Open Your Eyes: Sustainable Agriculture

Over the last few weeks, we have explored the largely damaging impacts of industrial agriculture, characterised by the exploitation of resources, large-scale single specie regimes, and high consumption of fossil fuels, pesticides and fertilisers. The destruction of this farming methodology is undeniable, from the emissions, pollution and deforestation of the livestock industry to the water depletion, desertification and toxic chemicals produced by crop production. This cannot go on indefinitely. But what can we do? Surely there are no other options?

Wrong! Sustainable agriculture is an alternative which, in its various practices, involves fulfilling present and future demands of food, water, health and ecosystem demands, whilst maximising societal benefits and environmental well-being. These systems typically focus on conserving resources, utilising natural ecosystem relationships between animals and plants, preserving biodiversity, reducing chemical inputs and incorporating renewable forms of energy. Additionally, sustainable agriculture tends to bring the consumer closer to the producer by decreasing the size of farms, distance travelled and emphasis on economic gains (that inevitably push hidden costs onto society), and in the long term sustaining healthy soil, land, communities and ecosystems.

What makes this type of agricultural more beneficial? In a world where resources and economic expansion are limited, we need to move away from our desire to drive profits, and push toward a more secure future. Sustainable agriculture tends to rely on small-scale, independent and local farms, which generate local employment, local spending and boost average incomes. Unsurprisingly, agribusinesses and farming industries are shown to do the opposite, with the core aim to turn high yields and profits at the expense of farmers, communities and the environment. These big businesses can actually be highly inefficient/ For example, despite rice farmers in Japan, Korea and Taiwan using more than 50% of all insecticides sprayed on rice globally, they yield only 2% of the Earth’s crops.

So, if sustainable agriculture benefits consumers, producers and the environment, why aren’t we doing it? Maybe the techniques used are hard to achieve? Wrong again! Here are some examples of the typical methods used by sustainable farmers:

• Rotation of two or more crops – to reduce pests, increase biodiversity and soil fertility
• Improved soil management –  by decreasing chemical inputs, and increasing organic material suitable for helpful bacteria and fungi
• Maintaining topsoil – by reducing the use of heavy machinery on the soil, this is known as tillage
• Allowing animals to graze rotationally – by relocating animals to different fields to improve soil quality, restore vegetation, and reduce high-protein feed, need for manure management and costs.
• Nitrogen management – by decreasing use of high-protein feeds, fertilisers and pesticides, farmers can effectively monitor nutrient content in soil and prevent contamination of waterways and air quality.

I don't know about you guys, but this was always my idea of how normal farms operated (until discovering the reality and widespread existence of factory farms), and I ascertain that that is how they should be! So, what do we need to do to push for more of these systems?! 

1. Raise awareness of the importance and social benefits of sustainable agriculture
2. Campaign for climate and social justice in the agricultural sector
3. Make sensible dietary choices that eliminate industrial means, i.e. opt for local, seasonal and organic produce
4. Put press on industrial farms by holding them accountable!
5. Reduce animal products, particularly from caged animals

Source: http://s.hswstatic.com

Industrial Crop Production: Part 2 - Models Galore

Source: www.organicfacts.net/

Models are fundamental tools to helping us understand and predict real-life scenarios without having to meddle and tamper with them in actuality. Crop modelling is of particular importance to our society, particularly when considering the global population’s high dependence on the security, efficiency and existence of crops. Additionally, the large scale of systems like these raises a multitude of potential environmental implications that must be measured carefully and projected as accurately as possible.

However, there is some ambiguity and scepticism revolving around the use of models, especially within the field of crop modelling. In the last two decades, research has be launched to reduce the uncertainty prevalent in existing models through inter-comparison, scaling, development of code, removal of deficiencies and calibration of models to suit certain regions more effectively.

Below are some strong examples of models, or improvement projects, which have been utilised in last 15 years (and are, quite possibly, the cream of the crop!).

SIRIUS

Sirius is a simulation model which focuses on a specific cereal, wheat, to estimate the growth of wheat in multiple conditions, including varying climate scenarios. Within the simulation, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) (the wavelength range of photosynthesis, between 400nm to 700nm) is obtained, using satellite imaging, to measure the biomass, and net growth of wheat. The leaf area index (LAI) (the proportion of ground area covered by vegetation) is then found using a thermal-time model, in order to estimate the natural cycle of leaf appearance and fluctuation in wheat. From here, Sirius has been programmed to measure the nitrogen and water deficiencies in the crop, by combining observations of LAI over time with photosynthetic effect. The model has been successfully calibrated in Europe, New Zealand, Australia and USA, and has shown accurate results in the face of climate change.

ATOPICA

The purpose of ATOPICA is to model the health risks and future trends of a particular allergenic pollen strain “Ambrosia” associated with the European influence of climate change, pollution and land-use changes. The aims of the project are:

• Increase understanding of the interaction between environmental change and effects on sufferers of Ambrosia pollen-related allergies
• Assessing the present and future risks associated with allergens
• To formulate responses to outbreaks, and improve regulation, in a policy-making context

Source: www.atopica.eu/

ADAPTAWHEAT

ADAPTAWHEAT is a four year project, set to complete next month, after commencing in January 2012. Its aim is to improve crop yield and performance of wheat, and develop adaptation strategies against climate change, within Europe, by looking at particular genetic components and germplasm, for flowering time and its periodicity (phenology).

Source:www.rothamsted.ac.uk

LARS-WG

LARS-WG conducts a time-series analysis of the weather in certain locations to assess the risk of weather on agriculture and hydrology, and make future predictions based on climate change scenarios. Version 5.0 of the LARS-WG model uses data from 15 Global Climate Models (commonly known as GCMs) to eliminate or reduce uncertainty in results which can stem from differences in model design. Examples of the weather measured include heavy precipitation, drought and heat waves, alongside normal everyday weather activity.

AgMIP

AgMIP, the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project, has the core objective to inter-compare multiple models, reduce uncertainty and calibrate them sufficiently, so that these crop models output more reliable results for future projects of baseline and other climate change scenarios. These predictions will be combined with economic models, to formulate appropriate adaptation strategies and enhance food security globally.

The main elements of the project are:

• Inter-comparing crop models to reduce uncertainties in temperature, precipitation and greenhouse gas emissions
• Juxtapose with observations of temperature, precipitation and GHG emissions
• Developing stronger computer code and strengthening understanding of relationships within the system
• Calibration of model based on region
• Simulation impacts of soil health and water sources on agriculture
• Utilising models to develop suitable adaptation strategies

The crops tested within the context of AgMIP were originally wheat, maize, rice and sugarcane, with expansion now allowing to modelling of potato, sorghum-millet, peanut (groundnut) and soybean.

Source: www.agmip.org

MACSUR

MACSUR take a similar approach to AgMIP with their CropM project, which aims to improve the quality of crop models by reducing uncertainty through inter-comparison, scaling methodologies, data compilation, and inclusion of (often neglected) factors, such as, impact of climate change on flowering and the use of crop rotation modelling. By linking crop and soil modelling, they are able to obtain a stronger, more accurate depiction of reality, which will help them develop stronger adaptation and mitigation strategies to climate change, and well as strengthen global food security.

Source: www.hoffmann.wf

Industrial Crop Production: Part 1 - Environmental and Social Impacts

Hellooo, and welcome back! I hope you all enjoyed getting creative and discovering new recipes with the COP21 Recipe Challenge. Now, I’d like to return to our critical analysis of certain food production practices, with the focus of today being: Industrial Crop Production.

We have so far learned about the environmental impacts of the livestock industry, which have left many presenting me with a case for pro-veganism. However, we must not forget that plant-based diets also have a major effect on the environment, and that by simply omitting meat and dairy from our diets does not come without its own set of problems! So, what’s the planet’s beef with industrial crop production?

Land-Use Change and Deforestation

http://s.hswstatic.com/

Crop production is a major driver of land-use change and deforestation. As discussed previously in relation to livestock production, the conversion of forestland threatens native species, ecosystems, and displaces and releases vast stores of carbon, decreasing the Earth’s ability to absorb excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

However, despite the millions of individuals in the world who live in food poverty, a large proportion of these crops are not grown specifically for human food consumption. According to the FAO, up to 33% of cropland is utilised in livestock feed, with further significant percentages being designated to the production of medicine, clothing, alcohol and biofuels. According to an article in TIME magazine, 25% of the corn harvested in the United States, in 2007, was used toward biofuel production. Although the conversion of crops to biofuels sound beneficial in theory, this raises serious concerns in terms of global food security, at the expense of choosing “clean energy” cars (for our own non-mandatory satisfaction) over feeding the planet. Despite this, the use of biofuels are not as widely spread in all other parts of the world, and thus are not necessarily an immediate threat to food security.

Irrigation and Water Resource Depletion

Graph: Comparison of yield between irrigated (blue) and rain-fed crops (orange)
Source: www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4683e/y4683e07.htm

With around 1.2 billion people in the world living in areas of water insecurity, the preservation and use of water in agriculture is of incredibly high importance. As demonstrated in the graph, crops fed with irrigated water produce much higher yields than rain-fed crops, with some results showing a yield of 2 to 3 times as high. This is great news in terms of global food security, however, as with everything in life, irrigation comes with its own set of environmental and ethical problems:

• Groundwater and water source pollution through the use of fertilisers and pesticides
• Reduced availability and/or quality of water for humans and other wildlife, i.e. water depletion
• Decrease in agricultural employment, and less available jobs
• Soil and land degradation, soil acidification and salinization
• Change in river hydrology or flow
• Increased evaporation of water within the system
• Higher occurrences of waterlogging, i.e. soil saturated with water

Desertification

https://www.wageningenur.nl/

Desertification is a type of land degradation caused by the conversion of arid, semi-arid or grass land into desert through either direct or indirect human activities, or changes in climate. Typical causes of desertification include poor land-use management, deforestation, agriculture, overgrazing, excessive use of water and excessive cultivation of crops.

This poses a threat to global food security, as the more land that is degraded, the less available land there is to use for agriculture. With the population set to increase from 7 billion to 9.6 billion by 2050, the reduction of available agricultural land will put an immense pressure on the need for further deforestation and land-use change projects. It is estimated that almost one-sixth of the land surface is already affected by desertification to an extent.

Additionally, this change in natural environment will also have a great impact on biodiversity loss and ecosystem changes which, in turn, has a knock-on effect on faraway areas.

Fertilisers

The use of fertilisers in food production is a controversial issue, particularly amongst organic food lovers. Their capacity to allow the expansion of potential food production and feed our vast population is undeniable, yet their power to wreak havoc with the environment is equally something that we cannot ignore.

Contamination of groundwater and surface through high use of fertilisers is a common occurrence, and can increase the amount of nutrients and pollutants in the water sources, leading to eutrophication, health expenses, water treatment costs, increased mortality in fish and other aquatic or land species. Additionally, the commercial and widespread use of fertilisers can lead to poor soil health, which includes soil degradation, pollution and acidification.

http://www.latrobefertilisers.com.au/

Fertilisers are not just a pollutant of water, but also a potential air pollutant. Their emissions of various nitrogen oxides increase tropospheric ozone, which is caused by the reaction between nitrogen oxides and sunlight. This can have a damaging effect on the health, biodiversity and crops themselves. It is predicted that 35% of cereals are already vulnerable to high levels of tropospheric ozone.

Lastly, we cannot forget that the manufacturing process to produce fertilisers require vast quantities of fossil fuels, particularly the use of natural gas. Thus, from an environmentalist’s perspective, fertilisers are a further dependence on fossil fuels, which we are trying to diverge away from!

Yet, this puts me, and probably you too, in a serious dilemma. Realistically, food production is so highly dependent on the use of fertilisers, and so to totally eradicate them would likely cause mass global hunger and mortality. However, their environmental impacts are leading to a similar fate. The latter is slower, with possible mitigation strategies in the future, but is highly unethical. Maybe a gradual phasing out of fertilisers would be a good solution? Although, I’m not entirely sure if that’s possible, with such a high population to feed… If anyone could give their insight on that one, I’d be really interested to hear your views!

Pesticides

Pesticide use, including herbicides, insecticides, fungicides and disinfectants, are another controversial aspect of crop production. They carry similar environmental impacts to fertilisers, for example, water contamination, air pollution, soil degradation and pollution, human health and ecosystems.

http://evanslab.org.uk/

The most known environmental or ecological impact is the effect of pesticide use on bees. Honey bees, in particular, are exposed to pesticides due to their high dependence on crops, such as, maize, sunflower and oilseed rape. Bees often transport pesticides in pollen and nectar, and store it within the hive, leaving non-foraging bees exposed to toxic effects of pesticides. This is supposedly taken into account by pesticide manufacturers, who ensure that doses of neonicotinoids (the damaging toxin) are below what is considered lethal (without a controlled setting)(. Despite this, decline in bee populations are still prevalent through the exposure of sub-lethal doses of neonicotinoids in pesticides. As common pollinators of major food sources, including commercial crops, this could have a potentially devastating impact on the food web and ecosystems.

Furthermore, the use of pesticides becomes a bit of an arms race between humans and pests. It is thought that within approximately 10years, most insects become resistant to insecticides, and for some bacteria this resistant to antibiotics can occur within 1-3 years. In this respect, it’s a never-ending struggle, with the end result being super-resistant pests with more potential of harm to human health.

Monocropping

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/

Monocropping is an agricultural practice where only a single crop is grown in an area from year to year, without rotating. Crop rotation is important for increased soil health and quality, thus monocropping leads to soil degradation and smaller yields. If soil degradation persists over time, this could lead to the land being usable for agricultural purposes, and thus reducing the amount of available land for food production.

The genetic uniformity of crops contributes to a lack of biodiversity in animal and plant species, as well as increase the crops’ susceptibility to pests and disease, hence the heightened use of pesticides in crop production. With 60% of the human food source dependent on only three cereals (wheat, rice and corn), this makes monocropping a huge threat global food security.