farming in corrupt societies where agriculture is relegated to the background in preference to oil prospecting and political hangouts where the money are. Thank God for the current oil glut and global economic downturn that is forcing some developing countries to embrace agriculture instead of being perpetual food stamp and AID dependents. To me there should be no food aid or stamp. No food for lazy man especially in traditional societies with access to land for farming and utilization of local resources including organic manure. Food aid can be worthy in events of environmental catastrophe that is beyond a given nation but not when the citizens are lazy and chasing rats when their houses are on fire. Nevertheless, we can combine organic agriculture with chemical agriculture in a sustainable and environmental friendly and ecological based fashion. Again farm mechanization tailored and built on regional or ecological needs can make farming more interesting especially in developing nations that constitute the greater portion of the vulnerable, hungry and angry citizens. That is breeding most of the political instability, violence and wars. As the adage goes, a hungry man is an angry man and easily resorts to violence and wars to assert anger and dissatisfaction.

Yes, Dr. Paul, I agree with your comments. as you mentioned organic agriculture alone can't sustain agricultural productivity and food demand for the growing population, especially in developing countries. As you mentioned the combined application of judicious doses of organic  and inorganic nutrient sources could be a feasible solution in terms of agricultural and environmental sustainability.

I think , integrated soil fertility management  could be the best strategy to address three pillars of climate smart agriculture , and the strategy as such is very close organic farming , since the central theme of both the concepts revolve around those criteria only..

I think that conventional agriculture have similar problem in increasing future food production security in the world as organic agriculture, maybe even more pronounced. There is attained plateau in yield increasing in majority of countries with the most advanced agriculture. Plateau is result of thresholds achieved in plant breeding as well as in growing technology. So it is difficult to  expect increasing of world food production for 50% or more in the goal of providing food for projected increase of world population in next 30 years. Expected future progress in agricultural production  in next decades would be probably lower than necessary. So organic agriculture could obtain its more important place in future sustainable agriculture development, especially in systems of integrated, ecological or conservation agriculture.      

Yes, I agree, Dr. Milivoje, the current conventional agriculture approach needs to be modified into a comprehensive and sustainable agriculture that can fulfill the needs of the growing population. The present method (seed + fertilizer approach) has already reached its diminishing returns.

Yes, because yet, we didn't work on the potential of organic agriculture. So, we miss to measure and know its potential; as me, which can feed the world.

Mr. Getachew Agegnehu

The answer to your question is a challenge, recognizing the importance of food for human survival.  Unfortunately, we cannot forget that agriculture is among the greatest contributors to global warming, and can be exacerbated if we try to meet the growing need for food worldwide. In this regard the debate over how to address the global food challenge has become divided, struggling conventional agriculture and global commerce against local food systems and organic farms. If we examine the proposals of each to feed the planet, they are right, but at the expense of what? Dr. Jonathan Foley, Executive Director at the California Academy of Sciences, and his team, have proposed five steps that could solve the world’s food dilemma. In their proposal they take into consideration the ideas from all the stakeholders, whether from organic and local farms or high-tech and conventional farms, blending the best of all. The steps are: 1) freeze agriculture’s footprint, 2) grow more on farms we’ve got, 3) use resources more efficiently, 4) shift diets, and 5) reduce waste.

Carmen María Pérez

Dear Carmen, thank you for your enlightening response to the question. Yes, as you mentioned and many researchers agree that the agricultural intensification on the currently cultivated land and efficient utilization of resources is the best alternative option to feed the global population and mitigate climate change. Expansion of agricultural land to the most fragile environment may  exacerbate the prevailing climate chang. A new approach that meets both the demand of the people and the environmental protection is required.  I would be very appreciative if you attach me Prof. Foley's document.

Sorry, I do not have the pdf document. You can find his recommendations in: 1) A Five-Step Plan to Feed the World. National Geographic. Volume 225 No. 5, May 2014, Pages 26-56, and 2) Solutions for a Cultivated Planet. Nature. Volume 478 Issue 7369 October 20, 2014, Pages 337-342.

Carmen María Pérez

Dear Getachew receive my apologies. The article in the journal Nature is of the year 2011, not of 2014. Excuses.

Some nice exchange of views  , appreciate such a quality discussion . Organic agriculture is considered very close to other much talked about practices like conservation agriculture , integrated crop management , climate resilient agriculture , etc etc ..how do you differentiate between all of them , especially while addressing  them  within the domain of  prevailing climate change paradigm...?

I don't think so because it is practiced at smaller scale especially in developed countries. Developing countries are still struggling for food security and large population has no access to sufficient food.

I personally believe it can. However, how do you define "organic" Ag? In addition, in the combined topics of Food sovereignty and Food security it is a new science. Yes we do nave a lot of old data and systems but such practices are ultimately detrimental to the very soils required for the long run food production. There is so much more to the forest were you find this one tree you speak of.

Please have a look at the link below:

Article Organic Agriculture and the Global Food Supply

Unfortunately organic agriculture is still far from reality ....with few exception. Many times , we compare organic agriculture with natural farming......thats unfair comparison....

I am a little bit sceptical about this. No doubt organic agriculture should be the way of life owing to the health benefits but as per the current scenario, we have to rely upon inorganic sources of nutrients for increasing the crop loads. However, there is always a window open for nutrient enrichment of the organic manures and fertilizers. Future thrust should aim at developing technologies to enrich the organic nutrient sources for enhanced availability of the nutrients just like inorganic fertilizers.

Conventional/intensive agriculture and organic farming are 2 methods of food production that are located at the extreme and opposite points of the agricultural spectrum. I suggest that they both move towards agroecology in their methods and approaches to food production. Obviously, reducing, or even eliminating food waste, while stabilizing the human population remain focal objectives to operate this merge between the 2 different agriculture paradigm. In this "picture" a big role is played by policy making and more forms of support by governments, to make this happen.

Organic food and the production intensity depend upon

consumer demand. I think we may decide what food is needed and what else is required to ensure food security for say -

wheat, rice، veges, bannana-----etc.

I don't think so much because it is practiced at smaller scale especially in developed countries. Developing countries are still struggling for food security and large population has no access to sufficient food.

An article on "organic aquaculture productivity, environmental sustainability, and food security" has been published in Food Security journal. This article focuses on whether organic aquaculture can provide global food security.