Feeding the WorldOrganic agriculture could feed the world, butwill it? A state of Otopia, an organic Utopia of100% organic food and organic agriculture isa dream, or is it a pipe-dream? And if adream, might it manifest in four decades or54 decades? Two roads to Otopia areextrapolated from the current state of globalorganics.

A meta-study of organic versus chemicalagriculture by a research team from theUniversity of :Michigan, and headed byCatherine Badgley, found that if the worldmade a switch to organic agriculture then theglobal food supply could increase. Andimportantly, the increases would be greatestin areas of greatest need. Allied withincreases [or most of the world's farmers,Badgley's team showed that yields wouldreduce in areas of the least need, for examplethe USA, where there is overproduction fromindusl:!ialized agriculhue that is now heavilysubsidized by US taxpayers.

Ancien Regime organic agriculture fed theworld for ten millennia. Ghengis Khan,Beethoven, Socrates, :Michelangelo - selectyour own heroes or villains up to andinclUding the nineteenth century - and all thegreat and ungreat figures of history, had adiet of de facto organic food.

Since the development of the Haber­Bosch process of nitrogen fixation a centuryago we have witnessed the relentless

colonization of the agricultural space bysynthetic fertilizers. Then, chemical warlareagents developed in WWI, and moreespecially in WWll, have been repurposedfor agriculture, sending de facto organicagriculture into a near-terminal decline.

Yet, that tenninus has not been reached.Through a series of agricultural innovations,induding the development of organicstandards, the certification of the productionprocess, the implementation of traceabilitypathways, and the labelling of organic food,the decline of de facto organic has been metwith the rise of certified organic. Oblivionnow appears unlikely with the certifiedorganic sector often popularly described asuthe world's fastest growing food sector".

Organic versus "Chemical"AgricultureThe reaction against synthetic fertilizers andpesticides dates at least back to RudolfSteiner who delivered a series of lectures, inwhat is now Poland, in 1924. From that seriesof eight lectures delivered over 10 summerdays, bio-dynamic agricultme has developedinto a worldwide phenomenon.

The British agriculturalist LordNorthbowne introduced the tenn "organicagriculture" in his 1940 book Look to theLand. He presented the idea that theagricultural space is a contested space:

Uorganic versus chemical farming".In 1972, three decades on from

Northboume, all streams of agriculture thateschewed synthetic fertilizers and pesticides- including biodynamic, organic, bio andecological - were united in France under thewnbrella of the newly fonned InternationalFederation of Organic AgricultureMovements (IFOAM). This development laidthe grounds for sharing, extending, and theharmonizing of local innovations, includinginnovations of agricultmal practice, ofstandards, of certifications, of labelling, andof training and advocacy into theinternational arena.

The United Nations EnvironmentProgramme (UNEP) has estimated that thereare 150 dead zones in the oceans due tofertilizer and pesticide runoff. These deadzones are silent witnesses to the wisdom ofthose early organic pioneers. Since the firstarticulation of organic standards, theexclusion of synthetic fertilizers andpesticides has been extended to excludingirradiated food and genetically modifiedorganisms (GMOs) from the certified organicfood slIeam.

Most recently there has been the call, andin sev(:!ral countries the action, to excludeengineered nanoparticles from organic foodproduction. Nanoparticles are of a size from 1to 100 billionths of a metre. That is smallenough to pass through bio-barriers,

22 AUS11lAUAN Cer1iIied Organic MAGAZH Sunvner 2010 / Autumn 20 11

Figure 1: The growth of worldwide Organic Agriculture (sources: IFOAM reports dated from2CXXl to 2009).

oHa2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year Reported

Organic Targets

scenarios :if you prefer.In Scenario 1, organic agriculture

continues to grow geometrically at 13.2% peryear (Figure 2). Under this scenario organicagricultun~ will represent 2.8% of agriculturein 10 years (2019), 9.6% in 20 years (2029),33.0% in 30 years (2039), and 100% in 39years (2048).

In Scenario 2, organic agriculture continuesto grow aritlunetically at 22.8% per year(Figure 2). Under this scenario, organicagriculture will account for 2.6% of agriculturein 10 years (2019), 4.5% in 20 years (2029),6.3% in 30 years (2039), and 8.1 % in 40 years(2049). If this rate of increase were to continue,a state of Otopia, 100% organic agriculture,would be iichieved in 544 years (2553).

As the Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change (IPCC) reiterates inreference to their own work, scenarios are notpredictions. Scenarios are mathematicalextrapolations from the present based onsome mod.elling hypothesis. We would need acrystal ball to really see into the fuh.rre.Scenartos, nevertheless, can be used togenerate insights. The future is not merelysome place we are sailing into, it is the fruit ofthe present, and it is under construction now.

Many countnes have set targets forconversion to Organic Agriculture. Brazil hasset the goal to be 20% organic by 2012.France has set a goal of 20% organic by 2020.The Indian state of Kerala has set the bareven higher with the aim of 100% by 2012.

Uechte!nstein has already achieved 29.7%of its agricultural land as organic. Austria has13.4% of its agricultural land as organic, andthe figure is 11.0% for Switzerland. Australiawith 37% of the world's organic hectares is2.7% organic.

100%~

90%3"3u 80%'§'<l: 70%'5~ 60%'".c 50%'"u'c 40%'"~ 30%0'0 20%{j" 10%'ea- 0%

'" ~ '" "' "- '" N ~ "' "- '" C;; '" "' "- '" :;: ~ "' "- '"0 ;; ;; ;; ;; ;; N N N '" '" '" '".,. .,. .,.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1\1 1\1 0 0 0 0N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N

Figure 2: Projected organic share of agriculture 2lX'l9-2049.

Organic Scenarios

organic hectares in 2000, and 32,221,311organic hectares in 2009. Based on theseIFOAM statistics, organic agriculture hasgrown at the rate of 13.2% per annum- if wetake that growth to be geometric (i.e. growingyear on year like compound interest).

On the other hand, using the sameIFOAM data, organic agriculture has grownat a rate of 22.8% per annlllTI - if we take thegrowth to be arithmetic (i.e. growing likesimple interest since 2000).

What is clear is that the worldwide growth oforganic agriculture has a certain momentlun;just what kind of momentlllTI it has, however,is unclear. Here I examine MO futures, MO

/

5,000,000 Ha

20,000,000 Ha

25,000,000 Ha

35,000,000 Ha

10,000,000 Ha

15,000,000 Ha

'"~ 30,000,000 Ha

-gI

~~:;u.":t".~~o'0

~8."a:

including the skin, animal membranes ingeneral, and the bloodlbrain baIrier.Excluding nanotechnology from certifiedorganic food is a logical progression for anagricultural methodology that aims toexclude cryptic technologies - that is, techno­stuff that you have no way of knowing ispresent or not - from the clinner plate.

Organic Timeline

Willer and Kilcher in IFOAM's The World ofOrganic Agriculture, Statistics and EmergingTrends 2009, record a worldwide total of32,221,311 organically managed agriculturalhectares. By their calculation that represents0.8% of the total worldwide agriculturehectares. Their figure is a total of hectaresreported by organic certifiers as certifiedorganic or organic in-conversion. Farms thatare de facto organic for whatever reason,perhaps remoteness, are not included in theWiller & Kilcher figure, so their figure is alower bound estimate of organicallymanaged land.

IFOAM have reported the global total oforganic hectares in arumal reports since 2000(Figure 1). Over that decade the total organichectares has tripled from 10.6 million to 32.2million hectares. That is an impressive rate ofgrowth. However the timeline is too short todeclare that the style of growth exhibited iseither arithmetic or geometric growth. AsThomas Malthus pointed out in 1798, andalso perhaps your high-school economicsteacher, these MO styles of growth producedramatically different outcomes whentracked over a longer time frame.

\FOAM reported a total of 10,550,311

Summer 2010 / Autumn 2011 AUSTRAliAN Certified Organic MAGAZINE 23

fARMER10 CONSUMER

our 'One Stop' Organic Cereal Grainapd Flour Supplier

Kialla shecialises in supplying theartisa baker with a full range of

org'an' cereal grains and specialtyflours.

ut~~, rJ~r=-~ °1SPecial 9~\~"FOUR LEAF MILLING celebrates fourdecades in the business of speciality &quality grains. A wide range now offers thebest in rolled grains for muesli or porridge,specialist flours. flours for sourdough,yeasted, and flat breads, pasta, and more.We also provide baby cereals, and mixedgrains for soup or to make savourynibbles. All products are available in arange of sizes from distributors in allstates. Visit our web page for detailed infoand recipes!

M\I!'I!II!I

Reprinted from: Paull, J., 2010, The Future of Organic Agriculture: Otopiaor Oblivion? Innovative Science Edltions, 1: 11-14

Dr. John PaullUniversity of OxfordEmail:john.paull@anthro.ox.ac.uk

ORGANIC RESEARCH

There are also some significant achievements in reaching toward a crop-specific Otopia.Mexico coffee production is 30% organic, and its coconut production is 67% organic,according to the latest IFOAM statistics. And the Dominican Republic is 70% of the way tobecoming a banana-Otopia.

The sciences driving organic agriculture and chemical agriculture have rarely coincided.Organic agriculture has drawn substantially from the ecological sciences, while chemicalfarming has drawn substantially from the toxicological sciences, and more recently fromgenetic modification and nanotechnology.

Organic and chemical agricultures are competing paradigms, and as such they engagescience differently. A current spat is the effort to proprietise the work of the first 10 thousandyears of agriculturalists by tweaking the fruits of that enterprise via GMtechnologies and proceeding to claim patent rights over an organism.TIlls is seen as bio-piracy by some including the organic sector and restson philosophical differences including the question; is it right or proper,or in the common interest, for a company to have a patent over a lifeform?

Humans are the only species that, as a general modus operandi, spraytheir food with poisons prior to consumption. There are eco-issues withthis for the farm, the faJ1!1er, and the planet. Because "no fann is anisland", and what goes on the fann doesn't stay on the farm, this becomeseveryone's issue.

Organic versus chemical fanning is a "clash of fundamentalisms".These two agriculture paradigms are underpinned by different valuesand different approaches to science. Organic agriculture looks toengaging the precautionary principle, to dancing with biodiversity, and toseeking eco-harmony. Chemical agriculture is weighted towardsengaging the postcautionary principle, to waging a "war on weeds", andto vesting faith in techno-fixes. These are two different paths, leading tot",JO different futures.

The stated goal of the organic movement is the adoption worldwide oforganic agriculture. That task has a long path to travel, with organicagriculture currently accounting for 0.8% of agricultural land worldwide. ITan aritlunetic rate of growth of 22.8% pa were to continue indefinitely thenwhat Liechtenstein has already achieved, a 30% organic share, would take160 ye~ to achieve worldwide, and a state of Otopia would take 544 years(2553). Under a geometric growth scenario - think compound interest ­Otopia would be reached in 39 years (2048). Can we afford four moredecades of chemical agriculture, let alone 54 decades? «+

24 AUSTRAlLAN Certified Organic MAGAZINE Summer 2010 / Autumn 20 11