First, I'd like to share with you an article that I wrote for the Michigan Organic Connections newsletter that reflects on my reasons for farming using organic methods:
______
Ethics, Esthetics & Ecology: Why I Farm Organically
by Amy NewdaySince the last MOFFA newsletter, which included several great articles on the “what” of organic agriculture, I’ve been pondering the “why.” For me and most of the farmers I know who use organic growing practices, certified or not, the reasons are more complicated than a market-driven response to consumer demand. After all, there are a lot of easier ways to make a buck.
I farm organically because before she married my dairyman grandfather, my grandmother taught nature studies. My primary babysitter when I was too young to help with farm chores, she introduced me to many farm residents who I still count among my friends: the bullfrogs that moo in the duck pond on warm spring evenings, the thrushes whose bell-choir holds the ravine rapt in summer. On clear nights she’d spread a blanket in the hay field so I could learn constellations and ponder my small place in the nature of things.
It seems to me that “conventional” agriculture as it is currently practiced has its root in a fallacy that runs through our culture—that the human place in the nature of things is one of inherent opposition: Humans vs Nature. Which also seems to me to be a really weird way of thinking about ourselves. We don’t talk about other species this way. To think about “bears vs nature” would be absurd. We might even say that bears are nature, or part of it. Certainly, their lives depend upon it—for bears to thrive, they need functioning ecosystems within which they play vital roles. Somehow we have convinced ourselves that we are the only species to whom this doesn’t apply.
And so we pollute air as if it does not constantly pass through our lungs, spread poisons in water as if our bodies were not over fifty percent composed of it, strip life from soil as if it were not the source of our own living energy, and diminish the diversity of our ecosystems as if we didn’t know that other threads plucked from the ecological web tremble our own.
To counter these acts, botanist Robin Wall Kimmerer calls for “acts of restoration, not only for polluted waters and degraded lands, but also for our relationship to the world.” She encourages us “to live as if this is the land that feeds you, as if these are the streams from which you drink ... to take care of the land as if our lives and the lives of all our relatives depend on it. Because they do.”
For three quarters of my life, this piece of farmland has fed me and I have drunk from the stream beneath it that feeds my well. Organic farming is my act of restoration, of giving back to this land and my community. Though since my farm isn’t certified, perhaps I should find a different term for what I do. I like “ecological farming” because it reminds me of Aldo Leopold’s call to recognize that I am a “plain member and citizen” of an ecosystem community that includes “soils, waters, plants, and animals, or collectively: the land.” When it comes to the “whats” of ecological farming, I follow NOP guidelines, but I also measure my decisions against Leopold’s prescription for cultivating an ethical relationship to land: “Examine each question in terms of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well as what is economically expedient. A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”
Of course, my ability to live up to this ethical ideal (and to do so without engaging in practices that degrade and destabilize ecosystems other than my own) is constrained, in part, by the socio-economic structures built by my human community. It’s hard to farm ecologically within a culture that doesn’t recognize the inextricable ties between human well-being and ecological health and that doesn’t include downstream and long-term consequences when factoring value. I’ve got some work to do before my farm is able to sustain a truly reciprocally supportive relationship with the biotic community in which I live while also remaining economically and energetically sustainable. Pursuing that goal means both refining my farming practices and working to increase ecological awareness and sustainability within my human culture and community.
When my grandmother let nettles grow tall in the corner of her yard and taught me to peek between their folded leaves to find Red Admiral caterpillars, I learned more than butterfly identification. I learned that I have the ability and responsibility to nurture beauty and diversity in this world. Each year I farm I realize a little more of what that means. Sometimes the lessons are hard, reminding me of just how much more I have to learn. I’m grateful to be a part of this organic community, which inspires, supports, and teaches me. Together I hope we are moving toward a cultural change that will enable all of us to live with more integrity and beauty in relationship to each other and our ecosystems.
Works Referenced
Kimmerer, Robin Wall. Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants. Milkweed Editions, 2013.
Leopold, Aldo. Sand County Almanac. Oxford University Press, 1949.
_____
Even though I claim to use organic farming methods in the above article, because we aren't certified, we can't label our produce as organic. It might be useful to think a little bit about the history of the term "organic" as currently applied to farming systems. Obviously (or maybe not so obviously), human cultures across the earth have developed diverse farming systems specific to the ecosystems in which they lived. Some of these systems were ecologically destructive, reducing biodiversity and using up soil nutrients so that after a period of time the land would be no longer productive and the people would have to move their growing activities to new land. Some agricultural systems, however, actually increased biodiversity and soil health, enriching the ecological web while providing the people with nourishment for generations.
I suppose that some of these indigenous, ecologically-based farming systems could have been organically certified if such a certification had existed during the times they were practiced, but really that term is a relatively new one that has evolved over the past century to refer to a specific set of rules managed by a governmental group called the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB). Here's brief history of the development of organic regulations:
History of Organic (SARE): https://www.sare.org/Learning-Center/Bulletins/Transitioning-to-Organic-Production/Text-Version/History-of-Organic-Farming-in-the-United-States
And here are the regulations as they currently stand. You definitely don't have to read all this! But take a look through the table of contents and click on one or two of the subject headings just to get a sense of what this document looks like:
National Organic Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=3f34f4c22f9aa8e6d9864cc2683cea02&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title07/7cfr205_main_02.tpl
Here is how the USDA tries to simplify the organic rules for the general public (do read all of this one!):
USDA Organic 101: https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means
Sounds pretty good, huh? Except that as more and more consumers have become concerned about the toxic effects of chemical farming on the environment and their health and have turned to buying organic food as a solution, big business has entered the organic market. You would think that would be a good thing that led to more farmers being able to grow healthier food in more environmentally sustainable ways. Except that the businesses that are now running these organic farms aren't really committed to organic principles; they are committed to making as much profit as possible. And while making a profit is of course important for a business, the influence of big business on the organic food system has led to a number of recent controversies including scandals over a lack of enforcement that has allowed imports of grain into the U.S. that were fraudulently labeled organic and a rule that would have improved animal welfare standards being withdrawn from consideration. The organic standards also don't provide protection for farm workers laboring on large organic farms and in what was the final straw for some organic growers already fed up with the system, the NOSB voted last year to allow hydroponic growing to be certified under NOP standards. Because the original premise of organic farming rests on stewarding healthy soil to grow healthy plants, these farmers say that farming without soil is not organic farming.
Here's an article from Modern Farmer that goes into more depth on both sides of the hydroponic debate: https://modernfarmer.com/2017/05/is-hydro-organic-farming-organic/
That article was from May 2017. In the fall of 2017, the NOSB voted to allow hydroponics to be certified organic. One NOSB member, farmer and agronomist Francis Thicke resigned from his position on the board in protest after that meeting. Here is the statement he released after his resignation: https://www.keepthesoilinorganic.org/final-comments-from-francis-thicke
As Thicke mentions, there are coalitions of farmers working together to create add-on or alternative certification systems to the current organic program. Here are a couple:
Regenerative Organic: https://rodaleinstitute.org/regenerativeorganic/
Real Organic: https://www.realorganicproject.org/
Questions for you: In the comments section, please respond to what I've shared by reflecting on your own knowledge and beliefs about the word "organic." Prior to reading this post, what did you know about organic food and farming? When you see food labeled "organic," what assumptions do you have about where that food came from and how it was produced?
Also, what opinions do you have on the organic hydroponics debate? Do you think that food grown in soil-less mediums should be considered "organic"? Why or why not?
Prior to this reading, I didn't know that the "organic" label had such a heavy connotation of environmental/ecological responsibility. I knew that synthetic compounds and crops are banned, but was especially blindsided by the soil debate. I think the "sustainable hydroponic v. organic" debate is symptomatic of broader ignorance of food production in our culture. Honestly, I think arguments about semantics like this are often wasteful. If the same funding an effort were put into educating consumers about the differences in these growing methods and allowing them to make the choice, I think that would be a much more desirable outcome.
ReplyDeleteThe words "organic" and "local" have always been synonymous to me. Because my parents tend to shop for organic produce specifically at local farmers markets, I always used to assume all organic produce came from somewhere local, or at least somewhere not far. However, like you said, organic produce is becoming more and more popular and mainstream and big businesses are beginning to enter the organic market. This, and the fact that organic standards do not provide adequate protection for their farm workers on the big organic farms, change the connotation of the word "organic" for me. For me, organic means naturally produced, therefore anything synthetically produced in what is called "organic hydroponics" signifies a red flag and seems like it shouldn't be considered organic.
ReplyDeleteUntil this post, I don't think I have actually ever thought about the word organic and what it actually means. I know for sure that I always assumed food that was organic was healthier and more naturally grown and produced than other foods you find in the grocery store and that it is usually produced without using chemicals or pesticides, but I did not think about other farming methods and techniques that go into producing an organic product.
ReplyDeleteBased on what we have heard about soil in this class, I would not consider food that is grown soil-less to be organic. I feel like what we learned so far has shown us how important the type of soil used (like the 3 different types we saw last week) or the health of the soil used in producing certain products has a big impact on the health of the plant or crop. The soil test we saw last week showed us how important soil is and how certain nutrients are needed to maintain good soil that produces a healthy product. Therefore, producing crops without soil cannot be considered organic in my opinion because it lacks a central part of what makes the product natural.
I have an embattled relationship with organic food. On the one hand food should be pesticide, herbicide, and antibiotic free, but, on the other, organic food is exorbitantly expensive and still doesn't necessarily meet the standards imagined of it. The grandma of a cattle ranch I worked on told me about how she doesn't bother buying organic food because she knows how wishy-washy the requirements are and how infrequent the inspections are. Following her lead and the capacity of my wallet I infrequently spend the extra money for organic vegetables. The lack of antibiotics used in organic animal products, however, is a bigger deal to me. If cows aren't given the proper amount of space to roam then they will develop infections and antibiotics will become necessary. Therefore I use "no antibiotics" labels as an indicator of whether or not animals have been kept in close containment.
ReplyDeleteAs to whether hydroponics should be considered organic, the debate seems split between consumptive and productive concerns. On the one hand, consumers primarily are thinking about their own health, and therefore non-chemically foods will do, regardless of whether they were grown hydroponically or in the soil. On the other hand, producers think about the health of their soil, so organic farming centers around not buying fertilizer and instead promoting the fertility of a piece of land by decomposing organic matter. In my opinion hydroponics will be part of the next food system and will allow a more self-sustaining urban environment, so incentives for bright people to continue research on hydroponics are welcome in my eyes. That said, I think that responding by searching for another way of defining soil-grown organic food is appropriate
My thoughts about the 'organic' label changed significantly after hearing the stories of farmers in Thailand. The organic label is not as well known there by consumers, especially as fresh produce is often sold in open-air markets without any labels. Prices are not marked up for organic produce there the way that they are in the United States, so it's less lucrative for farmers to adhere to organic standards. Nevertheless, many farmers do embody the 'spirit' and 'vision' of organic that a few of these articles discussed. The label itself seems fairly arbitrary to me as it is practiced in the United States, due to improper monitoring and deals cut with corporate organic farmers, as Thicke mentions. The 'all or nothing' nature of the certification holds true in Thailand. For example, 'buffer zones' (as required in section §205.202 of the National Organic Regulations document for the US organic movement) cannot protect against pesticides from other nearby fields drifting into a field that does not use pesticides and disqualifying that field from being certified organic. The label of 'USDA organic' seems less about embodying a 'spirit' of environmentally-conscious organic than about appealing to consumers' (often not very developed) knowledge about what it means to be organic.
ReplyDeleteThe hydroponics debate is interesting to me because the main arguments against hydroponics are not environmental, but rather concerned with money (since consumers pay up to twice as much for certified organic food). It also seems like a comparison that should not necessarily be made; hydroponics and soil-based farming require similar inputs (so that the plants will grow) but are done in such different ways that one label does not seem appropriate for both. Organic farmers using soil must put in much more effort to meet organic qualifications (such as farming on soil that has not been treated with chemicals for three years), whereas the hydroponic growers can start from scratch each growing season. In a way I feel that hydroponics offer a more sustainable method of growing produce in urban areas and could be part of a solution to food deserts in areas with destroyed (leached, chemicalized, etc.) soils. At the same time, I feel that efforts should be made to support organic farmers who use soil so that hydroponics do not entirely replace them. If they fall under the same label, and that label continues to bring in more net profit than unlabeled produce solely because of its reputation, hydroponic growers will likely succeed more than soil-based farmers, due to fewer input costs. I thus do not think that hydroponics should share the same 'USDA organic' label as produce farmed in soil, but I also think that the 'USDA organic' label should be enforced more strictly and that consumers should be able to access real information about what they are buying.
Prior to reading this post, I knew a little bit of term “organic.” When I would go to the supermarket with my mom, we are convinced ourselves that our produce is ‘organic’ if we pick out the ripe fruit and non-brown stain vegetables. Usually our shopping cart would be full of plastic bags with fruits and vegetables that have a label sticker that says “organic” or “freshly-picked.” Again, my mother and I are convinced that our food was ‘organic’ by looking at the appearance and label of our fruits. However, my first time at a farmer’s market, I noticed how the texture and color of the common produce I would normally buy (such as carrots, tomatoes, potatoes, beans, corn, etc.) were very different. At first, I was so unfamiliar by its appearance because I was introduced to the different specimen of produces. Unlike, a supermarket, these crops had a distant name, taste and of course, a story. The farmers and sellers at the local fresh market gave out small samples for customers to taste and to learn more of its origins, and the time dedicated to grow and harvest. The interaction between the farmers and I was real and convincing that I came home with bags of apples, blueberries, and squash (which I did not know I liked). To me, ‘organic’’ meant that food must have its distinct story that must be told and practice.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading about the organic hydroponics debate, I believe that hydroponics offer a more sustainable method of growing produce in urban areas, especially in dry-states like California and Arizona. The method is very different to organic farming, because the conversations of learning about the soil is lost. The soil has a lot to do with nitrogen fixation and absorption of nutrients within roots. However, I do believe that hydroponics can be practice but should not be considered and categorized as ‘organic.’
I am new to the realm of organics and non-gmo's, and before this year always dismissed the label as the most recent in a series of health trends. However, after reading the literature and watching the documentary, my opinion is beginning to waver. The actions of companies like Monsanto and their ilk lead me to believe that there needs to be a counterbalance to the corporatization of agriculture, thus the importance of organic farming.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I also believe that organic farming may be romanticized in the US. It is one thing to rely on traditional farming in a system with numerous social safety nets. In a region where a dependable annual crop is vital to sustaining life, avoiding starvation in the short-term may trump long-term soil health. On this subject, however, I will be the first to admit my ignorance. I am unsure as to the variance in crop yields, the health consequences, and the looming danger of dwindling biodiversity, and my opinion is ultimately dependent on the well being of the poorest farmers in question.
On the subject of hydroponics, I believe that although they do not fit the spirit of organic farming, nor are they grown in soil, they are still a preferable alternative to intense pesticide and fertilizer usage.
When I think of the word "organic" I think about the middle section at my local Vons that is for organic produce. I think about who would be able to buy just from that section. Even though my family would sometimes buy one or two things from that section, there were folks that always got produce from that section. Most of the time, they were a second generation, upper middle class Italian-American that had access to wealth when making their purchases. I have always seen it as an inaccessible word or type of food.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the above post, I see the ways in which the future of the word organic is connected to corporations. This is concerning to me, especially in respect to their increasing control on the policy of organic farming and its legal definitions. I am also thinking of the relationship of land use, policy, and non-restorative to the basis of much of the globalized world: white supremacy (and capitalism being unbindable from this reality). The first corporations in the world were colonial bodies that controlled the trade of spices and the movement of food in empire. What is different 400 years from the conception of a corporation? The accumulation of wealth from enslaving African and Indigenous folks to work stolen land; the theft of food and spice from European colonies; the mentality of resource infinity and constant extraction. all of these are the basis for our globalized systems of food and material. In many ways, still our realities. And still, corporations persist. They take over the organic farming movement and exacerbate the mindset of racial capitalism: profit maximization. I stand with Thicke in his aversion to hydroponics as it is another locus of power for corporate power. I don't think I am against hydroponics overall though. I am against the way it is being mobilized. In some spaces, the ability to cultivate/access to soil is difficult or impossible (i.e. urban space). In this case I have seen hydroponics be beneficial and have seen experiments in aquaponics (closed systems with fish as part of it: see http://plantchicago.org/). I am questioning the systems of power associated with every part of our lives, and particularly our food systems.
Prior to this post, I knew very little about organic food and farming. I had a general idea that organic food was supposedly “healthier” to eat than non-organic food, probably because organic farmers used less harsh chemicals and interfered less with plants’ natural growth cycles. (Similarly, I thought that that organic meats came from animals raised more freely—that is, ate less processed/organic food and were allowed plenty of space and time outside). I figured that the extra time and attention given to farming organically explained why organic foods were pricier at the grocery store. My parents still like to shop organic because of their perception that the food is more “natural” (but I’m not sure they or I know exactly what the term “natural” implies).
ReplyDeleteThis post was also the first time I heard about hydroponic farming. From reading all the articles, I do not believe that food grown in soil-less mediums should be allowed to bear the “organic” label. Although hydroponic food may be as nutritious as soil-grown food (which I highly doubt), hydroponic food grown in closed off laboratories, secluded from their natural habitat, is straying too far from the original concept of organic. I agree with the Cornucopia Institute—organic must involve the larger environment that the food is grown in. Proper soil-based organics can build a and thriving ecosystem, and this should be a goal in organic farming. Furthermore, farmers should be rewarded for their dedication to sustainable practices; raising organic label standards makes it more difficult for large corporations to overtake the organic program for their own financial agendas.
I took a course in Thailand on agriculture where we learned about organic farming and the history. I think the big businesses that are going organic with large mono-cultured fields are problematic, especially because I don't think consumers picture the big scale farms when they think of organic. I think a lot of people assume organic = no chemicals = good for the Earth. However, the large scale farming isn't sustainable. I read a statistic that while large scale farming is cheaper per square unit on a farm, smaller farms are actually more efficient.
ReplyDeletePerhaps a different word, like ecological farming as you suggested, could bring attention to the problems of organic farming, and would give credit to farmers who are trying to farm sustainably with a balance and respect for the land.
I connected with what you wrote about the problematic take people often have of humans vs. nature. I think it is ridiculous, and not true. People are a huge part of the ecosystem - I think we are keystone species in the sense that what we do impacts every ecosystem on Earth. I think hydroponics could be considered organic, but I think hydroponics is people further disconnected from nature and a balanced ecosystem.
Prior to reading any of what was posted above, I assumed that organic went hand in hand with concepts like healthy or the animals were treated well while alive. When seeing the organic label on things I feel like most people just assume that it was grown/raised on a small farm and was treated well. This is not always the case in fact, the tag organic is mostly used as a marketing tactic to justify having a higher price for some food items. As far as hydroponics is concerned, I do not believe organic should be associated with it. For something to be truly organic I believe that soil is required.
ReplyDelete