In this guide, we outline the potential pros and cons of sustainable agriculture and farming.
Summary – Pros & Cons Of Sustainable Agriculture & Farming
Firstly, What Is Sustainable Farming/Agriculture?
A summarised list of some of the potential pros and cons of sustainable farming and agriculture might be …
Pros
Aspects of sustainable agriculture and farming are already being used in different regions worldwide
Can help reduce the environmental footprint of conventional farming, or have general environmental benefits
Can help with the sustainable use of resources (especially natural and renewable resources)
Can help address the externalized/hidden costs of conventional and industrial farming
Sustainable farming practices can be implemented in stages, or, one by one
Some sustainable food production practices can be done by individuals or small communities, and aren’t exclusive to large scale farms
Some reports suggest that sustainable farming practices can decrease insecticide use, and increase yield and profitability
May better protect the health and safety of farm workers in some instances
May lead to farmers gaining more sovereignty, being more independent, and being less reliant on a small number of large organisations in some instances
Cons
Different groups and individuals can have different views on what sustainable farming actually is, and how it should be managed
There’s debate that some of the goals of sustainable farming conflict with other goals
There might be some debate about what approach to farming, or what farming techniques and systems might best help achieve the goals of sustainability
A rigid approach or ‘all in’ approach to sustainable farming may create a scenario where only non-natural solutions can help address the situation that a more natural farming approach created
There may be limited evidence available that some sustainable farming practices contribute to some sustainability goals as much as some sources claim
Farmers may argue that incorporating new farming practices without prior agreed and guaranteed economic protection is too much of a financial risk for their business
Some sustainable farming practices may be more resource intensive, lower quality of life, and be less profitable for farmers
Sustainable farming can be a ‘tough sell’ when the benefits are not immediately visible compared to conventional farming where the benefits are usually immediately visible
Sustainable farming might be harder to implement when there is less support for agroecology research, along with less outreach and education to help farmers make effective use of the science
Greater investment of public resources may be required for greater adoption of sustainable farming practices in general, in the future
Agriculture can be significantly impacted by geography and local conditions, and some sustainable farming may not be practical everywhere
Some individuals and groups may argue that it’s not agriculture that needs to drastically change, as much as it is addressing population sizes, the demand for resource intensive foods, and other large social issues
A potential reduction in the production of ‘unsustainable’ foods or fibres decreases the selection of products available to the market
Some foods considered to be ‘unsustainable’ to farm may be necessary to some people’s health/dietary requirements
Some foods considered to be ‘unsustainable’ to farm may be important or critical to some people’s religious beliefs or culture
*Note
This is a generalized pros and cons guide.
Obviously, the sustainability of farming and agriculture will vary depending on variables such as the different farming practices uses, the geographic region, inputs used, waste produced, and so on.
Potential Pros Of Sustainable Agriculture & Farming
Aspects of sustainable agriculture and farming are already being used in different regions worldwide
Both developed countries, and developing countries, are already using elements of sustainable farming practices.
Some are even using comprehensive systems that incorporate a greater number of practices.
For example, there’s evidence that Australian farmers [across different parts of the country] already invest in safeguarding soil, preserving water, biodiversity, precise pasture management, and renewable energy (business.nab.com.au)
There’s case studies and information on different farmers and ranch owners using different regenerative farming practices (which some might consider a type of sustainable farming)
Sustainable farming practices are also being used in lesser developed regions that don’t have access to modern farming equipment and technology, or a lot of synthetic chemicals.
Can help reduce the environmental and sustainability footprint of conventional farming in some ways, or, have a general environmental benefit
Sustainable farming practices may help address environmental issues that conventional farming can contribute to.
Examples of these issues include but aren’t limited to greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, water pollution, land degradation, and more.
In general, different sustainable farming practices, and the use of plant life and soil in certain ways, may help with carbon sequestration from the atmosphere
Can help with the sustainable use/management of resources
Sustainable farming may help address this in two ways:
1. Using general resources more efficiently
For example, sustainable farming may look to use synthetic pesticides and fertilizers more efficiently if they are used.
But, the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers might be limited in truly sustainable farming because they are made from non renewable fossil fuel compounds/feedstock.
2. Using natural or renewable resources more sustainably and efficient
But mainly, sustainable farming may help more sustainably manage of the use natural or renewable resources like fresh water (used for irrigation), topsoil, agricultural land, agricultural inputs, and more.
As just a few examples …
More efficient irrigation systems may help use fresh water more sustainably.
And, soil conservation practices may help preserve topsoil depth and health (topsoil is a resource)
New farming practices like terraces and temporary “cover” crops have helped lower soil erosion by more than 40 percent over the past two decades (theweek.com)
Can help address the externalized/hidden cost of conventional and industrial farming
Some claim that the cost of modern day conventional farming and industrial farming is externalized or hidden
This means it is either not seen directly/clearly, or, the cost does not show up until years down the track
Two examples of this are:
– Where chemicals like pesticides used on the farm pollute or cause environmental issues in water sources away from the farm
– Where issues to do with topsoil degradation and erosion don’t show up or become serious until decades later (after decades of intense farming activity)
When no till and cover crops are used, the cumulative erosion cost [assuming there is a built in cost for erosion with decreased or lost yields] per decade, per 40 acres, can drop from almost $13,000, to $500 (farmprogress.com)
Sustainable farming practices can be implemented one by one
There are many different sustainable farming practices
These practices can be implemented one at a time by a farmer, and can be tested/vetted one at a time to find the ones that are effective, and that are feasible
Farmers do not have to pick between a fully conventional, or fully sustainable farming system.
Essentially, they can ‘scale in’ and ‘scale out’ of each system at their discretion
Some sustainable food production practices can be done by individuals or small communities, and aren’t exclusive to large scale farms
One example of this is urban agriculture – people growing small amounts of foods in their gardens, or in community spaces.
Technically, this can take some pressure off larger scale farming operations, whilst also helping with the environmental cost of large scale agriculture, and helping with the management of natural resources.
Some reports suggest that sustainable farming practices can decrease insecticide use, and increase yield and profitability
There’s two reports that suggest these things might be a possibility.
One report:
Recent work in irrigated rice production system of east Asia has suggested that – in relation to pest management at least – promoting the ecosystem service of biological control using nectar plants can reduce the need for insecticides by 70% whilst delivering a 5% yield advantage compared with standard practice (wiikpedia.org)
Another report:
The latest science … shows how agroecological practices can support productive, profitable farms.
For instance, an ongoing study … has shown that complex crop rotation systems can outperform conventional monoculture in both yield and profitability
– ucsusa.org
May better protect the health and safety of farm workers in some instances
This could be the case where for example biological pest control methods are used over synthetic pesticide sprays.
May lead to farmers gaining more sovereignty, being more independent, and being less reliant on a small number of large organisations in some instances
Some sustainable systems may place a greater amount of ownership and control of resources, technology and equipment used in the hands of farmers, as opposed to large companies and other external groups.
One example of this could be the use of natural crop seeds over GM seeds (where a small number of large companies own the patents to the technology and seeds themselves)
Another example could be the sourcing of compost or manure for fertilizer internally from the farm itself, or external smallholder suppliers, as opposed to externally sourced fertilizer (and nutrients supplies) from large companies.
It’s also worth noting that a small number of large companies also supply a large % of the world’s pesticides, and biological pest control, or more natural pest control methods may reduce dependence on these companies.
Some sustainable farming practices may reduce the need completely for any type of fertilizer or pesticide in some select instances.
Potential Cons Of Sustainable Agriculture & Farming
Different groups and individuals can have different views on what sustainable farming actually is, and how it should be managed
There can be differing perspectives amongst groups and individuals on what sustainable farming actually is
With this being the case, there can be different views on what sustainable farming metrics should be tracked, and what requirements or guidelines should go into a sustainable farming policy in the future.
Using one example, some people may think that sustainable farming should mainly focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, whilst others might think that it should focus on water scarcity and water conservation.
There may also be other short term vs long term conflicts of interest, such as short term profitability and feasibility for farmers vs meeting longer term environmental or sustainability goals.
[In 2019, in Australia … There was a ‘policy vacuum’ in regards to sustainable farming and there was no] contemporary definition of sustainable agriculture, including agreed on-farm metrics (theconversation.com)
Conventional farming may have benefits or capabilities that sustainable farming may find it difficult to provide or replace
For example, some sustainable farming systems may have challenges with producing food or fibres on a large scale like some conventional industrial farming can, and may therefore be better suited to smaller scale farming operations.
There may be further practical and economic challenges that some sustainable farming systems may encounter compared to conventional agriculture.
There’s debate that some of the goals of sustainable farming conflict with other goals, or, may not work on a large scale like conventional industrial farming systems can
One example is reducing non renewable inputs like synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, whilst also maintaining farming yields and farming production at the same time
The capacity for ecosystem services to be strong enough to allow a reduction in use of non-renewable inputs whilst maintaining or boosting yields has been the subject of much debate (wikipdia.org)
There might be some debate about what approach to farming, or what farming techniques and systems might best help achieve the goals of sustainability
Two different approaches might involve the ecocentric approach, and a technocentric approach
The ecocentric approach involves more organic and biodynamic farming techniques
The technocentric approach involves modification of the existing industrial system, and the use of biotechnology, amongst a range of other strategies
– wikipedia.org
A rigid approach or ‘all in’ approach to sustainable farming may create a scenario where only non-natural solutions can help address the situation that a more natural farming approach created
[An example of this might be where] Uganda experienced a banana crisis, and the government ended up issuing a Bill which will allow scientists to start experimenting with genetically modified organisms to help address the issue (wikipedia.org)
There may be limited evidence available that some sustainable farming practices contribute to some sustainability goals as much as some sources claim
[For example …] There is limited evidence polyculture may contribute to sustainable agriculture.
A meta-analysis of a number of polycrop studies found that predator insect biodiversity was higher at comparable yields than conventional in certain two-crop systems with a single cash crop combined with a cover crop
– wikipedia.org
This raises the question how much other sustainable farming practices contribute to specific sustainability goals.
Case studies would have to carried out to gather evidence and results of different sustainable farming practices vs conventional practices.
Farmers may argue that incorporating new farming practices without prior agreed and guaranteed economic protection is too much of a financial risk for their business
Farming and agriculture is a business.
Businesses are subject to market factors and forces, along with risks.
Businesses also provide a livelihood and employment for people.
Farmers may argue that asking them to incorporate new practices without a prior guarantee of financial support/protection from the government in case the new practices negatively impact their profits and business, or there’s too much uncertainty involved, is too much of a financial risk for their business
Some sustainable farming practices may be more resource intensive, lower quality of life, and be less profitable for farmers
Some sustainable farming practices may involve more labor, require more intensive labor based effort, and/or may be less profitable for farmers than conventional farming practices that get the same amount of production (or more).
Farmers may argue that an impact on these factors lowers quality of life for them and their employees, and in some cases decreases the incentive to farm or penalizes them as business owners when profits are less
Overall, sustainable farming practices may present tradeoffs in the form of achieving environmental sustainability goals, but then potentially seeing a negative impact on one of or a combination of quality of life, labor intensity, profits, yield, ability to compete economically, and more.
Sustainable farming can be a ‘tough sell’ when the benefits are not immediately visible compared to conventional farming where the benefits are usually immediately visible
As just one example, efforts to sustainably conserve topsoil depth and soil health and fertility, which impact overall production and yields, make takes years to show a result.
Alternatively, in conventional agriculture, the use of synthetic fertilizers and intensive farming practices to boost yields may show results immediately, or over the course of one growing season.
The same might be said for using synthetic pesticides when trying to eliminate pest species, and protect yields and production.
Additionally, the costs of using conventional farming methods may be ‘hidden’ or ‘externalized’, covering up the true net benefits and costs of a conventional farming approach compared to a sustainable farming approach – making a clear comparison of the two that can be communicated to the public, farmers and government more challenging in some ways.
Sustainable farming is harder to implement when there is less support for agroecology research, along with less outreach and education to help farmers make effective use of the science
Agroecology research helps put together studies and evidence to support the results that sustainable farming can help achieve.
Education helps train farmers to effectively implement sustainable farming practices.
If there’s less time and money invested in these things, sustainable farming becomes harder to implement.
And there’s evidence this has been the case in some places recently:
[Crop] Breeding research programs have dwindled in recent years, leaving farmers increasingly reliant on a limited set of varieties tailored to the needs of industrial farms (ucsusa.org)
Greater investment of public resources may be required for greater adoption of sustainable farming practices in general, in the future
If sustainable farming practices are the be adopted on a grater scale in general in the future, greater financial investment might be required compared to putting that financial investment in the subsidisation of conventional farming practices.
Reports suggest that:
… the lion’s share of public resources [are currently put] behind subsidizing overproduction of corn and other commodity crops [that are assumed to be produced using mainly industrial or conventional farming practices] (ucsusa.org)
Agriculture can be significantly impacted by geography and local conditions, and some sustainable farming may not be practical everywhere
Variables like the climate, weather, land and soil conditions, and other factors can vary from place to place
As a result, some locations may be more practical than others to implement sustainable farming practices in
Some individuals and groups may argue that it’s not agriculture that needs to drastically change, as much as it is addressing population sizes, the demand for resource intensive foods, and other large social issues
Population sizes, demand for resource intensive agricultural products, and behavioral trends like overconsumption are what can drive large scale and intensive conventional and industrial agriculture.
Some argue that a major investment in changing from conventional agricultural practices to sustainable agricultural practices might be a less effective thing to focus on changing compared to managing and changing the above listed factors.
There may be even more credibility behind this rationale in countries where calories are in surplus and populations are experiencing obesity related problems, and are also seeing other issues related to overconsumption.
A potential reduction in the production of ‘unsustainable’ foods or fibres decreases the selection of products available to the market
This impacts suppliers, sellers, consumers and other parties.
Apart from decreasing selection, it may also impact other market factors like price and availability of the remaining products.
Some foods considered to be ‘unsustainable’ to farm may be necessary to some people’s health/dietary requirements
Some people may require a certain type of food diet to meet their specific health or nutrition requirements
Some people are also intolerant to, allergic to, or experience negative side effects when consuming certain types of food.
As one example, some people primarily eat beef in their diet for food intolerance reasons, but beef is reported to be a resource intensive food to produce with a significant sustainability footprint
Some foods considered to be ‘unsustainable’ to farm may be important or critical to some people’s religious beliefs or culture
An issue might arise when sustainable farming practices or principles deem a particular food unsustainable to produce, and that food is critical/important to a specific religion or culture
What Factors Might Help With Wider Implementation Of Sustainable Farming In The Future?
For sustainable farming practices and systems to be used more widely in the future, some of the things that might help do this might include, but aren’t limited to:
1. Increased public investment (of resources) in sustainable farming compared to other types of conventional farming
2. Reducing the financial risk and business risk for agricultural business owners and farmers in implementing new sustainable farming practices
3. Better and more comprehensive data/evidence available on the results that sustainable farming is most likely to produce, so better and more informed decisions can be made by governments and farmers
4. Better training and education for the agricultural business owners and farmers, so that they can effectively implement sustainable farming practices
Sustainable Farming vs Other Types Of Farming
In this guide, we compare sustainable farming to organic farming, and also conventional farming
Sources
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_agriculture
2. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/what-sustainable-agriculture
3. https://foodprint.org/the-total-footprint-of-our-food-system/issues/sustainable-agriculture/
4. https://business.nab.com.au/hats-off-to-australian-farmers-putting-sustainable-agriculture-into-practice-35602/
5. https://theconversation.com/australia-urgently-needs-real-sustainable-agriculture-policy-120597
6. https://theweek.com/articles/554677/america-running-soil
7. https://www.farmprogress.com/soil-health/economics-soil-loss
8. Various Better Meets Reality Guides
','' ); } ?>