Intrested

None of the two. I will opt for an integrated approach. Integrated soil fertility management would enable me take advantage of the natural soil fertility management practices while applying inorganic fertilizers judiciously based on crop nutrient requirements. Integrated pest and disease management would similarly control economic damage on crops while maintaining pesticide usage at a minimum. In other words I will pursue sustainable land and crop management practises.

using pesticides and other overload technologies as heavy tillage will increase yield and maybe the quality temporary, but the use of the principles of sustainable natural ecology in agroecology will lead to a consequent stable land of organic production for decades.

thanks

Hafida Rahal-Bouziane

Dear Researcher,

This is a very interesting question. It has a tinge of behavioral science also. If I read your question very carefully, it can be seen that it is not really about agriculture. It is about choice making. That is how, this question caters into the area of behavioral sciences also.

The great French philosopher, Rousseau said that man is born free but is everywhere in chains. So most of the time when we have to make a choice, we are forced to go by the popular choice. You will almost most of the time see that most people who are using pesticides and chemical fertilizers are fully aware about the bad effects of it. Still they do it. It is because of the societal norms, it is because of the pressure of the peers and the governing authorities around. So if I have to make a choice, probably I will be also forced to go with pesticides and chemical fertilizers.

Best regards,

Anamitra.

@Anamitra Roy, your observation about a test for human behaviour in this question is valid. In Agricultural Extension discipline it is widely argued that farmers are "Rational Decision-Makers". I think this question partly inquires on what is our rational choice.

Thank you Dr Joseph Kipkorir Cheruiyot for your answer which evokes a very important approach to ensure the most sustainable agriculture possible, namely the integrated approach. The latter opts for the use of natural means and mechanisms similar to those that exist in nature. Thank you for your enriching contribution. Thank you Dr Ahmad A. Al Rababah

I am agreed with the answer of Joseph Kipkorir Cheruiyot

An integrated approach is the one I will use. Use of biofertilizers with lower doses of fertilizers. This integrated approach will improve the yield and reduce the degree of the harmful impact of chemicals on the environment.

Thank you Dr Pratibha Rawat for joining us in the discussion on an important topic given the magnitude of agriculture's contribution to the greenhouse effect. It is a good thing that we have practical testimony from you about using the integrated approach in agriculture. Thank you and thanks for all those who reacted to this question from their replys.

health problems are due to chemicals

Thank you Dr Shathar Abdulhamza Imran for your reply.

Unfortunately, in general, whether they are chemical pollutants in agriculture or others, many things are contaminated in our daily lives by chemicals and this negatively affects our health (respiratory system, renal system, cardiovascular system …).

health problems are due to chemicals

health problems are due to chemicals

I prefer a judicious combination of both. Aim to optimize yield with low or no soil health hazards.

This is not an agronomic question, but that of society.

If you own land you should do whatever it takes to preserve it.

If you own land to live off of it, then you do the same thing to feed yourself and use sustainable practices, that do not harm the environment or yourself.

If you own land to feed others, making money in the operation, your moral standards should not change.. should they ?

Thank Dr Tulsi Parajuli for giving your sincer opinion . Thanks for all for your interest and for providing your good replys on this matter. This is how one can do even a small poll to get a little idea of the opinion of a small sample of the scientific community on an important and defining subject. It's a bit of the whole thing, agronomic or not, the main goal behind the question is to see how much importance we attach to our environment, to our health and to our planet in general. It is certain that scientists are quite informed and sensitized on the danger of chemicals in general whether in agriculture or in other sectors, but between knowledge and practice, things can differ. In any case and as Dr Herve Bonin has rightly pointed out, moral standards should be maintained in all situations.

All health problems due to chemicals and organic fertilizers are the solution

I would use pesticides

I will use organic fertilizers and and when I need chemicals, I will use them in small quantities as there will be no harm to the crop and soil

Yes certainly

Manure adds nutrients to the soil without affecting its fertility. It does not damage the crops and produces healthy plants with high yields. Fertilizers are chemicals which lower the fertility of the soil if used regularly.

Solely depending upon chemical fertilizer and pesticides have negative impact on soil health, microbial population of soil and also on human health. On the other hand use of natural fertilizer ( compost, FYM, vermi compost) have low nutrient content and might not be adequate for proper plant growth and also they slowly release nutrients . So integrated nutrient management practice might be best option.

In case of use of synthetic pesticide they should only be used if the pest damage is severe. Other wise bio pesticide and plant extract should work well to control small pest population.

Certainly i am used the organic matter