A switch to organic farming would not reduce the world's food supply and could also increase food security in developing countries, say the authors of a new study.
They claim their findings lay to rest the debate over whether organic farming could sustainably feed the world. Organic farming avoids or heavily restricts the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, as well as livestock feed additives. ...
Now, a team of researchers has compiled research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems. ...
The world currently produces the equivalent of 2786 calories per person per day. The researchers found that under an organic-only regime, farms could produce between 2641 and 4381 calories per person per day.
This makes me question the die-off mantra that PO will result in mass starvation as synthetic pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers and feed additives become unaffordable. If organic farming has been shown to provide larger yields than current conventional agriculture, why would the post peak agricultural paradigm continue to rely on petrochemical inputs?
Perhaps there is currently vested interest in maintaining the current agricultural system, but what's stopping a mass change towards organic farming? Will we refuse to adopt more productive methods as petrochemical agriculture becomes increasingly unsustainable?
Would we rather starve than adopt an organic regime?