Can Organic Farming Feed Us All?

Related Links

• World Watch Magazine: May/ June 2006
• Sources and Resources for "Can Organic Farming Feed Us All?"

Worldwatch Live Online Discussion

Brian Halweil: Senior Researcher

April 18, 2006 - 12:00pm EDT

Join Worldwatch Institute Senior Researcher Brian Halweil to discuss the role of organic food in helping to alleviate hunger globally. In an article in the May/June issue of World Watch Magazine, Halweil notes that two recent studies reveal that a global shift to organic farming would yield more food, not less, for the world's hungry. Organic farming tends to raise yields in poorer nations, precisely those areas where people are hungry and can't afford chemical-intensive farming. "In poorer nations, organic farming techniques like composting and green manuring and biological pest control may be farmers' best hope for boosting production and reducing hunger," writes Halweil.

Beyond this yield advantage, organic farming has proven benefits for wildlife, water and air quality, and food safety. And while analysts on the two sides of this issue are constantly at odds, some experts are starting to advocate a middle path that uses many of the principles of organic farming and depends on just a fraction of the chemicals used in conventional agriculture. Such an integrative system, they believe, would have great benefits for farmers, consumers, and the environment. "The lack of widespread support for organic farming from governments, industry, and farmer organizations is short-sighted and may ultimately be contributing to world hunger," says Halweil.

Steve Conklin, Worldwatch Institute: Welcome to Worldwatch Live! Worldwatch Senior Researcher Brian Halweil joins us today to discuss his latest article in World Watch Magazine, "Can Organic Farming Feed Us All?" Welcome, Brian!

Brian Halweil: Thanks for the intro, Steve, and thanks to everyone for their interest. There are lots of questions, and I'll try to answer as many as possible. Let's get started.

Berlin, Germany: While ultimately at least a transition from petroleum-based fertilizerts will be necessary for very obvious practical reasons (quite doable, as evidenced by the example of Cuba), is the real issue merely whether organic can feed us all - I would assume, quite obviously, since yields are easily competitive with fertilizer crops, not to mention increased performance against drought and similar circumstances - but rather, how can we re-establish a closer and tighter production cycle (farm to consumer) with emphasis on regional agriculture? It seems to me that the increased manufacturing-style food production being currently exported to third world countries, who have the opportunity to set new and sustainable examples is just going to hit a wall.

Brian Halweil: You make a good point. We are not simply talking about a transition away from sythetic fertilizers and pesticides, but a transition to a different sort of food system. I think that the philosophy of organic agriculture is closer to this food system--more equity, more healthy foods and fewer processed foods, more interaction between farmer and eater--but current organic farming standards around the world say very little about these sorts of social, ethical, and economic issues. Nonetheless, if you look at organic farmers around the world, they are more likely than nonorganic farmers to be involved in farmers markets, community supported agriculture and alternate marketing schemes, so I think the transition to organic growing will naturally encourage some of the other changes you mention.

Austin, TX: The ecological footprint contribution from local organic food purchased at the farm was calculated by a team in my class, and found to be about 10% of "conventional production of food" (compared to the Household EF Excel spreadsheet calculation). The component for human labor within this smaller total EF contribution was about 3 times more than for conventional production of fresh produce (industrial production). Of course, the local organic produce was fresh (seasonal). With respect to food security, this local supply with a smaller EF was less dependent on refrigeration, transportation, etc. This is parallel to the experience in Cuba after the fall of the USSR, where local food production had to be relied upon for survival. Do you think these lessons can become "mainstream" in the US without a major disaster acting as a catalyst? If so, how could a national shift be catalyzed?

Brian Halweil: It's always difficult to imagine mainstream American making radical changes in its lifestyle without a major motivating event--fuel crisis, bioterror attack, etc. But I do think this is already happening on a small scale. Think of how the number of farmers markets has grown (more than doubled to nearly 4000 in just the last 10 years) or membership in groups like Slow Food has grown or the number of supermarkets carrying local or organic produce has grown. Americans are getting better about buying fresh produce to be prepared within a day or so, and getting better at cooking this sort of food. Of course, at the same time, Americans are still highly dependent on fast food and frozen dinners, and the drive for convenience isn't going away. I suspect that some degree of disaster-like events (mad cow disease or avian flu or some other fallout of industrial agriculture) will combine with cultural changes. And the cultural changes will partly be spurred by a desire to get more pleasure and satisfaction out of our food.

Alexandria, Egypt: Can we instrumentally decide whether GM foods safe or not ?

Brian Halweil: Impossible question to answer in this format. See the work that the Union of Concerned Scientists has done on health and enviro risks. My main issue with GM foods has not been the safety questions, but first and foremost, the need questions. Do we really need these crops to feed the world and eliminate chemical use, as proponents argue? The current GM crops being used, and the crops in the pipeline for the forseeable future, indicate otherwise.

Summertown TN: Although this seems like a peripheral issue, in fact it is vital to the continued popular support for organic farming. James Lovelock in his recent book The Revenge of Gaia relegates organic farming as a deadly mistake because, among other reasons, he claims it takes more area than industrial farming. He deplores farming in general as reducing the world's ability to maintain the biosphere compared to the carbon-sequestering ability of the natural landscape. (He would have us synthesize fermented food from air, water, and trace chemicals). All this might be attributed to advanced age and mental capacity were it not that James Lovelock is a world famous physician, inventor, and the author of the notion that the Earth is a quasi-living entity (Gaia). He swings enormous influence with the Greens, and his ignorant advocacy of nuclear power to reduce CO2 and mitigate global warming has been instrumental in the so called Green Nukes movement. I would greatly appreciate if you were to mention your main conclusions as being an answer to the misconception that organic farming takes more area than industrial farming. I myself am involved in integrated organic agri-ethanol, led by David Blume, as a solution to the world food and energy problems. Thank you, Frank Michael mushroom@thefarm.org

Brian Halweil: I can't comment on Lovelock's work, but, yes, the gist of my article is that there is now very solid evidence from around the world that organic farming does not take up more area and in some cases will take up less. Of course, grassfed beef, for instance, is going to take up more land than the cows standing in front of grain troughs at feedlots. But the pastured cows will also be more integrated into the landscape, will be providing fertility and won't require us to raise as much grain. The Danish group that I cite in my article said that one of the most important aspects of a global transition to organic farming would be better integration of meat and dairy production with grain or pasture production.
And, organic farming does hold additional solutions to our energy issues, because it uses a lot less energy, primarily because synthetic fertilizers are so energy intensive.

Ouarzazate: We are encouraging date and olive oil organic productions in south moroccan oases. However, on going studies show that this farming system is burdened by the deep gap between the potential consumers located mostly in Europe and the poor farmers who feel unable to respect the terms of certification for this kind of production. The problem seem to more linked to cultural behavior and fair trade between south and norh.What would be your advice.Best regards.

Brian Halweil: That's a difficult situation. There is always the risk with production for export that farmers will be raising a crop for foreign mouths, while they are eroding their own food security, especially if there is no market for the export or if the price isn't good. Fair trade tries to solve this problem. But farmers will not go through the time and expense of certification if they don't see the eventual profits and other benefits. Without knowing more about your situation, I would encourage you to seek out more local markets. Check out the example of the Egyptian organic company SEKEM, which has created a great local market for organic products.

Sound Beach NY: My question is: Have you seen an increase nation wide for CSA and/or organic farming? Especially in the "bread basket" of the midwest. My other concern is that the corporate farms are holding out and how can we get the message to them that it would be profitable for them to convert to organic farming methods? (As a sidebar - the supermarket chain Stop and Shop has its own line of organics called "Natures Own" - is this a sign of a corporate change?) PS - Having read your book "Eat Here" a year and a half ago and buying organic for many years, I have been passing on your words of wisdom to many people. This will be my second year of buying from a CSA in Jamesport and as a result of my praise for the yields received last year, two more families have bought shares in this particular CSA. Keep up the good work!

Brian Halweil: Thank you for your questions and kind words. Yes, there has been a big increase in CSAs and organic farming all around the country. One of the biggest growth areas is large-scale organic grain and soybean production in the Midwest to supply organic meat and dairy production. As you point out, corporate farms and big agribusiness is already getting the point. Not necessarily because they agree with organic in principle, but because the market is growing. Without altering federal farm subsidies, which encourage chemical-intensive farming, we won't see a more rapid shift on a large scale.

Buenos Aires: so how could we do to change the actuals world's technics of farming for the organics? there are thousands of things that people could change to help themselves, baut arent done for tinnies inconvinients...or for just being afraid of the change... thank you for your time

Brian Halweil: Excellent points. Yes, experience of people working in the field around the world show that often farmers want to change or see the benefits of change, but there are still obstacles. Change takes time and can take money and it involves risks. The best solution would be wider support for organic farming, from government, industry, and farmers groups. And, as Roland Bunch, an agricultural development expert in Central America, points out in the article, farmers might be most attracted to some, but not all of the organic farming techniques. And once they have adopted some, and seen the results, they might be open to others.

Washington D.C.: I spent 6 months teaching reproductive health and environment in a rural primary school in Tanzania last year. The children, many who will farm to provide for themselves for the rest of their lives, work in school fields that use chemical inputs and learn that they are good. We taught about organic farming with our limited NGO funds. If traditional intercropping and organic techniques provide the keys to eliminating hunger, do you see national governments in the developing world adopting extension policies and education to enhance their use and effectiveness, or do you envision the interests of corporations in donor nations override any such attempt?

Brian Halweil: It's hard to say what plays a role in determining the extension policies of governments in the developing world. Experience from the industrial world shows that agribusiness has tremendous influence over farm extension and extension has largely been privatized in recent years. Similar trends are taking place in the developing world, but aren't as extensive, and I think there is still great opportunity for governments to steer the techniques towards organic production. Look at the experience of Cuba and Switzerland (with agriculture in general) or Uganda and Egypt (with cotton).

Prince Albert, Saskatchewan: I'm really cheering for organic farmers, but with "The lack of widespread support for organic farming..." what are some real things that someone can do to change the widespread attitudes and promote organic farming, maybe even bring it into the mainstream? Does organic farming even stand a chance against chemical-intensive farming?

Brian Halweil: On a personal basis, you can buy organic whenever or wherever possible, encourage friends to do the same, and encourage farmers and food companies near you to go organic. On a larger scale, there are organizations in every nation that are working to change broader government policy in this area. Check out the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (ifoam.org) or the Organic Consumers Association for more information. Yes, organic farming does stand a chance, and even though it's still a small share of the total food system, it's the only part that's growing.

Vancouver Canada: Will pollution from GMOs make organic agriculture impossible?

Brian Halweil: Pollution from GMOs can disrupt organic agriculture where farmers are required to show that their crop isn't contaminated. Studies have already shown some level of GMO contamination throughout the food system (including in organic foods) for crops like corn and soybeans which are widely planted in GM varieties. But to some extent the organic industry already deals with this when it comes to pesticide pollution, which makes its way into organic fields too. The lawsuits and contamination regulations pending in many nations will help determine the results, and the fact that this issue isn't resolved is another reason to be wary of GMOs.

Okinawa, Japan: Are you aware of the recent discoveries in extracts made from deep sea ocean water in Japan and the momentous effects (positive) on Organic (bio-dynamic) farming; increased yields and growth rates? We are researching these effects at the University here in cooperation with the gentleman (Prof) who invented fiber optic cables (especially where the nano particles affect DNA repair). We are looking at introducing ORMUS materials through agriculture into the human food-chain. WE believe that the best effects will be enjoyed by those who embrace a vegetarian lifestyle. You can contact me at essene@mac.com. Superconductivity in human at the atomic and cellular level is the focus of the study.

Brian Halweil: Thank you for sharing this information. I am not aware of this research, though I have seen some research on the use of diluted sea salts as a micronutrient fertilizer and some resulting increases in yields.

New York, NY: I have recently retired as a Professor of Cultural Anthropology from CUNY. I have been working on agriculture issues in South India for close to half a century and have ;published many things. At present I have started a very very small foundation called The Second Chance Foundation based in New York to try and help some of the NGOs working on sustainable agriculture for the poorest of the poor. Shortly I expect to be working with an Indian institution to conduct domentary research on a small number of successful or partly successful programs. The funding for my Indian colleagues comes from funds from the Dutch Embassy in New Delhi which I have arranged for. I want to know if there is any way I can get the information about some of these things going on in the US to my grassroots friends (who do have on and off access to the Internet) about the kinds of things you are reporting on in the US> Because of the influence of US agricultural Universities on Indian ones, alternative information is not available there. I really could use help in getting it out. Also, is your book Eat Here available in India? Took it with me last time, but it is hard to get it to enough people. In any case, if there is anyone I can show any of my materials to in the greater NY area, please let me know?

Brian Halweil: please send me a message at info@worldwatch.org and i'll see what we can do.

Glencoe, Minnesota: Is there anything that the ordinary citizen of the U.S. can do to influence the policy direction of institutions like the World Bank and IMF, which have such a huge impact on what sorts of agriculture are promoted by the governments of third world countries?

Brian Halweil: Groups like the Bank Information Center and Oxfam are some of the watchdogs of the World Bank and IMF and making contact with them would be the best way to get involved.

courtenay ,bc.: i have long known that organic farming practices are synergistic in nature, as we are an integral part of the whole earth ecosystem. i have long supported these ideas and practical ideals. it is imperative we act in a manner which is life affirming utilizing our insight to intergrate all activity in the solar, galactic and universal systems. all of which are absolutely necessary and complemetary. we must work toward the ideal of recycling and transformation at 100%. this includes all manner of what is currently considered human waste. all products must be designed and manufactured with these principles in mind, and knowing humanity can survive, exist and in fact thrive on a totally vegetarian diet. all biological waste must also be 100% recycled (including the dead)within natural systems for self sutaining, healthy living environs. how can we not do this?

Brian Halweil: You make a good point. In addition to being more efficient in our agricultural systems (recycling animal waste, eating a more vegetarian diet, etc.), there's a good case to be made for transforming modern sewage systems to make better use of human waste, which is currently turned into a pollutant by mixing it with the industrial waste stream. It means the loss of a tremendous amount of useful water and nutrients.

New delhi: Which country is leading producer of organic products? how does organic farming contribute to sustainable development?Do you think that organic farming at a micro level(household)can boost the production and promotion of this.?What do you think this in comparision in relation to booming Genetic farming??? I am student of university of delhi? and Aspirant of masters in sustainable development??

Brian Halweil: Thank you for your interest and for focusing on sustainable development. Some of your questions are answered in the above responses. You can find statistics on the leading agricultural producers at ifoam.org. Australia has the most area, but Europe is the leading producer in terms of value and in terms of the share of their land and food. Based on the findinds in my article, organic farming would seem to be a key part of any agricultural development strategy and a key part of sustainable development due to its more efficient use of resources, reduced pollution, and better integration with wilderness areas.

BAPATLA.ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA: Oraganiclly growen foods are Nutritionally superior?What about their shelflife?

Brian Halweil: This is an area where this is not very much research. But several studies have shown that organically grown crops have higher nutrient levels, particularly levels of phytochemicals--those compounds like flavinoids and isoflavones and betacarotene that plants produce to ward off pests but which have important health benefits (anti-cancer, anti-aging) for humans. Part of the explanation of this higher nutrient level is because of the greater focus on healthy, well-nourished soils in organic agriculture, and also the fact that plants sprayed with pesticides do not produce as many of these compounds. Re: shelflife, I haven't seen much info on this, but since organic farming standards for processed foods do not allow certain preservatives, the shelflife is naturally shorter.

Australia: An Aurtralian study calculated that about 42m2 of garden is required to kep a family in most vegetables all year round. Are there similar studies done in the US?

Brian Halweil: You can check out the work of John Jeavons and Ecology Action in Willits, CA. Ecology Action has shown that biointensive gardening can raise a tremendous amount of produce on a small area.

Nairobi: How feasible is organic farming climatically and culturally to the marginalized pastoral communities in Sub saharan Africa?having in mind that very vast land in this area is arid and semi arid.

Brian Halweil: I can't say how appropriate organic farming is culturally, especially if you are speaking of people who are primarily herders. But climatically, organic farming is much better suited than nonorganic farming, since the greater focus on composting, covercropping and building organic matter in the soils tends to reduce susceptibility to drought. The article cites several cases from dry climates.

New Paltz, New York: You claim that organic farming methods increase productivity, but add the disclaimer that this happens primarily in impoverished areas. Now here we have a difficult problem of implementation. We are dealing with perhaps a resistant population of farmers who are more interested in the economic bottom line and continue to be subsidized for using non-organic inputs. On the other hand you have the impoverished who are going to want to produce "more intensely" and more quickly on the land in order to get them out of poverty. Many indigenous people know that fertilizer destroys the productivity of the soil but they use it anyway because of its speed. Given these economic incentives to produce food "quickly" and "intensely" as opposed to more slowly with perhaps higher yields, both the impoverished and the better-off might sustain a reluctance to adopt organic methods. What are the practical measures to overcome these problems in order to mainstream organic methods? What sort of agricultural restructuring would have to occur for this to happen? Do governments have an interest in not supporting organic (such that it would raise their GNP because of economic interactions such as fertilizer, pesticides, etc.)? What concrete issues are we up against?

Brian Halweil: Yes, you've pointed to the crux of this issue. Organic farming holds benefits for both rich and poor, but most of the incentives that farmers and consumers face are pointing in the other direction. As I've noted below, restructuring agricultural subsidies in wealthy nations so that they do not support the production of just a handful of commodity crops, but actually reward farmers for meeting certain ecological goals would be an important move. On a practical level, using agricultural research insituttes, colleges, and extension offices to promote organic farming rather than just a chemical based approach would also go a long way to overcoming these barriers. Re: GNP, while there may be losses to the agrochemical industry, organic farming actually costs society much less in terms of pollution to water ways, soil erosion, and wildlife deaths.

College Park, Maryland: I read somewhere that a town in Germany owns farmland and allows people to use it free if they will farm it organically. Do you know about this town? What do you think of this, especially as farming is becoming less and less an option as a livelihood as developers bid up the price of farm land.

Brian Halweil: I don't know about this case. But in those countries and communities that have been most supportive of organic farming (Cuba and Switzerland, for instance) such goverment support is key. In my own area, the town of East Hampton bought a 40 acre farm that was going out of business and handed it over to a group that wanted to farm as a community venture, as long as they only farm it organically.

Egypt, Cairo: Can insect bio-control in agriculture protect crops 100%?

Brian Halweil: Biological control can be very effective, but there is no pest control, including pesticides, that are 100 percent effective. Organic farming is able to achieve high rates of pest control by using a multitude of approaches, from crop rotation to bio-control to planting resistant crop varieties.

Cochin, INDIA: Farming in Poor countries are not only for hunger, it should be income generating exercise. I hope they should get right guidance onistribution chain and marketing. Is there any guidelines formed during your research that will help the farmers?

Brian Halweil: You are right that organic production in poor nations isn't just for subsistence, but might also be used to sell locally or export. I didn't focus on such guidelines in the latest article, but my book Eat Here on the local food movement does focus on distribution and marketing. You might also look at the work fo the ITDG, the Intermediate Technology Development Group.

Hyderabad, INDIA: I too beleive so. BUT we need to have proof in large tracts and what happens in the ORGANIC FARMING IS ALWAYS on a small scale. WHY is it so? If we have proof of this concept in large tracts say a few thousand hectares the civil society can put pressure for a healthy food. CAN WE HAVE PROOF OF THIS CONCEPT IN LARGE AREAS? ALSO the organic food must not be the preserve of the RICH which is so now. pvssk@hotmail.com

Brian Halweil: There are several studies that have looked at the yield question in large tracts, and I mention some in my article. Of course, it's always good to have more and more evidence, but part of the reason there aren't more large scale studies is that there isn't much research or institutional support for organic farming. For instance, the Organic Farming Research Foundation found a few years ago that the US Department of Agriculture was spending less than one-tenth of one percent of its budget on organic farming research.

Bucharest, Romania: Dear Sir, It is, for me at least, that organic farming have a selected market. Only because of poverty in Romania large areas can be considered as functioning under the rules of organic farming, but farmers are focusing on profits. If they can earn more from organic farming, they will do that. If not, they will switch to conventional or biotech. There is little place for governments in a market economy. Can you send me your opinion? Best regards, Gregory

Brian Halweil: Yes, economics will drive the shift. But I still think that governments can play a role, not just by creating financial incentives for organic farmers (whether it's by taxing pesticides or giving payments to help in converting to organic growing), but also by supporting helpful research. In a strict market economy, perhaps there is no room for subsidies, but if current farm practices are harming society then the government needs to use tools like subsidies to support the type of farming that's best for its citizens.

Sydney, Australia: Does your research support that a combination of Effective Micro-organism (EM) and Terra Preta Soils is a viable solution to both developed and developing world agricultural production problems?

Brian Halweil: I am not so familiar with EM and Terra Preta technology, so I did not examine it. The Michigan team that I cited in my article did say that the use of free-standing nitrogen-fixing microbes and soil innoculation with beneficial microbes are just a few of the organic techniques that could raise yields but have not gotten much official support.

Yorktown, VA: Does your theory of organic farming have as one of its tenets the proposal that we all become vegetarians? If so, that is an unrealistic expectation.

Brian Halweil: The models I cite do not assume a shift to vegetarian diets. They looked at the world's current crop mix and diets and just assumed that all existing acreage (for everything from corn production to cattle grazing) would go organic.

Cold Spring, NY: Since the FAO has published material that aggressively advocates GE/GMO technologies, what is your opinion or analysis on the proper international forum or organization to advocate for the "middle path" compromise b/w organic and conventional ag?

Brian Halweil: Yes, FAO has been supportive of GMO technologies, but it has also been quite supportive of organic farming, as I cite in my article. The FAO is a great vehicle to promote organic or a middle path. The World Bank's international agricultural consortium (the CGIAR) is also a good vehicle, and although it has been supportive of GM crops, it also has many researchers (and even directors) supportive of a middle path. They call it "eco-agriculture." Groups like IFOAM have worked with FAO and are trying to develop more ties with other international groups, especially environmental groups who have not been very outspoken on agriculture and could be important voices for change.

Lilongwe, Malawi (Africa): I completely agree with you that organics can feed the world for both the poor and rich. But a closer look needs to be taken at what is grown. Nutritionists around the world are advocating for more fruits, vegetables, beans, nuts, and oilseeds in our diets, yet agriculture continues to produce mass amounts of grain. Agricultural food balance sheets and agriculture itself needs to shift to match what is needed for a healthy diet. A wide variety of foods that are appropriate to the local conditions is a healthy choice for us, our environments and our economy.

Brian Halweil: I couldn't agree with you more. Of course, diets will vary around the world, but there is a tremendous amount of waste in current agricultural production, whether you consider the large amounts of grain and beans fed to livestock or the large amounts of sugar crops or the large amounts of wastage due to improper storage and processing.

Las Cruces, NM: How would scale of farming factor in here? In other words, can small scale local organic farming feed the world, or do we still need great swaths of monoculture focusing on basic grains? Also, does "organic" in this view mean integrated crop/livestock systems?

Brian Halweil: Yes, integrated crop/livestock systems will be the most efficient in an organic world (or any world. See my previous response on this issue.

Re: scale, that will naturally vary by crop. Certain crops, like grains, lend themselves to larger-scale, more mechanized production since there is not as high a premium on aethetics or perfect pest control, whereas fruit and vegetable crops work much better on a small scale where quality can be maintained. The same goes for where the crops are grown. 100% self-sufficiency by every community is not necessarily a good idea, and some areas will be better at growing certain crops than others. But our current system of food shipping is incredibly wasteful with many areas importing crops they can readily produce themselves. (In some cases, areas import AND export large quantities of the same thing.) The bottom line is that the more self-sufficient a community or nation can be, the more jobs, revenue, and good nutrition it will generate.

Hyderabad (AP) India: In a country like India, with a huge population to feed &where the production has to be sustained at higher levels, Is it possible to do so with organic farming alone and also taking into consideration the availability of organic sources do you advocate organic farming for a country like India.

Brian Halweil: As I argue in more detail in the article, organic farming might be the BEST option for a large country like India, simply because chemical-intensive farming hasn't worked and may never take hold in much of the nation. In contrast, organic farming thrives in just those settings where farmers and communities are often too poor to afford the chemical inputs.

US: Hi Brian, I led a team of researchers for IFAD last year to conduct an evaluation of organics in Asia (Giovannucci, Daniele. 2005. Organic Agriculture and Poverty Reduction in Asia. IFAD: Rome) looking at a number of original case studies and we came to the same conclusion. For the poor and remote it is a clear advantage; for intensive farmers, the economics vary and require a local cost-benefit analysis. The environmental and social aspects were often better on the side of organics. Although even for the most intensive users of agchems (i.e. cotton) the economics were sometimes surprisingly in favor of organics. Story is not so rosy however. Local institutions (farmer orgs, NGOs, etc.) were a major factor and necessary for success since the learning curve is surprisingly difficult as many farmers are farming by default and lack many basic skills. If you would like to know more write me at: dpg@consultant.com Regards, D

Brian Halweil: Thank you very much for your comment. This helps to answer some previous questions about the barriers to going organic even when the economics work. It points to the large mental and institutional barriers associated with shifting away from chemicals, and the long way we have to go along the learning curve.

Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil: What do you think about the social risks of the monopoly of large food companies which are taking over the organic food sector? Fair trade and CSA (community Supported agriculture) wouldn¥t be a way to save organic family farmers from the organic monopoly mentioned before?

Brian Halweil: This monopoly is very dangerous. Not just because of the way in which it disrupts markets, allowing some companies to drive out their competition, fix prices, and reduce quality. But because this level of concentration also makes the food supply vulnerable to contamination, transportation problems and a malicious attack. Fair trade, CSAs, and any other schemes that return the marketing power to the farmer are key to reducing the social risks of food monopolies.

Austin, Texas: This premise of reduced hunger in poorer nations through organic agriculture assumes a shift from producing for export, to producing for the local economy. Please comment on the effect on individual income/wellbeing in second and third-world countries of a shift from export-focused agriculture to an agriculture that feeds the local population.

Brian Halweil: HELLO EVERYONE, I'VE STILL GOT A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS TO ANSWER AND WE'VE RUN OUT OF OUR OFFICIAL TIME. I WILL GET TO THEM, SO PLEASE CHECK BACK IF YOU HAVE TO LEAVE.

Re: this question, the models I cite did not assume any shift in production for local vs. export consumption. Many of those developing nations that benefited from the shift to organic production were already producing mainly for local consumption, and so the researchers just assumed that the increased production would either be enjoyed locally or sold into nearby markets. But, as several other questions have implied, the question of hunger is not just about quantity. It's about distribution so even if the world had twice as much food as it does now, there is no guarantee that everyone would get that food. Export agriculture can be an important source of revenue for many "second and third-world countries," but my research has also shown that often the benefits of this revenue go largely to processors, traders, and brokers, and do not trickle down to farm communities. Arrangements that try to give the farmers more power in this regard--cooperatives, fair trade, etc.--will held right this balance.

Ann Arbor, MI: What about politics and corruption and inequality and injustice? As I understand it, any conversation about feeding the world is only partly about the quantity of food, and more importantly about the distribution of food, which is strongly tied to politics. Is it fair to say that this "middle path" might also result in more distributed food production, and might therefore address these very complicated problems as well (problems not having to do with quantity of food?) Or is that too much of a leap?

Brian Halweil: Please see the above answer. The middle path will only help in this regard if it helps more farmers produce more food and either feed themselves or increase their incomes. This reduction of poverty will give these people more power in the marketplace, and more power to acquire the food they need.

Denver, CO: Which members of our government and congress are supportive (taking action) to move our ag/food system in this direction?

Brian Halweil: Good question. I'm not that sure. I know there are a handful that are supportive of subsidy reform and organic farming. You might get in touch with the Organic Consumers Association or Organic Trade Association or ofrf.org on this question.

Kingston, RI: Why do you think chemical intensive agriculture acheives higher yields than organic agriculture in developed nations, but lower yields than organic in less developed nations? What causes this difference between nations?

Brian Halweil: See my article for a more detailed explanation. The short answer is that in the developed world, farmers can afford to use very large quantities of fertilizer and pesticides as a sort of crop insurance and to maximize yield in any given year. In poorer nations, farmers often cannot afford to do this, so organic farming offers a low-cost option for improving fertility and pest control. Remember these are based on averages. There are some very productive organic farms in the US and Europe that can compete with nonorganic farms on yield.

Ithaca, NY: One criticism of local/organic farming that I have heard is that the amount of farmland in the US would need to be drastically increased. This would be a potentially unpopular move in the East, for example, which has experienced massive reforestation over the past 100 years. Do you feel this is true? Will the landscape of the East Coast need to change? If so, how do we go about reworking the entire history of the environmental movement which has taught that "environment" = "forest", not farmland?

Brian Halweil: I don't think the landscape will need to change dramatically, in terms of the amount of land being farmed. I think that communities might vote to preserve certain land as agricultural and protect it from shifting to sprawling subdivisions if raising its own food becomes important. But the use of existing farmland will likely change as a shift towards organic and local production both encourage more diverse fields (including orchards, berries, and livestock, in addition to crops) and more frequent crop rotations. And food production will likely crop up in places we don't necessarily expect it, like front yards, grass lawns, parks, and on the margins of playing fields.

connecticut: Sounds great, but how can the little organic farmer protect his crop from GMO's growing next door? And how can that farmer stand up against companies like Mosanto?

Brian Halweil: See my earlier response on the question of contamination.

Santa Rosa, California: Since protein production determines carrying capacity, and Cannabis (hemp) seed is potentially the world's best available and sustainable source of organic protein & essential fatty acids; then isn't the prohibition of 'marijuana' effectively crippling mankind's ability to feed itself, by suppressing cultivation of the world's most useful, unique and essential agricultural resource?

Brian Halweil: I've seen lots of studies on this benefits of cannabis as an agricultural crop, and there's no doubt that the "war on drugs" has prevented farmers and societies from using a plant with multiple uses. But a crop can be grown many different ways, and there's no guarantee that cannabis, even with its reported low needs for pesticides and fertilizers, wouldn't be raised in big monocultures with lots of chemical inputs.

Orlando FLORIDA: Can we link up Farmers and Consumers without any midiation.?Can Organic Scientists educate Farmers & consumers soon enough to avoid intelectual coruption from Chemiculture scientists.?

Brian Halweil: Yes, farmers and consumers are already being linked up through the explosive growth in farmers markets, CSAs, farm-to-school programs, and other local buying schemes. See my book Eat Here for more details. The education you mention is already happening, and it's definitely not happening fast enough, but that can change.

Washington, DC: What do you think is driving the increasing demand for organic food, and do you expect this interest in organic to continue into the future?

Brian Halweil: I think that the demand is being driven by interests in personal health and safety, first, and interest in the environment and broader society-wide issues, second. For instance, families often start buying organic for newborns or young children, but later learn about the broader benefits for reducing pollution. Yes, I do expect it to continue as supermarkets, food service companies, and other large food buyers get interested.

Denver, CO: Besides the reduction of petroleum-based fertilizers, I'm curious if you think the cost of oil will fuel (sorry for the pun) the change to more organic agriculture?

Brian Halweil: Yes, it definitely will because chemical fertilizer (primarily nitrogen fertilizer) is so energy intensive, and its price is already going up as fuel costs go up.

San Diego: i understand your advice, "Buy organic whenever possible," however i still struggle with this arguement. i suppose this isn't a new dilemma, but how do you address the non-organic local vs organic? Does it make sense for me to buy organic tomatoes from Chile when i could buy non-organic tomatoes from the farmer thirty minutes from my house?

Brian Halweil: No, it doesn't make sense to buy the Chilean tomatoes, unless you are very sensitive to pesticide use and unless they taste dramatically better than the local tomatoes (which I doubt). The advantage of buying from the farmer 30 minutes away is that you have an opportunity to know exactly how that food is raised and to influence that growing. You can tell that farmer about your concerns about pesticide use and you might be surprised about their response. They might reduce or even eliminate their pesticide spraying if enough customers ask them to. In this respect, local has many advantages over organic, wherever it comes from.

St. Paul, Minnesota: Do you think standards can be written to incorporate social, ethical,and economic issues, as well as the more technical aspects of farming such as in the US National Organic Program? Do you think fair trade standards offer a model? Are such standards truly enforceable by a government entity, or only by educated consumers?

Brian Halweil: Yes, fair trade standards do offer a model to incorporate these intangibles into a verifiable set of rules. But they will always be subjective to some extent. What is a fair wage for a farmer or farmworker? What is the humane way to treat animals? What share of the profit from your cup of coffee should go to the coffee farmer? Governments or trade associations will be able to give us some guidance--a standard that could be used as a minimum, like a minimum wage--but you're correct that educated consumers, who think about the food choices they make and ask questions about the food they put in their mouths will be our best standard bearers.

Steve Conklin, Worldwatch Institute: Thanks for joining us today, Brian!

Brian Halweil: And thank you all for your great questions. I hope you found the discussion useful.