CHAPTER 4: NON-TRADITIONAL AGRICULTURAL DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY – THE
4.5. Critical Analysis of the Profitability, Environmental Impact and Export Potential of Organic
4.5.2. Environmental Impact
were 40 000 in 2004. There has also been a considerable increase in the number of exporting companies focusing on organic products since 2004. In 2004, there were less than 12 companies working in the organic sector in Uganda, while there were 44 companies in 2009. Similar trends have been noted in Kenya, Tanzania and Zambia.
in lower agricultural yields and a loss of nutrients for growing plants. Organic agriculture advocates that soil should not lie bare, but be covered by plant material at all times. This reduces the loss of this top soil and can lessen the effects of droughts and floods, thus reducing soil erosion. The improvement in soil structure also increases the water retention of the soil (El-Hage Scialabba, 2002; Schnug et al., 2006; Jordan et al., 2009).
A 21-year study conducted in Central Europe comparing organic and conventional farming in terms of crop success, soil structure and fertility found that the soils under organic management were healthier than those under conventional farming systems (Mäder et al., 2002). Furthermore, Pimental et al. (2005) found that organic farming systems had high organic matter (soil carbon) and nitrogen in their soils, which enhances the sustainability of organic farming. Overall, soil fertility is vital in any agricultural system and more so in organic agriculture, as it cannot rely on synthetic inputs. Soil fertility forms the foundation from which any additional environmental benefits will arise with organic systems.
4.5.2.2. Enhanced Biodiversity
Biodiversity is a crucial element in ensuring the stability of agricultural systems. Organic agriculture has been shown to improve the biodiversity of farming systems and to ensure the stability and sustainability thereof. Organic systems lead to a greater abundance and wider range of flora and fauna than conventional farming systems. Stable agricultural systems are critical to sustaining a country‟s food supply. This can be achieved through promoting soil fertility and implementing habitat management, for instance by using green manures and crop rotation methods to encourage diversity of larger species and plants, insects and micro and macrofauna in the soil (Altieri et al., 2005; Gabriel et al., 2006; Schnug et al., 2006; Niggli et al., 2007).
Hole et al. (2005) studied the impact of both organic farming and conventional agriculture on biodiversity through conducting a comprehensive review of comparative studies on the two agricultural systems. Of the 76 studies reviewed, it was concluded that the majority of the studies showed that the variety and abundance of species was greater on organic rather than conventional farms. Bartram and Perkin (2003) conducted a similar comparative study and examined 33 published studies. These studies compared
(2003) found that, in general, organic agriculture was associated with richer biodiversity than conventionally managed farms. Furthermore, this study highlighted that the organic management practices that positively affected biodiversity included mixed crop rotations, the non-use of herbicides and insecticides, the utilisation of farmyard manure and shallow ploughing and the adoption of sensitive management practices in fields that were not cropped so as to preserve ecologically sensitive habitats. On the other hand, the organic practices that impacted negatively on farm biodiversity were the use of mechanical methods to control weeds and the undersowing of crops.
Furthermore, a study using a multiscale hierarchical sampling design assessed the effect of land use across multiple spatial scales on farmland biodiversity in the UK. This study used a sample of 301 plant species, 19 farmland bird species, 9026 earthworms, 119 121 epigeal arthropods, 4451 butterflies, 10 420 hoverflies, 4399 bumblebees and 5751 solitary bees. The results indicate that organic farming positively affects biodiversity on a farm and landscape scale. However, on average, these positive effects are not as dominant as anticipated. The authors attribute this to the fact that not many previous studies have evaluated paired farms (similar in size) within a landscape. However, the results show that organic farming strongly affected the biodiversity of farm management in some cases (Gabriel et al., 2010).
4.5.2.3. Mitigating Climate Change and Reduced Energy Consumption
There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that various greenhouse gases are causing climate change and global warming. Agriculture is a major contributor of these greenhouse gases (Kotschi and Müller-Sämann, 2004). The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate states that the agricultural sector accounts for 10- 12% of greenhouse gas emissions. This, however, only includes direct agricultural emissions and omits emissions arising from the use of agricultural inputs, such as nitrogen fertilizers, synthetic pesticides and fossil fuels used by machinery and irrigation systems, as well as the changes in carbon stocks attributed to the removal of primary forests. This 10-12% can be supplemented with the emissions resulting from deforestation for agricultural purposes, which accounts for 12% of all emissions. Thus, agricultural emissions amount to approximately a quarter of global emissions (El-Hage Scialabba and Müller-Lindenlauf, 2010).
A number of studies highlight organic agriculture‟s tremendous potential to mitigate climate change through its practices and principles. The two most prominent ways in which organic agriculture can mitigate climate change include carefully managing nutrients and high carbon sequestration and decreasing the amount of primary ecosystems being cleared. The careful management of nutrients within the organic system contributes to reducing N2O emissions from the soil. Soil stores three times more carbon than air and five times more carbon than forests. The loss of carbon from the soil due to agricultural production accounts for approximately one tenth of total CO2 emissions globally. Unlike with other carbon stores, the carbon trapped in the soil can be regenerated if appropriate farming methods are employed. Due to its focus on improving soil structure and fertility, organic agriculture can recapture this carbon cost effectively, as organic practices prohibit the use of synthetic inputs. However, its success in this respect depends on the local environmental conditions and management practices (Jordan et al., 2009; Muller, 2009). El-Hage Scialabba and Müller-Lindenlauf (2010) indicate that if all agricultural systems in the world are organically managed, agricultural emissions would reduce by an estimated 20%, with half of this reduction resulting from decreased N2O emissions and half being caused by a lower demand for energy for agricultural purposes. However, there are limited long-term scientific studies to confirm the authors‟ findings.
There are a number of additional organic agricultural practices that can assist with reducing greenhouse gas emission. These include not using chemical fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides; avoiding leaving soil bare; planting a combination of annual and perennial crops; practising sustainable livestock management; enhancing the management of grasslands; and promoting local production and consumption.
Furthermore, organic agriculture can mitigate climate change relatively cheaply as the organic system itself represents a cost effective form of production and its practices and management principles can potentially lower greenhouse gas emissions. However, a major disadvantage of the organic system in influencing climate change is the size of this sub-sector. In order to reduce C2O successfully, organic agriculture would need to expand substantially (Jordan et al., 2009; Muller, 2009).
Organic agricultural systems also require less energy than conventional agricultural systems, directly, through reduced use of oils and fuels, as well as indirectly, through the non-use of synthetic inputs, which consume large amounts of energy during the
generally found that organic systems use 30-50% less energy in the production process than conventional farming systems and that they are more energy efficient. Reducing energy consumption demands plays an important role in lowering green house gases (Dalgaard et al., 2001; FAO, 2002; Pimental, 2006; Ziesemer, 2007).
4.5.3. Organic Agriculture’s Export Potential and Market Access in Sub-Saharan