FAQs
FAQs
Myths & Realities About Organic Agriculture
Myths & Realities
Creating a broad-based national awareness of what organic farming systems entail would address the apparent misrepresentation of facts about the science, politics, social and economic underpinnings of organic farming. We attempt to address some of the commonly held misconceptions here.
Myth
Organic verification requires 3rd party certification, which is expensive.
Reality
Participatory Guarantee Schemes (PGS) are ‘.... locally focused quality assurance systems. They verify producers based on active participation of stakeholders and are built on a foundation of trust, social networks and knowledge exchange.’
Thousands of organic producers and processors are now verified through PGS initiatives across the world. The PGS approach has been adopted by ZOPPA to form the backbone of Zimbabwe’s national organic standards because it is less expensive than 3rd party certification and provides Zimbabwean producers with an opportunity to participate in selecting their standards from within the wider standards framework (lodged with SAZ).
Participatory Guarantee Systems, like third-party certification, aim to provide a credible guarantee for consumers seeking organic produce. The difference between the two lies in the approach: direct participation of farmers, consumers & other stakeholders in the verification process is not only encouraged in PGS but required.
Such involvement is realistic and achievable given that the PGS is likely to serve small farms and local, direct markets. Costs of participation are low and mostly take the form of time rather than financial expenditure, making it more accessible to small scale producers. Zimbabwe’s national standards have been accepted in the IFOAM family of standards. These national standards have also been designed to be EU and US compliant, providing an advantage to Zim producers seeking to access these markets.
Environmental Benefits
Myth
OA is ravaged by pest & diseases which reduce yields & increase costs.
Reality
Combinations of strategies are employed within OA to increase resilience. Plants, crops and livestock produced under OA conditions grow comparatively slower and so are more resilient to pests & diseases. Soil health is managed by the application of organic matter, and rotation away from potential disease; with intercropping and catch crops effectively controlling inevitable pests & diseases, while preventing risk of increased resistance. These techniques are combined with knowledge creation around ecosystem functions to conserve habitats of natural predators. During periods of pronounced pest & disease, some naturally occurring fungicides & pesticides are permitted. During the project, 16 indigenous species were identified & analysed for their active compounds, resulting in the selection of those which most effective against pests & parasites.
Myth
Compost is time consuming and cannot restore key elements (NPK).
Reality
Soil health is not just about nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (NPK). The application of green manures and good composting practices focuses on restoring NPK and stabilising PH through the introduction of beneficial microorganisms, which increase micro-nutrients for NPK uptake and plant health. Studies of organic projects consistently demonstrate that, over time, fertility is restored (and maintained) and yields increased
Good soil management is also about being conscious of the demand which various crops place on the soil. Just as the principal of rotation aims to rotate crops away from disease, it also rotates towards fertility, benefiting from the inclusion of nitrogen fixing crops. It is beneficial, within this rotation, to leave an area to lie fallow for a season to enable the regeneration of soil, although there are concerns that this practice will negatively impact overall farm yield and income (by up to 30%).
While this is questionable (see ‘Maximising Production’ following page), when viewed within the wider context of continuous cropping & soil loss, intercropping with legumes on the same plot of lands should be considered to overcome land pressures. Soil organic matter (OM) content and the associated microorganisms in Zimbabwe’s soils has experienced a dramatic decline resulting from years of intensive farming, with fertiliser-use and ploughing (resulting in oxidation), depleting OM content of sandy soils within 5 years, and of clay-based soils within 10 years.
There is therefore an urgent need to increase OM content if soils are to continue to yield. For this to be undertaken efficiently significant amounts of compost must be applied, and soils protected (mulched) from the elements to guard against further depletion. With livestock in short supply or roaming free, the collection of manure represents something of a challenge. Furthermore, it is
believed that manure from livestock grazing on denuded communal land contains far lower levels of nitrogen to support fertility (via compost). In such cases, poultry manure, high in N, can be substituted in compost to boost fertility.
While composting is undoubtedly a serious task for any organic farmer, it remains the key to restoring NPK (and vital micro-nutrients). Importantly, it is essential for building soil structure which enables moisture and nutrient retention, aided by mulch and other soil conservation practices. Organic farmers therefore take pride in the size & quality of their compost, understanding that this time and reinvestment is the key to their sustainability & success.
Myth
Any form of agriculture uses high levels of water, we just need to dig deeper, and build more large-scale dams.
Reality
Agriculture is indeed the thirstiest industry on the planet – consuming 72% of global freshwater resources – 80% of which are already over exploited. This is due, in no small part, to indirect overhead irrigation, leading to high levels of evaporation, and crops being planted in zones least suited to their cultivation. OA instead focuses on the principle of ‘right plant, right place’ growing drought tolerant species which have been adapted over time by farmers, and precise irrigation, dramatically reducing water-use.
Intercropping with a range of species, all casting their root systems at various depths improves water and air percolation and reduces soil compaction. A focus on soil management to increase moisture retention and reduce run-off results in more water being sunk to recharge groundwater supplies.
Furthermore, organic manures and ‘green mulches’ fix minerals in the soil, resulting in nitrate-leaching rates p/ha in OA systems being roughly half those of conventional agriculture –
causing less groundwater pollution. Within the context of agroecology, which forms the knowledgebase of OA, the elements of soil & water, plant health, and indeed human health & wellbeing, are viewed not as disparate yet distantly connected disciplines, but as part of an indivisible whole, upon which we all depend.
Myth
As the population grows, and pressure on land increases, the imperative is to increase the availability of food by any means.
Reality
There are growing concerns regarding the simplistic assertion that there is not enough food, leading to calls for more equitable access to, and distribution of resources. Contributing factors to this faltering food web include natural resource depletion and flat-lining yields, pest & disease resistance, oil prices, unfair trade conditions, failing markets, commodity price speculation, land grabbing, proprietorial control over genetic resources, reduction in landraces, centralised distribution systems, and gender inequality.
While some of these points can be mitigated by OA, many require concerted international and regional action by governments and civil society. However, the last point – 0n gender- cannot so easily be delegated. Women currently make up most Zimbabwe’s producers.
Globally, it is thought that by:
‘Providing women with more support and equal access to farming resources such as land, tools, seed and transport, it is thought that 100-150 million more people would have enough to eat.’
As for the performance of OA, this depends on the previous agricultural management system used. In industrialised countries, organic systems may decrease yields, on average by 30%, depending on the level of inputs used prior to conversion. In the countries applying ‘Green Revolution’ technologies, conversion to OA reportedly leads to almost identical yields. And in traditional rain-fed agriculture, predominant in Zimbabwe, OA significantly increases yields, by an average of 79%vii, by actively promoting the nutrient content of the soils biologically, rather than introducing costly synthetic chemicals.
With reduced levels of expenditure on these synthetic inputs, profit margins are increased significantly creating opportunities for onward investment. So while we will inevitably need more food as population pressures increase, the question remains: how should our food be produced; and is there a role for better quality food which is sustainably cultivated, ethically sourced, and equitably distributed?
Socio-cultural Benefits
Myth
OA is no better for us than food derived from conventional methods.
Reality
Dependency on costly synthetic inputs is not only affecting the health of our environment, research points to their significant impact this on human health. According to the WHO there are an estimated 20,000 accidental deaths worldwide from pesticide poisoning. Research also highlights concerns about exposure to organo-phosphates and carbonate - lowering immune responses, particularly in women and children who traditionally carry out spraying and threshing. This is significant in countries with a high HIV/Aids burden. When analysing the health benefits of OA, such concerns cannot be ignored.
There remains heated debate about the nutritional value of organic produce when compared to those which are conventionally produced. More research is undoubtedly required. However, a European Union-funded study, the largest of its kind to date, involving 31 research and university institutes and the publication of over 100 scientific papers, at a cost of €18 million, concluded that:
‘The differences were so marked that organic produce could even help to increase the nutrient intake of people not able to access the recommended five portions a day of fruit and vegetables.’
When considering the rehabilitation requirements of healthcare, and the learning and retention demands of childhood education, nutrition plays a vital role in building the physical & mental resilience of any nation. For Zimbabwe, this focus could also signify the squaring of a difficult circle, boosting the development of a sector which also contributes to building environmental, social, and economic resilience in the face of seemingly overwhelming rural poverty.
Myth
Smallholder agriculture is inefficient –smallholder OA even more so.
Reality
Smallholders produce as much as 90% of Africa’s agricultural output. Despite the challenges they face, and opportunities they provide, smallholders are continuously neglected by donors and policy makers; particularly women, who produce 70% of Africa’s food.
Livelihoods tend to be discussed within the narrow confines of economic activities. In reality, an understanding of livelihoods, and in particular sustainable livelihoods, encompasses human, social, financial and physical assets or resources. Within OA, and the project discussed here, all these aspects have received equal attention in order to understand how poverty can be alleviated by improving the sustainability of livelihood options.
Helping to improve the productivity of smallholders through OA is a key consideration in improving household food security. As well as improving yields for household consumption, OA can provide higher incomes, which contributes to greater food and livelihood security. This implies having a reliable food supply.
As OA is based on multi-cropping & polycultures, as opposed to monocropping, OA is far less risk-intensive, and is more resilient. By working as associations, it is possible to reduce transaction costs and improve economies of scale.
Myth
OA is backward looking and does not represent the future.
Reality
The value of traditional knowledge (TK) in farming cannot be ignored. Much TK focuses on how best to work with the land and understanding ecosystem functions, including harvesting and storage techniques. By valuing this provenance, TK can enhance the successful implementation of OA techniques, while OA can enhance the productivity of traditional farming systems. With its focus on biological farming, OA employs the latest scientific research in plant breeding, soil fertility, and phyto-controls to boost yields and reduce losses.
Smallholders are in a particularly strong position to benefit from OA. Due to the nature of their production practices (low agro-chemical input) they are more readily able to convert to OA. And as climate changes, and adaptation skills are increasingly required, many experts consider that TK and OA (and other truly sustainable agriculture models) represent our very best chance for a sustainable future.
The spiraling use and dependency on synthetic pesticides & fertilisers is already leading to increased resistance, disease susceptibility, loss of natural biological controls, soil loss and reduced nutrient cycling. Through the current lens of conventional agriculture, we may justifiably question whether it is possible or prudent to attempt further yield increases by applying yet more costly inputs. In addition to questions of environmental sustainability, is this a reasonable livelihoods proposition in a world increasingly plagued by commodity price volatility?