¿Food security at world level? Very limited. Organic agriculture demands more land and other resources.

I think there are n`t a solution for overall sustainability aspects except to control human population. No sustainability is imaginable with current rates of human interference which is mainly under pressure of growing population demands.

Thank you Rehmani, for your question. According to many sources (including UN FAO: www.fao.org), there is plenty of food to feed the world. See also a recent article in Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7397/full/nature11069.html).

The challenges are to do with inequality, poverty, access, transport, distribution, energy, and governance.

There is also a values based challenge. There is an increasing demand by many communities to consume animals for food. This is environmentally the most detrimental form of farming. Many environmental activists and scientists have adopted a vegan or vegetarian diet. Yet many people from developing nations want to include meat in their diet. So I think another challenge is education... it is also an opportunity for a kinder and healthier world (I think I've made my perspective clear here!).

There are equally many opportunities for local innovation. Sustainable Yogic Agriculture (which is a project I am involved in), is a local experiment that has brought real change to farmers in India. But this is just one of many. If we can support local initiatives like these, I believe it can balance the negative impact of a world that is dependent primarily on chemical agriculture that has resulted in loss of biodiversity, impacted on soil health and water retention, and so invariably impacted on human wellbeing.

Both the challenges and opportunities are many!

Respectfully, I must say that speaking in generalities is often not helpful. I will submit an example for your consideration. About 10 yr ago, I obtained organic certification for a seed enhancement process termed 'solid matrix priming' (SMP). Seed priming is a pre-sowing hydration of seeds at a water potential that allows seeds to initiate many cellular processes prior to, but not including, radicle emergence. It is actually quite easy to do and the materials are cheap. Primed seeds germinate more quickly and uniformly than non-primed seeds, and they will germinate well (in most cases) at non optimal soil temperatures. And it can be done organically. This is probably not exactly what you had in mind, but it does work, and can be done with 5 grams of seed as well as 500 kg. Primed seeds deteriorate in storage fairly quickly, but if one does not have elaborate seed storage facilities, you simply prime the seeds a few weeks prior to sowing.

I hope you find this helpful.

Challenges (economic, political, environmental, etc.) are many and may very among countries and even regions within the same country. There is a World tendency towards increased urbanization and decreased number of farmers. How to feed the growing human population under these circumstances? Is it possible to have an organic agriculture that is sustainable and also able to feed the World? it is indeed possible to feed the entire World but economic reasons prevent that to happen. True agricultural sustainability is thus difficult under our current economic, social (life style, etc.) and political conditions. Some opportunities towards increased food security and improved sustainable agricultural production systems (both organic and conventional) include reduced usage of inputs (particularly external) , reduced tillage, increased use of cover crops to protect and improve the soil, increased use of organic fertilizers, increased use of locally adapted cultivars/crops, enhanced marketing strategies for small growers, among other actions.

In my view there are two aspects:

1) The sustainability of organic farming per se. Soil quality and provision with nutrients on organic farms need to be sustained, in particular for other nutrients than nitrogen (which can be fixed by leguminous plants). There is a risk of long-term P & K depletion of organic soils. Possibly the rules for organic certification will need to be adapted in the future.

2) I share the argument that food scarcity is more a problem of equity and distribution. In addition we have high percentages of food waste in many countries. And in recent years a lot of land has gone to biomass production for energy. Thus the need to intensify and produce more may actually be overemphasised.

A free community is a community that knows how to locally produce their own food, knows how to use the many forms of energy that are available locally, knows how to respect the environment and knows how to adapt to global changes. The local availability of food in abundance will depend, ultimately, on the level of intelligence and knowledge that they have achieved in relation to these resources.

Thanks to all for the thoughtful perspectives. This discussion overlaps quite a bit with another one on a different site. A study from UNCTAD (cf. http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf) with an Africa-based focus on food security and organic agriculture was shared, which you should find helpful.

Challenges include finding the labour required to produce food organically. Developing labour efficient and effective weed and pest management for organic systems. Maintaining soil chemical fertility. There is little to be gained by demonising agriculture that is based on synthetic fertilisers and chemical use. This form of agriculture, with the associated advances in variety breeding, has massively increased food production compared to that when organic production was the norm. There is much to be leant from both spheres. I think the most sustainable food production is probably one that takes aspects of both organic and conventional agricuture. Therefore in reality "conventional" agriculture will be flexible enough to adapt to sustainability and production needs whereas organic agriculture is limited but its own definition of production and system inputs.

If we talk about organic agriculture, we should also talk about food sovereignty and not food security.

Very pertinent points all !Human ingenuity is what has enabled progress in all fronts.The modern sciences, and applied technologies are all fine. Even chemical based farming which feeds a record (7 billion plus?) need not be given up immediately.Rural development being a stagnant feature globally has spurred mass exodus to the mega cities.M.K Gandhi wanted independent India to develop from the villages and not from the cities.Education should emphasize that food should be available to all and no one shall starve or die due to starvation.This will create world class citizens from the young. Capitalism of the West is propped up through hidden subsidies.The benefits are reaped by mega corporations called as MNCs. They dump food at low prices depressing agricultural markets in developing countries.This flow of food across the globe should be addressed by these so called capitalist nations who seem to be even more inefficient than the Communists and Socialists.The most efficient food security is through peoples participation; not by Executive Fiat. ( I am referring to the Ordinance passed in the Indian Parliament yesterday) . I can send a copy of the e mail sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee which invited public response.Social equity should be the norm. This will hopefully help build a new World Economic Order of which agriculture is but the first step.

I have read the question and also the contributions made by different agricultural scientists. It is indeed a challenge to feed the rapidly growing population with organic foods. I might be a little complaisant with this type of argument particularly with developing countries whose main source of household income is from farming. The problem with the current agricultural productivity in most African countries south of the Sahara is low productivity per unit land area. The main gear perpetuated for increasing productivity has been the use of good agronomic practices - fertilizers and pesticides to control various insect pests and pathogens that cause plant diseases. A large proportion of farm produces deteriorate due these biotic problems. Apparently, organic farming requires farmers to produce using organic technology such as green manuring, cover crops, mulches .. etc., for improving soil fertility. Pests and diseases may be controlled by the use of botanical extracts like those from the neem tree to control insect pests. The problem I see is that the technology is not that much amplified and is ill-understood by many resource-poor farmers in the tropics. In addition, such products are not readily available on the market. It is therefore difficulty to propagate such technologies to poor farmers who in their own perspective they not even conversant with what is termed production using synthetic inputs. To me organic farming is still a developing technology which is not ready for a blanket recommendation. Special groups of farmers, supported the marketing system, may adopt organic farming (with special support!). It is therefore too early to say that organic farming can meet the needs of the growing population particularly in developing countries. What I see in my surroundings is that organic farming is for export to developed world markets. We should allow organic farming to penetrate the farming systems of much of the tropics at a slow pace in order not to cause hunger and food insecurity to those populations. After all, they are, to some extent, practicing organic farming because they can rarely afford to buy synthetic inputs and for that reason their agricultural production is always low.

Thank you Rehmani for your question. My take on it is: the climatic factors in the tropical areas pose very favourable conditions for pests and diseases. indiscriminate use of chemicals in the past led to elimination of the natural enemies for most of the pests and this makes it difficulty to practice organic farming. Continuous cultivation, especially monocropping of the cereals, has led to exhaustion of the soils and this necessitates usage of inorganic fertilizers.

The opportunities include the growing population of health conscious people who are willing to pay premium price for organic products. The farmers who can produce organic products can greatly benefit from sales to these consumers. Organic production is environment friendly and therefore ensures sustainability in the long run. The health of the people who consume organic products is generally better and so is their productivity.

This is a very important question. All the above answers are from their own perspectives. My answer is very simple: We can overcome the problem by introducing " PERMACULTURE" which include the principles of Organic agriculture.

There are very good answers here in this forum. I would say that we really need more technology for organic agriculture system. See the Brazilian situation; we do have a huge agriculture business, but very low initiatives for organics’ technology. Our research group is engaged to change this scenario (low technology) with new research on organic biofertilizers and so on. Plant nutrition and physiology on organic system is only beginning. We’ve already spent too much time, we need to contribute with reliable scientific data and help to attend the demands of the producers themselves.

Permaculture grown products are: Natural, Clean and Safe.

I don't know if the contributors are familiar with Dr Elinor Ostrom, now deceased, former winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics several years ago. She was a strong advocate of local and regional control of natural resources. Growing up in a traditional, Western-style educational system, we were taught about the Britons' experience of the "tragedy of the commons", whereby pooled, local resources were managed inefficiently. We were taught the formula that commons = "bad". Dr Ostrom upended this notion by citing numerous historical examples quite contrary to that notion, and proceeded to offer her own set of solutions that you might be interested in.

[One of the previous answers mentioned that efficiency is derived from "peoples' participation" and stressed rural development and education (cf. Santhanam R., above.) I absolutely agree. That is why I mentioned Dr. Ostrom.]

Sorry to get off topic, but there is an excellent review of the sustainability of the United States' Midwestern agroecosystem (the one that produces enormous amounts of GM maize). Please note carefully that none of the authors in this paper is in the employ of an American or European institution. It is high quality work, and it is based on carefully considered data by highly respected researchers. To cite but one example from the paper: "Between 1996 and 2011, overall herbicide use increased by 239 million kg . . ."

One of the main reasons to bring this up is that whether one considers synthetic agriculture, organic, or a hybrid of the two, agrobiodiversity and resiliency are incredibly important. In agroecosystems of North America, diversity is alarmingly low, which seems incredibly unwise in the face of potentially large climatic changes that are stubbornly difficulty to anticipate.

Mr Mikunthan,

Most people involved in progressive approaches to agriculture in the U.S. recognize that a viable solution that would maintain yields while reducing pesticide use is not 100% organic, but instead uses a 'hybrid' approach. This would involve IPM strategies, focused extension efforts to educate growers, development of effective non chemical means to control weeds and pests, and so forth. I know that the main question in this thread is geared toward organic agriculture, and I certainly enjoy organic produce and grains myself. If consumers demanded it, the agro industry would find a way to make it more economical.

You posed insightful questions, and they are difficult to address. Difficult, but necessary. I am sorry only to have generalities available. One bright spot is that organic technologies that improve seed quality are available. I obtained organic certification in California, a state with strict organic quality standards, for a seed process that improves the germination rate and uniformity of seeds. Our team found a way to use the process without chemicals, in order to better serve the needs of organic farmers in California and nearby states that have relatively high consumer demand for the produce.

Delving into the specifics is the key, as you allude to in your line of questions. Some situations will fit organic production paradigms better than others. As a plant breeder, one of my career goals is to find ways to shift the profile of secondary metabolites of important crops such that they are better able to resist pests and diseases. It is well documented now that focusing on a single compound related to resistance to a particular pest is not an effective strategy. As climate change effects continue to unfold, mobile pests such as insects have a distinct advantage over sessile terrestrial plants. If the metabolite profile in grains or leaves of a cereal crop, for example, that gave better resistance to a particular insect pest were known, then breeding plants that have the target chemical profile in their organs would be fairly straightforward.

I hope this helps and eager to hear the thoughts of others interested in reducing chemical pesticide use. Between 1996 and 2011, mainly due to the adoption of glyphosate resistant GM crops, herbicide usage increased 239 million kg (Benbrook 2012, Environmental science Europe, 24, 24).

Thanks to Anthony Watson, for your answers to my questions. I have raised these questions based on the ground situation in my place at Jaffna, Sri Lanka. Increase of cancer incidents, increasing concentration of nitrate nitrogen in ground water are alarming messages of this moment. Though the Govt started to ban many pesticides including herbicides (due to heavy metals in shallow water in central part of Sri Lanka) still there is no alternate measures available to replace these pesticides. No commercial products available on bio agents. We are currently working on this.

Organic agriculture needs to address many issues

1. how to grow crops without pesticides as the farmers are tuned to these pesticides already

2.How do we manage the pests problem while using high yielding varieties?

3. Is it possible to integrate the farmers towards organic agriculture?

4. Do we get Govt support to this

5. The products of organic agriculture should have higher price than the commercial ones

6. is it possible to all crops/

Some research suggests that organic farms benefit from the halo effect of pest and disease control in surrounding conventional farms. If the whole region went organic, what would happen to the halo effect? We currently waste alot of food in storage and after purchase (up to 30% is wasted in the UK). If this was reduced we wouldn't need such intensive production systems, which can be very wasteful in supermarket-driven societies. I'm not against organic farming, but think we need a range of production systems, all implementing Integrated Farm Management and IPM.

I agree with Nick Birch. Range of production systems is the need of the current problems and we have to develop strategies and mechanisms based on the requirement.

Dear Rehmani,I begin with this question: organic farming friend or enemy?In my opinion it may be enemy.Because it is proved that some PGPRs(plant growth promoting rhizobacteria)that is widley used in organic systems are dangerous for human healths.Some like bacillus,herbaspirilum and pesudomonas produce cancer and sistic fibrousis in humans.Some of these biofertilizers was used as bioweapons in some countries(Bioterrorism).So I think optimum usage of chemical fertilizers is better than these biofertilizers.

If we had to consider just the fertilization (inorganic vs organic) at the great plains of wheat cultivation like Canada, Russia, China etc.

if we just try to calculate the organic fertilizers needed only for this situation, I am afraid that we have to admire that we can not rely only to organic fertilization. Numbers are relentless.

Dear Ghazi,

Depending on the study you read, you will find that some researchers say that organic farming requires more land and is less productive. However, other studies (these ones use to be long-term studies) tend to show that productivity is similar, and that other outputs (socials and environmental services) are provided in addition (advatange above conventional farming.

Please check my book chapter attached. This slightly comment on this topic.

Regards,

Alfredo J. Escribano.

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

The big difference that is often not talked about is the approach to farming. Organic farming is holistic in that it looks at different aspects, soil fertility, for instance, or accompanying plants, or hedges a long the fields etc, all in an effort to keep life cycles as closed as possible and use nature forces to enhance the quality of the produce, promoting the growth and establishment of beneficiary insects etc. conventional farming on the other hand is very one directional and capitalist oriented. I throw that much fertiliser into the ground and spray that much pesticides to cross an economic threshold to make profit. It leaves very little room for sustainable non conventional innovations such as sprout in the organic farming sector, eg community supported farming, bed and breakfast in the hay, etc. you named it. And while every farmer does need to survive and eat as well I thank the organic farmer because s/he does not only take but also give back to nurture our earth, the only planet we have.

I would like to reverse the question: What are the challenges and opportunities in achieving food security through industrial-chemical agriculture (ICA) in a world with rapidly growing population?

We know now that ICA is destroying the soil by mineralisation (nutrient leaching due to the exaggerate use of fertilizers), by compating the soil with heavy tractors, by contaminating groundwater (as a consequence of compation->erosion->leaching), by growing vegetables and fruits that contain up to 100 times less vitamines/oligoelements  than before the Green Revolution. The answer to the reverse question is that ICA henceforth has dispproportionate problems compared to its (apparent) advantages.

On healthy soil, organic agriculture is more sustainable and produce better quality of food and is much less dependent on petrol. The challenges of organic agriculture is then to heal all the soils that ICA destroyed, and this takes, depending on the soil, 5 to 15 years.

In a time of growing population, much more people will have to go back to the countryside. We will need more farmers for organic agriculture, which can be seen as a challenge but which is actually an opportunity for reducing unemployement in this time of economic crisis.

In conclusion: organic agriculture depends on healthy soil, so the challenge is to heal and take care of soils as soon as possible. Organic farming requires more labour force but much less petrol: which will be determining in a near future, when petrol will be too expensive to grow affordable products. The petrol peak and the economic crisis that will follow will also creates the unemployement of many people: those will have the opportunity to retraining in the farming sector.

And the major challenge will be the definition of what "organic agriculture" means. Do we allow biofertilizers, although they might not be less harmful? Do we forbid every input? Do we want to promote biodiverse field instead of monoculture?

I would like to reverse the question: What are the challenges and opportunities in achieving food security through industrial-chemical agriculture (ICA) in a world with rapidly growing population?

We know now that ICA is destroying the soil by mineralisation (nutrient leaching due to the exaggerate use of fertilizers), by compating the soil with heavy tractors, by contaminating groundwater (as a consequence of compation->erosion->leaching), by growing vegetables and fruits that contain up to 100 times less vitamines/oligoelements  than before the Green Revolution. The answer to the reverse question is that ICA henceforth has dispproportionate problems compared to its (apparent) advantages.

On healthy soil, organic agriculture is more sustainable and produce better quality of food and is much less dependent on petrol. The challenges of organic agriculture is then to heal all the soils that ICA destroyed, and this takes, depending on the soil, 5 to 15 years.

In a time of growing population, much more people will have to go back to the countryside. We will need more farmers for organic agriculture, which can be seen as a challenge but which is actually an opportunity for reducing unemployement in this time of economic crisis.

In conclusion: organic agriculture depends on healthy soil, so the challenge is to heal and take care of soils as soon as possible. Organic farming requires more labour force but much less petrol: which will be determining in a near future, when petrol will be too expensive to grow affordable products. The petrol peak and the economic crisis that will follow will also creates the unemployement of many people: those will have the opportunity to retraining in the farming sector.

And the major challenge will be the definition of what "organic agriculture" means. Do we allow biofertilizers, although they might not be less harmful? Do we forbid every input? Do we want to promote biodiverse field instead of monoculture?

Organic agriculture in developed countries have become a very strong niche production as there is a growning number of consumers, who do not want to have pesticides residues, or antibiotica in meat, etc.

The production is more labour intensive, less engery intensive, so it not only produces food that is more healthy, but can also crate more employment. In developed countries the challenge might be to find the workforce needed. In developing countries the workforce is there, but here a challenge might be the higher costs organic produced commodities might costs. They then won't be easily accessible to poorer sections of societies.

Organic agriculture also does not depend on monocultures, but on mixed cropping, which also has many ecological advantages.

It still would take very long to transfer from conventional agriculture to organic agriculture. Work organizations of farming need to change, skills developed, knowldege about organic pest controll and fertilizers, etc.