Open AccessOrganic and Conventional Agriculture: A Useful Framing?
Author(s) -
Carol Shennan,
Timothy J. Krupnik,
Graeme Baird,
Hamutahl Cohen,
Kelsey Forbush,
Robin J. Lovell,
Elissa M. Olimpi
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
annual review of environment and resources
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.01
H-Index - 115
eISSN - 1545-2050
pISSN - 1543-5938
DOI - 10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085750
Subject(s) - cognitive reframing , organic farming , framing (construction) , cropping , agroecology , sustainability , food systems , agriculture , natural resource economics , ecological farming , environmental resource management , environmental ethics , economics , food security , geography , ecology , psychology , social psychology , archaeology , biology , philosophy
In this review, we examine the debate surrounding the role for organic agriculture in future food production systems. Typically represented as a binary organic–conventional question, this debate perpetuates an either/or mentality. We question this framing and examine the pitfalls of organic–conventional cropping systems comparisons. The review assesses current knowledge about how these cropping systems compare across a range of metrics related to four sustainability goals: productivity, environmental health, economic viability, and quality of life. We conclude by arguing for reframing the debate, recognizing that farming systems fall along gradients between three philosophical poles—industrial, agrarian, and ecological—and that different systems will be appropriate in different contexts. Despite evidence for lower yields in organic crop systems, we found considerable evidence for environmental and social benefits. Given these advantages, and the potential for improving organic systems, we echo calls for increased investment in organic and ecologically based cropping systems research and extension.