McBride, William D., Catherine Greene,. Linda Foreman and Mir Ali. 2015. The. Profit Potential of Certified Organic Field. Crop Production. Economic Information.
840
April 2017
being critical, we have actually made great strides in reducing soil erosion since the days of Hugh Bennett. According to the 2012 National Resources Inventory (NRI), average erosion rates on cropland have declined by 35% since 1982, from 7.1 tons per acre to 4.6 tons per acre (USDA 2015). The documentary also mentions the loss of cropland to other uses as a threat to our ability to feed a growing world population. According to the NRI, cultivated cropland declined about 18% between 1982 and 2012, but this does not tell the entire story. Each year, there are shifts in use between cropland and other uses. For example, between 2007 and 2012, 11 million acres of new cropland went into production, coming from pasture, range, and idled former cropland (the Conservation Reserve Program or CRP). This gain more than made up for the shift of 7 million acres of cultivated cropland to other uses, primarily pasture and the CRP. About 10% of cropland losses were to development. It is difficult to say based on these figures what the impact on future food supplies might be. Certainly, research on all long-term impacts of land conversion, soil erosion, and a changing climate on food production and other environmental services is warranted, as well as research on the policies that could be used to protect the most productive croplands. Marc Ribaudo Economic Research Service doi: 10.1093/ajae/aaw067 The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Economic Research Service or USDA. References Kladivko, E.J., T.C. Kaspar, D.B. Jaynes, R.W. Malone, J. Singer, X.K. Morin, and T. Searchinger. 2014. Cover Crops in the Upper Midwestern United States: Potential Adoption and Reduction of Nitrate Leaching in the Mississippi River Basin. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 69 (4): 279–91. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015. 2012 National Resources Inventory: Summary Report. Washington DC: Natural Resources Conservation Service; and Ames, IA: Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology, Iowa State University Ames.
Amer. J. Agr. Econ.
Symphony of the Soil [documentary]. Directed, produced, and written by Deborah Koons. Lily Films. 2012. Symphony of the Soil, directed by Deborah Koons Garcia, is a nearly two-hour documentary that celebrates the beauty and complexity of soil formation while questioning our use and misuse of this critical natural resource. The core message of the film is that soil is a synergistic ecosystem—a “symphony” of parts that make up a whole. Alongside this message, the film provides a polemic in a long-standing debate on the risks and returns of conventional versus organic agriculture and offers a message on the importance of organic methods. Two strands define the movie. Much of the first half provides a useful (for this economist) overview of soil science. One learns that soil is a living ecosystem. Following a discussion of geological soil formation processes, a compelling mix of interview, narratives, and visuals describe how soils are formed via complex symbiotic relationships between plants, bacteria, and fungi. The film provides a compact primer on the history of different soils; and the way in which physical and biological factors interact to produce unique above- and below-ground ecosystems. Does everyone know of the importance of carbon flows from aboveground plant material to soil microorganisms? As the film progresses, its attention turns to the prospects provided by organic agriculture—a production system that recognizes this complexity. Featuring interviews with microbial ecologists, agronomists, and other physical scientists, along with working organic farmers, the film presents the best and brightest aspects of organic agriculture, including reduced chemical outflows and soil erosion, better water retention, improved soil structure and biodiversity, and increased carbon sequestration. Like many good documentaries, a compelling narrative is drawn by the use of contrasts. The main contrast is between “organic” and “conventional” agriculture. Writ large, the film files a brief in the contention that continued reliance on conventional agriculture is a course fraught with perils: ever-expanding environmental pollution, poisoning of foods, and—most telling—depleted soils that will inevitably decline in productivity. Organic methods that build and sustain soil ecosystems are advocated as a feasible and necessary alternative. Writ small, the film implies that farmers could give up synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, start generating compost, and
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ajae/article-abstract/99/3/840/2632256 by guest on 29 May 2018
Publication
never look back. The film argues that their yields would be sustainably high and they would have little need for purchased inputs. Summarizing: the open-minded viewer of Symphony of the Soil will learn fundamental lessons on what constitutes soil and learn significant facts about the promise of organic agriculture. For example, changes in practices can generate ecosystem services that have significant on-farm and off-farm benefits. Reduced reliance on purchased inputs can reduce production costs, and organic certification and production for specialized markets can mean that a farmer gets a price premium. And yet, the film is a polemic, so the openminded viewer asks what is left out. The development of conventional agriculture, as exemplified by the increasing use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, along with the seeds bred to work with these chemicals, has provided real benefits. Increased crop productivity has freed up labor in agriculture for innovation and development of other sectors. Trade and specialization of agriculture has improved food security in many parts of the world. Moreover, the increases in productivity associated with high-input conventional agriculture may have reduced the need to convert marginal lands to cropland (in both developed and developing countries) in much of the latter half of the twentieth century. This is a lot to walk away from, under the hope that widespread adoption of organic methods will do the job. While organic methods are known to be both productive and sustainable, why haven’t the majority of farmers adopted them? The film’s answer is that inputs (such as fertilizer) are too cheap (because oil is too cheap) and that farmers are stuck in a cycle where they are dependent upon such inputs for production. Is that the whole story? For example, are organic methods riskier— even if only occasionally? Are organic methods more difficult, or more labor and time consuming—so that a utility-maximizing farmer will eschew the hassles and stick with conventional methods? Are there discount rate issues? Farmers may take an individualistic view of their future and be less willing (than society would choose) to sacrifice nearterm profits to ensure sustainability. Moreover, given evidence on lower per-acre yields of organic methods for some crops and in some growing conditions (Seufert, Ramankutty, and Foley 2012), is there enough organically farmable land to support the food needs of a growing population?
Media Reviews
841
By sticking to the two ends of the ideological spectrum, the film misses some of the nuance and complexity of the ever-evolving global agricultural system. For example, many conventional farmers in the United States are adopting cover crops and other conservation practices to reduce environmental impacts and improve soil health (Wade, Claasen, and Wallander 2015). Many well-managed organic farms use purchased inputs, such as manure, compost, and biological pesticides (McBride et al. 2015). Genetic engineering technology has a potential to produce environmental benefits (National Research Council 2010). And are there farming systems on the horizon—such as perennial grain systems that don’t need chemical applications, tilling, or replanting—that are more sustainable than any type of farming system that is currently in commercial production? A more balanced approach, even one with its heart in organics, might be more convincing. It would be of interest to hear a case on the long-term sustainability of conventional methods— perhaps in a system where continual application of inputs (that would not be necessary under organic methods) are required. Symphony of the Soil raises provocative questions that have vast import (will declines in soil productivity impact food availability for future generations?). The vision of the complexity and robustness of healthy soils is compelling, and their critique of conventional methods has merit. But it is quite a step to conclude conventional methods must be rejected. For example: can sophisticated conventional methods—such as precise application of chemical inputs, well-managed genetic engineering, and adoption of cover crops and no-till technologies—achieve many of the on-farm and off-farm environmental benefits of organic systems?
Note The view and opinions expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Economic Research Service or United States Department of Agriculture. Daniel Hellerstein, Catherine Greene, and Maria Bowman Economic Research Service doi: 10.1093/ajae/aaw066
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ajae/article-abstract/99/3/840/2632256 by guest on 29 May 2018
842
April 2017
References McBride, William D., Catherine Greene, Linda Foreman and Mir Ali. 2015. The Profit Potential of Certified Organic Field Crop Production. Economic Information Bulletin Number 188. United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. National Research Council. 2010. The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States. Committee on the Impact of Biotechnology on Farm-Level Economics and Sustainability. National Academies Press. Seufert, Verena, Navin Ramankutty, and Jonathan A. Foley. Comparing the Yields of Organic and Conventional Agriculture. Nature. 485 (2012): 229–32. Wade, Tara, Roger Claasen, and Steven Wallander. 2015. Conservation-Practice Adoption Rates Vary Widely by Crop and Region. Economic Information Bulletin Number 147. United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. White, Courtney. 2014. Grass, Soil, Hope: A Journey Through Carbon Country [book]. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green. This book begins with a prologue in which author Courtney White describes the path that led him to become involved in the formation of coalitions among environmentalists, farmers, ranchers, and others for effective conservation efforts. Though I have not personally met Mr. White, the tone of this book suggests that his work with agricultural interests to promote sound land management practices has enabled him to develop a strong optimism for the role agriculture can play in increasing carbon sequestration, thus slowing climate change. Grass, Soil, Hope communicates that optimism through a series of case studies of efforts, mostly agricultural in nature, in the United States and Australia that work toward sustainability goals. Sustainability in this case incorporates increasing carbon sequestration and decreasing carbon emissions to reduce and potentially inhibit further humaninduced climate change. This is, of course, quite a tall order, but White presents some intriguing ideas that provide the reader with
Amer. J. Agr. Econ.
the desire to dig deeper and further investigate the potential for wider application. While reading the book, I entered into some interesting conversations with colleagues, including a discussion with a biologist friend over dinner about mycorrhizal fungi and its role in carbon sequestration. I think it is just such conversations that White hopes will ensue if we are to determine which production systems are adoptable en masse, versus those that are likely to work only in limited cases. A major strength of this book is that it is very well written and easy to understand so that it is of interest and accessible to a wide audience. Thus, it enables people from an array of backgrounds to engage in conversations about carbon sequestration and emissions. I will not go into detail on each of the case studies, but they include: California and New Mexico cattle ranchers using production systems designed to positively impact soil health and reduce atmospheric CO2; a New Hampshire farmer using organic no-tillage to increase the health and yield of the soil on his farm; a farmer in Australia utilizing pasturecropping; residents of Massachusetts who constructed an “edible forest” on their city lot; a New Yorker operating a roof-top farm; and a Utah ranch where sustainable grazing practices have been adopted. Each of these cases provides significant discussion on the benefits and complications associated with using their chosen production systems. In particular, the impact of these systems on soil carbon sequestration and carbon emissions is discussed – details that are well beyond my expertise as an economist to fully evaluate but are nonetheless described at an easy-to-understand level. Crop and livestock yields, as well as input usage, are also discussed. Some of the conservation practices that are part of these systems, such as no-tillage, cover crops, and rotational grazing, are rather standard best management practices that have been promoted for many years. Some of these, particularly cover crops, have experienced limited adoption, and, while no-tillage has experienced strong adoption, its use without pesticides has not. Though many of the practices that are a part of the systems discussed have long been promoted, the production systems as a whole as described in this book are by no means “conventional.” Examples are producing crops and livestock on the same land and using various practices for grass-finishing beef. In addition to presenting cases of farming practices designed to impact carbon
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ajae/article-abstract/99/3/840/2632256 by guest on 29 May 2018
