The relative sustainability of alternative, conventional, and reduced-till farming systems

Abstract

We compared the agronomic, economic, and ecological performance of alternative (organic), conventional, and reduced-till farming systems over a 7-year period. We evaluated the sustainability of the various systems regarding several concerns, including soil erosion, pollution potential, whole-farm productivity, energy use, environmental stress, economic performance, and farm size. The alternative systems relied primarily on forage legumes (alfalfa or clover) as substitutes for the pesticides and commercial fertilizers used in the other systems.Two studies were established in northeastern South Dakota in 1985. Study I emphasized row crops, Study II small grains. The alternative system in Study I, which included alfalfa hay in the rotation, was the most productive, both agronomically and economically. In Study II, the alternative system included a green manure crop (clover) in the 4-year rotation and had the lowest agronomic production; however, its economic performance was similar to the conventional system's. Year-to-year variability in production was lowest in the alternative systems. The alternative systems in both studies were the most energy-efficient, and the reduced-till systems the least. Judged by the distribution ofnitrate-N in the soil profile, the potential for groundwater pollution was higher in the conventional and reduced-till systems in Study I than in the alternative system. The alternative systems in both studies depended less on government payments for their profitability. Results in Study I also showed that more widespread adoption of alternative systems would tend to halt or slow the trend of ever-increasing farm size. These studies suggest that alternative systems are more sustainable in this agro-climatic area.

Food security and biodiversity: can we have both? An agroecological analysis

“…However, there are indications that the economic performance of alternative farming systems can be comparable to, if not better than, that of conventional farming systems. This is supported by work at national levels as well as within-farm levels Kremen 2002, 2003;Madden 1987;Offermann and Nieberg 1999;Pacini et al 2003;Padel and Lampkin 1994;Smolik et al 1995). The findings of Smolik et al (1995) support the conclusions of Rosset (1999) by suggesting that the widespread adoption of organic farming in their study system would tend to counter the trend of increasing farm size: conventional farming was calculated to require a greater area for the same level of profitability as a smaller organic farm in most cases.…”

“…This is supported by work at national levels as well as within-farm levels Kremen 2002, 2003;Madden 1987;Offermann and Nieberg 1999;Pacini et al 2003;Padel and Lampkin 1994;Smolik et al 1995). The findings of Smolik et al (1995) support the conclusions of Rosset (1999) by suggesting that the widespread adoption of organic farming in their study system would tend to counter the trend of increasing farm size: conventional farming was calculated to require a greater area for the same level of profitability as a smaller organic farm in most cases. Additionally, supporting the viability of alternative agriculture in terms of the level of difficulty in its management is the work of Pacini et al (2003), Lockeretz (1995), and the comprehensive survey of sustainable farms by Pretty and Hine (2001).…”

Organic Farming and Sustainable Agriculture in Malaysia: Organic Farmers' Challenges towards Adoption

“…According to (Smolik, Dobbs, & Rickerl, 1995), OF is more profitable than conventional farming in the long-term. Studies conducted by (Badgley et al, 2007) have shown that OF can produce almost the same yield of conventional farming in developing countries.…”

Economics of organically managed and conventional potato production systems in Atlantic Canada

“…Low or no till systems decrease direct energy inputs but can increase indirect energy by requiring more herbicides, pesticides, and other chemicals (Smolik et al, 1995). Seen in a more global perspective (that is beyond a given farm), no tillage systems are often crop monocultures which entail off-farm degradation through intensive livestock systems that make use of energy intensive feed, let alone direct pollution externalities.…”