The Cisgenic Hybrid Seed Conundrum

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Cisgenic Hybrid Seed Conundrum The Cisgenic Hybrid Seed Conundrum It is spring planting time, and most farmers are out planting seeds. The process of developing varieties of plant traits is as old as agriculture and farmers have been selecting seed from plants they like and replanting it for generations. They use open pollinated (OP) seed in this process, which in nature creates new varieties by spreading pollen to flowers randomly. When grown in isolation from cross-pollination with different same species, however, OP methods are designed to produce seed offspring very similar to the original parent population. OP seeds will grow ‘true-to-type’ generation after generation. Heirloom seeds are open-pollinated and have been handed down by seed savers for many years. But since the industrialization of farming, farmers and gardeners have increasingly handed that seed breeding role over to companies that specialize in the genetics of seeds. The monk Gregor Mendel was the first to get a scientific understanding of seed genetics a generation before the end of the 19th century. His work was discovered at about the turn of the century and in the 1920s Henry A. Wallace (later Ag. Secretary & Vice President under FDR) perfected the process of hybridizing seed – carefully crossing two different parent varieties and producing a new hybrid variety. The first step in producing hybrids is to breed inbreds. These plants are crossed with themselves for many generations and they become highly uniform genetically. When two different inbreds are crossed with each other the first generation of hybrid seed produced by the cross (the f1 generation) often exhibits uniformity and special size, taste, earliness, or other desirable traits because of “hybrid vigor” or the tendency of that generation to exhibit the best traits of the parents. If the product of planting f1 seed is replanted for an f2 generation, however, the old parental traits recur and the product is neither uniform nor desirable. Because many plants are hermaphroditic and have both male and female parts, it is crucial to the process of hybridizing to produce a female parent line that is “male sterile” or does not contain viable male gametes. Then, when crossed with another line, all the viable pollen comes from the second parent line. One common way to create male sterility is to do it through the cytoplasm, the non-nuclear material that fills a cell and is inherited only maternally through the mitochondria or plastid genome. This is termed Cytoplasmic Male Sterility or CMS. This trait of hybrids to not breed true was quite valuable to seed breeders because farmers could no longer save seed for a new generation, but had to come back to the breeder each year and buy a new supply of this valuable f1 hybrid seed. When Wallace started, virtually no corn seed was hybridized, but by the 1940s, 90% of it was, mostly by Wallace’s own company, making him quite wealthy. For the last couple of decades, however, since the US Supreme Court allowed the patenting of life forms, the momentum in the US seed market has been held by the biotechnology companies with their genetically engineered, transgenic seeds. Transgenic seeds have DNA from a totally different species spliced into them – say a flounder gene spliced into a strawberry. They could never have existed in nature as they could not have been produced by natural breeding. But a non-transgenic seed breeding technology has been gaining interest among the biotechnologists. Cisgenic (meaning within the same genetic family) hybrid seeds are produced by means that many consider unnatural and offensive. Should these be treated as GMOs and prohibited in organic agriculture? Opinions differ on this and the question needs to be discussed far more widely within the organic community. Cisgenic seed cell fusion is a biotechnical process using mutagenesis (the creation of mutations) in which the nucleus is removed from a plant cell and replaced by a mutated nucleus from a different plant within the same botanical family. Chemicals and radiation are used in the process to stimulate the mutations. This creates a hybrid plant containing the mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA from one cell and the nuclear DNA from a different one. Cell fusion can also involve protoplast or somatic fusion – meaning the nuclear DNA from two or more plants from the same family are fused so the resulting seed contains DNA from both. Hybrid seeds were first developed with induced mutagenesis in the early 20th century to possess disease resistance and features to increase yields. Since the 1950’s cell fusion hybrid techniques have evolved from random treatment with chemical/electrical/radiation stimulation to a site-direct mutagenesis process targeting specific genes with “marker assisted breeding”. This targeted mutation, known as genome editing, uses tools including complex protein structures called “zinc fingers,” or meganucleases, that can selectively insert or silence genes in crop species and induce errors in DNA repair to stimulate mutations. This shortens development time for crops by years, compared to working with traditional breeding and open pollinated seed. According to a 11/21/2013 news report by Business Week, industry experts say over the past five years breeding and biotechnology have improved on prior haphazard methods of cell fusion mutagenesis by using molecular markers and sequenced genomes of crops to site direct crossbreeding, making conventional breeding more like genetic engineering. The article quotes Paul Schickler, president of DuPont’s Pioneer seed unit as saying “There is not a black line between biotechnology and non-biotechnology, it’s a continuum.” Business Week also cites reports from the National Academy of Sciences, representing the consensus of experts in the field, saying that the risk of creating unintended health effects is greater from mutagenesis than any other technique, including genetic modification. Mutagenesis deletes and rearranges hundreds or thousands of genes randomly, spawning mutations that are less precise than GMOs. The academy has warned that regulating genetically modified crops, while giving a pass to mutant products, isn’t scientifically justified. In addition to the regulatory-free environment they operate in, the magazine suggests mutant crops are also gaining in popularity because they’re cheaper to produce. Monsanto spends anywhere from $150 million to $200 million to launch a single genetically engineered product. Japan, by comparison, invested $69 million from 1959 to 2001 on mutant breeds that yielded $62 billion worth of products over that period, according to data from the United Nations’ Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture program. “These difficulties in getting a GMO to the market, we don’t have in mutation breeding,” says Pierre Lagoda, who heads up the UN program. That’s spurred even more interest in the mutant varieties, he says. In 2013 alone, Lagoda’s program has received requests to help irradiate a record 31 plant species ranging from sugar beets from Poland to potatoes from Kenya. BASF, the world’s biggest chemical company, developed its Clearfield wheat and other crops through chemical mutagenesis which alters the crops’ DNA by dousing seeds with chemicals such as ethyl methanesulfonate and sodium azide, according to company filings in Canada, reported Bloomberg News in a 11/13/2013 article. “This has been a technique used for many decades without issue, without concern,” Jonathan Bryant, a BASF vice president was quoted as saying in the Bloomberg news report. Overall the debate over whether cell fusion and mutagenesis in seed production are genetic engineering has caused confusion and conflicting answers in the organic community. In organic farming transgenic genetic engineering (GE) is banned, but cisgenic seed created by the cell fusion process is permitted under USDA organic regulations. By international organic certification standards, however, established by The International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements (IFOAM) cell fusion is classified as genetic engineering. “Cell-fusion is a controversial topic,” says John Navazio, Senior Scientist with the Organic Seed Alliance and Washington State Univ. Extension Specialist in Organic Seed. “IFOAM would like to ban it from organics completely, as they consider it a form of GM. But many of us in the organic community know that that would seriously compromise the ability of organic farmers to grow commercial crops of several brassica varieties.” “Several of the large production research seed companies that produce organic seed,” he continues, “are not talking when asked which of their hybrids are produced using cell fusion mediated CMS. By the way, there is also ‘naturally occurring CMS’ which we have used in hybrid carrots, onions, and beets for many years and should not be included in this debate.” “We do know that Monsanto/Seminis are getting into the ‘organic’ seed line,” says Liana Hoodes, director of the National Organic Coalition and National Organic Action Plan. “Which is precisely why OSA advises caution at this point in demanding that farmers use only organic seed — if the requirement to use absolutely only organic seed were made in stone right now, we would find a narrowing of the organic seed line, and a virtual takeover of the organic seed industry by the big boys. Organic has a long way to go to clarify the definition of GE as an excluded method, and if the USDA doesn’t get working with the true organic seed industry, we will indeed see organic seed production
Recommended publications
  • Northeast Organic Farming Association/ Massachusetts Chapter
    September 2013 Newsletter Northeast Organic Farming Association/ Massachusetts Chapter Inside this Issue: On Gardening & Proposed Food Safety Regs Big Ag Tries to Preempt Teaching Stir Farmer Anger State Laws on Farm Practices page 14 page 16 page 20 From the Editor Northeast Organic Farming Association/ Massachusetts Chapter, Inc. By Nicole Belanger 411 Sheldon Road Barre, MA 01005 NOFA/Mass Public Relations 978-355-2853 (p) 978-355-4046 (f) Coordinator [email protected] www.nofamass.org As the peaches ripen and bit by bit the days get shorter, our thoughts turn to how we can store NOFA/Mass Board Meetings are open to all the summer’s abundance and extend the season. members. For more information please contact: Reflecting on what we might do differently next time, Executive Director, Julie Rawson we are also reminded of what we’ve learned over the [email protected] years. 978-355-2853 Longtime gardener and NOFA/Mass member Christie Higginbottom grew up gardening with her parents © 2002-2013 NOFA/Massachusetts in central MA. She shared those experiences as NOFA/Massachusetts is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit an educator and gained new ones working at Old organization. Contributions are tax-deductible to Sturbridge Village for many years. In this issue, the extent allowed by law. Christie tells us her unique story and all about her tried and true tips for preparing the garden for the cold. Not a member yet? CLICK HERE NOFA/Mass Executive Director and longtime organic farmer Julie Rawson also reflects on a rekindled respect for comfrey and its diverse uses.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, Inc
    VERMONT ORGANIC FARMERS CERTIFICATION GUIDELINES 2018 Vermont Organic Farmers, LLC (VOF) and the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont, Inc. (NOFA-VT) Vermont Organic Farmers, LLC (VOF) Is the USDA accredited organic certification program of NOFA-VT. NOFA-VT Is a non-profit association of consumers, gardeners and farmers who share a vision of local, organic agriculture. Through education and member participation, NOFA works together to strengthen agriculture in Vermont. Please join us! As a member, you will receive subscriptions to NOFA's regional quarterly publication The Natural Farmer, NOFA-VT’s quarterly newsletter, NOFA Notes, NOFA-VT’s monthly e-news, and you will receive a copy of the Vermont Organic Farm & Food Directory. You will also receive reduced rates at NOFA's annual conference, seasonal workshops, farming supplies and discounts on books and publications. For additional information on membership and NOFA's work, please contact: NOFA-VT · PO Box 697 · Richmond, VT 05477 (802) 434-4122 (NOFA) · (802) 434-3821 (VOF) [email protected] or [email protected] www.nofavt.org 2 Executive Committee Annette Higby, Randolph, VT 728-4955 Brian Norder, Fairfax, VT 849-2000 Sam Smith, Charlotte 985-8018 Review Committee Paul Betz, E Calais, VT 456-8757 Annie Claghorn, Leicester, VT 247-3979 Dave Folino, Bristol, VT 989-5574 Anne Lazor, Westfield, VT 744-6855 Tim Sanford, South Royalton, VT 763-7981 Administration 434-3821 Enid Wonnacott, Executive Director Nicole Dehne, Certification Director Rachel Fussell, Certification Specialist (Crop & Livestock) Winston Rost, Certification Specialist (Processing & Maple) Gregg Stevens, Certification Specialist (Maple, Vegetable & Diverse Operations) Stephanie Walsh, Certification Specialist (Dairy & Livestock) Katy Lash, Certification Program Assistant Laura Nunziata, Quality Assurance Specialist 3 I.
    [Show full text]
  • August 11-13, 2017 Hampshire College • Amherst, MA
    August 11-13, 2017 Hampshire College • Amherst, MA Friday Keynote by Michael Phillips Saturday Keynote by Dr. Don M. Huber www.nofasummerconference.org #NOFASC TABLE OF CONTENTS Welcome .............................................................................................................. p.3 Weekend Overview .......................................................................................... p.5 Sponsors & Donors ........................................................................................... p.4 From vegetables and fruits to flowering 2017 NOFA Summer Conference Committee ......................................... p.6 plants and dairies, the ag industry General Logistics & Information & Wifi access ....................................... p.8 allows all of us to buy local and buy NOFA Membership Information ................................................................. p.9 fresh. Supporting local agriculture also ON-SITE LOGISTICS means supporting the livelihoods of Parking Information ........................................................................................ p.10 our neighbors. That’s simply a win-win. Checking-in and Housing Options ............................................................ p.10 Food Options and Menus ............................................................................... p.13 PROGRAM A Keynote Speakers .............................................................................................. p.18 Friday Intensive Seminars ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Organic Farming Research Foundation, June 12
    Testimony of Brise Tencer Executive Director, Organic Farming Research Foundation Submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives, Agriculture Committee, Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, & Research June 12, 2019 hearing on “Increasing Resiliency, Mitigating Risk: Examining the Research and Extension Needs of Producers” Chairwoman Plaskett, Ranking Member Dunn, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Biotechnology, Horticulture, and Research, thank you for your time and attention on the pressing issues of resiliency and risk in agriculture. Since 1990, OFRF has been working to foster the continuous improvement and widespread adoption of organic farming systems. Organic producers have developed innovative strategies that support agricultural resiliency and show potential to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and lessen the impacts of climate change on production. In addition, strong market demand and high prices for certified organic farm products can help reduce economic risks for organic producers. Even in the best circumstances, farmers are managing a variety of risks, including fluctuating markets, increasing production costs, and annual weather variations that may cause production challenges. Climate disruptions are increasing in intensity and frequency, which exacerbates existing risks. For instance, life cycles and geographic ranges of crop pests and pathogens are rapidly shifting, and soil health is degrading at a concerning rate (IPCC 2014, Kirschbaum, 1995; Montanarella et al., 2016). These shifts in abiotic and biotic stressors are already contributing to crop losses and threatening food security (Myers et al., 2017). In fact, climate disruptions are having a significant impact on family farmers and ranchers around the country. In the face of global climate change, extreme weather events are becoming more common.
    [Show full text]
  • New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food
    US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service 2014 Specialty Crop Block Grant Program USDA/AMS Agreement Number: 14-SCBGP-NH-0033 New Hampshire State Plan Final Report December 20, 2017 Revised February 9, 2018 Submitted by the New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food In cooperation with selected Project Partners Contact: Gail McWilliam Jellie, Director Division of Agricultural Development New Hampshire Department of Agriculture, Markets & Food PO Box 2042 Concord, New Hampshire 03302-2042 Tel. (603) 271-3788 Email: [email protected] Activities Performed The New Hampshire Dept. of Agriculture, Markets & Food received funding under the 2014 Special Crop Block Grant Program in October 2014. Nine projects were approved for funding. Individual project reports follow. Project 1 Project Title: Promoting SNAP/ EBT Redemption at Merrimack County Winter Farmers' Markets Project Partner Organization: Merrimack County Conservation District Final Report Project Summary Fresh, nutritious local foods can now be obtained in New Hampshire year-round at winter farmers' markets. As interest in local foods has grown, SNAP recipient purchases have remained low. Merrimack County Conservation District aims to increase SNAP purchases of fruits and vegetables at winter farmers' markets through a Double-Up Veggie Bucks SNAP coupon program at Merrimack County winter farmers' markets. The Specialty Crop Block Grant will help to fund program promotion and outreach with outside funds funding the double up coupons. This project increased sales to specialty crop producers, increased attendance at winter farmers’ markets, increased the use of nutritious food by SNAP recipients, and educated SNAP recipients on how to prepare and use whole, unprocessed specialty crop produce for home consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Entrepreneurship in the Natural Food and Beauty Categories Before 2000: Global Visions and Local Expressions
    Entrepreneurship in the Natural Food and Beauty Categories before 2000: Global Visions and Local Expressions Geoffrey Jones Working Paper 13-024 August 28, 2012 Copyright © 2012 by Geoffrey Jones Working papers are in draft form. This working paper is distributed for purposes of comment and discussion only. It may not be reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. Copies of working papers are available from the author. Entrepreneurship in the Natural Food and Beauty Categories before 2000: Global Visions and Local Expressions Geoffrey Jones Harvard Business School August 2012 Abstract This working paper examines the creation of the global natural food and beauty categories before 2000. This is shown to have been a lengthy process of new category creation involving the exercise of entrepreneurial imagination. Pioneering entrepreneurs faced little consumer demand for natural products, and little consumer knowledge of what they entailed. The creation of new categories involved three overlapping waves of entrepreneurship. The first involved making the ideological case for natural products. This often entailed investment in education and publishing activities. Second, entrepreneurs engaged in the creation of industry associations which could advocate, as well as give the nascent industry credibility and create standards. Finally, entrepreneurs established retail stores, supply and distribution networks, and created brands. Entrepreneurial cognition and motivation frequently lay in individual, and very local, experiences, but many of the key pioneers were also highly globalized in their world views, with strong perception of how small, local efforts related to much bigger and global pictures. A significant sub-set of the influential historical figures were articulate in expressing strong religious convictions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Natural Way of Farming
    Soil and Health Library This document is a reproduction of the book or other copyrighted material you requested. It was prepared on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 for the exclusive use of Niklas Wagner, whose email address is [email protected] This reproduction was made by the Soil and Health Library only for the purpose of research and study. Any further distribution or reproduction of this copy in any form whatsoever constitutes a violation of copyrights. The Natural Way of Farming The Theory and Practice of Green Philosophy By Masanobu Fukuoka Translated by Frederic P. Metreaud Japan Publications, Inc. ©1985 by Masanobu Fukuoka Translated by Frederic P. Metreaud All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book or portions thereof in any form without the written permission of the publisher. Published by JAPAN PUBLICATIONS, INC., Tokyo and New York Distributors: UNITED STATES: Kodansha International/US A, Ltd., through Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., 10 East 53rdStreet, New York, New York 10022. SOUTH AMERICA: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., International Department. CANADA: Fitzhenry & Whiteside Ltd., 195 Allstate Parkway, Markham, Ontario, L3R 4T8. MEXICO AND CENTRAL AMERICA: HARLA S. A. de C. V., Apartado 30-546, Mexico 4, D. F. BRITISH ISLES: International Book Distributors Ltd., 66 Wood Lane End, Hemel Hempstead, Herts HP2 4RG. EUROPEAN CONTINENT : Fleetbooks–Feffer and Simons (Nederland) B. V., 61 Strijkviertel, 3454 PK de Meern, The Netherlands. AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND: Bookwise International, 1 Jeanes Street, Beverley, South Australia 5007. THE FAR EAST AND JAPAN: Japan Publications Trading Co., Ltd., 1-2-1, Sarugaku-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Agriculture Introduction to Urban Agriculture Compiled by Jack Kittredge from Writings by Tom Philpott in Grist, Dr
    B- Spring 2018 Special Supplement on Urban Agriculture Introduction to Urban Agriculture compiled by Jack Kittredge from writings by Tom Philpott in Grist, Dr. Caroline Goodson, Jane Jacobs, the Guardian, Brette Jackson, Tammy LaGorce and Winnie Hu in the New York Times, and others Urban agriculture, according to most definitions, is the practice of cultivating, processing, and distributing food in or around a village, town, or city. That locational aspect is crucial to distinguishing urban agriculture from generic agriculture, which most people associate with taking place in rural areas. Urban agriculture projects include: community gardens established on vacant land that’s cultivated and maintained within an urban neighborhood; school gardens cultivated and maintained on school grounds, and factor into the curriculum; entrepreneurial gardens that grow produce and flowers for profit; backyard gardens, windowsill gardens, and rooftop gardens that provide vegetables, herbs, and flowers to individuals and/or small families. A reconstruction of ninth-century gardens in the Forum of Caesar, Rome. On the right Prehistoric Origins are rows of vegetables, on the left and center are grapevines, vegetables and fruit trees. But the rural association with farming has not farmed lands within city-walls and there is According to one contemporary account, the always been the case argues Jane Jacobs in her little evidence for commercial food markets of visitor to one of these barns “will nose the classic 1970 book “The Economy of Cities”. In rural produce.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Farming Crusader Kanniappan, Kulai, Johor
    Minimising Exposure to Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Successful Initiatives in Malaysia Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) Published by Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) 10, Jalan Masjid Negeri 11600 Pulau Pinang Malaysia Tel : 04-8299511 Fax: 04-8298109 Website : www.consumer.org.my email : [email protected] Printed by Jutaprint 2 Solok Sungai Pinang 3 Sungai Pinang 11600 Pulau Pinang Copyright © Consumers Association of Penang December 2014 ISBN : 978-967-5447-45-7 CONTENTS FOREWORD Knowledge of Integrated Pest Let’s Move Towards a Management (IPM) Vital for POPs Free Life 5 Chemical Free Agriculture 29 What Are Persistent Towards POPs-free Lifestyle Organic Pollutants (POPs) 7 Repel Pests Naturally 32 POPs In Your Daily Life 8 Repelling Fruit flies through Salted Fish Soaked Water 34 How POPs Travel 9 Repelling Household Pests - Persistent Organic Pollutants the Natural Way 35 Health Hazards 10 Creating Awareness of POPs 36 Protect Your Community from POPs 11 Plastic Perils 37 Advocating POPs-free Life Cloth Bags instead of Activities of the Consumers Plastic Bags 38 Association of Penang 12 Monoculture Vs Plant Diversity 40 Preparation of Various Types of Liquid Fertilisers,Growth Promoters Plants Experimented and and Pest Repellents by CAP in Harvested at CAP 41 Promoting Chemical Free Farming 14 Eliminating Toxic Chemicals in Avoid Burning : Compost Waste 20 Different Ways 42 Treating Soil Problems Naturally Instilling POPs-free Messages Marigold Plants Treat in Schools 43 Nematode Problems 23 Web Game : Understanding
    [Show full text]
  • Gdl :Kzgni]^C\ Ndj CZZY Id from Organic Compost, To
    O !"#$% '"#( %" ) %*++$,,)) +)+-) . Kimberly Stoner, Ph.D., Chair ! e Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, CT kim stoner Donald Bishop Gardens Are…, Marlborough, MA Dwight Brooks Dwight Brooks Horticulturist, Inc., Katonah, NY page Frank Crandall Wood River Evergreens, Hope Valley, RI Todd Harrington Harrington’s Safelawns & Landscape, LLC, Bloom" eld, CT Sarah Little, Ph.D. Pesticide Awareness Activist, Wellesley, MA Teresa Mucci Larry Weaner Landscape Design Associates, Wilton, CT Michael Nadeau Plantscapes, Inc., Fair" eld, CT Dina Pelletier, MPH Edible Organic Design, Avon, CT Priscilla Williams Pumpkin Brook Organic Gardening Inc., Townsend, MA Camilla Worden Camilla Worden Garden Design, Danbury, CT Bill Duesing CT NOFA Executive Director, Oxford, CT Ashley Kremser NOFA Organic Land Care Program, Manager, Oxford, CT Kathy Litch1 eld NOFA/Mass Organic Land Care Coordinator, Petersham, MA TOC page I$%*+0%1 P2*$3+ by Tim Abbey number of once-valued trees, shrubs, vines, ! ese plants have to be removed perennials and annu- by hand or mechanically, and for als are now considered terrestrial plants, herbicides are o# en Ainvasive pests. ! ey have dispersed used, an option not available to those from their original planting site to practicing organic land care. other locations and thrive there. One way that a vid gardeners and In naturalized areas, they establish the general public can do their part themselves at the expense of native to reduce the potential for additional plants. ! ey also detract from the introductions of aesthetic appear- I!+-%/+# 01-!"%: invasive plants is to ance of man- plant native plants aged landscapes Are not native to the ecosystem Before planting that invasive burning bush under consideration grown by local (Euonymus alatus), try one of the native plant and hamper nurseries.
    [Show full text]
  • Organic Farming and the Sustainability of Agricultural Systems
    Agricultural Systems 68(2001) 21±40 www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy Organic farming and the sustainability of agricultural systems D. Rigby a,*, D. Ca ceres b aSchool of Economic Studies, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK bDepartment of Rural Development, National University of CoÂrdoba, CC509-5000, CoÂrdoba, Argentina Received 20 October 1998; received in revised form 1 September 1999; accepted 30 October 2000 Abstract The desire for a sustainable agriculture is universal, yet agreement on how to progress towards it remains elusive. The extent to which the concept of sustainable agriculture has any operational meaning is discussed. Sustainability is considered in relation to organic farming Ð a sector growing rapidly in many countries. The role of regulation and the use of synthetic agrochemicals, the desired degree of self reliance of agricultural systems, and the scale of production and trade in agricultural goods are all considered in the context of this discussion of sustainability. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Sustainability; Organic farming; Self-suciency; Agrochemical The concept of sustainability lies at the heart of the debates that currently exist over the use of the planet's natural resources, yet there is no consensus on its meaning despite its intuitive appeal (Park and Seaton, 1996). This paper focuses on sustainable agriculture, although there is still no consensus on this more speci®c aspect of sustainability. Some have argued that, for example, organic farming and sustainable agriculture are synonymous, others regard them as separate concepts that should not be equa- ted. The relationship between organic agricultural systems and agricultural sustain- ability is therefore examined in this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Organic Farming Association/ Massachusetts Chapter
    April 2014 Newsletter Northeast Organic Farming Association/ Massachusetts Chapter Inside this Issue: Expanding (sub)urban Solidarity Agriculture: GMO labeling bill edible gardens with Ben A Farmer Exchange to favorably reported out of Barkan Peru legislative committee page 3 page 13 page 18 From the Editor Northeast Organic Farming Association/ By Nicole Belanger, NOFA/Mass Public Massachusetts Chapter, Inc. Relations Coordinator 411 Sheldon Road Barre, MA 01005 978-355-2853 (p) 978-355-4046 (f) Doesn’t that sun feel nice? The snow [email protected] piles melt and we say hello to crocuses www.nofamass.org and robins. It’s spring again! Finally! Here’s hoping that the winter wasn’t too bad for NOFA/Mass Board Meetings are open to all you. I hope that deep freeze killed a lot of your members. For more information please contact: unwelcomed insects, and that your bees and animals Executive Director, Julie Rawson made it through ok. [email protected] 978-355-2853 This time of year, energy shifts towards time outside and beginning to realize those new projects we’ve been scheming about for months. We at NOFA/ © 2002-2014 NOFA/Massachusetts Mass are feeling our plans take shape as well. NOFA/Massachusetts is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization. Contributions are tax-deductible Due to popular demand, we’re offering several new to the extent allowed by law. classes this season. Aaron Englander shares his experience with the closed-loop system of Korean Natural Farming. This diy fertility workshop will take place at Heifer Farm in Rutland, MA on May Not a member yet? 3rd.
    [Show full text]