ISOFAR EXPO South Korea 2015 Hall 1 to 10 Printed Sent.Pdf

Home , Arrowroot, Irish Moiled, White Park cattle

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

www.isofar.org

IMPRINT

CONTACT/COORDINATION Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke (ukiol@uni‐bonn.de) Institute of Organic Agriculture Katzenburgweg 3 D‐53115 Bonn Tel. +49‐2 28‐73‐56 16 Fax +49‐2 28‐73‐56 17 E‐Mail: iol@uni‐bonn.de www.iol.uni‐bonn.de

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer July, 2013

2 Content

Hall 1 ‐ Healthy and resilient soil …………………...... 5 Hall 2 ‐ Clean water………………………………...... 49 Hall 3 & 4 ‐ Clean air and mitigation of climate change……………………………………………………………...... 69 Hall 5 ‐ Enriched biodiversity………………………...... 99 Hall 6 ‐ Animal welfare………………………………… ...... 125 Hall 7 ‐ Optimal product and process quality...... 139 Hall 8 ‐ General human well‐being……………… ...... 199 Hall 9 ‐ Organic lifestyle……………………………… ...... 225 Hall 10 ‐ Practical skills for Organic Agriculture… ...... 365

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 1

Healthy and resilient soil

Authors: Prof. Dr. Mohammed BenKheder and Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke

www.isofar.org

5 Content A Mission: ...... 8 B Contents ...... 9 B 1 Soil fertility – Soil quality ...... 10 B 2 Nutrient management in Organic Agriculture ...... 10 B3 The prominent role of Soil Organic matter (SOM) – Humus11

B 3.1 Role and function of organic matter ...... 12

B 3.2 Maintaining and increasing SOM ...... 13

B 3.3 Cropping systems role – crop rotation design (B 2, i.) ...... 13 B 4 Nitrogen fixation...... 14 B 5 Mobilizing nutrients – increasing the soil‐root interfac ..... 15 B 5.1 Weathering /Unlocking soil‐nutrients ...... 15 B 6 Reducing nutrient losses, nitrate leaching ...... 16 B 7 Inhibit weed growth ...... 16 B 8 Cover crops and green fallow benefits ...... 16 B 9 Tillage and soil conservation ...... 16 B 9.1 The mouldboard plough: ...... 16 B 9.2 Reduced tillage intensity ...... 17 B 10 Soil Biology...... 17 B 10.1 Intact soil life: ...... 17

B 10.2 Abundance of soil organisms: ...... 17

B 10.3 The multifunctional role of soil organisms: ...... 17 B 10.4 Beneficial plant‐microbial interactions: symbiosis and ... association: ...... 18 B 10.5 Crop protection effects ...... 18 B 11 Controlling, maintaining and monitoring soil fertility ..... 18 B 11.1 Assessing soil quality on‐site: ...... 18 B 12 Off‐farm purchased nutrients – manures and fertilizers 19

B 12.1 Basics and principles of use...... 19 B 12.2 Optimized application ...... 19 B 12.3 Organic nitrogen fertilizers: which, how much, where, ... and when? ...... 19 B 12.4 Mineral non‐N‐fertilizers ...... 19

6 B 12.5 Organic fertilizers for soil conditioning (basal dressing), supplying nutrients, foliar spray …...... 19 C Central displays ...... 19 C 1 Sidewall 1: Soil as a life natural body and living entity ...... 20 C 2 Sidewall 2: Soil fertility building ...... 20 C 3 Sidewall 3: Cropping systems – crop rotations ...... 20 C 4 Sidewall 4: Soil conservation ...... 21 C 5. Middle of the hall: ...... 22 C 5.1 Living stands/plots: ...... 22 C 5.2 ‘The World of Compost’ ...... 22 C 5.3 The Soil Counter: ...... 22 IMPRINT ...... 23 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 23

7 Hall N°: 1

Title: Healthy and resilient soil

A Mission:

giving extensive insight to…

 The keyrole of soil fertility in Organic Agriculture  Preserving the soil as the most important resource for agricultural production  Healthy soil through organic production systems produces healthy crop that fosters the health of animal and people  The organic farmer as a provider of soil conservation /maintainer of soil /manager of soil resilience  Tools and technologies that are used in Organic Agriculture to provide and safeguard high soil quality  Maintain and/or improve biological, physical and chemical soil fertility by wider and more diversified crop rotation, well‐focused used of organic manure (leguminous green manure)  Improved organic matter management and soil health

The increase of food production is needed to feed a rapidly increasing world population. The primary purpose of consumers in his choices for esculents and foods is for improved human health and well‐being. Warranting healthy and resilient soil, organic product assurance systems and balanced living and ecological systems and cycles will ensure consumer’s expectations and satisfaction concerning process quality. A crucial component in this endeavor is improvement and maintenance of soil fertility. Organic Agriculture harmonizes the interests of sustainable/perpetuable ecological production, soil conservation, and natural balances. The hall shall display:

‐ The contribution of Organic Agriculture to reach the objective of healthy, fertile, biologically active, and resilient soil with improved structure and enhanced nutrient availability. ‐ Strategies and innovative technologies of soil fertility building in Organic Agriculture.

8 Overall view: Soil as a life natural body and living entity, an ecosystem carrying and containing a broad spectrum of living organisms Soil as the main source of nutrients and medium to feed plants The optimization of soil ‐ root interactions for nutrient management Soil as a basis for biodiversity, food and life

An old English saying: Live as if you would die tomorrow, Farm as you would live forever The shortest definition of Organic Agriculture

‘To fulfil our obligations to our descendents and to stabilize our communities, each generation should sustain its resources at a high level and hand them along undiminished’ (William A.Duerr 1968)

Features of Organic Agriculture impact on soil conservation management. Various soil functions will be presented on photos, posters and scientific imprints: i.e. ‐ Crop rotations systems for fertility building including legumes, and green manure ‐ Different sources and values of organic matter: crop residues, animal manure/solid/liquid, compost, compost tea, organic fertilizers ….. ‐ High activities of micro and macro‐organisms ‐ Measures for preventing soil erosion and soil degradation ‐ The role of the topsoil ‐ The role of the subsoil – where the hidden half of the soil meets the hidden part of the plant: the rizosphere/drilosphere: typical processes, effect on water and nutrient uptake, mobilizing nutrients from the solid phase

B Contents

Delivered message:

‘Feed the soil and the soil will feed the plants. The healthy soil results in healthy plants, healthy animals and healthy people’. The ultimate goal is to reach a perpetuity of high soil quality.

9 B 1 Soil fertility – Soil quality

Soil fertility is a function of soil use and management, i.e. the ability of soil to sustain crop growth in the long term

Soil quality in Organic Agriculture is the capacity to function within the farm boundaries in order to sustain biological productivity and biodiversity, maintain and enhance quality of water, air and climate as well as to promote human health and habitation Soil fertility in Organic Agriculture consists of: i. Production functions, i.e. efficient sustainable net production of crops combined in diversified crop rotations, and ii. Ecological functions, i.e. filter‐ and buffer function of the soil, self‐regulation, resilience and resilience/system stability.

Soil fertility has major and measurable impacts to the environment, amongst others the quality of ground and surface waters, landscape and biodiversity which also encompass economical, cultural and societal values, soil erosion, soil protection, etc...

Building soil fertility is facing and focusing biological activity

B 2 Nutrient management in Organic Agriculture

Definition: Nutrient management:

The systematic target‐oriented organization of nutrient flows, i.e.

Optimization of nutrient resources which are restricted or have to be unlocked by improving utilization (e.g. via increased rooting density and efficiency of nutrient absorption)

 Making nutrients in the system internally available or keeping nutrients potentially available in the long term

10 Organic farmers should rely on the nutrient sources available on the farm or permitted nutrients available via fertilizers from the market.

Three main streams determine nutrient management and fertilization: i. Nutrient management via crop rotation (nutrient cycling, fixed on‐site/single field) ii. Nutrients delivered by farm produced organic manures (nutrient cycling, inner‐farm, flexible applied) iii. Off‐farm purchased nutrients (primarily nutrient cycling (primarily composted household residues, mineral nutrients/ fertilizers, flexible applied)

Pathways of nutrient acquisition: Instead of directly increasing the chemical availability via increasing the nutrient concentration of the soil solution (increasing the intensity) as practiced in the mainstream, OA increases the accessibility of nutrients, via Crop sequence and tillage  affecting/optimizing the soil structure/soil properties (physical, biological, chemical), enabling  nutrient acquisition via root architecture/morphology, rhizosphere and drilosphere effects

B3 The prominent role of Soil Organic matter (SOM) – Humus

Definition:

SOM includes all non‐living residues of plant‐ , animal‐ and microbial origin and their organic metabolites located in the soil and on the soil surface. SOM does not include living organisms and roots

Positive effects of organic matter and its metabolites in the soil: • Creating and sustaining of favourable soil structure, thereby • better exchange of nutrients • greater water capacity and aquifer system • better aeration • Binding of plant nutrients by sorption and cation exchange • flow and continuous release of plant nutrients (particularly N, P, S)

11 B 3.1 Role and function of organic matter

Since important functions are associated to SOM having significant impact on soil quality and fertility it is essential to maintain and adequate/ side specific level of SOM through adapted production techniques, and organic amendments.

B3.1.1 Soil structural properties:

Improved soil structure, enhanced soil aggregation, heavy soils loosened, soil sealing reduced

B 3.1.2 Hydrology:

Water infiltration & water holding capacity enhanced; light soils become more retentive

B 3.1.3 Soil climate:

Darker soil – warmer soil; longer growing season, SOM as a source and sink of atmospheric CO2; more CO2 available for assimilation; acts as a buffer against drought, sudden temperature changes, etc. B 3.1.4 World climate change:

Although double the amount of CO2 determined in the atmosphere is found in the soil, the soil sink for CO2 is limited. The amount of CO2, that is photosynthetically fixed on the northern half of the globe during summer season is compensated by new CO2 emissions within 2‐3 years (link to halls 4, 9, 10)

B 3.1.5 Soil biology: Provides food/energy for soil organisms, size and composition of microbial (decomposer) community is enhanced; stimulates biological activity/soil respiration rate; SOM is the ‘fuel’ for soil microorganism and serve has habitat and shelter for a broad spectrum of soil organisms

B 3.1.6 Nutrient supply

SOM as the main reserve of nutrients (esp. N, P, S; micro nutrients), serves as a slow releases reservoir for macro and micro nutrients

12 B 3.1.7 Improves soil resilience and plant resistance and tolerance to diseases (anti ‐ phytopathological potential increased)

B 3.2 Maintaining and increasing SOM

The particulate organic matter is more responsive to management practices than the total organic carbon. The SOM status is influenced by management practices such as crop residue management and tillage intensity, cropping intensity and diversity. The C‐ content of the soil is a function of the amount and type of organic matter applied to the soil

B 3. 2.1 Primary organic matter sources:

Crop residues, farmyard manure, compost, green manure…

B 3.2.2 Rules and methods of application

B3.2.3. Crop residue management

B3.2.4. Application of farm yard manure

B3.2.5 Compost (processes, parameters, operations, quality …)

B 3.2.6 Application of liquid manures

B 3.2.7 Additional material obtained from biogenic waste

B 3.2.8 Compost tea extraction and use

B 3.3 Cropping systems role – crop rotation design (B 2, i.)

Adequate crop rotations have a multifunctional role (complementary crops for nutrients acquisition enabling biodiversity, on‐site nutrient management, positive precrop effects and resilience

B 3.3.1 Soil protection

By an efficient ground cover provides shade and optimizes soil tilth and soil structure

13 B 3.3.2 Reproduction of SOM

(soil rest, perennial fodder crops, e.g. lucerne, grass‐clover)

B 4 Nitrogen fixation

(grain and fodder legumes, Azolla, associative and free‐living N2‐fixers)

B 4 Focus box: Aquatic ecosystem paddy rice: using Azolla

14 B 5 Mobilizing nutrients – increasing the soil‐root interface

Root architecture strategy: Increasing rooting density, … branching, … number of young and fine roots … and root hairs

Biochemical strategy: Influencing the … pH degree … root exudates/organic acids … ectoenzymes … rhizosphere microorganism … arbuscular mycorhizal fungi

B 5 Focus box: Organic farm management practices and their effect on the AM association

… redox potential

B 5 Focus box: P‐solubilisation by different crops – P‐efficient crops

B 5 Focus box: Choosing nutrient efficient cultivars

B 5.1 Weathering /Unlocking soil‐nutrients

B 5.1.1 Bioporing the subsoil with taproot systems

B 5.1.2 Increasing the drilosphere space

B 5.1.2 Focuse box: Bioporing by roots and earthworms; in‐situ endoscopy:

15 B 6 Reducing nutrient losses, nitrate leaching (link to hall 2)

B 6 Focuse box: Strategies to curb nitrate by creating sinks for nitrate uptake

B 7 Inhibit weed growth

B 8 Cover crops and green fallow benefits

B 9 Tillage and soil conservation

The aim: creating or maintaining a healthy soil structure

B 9.1 The mouldboard plough: an effective and virtually essential tool in Organic Agriculture … for nutrient management … for inverting farmyard manure … for removing perennial leys … for inhencing root growth, nitrogen mineralization and nutrient uptake, as well as … efficient weed control

16 B 9.2 Reduced tillage intensity

No till/occasional direct seeding; protection from wind and water erosion

B 9.2 Focus box: Effects of soil compaction on root and shoot growth and yield B 9.2 Focus box: Strategies to avoid soil compaction: Side specific/opportunistic tillage, tractor type and weight, tire type, precision farming measures (RTK – controlled traffic/ harrowing, hoeing, ….) B 9.2 Focus box: occasional direct seeding of grain legumes (soy bean, faba bean). Triple‐disk direct seeding of faba bean (single‐ seeded shown; root and shoot development of faba bean, slow motion IOL video clip ready);

B 9.2.1 Avoiding soil compaction:

Machinery weight, Auflast radlast pressure and tires, reducing the passes

B 9.2.2 Site specific use of soil tillage equipment

B 10 Soil Biology

B 10.1 Intact soil life:

Maintains soil fertility

B 10.2 Abundance of soil organisms:

Earthworms, fungi, bacteria, actinomycetes, mycorrhiza – a function of soil environmental design

B 10.3 The multifunctional role of soil organisms:

The processes of mineralization and humification, mediating nutrient mobilization and nutrient uptake by plants

17 B 10.4 Beneficial plant‐microbial interactions: symbiosis and association:

Nitrogen fixation from the atmosphere, rhizosphere microorganisms – their role for nutrient uptake and plant protection

B 10.5 Crop protection effects

B 10.5 Focus box: Earthworms impact B 10.5 Focus box The metabolic quotient: A remarkable parameter

B 11 Controlling, maintaining and monitoring soil fertility

B 11.1 Assessing soil quality on‐site:

B 11.1 Focus box: spade diagnosis

Depth, type, structure (texture), earthworm activity

B 11.2 Laboratory soil analysis

B 11.2.1 Physical and chemical parameters: pH, Humus, CE (salinity), organic matter content, humus content, N, K, Mg, Ca, track elements (Mn, Zn, Cu, Fe ….)

B 11.2.2 Biological activity:

Respiration (metabolic quotient, see 3.6), enzymatic activities, functional microbial communities

B 11.2.3 Xenobiotics and heavy metals

18 B 12 Off‐farm purchased nutrients – manures and fertilizers (B2, iii.)

B 12.1 Basics and principles of use

B 12.2 Optimized application

B 12.3 Organic nitrogen fertilizers: which, how much, where, and when?

B 12.4 Mineral non‐N‐fertilizers

B 12.5 Organic fertilizers for soil conditioning (basal dressing), supplying nutrients, foliar spray …..

C Central displays

Panel Message: Health claims for organic food traced back to the early 20th century: ‘Healthy soil, healthy plants, healthy people’ Lady Eve Balfour, 1946. The Living Soil, London, Faber and Faber

Healthy and resilient soil will lead to: healthy plants, healthy products, healthy animals, healthy people, healthy environment and a healthy planet

Two meters soil depth feed the world: Several soil‐profiles demonstrate the broad spectrum of soil diversity. Pictures, posters, tables, figures and scientific information will be presented on the four sidewalls and the middle of the hall to emphasize the self‐regulation capacity of the soil (10 to 20 slides/panels per sidewall).

The organic farmer as manager of soil fertility Related to sub‐topics‐/chapters ‐ scenes/processes/techniques, strategies and measures to improve soil quality, soil fertility and biological activity are displayed ‐ Manuring and fertilization: organic and mineral fertilizers application techniques

19 C 1 Sidewall 1: Soil as a life natural body and living entity

Several aspects related to biological activity will be presented (links to specific feature boxes).

C 2 Sidewall 2: Soil fertility building

Soil organic matter (SOM) ‐ Dramatic decline of SOM ‐ it’s global role in soil fertility building ‐ Demonstrating the water‐holding capacity of a fertile soil by using transparent soil columns ‐ Demonstrating the effect of SOM content on soil structure/aggregation –> soil sealing avoided and percolated water quantified

Farmers activities and measures. Selected aspects of soil analysis and interpretation (links to specific feature boxes).

C 3 Sidewall 3: Cropping systems – crop rotations

Cropping Systems ‐ selected aspects will be displayed related to green manure and legumes, crop rotational effects, crop association, crop residues

Several crop rotations demonstrate the effects of land use and cropping on soil fertility building. Elements: use of legumes, green manure, green fallow, crop association, etc (links to specific feature boxes).

20 C 4 Sidewall 4: Soil conservation

Soil Erosion ‐ The four phases of soil erosion ‐> Bigger sized illustration derived/modified from Derpsch et al. 1988

Soil cultivation, no‐till, occasional direct seeding, machinery and equipment physically presented

Selected aspects related to the effect of soil preparation, tillage, soil cover/mulch, equipment and machinery on the conservation of a healthy soil structure will be presented (links to specific feature boxes).

C 4 Focus box: direct seeding of maize into hairy vetch mulch (roller and planter operating shown, IOL video clip ready, The Rodale Institute video clip requested/ available (Jeff Moyer)

21 C 5. Middle of the hall:

C 5.1 Living stands/plots:

Establishing two to three life crop rotations (temperate/tropic) with clear links to specific soil fertility aspects shown

C 5.2 ‘The World of Compost’

The World of Compost ‐ compost plant, machinery, and processes of composting, compost tea (fertilization and protection aspects) displayed

‐ Compost piles of different age ‐ Natural and active composting processes ‐ Organic materials used ‐ Compost tea extraction

Specific machinery related to compost and soil preparation may be shown. (At least demonstrated via bigger sized panels ‐> Brazilian techniques)

C 5.3 The Soil Counter:

Sensual experiences ‐ the touch and the smell of compost and fertile soil Soils of different fertility Haptic impressions: soils with different organic matter content Olfactory impressions of different compost (ripening stages) Healing soils (Bole/Bolus Heilerde)

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

Hall 1 Healthy and Resilient Soil

A Mission ELLIOT, L.F. AND J.M. LYNCH, 1994: Biodiversity and soil resilience. Greenland, D.J., Szaabolcs, I., (eds). From Soil Resilience and Sustainable Land Use, 353-364. MÄDER, P. ET AL. 2002: Soil fertility and biodiversity in organic farming. Science, Vol. 296, 1694–1697. B 1 Soil fertility – Soil quality

EMMERLING, C. & UDELHOVEN, T., 2002: Discriminating factors of the spatial variability of soil quality parameters at landscape-scale. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science - Zeitschrift Für Pflanzenernährung und Bodenkunde 165, 706-712. GUNASEKHAR NACHIMUTHU, PAUL KRISTIANSEN, CHRIS GUPPY, PETER LOCKWOOD, KATHY KING, 2012. Organic vegetable farms are not nutritionally disadvantaged compared with adjacent conventional or integrated vegetable farms in Eastern Australia. Scientia Horticulturae- Volume 146, 15 October 2012, Pages 164–168. KÖPKE, U., 2008: Principles of soil fertility building and nutrient management in Organic Agriculture. In: Ulrich Köpke, Sang Mok Sohn (Editors): Proceedings Organic Agriculture in Asia –ISOFAR International Symposium on Soil Fertility, - International Symposium on Organic Agriculture (ISOFAR), Dankook University, Korea, 13-14 March 2008 PER SCHJØNNING, SUSANNE ELMHOLT, LARS J MUNKHOLM, KASIA DEBOSZ. 2002. Soil quality aspects of humid sandy loams as influenced by organic and conventional long-term management Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 88, Issue 3, March 2002, Pages 195–214. PFIFFNER, L., MÄDER, P., 1997: Effects of biodynamic, organic and conventional production systems on earthworm populations. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 3-10. B 2 Nutrient management in Organic Agriculture KÖPKE, U., 2008: Principles of soil fertility building and nutrient managementin Organic Agriculture. In: Ulrich Köpke, Sang Mok Sohn (Editors): Proceedings Organic Agriculture in Asia –ISOFAR International Symposium on Soil Fertility, -International Symposium on Organic Agriculture (ISOFAR), Dankook University, Korea, 13-14 March 2008 B 3 The prominent role of Soil Organic matter (SOM) – Humus

PER SCHJØNNING, LARS J. MUNKHOLM, SUSANNE ELMHOLT, JØRGEN E. OLESEN. 2007. Organic matter and soil tilth in arable farming: Management makes a difference within 5–6 years. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment-Volume 122, Issue 2, October 2007, Pages 157–172. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.029

RICCARDO SPACCINI, ALESSANDRO PICCOLO. 2013. Effects of field managements for soil organic matter stabilization on water-stable aggregate distribution and aggregate stability in three agricultural soils. Journal of Geochemical Exploration-Volume 129, June 2013, Pages 45–51. Molecular Aspects of Humic Substances and Biological Functionality in Soil. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2012.10.004

R.S. MYLAVARAPU, G.M. ZINATI. 2009. Improvement of soil properties using compost for optimum parsley production in sandy soils. Scientia Horticulturae. Volume 120, Issue 3, 1 May 2009, Pages 426–430 Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2008.11.038.

S SIEGRIST, D SCHAUB, L PFIFFNER, P MÄDER. 1998. Does organic agriculture reduce soil erodibility? The results of a long- term field study on loess in Switzerland. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 69, Issue 3, 6 July 1998, Pages 253–264.

WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Decomposition. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 134-149. B 3.1 Role and function of organic matter RAPHAËL J. MANLAY, CHRISTIAN FELLER, M.J. SWIFT. 2007. Historical evolution of soil organic matter concepts and their relationships with the fertility and sustainability of cropping systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 119, Issues 3–4, March 2007, Pages 217–233. WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Decomposition. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 134- 149. B 3.1.1 Soil structural properties WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Soil Structure. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 158-186. B 3.1.2 Hydrology B 3.1.3 Soil climate

A. EDWARD JOHNSTON, PAUL R. POULTON, KEVIN COLEMAN. 2009. Chapter 1 Soil Organic Matter: Its Importance in

Sustainable Agriculture and Carbon Dioxide Fluxes. Advances in Agronomy-Volume 101, 2009, Pages 1–57. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)00801-8

R. MANCINELLI, E. CAMPIGLIA, A. DI TIZIO, S. MARINARI. 2010. Soil carbon dioxide emission and carbon content as affected by conventional and organic cropping systems in Mediterranean environment. Applied Soil Ecology, Volume 46, Issue 1, September 2010, Pages 64–72. B 3.1.4 World Climate Change WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Climat Change. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 267. B 3.1.5 Soil biology WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Soil organisms and the soil foodweb. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 27-55. B 3.1.6 Nutrient Supply

BI R, YUAN T, LU Q, YUAN Y, ZHOU S. 2013. Electron donor capacity of reducing dissolved organic matter from crop residue decomposition as probed by chronoamperometry. Chemosphere. 2013 May 18.

ALAIN F. PLANTE E, WILLIAM J. PATRON. 2007. The dynamics of soil organic matter and nutrient cycling. Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemistry (Third Edition)- 2007, Pages 433–467)

TRA T.T. DUONG, SUMAN L. VERMA, CHRIS PENFOLD, PETRA MARSCHNER. 2013. Nutrient release from composts into the surrounding soil. Geoderma. Volumes 195–196, March 2013, Pages 42–47. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.11.010,

BRUNO BASSO, JOE T. RITCHIE. 2005. Impact of compost, manure and inorganic fertilizer on nitrate leaching and yield for a 6- year maize–alfalfa rotation in Michigan. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume 108, Issue 4, 10 July 2005, Pages 329–341. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.01.011. B 3.1.7 Soil resilience and plant resistance - tolerance to diseases (anti - phytopathological potential increased) CÉLINE JANVIER, FRANÇOIS VILLENEUVE, CLAUDE ALABOUVETTE, VÉRONIQUE EDEL-HERMANN, THIERRY

MATEILLE, CHRISTIAN STEINBERG, 2007. Soil health through soil disease suppression: Which strategy from descriptors to indicators? Soil Biology and Biochemistry . Volume 39, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 1–23Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.07.001

MOHAMMAD AKHTAR, ABDUL MALIK. 2000. Roles of organic soil amendments and soil organisms in the biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: a review. Bioressources Technology-Volume 74, Issue 1 , Août 2000, Pages 35-47. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524 (99) 00154-6

Y. OKA. 2010. Mechanisms of nematode suppression by organic soil amendments-A review. Applied Soil Ecology-Volume 44, Issue 2, February 2010, Pages 101–115. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2009.11.003

L. TAMM, B. THÜRIG, A. FLIESSBACH, A.E. GOLTLIEB, S. KARAVANI,Y. COHEN. 2011. Elicitors and soil management to induce resistance against fungal plant diseases. NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences-Volume 58, Issues 3–4, December 2011, Pages 131–137. Improving Production Efficiency, Quality and Safety in Organic and 'Low-Input' Food Supply Chains. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2011.01.001

CATELLO PANE, ALESSANDRO PICCOLO, RICCARDO SPACCINI, GIUSEPPE CELANO, DOMENICA VILLECCO, MASSIMO ZACCARDELLI. 2013. Agricultural waste-based composts exhibiting suppressivity to diseases caused by the phytopathogenic soil-borne fungiRhizoctonia solani and Sclerotinia minor. Applied Soil Ecology. Volume 65, March 2013, Pages 43–51. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2013.01.002.

K.L. NELSON, D.H. LYNCH, G. BOITEAU. 2009. Assessment of changes in soil health throughout organic potato rotation sequences. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 131, Issues 3–4, June 2009, Pages 220–228.

RANDA JABBOUR, MARY E. BARBERCHECK. 2009. Soil management effects on entomopathogenic fungi during the transition to organic agriculture in a feed grain rotation. Biological Control, Volume 51, Issue 3, December 2009, Pages 435–443.

TAMM, L., THÜRIG, B., BRUNS, C., FUCHS, J.G., KÖPKE, U., LAUSTELA, M., LEIFERT, C., MAHLBERG, N., NIETLISPACH, B., SCHMIDT, C.,WEBER, F. & FLIEßBACH, A. , 2010: Soil type, management history, and soil amendments influence the

development of soil-borne (Rhizoctonia solani, Pythium ultimum) and air-borne (Phytophthora infestans, Hyaloperonospora parasitica) diseases. Eur. J. Plant Pathol., 127:465-481. DOI 10.1007/s10658-010-9612-2.

WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Biocontrol. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 202-217.. B 3.2 Maintaining and increasing SOM B 3.2.1 Primary organic matter sources B 3.2.2 Rules and methods of application B 3.2.3 Crop residue management

K. KUMAR, K.M. GOH.1999. Crop Residues and Management Practices: Effects on Soil Quality, Soil Nitrogen Dynamics, Crop Yield, and Nitrogen Recovery. Advances in Agronomy-Volume68 ,1999,pages197-319.Availableat : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113 (08) 60846-9

GARY D BENDING, MARY TURNER, JULIE E JONES. 2002. Interactions between crop residue and soil organic matter quality and the functional diversity of soil microbial communities. Soil Biology and Biochemistry-Volume 34, Numéro 8 , Août 2002, Pages 1073-108. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717 (02) 00040-8

HAAS, G. BRAND, H., & PUENTE DE LA VEGA, M., 2007:Nitrogen from Hairy Vetch (Vicia Villosa Roth) as Winter Green Manure for White Cabbage in Organic Agriculture. In: Biological Agriculture and Horticulture (BAH), Vol. 25, 2007, pp. 37-53.

M.A. REPULLO, R. CARBONELL, J. HIDALGO, A. RODRÍGUEZ-LIZANA, R. ORDÓÑEZ. 2012. Using olive pruning residues to cover soil and improve fertility. Soil and Tillage Research. Volume 124, August 2012, Pages 36–46. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2012.04.003.

WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Decomposition of Organic Residues. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 134. B 3.2.4 Farm yard manure A.N. OTINGA, P. PYPERS, J.R. OKALEBO, R. NJOROGE, M. EMONG’OLE,L. SIX, B. VANLAUWE,R. MERCKX. 2013. Partial

substitution of phosphorus fertiliser by farmyard manure and its localised application increases agronomic efficiency and profitability of maize production. Field Crops Research-Volume 140, January 2013, Pages 32–43. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.10.003 W. BEN ACHIBA,,ABDELBASSET LAKHDAR, NOUREDDINE GABTENI, GIJS DU LAING, MARC VERLOO,PASCAL BOECKX, OSWALD VAN CLEEMPUT, NACEUR JEDIDI, TAHAR GALLALI.2010. Accumulation and fractionation of trace metals in a Tunisian calcareous soil amended with farmyard manure and municipal solid waste compost. Journal of Hazardous Materials- Volume 176, Issues 1–3, 15 April 2010, Pages 99–108. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.11.004

TOYOTA K. AND S. KUNINAGA, 2006. Comparison of soil microbial community between soils amended with or without farmyard manure. Applied Soil Ecology 33 : 39–48

DENG, S.P., PARHAM, J.A., HATTEY, J.A. AND BABU, D., 2006. Animal manure and anhydrous ammonia amendment alter microbial carbon use efficiency, microbial biomass, and activities of dehydrogenase and amidohydrolases in semiarid agroecosystems. Applied Soil Ecology, Volume 33 (3) 258-268

ZALLER, J. G. & KÖPKE, U., 2004: Effects of traditional and biodynamic farmyard manure amendment on yields, soil chemical, biochemical and biological properties in a long-term field experiment. Biology and Fertility of Soils 40, 222-229. B 3.2.5 Compost (processes, parameters, operations, quality) YADVINDER-SINGH, BIJAY-SINGH, J. TIMSINA. 2005. Crop Residue Management for Nutrient Cycling and Improving Soil Productivity in Rice-Based Cropping Systems in the Tropics. Advances in Agronomy. Volume 85, 2005, Pages 269– 407. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(04)85006-5

KEIJI JINDO, KOKI SUTO, KAZUHIRO MATSUMOTO, CARLOS GARCÍA, TOMONORI SONOKI, MIGUEL A. SANCHEZ-MONEDERO. 2012. Chemical and biochemical characterisation of biochar-blended composts prepared from poultry manure. Bioresource Technology. Volume 110, April 2012, Pages 396–40Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.120.

M. TAKEDA , T. NAKAMOTO, K. MIYAZAWA, T. MURAYAMA, H. OKADA. 2009. Phosphorus availability and soil biological activity in an Andosol under compost application and winter cover cropping. Applied Soil Ecology-Volume 42, Issue 2, June 2009, Pages 86–9. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2009.02.003

B 3.2.6 Liquid manures B 3.2.7 Biogenic material

A. DAS. 1988. City garbage compost as a source of humus. Biological Wastes. Volume 26, Issue 1, 1988, Pages 65–69. Available at:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0269-7483(88)90150-4.

B.G. HERMANNL. DEBEER, B. DE WILDE, K. BLOK, M.K. PATEL. 2011. To compost or not to compost: Carbon and energy footprints of biodegradable materials’ waste treatment. Polymer Degradation and Stability. Volume 96, Issue 6, June 2011, Pages 1159–1171Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2010.12.026. B 3.2.8 Compost tea extraction and use

YASMEEN SIDDIQUI, SARIAH MEON, RAZI ISMAIL, MAWARDI RAHMANI. 2009. Bio-potential of compost tea from agro-waste to suppressChoanephora cucurbitarum L. the causal pathogen of wet rot of okra.Biological Control. Volume 49, Issue 1, April 2009, Pages 38–44. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.11.008.

CATELLO PANE, GIUSEPPE CELANO, DOMENICA VILLECCO, MASSIMO ZACCARDELLI. 2012. Control of Botrytis cinerea, Alternaria alternata and Pyrenochaeta lycopersici on tomato with whey compost-tea applications.Crop Protection. Volume 38, August 2012, Pages 80–86. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.03.012.

YUVARANI NAIDU, SARIAH MEON, YASMEEN SIDDIQUI. 2013. Foliar application of microbial-enriched compost tea enhances growth, yield and quality of muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) cultivated under fertigation system.Scientia Horticulturae. Volume 159, 30 July 2013, Pages 33–40. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2013.04.024.

SOULEYMANE B. KONÉ, ANTOINE DIONNE, RUSSELL J. TWEDDELL, HANI ANTOUN, TYLER J. AVIS. 2010. Suppressive effect of non-aerated compost teas on foliar fungal pathogens of tomato.Biological Control. Volume 52, Issue 2, February 2010, Pages 167–173.Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.10.018. B 3.3 Cropping systems role – crop rotation design

RAPHAËL J. MANLAY, CHRISTIAN FELLER, M.J. SWIFT. 2007. Historical evolution of soil organic matter concepts and their relationships with the fertility and sustainability of cropping systems.Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume 119, Issues 3–4, March 2007, Pages 217–233. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.07.011.

D.W. REEVES. 1997.The role of soil organic matter in maintaining soil quality in continuous cropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 43, Issues 1–2, 1 November 1997, Pages 131–167 B 3.3.1 Soil protection B 3.3.2 Reproduction of SOM

L.W. BELL, B. SPARLING, M. TENUTA, M.H. ENTZ .2012. Soil profile carbon and nutrient stocks under long-term conventional and organic crop and alfalfa-crop rotations and re-established grassland. Agriculture, ecosystems and Environment. Volume 158, 1 September 2012, Pages 156–163. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2012.06.006

S. MARINARI, A. LAGOMARSINO, M.C. MOSCATELLI, A. DI TIZIO, E. CAMPIGLIA.2010. Soil carbon and nitrogen mineralization kinetics in organic and conventional three-year cropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research- Volume 109, Issue 2, August 2010, Pages 161–168 B 4 Nitrogen fixation

FINN P. VINTHER, ERIK S. JENSEN. 2000. Estimating legume N2 fixation in grass-clover mixtures of a grazed organic cropping system using two methods. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 78, Issue 2, April 2000, Pages 139– 147

G. CORRE-HELLOU, Y. CROZAT. 2005. N2 fixation and N supply in organic pea (Pisum sativum L.) cropping systems as affected by weeds and peaweevil (Sitona lineatus L.). European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 22, Issue 4, May 2005, Pages 449–458.

H. HAUGGAARD-NIELSEN, M. GOODING, P. AMBUS, G. CORRE-HELLOU, Y. CROZAT, C. DAHLMANN, A. DIBET, P. VON FRAGSTEIN, A. PRISTERI, M. MONTI, E.S. JENSEN.2009. Pea–barley intercropping for efficient symbiotic N2-fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Field Crops Research, Volume 113, Issue 1, 10 July 2009, Pages 64–71

WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: The Nitrogene Cycle. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 158. B 5 Mobilizing nutrients – increasing the soil-root interface

E.T. LAMMERTS VAN BUEREN, S.S. JONES, L. TAMM, K.M. MURPHY, J.R. MYERS, C. LEIFERT, M.M. MESSMER. 2011. The need to breed crop varieties suitable for organic farming, using wheat, tomato and broccoli as examples: A review NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences- Volume 58, Issues 3–4, December 2011, Pages 193–205- Improving Production Efficiency, Quality and Safety in Organic and 'Low-Input' Food Supply Chains.

EDUARDO AGUILERA, LUIS LASSALETTA, ALBERTO SANZ-COBENA, JOSETTE GARNIER, ANTONIO VALLEJO. 2013.The potential of organic fertilizers and water management to reduce N2O emissions in Mediterranean climate cropping systems. A review: Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment- Volume 164, 1 January 2013, Pages 32–52.

BAKSIENE, E., RAZUKAS, A. & NEDZINSKIENE, T.L. 2009. Effects of organic farming and crop rotation on crop productivity and nutrient amount in the soil. Agronomy Research 7 (Special issue I). 183-190.

R.J. HAYNES. 2005. Labile Organic Matter Fractions as Central Components of the Quality of Agricultural Soils: An Overview. Advances in Agronomy-Volume 85, 2005, Pages 221–268. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065- 2113(04)85005-3.

M.C. ROBSON, S.M. FOWLER, N.H. LAMPKIN, C. LEIFERT, M. LEITCH, D. ROBINSON, C.A. WATSON, A.M. LITTERICK. 2002. The Agronomic and Economic Potential of Break Crops for Ley/Arable Rotations in Temperate Organic Agriculture. Advances in Agronomy. Volume 77, 2002, Pages 369–427. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065- 2113(02)77018-1.

JORDI DOLTRA, METTE LÆGDSMAND, JØRGEN E. OLESEN. 2011. Cereal yield and quality as affected by nitrogen availability in organic and conventional arable crop rotations: A combined modeling and experimental approach. European Journal of Agronomy. Volume 34, Issue 2, February 2011, Pages 83–95. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2010.11.002.

L.W. BELL, B. SPARLING, M. TENUTA, M.H. ENTZ. 2012. Soil profile carbon and nutrient stocks under long-term conventional and organic crop and alfalfa-crop rotations and re-established grassland. Agriculture, Ecosystems & EnvironmentVolume 158, 1 September 2012, Pages 156–163

C. STOPES, S. MILLINGTON, L. WOODWARD. 1996. Dry matter and nitrogen accumulation by three leguminous green manure species and the yield of a following wheat crop in an organic production system. Agriculture, Ecosystems &

Environment, Volume 57, Issues 2–3, May 1996, Pages 189–196

JØRGEN E. OLESEN, MARGRETHE ASKEGAARD, ILSE A. RASMUSSEN. 2009. Winter cereal yields as affected by animal manure and green manure in organic arable farming. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 30, Issue 2, February 2009, Pages 119–128.

Y. ANDRIST-RANGEL, A.C. EDWARDS, S. HILLIER. 2007. Long-term K dynamics in organic and conventional mixed cropping systems as related to management and soil properties. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 122, Issue 4, December 2007, Pages 413–426.

S. MARINARI, A. LAGOMARSINO, M.C. MOSCATELLI, A. DI TIZIO, E. CAMPIGLIA. 2010. Soil carbon and nitrogen mineralization kinetics in organic and conventional three-year cropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 109, Issue 2, August 2010, Pages 161–168.

FRITZ OEHL, EMMANUEL FROSSARD, ANDREAS FLIESSBACH, DAVID DUBOIS, ASTRID OBERSON. 2004. Basal organic phosphorus mineralization in soils under different farming systems. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, Volume 36, Issue 4, April 2004, Pages 667–675.

MARIA, S., BARBRO, U., MATS, S., BJÖRN, R., KARL, D. & CARL-ANDERS, H. 2012. Tile drain losses of nitrogen and phosphorus from fields under integrated and organic crop rotations. A four-year study on a clay soil in southwest Sweden. Science of The Total Environment. Volume 434. Pages 79-89.

H. HAUGGAARD-NIELSEN, A. JOHANSEN, M.S. CARTER, P. AMBUS, E.S. JENSEN. 2012. Strip cropping of alternating perennial grass–clover and annual rye– vetch intercrops when grown within an organic farming system. Field Crops Research, Volume 136, 20 September 2012, Pages 1–11

BECKER J., P. MAKUS, S. SCHRADER, 2001. Interactions between soil micro- and mesofauna and plants in an ecofarming system. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 37 : 245−249.

NARDI S., E. SESSI, D. PIZZEGHELLO, A. STURARO, R. RELLA AND G. PARVOLI, 2002. Biological activity of soil organic matter mobilized by root exudates. Chemosphere 46 : 1075–1081.

NAKAMOTO, T. AND TSUKAMOTO, M., 2006. Abundance and activity of soil organisms in fields of maize grown with a white

clover living mulch. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 115 : 34–42.

BIEDERBECK V.O, R.P. ZENTNER AND C.A. CAMPBELL, 2005. Soil microbial populations and activities as influenced by legume green fallow in a semiarid climate. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 37 :1775–1784.

KANCHIKERIMATH M. AND D. SINGH, 2001. Soil organic matter and biological properties after 26 years of maize–wheat– cowpea cropping as affected by manure and fertilization in a Cambisol in semiarid region of India. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 86: 155–162.

BONKOWSKI M, W. CHENG, B.S. GRIFFITHS, J. ALPHEI AND STEFAN SCHEU, 2000. Microbial-faunal interactions in the rhizosphere and effects on plant growth .Eur. J. Soil Biol. 36 : 135−147.

LANDA, B. B., HERVÁS, A., BETTIOL, W., JIMÉNEZ-DÍAZ, R. M., 1997. Antagonistic Activity of Bacteria from the Chickpea Rhizosphere Against Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. ciceris. Phytoparasitica 25(4): 305-318.

CARDOSO, I. M. AND KUYPER, T. W., 2006. Mycorrhizas and tropical soil fertility. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 116 (1–2) : 72–84.

BRINKMAN, E. P., RAAIJMAKERS, C. E., BAKX-SCHOTMAN, J.M.T., HANNULA, S. E., KEMMERS, R.H., DE BOER, W. AND VAN DER PUTTEN, W.H. , 2012. Matgrass sward plant species benefit from soil organisms. Applied Soil Ecology 62 : 61– 70.

LADYGINA, N., HENRY, F., KANT, MR., KOLLER, R., REIDINGER, S., RODRIGUEZ, A., SAJ, S., SONNEMANN, I., WITT, C. AND WURST, S., 2010. Additive and interactive effects of functionally dissimilar soil organisms on a grassland plant community. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 42 (12): 2266–2275.

BARRETT, G., CAMPBELL, C.D., FITTER, AH. AND HODGE, A., 2011. The arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus hoi can capture and transfer nitrogen from organic patches to its associated host plant at low temperature. Applied Soil Ecology 48 (1) : 102–105.

BONKOWSKI, M., CHENG, W., GRIFFITHS, B.S., ALPHEI, J. AND SCHEU, S., 2000. Microbial-faunal interactions in the rhizosphere and effects on plant growth. European Journal of Soil Biology 36 (3–4) : 135–147.

B 5.1 Weathering/Unlocking soil-borne nutrients from the subsoil solid phase JOAN ROMANYÀ, AND PERE ROVIRA. 2009. Organic and inorganic P reserves in rain-fed and irrigated calcareous soils under long-term organic and conventional agriculture. Geoderma- Volume 151, Issues 3–4, 15 July 2009, Pages 378–386. WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Plant Root Interaction with Symbiotic Organisms. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 27-55. WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Plant Root Interaction with SFree-living Soil Organisms. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 27-55. B 5.1.1 Bioporing the subsoil

KAUTZ, T. AND KÖPKE, U.,2010: In situ endoscopy: New insights to root growth in biopores. Plant Biosyst. 144 (2), 440-442. © Taylor & Francis Group.

KAUTZ, T., STUMM, C., KÖSTERS, R. AND KÖPKE, U., 2010: Effects of perennial fodder crops on soil structure in agricultural headlands. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 173: 490-501. B 5.1.2 Increasing the drilosphere space S.J. Grayston, D. Vaughan, D. Jones.1997. Rhizosphere carbon flow in trees, in comparison with annual plants: the importance of root exudation and its impact on microbial activity and nutrient availability. Applied Soil Ecology- Volume 5, Issue 1, January 1997, Pages 29–56. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(96)00126-6 . B 6 Reducing nutrient losses, nitrate leaching

AUDUN, K. 2008. Relations between nitrogen leaching and food productivity in organic and conventional cropping systems in a long-term field study. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume 127, Issues 3-4. Pages 177-188.

J ERIKSEN, J.E OLESEN, M ASKEGAARD. 2002. Sulphate leaching and sulphur balances of an organic cereal crop rotation on three Danish soils. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 17, Issue 1, July 2002, Pages 1–9.

M. ASKEGAARD, J.E. OLESEN, I.A. RASMUSSEN, K. KRISTENSEN. 2011. Nitrate leaching from organic arable crop rotations is mostly determined by autumn field management. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 142, Issues 3–4, August 2011, Pages 149–160.

H.L. TUOMISTO, I.D. HODGE, P. RIORDAN, D.W. MACDONALD,. 2012. Does organic farming reduce environmental impacts? – A meta-analysis of European research. Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 112, 15 December 2012, Pages 309–320. B 7 Inhibiting weed growth

GILLES D. LEROUX, DIANE-L. BENOÎT, SOPHIE BANVILLE. 1996. Effect of crop rotations on weed control, Bidens cernua andErigeron canadensis populations, and carrot yields in organic soils. Crop Protection, Volume 15, Issue 2, March 1996, Pages 171–178

CAMILLE AMOSSÉ, MARIE-HÉLÈNE JEUFFROY, FLORIAN CELETTE, CHRISTOPHE DAVID. 2013. Relay-intercropped forage legumes help to control weeds in organic grain production. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 49, August 2013, Pages 158–167.

STEFANO CANALI, GABRIELE CAMPANELLI, CORRADO CIACCIA, FABRIZIO LETEO, ELENA TESTANI, FRANCESCO MONTEMURRO. 2013. Conservation tillage strategy based on the roller crimper technology for weed control in Mediterranean vegetable organic cropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 50, October 2013, Pages 11–18

H. UCHINO, K. IWAMA, Y. JITSUYAMA, T. YUDATE, S. NAKAMURA. 2009. Yield losses of soybean and maize by competition with interseeded cover crops and weeds in organic-based cropping systems. Field Crops Research, Volume 113, Issue 3, 4 September 2009, Pages 342–351

FEDERICA GRAZIANI, ANDREA ONOFRI, EURO PANNACCI, FRANCESCO TEI, MARCELLO GUIDUCCI. 2012. Size and composition of weed seedbank in long-term organic and conventional low-input cropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 39, May 2012, Pages 52–61

N. COLBACH, C. TSCHUDY, D. MEUNIER, S. HOUOT, B. NICOLARDOT. 2013. Weed seeds in exogenous organic matter and their contribution to weed dynamics in cropping systems. A simulation approach. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 45, February 2013, Pages 7–19. B 8 Cover crops and green fallow benefits B. HERMAWAN, A.A. BOMKE.1997. Effects of winter cover crops and successive spring tillage on soil aggregation. Soil & Tillage Research, Volume 44, Number 1, 1 December 1997 , pp. 109-120(12Available at:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(97)00043-3 B 9 Tillage and soil conservation

B.C BALL,I.P MCTAGGART, C.A WATSON. 2002. Influence of organic ley–arable management and afforestation in sandy loam to clay loam soils on fluxes of N2O and CH4 in Scotland. Agriculture, ecosystems and Environment . Volume 90, Issue 3, August 2002, Pages 305–317Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00207-9

M.A AON, , D.E SARENA, J.L BURGOS, S CORTASSA . 2001.(Micro)biological, chemical and physical properties of soils subjected to conventional or no-till management: an assessment of their quality status. . Soil and Tillage Research . Volume 60, Issues 3–4, July 2001, Pages 173–186Avaialble at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(01)00190-8

JEAN ROGER-ESTRADE, CHRISTEL ANGER, MICHEL BERTRAND, GUY RICHARD .2010. Tillage and soil ecology: Partners for sustainable agriculture. Soil and Tillage Research Volume 111, Issue 1, December 2010, Pages 33–40Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2010.08.010

D.S. POWLSON, A. BHOGAL, B.J. CHAMBERS, K. COLEMAN, A.J. MACDONALD, K.W.T. GOULDING, A.P. WHITMORE. 2012. The potential to increase soil carbon stocks through reduced tillage or organic material additions in England and Wales: A case study. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment- Volume 146, Issue 1, 1 January 2012, Pages 23–33.

ANTHONY TREWAVAS. 2004. A critical assessment of organic farming-and-food assertions with particular respect to the UK and the potential environmental benefits of no-till agriculture. Crop Protection, Volume 23, Issue 9, September 2004, Pages 757–781.

CHRISTINA VAKALI, JOHANN G. ZALLER, ULRICH KÖPKE. 2011. Reduced tillage effects on soil properties and growth of cereals and associated weeds under organic farming. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 111, Issue 2, January 2011, Pages 133–141.

JUSTICE NYAMANGARA, ESTHER NYARADZO MASVAYA, RONALD TIRIVAVI, KUDZAI NYENGERAI. 2013. Effect of hand-hoe based conservation agriculture on soil fertility and maize yield in selected smallholder areas in Zimbabwe. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 126, January 2013, Pages 19–25

ADRIANO STEPHAN NASCENTE. 2013. Carlos Alexandre Costa Crusciol The no-tillage system and cover crops—Alternatives to

increase upland rice yields. European Journal of Agronomy, Volume 45, February 2013, Pages 124–131. B 9.1 Mouldboard plough B 9.2 Reduced tillage intensity No till/occasional direct seeding KÖPKE, U. & SCHULTE, H., 2008 : Direct Seeding of Faba Beans in Organic Agriculture. In: Daniel Neuhoff, Niels Halberg, Thomas Alföldi, William Lockeretz, Andreas Thommen, Ilse A. Rasmussen, John Hermansen, Mette Vaarst, Lorna Lueck, Fabio Caporali, Henning Hogh Jensen, Paola Migliorini, Helga Willer (Editors): Cultivating the future based on science, Vol. 1 Organic Crop Production. Proceeding of the Second Scientific Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR), Modena, Italy 18-20 June 2008.

MASSUCATI L.F.P. & U. KÖPKE, 2011: Faba bean (Vicia faba L.): response to occasional direct seeding into straw residues under temperate climate conditions. In: D. Neuhoff et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd scientific conference of ISOFAR-Organic is life -knowledge for tomorrow. Namyangju/Südkorea, 28. September -01. Oktober 2011. IOL, 1, pp. 198-201.

VAKALI, C., ZALLER, J.G. AND KÖPKE, U., 2011: Reduced tillage effects on soil properties and growth of cereals and associated weeds under organic farming. Soil Till. Res. 111, 133-141. B 9.2.1 Avoiding soil compaction

A.K. BAKKEN, L.O. BRANDSÆTER, R. ELTUN,, S. HANSEN,, K. MANGERUD, R. POMMERESCHE, H. RILEY. 2009. Effect of tractor weight, depth of ploughing and wheel placement during ploughing in an organic cereal rotation on contrasting soils. Soil and Tillage Research . Volume 103, Issue 2, May 2009, Pages 433–441.

I. HÅKANSSON, V.W. MEDVEDEV.1995. Protection of soils from mechanical overloading by establishing limits for stresses caused by heavy vehicles. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 35, Issues 1–2, August 1995, Pages 85–97.

JEFF TULLBERG.2010.Tillage, traffic and sustainability—A challenge for ISTRO. Soil and Tillage Research, Volume 111, Issue 1, December 2010, Pages 26–32. B 9.2.2 Site specific use of soil tillage equipment B 10 Soil Biology

PE´REZ-PIQUERES A., V. EDEL-HERMANN, C. ALABOUVETTE AND C. STEINBERG, 2006. Response of soil microbial communities to compost amendments. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 38 : 460–470 WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Soil organisms and the soil foodweb. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 27-55 B 10.1 Intact soil life

SUZUKI C, T. KUNITO, T. AONO, C.-T. LIU AND H. OYAIZU, 2005. Microbial indices of soil fertility. Journal of Applied Microbiology 98, 1062–1074.

SHUKLA M.K, R. LAL AND M. EBINGER, 2006. Determining soil quality indicators by factor analysis. Soil & Tillage Research 87 : 194–204

ROS M, M. T. HERNANDEZ AND C. GARCI´A, 2003. Soil microbial activity after restoration of a semiarid soil by organic amendments. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 35 : 463–469.

LADD J.N., M. AMATO, H. A. VAN VEEN, 2004. Soil microbial biomass: its assay and role in turnover of organic matter C and N. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 36 : 1369–1372.

STARK, L.M. CONDRON, A. STEWART, H.J. DI AND M. O’CALLAGHAN, 2007. Influence of organic and mineral amendments on microbial soil properties and processes. Applied Soil Ecology 35 (1) : 79-93.

FRANCO WIDMER, FRANK RASCHE, MARTIN HARTMANN, ANDREAS FLIESSBACH. 2006.Community structures and substrate utilization of bacteria in soils from organic and conventional farming systems of the DOK long-term field experiment. Applied Soil Ecology . Volume 33, Issue 3, October 2006, Pages 294–307Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2005.09.007

COLEMAN, D. C., 2013. Soil Biota, Soil Systems, and Processes. Encyclopedia of Biodiversity (Second Edition): 580–589.

BARRIOS, E., 2007. Soil biota, ecosystem services and land productivity. Ecological Economics, 64 (2) : Pages 269-285.

WINDING, A., HUND-RINKE, K. AND RUTGERS, M., 2005. The use of microorganisms in ecological soil classification and assessment concepts. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 62 (2) : 230-248

RAMIA JANNOURA, CHRISTIAN BRUNS, RAINER GEORG JOERGENSEN.2013.Organic fertilizer effects on pea yield, nutrient uptake, microbial root colonization and soil microbial biomass indices in organic farming systems.European Journal of Agronomy- Volume 49, August 2013, Pages 32–41.

RICHARD P. DICK.1992. A review: long-term effects of agricultural systems on soil biochemical and microbial parameters. Biotic Diversity in Agroecosystems. 1992, Pages 25-36. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-89390- 1.50005-6

SANCHEZ-MORENO, S., SMUKLER, S., FERRIS, H., O'GEEN, A. T. & JACKSON, L. E., 2008: Nematode diversity, food web condition, and chemical and physical properties in different soil habitats of an organic farm. Biology and Fertility of Soils 44, 727-744.

EDDIE CYTRYN , LARISSA KAUTSKY, MAYA OFEK, RAPHI T. MANDELBAUM, DROR MINZ. 2011. Short-term structure and functional changes in bacterial community composition following amendment with biosolids compost. Applied Soil Ecology. Volume 48, Issue 2, June 2011, Pages 160–167Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2011.03.010.

COOKSON, W. R., MARSCHNER, P., CLARK, I. M., MILTON, N., SMIRK, M. N., MURPHY, D. V., OSMAN, M., STOCKDALE, E. A. & HIRSCH, P. R.,2006: The influence of season, agricultural management, and soil properties on gross nitrogen transformations and bacterial community structure. Australian Journal of Soil Research 44, 453-465

R. MAARIT NIEMI, MILJA VEPSÄLÄINEN, KAISA WALLENIUS, KIRSTI ERKOMAA,, SANNA UKKONEN, ANSA PALOJÄRVI, MAURITZ VESTBERG. 2008. Conventional versus organic cropping and peat amendment: Impacts on soil microbiota and their activities. European Journal of Soil Biology, Volume 44, Issue 4 , July–August 2008, Pages 419–428.

JAY SHANKAR SINGH, VIMAL CHANDRA PANDEY, D.P. SINGH. 2011. Efficient soil microorganisms: A new dimension for sustainable agriculture and environmental development. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume 140, Issues 3–4, March 2011, Pages 339–353. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.017.

NSABIMANA D., R.J. HAYNES, F.M. WALLIS, 2004. Size, activity and catabolic diversity of the soil microbial biomass as affected by land use. Applied Soil Ecology 26 : 81–92. B 10.2 Abundance of soil organisms LEWIS J. DEACONA, E. JANIE PRYCE-MILLERA, JULIET C. FRANKLAND, BRIAN W. BAINBRIDGE, PETER D. MOOREA AND CLARE

H. ROBINSON, 2006. Diversity and function of decomposer fungi from a grassland soil. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 38 : 7–20.

AMY M. TREONIS, ERIN E. AUSTIN, JEFFREY S. BUYER, JUDE E. MAUL, LORI SPICER, INGA A. ZASADA. 2010. Effects of organic amendment and tillage on soil microorganisms and microfauna. Applied Soil Ecology . Volume 46, Issue 1, September 2010, Pages 103–110Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.06.017

CHRISTOPHER NGOSONG, MAREIKE JAROSCH, JOACHIM RAUPP, ELKE NEUMANN, LILIANE RUESS. 2010.The impact of farming practice on soil microorganisms and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi: Crop type versus long-term mineral and organic fertilization. Applied Soil Ecology- Volume 46, Issue 1, September 2010, Pages 134–142 B 10.3 The multifunctional role of soil organisms

WU S.C., Y.M. LUO, K.C. CHEUNG AND M.H. WONG, 2006. Influence of bacteria on Pb and Zn speciation, mobility and bioavailability in soil: A laboratory study. Environmental Pollution 144 (3) : 765-773.

ŘEZÁČOVÁ V., H. HRŠELOVÁ, H. GRYNDLEROVÁ, I. MIKŠÍK AND M. GRYNDLER, 2006. Modifications of degradation-resistant soil organic matter by soil saprobic microfungi. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 38 (8) : 2292-2299

PARFITT R. L., G.W. YEATES, D.J. ROSS, A.D. MACKAY AND P.J. BUDDING, 2005. Relationships between soil biota, nitrogen and phosphorus availability, and pasture growth under organic and conventional management. Applied Soil Ecology 28 : 1–13.

COOKSON W.R., D.A. ABAYE, P. MARSCHNER, D.V. MURPHY, E. A. STOCKDALE AND K.W.T. GOULDING, 2005. The contribution of soil organic matter fractions to carbon and nitrogen mineralization and microbial community size and structure. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 37 : 1726–1737

GRIFFITHS R.I., M.J. BAILEY, N.P. MCNAMARA AND A.S. WHITELEY, 2006. The functions and components of the Sourhope soil microbiota. Applied Soil Ecology 33 (2) 114-126.

JONGMANS A.G., M.M. PULLEMAN, M. BALABANE, F. VAN OORT, J.C.Y. MARINISSEN, 2003. Soil structure and characteristics of organic matter in two orchards differing in earthworm activity. Applied Soil Ecology 24 : 219–232. Van Bruggen A.H.C and A.M. Semenov, 2000. In search of biological indicators for soil health and disease suppression. Applied

Soil Ecology 15 : 13-24.

DECKMYN, G., CAMPIOLI, M., MUYS, B. AND KRAIGHER, H., 2011. Simulating C cycles in forest soils: Including the active role of micro-organisms in the ANAFORE forest model. Ecological Modelling 222 (12) : 1972–1985.

AKHTAR, M., AND ABDUL M., 2000. Roles of organic soil amendments and soil organisms in the biological control of plant- parasitic nematodes: a review. Bioresource Technology 74: 35–47.

DE BOER, W AND KOWALCHUK G.A., 2001. Nitrification in acid soils: micro-organisms and mechanisms. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 33; 7–8 : 853–866

PROSSER, J.I., 2005. Nitrogen in soils.| Nitrification. Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment : 31–39.

WARD, B.B., 2008. Nitrification. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences. Encyclopedia of Ecology : 2511–2518.

BROOKES, P.C., CAYUELA, M.L., CONTIN, M., DE NOBILI, M., KEMMITT, S.J. AND MONDINI, C., 2008. The mineralisation of fresh and humified soil organic matter by the soil microbial biomass. Waste Management 28 (4) : 716–722. Cambardella, C.A., 2005. CARBON CYCLE IN SOILS. Formation and Decomposition. Encyclopedia of Soils in the Environment :170–175.

JIMÉNEZ, J.J. AND DECAËNS, T., 2004. The impact of soil organisms on soil functioning under neotropical pastures: a case study of a tropical anecic earthworm species. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 103 (2) : 329–342.

SANGINGA, N., MULONGOY, K. AND SWIFT, M.J., 1992. Contribution of soil organisms to the sustainability and productivity cropping systems in the tropics. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 41 (2) :135-152.

RUTIGLIANO, F. A., CASTALDI, S., D’ASCOLI, R., PAPA, S., CARFORA, A., MARZAIOLI, R. AND FIORETTO, A., 2009. Soil activities related to nitrogen cycle under three plant cover types in Mediterranean environment. Applied Soil Ecology 43 (1) : 40-46.

GAO, M., LI, R., DAI, S., WU, Y. AND YI, D., 2008. Diversity of Bacillus thuringiensis strains from soil in China and their pesticidal activities. Biological Control 44 (3): 380-388.

RÖMBKE, J., JÄNSCH, S. AND DIDDEN, W., 2005. The use of earthworms in ecological soil classification and assessment concepts. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 62 (2) 249-265.

BIRKHOFER, K., DIEKÖTTER, T., BOCH, S., FISCHER, M., MÜLLER, J., SOCHER, S. AND WOLTERS, V., 2011. Soil fauna feeding activity in temperate grassland soils increases with legume and grass species richness. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 43 (10) : 2200-2207.

BRUSSAARD, L., PULLEMAN, M.M., OUÉDRAOGO, E., MANDO, SIX, A. AND J., 2007. Soil fauna and soil function in the fabric of the food web. Pedobiologia 50 (6): 447-462.

PHUONG-THI NGO, ,CORNELIA RUMPEL, THU-THUY DOANC, PASCAL JOUQUET. 2012. The effect of earthworms on carbon storage and soil organic mattercomposition in tropical soil amended with compost and vermicompost. Soil Biology and Biochemistry- Volume 50, July 2012, Pages 214–220. B 10.4 Beneficial plant-microbial interactions B 10.5 Crop protection effects

CÉLINE JANVIER, FRANÇOIS VILLENEUVE, CLAUDE ALABOUVETTE, VÉRONIQUE EDEL-HERMANN, THIERRY MATEILLE, CHRISTIAN STEINBERG, 2007. Soil health through soil disease suppression: Which strategy from descriptors to indicators? Soil Biology and Biochemistry. Volume 39, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 1–23. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2006.07.001,

DEEKSHA JOSHI , K.S. HOODA, J.C. BHATT, B.L. MINA, H.S. GUPTA. 2009. Suppressive effects of composts on soil-borne and foliar diseases of French bean in the field in the western Indian Himalayas. cultures protection-Volume 28, Number 7 , July 2009, Pages 608-615. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2009.03.009 B 11 Controlling, maintaining and monitoring soil fertility LOURDES FLORES-DELGADILLO, SCOTT L. FEDICK, ELIZABETH SOLLEIRO-REBOLLEDO, SERGIO PALACIOS-MAYORGA, PILAR ORTEGA-LARROCEA, SERGEY SEDOV, ESTEBAN OSUNA-CEJA. 2011. Sustainable system of a traditional precision agriculture in a Maya homegarden: Soil quality aspects. Soil and Tillage Research. Volume 113, Issue 2, June 2011, Pages 112–120. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.03.001

B 11.1 Assessing soil quality on-site B 11.2 Laboratory soil analysis ERIC, S. G., DAN, M. S., CRAIG, G. C., ANDY, I. B., DELBERT, D. H. & ELIZABETH, A. M. Estimating Plant-Available Nitrogen Release from Manures, Composts, and Specialty Products. Journal of Environmental Quality. Volume 35 No. 6. Pages 2321-2332. D.S. POWLSON, P.C. PROOKES, B.T. CHRISTENSEN. 1987. Measurement of soil microbial biomass provides an early indication of changes in total soil organic matter due to straw incorporation. Soil Biology and Biochemistry.Volume 19, Issue 2, 1987, Pages 159–164. B 11.2.1 Physical and chemical parameters KASIA DEBOSZ, SØREN O PETERSEN, LIV K KURE, PER AMBUS . 2002.Evaluating effects of sewage sludge and household compost on soil physical, chemical and microbiological properties. Applied Soil Ecology. Volume 19, Issue 3, March 2002, Pages 237–248 Avaialble at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(01)00191-3 B 11.2.2 Biological activity ROBERTO GARCÍA-RUIZ, VICTORIA OCHOA,M. BELÉN HINOJOSA, JOSE ANTONIO CARREIRAA .2008.Suitability of enzyme activities for the monitoring of soil quality improvement in organic agricultural systems. Soil Biology and Biochemistry . Volume 40, Issue 9, September 2008, Pages 2137–2145Available at:; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2008.03.023 HILL G.T., N.A. MITKOWSKI, L. ALDRICH-WOLFE, L.R. EMELE, D.D. JURKONIE, A. FICKE, S. MALDONADO-RAMIREZ, S.T. LYNCH AND E.B. NELSON, 2000 Methods for assessing the composition and diversity of soil microbial communities. Applied Soil Ecology 15 : 25–36. B 11.2.3 Xenobiotics and heavy metals CHRISTOPHE DAVID, MARIE-HÉLÈNE JEUFFROY, SYLVIE RECOUS, FRUCK DORSAINVIL .2004.Adaptation and assessment of the Azodyn model for managing the nitrogen fertilization of organic winter wheat. European Journal of Agronomy. Volume 21, Issue 2, August 2004, Pages 249–266Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2003.09.003

J.E. OLESEN, K. SCHELDE, A. WEISKE, M.R. WEISBJERG, W.A.H. ASMAN, J. DJURHUUS . 2006.Modelling greenhouse gas

emissions from European conventional and organic dairy farms. Agriculture, ecosystems and Environment. Volume 112, Issues 2–3, February 2006, Pages 207–220Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.08.022.

A TIKTAK, D.S DE NIE, J.D PIÑEROS GARCET, A JONES, M VANCLOOSTER. 2004. Assessment of the pesticide leaching risk at the Pan-European level. The EuroPEARL approach. Journal of Hydrology. Volume 289, Issues 1–4, 20 April 2004, Pages 222–238. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2003.11.030. B 12 Off-farm purchased nutrients – manures and fertilizers B 12.1 Basics and principles of use B 12.2 Optimized application

BAHMAN, A. L. & SAYED, J. H. 2012. Comparison of integrated chemical and organic fertilizer management on rice growth and yield under system of rice intensification (SRI). International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Protection. Vol., 3 (S). Pages 726-731.

ANDREWS, N., SULLIVAN, D.M., JULIAN, J.W. & POOL, K.E. 2011. Development and use of the osu organic fertilizer and cover crop calculator. Western Nutrient Management Conference. Vol. 9. Reno, NV. B 12.3 Organic nitrogen fertilizers

DELATE, K., CAMBARDELLA, C. & MCKERN, A. 2008. Effects of Organic Fertilization and Cover Crops on an Organic Pepper System. HorTechnology, April-June. Vol. 18 (2).

EDUARDO, A., LUIS, L., ALBERTO, S.C., JOSETTE, G. & ANTONIO, V. 2013. The potential of organic fertilizers and water management to reduce N2O emissions in Mediterranean climate cropping systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume 164, Issues 1. Pages 32-52.

WALTER, S., KURT, M. & GÜNTER, L. 2008. Effects of biogas digestion of clover/grass-leys, cover crops and crop residues on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in organic stockless farming systems. European Journal of Agronomy. Volume 29, Issues 2-3. Pages 125-134.

ANDREW, W. K., TIMOTHY, A. D., WILLIAM, R. H. & CHRIS, V. K. 2002. Combining fertilizer and organic inputs to synchronize N supply in alternative cropping systems in California. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. Volume

91, Issues 1-3. Pages 233-243.

KRISTIAN, T. K., DORTE, B. D. & HANNE, L. K. 2012. Crop yield, root growth, and nutrient dynamics in a conventional and three organic cropping systems with different levels of external inputs and N re-cycling through fertility building crops. European Journal of Agronomy. Volume 37, Issues 1. Pages 66-82.

SOREN, O. P., SOREN, C. & BENT, T. C. 2012. Sources of Ntrogen for winter weat in Organic cropping systems. Soil science society og America Journal. J. 77. Pages 155-165.

FLORIAN AMLINGER, BETTINA GÖTZ, PETER DREHER, JUTTA GESZTI, CHRISTOF WEISSTEINER. 2003. Nitrogen in biowaste and yard waste compost: dynamics of mobilisation and availability—a review. European Journal of Soil Biology. Volume 39, Issue 3, July–September 2003, Pages 107–116. Availbale at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1164-5563(03)00026-8.

DILEK KILLI, YASEMIN KAVDIR. 2013. Effects of olive solid waste and olive solid waste compost application on soil properties and growth of Solanum lycopersicum. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. Volume 82, August 2013, Pages 157–165. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.03.004 B 12.4 Mineral non-N-fertilizers

ELLIOTT, A. L., DAVIS, J. G., WASKOM, R. M., SELF, J. R. & CHRISTENSEN, D. K. 2007. Phosphorus Fertilizers for Organic Farming Systems. Colorado State University. Fact sheet No. 0.569.

RAMIA, J., CHRISTIAN, B. & RAINER, G.J. 2013. Organic fertilizer effects on pea yield, nutrient uptake, microbial root colonization and soil microbial biomass indices in organic farming systems. European Journal of Agronomy. Volume 49. Pages 32-41.

SUKHDEV, S. M., TARLOK, S. S. & KABAL, S. G. 2013. Chapter 5. Potential of Management Practices and Amendments for Preventing Nutrient Deficiencies in Field Crops under Organic Cropping Systems. Agricultural Sustainability – Progress and Prospects in Crop Research. ACADEMIC PRESS. Pages 77-101.

B 12.5 Organic fertilizers for soil conditioning C Central displayes C1 Soil as a life natural body and living entity WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: The soil foodweb. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 94-105. C 2 Soil fertility building GOMEZ E, L. FERRERAS AND S. TORESANI, 2006. Soil bacterial functional diversity as influenced by organic amendment application. Bioresource Technology 97 : 1484–1489. WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Formation of Soil Humus. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management,149. C 3 Cropping systems – crop rotations C 5 Middle of the hall S.A. AYANLAJA, J.O. SANWO. 1991. Management of soil organic matter in the farming systems of the low land humid tropics of West Africa: a review. Soil Technology. Volume 4, Issue 3, September 1991, Pages 265–279. Available at : http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0933-3630(91)90006-9. C 4 Soil conservation S SIEGRIST, D SCHAUB, L PFIFFNER, P MÄDER. 1998. Does organic agriculture reduce soil erodibility? The results of a long- term field study on loess in Switzerland. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 69, Issue 3, 6 July 1998, Pages 253–264. WAHLEN, J.K. AND L. SAMPEDRO, 2010: Ecosystem Management and Soil Biota. In: Wahlen, J.K. and L. Sampedro (eds), Soil Ecology and Management, 227-256. C 5.1 Living stands/plots C 5.2 ‘The World of Compost’ C 5.3 The Soil Counter

Goesan County Chungqbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 2

Clean water

Authors: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke

www.isofar.org

Content

A Mission: ...... 52 B Contents: ...... 54 B 1 Land use/ cropping system’s effects and impacts – OA in contrast to the mainstream ...... 54 B 2 Case studies/examples: ...... 55

B 2.1 Tropical climate – Irrigation: ...... 55

B 2.1.1 Sustainability over centuries: ...... 55 B 2.1.2 Sekem, Egypt: ...... 55 B 2.2 Temperate climate: ...... 55 B 2.3 Case studies: ...... 56 C Central display: ...... 58 C 1 6‐field crop rotation temperate climate ...... 58 C 2 Multifunctional rice‐duck‐fish‐ ‐vegetable farming (tropical) ...... 59 D Mode of concomitant material exhibited: ...... 60 D 1 Clear signals: ...... 60 D 2 Water in it’s different phases: ...... 60 D 2.1 Liquid phase: ...... 60 D 2.2 Dew: ...... 60 D 2.3 Gaseous phase: ...... 60 D 2.4 Solid phase: ...... 60 D 3 Sensual experiences: ...... 61 D 3.1 Organoleptic and haptic impressions of different water phases ...... 61 D 3.2 Water treatments: ...... 61

D 3.3 Water as a carrier of information and sound: ...... 61

Hall N°: 2

Title: Clean water

A Mission:

giving extensive and detailed insight to…

 The role of water in Organic Agriculture and as the most important esculent (most important food);

 The organic farmer as a provider / maintainer of high ground and surface water quality – base for best drinking water quality,

 Tools and strategies that are used in OA in order to provide and safeguard high water quality.

The primary purpose of consumers in his choices for esculents and foods is for improved human health and well‐being. Warranting food quality (i.e. product quality) including clean waters following the organic product assurance systems (process quality) is the only means to ensure consumer’s expectations and satisfaction including process quality (i.e. positive environmental impacts). These systems are not only seasoned through experiences, but anchored on innovation and science.

The hall shall display:

‐ water quality as the product of through organic production and processing systems gained through science and technology.

‐ information, strategies and innovation on ensuring high water quality of untreated raw waters, i.e. ground and surface waters as the basis for producing high drinking water quality.

It shall also provide insights and examples for techniques used in OA to realize this target.

Overall view: Water the essential media for….all life! Clean water: a function of omitting pesticides and herbicides Clean water: a function of efficient nutrient management The role of water in different cultures and religions, their view on Organic Agriculture

Background information on:

 sustainable water use

 the global circulation of water: a quantification of the chronological water flows and agriculture as user and provider of waters.

Each main aspect shall be displayed in large illuminated information panels as part of the background landscape. It shall contain photos of commodities and titles of sub‐themes (e.g. ‘Our daily healthy water ‐ produced in a healthy environment’) and shall contain the salient features of organic healthy water. Below the panels are landscapes formed by diversified crop rotations (grass‐clover, potato, wheat, grain legume, spring cereals, winter rye with grass‐clover underseeded/rice – vegetable production) where visitors can pass through, feel and smell and are informed via short headline texts. Along with them are illuminated smaller

posters (panel or box types) with imprints of key facts, scientific abstracts or evidences.

Barcode info‐stations explain details via downloads of scientific material.

B Contents:

Hall entrance design: waterfalls, wells and lakes Delivered message: Water – t h e essential element must not be polluted. Organic Agriculture has a role.

B 1 Land use/ cropping system’s effects and impacts – OA in contrast to the mainstream

(comparisons) e.g. * reduction of trophic level of the soil * no use of pesticides

General: Advantages of Organic Agriculture and adapted land use strategies in different water catchment areas; the advantage of environmentally sound pesticide free production: About a Billion people worldwide suffer from polluted waters. Pesticide free waters provided by Organic Agriculture. Background water pollution by pesticides worldwide. The avoidable impact. Data provided at a wall.

B 2 Case studies/examples:

B 2.1 Tropical climate – Irrigation:

Saving water – efficient water use

B 2.1.1 Sustainability over centuries: irrigated rice, background story placed at a wall bigger‐sized: terraces of Banaue Philippines,

B 2.1.2 Sekem, Egypt:

Optimizing the techniques of the anchestors ‐ turning the desert to fertile soils ‐ furrow irrigation in Nil‐Delta. (site)

B 2.2 Temperate climate:

B 2.2.1 Crop rotations in watercatchment areas

Tools to safeguard high water quality: The three main strategies to avoid nutrient losses and water pollution by nutrients

B 2.2.1.1 Liquid phase:

Redirecting vertical downward nutrient flow:

The role of crops acting as sinks for nutrient uptake/ curbing nitrate/ preventing nutrients from leaching

Indicators: nitrate leaching Conservation quality target: protection of groundwater from impacts of agricultural land use/measures

Indicators: groundwater recharge Conservation quality target: high groundwater recharge rates

Information on the role of the crop for water quality displayed on‐ site (audio, barcode info) The special role of catch crops and second cash crops.

B 2.2.1.2 Solid phase:

Retarding lateral nutrient flow: erosion control measures; Strategies to avoid / reduce water‐ and wind erosion

Indicators: wind erosion Conservation quality target: protection of soil from wind erosion

Indicators: water erosion Conservation quality target: protection of soil from water erosion

B 2.2.1.3 Gaseous phase:

fixing/absorbing nutrients preventing gaseous losses, e.g. NH3; reducing gaseous emissions NH3; limited nitrogen turn‐over, fixing

NH4; the negative impact of NH3‐ emissions on the so called ‘Waldsterben’

Indicators: NH3‐ emissions

Conservation quality target: protection of air from NH3‐ emissions

B 2.3 Case studies:

B 2.3 Focus Box All backed up by impressive landscape/subtheme background photos, visitors walk along multiple crop rotations; land use stems oriented on water use embedded in related landscapes; Demonstrating the ‘selflessness of water’,

B 2.3.1 Waterworks prefer organic.

Panels: Examples, interviews citations of waterwork leaders worldwide displayed at a wall with a water fall. Farmers as providers of high water quality. Case studies of successful strategies to control weeds without herbicide impacts. Partnerships with waterworks Land use options: arable cropping and grassland competing with reforestration in water catchment areas.

B 2.3.2 Adapted/ optimized cropping/ crop rotations special strategies for special crops (potato, grain legumes, perennial fodder crops (grass‐clover)

B 2.3.3 Examples of sustainable water use:

Saving water, reducing inefficient evaporation, efficient irrigation systems etc.; adapted crop establishment (spacing, soil‐ cover).

B 2.3.4 Smart farming/precision farming

As a tool for efficient nutrient management

B 2.3.5 Adapted/opportunistic tillage:

Soil conservation, mulching and erosion control (reduced tillage / direct seeding)

B 2.3.6 Organic Aquaculture and fisheries:

What is different from the mainstream?

B 2.3.7 Glacier water treatment plant:

Why organic?

B 2.4.9 Reed filter plant:

Function and principle and use, hygienizational effects

B 2.4.10 Spa towns/ health resorts with mineral springs prefer organic.

Examples, interviews citations of spa town managers displayed with panels/ at a wall with a water fall.

C Central display:

At least two diversified crop rotations (temperate climate, tropical); if possible same crop rotations are displayed under different hall themes linking the halls and giving a holistic view on crop rotations roles)

The starting point: reflecting the organizational principle – self‐ regulation of nitrogen‐flow –nitrogen: a plant nutrient with the highest negative environmental impact.

C 1 6‐field crop rotation temperate climate

Crop rotation: Wiesengut, (will be repeated, to be displayed in other halls too) (each description related to hall topic only)

C 1.1 Grass‐clover: Leaching: ploughing shifted from autumn to early spring, wintercatch crop (brassicas), 2nd cash crops (brassica root/leave

crops). During growth, BNF realized with lowest nitrate in soil water. Strategies to avoid nitrate leaching.

C 1.2 Potatoes: Critical stage of nitrate leaching: after harvest/tillage. Catch crop to be grown, followed by spring cereals, brassicas , main crop follows (e.g.oilseed rape) Undersown crops in potatoes: CS, GH literature: sunflower, buckwheat, brassicas

C 1.3 Wheat: w.wheat/s.wheat. sink capacity for surplus soil‐nitrate limited. Thus, export of N via second cash crop after potatoes / same year, e.g. turnips

C 1.4 Fababean: Nitrate leachig curbed via undersown brassicas; brassicas as winter catch crops over winter, Turnips as second cash crops

C 1.5 Spring cereals: s.wheat, oats: acting as nutrient sinks, preventing leaching during season, positive pre crop effects

C 1.6 Winterrye /grass‐clover undersown prevents leaching as a sink for nutrients for 10 months (+8 further months of undersown grass clover phase i.e. soil rest of 18 months): soil cover over winter: erosion‐control, soil rest of 18 months, permanent nutrient sink given, lowest amount of nitrate measured beneath legume mixture‐stands

C 2 Multifunctional rice‐duck‐fish‐ ‐vegetable farming (tropical)

D Mode of concomitant material exhibited:

D 1 Clear signals:

Impressive waterfalls, wells and lakes at entrances

D 2 Water in it’s different phases:

D 2.1 Liquid phase:

Surface waters susceptibilities, linked to biodiversity (hall 5)

D 2.2 Dew:

Its use in pharmacy and cosmetics (e.g. Tautropfen cosmetics, Wala, Weleda).

An African Story behind: ICON Nov 2012 ‐ collecting the dew in the morning, filled in a bladder of a giraffe, digging into the soil, drinking it in the evening (similarities to Biodynamic Agriculture measures)

D 2.3 Gaseous phase:

E.g. fog (cattle in the morning fog photo background); steam: microclimate – via transpiration – No herbicidal hormons used (no irritation smell/odour in air); agriculture side by side with urban/industrial areas – the case of Korea.

D 2.4 Solid phase:

Frost prevention strategy in orchards; fruit production in temperate climate

D 3 Sensual experiences:

D 3.1 Organoleptic and haptic impressions of different water phases

Ice and snow: Their agricultural effects and qualities (nature/organic and other mineral waters);

Influencing water quality: flow forms, effects of stirring, water as a medium for information / as an agent of quality;

Links to other theme halls displayed.

D 3.2 Water treatments:

Waterwhirl enhances water quality: learning from nature.: flow forms/ stirring, link to www.stroemungsforschungsinstitut.de

D 3.3 Water as a carrier of information and sound: b.d. agriculture’s preparation ‐ a kind of homeopathy; Bio‐dynamic agriculture’s preparations

D 3.3.1 ‘Water Bar’:

Mineral waters: Can they be organic? Taste waters: organoleptic experience of water qualities

There will be free taste of different waters. Organoleptic experience of water qualities. There will be free taste of different waters. Hands‐on experiences will also be done.

General: a. Information display/showcase b. Entertaining and educational walk‐ through experiences c. Product display, demonstrations, tasting and sale (?) d. Interactions with scientist, producers and processors e. Suggested commodities: Organic Mineral waters, drinking water,

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

Hall 2 Water

A Mission DALGAARD, T., HALBERG, N., KRISTENSEN, S., 1998: Can organic farming help to reduce N-losses? Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 52, 227- 287. B Contents B 1 Land use/cropping system’s effects and impacts – OA in contrast to mainstream ELTUN, R., 1995: Comparisons of nitrogen leaching in ecological and conventional cropping systems. Biol. Agric. Hort. 11, S. 103-114. LODE, O. (Ed), 1994: Contamination of pesticides from agricultural and industrial areas to soil and water. Norwegian J. Agric. Sci. (Suppl. 13), 212 pp. LOES, A-K., ODEGAARD, A.F., 1997: Changes in the nutrient content of agricultural soil on conversion to organic farming in relation to farm-level nutrient balances and soil contents of clay and organic matter. Acta Agric. Scand., B, Soil Plant Sci. 47, 201-214. GICHERU, P., 2004. Effects of soil management practices and tillage systems on surface soil water conservation and crust formation on a sandy loam in semi‐arid Kenya. Soil and Tillage Research, 75(2), pp.173–184. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167198703001612 POPPENBORG, P. & KOELLNER, T., 2013: Do attitudes toward ecosystem services determine agricultural land use practices? An analysis of farmers' decision-making in a South Korean watershed. Land Use Policy 31, 422-429. VOLK, M., LIERSCH, S. & SCHMIDT, G., 2009: Towards the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive? Lessons learned from water quality simulations in an agricultural watershed. Land Use Policy 26, 580-588. WETTERICH, F., AND G. HAAS 2000: Impact on ground and surface water quality of intensive, extensive and organic grassland farms in southern Germany. S23. B 2 Case studies/examples B 2.1 Tropical climate - Irrigation B 2.1.1 Sustainability over centuries B 2.1.2 Sekem, Egypt B 2.2 Temperate climate B 2.2.1 Crop rotation in watercatchment areas B 2.2.1.1. Liquid phase ELTUN, R., 1995: Comparisons of nitrogen leaching in ecological and conventional cropping systems. Biol. Agric. Hort. 11, S. 103-114.

ELTUN, R., FUGLEBERG, O., NORDHEIM, O., 1996: The Apelsvoll cropping system experiment. VII. Runoff losses of soil particles, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, calcium and sulphur. Norwegian J. Agric. Sci. 10, 371-384. JONSON, P.A., SHEPERD, M.A., SMITH, P.N., 1997: The effects of crop husbandry and nitrogen fertilizer on nitrate leaching from a shallow limestone soil growing a five course combinable crop rotation . Soil Use and Management 13 (1997), 17-23. JUSTUS, M., KÖPKE, U., 1995: Strategies to reduce nitrogen losses via leaching and to increase precrop effects when growing faba beans. 1st Intern. Workshop on Nitrate Leaching, 11.-15.10.1993, Copenhagen, Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture (BAH), Vol. 11/1995, 145-155. KÖPKE, U., 1995: Nutrient management in Organic Farming Systems: The case of Nitrogen. 1st Intern. Workshop on Nitrate Leaching, 11.- 15.10.1993, Copenhagen, Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture (BAH), Vol 11/1995, S. 15-29.

POUDEL, D.D., Horwath, W.R., LANINI, W.T., TEMPLE, S.R., VAN BRUGGEN, A:H.C., 2002: Comparison of soil N availability and leaching potential, crop yields and weeds in organic, low-input and conventional farming systems in northern California. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 90 (2002), 125-137. HAAS, G., BERG, M., KÖPKE, U., 2002: Nitrate leaching: comparing conventional, integrated and organic agricultural production systems. In: Agricultural Effects on Ground and Surface Waters: Research at the Edge of Science and Society. Steenvoorden, J., et al. (eds), International Association of Hydrological Sciences 2002 (pub), 131-136. B 2.2.1.2 Solid phase B 2.2.1.3 Gaseous phase B 2.3 Case Studies B 2.3.1 Waterworks prefer organic B 2.3.2 Adapted/ optimized cropping/ crop rotations HUANG, M. ET AL., 2003. Water use efficiency and sustainability of different long‐term crop rotation systems in the Loess Plateau of China. Soil and Tillage Research, 72(1), pp.95–104. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167198703000655 B 2.3.3 Examples of sustainable water use B 2.3.4 Smart farming/precision farming B 2.3.5 Adapted/opportunistic tillage ZHANG, G. ET AL., 2007. Relationship between soil structure and runoff/soil loss after 24 years of conservation tillage. Soil and Tillage Research, 92(1‐2), pp.122–128. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167198706000304 TAN, C. ET AL., 2002. Effect of tillage and water table control on evapotranspiration, surface runoff, tile drainage and soil water content under maize on a clay loam soil. Agricultural Water Management, 54(3), pp.173–188. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378377401001780 SU, Z. ET AL., 2007. Effects of conservation tillage practices on winter wheat water‐use efficiency and crop yield on the Loess Plateau, China. Agricultural Water Management, 87(3), pp.307–314. Available at:

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378377406002216 B 2.3.6 Organic Aquaculture and fisheries B 2.3.7 Glacier water treatment plant B 2.4.9 Reed filter plant B 2.4.10 Spa towns/ health resorts with mineral springs prefer organic C Central display C 1 6-field crop rotation temperate climate C 1.1 Grass-clover KÖPKE, U., 1996: Legume nitrogen in crop rotation: Reducing losses – increasing precrop effects. In: Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in crop rotations with mature fertilization, J. Raupp (ed). Proceedings of the 3rd meeting of FERSY in Copenhagen, 4.-5.3.1996, 32-51. C 1.2 Potatoes HAAS, G., KÖPKE, U., 2000: Underseeds in potatoes to minimize environmental burdens. In:Proceedings 13 th International IFOAM Scientific Conference, Alföldi, T., Lockeretz, W., Niggli, U., (eds), 28- 31.8. 2000, Convention Center Basel, Switzerland, 391. KOTNIK, T., KÖPKE, U., 2000: Efficient use of turnip (Brassica rapa L. var. rapa) for nitrogen management and enhancement of farm income. In: Proceedings 13 th International IFOAM Scientific Conference; Alföldi, T., Lockeretz, W., Niggli, U., (eds), 28.-31.8.2000, Convention Center Basel, Switzerland, 81. C 1.3 Wheat C 1.4 Fababean SCHRÖDER, D., KÖPKE, U., 2012: Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) intercropped with oil crops – a strategy to enhance rooting density and to optimize nitrogen use and grain production? Field Crops Research 135 (2012), 74-81. KIEßLING, D., KÖPKE, U., 2008: Intercropping of oilseeds and faba beans In: Cultivating the future based on science, Vol.1, Organic Crop Production, Neuhoff, D., et al. (eds). Proceedings of the 2nd Scientific Conference of the Second Scientific Conference of ISOFAR, 18.- 20.6.2008, Modena, Italy. KÖPKE, U., NEMECEK, T., 2010: Ecological services of faba bean. Field Crops Research 115 (3), 217-233. BUGG, R.L., ELLIS, R.T., CARLSON, R.W., 1989: Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera) using extrafloral nectar of faba bean (Vicia Faba L. Fabaceae) in Massachusetts. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 6, 107-114. C 1.5 Spring cereals C 1.6 Winterrye/ grass clover undersown C 2 Multifunctional rice-duck-fish-vegetable farming (tropical)

D Mode of concomitant material exhibited D 1 Clear signals D 2 Water in it´s different phase D 2.1 Liquid phase KÖPKE, U., 1995: Nutrient management in Organic Farming Systems: The case of Nitrogen. 1st Intern. Workshop on Nitrate Leaching, 11.- 15.10.1993, Copenhagen, Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture (BAH), Vol 11/1995, S. 15-29. DJURHUUS, J., OLSEN, P., 1997: Nitrate leaching after cut grass/clover leys as affected by time of ploughing. Soil Use and Management 13 1997), 61-67. KORSAETH, A. & ELTUN, R., 2000: Nitrogen mass balances in conventional, integrated and ecological cropping systems and the relationship between balance calculations and nitrogen runoff in an 8‐year field experiment in Norway. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 79(2‐3), pp.199–214. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880900001298 D 2.2 Dew D 2.3 Gaseous phase LAL, R., 1997. Residue management , conservation tillage and soil restoration for mitigating greenhouse effect by CO , ‐enrichment. Soil and Tillage Research, 43, pp.81–107. Available at: http://biodqc.org/files/Lal.pdf D 2.4 Solid phase D 3 Sensual experience D 3.1 Organoleptic and haptica impressions of different phases D 3.2 Water treatements D 3.3 Water as carrier of information and sound D 3.3.1 Water Bar EISELE, J.-A. & KÖPKE, U., 1997: Choice of cultivars in Organic Farming: New criteria for winter wheat ideotypes. Vol. I: Light conditions in stands of winter wheat affected by morphological features of different varieties. Pflanzenbauwissenschaften 1, 19-25. EISELE, J.-A. & KÖPKE, U., 1997: Choice of cultivars in Organic Farming: New criteria for winter wheat ideotypes. Vol II: Weed competitiveness of morphologically different cultivars. Pflanzenbauwissenschaften 1 (2), Verlag Eugen Ulmer GmbH & Co., Stuttgart, 84-89. HAAS, G., BERG, M. &. KÖPKE, U, 1998: Grundwasserschonende Landnutzung: Vergleich der Ackernutzung Organischer, Integrierter und Konventioneller Anbau – Vergleich der Landnutzungssysteme Ackerbau, Grünland und Forst (Aufforstung). Abschlußbericht DBU- Projekt. Schriftenreihe Institut für Organischen Landbau, Bd. 10, Berlin: Verlag Dr. Köster. 164 S. BERG, M., HAAS, G. &KÖPKE, U., 1999: Konventioneller, Integrierter oder Organischer Landbau: Fallbeispiel Wasserschutzgebiet am Niederrhein. In: Bundesanstalt für alpenländische Landwirtschaft Gumpenstein (Hrsg.): Bericht über die 8. Lysimetertagung – Stoffflüsse und ihre regionale Bedeutung für die Landwirtschaft.13./14.04.99, Irdning, Österreich, 145-147.

HAAS, G. & KÖPKE, U., 2000: Underseeds in potatoes to minimize environmental burdens. In: ALFÖLDI, T., LOCKERETZ, W. & NIGGLI, U. (eds): Proceedings 13th International IFOAM Scientific Conference, 28 to 31 August 2000, Convention Center Basel, Switzerland, 391. JUROSZEK, P., DREWS, S., NEUHOFF,D. & KÖPKE, U., 2002: Effects of season on the efficiency of photocontrol of weeds. In: Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz. Sonderheft XVIII, ISSN 0938-9938. Verlag Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart, 639-646. ZALLER, J. G., 2004: Ecology and non-chemical control of Rumex crispus & R. obtusifolius (Polygonacae): A review. Weed Res. 44, 414-432. HOAD, S., OVE BERTHOLDSSON, N., NEUHOFF, D. & U. KÖPKE, 2012: Approaches for improved weed suppression in organically grown cereals. In : Organic Crop Breeding: Edited by E. Lammers vam Bueren & J. R. Myer, Wiley-Blackwell 2012, 61-76. DREWS, S., NEUHOFF, D. & KÖPKE, U., 2009: Weed suppression ability of three winter wheat varieties of different row spacing under organic farming conditions. Weed Res. 49, 526-533 LUKASHYK, P. BERG, M. & KÖPKE, U., 2008: Strategies to control Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) under organic farming conditions. Renew. Agr. Food Syst. 23(1), 13-18.

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 3 & 4

Clean air ‐ mitigation of climate change

Authors: Prof. Dr. Gerold Rahmann and Dr. Daniel Neuhoff

www.isofar.org

Content

A Mission: ...... 72 B Contents ...... 73 B 1. Glossary and key statistics on climate change ...... 74 B 1.1 Definition of key terms ...... 74 B 1.2: Statistics on main pollutants of the atmosphere: ...... 82 B 2. Climate friendly food production on farm ...... 83 B 2.1. Productive organic on‐farm food production through intelligent and integrative production methods: ...... 83 B 2.2. Climate friendly housing material and farm technology: ...... 84 B 2.3. Energy use and renewable energy on farms ...... 84 B 3. Towards climate friendly food processing and trading .... 84 B 4. Climate friendly consumption ...... 85 B 4.1. Example Apples: ...... 85

B 4.2. Climate friendly food purchasing systems: ...... 85 B 4.3. Climate friendly lifestyles: ...... 85 B 4.4. Reduction of losses ...... 86 B 5 Air pollution beyond GHG ...... 86 B 5.1 Ammonia ...... 86 B 5.2 Pesticides in the air ...... 87 C Central display ...... 88 C1. The world of climate friendly organic food production ..... 89 C1.1. Europe ...... 89 C1.2. America ...... 89 C1.3. Asia ...... 89 C1.4. Oceania ...... 89 C1.5. Africa ...... 89

C2. Energy efficiency of organic farms and households with special focus on renewable energy ...... 90 C3. Climate friendly food preparation ...... 90 C4. Reducing ammonia and pesticide emissions from agriculture ...... 90 D. Mode of concomitant material exhibited ...... 91 IMPRINT ...... 92 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 92

Hall N°: 3 & 4

Title: Clean air ‐ mitigation of climate change

A Mission:

giving extensive insight to…

 Pollution of the atmosphere by agriculture  The key environmental problem: greenhouse effect  Key statistics on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and climate change  Astonishing facts on climate change  Organic Agriculture and GHG emissions  Reduction of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions by improved management practices  Consumption patterns and consumer behavior  Air pollution beyond GHG emissions

Agricultural activities have negative impacts on the atmosphere both on a global and a local scale. One of the greatest challenges to humanity is the climate change. Organic Farming is considered to have the potential as a climate friendly way of food production and consumption chain (“farm to fork”). Efficient utilisation of local resources and regional production and consumption are elements of this approach. Carbon sequestration by the soil via implementation of positive carbon balances are a key factor of any good organic practice. Nevertheless, critics argue, that yields are much lower compared to conventional production, often resulting in an adjustment of product related balances. The system boundaries are the main challenge for appropriate assessments and comparisons. Most life cycle assessments (LCAs) for agriculture nowadays include data on greenhouse gas emissions. Research studies have shown that organic farming is competitive with

conventional production even when comparisons are referred to

CO2eq per product unit. The key factor in the food and agriculture chain for reducing GHG emission however is the human consumption pattern. Low consumption of meat and dairy products and locally produced food generally provoke lower emissions.

In addition to GHG emissions agricultural activities strongly affect local and regional air quality. By far the most relevant non GHG emitted by agriculture is ammonia resulting from animal husbandry. Air pollution by pesticides may cause serious health problems to rural people at least off odours.

The hall shall display:

‐ Contribution of agriculture to greenhouse gas emissions ‐ Crop management to mitigate climate change ‐ Renewable energy in the food chain

‐ Sustainable consumer patterns including CO2‐foot print calculators ‐ Air pollution by ammonia and pesticides

Features of OF on climate mitigation will be shown through posters with research results, models of renewable energy techniques in production and processing, exhibits, films and videos and computer terminals for carbon footprint calculation for consumers. The system immanent ecological advantages of OF will be demonstrated in the context of air pollution (ammonia).

B Contents

The message is “organic production can contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions and mitigate climate change. Good organic farming, processing, trading and consumption incl. renewable energy as well as high energy efficiency are core elements.” The

ultimate goal is to have a CO2eq neutral food production and consumption.

‘We will not overcome world poverty unless we manage climate change successfully. I've spent my life as a development economist, and it's crystal clear that we succeed or fail on winning the battle against world poverty and managing climate change together. If we fail on one, we fail on the other’. Professor Nicolas Stern, British Economist at LSE

B 1. Glossary and key statistics on climate change

B 1.1 Definition of key terms

including climate change, greenhouse gases, CO2‐equivalents, processes such as denitrification, methanogenesis,

Glossary (source: IPCC 2012, Editor: A.P.M. Baede (Netherlands)

Aerosols A collection of airborne solid or liquid particles, with a typical size between 0.01 and 10 μm that reside in the atmosphere for at least several hours. Aerosols may be of either natural or anthropogenic origin. Aerosols may influence climate in several ways: directly through scattering and absorbing radiation, and indirectly by acting as cloud condensation nuclei or modifying the optical properties and lifetime of clouds (see Indirect aerosol effect).

Afforestation Planting of new forests on lands that historically have not contained forests. For a discussion of the term forest and related terms such as afforestation, reforestation and deforestation, see the IPCC Special Report on Land Use, Land‐Use Change and Forestry (IPCC, 2000). See also the report on Definitions and Methodological Options to Inventory Emissions from Direct Human‐induced Degradation of Forests and Devegetation of Other Vegetation Types (IPCC, 2003).

Atmosphere The gaseous envelope surrounding the Earth. The dry atmosphere consists almost entirely of nitrogen (78.1% volume mixing ratio) and oxygen (20.9% volume mixing ratio), together with a number of trace gases, such as argon (0.93% volume mixing ratio), helium and radiatively active greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide (0.035% volume mixing ratio) and ozone. In addition, the atmosphere contains the greenhouse gas water vapour, whose amounts are highly variable but typically around 1% volume mixing ratio. The atmosphere also contains clouds and aerosols.

Atmospheric boundary layer The atmospheric layer adjacent to the Earth’s surface that is affected by friction against that boundary

Biosphere (terrestrial and marine) The part of the Earth system comprising all ecosystems and living organisms, in the atmosphere, on land (terrestrial biosphere) or in the oceans (marine biosphere), including derived dead organic matter, such as litter, soil organic matter and oceanic detritus.

Carbon cycle The term used to describe the flow of carbon (in various forms, e.g., as carbon dioxide) through the atmosphere, ocean, terrestrial biosphere and lithosphere.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) A naturally occurring gas, also a by‐product of burning fossil fuels from fossil carbon deposits, such as oil, gas and coal, of burning biomass and of land use changes and other industrial processes. It is the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas that affects the Earth’s radiative balance. It is the reference gas against which other greenhouse gases are measured and therefore has a Global Warming Potential of 1.

Climate Climate in a narrow sense is usually defined as the average weather, or more rigorously, as the statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant quantities over a period of

time ranging from months to thousands or millions of years. The classical period for averaging these variables is 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization. The relevant quantities are most often surface variables such as temperature, precipitation and wind. Climate in a wider sense is the state, including a statistical description, of the climate system. In various chapters in this report different averaging periods, such as a period of 20 years, are also used.

Climate change Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identifi ed (e.g., by using statistical tests) bychanges in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings,or to persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmosphere or in land use. Note that the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1, defi nes climate change as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods’. The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition, and climate variability attributable to natural causes. See also Climate variability; Detection and Attribution.

Climate model (spectrum or hierarchy) A numerical representation of the climate system based on the physical, chemical and biological properties of its components, their interactions and feedback processes, and accounting for all or some of its known properties. The climate system can be represented by models of varying complexity, that is, for any one component or combination of components a spectrum or hierarchy of models can be identifi ed, differing in such aspects as the number of spatial dimensions, the extent to which physical, chemical or biological processes are explicitly represented, or the level at which empirical

parametrizations are involved. Coupled Atmosphere‐Ocean General Circulation Models (AOGCMs) provide a representation of the climate system that is near the most comprehensive end of the spectrum currently available. There is an evolution towards more complex models with interactive chemistry and biology (see Chapter 8). Climate models are applied as a research tool to study and simulate the climate, and for operational purposes, including monthly, seasonal and interannual climate predictions.

Climate prediction A climate prediction or climate forecast is the result of an attempt to produce an estimate of the actual evolution of the climate in the future, for example, at seasonal, interannual or long‐term time scales. Since the future evolution of the climate system may be highly sensitive to initial conditions, such predictions are usually probabilistic in nature. See also Climate projection; Climate scenario; Predictability.

Deforestation Conversion of forest to non‐forest. For a discussion of the term forest and related terms such as afforestation, reforestation, and deforestation see the IPCC Special Report on Land Use, Land‐Use Change and Forestry (IPCC, 2000). See also the report on Definitions and Methodological Options to Inventory Emissions from Direct Human‐induced Degradation of Forests and Devegetation of Other Vegetation Types (IPCC, 2003).

Denitrification Is a microbially facilitated process of nitrate reduction that may ultimately produce molecular nitrogen (N2) through a series of intermediate gaseous nitrogen oxide products. (Source: Wikipedia)

Desertification Land degradation in arid, semi‐arid, and dry sub‐ humid areas resulting from various factors, including climatic variations and human activities. The United Nations Convention to Combat Desertifi cation defi nes land degradation as a reduction or loss in arid, semi‐arid, and dry sub‐humid areas, of the biological or

economic productivity and complexity of rain‐fed cropland,irrigated cropland, or range, pasture, forest, and woodlands resulting from land uses or from a process or combination of processes, including processes arising from human activities and habitation patterns, such as (i) soil erosion caused by wind and/or water; (ii) deterioration of the physical, chemical and biological or economic properties of soil; and (iii) long‐term loss of natural vegetation.

Drought In general terms, drought is a ‘prolonged absence or marked deficiency of precipitation’, a ‘deficiency that results in water shortage for some activity or for some group’, or a ‘period of abnormally dry weather sufficiently prolonged for the lack of precipitation to cause a serious hydrological imbalance’ (Heim, 2002). Drought has been defined in a number of ways. Agricultural drought relates to moisture deficits in the topmost 1 metre or so of soil (the root zone) that affect crops, meteorological drought is mainly a prolonged defi cit of precipitation, and hydrologic drought is related to below‐normal stream flow, lake and groundwater levels. A megadrought is a longdrawn out and pervasive drought, lasting much longer than normal, usually a decade or more.

Energy balance The difference between the total incoming and total outgoing energy. If this balance is positive, warming occurs; if it is negative, cooling occurs. Averaged over the globe and over long time periods, this balance must be zero. Because the climate system derives virtually all its energy from the Sun, zero balance implies that, globally, the amount of incoming solar radiation on average must be equal to the sum of the outgoing refl ected solar radiation and the outgoing thermal infrared radiation emitted by the climate system. A perturbation of this global radiation balance, be it anthropogenic or natural, is called radiative forcing.

Equivalent carbon dioxide (CO2) emission The amount of carbon dioxide emission that would cause the same integrated radiative forcing, over a given time horizon, as an emitted amount

of a well mixed greenhouse gas or a mixture of well mixed greenhouse gases. The equivalent carbon dioxide emission is obtained by multiplying the emission of a well mixed greenhouse gas by its Global Warming Potential for the given time horizon. For a mix of greenhouse gases it is obtained by summing the equivalent carbon dioxide emissions of each gas. Equivalent carbon dioxide emission is a standard and useful metric for comparing emissions of different greenhouse gases but does not imply exact equivalence of the corresponding climate change responses.

Global Warming Potential (GWP) An index, based upon radiative properties of well‐mixed greenhouse gases, measuring the radiative forcing of a unit mass of a given well‐mixed greenhouse gas in the present‐day atmosphere integrated over a chosen time horizon, relative to that of carbon dioxide. The GWP represents the combined effect of the differing times these gases remain in the atmosphere and their relative effectiveness in absorbing outgoing thermal infrared radiation. The Kyoto Protocol is based on GWPs from pulse emissions over a 100‐year time frame.

Greenhouse effect Greenhouse gases effectively absorb thermal infrared radiation, emitted by the Earth’s surface, by the atmosphere itself due to the same gases, and by clouds. Atmospheric radiation is emitted to all sides, including downward to the Earth’s surface. Thus, greenhouse gases trap heat within the surface‐troposphere system. This is called the greenhouse effect. Thermal infrared radiation in the troposphere is strongly coupled to the temperature of the atmosphere at the altitude at which it is emitted. In the troposphere, the temperature generally decreases with height. Effectively, infrared radiation emitted to space originates from an altitude with a temperature of, on average, – 19°C, in balance with the net incoming solar radiation, whereas the Earth’s surface is kept at a much higher temperature of, on average, +14°C. An increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases leads to an increased infrared opacity of the atmosphere, and therefore to an effective radiation into space from a higher altitude at a lower

temperature. This causes a radiative forcing that leads to an enhancement of the greenhouse effect, the so‐called enhanced greenhouse effect.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) Greenhouse gases are those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and anthropogenic, thatabsorb and emit radiation at specifi c wavelengths within the spectrum of thermal infrared radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface, the atmosphere itself, and by clouds. This property causes the greenhouse effect. Water vapour (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O),methane (CH4) and ozone (O3) are the primary greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. Moreover, there are a number of entirely humanmade greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as the halocarbons and other chlorine‐ and bromine‐containing substances, dealt with under the Montreal

Protocol. Beside CO2, N2O and CH4, the Kyoto Protocol deals with the greenhouse gases sulphur hexafl uoride (SF6), hydrofl uorocarbons (HFCs) and perfl uorocarbons (PFCs).

Industrial revolution A period of rapid industrial growth with farreaching social and economic consequences, beginning in Britain during the second half of the eighteenth century and spreading to Europe and later to other countries including the United States. The invention of the steam engine was an important trigger of this development. The industrial revolution marks the beginning of a strong increase in the use of fossil fuels and emission of, in particular,fossil carbon dioxide. In this report the terms pre‐ industrial and industrial refer, somewhat arbitrarily, to the periods before and after 1750, respectively.

Kyoto Protocol The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted in 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, at the Third Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC. It contains legally binding commitments, in addition to those included in the UNFCCC. Countries included in Annex B of the Protocol (most Organisation

for Economic Cooperation and Development countries and countries with economies in transition) agreed to reduce their anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofl uorocarbons, perfl uorocarbons, and sulphur hexafl uoride) by at least 5% below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012. The Kyoto Protocol entered into force on 16 February 2005.

Land use and Land use change Land use refers to the total of arrangements, activities and inputs ndertaken in a certain land cover type (a set of human actions). The term land use is also used in the sense of the social and economic purposes for which land is managed (e.g., grazing, timber extraction and conservation). Land use change refers to a change in the use or management of land by humans, which may lead to a change in land cover. Land cover and land use change may have an impact on the surface albedo, evapotranspiration, sources and sinks of greenhouse gases, or other properties of the climate system and may thus have a radiative forcing and/or other impacts on climate, locally or globally. See also the IPCC Report on Land Use, Land‐Use Change, and Forestry (IPCC, 2000).

Methanogenesis or biomethanation Is the formation of methane by microbes known as methanogens. Organisms capable of producing methane have been identified only from the domain Archaea, a group phylogenetically distinct from both eukaryotes and bacteria, although many live in close association with anaerobic bacteria. The production of methane is an important and widespread form of microbial metabolism. In most environments, it is the final step in the decomposition of biomass. (Source: Wikipedia)

Respiration The process whereby living organisms convert organic matter to carbon dioxide, releasing energy and consuming molecular oxygen.

Troposphere The lowest part of the atmosphere, from the surface to about 10 km in altitude at mid‐latitudes (ranging from 9 km at high latitudes to 16 km in the tropics on average), where clouds and weather phenomena occur. In the troposphere, temperatures generally decrease with height.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) The Convention was adopted on 9 May 1992 in New York and signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro by more than 150 countries and the European Community. Its ultimate objective is the ‘stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system’. It contains commitments for all Parties. Under the Convention, Parties included in Annex I (all OECD).

B 1.2: Statistics on main pollutants of the atmosphere:

(CO2 concentration of the atmosphere, per capita emissions world‐ wide, carbon footprint, sources of pollution, contribution of agriculture, etc.). Updated data will be compiled in 2014.

Agricultural activities contribute directly and indirectly to greenhouse gas emissions. In total they account for approximately 19‐29% of the anthropogenic GHG emissions. Direct emissions by soil respiration (CO2), denitrification (N2O) and methanogenesis

(CH4) account for approximately 10‐14% of the total GHG emissions, while indirect emissions via deforestation, forest degradation and peat land degradation (land use change) account for approximately 12%. Agricultural production accounts for appr.

60% of the world wide N2O emissions and for 50% of the methane emissions.

B 2. Climate friendly food production on farm

B 2.1. Productive organic on‐farm food production through intelligent and integrative production methods:

Well‐managed nutrient cycles, high productivity and resource efficiency, profitable, animal friendly

Although agricultural production generally has positive energy balances, the emission of GHG’s may vary significantly between different crops and systems. Mineral nitrogen supply to crops, more than organic amendments increases the potential of denitrification, which is mainly a function of climatic conditions (soil moisture and temperature) and soil tillage. Moreover the production of fertilizers already emitted 284‐575 megatonnes of CO2. Methane is mainly generated by ruminants via enteric fermentation and via anaerobic turnover in paddy rice production.

To reduce GHG emissions in crop production rotations with legumes and positive carbon balances, reasonable use of nitrogen fertilizers and conservation tillage is recommended. Yield losses and post‐harvest losses have to be minimized.

Organic crop production often releases less GHG gases than conventional production, at least per surface area. Well managed organic production even show lower GHG emissions per unit of output. The main reasons for this feature are the omission of mineral nitrogen fertilizers in organic systems and sometimes higher carbon sequestration by the soils (link hall 1). On average denitrification is lower in organically managed soils, because soil nitrate contents are generally lower and soil structure is better (aeration). Methane emissions of ruminants are unavoidable but may be reduced by improved feeding regimes and by promoting longevity of cows. Both aspects are positively affected by organic farming practices often resulting in lower methane emissions.

Animal husbandry always requires a holistic view. Improved eco‐ balances induced by animal exploitation are not acceptable in OF (link to hall 6).

B 2.2. Climate friendly housing material and farm technology:

Farm technology has to consider energy and resource consumption. Organic farmers have to take care (by regulations) that natural resources are used in a sustainable way. Modern techniques such as sensor guided hoeing machines (precision farming) help to improve non‐chemical weed control. Occasional direct seeding of grain legumes also results in a considerable saving of diesel and

CO2 emission.

B 2.3. Energy use and renewable energy on farms

Increasingly organic farmers start to produce biogas. This approach may be suitable for specific sites. Other than conventional farmers that mainly use maize as a substrate, organic farmers can use fodder legumes to increase soil fertility at the same time (biological nitrogen fixation). The principles of Organic Agriculture suggest that organic farms should continually increase the use of renewable resources including solar energy, bio‐fuel and wind energy.

B 3. Towards climate friendly food processing and trading

Food processing may be very energy consuming (cookers boilers, furnaces) resulting in high GHG emissions of some products. Deep frozen French fries for example produce 5,714 g CO2 per kg, while fresh potatoes only 197 g kg‐1. Food transport plays a role for GHG emissions as well. In the USA, for example, transportation as a whole represents 11% of GHG emissions from the agriculture and food sector, and final delivery from producer to retail contributes only 4%. Consumption of non‐renewable resources such as fossil

oil not only affects GHG emission but also overall sustainability. It is estimated that the same amount of fuel can approximately transport 5 kg of food only 1 km by car, 43 km by air, 740 km by truck, 2,400 km by train and 3,800 km by ship. Thus, avoiding air transport and long car transport of food are key rules to minimize GHG emissions.

B 4. Climate friendly consumption

Most researchers agree that the most efficient approach for reducing GHG emissions in the food and agriculture sector would be a change of the consumption patterns. Key elements of this pattern would be the reduced consumption of meat and dairy products and an increased consumption of locally grown organic food. Vegetarians and vegans are representatives of lifestyles fitting this aim. Food waste in private households is estimated to be very high in western countries (e.g. about 80 kg per capita and year in Germany) while not playing a role in most other parts of the world.

B 4.1. Example Apples:

Apples from the region or overseas: the question of storage and pest management

B 4.2. Climate friendly food purchasing systems:

Cooperative shopping, delivery services, etc.

B 4.3. Climate friendly lifestyles:

Vegane, vegetarian, “less meat”, LOHAS (link to halls 9 & 10)

B 4.4. Reduction of losses

Of food in the whole food chain (postharvest losses, food waste)

B 5 Air pollution beyond GHG

In addition to greenhouse gas emissions agricultural activities significantly contribute to local and regional air pollution. The most important air pollutants emitted by agriculture are ammonia and pesticides and to a lesser degree particulate matter such as dusts. Ammonia emissions caused by intensive livestock farming have contributed to the forest death (German Waldsterben) in Central Europe.

B 5.1 Ammonia

Ammonia is released mainly during naturally occurring processes, i.e. the breakdown of the urea excreted by farm livestock. Ammonia emissions are a function of the amount of N excreted, the composition of the excreta, in particular the portion of N which may be readily converted to ammonia (TAN) and the distribution of N fractions between faeces and urine. Intensive animal husbandry including concentration of animals in large stables causes high ammonia emissions. In the UK cattle farming produces 44% of the UK’s total ammonia emissions. Most of ammonia losses are from manure spreading on land (48% of cattle emissions) and from livestock housing (34% of cattle emissions). Organic farming is much less intensive. Animals need to have free access to pastures, herd size is linked to farm size and fodder production mainly takes place on the farms (mixed farming systems) (link to hall 6).

“ He who is within the sphere of the scent of a dunghill, smells that which his crop would have eaten, if he had permitted it. Instead of manuring his land, he manures the atmosphere; and before his dunghill has finished turning, he has manured another parish, perhaps another county.”

Statement made by Arthur Young, the 18th century agricultural pioneer, as reported by Thomas Potts in 1807. Perhaps without realising, Young identified the problem of ammonia emission. Methods to reduce emissions from slurry and manure according to DEFRA UK

Slurry storage: Cover store using engineered roofs, floating sheets and floating crusts

Slurry application to land: low emission application using machinery with injection technique or band spreader with trailing shoes

Solid manure storage: Keep as dry as possible. Separate liquid from solid phase.

Solid manure spreading: Incorporate into the soil, preferably by ploughing immediately after broadcasting with flatbed‐muck spreaders.

To increase the reduction of ammonia emissions at stages of manure / slurry management it is recommended to reduce crude protein in livestock diet, to use extra straw for bedding cattle, to modify design of livestock housing, to equip livestock houses with air scrubbers or filters, to cover manure storage surface with straw, plastic sheets or clay granules, to dilute slurry with water when spreading and to choose optimum time for application.

B 5.2 Pesticides in the air

A certain fraction of the pesticides used on farmland is dispersed to the surrounding environment (atmosphere, surface waters, soil and ground water). Calculations for the Netherlands indicate that in the case of arable land this fraction may be up to 9.5% of the total amount applied mainly as a result of volatilization. A study in German grapevine growing areas confirmed that selected

pesticides can be measured in the air. The concentrations however do not represent a concern for human health in terms of acute risk but no conclusions can be drawn on long‐term effects of pesticide exposure at low concentrations. Further impacts are given with off odors resulting especially from the application of horman weed killers such as 2,4 D. ‘Roundup Ready’ soybean is now being cultivated on a massive scale across the globe, along with the exponentially increasing use of the herbicide Roundup. Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" soy beans are genetically modified to survive otherwise lethal doses of glyphosate, the active ingredient in the company's herbicide Roundup. Argentina’s population is being sickened by massive spraying of herbicides on its genetically engineered soybean fields. Glyphosate, the main ingredient in Roundup, is blamed for the dramatic increase in devastating birth defects as well as cancer.

C Central display

Message Climate friendly organic food chain through high resource efficient and profitable production, processing, trading and consumption is possible. Producer and consumers act together.

Four subthemes will be exhibited in the hall:

C1. The world of climate friendly organic food chain as videos/web‐ cams on the walls of the hall.

C2. An exhibition on energy use of farms and households with special focus on renewable energy.

C3. Climate friendly food preparation with practical examples, e.g. vegan dishes

C4. Reducing ammonia and pesticide emissions from agriculture

C1. The world of climate friendly organic food production

(the walls): Best practice organic food chains of the world towards South Korean consumers

Videos and web‐cams of real existing “best practice” organic farms and the related organic food chains (from the world to South Korea)” give a keen insight to modern and climate friendly/neutral organic farming in several agro‐environments of the world: example from

C1.1. Europe

(Germany: grassland system: milk and meat chain, occasional direct seeding).

C1.2. America

(USA: cropland system: grain/corn chain),

C1.3. Asia

(South Korea: gardening system: vegetable chain),

C1.4. Oceania (New Zealand: permanent culture: apple chain)

C1.5. Africa

(Ghana: wilderness: herbs, spices).

C2. Energy efficiency of organic farms and households with special focus on renewable energy

The crucial issue of energy supply will be presented on two levels, i.e. the farm level and the household level. For both levels technical options will be presented that help to reduce GHG emissions from energy consumption.

Farm level: exhibition material on: biogas and solar energy on organic farms, technical approaches to reduce energy consumption e.g. via solar drying, energy saving soil tillage etc. The exhibition material will preferentially be provided by the local industry.

Household level: options to reduce energy consumption in households via adapted technical solutions will be exhibited (solar cooker, energy saving domestic appliances etc.). The aim of the exhibition is to sensitize the consumers for sustainable energy use.

C3. Climate friendly food preparation

Organic dishes with low carbon emission will be prepared and offered to visitors. Background information on climate friendly consumption patterns will be given. A Carbon footprint calculator will be available. Links to hall 9 on organic life style.

C4. Reducing ammonia and pesticide emissions from agriculture

Negative impacts of intensive animal husbandry and non‐soil linked meat production will be demonstrated with contrasting models of industrial and ecological approaches to animal husbandry including fodder supply via import or own production. Links to hall 1 and 6. Technical options and effects of reducing ammonia emissions from

manure and slurry will be demonstrated. Films and publications on glyphosate abuse in Argentina will be shown / exhibited.

D. Mode of concomitant material exhibited

The hall will mainly focus on visual effects, transfer of knowledge and practical recommendations to reduce individual GHG – emissions. Guideline: The climate friendly way of the organic food chain: local, resource efficient, profitable and healthy.

The ‘climate neutral organic production”: from “farm to fork” displayed in the Kimchi food chain as an example of scientifically developed model/example for future food production, processing, trading and consumption.

Sensual experience

See the climate friendly organic world in movies (videos) and web‐ cams and taste the organic and climate neutral Kimchi from South Korea. Move through a climate neutral Kimchi food chain and feel the modern lifestyle of climate friendly food consumption. Taste organic food with low carbon emissions. Contrasting element: Smelling manures and slurries that have either been purified with different treatments or not.

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

Hall 4 Clean air - mitigation of climate change A Mission B 1 Content B 1 Glossary and key statistics on climate change Statistical data and definitions: IPCC, World bank, EuroStat, FAO, B 2 Climate friendly food production on farm AGUILERA, E., LASSALETTA, L., GATTINGER, A., GIMENOE, B., 2013: Managing soil carbon for climate change mitigation and adaptation in Mediterranean cropping systems: A meta-analysis. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment Volume 168, 15 March 2013, Pages 25–36.

BOS, J.F.F.P.; DE HAAN, J.J.; SUKKEL, W. AND SCHILS, R.L.M. 2007: Comparing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in organic and conventional farming systems in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the 3rd QLIF Congress: Improving Sustainability in Organic and Low Input Food Production Systems, University of Hohenheim, Germany, March 20-23, 2007.

FLESSA, H., RUSER, R., DÖRSCH, P., KAMP, T., JIMENEZ, M.A., MUNCH, J.C., BEESE, F. 2002: Integrated evaluation of greenhouse gas

emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O) from two farming systems in southern Germany. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 91, 175-189.

GARNETT, T., 2009: Livestock-related greenhouse gas emissions: impacts and options for policy makers. Environ. Sci. Policy 12:491–503.

GARNETT, T., 2011: Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Policy 36:23–32.

HAAS, G., WETTERICH, F., 2000: Optimizing agri-environmental program to reduce negative environmental impact in the Allgaeu region using life cycle assessment. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 78, 92-105.

HERRERO, M., GERBER, P., VELLINGAC, T., GARNETT, T., LEIP, A., OPIO, C., WESTHOEK, H. J., THORNTON, P. K., OLESEN, J., HUTCHINGS, N. MONTGOMERY, H., SOUSSANAI, J.F., STEINFELD, H., MCALLISTER, T.A., 2011: Livestock and greenhouse gas emissions: The importance of getting the numbers right. Animal Feed Science and Technology 166– 167 (2011) 779– 782.

JØRGENSEN, U. DALGAARD, T., KRISTENSEN, E. S., 2005: Biomass energy in organic farming—the potential role of short rotation coppice. Biomass and Bioenergy 28, 237–248.

KÜSTERMANN, B., KAINZ, M., HÜLSBERGEN, K.-J., 2008: Modeling carbon cycles and estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from organic and conventional farming systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23, 38-52.

LIU, X.. MOSIER, A., HALVORSONC, A., REULEC, C., ZHANG, F., 2007: Dinitrogen and N2O emissions in arable soils: Effect of tillage, N source and soil moisture.Soil Biology & Biochemistry 39, 2362–2370.

MÜLLER-LINDENLAUF, M.,DEITTERT, C. & KÖPKE, U., 2010: Assessment of environmental effects, animal welfare and milk quality among organic dairy farms. Livest. Sci. 128, 140-148.

NIGGLI, U., FLIEßBACH, A., HEPPERLY, P., SCIALABBA, N., 2009: Low Greenhouse Gas Agriculture: Mitigation and Adaptation Potential of Sustainable Farming Systems. FAO, Rev. 2.

PIELKE RA, ADEGOKE JO, CHASE TN, MARSHALL CH, MATSUI T, NIYOGI D. 2007: A new paradigm for assessing the role of agriculture in the climate system and in climate change. Agric. Forest Meteorol.142:234–54.

RADERSMA, S., SMIT, A.L., 2011: Assessing denitrification and N leaching in a field with organic amendments. Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 58, 21–29.

ROBERTSON, G.P., P. ELDOR, R. HARWOOD, 2000: Greenhouse gases in intensive agriculture: contributions of individual gases to the radiative forcing of the atmosphere. Science, Vol 289, 1922-1925.

STINNER, W. MÖLLER, K., LEITHOLD, G., 2008: Effects of biogas digestion of clover/grass-leys, cover crops and crop residues on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in organic stockless farming systems. Europ. J. Agronomy 29 (2008) 125–134.

THANGARAJAN, R., BOLAN, N., TIAN, G., NAIDU, R., KUNHIKRISHNAN, A., 2013: Role of organic amendment application on greenhouse gas emission from soil. Science of the Total Environment xxx, xxx–xxx.

VERMEULEN, S.J., CAMPBELL, B. M., INGRAM, J., 2012: CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOD SYSTEMS ANNU. REV. ENVIRON. RESOUR. 37:195–222.

YAN X.Y, AKIYAMA H, YAGI K, AKIMOTO H. 2009. Global estimations of the inventory and mitigation potential of methane emissions from rice cultivation conducted using the 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23:GB2002. B 3 Towards climate friendly food processing and trading CLAY J. 2011: Freeze the footprint of food. Nature 475:287–89.

GARNETT T. 2011: Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)? Food Policy 36:23–32.

SMITH P,MARTINO D, CAI Z,GWARY D, JANZEN HH, ET AL. 2008.: Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. 363:789– 813.

B 4 Climate friendly consumption CARLSSON-KANYAMA, A., GONZALEZ, A.,2009: Potential contributions of food consumption patterns to climate change. Am J Clin Nutr, May 2009 Vol. 89 no. 5, 1704-1709.

CHRYSSOHOIDIS, G., KRYSTALLIS, A., 2005: Organic consumers personal values research: Testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale and implementing a value-based segmentation task. Food Quality and Preference 16 (2005) 585–599.

CLAY J. 2011: Freeze the footprint of food. Nature 475:287–89. GUZMÁN, G., ALONSO A, 2008: A comparison of energy use in conventional and organic olive oil production in Spain. Agricultural Systems, Volume 98, Issue 3, October 2008, Pages 167–176.

MILÀ I CANALS, L., COWELL, S., SIM, S., BASSON, L., 2007: Comparing domestic versus imported apples: A focus on energy use Environmental Science and Pollution Research - International, Volume 14, Issue 5, pp 338-344.

KRAMER, K.J., MOLL, H.C., NONHEBEL, S., WILTING, H. C., 1999: Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption. Energy Policy 27 (1999) 203}216.

PELLEGRINI, G., FARINELLO, F., 2009: An Italian country survey on consumption patterns. British Food Journal, Vol. 111 Iss: 9, pp.948 – 974.

WEBER, C., S. MATTHEWS, 2008: Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 3508–3513. B 5 Air pollution BOBBINK R, HORNUNG M AND ROELOFS J G M 1999:. The effects of air-borne nitrogen pollutants on species diversity in natural and seminatural European vegetation. Journal of Ecology 86, 717-738.

CAROZZI, M. , LOUBET, B., ACUTIS, M., RANA, G. FERRARA, M, 2013: Inverse dispersion modelling highlights the efficiency of slurry injection to reduce ammonia losses by agriculture in the Po Valley (Italy) Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Volumes 171–172, 15 April 2013, Pages 306–318.

DE JONG, F., DE SNOO, G., VAN DE ZANDE, J. 2008: Estimated nationwide effects of pesticide spray drift on terrestrial habitats in the Netherlands, Journal of Environmental Management 86, 721–730.

DE SNOO, G., VAN DER POLL, R.J., 1999: Effect of herbicide drift on adjacent boundary vegetation. Ecosystems and Environment 73 (1999), 1-6.

ERISMAN, J.W., BLEEKER, A., HENSEN, A., VERMEULEN, A., 2008. Agricultural air quality in Europe and the future perspectives. Atmos. Environ. 42, 3209–3217.

JAWARD, F. M . FARRAR, N, HARNER, T, SWEETMAN, A., JONES., K., 2004: Passive Air Sampling of PCBs, PBDEs, and Organochlorine Pesticides Across Europe* ,. Environ. Sci. Technol. 38, 34-41.

KAY R M AND LEE P A 1997: Ammonia emissions from pig buildings and characteristics of slurry produced by pigs offered low crude protein diets. In: Voermans J A M and Monteney G J (eds). Ammonia and Odour Emission from Animal Production Facilities. Vinkeloord, the Netherlands pp 253-259.

KLÖPPEL, H. AND KÖRDEL, W. 1997: Pesticide volatilization and exposure of terrestrial ecosystems. Chemosph., 35, 1271-1289.

MAJEWSKI, M.S. 1991: Sources, movement and fate of airborne pesticides. In: FREHSE, H. (Ed.) (1991): Pesticide chemistry: advances in international research, development and legislation. Weinheim, S., pp. 307-317.

MISSELBROOK T H, CHADWICK D R, PAIN B F AND HEADON D M 1998: Dietary manipulation as a means of reducing N losses and methane emissions and improving N uptake following application of pig slurry to grassland. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 130, 183-191.

MISSELBROOK T H, SMITH K A, JOHNSON R A AND PAIN, B F. Slurry application techniques to reduce ammonia emissions: Results of some UK field-scale experiments. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research (in press).

PITCAIRN C E R, LEITH I D, SHEPPARD L J, SUTTON M A, FOWLER D, MUNRO R C, TANG S AND WILSON D 1998: The relationship between nitrogen deposition, species composition and foliar N concentrations in woodland flora in the vicinity of intensive livestock farms. Environmental Pollution (Nitrogen Special Issue).102, S1, 41-48.

SANUSI, A.; MILLET, M.; MIRABEL, P. & WORTHAM, H. 2000: Comparison of atmospheric pesticide concentrations measured at three sampling sites: local, regional and long-range transport. Sci. of the Total Environ., 263, pp. 263-277.

STEVENS R J AND LAUGHLIN R J 1997: The impact of cattle slurries and their management on ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from grassland. In: Gaseous Nitrogen Emissions from Grasslands. S C Jarvis and B F Pain (eds) CAB International, Wallingford pp 233-256.

VAN DEN BERG, F.; KUBIAK, R.; BENJEY, W.G.; MAJEWSKI, M.S.; YATES, S.R.; REEVES, G.L.; SMELTH, J.H. & VAN DER LINDEN, A.M.A. 1999: Emission of pesticides into the air. Water, Air, and Soil Poll., 115, pp. 195-218.

VAN DIJK, H.F.G. & GUICHERIT, R. 1999: Atmospheric dispersion of current-use pesticides: a review of the evidence from monitoring studies.

Water, Air, and Soil Poll., 115, pp. 21-70.

VAN JAARSVELD, J.A. & VAN PUL, W.A.J. 1999: Modeling of atmospheric transport and deposition of pesticides. Water, Air, and Soil Poll., 115, pp. 167-182.

WEBB, J., PAIN, B., BITTMAN, S., MORGAN, J., 2010: The impacts of manure application methods on emissions of ammonia, nitrous oxide and on crop response-A review. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ 137, 39–46.

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 5

Enriched biodiversity

Author: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke

www.isofar.org

Content

A Mission: ...... 102 B Contents ...... 103 B 1 Land use/ cropping system’s effects and impacts on biodiversity ...... 103 B 2 Tools to safeguard and enhance high biodiversity ...... 103 B 2.1 Planned and associated diversity in the farm interactions ...... 104 B 2.2 Off‐site diversity ...... 104 B 3 A holistic view on mixed farm effects ...... 104 B 4 Case studies and strategies (may be increased by B 2.2 topics): ...... 105 B 4.1 Field margins/ boundaries as habitat for wild fauna ... 105 B 4.2 Weed strips as pest control agents ...... 105 B 4.3 Precision farming as a tool for maintaining diverse segetal flora ...... 105 B 4.5 Effects of diversity on resilience and pest control ...... 105 B 4.6 Greening the headlands ...... 105 B 4.7 The role of hunt ...... 105 B 4.8 Effect on birds ...... 105 B 4.9 Interaction of weeds and insects/ fauna ...... 105 B 4.10 Soil reaction/adaption ...... 105 B 4.11 Set aside effects ...... 105 B 5 Site‐specific conservation quality targets ...... 105 B 5.1 Development of oligotrophic biocoenos ...... 105 B 5.2 Seeding/ crop density effects ...... 105 B 5.3 Others ...... 105 B 6 Ecological intensification – ecosystem services ...... 105 B 6.1 Biodiversity and biocontrol ...... 105

100

B 6.2 Pollination ...... 105 B 7 Landscape as a function of biodiversity ...... 105 C Central display: ...... 106 C 1 6‐field crop rotation (temperate climate) ...... 106 C1.1 Grass‐clover ...... 106 C1.2 Potatoes ...... 106 C 1.3 Wheat ...... 106 C 1.4Fababean ...... 106 C 1.5 Spring cereals ...... 107 C 1.6 W.rye /grass‐clover undersown ...... 107 C 2 Multifunctional rice‐duck‐fish‐ ‐vegetable farming (tropical) ...... 107 D Mode of concomitant material exhibited: ...... 107 IMPRINT ...... 109 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 109

101

Hall N°: 5

Title: Enriched Biodiversity

A Mission:

giving insight to…

 The roles of biodiversity in Organic Agriculture  Biodiversity through organic production systems gained through science and technology.  The organic farmer as a provider of nature conservation/ maintainer of biodiversity/resilience manager using biodiversity landscape designer  Tools that are used in OA in order to provide and safeguard high biodiversity.

The primary purpose of consumers in his choices for esculents and foods is for improved human health and well‐being entailing the believe to contribute to a healthy environment. Warranting biodiversity and ecological services is a mean to ensure consumer’s expectations and satisfaction concerning process quality, thus their general well‐being. Organic Agriculture links the interests of agricultural production, biodiversity and nature conservation.

The hall shall display information, strategies and innovation on ensuring and enriching high biodiversity as a basis for agricultural production, nature conservation, landscape formation and general well‐being of consumers. It shall also provide insights and examples for techniques used to maintain and increase biodiversity in OA systems to develop ‘nature – culture’.

102

Overall view: Species rich Biodiversity: indicator for resilient and healthy environment Enriched biodiversity : a function of omitting pesticides and herbicides The role of biodiversity and species richness in different cultures and religions, their view on Organic Agriculture as conserving and enriching biodiversity

Each main aspect shall be displayed in large illuminated information panels as part of the background landscape. It shall contain photos of endangered species, interdependencies of the food web and titles of sub‐themes (e.g. sub‐theme for biodiversity ‘Biodiversity stabilizing ecological services, resilience and human well‐being’) and shall contain the salient features of Organic Agricultures impacts on nature conservation and biodiversity. Below the panels are landscapes formed by crop rotations (e.g. grass‐clover, potato, wheat, grain legume, spring cereals, winter rye with grass‐clover undersown/rice – vegetable production) where visitors can pass through, feel and smell and will be informed via short headline texts. Along with them are illuminated smaller posters (panel or box types) with imprints of scientific abstracts or evidences. Barcode info stations explain details and allow downloads of scientific material.

B Contents

B 1 Land use/ cropping system’s effects and impacts on biodiversity

B 2 Tools to safeguard and enhance high biodiversity

103

B 2.1 Planned and associated diversity in the farm interactions

B 2.1.1 On‐site diversity

B 2.1.2 Diversified crop rotations

B 2.1.3 Intercropping and undersown crops – mixed cropping

B 2.1.4 Ley farming effects/ temporary grassland

B 2.1.5 Role of flowering crops

B 2.1.6 Associated wild flora and fauna

B 2.2 Off‐site diversity

B 2.2.1 Hedgerows and hedgerow edges

B 2.2.2 Boundary ridges

B 2.2.3 Copses/ groves/brooks/single trees

B 2.2.4 Fencerows

B 2.2.5 Groves

B 2.2.6 Set aside

B 2.2.7 Small ponds/brooks

B 2.2.8 Wilderness share

B 2.2.9 Semi‐natural area share

B 3 A holistic view on mixed farm effects

104

B 4 Case studies and strategies (may be increased by B 2.2 topics):

B 4.1 Field margins/ boundaries as habitat for wild fauna

B 4.2 Weed strips as pest control agents

B 4.3 Precision farming as a tool for maintaining diverse segetal flora

B 4.5 Effects of diversity on resilience and pest control

B 4.6 Greening the headlands

B 4.7 The role of hunt

B 4.8 Effect on birds

B 4.9 Interaction of weeds and insects/ fauna

B 4.10 Soil reaction/adaption

B 4.11 Set aside effects

B 5 Site‐specific conservation quality targets

B 5.1 Development of oligotrophic biocoenos

B 5.2 Seeding/ crop density effects

B 5.3 Others

B 6 Ecological intensification – ecosystem services

B 6.1 Biodiversity and biocontrol

B 6.2 Pollination B 7 Landscape as a function of biodiversity

105

C Central display:

Hall entrances: ‘view on paradise’ ‐ display/composition of biodiversity (flowering plants/crops, bees, bumble bees, birds)

Message: Experienced biodiversity – understanding the role of Organic Agriculture for an unpolluted healthy environment

At least two diversified crop rotations (temperate climate, tropical; same crop rotation displayed in halls 2, linking the halls and giving a holistic view on crop rotation’s roles for biodiversity and nature conservation)

C 1 6‐field crop rotation (temperate climate)

Crop rotation: Wiesengut, (will be repeated, to be displayed in other halls too) (each description related to hall topic only)

C1.1 Grass‐clover:

Enhancing insects, spiders, field birds, small mammals (hares)

C1.2 Potatoes: Enhancing special weed flora and and bugs Undersown crops in potatoes: CS, GH literature: sunflower, buckwheat, brassicas

C 1.3 Wheat:

Less dense stands enhance special weed flora, enable movement of spiders and bugs

C 1.4Fababean: bumble bees enhanced, see Köpke and Nemecek (2010)

106

C 1.5 Spring cereals:

C 1.6 W.rye /grass‐clover undersown

Soil cover enhanced; adapted fauna

C 2 Multifunctional rice‐duck‐fish‐ ‐vegetable farming (tropical)

D Mode of concomitant material exhibited:

The organic farmer as a landscape designer; Landscape background photos The farm trail: Visitors walk along multiple crop rotations embedded in landscapes; interactions of planned and associated diversity shown (resilience, beneficial insects, flora‐fauna interactions, endangered weeds) ; off‐site nature conservation Communing tubes: planned and associated diversity The lost role in simplified farming systems: monotonous landscapes pay‐off enhanced diversity Resilience as a function of on‐farm nature conservation: examples for pest control

Examples for landscape management,

Sensual experience: Organoleptic and haptic impressions, hands‐on experiences…

…of tomato diversity (or other crops different in shape, colour, odour)

…flowering crops: from flowers smell to honey’s taste

….cutted grassland /hay, straw, manures, smell of living soil, etc., Typical on‐farm sounds of nature:

107

singing birds, humming bees, croaking frogs, etc. (their role for farm ecology, biological pest control and resilience)

Further: f. Information display/showcase g. Entertaining and educational walk‐ through experiences h. Product display, demonstrations, tasting and sale of honey i. Interactions with scientists, farmers, bee‐keepers processors and retailers j. Suggested commodities: maintaining via consumption: endangered cultivars and breeds to be tasted; health food

108

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

109

Hall 5 Enriched Biodiviersity

A Mission BARDGETT, R.D., COOK, R., 1998: Functional aspects of soil animal diversity in agricultural grasslands. Applied Soil Ecology10, 263‐276. BENGTSSON, J., AHNSTRÖM, J., WEIBULL, A.-C., 2005: r The Effect of Organic Agriculture on Biodiversity and abundance: A meta‐analysis. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 42, 261–269. BIRKHOFER, K., et al., 2008: Long‐term organic farming fosters below and aboveground biota: Implications for soil quality, biological control and productivity. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 40 (2008), 2297‐2308. ELLIOTT, L.F., LYNCH, J.M., 1994: Biodiversity and soil resilience. Greenland, D.J., Szabolcs, I., (eds). From Soil Resilience and Sustainable Land Use, 353‐364. ELSEN, T. VAN, 2000. Species diversity as a task for organic agriculture in Europe. Agricultural Water Management, 77(July 1999), pp.101– 109. Available at: http://elmu.umm.ac.id/file.php/1/jurnal/A/Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment/Vol77.Issue1‐ 2.Jan2000/1497.pdf FULLER, R. J., NORTON, L. R., FEBER, R. E., JOHNSON, P. J., CHAMBERLAIN, D. E., JOYS, A. C., and L. G., FIRBANK, 2005: Benefits of organic farming to biodiversity vary among taxa. Biology letters, 1(4), 431‐434. HOLE D.G., Perkins, A.J., WILSON, J.D., et al., 2005: Does organic farming benefit biodiversity? Elsevier Biological Conservation 122, 113‐130. MOREBY, S.J., AEBISCHER, N.J., 1992: Invertebrate abundance on cereal fields and set‐aside land: implications for wild gamebird chicks. Clark J. (ed) Setaside 50, BCPC, Farnham, 181‐186. VAN BOL, V., PEETERS, A., 1996: Nature Conservation in the framework of an Ecological Farming System. In: Biodiversity and Land Use: The Role of Organic Farming, Isart, J., Llerena, J.J. (eds). Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of the European Network for Scientific Research Coordination in Organic Farming, Bonn, 9.12.1995, Barcelona, 127‐136. WEETERICH, F., 2001: Biological Diversity of Livestock and Crops: Useful Classification and Apporopriate Agri‐Environmental Indicators. Beitrag zum Oe’CD Expert Meeting on Agri‐Biodiversity Indicators vom 5.‐8.11.2001 in Zürich. ZANOLI, R., 1996: Evaluation of externalities due to biodiversity preservation in organic farming: methodological aspects. In: Biodiversity and Land Use: The Role of Organic Farming, Isart, J., Llerena, J.J.(eds). Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of the European Network for Scientific Research Coordination in Organic Farming, Bonn, 9.12.1995, Barcelona, 147‐155. B 1 Land use ANGEVIN, F., KLEIN, E. K., CHOIMET, C., GAUFFRETEAU, A., LAVIGNE, C., MESSEAN, A. & MEYNARD, J. M., 2008: Modelling impacts of cropping systems and climate on maize cross-pollination in agricultural landscapes: The MAPOD model. European Journal of Agronomy 28, 471‐484. ALTIERI, M. A., 1992: Agroecological foundations of alternative agriculture in California. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 39, 23-53.

BALEZENTIENE, L., 2011: Alpha-diversity of differently managed agro-ecosystems assessed at a habitat scale. Polish Journal of Environmental

110

Studies 20, 1387-1394. BATÁRY. P., MATTHIESEN, T., TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: Landscape‐moderated importance of hedges in conserving farmland bird diversity of organic vs. conventional croplands and grasslands. Biological Conservation 143, 2020‐2027. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320710002193 BARDGETT, R.D., COOK, R., 1998: Funktional aspects of soil animal diversity in agricultural grasslands. Applied Soil Ecology10, 263‐276. BASEDOW, TH., 1990: Effects of insecticides on Carabidae and the significance of these effects for agriculture and species number. In: The role of ground beetles in ecological and environmental studies, Stork, N.E. (ed), Intercept, Andover, 115‐125. BENGTSSON, J., AHNSTROM, J. & WEIBULL, A. C., 2005: The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 261-269. BIRKHOFER, K., FLIEßBACH, A., WISE, D.H., SCHEU, S., 2008: Generalist predators in organically and conventionally managed grass‐clover fields: implication for conservation biological control. Annals of Applied Biology 153, 271‐280. BOOIJ, C.J.H., NOORLANDER, J., 1992: Farming systems and insect predators. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 40, 125‐135. BURN, A.J., 1989: Long‐term effects of pesticides on natural enemies of cereal crops pests. In: Pesticides and Non‐target Invertebrates, Jepson, P.C.(ed), Intercept, Andover, 177‐193. CHRISTENSEN, H., et al., 1996: Field breeding birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 126, 270‐274. DRITSCHILO, W., WANNER, D., 1980: Ground beetle abundance in organic and conventional corn field. Environmental Entomology 9, 629‐ 631. FRIEBEN, B., KÖPKE, U., 1996: Effects of farming systems on biodiversity. In: Biodiversity and Land Use: The Role of Organic Farming. Isart, J., Llerena, J.J.(eds) Proceedings of the 1st Workshop of the European Network for Scientific Research Coordination in Organic Farming, Bonn, 9.12.1995, Barcelona, 11‐21. FULLER, R. J., NORTON, L. R., FEBER, R. E., JOHNSON, P. J., CHAMBERLAIN, D. E., JOYS, A. C., and L. G., FIRBANK, 2005: Benefits of organic farming to biodiversity vary among taxa. Biology letters, 1(4), 431‐434. GEIGER, F., BENGTSSON, J., BERENDSE, F., WEISSER, W. W., EMMERSON, M., MORALES, M. B., CERYNGIER, P., LIIRA, J., TSCHARNTKE, T., WINQVIST, C., EGGERS, S., BOMMARCO, R., PART, T., BRETAGNOLLE, V., PLANTEGENEST, M., CLEMENT, L. W., DENNIS, C., PALMER, C., ONATE, J. J., GUERRERO, I., HAWRO, V., AAVIK, T., THIES, C., FLOHRE, A., HANKE, S., FISCHER, C., GOEDHART, P. W. & INCHAUSTI, P., 2010: Persistent negative effects of pesticides on biodiversity and biological control potential on European farmland. Basic and Applied Ecology 11, 97-105. GOMIERO, T., PIMENTEL, D. & PAOLETTI, M. G., 2011: Environmental Impact Of Different Agricultural Management Practices: Conventional Vs. Organic Agriculture. Critical Reviews In Plant Sciences 30, 95-124. HAAS, G., WETTERICH, F., 2000: Optimizing agri-environmental program to reduce negative environmental impact in the Allgaeu region using life cycle assessment. Berichte über Landwirtschaft 78, 92-105. HOKKANEN, H., HOLOPAINEN, H., 1986: Carabid species and activity densities in biologically and conventionally managed cabbage fields. Journal of Applied Entomology 102, 353‐363.

111

INGRISCH, S., WASNER, U., GLÜCK, E., 1989: Vergleichende Untersuchungen der Ackerfauna auf alternativ und konventionell bewirtschafteten Flächen. Schriftenreihe LÖLF. 11, 113‐ 271. KLEIJN, D., BERENDSE, F., SMIT, R., GILISSEN, N., 2001: Agri‐environment schemes do not effectively protect biodiversity in Dutch agricultural landscapes. Nature, Vol. 413, 723‐725. KROOSS, S., SCHAEFER, M., 1998: The effect of different farming systems on epigeic arthropods: a five‐year study on the rove beetle fauna (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) of winter wheat . Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 69, 121–133. KRAGTEN, S. & DE SNOO, G. R., 2008: Field-breeding birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 126, 270-274. KRAGTEN, S., TAMIS, W. L. M., GERTENAAR, E., RAMIRO, S. M. M., VAN DER POLL, R. J., WANG, J. & DE SNOO, G. R. 2011: Abundance of invertebrate prey for birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Bird Conservation International 21, 1-11. MACLEOD, C. J., BLACKWELL, G. & BENGE, J., 2012: Reduced pesticide toxicity and increased woody vegetation cover account for enhanced native bird densities in organic orchards. Journal of Applied Ecology 49, 652-660. MCKENZIE, A. J. & WHITTINGHAM, M. J., 2009: Why are birds more abundant on organic farms?. Journal of Food Agriculture & Environment 7, 807- 814. NEUMANN, V. H., LOGES, R. & TAUBE, F., 2007: Does organic farming benefit the diversity and abundance of breeding birds on arable land? Results from the hedge-landscape of Schleswig-Holstein. Berichte Über Landwirtschaft 85, 272-299. MAGBANUA, F. S., TOWNSEND, C. R., BLACKWELL, G. L., PHILLIPS, N. & MATTHAEI, C. D., 2010: Responses of stream macroinvertebrates and ecosystem function to conventional, integrated and organic farming. Journal of Applied Ecology 47, 1014-1025. MOREBY, S.J., AEBISCHER, N.J., 1992: Invertebrate abundance on cereal fields and set‐aside land: implications for wild gamebird chicks. Clark J. (ed) Setaside 50, BCPC, Farnham, 181‐186. PFIFFNER, L., MÄDER, P., 1997: Effects of biodynamic, organic and conventional production systems on earthworm populations. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 3‐10. REDDERSEN, J., 1997: The arthropod fauna of organic versus conventional cereal fields in Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 61‐71. RISKU-NORJA, H., HIETALA, R., VIRTANEN, H., KETOMAKI, H. & HELENIUS, J., 2008: Localisation of primary food production in Finland: production potential and environmental impacts of food consumption patterns. Agricultural and Food Science 17, 127-145. VESELY, M., KOSTKAN, V., SARAPATKA, B., 1997: A six‐year study on the effects of organic versus conventional cultivation on Carabids: experimental layout and preliminary results. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 361‐369. VICKERMAN, G.P., 1988: Farm scale evaluation of the long term effects of different pesticides regimes on the arthropod fauna of winter wheat. In Field Methods for the Study of Environmental Effects of Pesticides. British Crop Protection Council Monogr. No. 40, 127 – 135. VOGT, H., 1994: Pesticides and beneficial organisms. International Organization for Biological Control 17(10), 1‐178. WILSON, J. D., EVANS, J., BROWNE, S. J. & KING, J. R., 1997: Territory distribution and breeding success of skylarks Alauda arvensis on organic and intensive farmland in southern England. Journal of Applied Ecology 34, 1462-1478. B 2 Tool to safeguard and enhance high diversity

112

B 2.1 Planned and associated diversity B 2.1.1 On‐site diversity DI FALCO, S., CHAVAS, J-P., 2006: Crop genetic diversity, farm productivity and the management of environmental risk in rainfed agriculture. European Review of Agricultural Economics 33 (3), 289‐314. B 2.1.2 Diversified Crop rotation DEN NIJS, L. BOOIJ, K., DAAMEN, R., LOCK, C., NOORLANDER, J., 1997: The effects of crop rotation on beneficial arthropods in agroecosystems. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 364‐366. B 2.1.3 Intercropping and undersown crops BRUST, G.E., STINNER, B.R., MCCARTNEY, D.A., 1986: Predation by soil inhabiting arthropods in intercropped and monoculture agroecosystems. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 18, 145‐154. PICASSSO, V.D., BRUMMER, CH.E., LIEBMAN, M., DIXON, P.M., WILSEY, B.R., 2011: Diverse perennial crop mixtures sustain higher productivity over time based on ecological complementarity, Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 26 (4), 317‐327. SCHRÖDER, D., KÖPKE, U., 2012: Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) intercropped with oil crops – a strategy to enhance rooting density and to optimize nitrogen use and grain production? Field Crops Research 135 (2012), 74‐81. KIEßLING, D., KÖPKE, U., 2008: Intercropping of oilseeds and faba beans In: Cultivating the future based on science, Vol.1, Organic Crop Production, Neuhoff, D., et al. (eds). Proceedings of the 2nd Scientific Conference of the Second Scientific Conference of ISOFAR, 18.‐ 20.6.2008, Modena, Italy. THEUNISSEN, J., 1997: Application of Intercropping in Organic Agriculture. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 251‐259. BOOIJ, C.J.H., NOORLANDER, J., THEUNISSEN, J., 1997: Intercropping cabbage with clover: effects on ground beetles. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 261‐268. HILTBRUNNER, J., LIEDGENS, M., 2008: Performance of winter wheat varieties in white clover living mulch. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 26, 85‐101. SCHADER,C., ZALLER, J.G., KÖPKE, U., 2005: Cotton‐basil intercropping: effects on pests, yields and economical parameters in an organic field in Fayoum, Egypt. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 23, 59‐72. OLOWE, V.I.O., ADEBIMPE, O.A., 2009: Intercropping sunflower with soyabeans enhances total crop productivity. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 26, 365‐377. B 2.1.4 Ley farming effects B 2.1.5 Role of flowering crops B 2.1.6 Associated wild flora and fauna

ALBRECHT, H. & MATTHEIS, A., 1998. The effects of organic and integrated farming on rare arable weeds on the Forschungsverbund

113

Agrarökosysteme München ( FAM ) research station in southern Bavaria. Biological Conservation, 86, pp.347–356. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320798000287 ANDERSEN, A., ELTUN, R., 2000: Long‐term developments in the carabid and staphylinid (Col., Carabidae and Staphylinidae) fauna during conversion from conventional to biological farming. Journal of Applied Entomoly 124, 51‐56. ANDERSSON, G. K. S., RUNDLOF, M. & SMITH, H. G., 2012: Organic farming improves pollination success in strawberries. PLOS ONE 7: E31599. BATARY, P., SUTCLIFFE, L., DORMANN, C. F. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2013: Organic farming favours insect‐pollinated over non‐insect pollinated forbs in meadows and wheat fields. PLOS ONE 8: E54818. BOOIJ, C.J.H., NOORLANDER, J., 1992: Farming systems and insect predators. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 40, 125‐135. CHAMBERLAIN, D., FULLER, R., BROOKS, D., 1996: The effects of organic farming on birds. Elm Farm Research Center Bulletin 21, 4‐9. HALD, A.B., 1999. Weed vegetation (wild flora) of long established organic versus conventional cereal fields in Denmark. Annals of Applied Bioligy, 134, pp.307–314. Available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1744‐7348.1999.tb05269.x/pdf HYVÖNEN, T. ET AL., 2003. Weed species diversity and community composition in organic and conventional cropping of spring cereals. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 97(1‐3), pp.131–149. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880903001178 KROMP, B., 1989: Carabid beetle communities (Col. Carabidiae) in biologically and conventionally farmed agroecosystems. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 27, 241‐251. KROMP, B., 1990: Carabid beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae) as bioindicators in biological and conventional farming in Austrian potato fields. Biology and Fertility of Soils 9, 182‐187. PFIFFNER, L., NIGGLI, U., 1996: Effects of bio‐dynamic, organic and conventional farming on ground beetles (Col. Carabidae) and other epigaeic arthropods in winter wheat. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 12, 353‐364. PFIFFNER, L., MÄDER, P., 1997: Effects of biodynamic, organic and conventional production systems on earthworm populations. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 3‐10. PFIFFNER, L., LUKA, H., 2000: Overwintering of arthropods in soil of arable fields and adjacent seminatural habitats. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Vol. 78, Issue 3, 215‐222. MOREBY, J.S., AEBISCHER, N.J., SOUTHWAY, S.E., SOTHERTON, N.W., 1994: A comparison of the flora and arthropod fauna of organically grown winter wheat in Southern England. Annals of Applied Biology 125, 13‐27. REDDERSEN, J., 1997: The arthropod fauna of organic versus conventional cereal fields in Denmark. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 61‐71.

SOUTHWOOD, T.R.E., CROSS, D.J., 1969: The ecology of the partridge. III. Breeding success and the abundance of insects in natural habitats. Journal of Animal Ecology 38, 497‐509. SPEIGHT, M.R., LAWTON, J.H., 1976: The influence of weed‐cover on the mortality imposed on artificial prey by predatory ground beetles in cereal fields. Oecologica 23, 211‐233.

114

STEINBORN, H.A., MEYER, H., 1994: Influence of ‘biological’ and conventional (intensive) farming on the predatory arthropod fauna in agroecosystems of Schleswig‐Holstein. (Araneida, Coleoptera: Carabidae, Diptera: Dolichopodidae, Empididae, Hybotidae, Mircophoridae). Faunistisch‐Oekologische Mitteilungen 6, 409‐438. VESELY, M., SARAPATKA, B., 2008: Effects of conversion to organic farming on carabid beetles(Carabidae) in experimental fields in the Czech Republic. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 25, 289‐309. VOGT, H., 1994: Pesticides and beneficial organisms. International Organization for Biological Control 17(10), 1‐178. B 2.2 Off‐site diversity MOONEN, A. . & MARSHALL, E.J.., 2001. The influence of sown margin strips, management and boundary structure on herbaceous field margin vegetation in two neighbouring farms in southern England. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 86(2), pp.187–202. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880900002838 B 2.2.1 Hedgerows and hedgerow edges BATÁRY. P., MATTHIESEN, T., TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: Landscape‐moderated importance of hedges in conserving farmland bird diversity of organic vs. conventional croplands and grasslands. Biological Conservation 143, 2020‐2027. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320710002193 AUDE, E., TYBIRK, K. & BRUUS PEDERSEN, M., 2003. Vegetation diversity of conventional and organic hedgerows in Denmark. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 99(1‐3), pp.135–147. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880903001464 AUDE, E. ET AL., 2004. Conservation value of the herbaceous vegetation in hedgerows – does organic farming make a difference? Biological Conservation, 118(4), pp.467–478. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320703003926

POLLARD, E., HOOPER, M., MOORE, N., 1974: Hedges. The new naturalist 58, 256 pp. PAOLETTI, M.G., BOSCOLO, P., SAMMAGGIO, D., 1997: Beneficial insects in fields surrounded by hedgerows in North Eastern Italy. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 311‐321. VANLOQUEREN, G., BARET, P.V., 2008: Why are ecological, low‐input, multi‐resistant wheat cultivars slow to develop commercially? A Belgian agricultural ‘lock‐in’ case study. Ecological Economics 66, 436–446. B 2.2.2 Boundary ridges CARVELL, C., MEEK, W.R., PYWELL, R.F., NOWAKOWSKI, M., 2004: The response of foraging bumblesbees to successional change in newly created field margins. Biological Conservation 118, 327‐339. FRY, G.L.A., 1994: The role of field margins in the landscape. In: Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. Boatman, N.(ed) British Crop Protection Council, Monograph No. 58, Farnham UK, 31‐40. PETERSEN, S. ET AL., 2006. Effects of organic farming on field boundary vegetation in Denmark. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 113(1‐ 4), pp.302–306. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880905005086 B 2.2.3 Copses/ groves/ brooks/ single trees B 2.2.4 Fencerows

115

B 2.2.5 Groves B 2.2.6 Set aside TSCHARNTKE, T., Batáry, P., DORMANN, C.F., 2011: Set‐aside management: How do succession, sowing patterns and landscape context affect biodiversity? Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 143 (2011), 37‐44. B 2.2.7 Small ponds/ brooks B 2.2.8 Wilderness share CARVALHEIRO, L. G., SEYMOUR, C. L., VELDTMAN, R. & NICOLSON, S. W., 2010: Pollination services decline with distance from natural habitat even in biodiversity‐rich areas. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY 47, 810-820. B 2.2.9 Semi‐natural area share LUKA, H., 2000: Die Käferpopulationen (Col.: Carabidae & Staphylinidae) von anthropogenen Inselökosystemen in der Agrarlandschaft am Beispiel der Wasserversorgungsanlagen. Mitt. Dtsch. Ges. Allg. Angew. Entw. 12, 327‐330. PFIFFNER, L., LUKA, H., 2000: Overwintering of arthropods in soils of arable fields and adjacent semi‐natural habitats. Agriculture, Ecosytems & Environment 78, 215‐222. SMITH, A. A., BENTLEY, M. & REYNOLDS, H. L., 2013: Wild bees visiting cucumber on midwestern US organic farms benefit from near-farm seminatural areas. Journal of Economic Entomology 106, 97-106. B 3 Holistic view of mixed farm eff. B 4 Case studies and strategies B 4.1 Field margins as habitat for wild fauna DENNIS, P., THOMAS, M.B., SOTHERTON, N.W., 1994: Structural features of field boundaries which influence the overwintering densities of beneficial arthropod predators. Journal of Applied Ecology 31, 361‐370. FRY, G.L.A., 1994: The role of field margins in the landscape. In: Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. Boatman, N.(ed) British Crop Protection Council, Monograph No. 58, Farnham UK, 31‐40. HARWOOD, H.W.J., HICKMAN, J.M., MACLEOD, A., SHERPRAT, T.N:, WRATTEN, S.D., 1994: Managing field margins for hoverflies. In: Field Margins: Integrating Agriculture and Conservation. Boatman, N. (ed) British Crop Protection Council, Monograph No. 58, Farnham UK, 147–152. PARISH, T., SPARKS, T.H., Lakhani, K.H., 1994: Models relating bird species diversity and abundance to field boundary characteristics. In: Hedgerow management and Nature Conservation, T.A. Watt, G.P. Buckley (eds), Wye College Press, 58‐79. VICKERY, J. A., FEBER, R. E. & FULLER, R. J., 2009: Arable field margins managed for biodiversity conservation: A review of food resource provision for farmland birds. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 133, 1-13.

VICKERY, J., CARTER, N. & FULLER, R. J., 2002: The potential value of managed cereal field margins as foraging habitats for farmland birds in the

116

UK. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 89, 41-52. B 4.2 Weed strips as pest control HOLZSCHUH, A., STEFFAN-DEWENTER, I. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: How do landscape composition and configuration, organic farming and fallow strips affect the diversity of bees, wasps and their parasitoids? Journal of Animal Ecology 79, 491-500. MOONEN, A. . & MARSHALL, E.J.., 2001. The influence of sown margin strips, management and boundary structure on herbaceous field margin vegetation in two neighbouring farms in southern England. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 86(2), pp.187–202. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880900002838 SPEIGHT, M.R., LAWTON, J.H., 1976: The influence of weed‐cover on the mortality imposed on artificial prey by predatory ground beetles in cereal fields. Oecologica 23, 211‐233. WYSS, E., 1997: Biocontrol of apple aphids by weed strip‐management in apple orchards. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 367‐ 369F. B 4.3 Precision farming B 4.4 Effects of diversity B 4.5 Greening the headlands SOTHERTON, N.W., 1984: The distribution and abundance of predatory arthropods overwintering on farmland. Annals of Applied Biology 105, 423‐429. B 4.6 The role of hunt B 4.7 Effects on birds CHAMBERLAIN, D., FULLER, R., BROOKS, D., 1996: The effects of organic farming on birds. Elm Farm Research Center Bulletin 21, 4‐9. CHAMBERLAIN, D.E., WILSON, J.D. & FULLER, R.J., 1999. A comparison of bird populations on organic and conventional farm systems in southern Britain. Biological Conservation, 88(3), pp.307–320. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320798001244 BATÁRY. P., Matthiesen, T., TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: Landscape‐moderated importance of hedges in conserving farmland bird diversity of organic vs. conventional croplands and grasslands. Biological Conservation 143, 2020‐2027. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320710002193 EYRE M.D., HUGHES, M., LEIFERT, C., 2012: Winter bird activity in fields on a split conventional/organic farm in northern England. Organic Agriculture 2012 (2), 197‐203 KRAGTEN, S., TRIMBOS, K.B. & DE SNOO, GEERT R., 2008. Breeding skylarks (Alauda arvensis) on organic and conventional arable farms in The Netherlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 126(3‐4), pp.163–167. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880908000352 QUINN, J.E., BRANDLE, J.R. & JOHNSON, R.J., 2012. The effects of land sparing and wildlife‐friendly practices on grassland bird abundance within organic farmlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 161, pp.10–16. Available at:

117

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167880912002812 STEIN-BACHINGER, K., FUCHS, S., 2012: Protection strategies for farmland birds in legume‐grass leys as trade‐offs between nature conservation and farmer’s needs. Organic Agriculture (2012) 2, 145‐162. B 4.8 Interaction of weeds BATÁRY. P., MATTHIESEN, T., TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: Landscape‐moderated importance of hedges in conserving farmland bird diversity of organic vs. conventional croplands and grasslands. Biological Conservation 143, 2020‐2027. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0006320710002193 CHAMBERLAIN, D., FULLER, R., BROOKS, D., 1996: The effects of organic farming on birds. Elm Farm Research Center Bulletin 21, 4‐9. CHAMBERLAIN, D. E., JOYS, A., JOHNSON, P. J., NORTON, L., FEBER, R. E. & FULLER, R. J., 2010: Does organic farming benefit farmland birds in winter?. Biology Letters 6, 82-84. CHRISTENSEN, H., et al., 1996: Field breeding birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 126, 270‐274. DANHARDT, J., GREEN, M., LINDSTROM, A., RUNDLOF, M. & SMITH, H. G., 2010: Farmland as stopover habitat for migrating birds - effects of organic farming and landscape structure. Oikos 119, 1114-1125. ELTS, J. & LOHMUS, A., 2012: What do we lack in agri-environment schemes? The case of farmland birds in Estonia. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 156, 89-93. FISCHER, C., FLOHRE, A., CLEMENT, L. W., BATARY, P., WEISSER, W. W., TSCHARNTKE, T. & THIES, C., 2011: Mixed effects of landscape structure and farming practice on bird diversity. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 141, 119-125. FOX, A. D., 2004: Has Danish agriculture maintained farmland bird populations? Journal of Applied Ecology 41, 427-439. FREEMARK, K. E. & KIRK, D.A., 2001: Birds on organic and conventional farms in Ontario: partitioning effects of habitat and practices on species composition and abundance. Biological Conservation 101, 337-350. FULLER, R., HILL, D. & TUCKER, G., 1991: Feeding the birds down on the farm - perspectives from Britain. Ambio 20, 232-237. GEIGER, F., DE SNOO, G. R., BERENDSE, F., GUERRERO, I., MORALES, M. B., ONATE, J. J., EGGERS, S., PART, T., BOMMARCO, R., BENGTSSON, J., CLEMENT, L. W., WEISSER, W. W., OLSZEWSKI, A., CERYNGIER, P., HAWRO, V., INCHAUSTI, P., FISCHER, C., FLOHRE, A., THIES, C. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: Landscape composition influences farm management effects on farmland birds in winter: A pan-European approach. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 139, 571-577. KIRK, D. A., LINDSAY, K. E. & BROOK, R. W., 2011: Risk of agricultural practices and habitat change to farmland birds. Avian Conservation and Ecology 6, 5. KRAGTEN, S. & DE SNOO, G. R., 2008: Field-breeding birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 126, 270-274. KRAGTEN, S., TAMIS, W. L. M., GERTENAAR, E., RAMIRO, S. M. M., VAN DER POLL, R. J., WANG, J. & DE SNOO, G. R. 2011: Abundance of invertebrate prey for birds on organic and conventional arable farms in the Netherlands. Bird Conservation International 21, 1-11.

118

MACLEOD, C. J., BLACKWELL, G. & BENGE, J., 2012: Reduced pesticide toxicity and increased woody vegetation cover account for enhanced native bird densities in organic orchards. Journal of Applied Ecology 49, 652-660. MCKENZIE, A. J. & WHITTINGHAM, M. J., 2009: Why are birds more abundant on organic farms?. Journal of Food Agriculture & Environment 7, 807- 814. NEUMANN, V. H., LOGES, R. & TAUBE, F., 2007: Does organic farming benefit the diversity and abundance of breeding birds on arable land? Results from the hedge-landscape of Schleswig-Holstein. Berichte Über Landwirtschaft 85, 272-299. PURVIS, G., CURRRY, J.P., 1984: The influence of weeds and farmyard manure of the activity of Carabidae and other ground‐dwelling arthropods in a sugar beet crop. Journal of Applied Ecology 21, 271‐283. PIHA, M., TIAINEN, J., HOLOPAINEN, J. & VEPSALAINEN, V., 2007: Effects of land-use and landscape characteristics on avian diversity and abundance in a boreal agricultural landscape with organic and conventional farms. Biological Conservation 140, 50-61. PLUSH, C. J., MOORMAN, C. E., ORR, D. B. & REBERG-HORTON, C., 2013: Overwintering sparrow use of field borders planted as beneficial insect habitat. Journal of Wildlife Management 77, 200-206. QUINN, J. E., BRANDLE, J. R. & JOHNSON, R. J., 2012: The effects of land sparing and wildlife-friendly practices on grassland bird abundance within organic farmlands. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 161, 10-16. SMITH, H. G., DANHARDT, J., LINDSTROM, A. & RUNDLOF, M., 2010: Consequences of organic farming and landscape heterogeneity for species richness and abundance of farmland birds. Oecologia 162, 1071-1079. SCHERBER, C., et al., 2010: Bottom‐up effects of plant diversity on multitrophic interactions in a biodiversity experiment. Nature, Vol. 468, November 2010, 553–556 WHITFIELD, J., 2001: Birds fly in the face of ‘green’ farming incentive scheme. Nature, Vol. 413, 659. VICKERY, J., CARTER, N. & FULLER, R. J., 2002: The potential value of managed cereal field margins as foraging habitats for farmland birds in the UK. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 89, 41-52. B 4.9 Soil reaction/ adaption SCHERBER, C., et al., 2010: Bottom‐up effects of plant diversity on multitrophic interactions in a biodiversity experiment. Nature, Vol. 468, November 2010, 553–556 B 4.10 Set aside effect B 5 Site specific conservation quality targets B 5.1 Development of oligotrophic biocoenosis B 5.2 Others HONEK, A., 1988: The effect of crop density and microclimate on pitfall trap catches of Carabidae, Staphylinidae (Choleoptera) and Lycosidae (Araneae) in cereal fields. Pedobiologia 32, 233‐242. ZHU, Y., CHEN, H., FAN, J., WANG, Y., LI, Y., CHEN, J., FAN, J.X., YANG, S., HU, L., LEUNGK, H., MEWK, T.W., TENGK, P.S., WANGK,

119

Z., MUNDTK, C.C., 2000: Genetic diversity and disease control in rice. Nature, Vol. 406, 718‐722.

B 6 Ecological intensification – Ecosystem services BIELING, C:, DINTER. Y., GERDES, H., OHNESORGE, B., PLIENINGER, T., SCHAICH, H., SCHLEYER, C., TROMMLER, K., WOLFF, F., 2013: Kulturlandschaften entwickeln, Ökosystemleistungen stärken. Politikpapier, Nachwuchsgruppe Ökosystemleistungen, Berlin‐Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaft. DE GROOT, R.S., WILSON, M.A., BOUMANS, R.M.J., 2002: A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Journal of Ecological Economics 41, 393‐408. JENSEN, E.S., PEOPLES, M.B., HAUGGAARD-NIELSEN, H., 2010: Faba bean in cropping systems. Field Crops Research, 115, 203‐216. JOSE-MARIA, L., BLANCO-MORENO, J. M., ARMENGOT, L. & SANS, F. X., 2011: HOW DOES AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION MODULATE CHANGES IN PLANT COMMUNITY COMPOSITION? AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT 145, 77-84. KÖPKE, U., NEMECEK, T., 2010: Ecological services of faba bean. Field Crops Research, 115, 217‐233. NEW, T.R., 1975: The biology of Chrysopidae and Hemerobiidae (Neuroptera) with reference to their usage as biocontrol agents: A review. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society, London 127, 115‐140. NYFFELER, M., BENZ, G., 1987: Spiders in natural pest control: A review. Journal of Applied Entomology 103, Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg, Berlin, 321‐339. OSMAN, M. Z., SELMAN, B.J., 1996: Effect of larval diet on the performance of the predator Chrysoperla carnea Stephens (Neuropt., Chrysopidae), Journal of Applied Entomology 120, 115‐117. PANKANIN-FRRANCZYK, M., CERYNGIER, P., 1995: Cereal aphids, their parasitoids and coccinellids on oats in central Poland. Journal of Applied Entomology 119, 107‐111. SMUKLER, S. M., SANCHEZ-MORENO, S., FONTE, S. J., FERRIS, H., KLONSKY, K., O'GEEN, A. T., SCOW, K. M., STEENWERTH, K. L. & JACKSON, L. E., 2010: Biodiversity and multiple ecosystem functions in an organic farmscape. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 139, 80-97.

WHITTINGHAM, M.J., 2011: The future of agri‐environment schemes: biodiversity gains and ecosystem service delivery? Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 509–513. B 6.1 Biodiversity and Biocontrol BUGG, R.L., DUTCHER, J. D., 1993: Sesbania exaltata (Rafinesque‐Schmaltz) Cory (Fabaceae) as a warm‐season cover crop in pecan orchards: effects on Aphidophagous Coccinellidae and pecan aphids. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 9, 215‐229. BUGG, R.L., ELLIS, R.T., CARLSON, R.W., 1989: Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera) using extrafloral nectar of faba bean (Vicia Faba L. Fabaceae) in Massachusetts. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 6, 107‐114. HIDAKA, K., 1997: Community structure and regulatory mechanism of pest populations in rice paddies cultivated under intensive, traditionally organic and lower input Organic Farming in Japan. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 35‐49.

120

HOLLAND, J.M., THOMAS, S.R., 1997: Assessing the role of beneficial invertebrates in conventional and integrated farming systems during an outbreak of Sitobion avenae. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 73‐82. HEMPTINNE, J.L., DIXON, A.F.G., 1997: Are Aphidophagous Ladybirds (Coccinellidae) prudent predators? Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 151‐159. KIENZLE, J., ZEBITZ, C.P.W., BRASS, S., 1997: Floral and faunal species diversity and abundance of aphid predators in ecological apple orchards. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 233‐240. MAINGAY, H.M., BUGG, R.L., CARLSON, R.W., DAVIDSON, N.A., 1991: Predatory and parasitic wasps (Hymenoptera) feeding at flowers of sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare Miller var. dulce Battandier & Trabut, Apiaceae) and spearmint (Mentha spicata L., Lamiaceae) in Massachusetts. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 7, 363‐383. NUNNENMACHER, L., GOLDBACH, H.E., 1997: Management of faba bean strips in a horticultural ecosystem and its effect on aphids and their predators. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 366‐367 OSTMAN, O., EKBOM, B. & BENGTSSON, J., 2001: Landscape heterogeneity and farming practice influence biological control. Basic and Applied Ecology 2, 365-371. OSTMAN, O., EKBOM, B. & BENGTSSON, J., 2003: Yield increase attributable to aphid predation by ground-living polyphagous natural enemies in spring barley in Sweden. Ecological Economics 45, 149-158. PAOLETTI, M.G., BOSCOLO, P., SAMMAGGIO, D., 1997: Beneficial insects in fields surrounded by hedgerows in North Eastern Italy. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 15, 311‐321. RÄMERT, B., 1993: Mulching with grass and bark and intercropping with Medicago literoralis against carrot fly (Psila rosae (F)). Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 9, 125‐135. ZHU, Y., CHEN, H SUNDERLAND, K.D., VICKERMANN, G.P., 1980: Aphid feading by some polyphagous predators in relation to aphid density in cereal fields. MUNDTK Journal of Applied Ecology 17, 389‐396.

VILICH-MELLER, V., 1992: Mixed cropping of cereals to suppress plant diseases and omit pesticide applications. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 8, 299‐308. WINDER, L., HIRST, D.J., CARTER, N., WRATTEN, S.D., SOPP, P.I., 1994: Estimating predation of the grain aphid Sitobion avenae by polyphagous predators. Journal of Applied Ecology 31, 1‐12. WINQVIST, C., BENGTSSON, J., AAVIK, T., BERENDSE, F., CLEMENT, L. W., EGGERS, S., FISCHER, C., FLOHRE, A., GEIGER, F., LIIRA, J., PART, T., THIES, C., TSCHARNTKE, T., WEISSER, W. W. & BOMMARCO, R., 2011: Mixed effects of organic farming and landscape complexity on farmland biodiversity and biological control potential across Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 570-579. ZHU, Y., CHEN, H., FAN, J., WANG, Y., LI, Y., CHEN, J., FAN, J.X., YANG, S., HU, L., LEUNGK, H., MEWK, T.W., TENGK, P.S., WANGK, Z., MUNDTK, C.C., 2000: Genetic diversity and disease control in rice. Nature, Vol. 406, 718‐722.

ZONGO, J.O., VINCENT, C., STEWART, R.K., 1993: Effects of intercropping and Sorghum‐Cowpea on natural enemies of the Sorghum Shoot fly, Atherigona soccata (Diptera: Muscidae) in Burkina Faso. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 9, 201‐213.

121

B 6.2 Pollination BELFRAGE, K., BJORKLUND, J. & SALOMONSSON, L., 2005: The effects of farm size and organic farming on diversity of birds, pollinators, and plants in a Swedish landscape. Ambio 34, 582-588. BRITTAIN, C., BOMMARCO, R., VIGHI, M., SETTELE, J. & POTTS, S. G., 2010: Organic farming in isolated landscapes does not benefit flower-visiting insects and pollination. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 143, 1860-1867. GABRIEL, D. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2007: Insect pollinated plants benefit from organic farming. AGRICULTURE ECOSYSTEMS & ENVIRONMENT 118, 43- 48. HOLZSCHUH, A., STEFFAN-DEWENTER, I., KLEIJN, D. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2007: Diversity of flower-visiting bees in cereal fields: effects of farming system, landscape composition and regional context. Journal of Applied Ecology 44, 41-49. HOLZSCHUH, A., STEFFAN-DEWENTER, I. & TSCHARNTKE, T., 2010: How do landscape composition and configuration, organic farming and fallow strips affect the diversity of bees, wasps and their parasitoids? Journal of Animal Ecology 79, 491-500. KARKI, M., TIWARI, B. K., BADONI, A. & BHATTARAI, N., 2005: Creating livelihoods and enhancing biodiversity-rich production systems based on medicinal and aromatic plants: Preliminary lessons from South Asia. WOCMAP III: Targeted Screening of MAPs, Economics and Law, 37- 43. KLEIN, A. M., BRITTAIN, C., HENDRIX, S. D., THORP, R., WILLIAMS, N. & KREMEN, C., 2012: Wild pollination services to California almond rely on semi-natural habitat. Journal of Applied Ecology 49, 723-732. KREMEN, C., WILLIAMS, N. M. & THORP, R. W., 2002: Crop pollination from native bees at risk from agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99, 16812-16816. POWER, E. F., KELLY, D. L. & STOUT, J. C., 2012: Organic farming and landscape structure: effects on insect-pollinated plant diversity in intensively managed grasslands. Plos One 7, e38073. POWER, E. F. & STOUT, J. C., 2011: Organic dairy farming: impacts on insect-flower interaction networks and pollination. Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 561-569. SMITH, A. A., BENTLEY, M. & REYNOLDS, H. L., 2013: Wild bees visiting cucumber on midwestern US organic farms benefit from near-farm seminatural areas. Journal of Economic Entomology 106, 97-106. WINFREE, R., WILLIAMS, N. M., GAINES, H., ASCHER, J. S. & KREMEN, C. , 2008: Wild bee pollinators provide the majority of crop visitation across land-use gradients in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, USA. Journal of Applied Ecology 45, 793-802. WINQVIST, C., AHNSTROM, J. & BENGTSSON, J., 2012: Effects of organic farming on biodiversity and ecosystem services: taking landscape complexity into account. Year In Ecology and Conservation Biology 1249, 191-203. B 7 Landscape as a function of biodiversity BADGLEY, C., 2003: The farmer as conservationist. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, Vol. 18, No. 4, 2003, 206‐212. BRITTAIN, C., BOMMARCO, R., VIGHI, M., SETTELE, J. & POTTS, S. G., 2010: ORGANIC FARMING IN ISOLATED LANDSCAPES DOES NOT BENEFIT FLOWER- VISITING INSECTS AND POLLINATION. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 143, 1860-1867.

122

VAN MANSVELT, J. D., STOBBELAAR, D. J. & HENDRIKS, K., 1998: Comparison of landscape features in organic and conventional farming systems. Landscape and Urban Planning 41, 209-227. PIHA, M., TIAINEN, J., HOLOPAINEN, J. & VEPSALAINEN, V., 2007: Effects of land-use and landscape characteristics on avian diversity and abundance in a boreal agricultural landscape with organic and conventional farms. Biological Conservation 140, 50-61. POWER, E. F., KELLY, D. L. & STOUT, J. C., 2012: Organic farming and landscape structure: effects on insect-pollinated plant diversity in intensively managed grasslands. Plos One 7, e38073. RUNDLÖF, M., BENGTSSON, J. SMITH, H.G., 2008: Local and landscape effects of organic farming on butterfly species richness and abundance. Journal of Applied Ecology 45, 813‐820. SMITH, H. G., DANHARDT, J., LINDSTROM, A. & RUNDLOF, M., 2010: Consequences of organic farming and landscape heterogeneity for species richness and abundance of farmland birds. Oecologia 162, 1071-1079. THIES, C., TSCHARNTKE, T., 1999: Landscape structure and biological control in Agroecosystems. Science 285, 893. TSCHARNTKE,T., TYLIANAKIS, J.M., RAND, T.A., DIDHAM, R.K., FAHRIG, L., BATÁRY, P., BENGTSSON, J., CLOUGH, Y., CRIST, T.O., DORMANN, C.F., EWERS, R.M., FRÜND, J., HOLT, R.D., HOLZSCHUH, A., KLEIN, A.M., KLEIJN, D., KREMEN, C., LANDIS, D.A., LAURANCE, W., LINDENMAYER, D., SCHERBER, C., SODHI, N., STEFFAN-DEWENTER, I., THIES, C., VAN DER PUTTEN, W.H., WESTPHAL, C., 2012: Landscape moderation of biodiversity patterns and processes ‐ eight hypotheses. Biological Reviews 87, 661–685. WINQVIST, C., AHNSTROM, J. & BENGTSSON, J., 2012: Effects of organic farming on biodiversity and ecosystem services: taking landscape complexity into account. Year In Ecology and Conservation Biology 1249, 191-203. WINQVIST, C., BENGTSSON, J., AAVIK, T., BERENDSE, F., CLEMENT, L. W., EGGERS, S., FISCHER, C., FLOHRE, A., GEIGER, F., LIIRA, J., PART, T., THIES, C., TSCHARNTKE, T., WEISSER, W. W. & BOMMARCO, R., 2011: Mixed effects of organic farming and landscape complexity on farmland biodiversity and biological control potential across Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology 48, 570-579. C Central display C 1 6‐field crop rotation C 2 Multifiunctional rice‐duck‐fish‐veg D Mode of Contamination

123

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 6

Enhanced animal health and welfare

Author: Prof. Dr. Gerold Rahmann

www.isofar.org

125

Content A Mission: ...... 128 B Contents: ...... 129 B 1 Hall entrances (four): From wild towards domestication ...... 131 B.1.1 entrance 1: ...... 131 B.1.2 entrance 2: ...... 131 B.1.3 entrance 3: ...... 131 B.1.4 entrance 4: ...... 131 B 2 In the hall (four paths towards the middle): Farm livestock today ...... 132 B.2.1 Cattle ...... 132 B.2.2 Laying chicken, ...... 132 B.2.3 Pigs ...... 132 B.2.4 Sheep and goats ...... 132 B.2.5 Horses ...... 132 B.2.6 Fresh water fish (carps) and ...... 132 B.2.7 Honey Bees ...... 132 B 3 Middle of the hall: Livestock products ...... 133 B.3.1 Milk products...... 133 B.3.2 Meat products ...... 133 B.3.3 Eggs ...... 133 B.3.4 Honey ...... 133

B 4 Hall corners: On‐ and off‐farm functions of livestock ...... 134 B.4.1 Other farm livestock species ...... 134 B.4.2 On‐farm functions ...... 134 B.4.3 Off‐farm functions ...... 134 B.4.4 Ethics and cultures ...... 134 C Organoleptic and haptic experience: ...... 134 IMPRINT ...... 135

126

CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 135

127

Hall N°: 6

Title: Enhanced animal health and welfare

A Mission:

Livestock has a multifunctional major role in Organic Farming through o the cycle of nutrients, o high quality food (e.g., meat, milk, eggs, honey), o non‐food products (e.g., fur, fibre, vax, oil) o renewable energy (transport, draugh power, manure energy, pollination) and o landscape forming.

Livestock deliver income for people through

o conversion of biomass ‐ which is not digestable or consumable by humans (grassland, pre‐harvest, post‐ harvest, post‐processing by‐products, and household kitchen biomass waste) into food and non‐food products and o for people with lack of farm land (urban, peri‐urban, rural poor).

Livestock has a specific ethical value in the different cultures and religions all over the world. Some species have a high (e.g., cattle in India) or low (e.g., pigs in islamic and jewish religion) reputation. In the western world animal welfare are highly relevant in social discussions and political decisions.

Organic farming tries to link between multifunctionality, income expectation and reputation of animal husbandry.

128

Animal welfare in Organic Agriculture is of major concern for consumers, and a major reason for them to pay premium prices for organic food. In the preambles and regulations, goals for good organic animal husbandry are defined and standards are regularly inspected and certified. In organic farming systems, animals should be allowed to behave as close to their natural behaviour as possible. Therefore, all farm animals should have access to outdoor excercise, sufficient space in‐door and out‐door runs and welfare friendly housing equipment. Social animals have to be kept in groups and animal manipulation (peck shortening, tail clipping, polling) is not allowed. The diet has to be based on organic origin preferably most of it produced on site. Animal health and productivity is kept or improved through animal‐welfare oriented and adapted feeding, keeping and breeding. Even special species like bees and fish have special regulations.

Multifunctionality of Organic Animal Husbandry

Products Services ‐ meat ‐ feathers ‐ therapy ‐ manure ‐ milk ‐ wool ‐ relaxation ‐ pollination of plants ‐ eggs ‐ furs ‐ landscape ‐ pest control ‐ blood ‐ hair preservation ‐ guarding ‐ honey ‐ bones ‐ sports ‐ heating ‐ silk ‐ status ‐ transport ‐ research ‐ hunting

B Contents:

The target is to inspire how different organic animal husbandry systems are carried out in the different regions of the world with special emphasis of the Korean animal husbandry. Eco‐system functions of Organic Animal Husbandry (e.g., feed‐manure chain, utilization of non‐human consumable crop products, landscape)

129

will be illustrated, intercultural animal welfare issues and definitions in a globalized world be addressed and livestock product qualities in the whole food chain („field‐to‐fork“; „stable‐to‐ table“) will be explained. Product qualities for meat, milk, eggs and honey from organic production will be assessed. Processing and trade chain will be considered. Technology and machinery will show the state‐of‐the‐art of Organic Animal Production.

The hall shall displays:

 Multifunctionality of Organic Animal Husbandry (OAH)  Global ethical aspects of animal welfare and health  Processing and trading of organic animal products  Health aspects of consumption of organic animal products

The hall shall provide insights and examples of organic animal husbandry systems (stables, out‐door grazing techniques, machinery for feeding, manure management, animal welfare and health care, documentation and traceability) as well as organic animal husbandry processing (models of dairy plants, abbatoirs, egg packaging, honey harvest) and organic livestock products. Public cooking with prominent cooks and consumption of animal products will be part of the exhibition events.

Overall view: The multifunctional role of livestock in the different organic farming systems, their ethical values and their products for a healthy and happy life: ‘People are what People eat! If people eat products from healthy animals, they become healthy. If people eat products from happy animals, they become happy’

130

Delivered messages:

Where and how organic farm animals live: wild and domesticated, in‐ and out‐door, high welfare and healthy life, product qualities and processing, consumption.

Material exhibited

B 1 Hall entrances (four): From wild towards domestication

Pictures of natural environments of wild (non‐domesticated) farm livestock:

B.1.1 entrance 1:

Mountains with wild goats and sheep

B.1.2 entrance 2: Tropical forest for wild chicken, bees

B.1.3 entrance 3: Boreal park forest / savanna for cattle, horses, pigs, rabbits, bees

B.1.4 entrance 4:

Fresh water ponds/streams with trouts and carps, ducks

131

B 2 In the hall (four paths towards the middle): Farm livestock today

From every entrance goes a path into the middle of the hall and meet there as a cross road. All four paths shall go “through a livestock living areas” in a dimension and vision of an animal.

B.2.1 Cattle

B.2.2 Laying chicken,

B.2.3 Pigs

B.2.4 Sheep and goats

B.2.5 Horses

B.2.6 Fresh water fish (carps) and

B.2.7 Honey Bees are excamples of farm livestock.

 After the entrance four paths towards the middle of the hall will start with an open grassland area with livestock (models or alive: stroking animals). This grazing area is equipped with everything what is necessary for open areas keeping of the presented livestock. After the grazing area an out‐door run and a stable will follow. These three elements will show the animal welfare issue.  Organic fresh water fish live will be shown with a path under water (tube). stable (1x1 for cattle; enlarged models for chicken, and e.g. bees)  After the stables the paths will continue with a section of edutainment with information about treatments, feeding, health care, reproduction and production of milk, eggs, honey, fishing. Eco‐system functions and multifunctionality will be shown as well.

132

B 3 Middle of the hall: Livestock products the processing and consumption will be explained

B.3.1 Milk products

B.3.2 Meat products

B.3.3 Eggs

B.3.4 Honey

133

B 4 Hall corners: On‐ and off‐farm functions of livestock

Four corners will explain:

B.4.1 Other farm livestock species (e.g., sheep, goats, pigs, fowl, camels, buffalos, horses, donkeys)

B.4.2 On‐farm functions (e.g., manure, pollination, draught)

B.4.3 Off‐farm functions (e.g., landscape, GHG emissions, renewable energy)

B.4.4 Ethics and cultures (co‐existence humans and livestock)

Posters, samples, sensoric material or models will be used for “edutainment”.

C Organoleptic and haptic experience:

 Accessable living areas (grassland, stables) will show the life of animals (wind, sun and rain could be experienced);  Headphones will explain the things all over the hall.  Real processing and public cooking of organic livestock products will give the chance for smell, touch and taste,  non‐food products from livestock (wool, vax),  strocking livestock (goats, rabbits).  On the tracks: broodery with living chicks,  Voice recorder with animal voices and explaination: “that do animals say!”,  Sensoric – smell, touch, feel ‐ feed tests parcours (“that do animals eat!”),  experiment with and without manure vegetable production.

134

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

135

Hall 6 Enhanced animal health and welfare

Alrøe, Hugo Fjelsted; Vaarst, Mette and Kristensen, Erik Steen (2001) Does organic farming face distinctive livestock welfare issues? ‐ A conceptual analysis. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14, pp. 275‐299. Bennedsgaard, Torben Werner; Klaas, I.C. and Vaarst, M. (2010) Reducing use of antimicrobials — Experiences from an intervention study in organic dairy herds in Denmark. Livestock Science, 131, pp. 181‐193

Diefenbach, H.; Hartung, E.; Sundrum, A.; Lohmeyer, M. and Rieger, M.A. (2007) Airborne biological hazards in different pig fattening systems. International Journal of Immunopatholoyg and Pharmacology, 20 (2 (S2)), pp. 15‐22

Häring, D.A.; Scharenberg, A.; Heckendorn, F.; Dohme, F.; Lüscher, A.; Maurer, V.; Suter, D. and Hertzberg, H. (2007) Tanniferous forage plants: Agronomic performance, palatability and efficacy against parasitic nematodes in sheep. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 23 (1), pp. 19‐29.

Heckendorn, F.; Häring, D.A.; Amsler, Z. and Maurer, V. (2009) Do stocking rate and a simple run management practice inﬂuence the infection of laying hens with gastrointestinal helminths? Veterinary Parasitology (159), pp. 60‐68.

Heerkens, Jasper and Tuyttens, Frank (2012) Consumer perception and communication on welfare in organic laying hen farming. In: Tackling the Future Challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry, Braunschweig: vTI, pp. 75‐78.

Hovi, Malla; Sundrum, Albert and Thamsborg, M.S. (2003) Animal health and welfare in organic livestock production in Europe– current state and future challenges. Livestock production science, 80 (1‐2), pp. 41‐53.

Ivemeyer, Silvia; Walkenhorst, Michael; Heil, Fritz; Notz, Christophe; Maeschli, Ariane; Butler, Gillian and Klocke, Peter (2009) Management factors affecting udder health and effects of a one year extension program in organic dairy herds. Animal, 3 (11), pp. 1594‐1604.

Kijlstra, Prof. Dr. Aize and Eijck, Drs. Ineke (2006) Animal health in organic livestock systems: a review. NJAS Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 54 (1), pp. 77‐94.

Lodesani, Dr Marco and Costa, Dr Cecilia (2008) Residues in beeswax after conversion to organic beekeeping. Poster at: Cultivating the Future Based on Science: 2nd Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research ISOFAR, Modena, Italy, June 18‐20, 2008.

Lund, Dr. Vonne (2006) Natural living – a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming. Livestock Science, 100 (2‐3), pp. 71‐83.

Lund, Vonne L. (2002) Ethics and animal welfare in organic animal husbandry: an interdisciplinary approach. Thesis, Swedish

136

University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Environment and Health. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae, no. 137. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.

Nielsen, Birte L. (2004) Breast blisters in groups of slow‐growing broilers in relation to strain and the availability and use of perches. British Poultry Science, 45 (3), pp. 306‐315.

Rahmann, Gerold (2002) The standards, regulations and legislation required for organic ruminant keeping in the European Union. In: Kyriazakis, I. and Zervas, G. (Eds.) Organic meat and milk from ruminants, Proceedings of a joint international conference organised by the Hellenic Society of Animal Production and the British Society of Animal Science, Wageningen Academic Publishers, no. 106, pp. 15‐26.

Rahmann, G & Godinho D (Eds) (2012) Tackling the Future Challenges of Organic Animal Husbandry. Special Issue Agriculture and Forestry Research No 362, Braunschweig, pp 482

Sundrum, Albert (2001) Organic livestock farming – a critical review. Livestock Production Science, 67 (3), pp. 207‐215.

Sundrum, Albert (2010) Organic Pig Husbandry Systems. In: Proceedings 2nd European Symposium on Porcine Health Management, pp. 25‐26.

Sundrum, Albert (2007) Conflicting areas in the ethical debate on animal health and welfare. In: Sustainable food production and ethics, Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 257‐262.

Thamsborg, Stig Milan and Roepstorff, Allan (2003) Parasite problems in organic livestock and options for control. Journal of Parasitology, 89 (Suppl.), pp. 277‐284.

Vaarst, M.; Alban, L.; Mogensen, L; Thamsborg, S.M. and Kristensen, E.S. (2001) Animal Health and Welfare during transition to organic dairy production: problems, priorities and perspectives. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental, 14 (4), pp. 367‐390.

Vaarst, M.; Leeb, C.; Nicholas, P.; Roderick, S.; Smoulders, G.; Walkenhorst, M.; Brinkman, J.; March, S.; Ströger, E.; Gratzer, E.; Winckler, C.; Lund, V.; Henriksen, B.I.F.; Hansen, B.; Neale, M. and Whistance, L.K. (2008) Development of animal health and welfare planning in organic dairy farming in Europe. In: Neuhoff, Daniel et al. (Ed.) Cultivating the Future Based on Science, 2, pp. 40‐43.

Vaarst, M.; Nissen, T.B.; Østergaard, S.; Klaas, I.C.; Bennedsgaard, T.W. and Christensen, J. (2007) Danish Stable Schools for Experiential Common Learning in Groups of Organic Dairy Farmers. Journal Dairy Science, 90, pp. 2543‐2554.

Vaarst, Mette; Leeb, Christine; Nicholas, Pip; Roderick, Stephen; Smolders, Gidi; Walkenhorst, Micheal; Brinkman, Jan; March, Solveig; Stöger, Elisabeth; Gratzer, Elisabeth; Winckler, Christoph; Lund, Wonne; Henriksen, Britt I.F.; Hansen, Berit; Neale, Madeleine and Whistance, Lindsay K. (2008) Development of animal health and welfare planning in organic dairy farming in Europe.

137

Speech at: Cultivating the Future Based on Science: 2nd Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research ISOFAR, Modena, Italy, June 18‐20, 2008.

Zeltner, Esther and Maurer, Veronika (2009) Welfare of organic poultry. In: World's Poultry Science Journal, World’s Poultry Science Association, pp. 104‐112.

138

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 7

Optimal product and process quality

Authors: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke & Prof. Dr. Peter von Fragstein und Niemsdorff

www.isofar.org

Contents A Mission: ...... 141 B Contents ...... 144 B 1 Distinguishing between product (nutritional quality) and process quality ...... 144 B 2 Plant products ...... 147 B 2.1 Beneficial ingredients ...... 148 B 2.2 Food safety: Undesirable/harmful ingredients ...... 159 B 3 Animal products ...... 164 B3.1 Beneficial ingredients ...... 164 B 4 Holistic/Complementary Methods ...... 171 B 4.1 Feeding experiments ...... 171 B 4.2 Post harvest effects ...... 171 B 4.3 Picture forming Methods ...... 172 B 5 Models for describing food quality ...... 172 B 6 Effects on human well‐being other than physical or chemical ones (link to process quality) ...... 175 B7 Recommendation to consumers 36 C 1 Process quality ...... 178 C 1.1 Life cycle assessment ...... 179 C 1.2 Regulation ...... 181

140

Hall N°: 7

Title: Optimal product and process quality

A Mission:

giving insight to…

 The qualified quality and health claim of organic products  Parameters and models to describe product quality  The qualified environmental health claim of organic products  Parameters, indicators and methods for quantifying positive environmental impacts of Organic Agriculture (partly referring to halls 1‐6)  Knowledge on product and process quality as driving forces for consumer’s decisions and consumer’s satisfaction (prelude for hall 8) and a pathway for high quality foods enabling higher quality living (halls 9 & 10)  Food safety, food quality and observed health effects of organic food, re‐establishing the true value of forward as a form of nourishment and health promotion  The organic farmer as a provider of high quality production  Tools that are used in OA in order to provide and safeguard high product quality.

141

The hall shall display information on

 Consumers becoming more educated about what they eat (link to halls 8, 9 & 10).  The primary purpose of consumers in their choices for high quality esculents and foods is for improved human health and well‐being entailing the believe to contribute via this way of consumption to a healthy environment.  Contradictory results are sometimes the result of numerous genetic and environmental factors that influence product quality.  The methodological problems for describing food of organic provenience as ‘better’ or ‘healthier’  Several investigations, meta‐studies and models revealing significant differences between organically and non‐ organically grown food.  Organically grown crops are significantly different from those produced by non‐organic farming in terms of nutritional content and nutritional value as well as the content of undesirable ingredients.  Food safety, primary nutrient contents and secondary nutrients as well as health outcomes, e.g. demonstrated by feeding trials.  Warranting high product quality entailing biodiversity and ecological services as a mean to ensure consumer’s expectations and satisfaction concerning process quality, thus their general well‐being.  Organic Agriculture linking the interests of agricultural high quality production as well as positive environmental impacts, e.g. clean water, clean air, enhanced biodiversity and nature conservation and other positive environmental impacts partly displayed in the previous halls.

142

Overall view:

What is Quality? The latin term qualitas/ qualis (lat) entails a broad spectrum of aspects: Character, composition, configuration, consitens consistency, constitution, habit, nature, properties and condition, property, quality, texture, condition, state

Key findings of comprehensive reviews and meta‐studies of existing research reveal significant differences between organically and non‐ organically grown food These differences relate to food safety, primary nutrients and secondary nutrients and health outcomes demonstrated by feeding trials

Modeling production of high quality produce and holistic techniques for assessing qualitative aspects of food including picture forming methods and storage degradation tests are able to overcome restrictions of analyses restricted to some desirable and undesirable ingredients, pesticides, food poisoning and food additives, only

Feeding trials have shown significant improvements in the growth, reproductive health and recovery from illness of animals fed organically produced feed

Conclusions and recommendations to consumers: food derived from organic farms is likely to improve once intake of minerals, vitamin C and secondary metabolites/antioxidants while reducing exposure to potentially harmful pesticide residues/contaminants, nitrate, GMOs an artificial food additives used in conventional food processing

143

Each main aspect shall be displayed in large illuminated information panels as part of the background ‘food served’. It shall contain photos of organic gardening and farming, vegetable production, skilled manual handcraftwork of food processing gastronomic specialities, delicate food etc. linked to endangered breeds and cultivars/ forgotten crops (interdependencies of the food web and titles of sub‐themes (e.g. sub‐theme for biodiversity ‘Biodiversity stabilizing ecological services, resilience and human well‐being’; link to hall 5) and shall link the salient features of Organic Agricultures impacts on nature conservation and biodiversity. Below the panels visitors can pass through, feel , taste and smell assorted products.

Additionally: illuminated smaller posters (panel or box types) with imprints of scientific abstracts or evidences. Barcode info stations explain details and allow downloads of scientific material.

B Contents

Hall entrance design: a broad spectrum of organic fresh high quality produce (daily substituted) food processing‐skilled manual work: milling, bakery, cheese production, sausage ripening, kimchi production etc

B 1 Distinguishing between product (nutritional quality) and process quality

Definition: Nutritional quality (which includes safety aspects) is defined as the value of the product for the consumer’s physical health, growth, development, reproduction and psychological or emotional well‐ being (Köpke, 2004).

144

This extended definition of nutritional quality can be divided into two terms:

One term is for the effects of food determined by its substance, i. e. the sum of all beneficial ingredients and harmful compounds their nutritional (or biological) aspects.

Nutritional quality describes the inherent biological or health value of produce including the ratio of beneficial to harmful substances, taste, fragrance, freshness and shelf‐life as well the risk of pathogen contamination as important quality characteristics that govern consumer behavior.

The second term covers the psychological effects of well‐being based on knowledge related to the organic label, indicating the process quality and the ethical, environmental and social values.

Thus, it covers the feelings of well‐being (or indisposition) that certain foods can induce in consumers. Organic agriculture has been confirmed as environmentally sound and more sustainable than mainstream agriculture. Related to this knowledge, the consumer’s well‐being is based on indulgence and the certainty that by purchasing, eating and enjoying organic food, one has contributed to a better future and an improved environment. These effects with their social implications along with improved animal welfare may, in the end, be more important than any measurable contribution of balanced Western diets to individual nutritional health.

Thus, the aspect of process quality items which are presented in halls 1‐6 are the baseline for the second term of quality which is related to knowledge and information concerning positive environmental impacts of Organic Agriculture. As a base of all these efforts specific regulations and standards have to be taken into account which are operational guides for the farmers, check lists for

145

the certifiers and proofs of credibility for the consumers (link to hall 8). They describe how organic husbandry has to be performed to with regard to the organizational principle, supply of seeds and transplants, the application of manures and fertilizers and plant protection products. In animal systems aspects of housing conditions, feeding, animal health and welfare are most relevant items. This frame conditions of organic production makes Organic Agriculture a system and its products of high creditability, well recognizable and unique. Thus, the

 classical understanding of quality referred exclusively to product quality, consistent of outer, technological and nutritive quality

 a widening of the perspective includes psychological issues on the one hand (subjective‐based) and environmental impacts on the other hand (objective‐based) (Vogtmann & von Fragstein 1984)

 Food nutritionists suggested further aspects i.e. social, economic and political values (Leitzmann & Sichert‐ Oevermann 1988)

 Recent issues on describing organic food quality are emphasizing five mayor principles as most essential: naturalness, health, sustainability, process and product orientation, and system approach (Kahl et al. 2012)

B1.1 Facing methodological problems of assessing product quality:

Market study/consumer baskets: High heterogeneity of products and origin, high sample size necessary

146

Farm comparison (pairs of mainstream and organic farms): Effect of farm manager impacts; effects of cultivars (e.g. to choose the same or the best system adapted cultivar?)

Factorial field experiment: Nearness to practical farming not given; effects of cultivars (e.g. the same or the best system adapted?)

Product quality is the result of numerous interacting environmental and genetical factors; result of numerous properties/features; limited generalizability; impacts of processing, handling, transport and storage (off‐flavor causing packaging materials)

As a function of inherent inconsistencies associated with Organic Agriculture ranging from soil and climate differences to effects of cultivars and seasons, differences in desirable ingredients are less pronounced but if differences were detected, the higher product quality was mostly found in organic produce.

A potential advantage of Organic Agriculture in producing healthy foods is based on higher concentrations of beneficial secondary plant substances in organically grown crops compared to non‐ organically grown crops.

B 2 Plant products

Remark: In order to check their validity Heaton (2001) reviewed 99 papers claiming or claimed to make a direct comparison of organically and non‐organically grown crops. Those papers and results that were determined as valid are summarized in each of the following chapters marked with the citation of Heaton (2001)

147

B 2.1 Beneficial ingredients

B 2.1.1 Dry matter content

Nutrient contents of vegetables and fruits are given on a fresh matter base

Higher nitrogen uptake often results in higher water content of vegetables, thus a lower nutrient content.

Consumer's point of view: "Paying for a high water content is not desirable."

Results of 19 valid comparisons:

ORG > NON‐ORG n = 10 ORG ≈ NON‐ORG n = 8 ORG < NON‐ORG n = 1

HEATON, S. (2001)

B 2.1.2 Protein, amino acids

Raw protein, pure protein, relative protein content: no clear trend

Free amino acids (a function of surplus N‐uptake and imbalance of assimilates and nitrate uptake):

148

ORG < NON‐ORG n = 13 valid comparisons

HEATON, S. (2001)

Increasing nitrogen content in wheat grains is correlated with lower protein quality!

B 2.1.4 Vitamines

Vitamin C

Results of 13 valid comparisons:

ORG > NON‐ORG n = 7 ORG ≈ NON‐ORG n = 6

HEATON, S. (2001)

Vitamin A

Increasing nitrogen availability/uptake results in higher Vit A contents. Results of 8 valid comparisons have shown no lower contents in ORG compared with NON‐ORG

HEATON, S. (2001)

149

B 2.1.4 Fatty acids

B 2.1.5 Mineral nutrients (major and trace elements)

USDA data collected between 1950 and 1995 have shown a dramatic trend of decline of desirable ingredients in 43 garden crops (Benbrook, et al., 2008)

Results of 14 valid comparisons (vegetables and fruits:

ORG > NON‐ORG n = 7 ORG ≈ NON‐ORG n = 6 ORG < NON‐ORG n = 1

HEATON, S. (2001)

Iron:

Trend: ORG > NON‐ORG

ORG ≈ NON‐ORG

B 2.1.6 Secondary metabolites, antioxidants, phytochemicals, taste, fragrance and the relationship of ‘ Outer Form’ and ‘Inner Formation’

Appearance and grading (including size, uniformity, freshness, colour and absence of dirt or mechanical damage) can be regarded

150

as a relic of an important attribute of food quality, i.e., related to form or shape. Correspondence between outer form, shape and quality (including beneficial ingredients) is the basis for numerous daily professional and commercial validations of plant products (vegetables, fruits, spice plants and medicinal plants), and the provenance is clearly related to their value reflected by their inner composition and maintenance of form (i. e., sustainable shelf‐life).

In addition to appearance, produce fragrance and taste are key factors for consumers. Reproaching conventional agriculture products for lack of taste and fragrance that is not coincident with its promising appearance is common. Shortcomings in the appearance of organic produce are often reported as counterbalanced by better taste and aroma. The negative correlation of excessive nitrogen uptake with fragrance and taste is relatively well documented. Since unbalanced nitrogen uptake is more likely in conventional production, differences between average organic and conventional products regarding fragrance and taste can most likely be found. This could only be proven if a sufficiently broad database derived from valid comparisons were available, which is currently not the case. Flavorful secondary metabolites play a key role in plants' defence against pathogens and pests, and also protect them against environmental stress such as damage resulting, for instance, from UV irradiation.

Several studies have confirmed the expectation that organic crops contain higher contents of secondary plant metabolites/ phytonutrients/ phytochemicals. Several of these ingredients determine taste and flavor. Apart from anticarcinogenic carotenoids that increases with readily available N, obviously most of the phytonutrients are synthesized under conditions of low nitrogen availability and uptake.

For example, in the case of sensory differences of Golden Delicious apples grown in paired organically and conventionally managed orchards, higher taste scores were given for the organically grown apples. These were also found to be firmer and to contain 18.6 percent higher rand contents of phenols, mainly flavonols (Weibel

151

et al, 1998). In other studies, tomatoes of organic origin were sweeter or had higher carotenoid contents (lycopene). Potatoes were better flavored than those conventionally produced. Ten percent higher polyphenol concentrations and 27 percent higher glycoalkaloid concentrations were determined compared to non‐ organically cultivated potatoes in two other valid studies. Some reports show potentially higher concentrations of beneficial secondary plant substances in organically grown crops, compared with non‐organically grown crops. These studies suggest that further research needs to be conducted. However, no clear trend can be detected concerning differences in organoleptic properties between organically and conventionally grown vegetables.

Nevertheless, there is a potential advantage of Organic Agriculture in producing healthy food: as a function of the organizational principle in Organic Agriculture, availability of nitrogen in soil is limited, having positive effects on cell size and cell wall thickness. The negative correlation of high nitrogen uptake with fragrance, taste and other sensory parameters like 'firmness' or 'crunchiness' is relatively well documented. Further documented and expected tendencies indicate improved quality of organic food with respect to health‐promoting phytochemicals: organic plants, with a lower nitrogen supply, can have a shortened vegetative growth period and an earlier onset of maturity compared to non‐organically produced plants. Since secondary metabolites are often synthesized during plant maturation, higher concentrations of these components may accumulate in organically grown foods. Furthermore, defence mechanisms based on phytochemicals might be more pronounced in organic crops than in crops in mainstream agriculture, which are protected by biocides. A review of secondary metabolites summarizes the available studies and indicates that there are insufficient data to draw any final conclusions, but that there is evidence that organically grown vegetables will contain 10‐ 50% more secondary metabolites than conventionally cultivated vegetables (Brandt and Molgaard, 2001).

152

Phytonutrients increase the capacity of crops to withstand pest and diseases, an increasing number of them is known to be beneficial for humans (B 5). If the defence‐related secondary metabolites/phytonutrients are the most important determinant of nutritional value, i. e. quality of vegetables and fruits in Western diets, then vegetable and fruit products grown in organic agriculture would be expected to be more health‐promoting than those from non‐organic origin (Brandt & Molgaard 2001).

Thus, organic crop production is able to deliver grains, fruits, vegetables of adequate quality. Recent research emphasizes the special contribution of OA towards products with elevated contents of antioxidants and their influence on preventative health care.

The following tables and figures are derived from Benbrook, et al. (2008) (and can potentially used for FOCUS boxes)

153

154

155

156

B 2.1.6 Focus Box:

Differences in Apples: Organic vs. Integrated (WEIBEL et al. 1999)

Organic resulted…

< 31.9% higher P‐content in the fruit flesh < 14.1% higher firmness (12% higher at the end of storage) <14.7% higher technical quality index (10.5% higher in the second series) < 8.5 % more dietary fibre < 18.6% more phenolic compounds, especially flavanols < 15.4% higher score in the panel test < 65.7% higher index of vital quality (132% at the end of storage)

157

• organic apples had good to superior inner quality: • technical quality, taste, nutritional fibres, phenols, vitality • differences in phenolic compounds and nutritional fibres were remarkable; but less with other health related parameters (vitamin C, E and Selenium) • Phosphorus played dominant role for quality, causality not clear • Thus, further and more specific studies planned to understand causalities and to check how generalisable these findings are •

B 2.1.8 Authentication  In order to prohibit fraudulant trade with mislabeled products on a premium price market the authentication of products with unknown background is urgently needed. Methods like 15N isotope analyses are good examples for the identification of organic tomatoes and lettuces.

158

B 2.2 Food safety: Undesirable/harmful ingredients

With regard to plant products the following groups of ingredients can cause harms:

B 2.2.1 Pesticide residues, other environmental contaminants

Chemical/synthetically produced pesticides are prohibited in Organic Farming. Thus, by definition residues of these pesticides cannot be found in products of organic origin. As undesirable contents they have to be considered as contaminants (immission purchased). By contrast higher contents of pesticide residues occur in non‐organic food origins. There is growing concern about multiple residues on human health (‘cocktail effect’) especially in young children and babies. Cereals are less contaminated compared with vegetables and fruits.

B 2.2.1Focus Box: An American study (Baker et al., 2002) based on three extensive US data sets concluded: ‘Organically grown foods consistently had about one‐third as many residues as conventionally grown foods, and about one‐halve as many , residues as found in IPM samples. Conventionally grown and IPM samples were also farm more likely to contain multiple pesticides residues then were organically grown samples.’

‘Comparison of specific residues on specific crops found that residue concentrations in organic samples were consistently lower than in the other two categories, across all three data sets. The IPM category, based on data from two of the test programmes, had residues higher than those in organic samples but lower than those in conventionally grown foods.’

159

B 2.2.2 Nitrate as botanical or man‐made obstacle

Most of the studies have shown lower levels in organically produced crops. Inadequate use of organic fertilizations can result in higher levels of potentially harmful nitrate in vegetables where non organic fertilization practices frequently result in higher levels. Lower nitrate contents in products from organic origins are a function of  Lower nitrogen availability  Continuous nitrogen flow  A balanced irradiation, photosynthesis and nitrogen uptake

B 2.2.3 Heavy metals and toxic elements

Can be avoided/ reduced via  Optimizing the pH degree in soil (liming)  Use of rock phosphate with low Cd content  Optimized application of copper containing fungicidal preparations (Reducing the amount applied, split‐ application of lower amounts)

B 2.2.4 Mycotoxins

A literature‐based study by Paulsen and Weissmann (2002) identified the main factors that may influence mycotoxin formation and contamination of food and feed in organic and conventional crop production systems. Three of 13 factors known to affect mycotoxin contamination (climatic conditions, site and storage conditions) were described as affecting all farming systems in a similar way. Another three factors were considered potentially to increase the risk in organic systems. There were prohibition of the use of appropriate modern fungicides, higher weed densities and the use of livestock breeding on litter straw, which the authors believe might lead to higher exposures to pathogenic fungi and

160

their mycotoxins. However, seven factors were considered to reduce the mycotoxin contamination risk in organic compared to conventional farming systems. These included (i) the trend towards the use of taller cultivars, (ii) non‐use of growth regulators, (iii) lower nitrogen input levels, (iv) lower crop densities resulting from (i), (ii) and (iii) and (v) non‐use of no or minimum tillage systems. For wheat, the lower density of wheat in organic rotations (vi) and the fact that maize is very rarely used as a previous crop (vii) is also thought to decrease the risk of mycotoxin (especially Fusarium mycotoxin) contamination levels (Köpke, 2007).

B 2.2.4 Focus box: Fusarium spp. in winter wheat lower as function of …  Diversified crop rotation, seldomly maize as a precrop  Lower nitrogen availability/application  Less Galium aparine weed  Intensive tillage/mouldboard ploughing inverting crop residues  Higher microbial activity (antagonists?)  Optimal storage: Immediate drying/cooling

B 2.2.5 Human pathogens, microbial contaminants

There is no evidence over higher risk given by organic methods. Careful composting/processing of manures minimizes pathogenic risks. Clear rules are given.

B 2.2.6 GMOs

In Organic Agriculture genetically modified organism (GMOs) and there derivatives are prohibited to be used.

161

 Due to clear restrictions concerning the use of synthetic pesticides organic products are much less contaminated by their residues, caused either by wind drift of spraying neighbours or by mobilisation of persistent residues in soil.  Environmental contaminants cannot be completely excluded, but farmers have to get the agreement for the cultivation of their land. Thus, there are mechanisms to exclude suspicious areas from organic cultivation.  There is a continous discussion about the harmful influence of nitrate towards the health of human beings. In case enough antioxidants are part of the diet the risk can be substantially diminished as shown in many investigations.  The accumulation of heavy metals and toxic elements have to be minimised in food as much as possible. The excluded use of sewage sludge in Organic Agriculture prohibits very efficiently the entrance of these harmful elements into the food chain. Municipal waste compost material can only be accepted when treated as controlled source separated compost or exclusive green waste compost and complying with official limits for content of heavy metals.  Potentially mycotoxins can be a harmful factor for the health of man and animal. Therefore hygienic standards have to be kept in consideration as much as possible during cultivation and post‐harvest treatments. Despite different strategies of plant protection organic food is not per se more concerned by correponding infections and negative interactions to quality.  Human and animal pathogens have to be excluded from edible food as much as possible. Therefore the application of urin and faeces has to be omitted to vegetables for fresh consumption. Composting of farm yard manure, if done appropriately, is a clear hygienizing process of on‐farm organic sources before used as soil conditioners.

162

B 2.2.6 Focus Box: Recommendations to consumers

 Investigations on plant products gave identified clearer differences between organic and non‐organic farming systems for vegetables crops than for seeds crops.  The best way of increasing nutrient intake remains in following traditional whole food recommendations as well as public information companies, such as ‘Five‐a‐Day for Better Health’; which recommended increased consumption of fresh (raw) fruit and vegetables.  Regarding the comparatives benefits of organically and non‐ organically grown foods, the available valid scientific evidence support the view that eating organically grown food is likely to improve consumers’ intake of minerals, vitamin C and antioxidants nutrients while reducing exposure to nitrate, GMOs and artificial additives.  Consumers who seek to reduce their exposure to pesticide residues can do so reliably by choosing organic produce.  When non‐organic produce cannot be avoided carefully washing may help to reduce external pesticide residues of non‐organic produce. Furthermore, to counteract uncertainties and available evidence on the safety on pesticides residues peeling is a sensible additional precaution when preparing fruits especially for small children.

163

B 3 Animal products

Consumers cite food safety as the main reason for consuming organic foods. Furthermore, concerning residues from antibiotics and knowledge of a rising resistance of salmonella types against these pharmaceuticals (and other veterinary drugs), Organic Agriculture's approach is clearly able to avoid potential negative impacts on human health, which are given by mainstream animal husbandry. Generally, levels of concern are highest for residues and irradiation; the latter is not allowed in processing organic food.

B3.1 Beneficial ingredients

Parallel to the positive influence of Organic Agriculture upon the quality of plant products the same can be expected for animal products although the context is more demanding for practitioners. In case of eggs, meat, and milk (as most important animal products) there is a list of components that are relevant for the achievement of high quality products.

B 3.1.1 Fatty acids

Tres et al. (2011) demonstrated the usefulness of fatty acid composition as fingerprint for the identification of eggs from different housing systems. Similar approaches were achieved by van Ruth et al. (2011) when organic and conventional eggs were screened by carotenoid profiling and could be traced at an

164

unexpected hit ratio of 97 %. Pintea et al. (2012) found out the high bio‐availability of lutein and zeaxanthin in eggs of two breeds when raised organically.

The low content of fatty acids in the winter fodder of cattle was found as improvable by the addition of mature fodder and sugar into the winter diet of cattle (Baars et al. 2011). Italian ryegrass could be such suitable component for the improvement of milk yield and quality although higher levels of energy content and protein concentration of ryegrass silage would be key factors for a further improvement of the winter feed of dairy cows (Baldinger et al. 2010). Milk from low‐input systems (including organic) show significantly higher values for nutritionally desirable fatty acids, antioxidants and carotenoids compared to high‐input systems using high amounts of concentrates.

As a function of feeding strategies used in organic ( pasture/grass‐ clover silage) and non‐organic (cereals/maize silage) the content of anti‐cancerogenic conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs) were 0.80 % and 0.34% in organic and non‐organic respectively (Jahreis et al., 1997)

165

B 3.1.1.1 Focus Box:

Bulk‐tank milk collected each month from organic (n = 17) and conventional (n = 19) dairy farms in the United Kingdom analyzed for fatty acid:

• Organic milk had a higher proportion of PUFA to monounsaturated fatty acids and of n‐3 FA than conventional milk • Contained a consistently lower n‐6:n‐3 FA ratio (which is considered beneficial) compared with conventional milk. • No difference between organic and conventional milk with respect to the proportion of conjugated linoleic acid or vaccenic acid was determined. • Factors other than farming system affecting milk FA content included month of year, herd average milk yield, breed type, use of a total mixed ration, and access to fresh grazing. • Thus, organic dairy farms in the United Kingdom produce milk with a higher PUFA content, particularly n‐3 FA, throughout the year. • Knowledge of the effects of season, access to fresh grazing, or use of specific silage types could be used by producers to enhance the content of beneficial FA in milk.

(Ellis et al., 2006)

166

B 3.1.1.2 Focus Box:

Potential positive aspects of conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs) on humans

Reduced susceptibility for diet‐related allergies

Anti‐cacernogenic effects

Better blood‐fat‐level

Strengthened immune system

Improved insulin balance

167

Finnish results of higher isoflavonoid levels in organic milk are of high interest with respect to human health and eating habits (Hoikkala et al. 2007). Sakowski et al. (2012) confirmed the positive impact of organic production on the content of conjugated linoleic acid (+20%), vitamin A (+21%) and vitamin E (+11%).

Organic milk from late pasturing (lp) systems had higher somatic cell counts and higher concentrations of whey proteins; in early indoor feeding (eif) system the protein parameters were lower in organic milk (Kuczynska et al. 2011). Factors like stage, length of grazing period and composition of diet have also to be considered (Butler et al. 2008, Stergiadis et al. 2012). In general, these authors interpreted the results as indicators for the health improvement of cow when raised in organic systems.

B 3.1.2 Protein

Grain legumes i.e. peas, fababeans and chickpeas are able to replace soybeans as source of dietary protein for lamb meat and to improve meat quality (Bonanno et al. 2011).

Traditional breeds i.e. the Danish Black‐Spotted breed tend to produce meat of special characteristics and to be more attractive for the organic premium‐price market due to slower growth (Kongsted et al. 2010). The feeding regime of cattle, early indoor feeding (eif) versus late pasturing (lp), reveal severe differences in the concentration of bioactive whey protein in organic and conventional animal husbandry.

168

B 3.1.3 Taste, flavor

The sensory profile of breast meat from broilers were reported as mostly liked for organically raised chicken (Horsted et al. 2011).

B 3.1.4 Authentication of organic origin

The traceability of organic products by the exclusion of atypical component is a very serious issue in specific when premium prices are attractive for fraudulent trading. Organic eggs were found to have higher stable 15N isotope than eggs from cage or barn systems (Rogers 2009). Tres et al. (2012) described NIRS (near‐infrared‐ spectroscopy) analyses combined with chemometrics as suitable tools for the identification of feed in organic poultry systems.

B 3.2 Food safety: Undesirable/harmful ingredients

Generally negative impacts of undesirable ingredients and contaminants are higher in animal products compared with plant products.

B 3.2.1 Pesticide residues, xenobiotics, contaminants

Higher dioxin contaminations were found in organic eggs and were attributed to outside running of hens and ingestion of soil (de Vries et al. 2006). Such a problem should be manageable by adjusting outside schedules for hens. Albert et al. (2003) confirmed similar microbiological status of organic and conventional meat products although nitrite was not used as conservant in organic meat processing.

169

B 3.2.2 Pharmaceutical residues

Due to other feeding concepts (medicinal fodder not permitted) and other production goals pharmaceutical residues, if detectable due to marginal levels, cause less problems compared to products of non‐organic production systems. Nonetheless milk and eggs have to be excluded from the market during antibiotic therapies of ill animals.

B 3.2.3 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)

Due to the non‐use of animal‐originated protein concentrates as feed stuff in organic husbandry one of the main causing agents of BSE are excluded from organic production.

Organic Agriculture pursues an organizational principle following a whole farm approach with the aim of managing a (mixed) farm as far as possible as a more or less closed and integrated system (like an organism). Compared to mainstream agriculture, Organic Agriculture depends more on the given site conditions, which determine the choice of the crops, cultivars, animals and breeds. It is also the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE)/variant Creutzfeldt‐Jakob disease complex and its risk for human health that has made the advantages of this system most convincing. Exposure to BSE seems to be clearly limited when purchasing organic beef or dairy products. Until now, no cases of BSE have been recorded for animals born and reared in Organic Agriculture.

Those cases of BSE that have been recorded in organic farms have always been brought in from non‐organic sources, e.g., farms that had just completed the transition process from conventional to Organic Farming. Therefore, Organic Agriculture represents one approach to solving the BSE problem. Banning the feeding of animal protein and milk replacers to ruminants has minimized exposure via feed sources in Organic Farming and clearly enhanced food

170

safety.The risks can be avoided by releasing the organizational principle over nearly closed farm organism, i. e. feeding the ruminants with own farm produced feeds, avoiding the purchase of female cattle from mainstream farms.

Consequently, consumers reacted with higher purchase of beef and dairy products derived from Organic Agriculture in 2000/2001 when the BSE problem was heavily stressed in newspapers (and in the end resulted in the dismissal of the German Minister of Agriculture, which was the start of the so‐called Agrarwende, i.e., 'the agricultural U‐turn ').

B 4 Holistic/Complementary Methods

B 4.1 Feeding experiments

It is scientifically challenging to adequately assess the nutritional quality of food grown under different cultivation methods, because the final measure of nutritional quality lies in the organism that consumes the food. Human beings are individuals with individual reaction patterns, also governed by the culinary value that a product promises.

Numerous investigations demonstrate clear animal selection for organic feed (e.g. Woese et al. 1997, Mäder et al. 2007).

B 4.2 Post harvest effects

Lower fresh matter yields in most cases are correlated with higher dry matter contents. That is a benefit for the longevity of vegetables and other crops which are kept on storage. Losses during storage are slower and less.

171

B 4.3 Picture forming methods

Beside classical biochemical methods for the determination of quality parameters a number of various approaches do exist for the definition of quality the result of which does not correspond to the sum of individual parameters. One of those utilize biophysical phenomena and describe quality by the measurement of ultraweak luminescence of irradiated raw extracts. Other, so‐called picture forming methods are originated in anthroposophic concepts of quality and interpret pictures of crude extracts as result of (a) an ascending paper chromatography or (b) copper crystallization. These approaches combined with modern methods of surface scanning combined with descriptive statistical evaluations steadily enable routine analyses with less dependence upon personal, subjective expertise. The assignment of unknown samples were found as applicable and reproducible if the conditions of testing could be completely standardized.

Results from complementary methods of quality assessment, so called pictureforming methods, seem to be closely correlated to attributes of the inner form represented by carbon‐dominated compounds and specific secondary plant metabolites or maintenance of form during shelf‐life. A German status report on the evaluation of organic versus conventional agricultural products (Tauscher et al., 2003) concluded that the holistic concept including complementary methods of quality assessment, followed by the scientifically based organic farming approach, should include all above‐mentioned aspects (B 2.1.6).

B 5 Models for describing food quality

Some decades ago, biodynamic researchers have correlated outer shape with inner formation. Inner formation is expressed by the different composition of food as a function of the influences of natural and man‐made environmental factors. Focus Box B 5.1 shows the model whose features of food quality are influenced by

172

the dominance of either natural (light and warmth) or man‐made environmental factors (water, humus, nitrogen). High quality is considered as realized under the balanced influence of these forces on plant composition, development and morphology. This early model combines the different aspects of quality mentioned above.

173

B 5.1 Focus Box‐: Quality of produce influenced by the polarity of natural and man‐made environmental factors on plant (from Köpke 2005)

Support of these general tendencies is given by the 'carbon/nitrogen balance theory' published in the early 1980s by scientific ecologists interpreting the interaction between plants and the environment in nature (Bryant et al., 1983). In its simplest form, this theory states that sufficient readily available nitrogen will force plants to synthesize compounds with high nitrogen content; when nitrogen availability is limited, the relative surplus of assimilates changes into carbon‐dominated compounds like starch, cellulose and nitrogen free phytochemicals (e.g. phenolics and terpenoids). Since the carbon/nitrogen balance theory cannot explain all phenomena observed in plant composition and related morphology, the theory was developed further into the more

174

complex growth/differentiation balance theory. Both models are closely related to the model presented in Focus Box B 5.1 and by studies on rocket by Athmann (2011).

The growth/differentiation balance theory states that a plant in any given situation will access the resources available to it and optimize its investment in processes directed towards growth or differentiation. The term differentiation can be considered as comprising the increased formation of defence compounds as well as accelerated maturation and seed development.

B 6 Effects on human well‐being other than physical or chemical ones (link to process quality)

The wider definition of nutritional quality covers the feelings of well‐being (or indisposition) that certain foods can induce in consumers. Genetic engineering is sometimes considered as an appropriate tool to improve the nutritional quality of conventional agriculture products. Genetic engineering is prohibited in Organic Farming in order to ensure the authenticity of the produce and to follow the worldwide precautionary principle. Several polls have indicated consistent reservations of the majority of consumers against genetically modified food. Serious and valid environmental, social, ethical, economic and political concerns persist among independent scientists and consumers for several reasons. Although only very few of the relevant published studies have shown negative effects of genetically modified‐organisms, again psychological effects on food security and consumer well‐being are directly concerned.

Psychological components are also related to taste and aroma; both have been well documented as being negatively correlated with nitrogen uptake. For example, growing conditions and information on origin affected consumers' preference for tomatoes, but differently for well‐liked tomatoes than for less well‐liked tomatoes. (Focus Box B 6.1)

175

B 6.1Focus Box: Effects on well‐being other than physical or chemical: preference for tomatoes affected by sensory attributes about growing conditions

Information about samples being organically grown increased the preference for tomatoes for three out of four samples, independent of whether this information was correct or false. But information about organic growing was less important when the varieties were per se sweet and the tomatoes had a strong taste ( cv. Gitana, see Focus Box B 6.1). Different response patterns were given for the best‐liked cultivar, which maintained its scores (Gitana), while the least‐liked cultivar scored higher for liking when it was known to be organically grown (cv. Jamaica).

An unpublished prospective study investigated whether the conversion from conventional to organic diet affects eating behaviour, physiological and psychological well‐being, immunological parameters and blood pressure. Seventeen sisters of a religious order participated in a phase of conventional food

176

(weeks 1 and 2), biodynamic diet (weeks 3‐6) and a following phase of conventional food (weeks 7 and 8) (Focus Box B6.1.2).

B 6.1.2 Focus Box: effects of organic and non‐organic diets

All members have been informed on these different periods. Questionnaires concerning eating behaviour and well‐being were filled in during the whole experiment. Blood samples were drawn and analysed in order to get an insight into the biological and immunological effects of the altered nutrition. The results shown in Focus Box B6.1.2 demonstrate alterations in decrease in blood pressure as well as well‐being, leaving the answer open which of the two components of nutritional quality have dominated these parameters, but underlining again the urgent need for human long‐ term studies.

177

B 7 Recommendation to consumers

 The best way of increasing nutrient intake remains in following traditional whole food recommendations as well as public information companies, such as ‘Five‐a‐Day for Better Health’; which recommended increased consumption of fresh (raw) fruit and vegetables.  Regarding the comparatives benefits of organically and non‐ organically grown foods, the available valid scientific evidence support the view that eating organically grown food is likely to improve consumers’ intake of minerals, vitamin C and antioxidants nutrients while reducing exposure to nitrate, GMOs and artificial additives.  Consumers who seek to reduce their exposure to pesticide residues can do so reliably by choosing organic produce.

C 1 Process quality

 Due to clear definitions of the Organic Farming systems (i.e. EU Decl. 834/2007 & 889/2008, NOP 2013, NASAA 2012) and the underlying standards Organic Agriculture itself consists of a specific quality: less negative environmental inputs by non‐use of synthetic N fertilizers and synthetic agrochemicals (Gomiero et al. 2011), less negative influences by less livestock units per ha and less contamination of animal products through non‐use of medicinal feed and fewer input of chemicals for therapeutic measures.

 Numerous life cycle assessments confirm the positive influence of organic farming practice to the environment, limited resources, the climate and quality issues (see reference list)

178

 In most of the studies the performances of organic systems were scored better and much better compared to conventional systems. Only the agronomic figures were also scored worse and much worse for organic as response to lower nutrient levels

C 1.1 Life cycle assessment

Besides self‐related factors (such as health and taste), consumers' choices can also be driven by altruistic and ethical factors. Complex life cycle assessments have confirmed Organic Agriculture as environmentally sound and more sustainable than conventional agriculture as displayed in the other halls (1‐6). Clear advantages for Organic Farming systems have been assessed for several impact categories by using environmental indicators showing reduced pollution of water, soil and air, and decreased global warming potential as well as reduced pressure on biodiversity (Focus Box C 1.1)

179

C 1.1 Focus Box: Life Cycle Assessment of organic compared to conventional farming (Ökobilanz Hamburger Landwirtschaft; Geier et al. 1998)

Consumer well‐being based on these comprehensive informations is then based on indulgence and the certainty that by purchasing, eating and enjoying organic food, one has contributed to a better future environment. This type of agriculture can reduce negative impacts on wildlife and biodiversity, pollution of water, soil, and air, and avoid substantial negative effects on the climate. Together, these effects with their social implications along with improved animal welfare may sometimes in the end be more important for consumer’s choice than the measurable (if at all measurable) contribution of balanced Western diets to individual nutritional health except for very rare cases of extreme deficiencies irrelevant to the average consumer.

180

C 1.2 Regulation

C 1.2.1 EU standards

C 1.2.2 NOP standards

C 1.2.3 NSAA standards

C 1.2.4 Other standards

181

IMPRESS

Institut of Organic Agriculture Katzenburgweg 3 D‐53115 Bonn Tel. +49‐2 28‐73‐56 16 Fax +49‐2 28‐73‐56 17 E‐Mail: iol@uni‐bonn.de www.iol.uni‐bonn.de

CONTACT/COORDINATION Prof. Dr. Ulrich Köpke (ukiol@uni‐bonn.de)

CONTACT/COORDINATION Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

182

all 7 Quality A Mission BRANDT, K., MOLGAARD, J.P., 2001: Featured Article – Organic agriculture: does it enhance or reduce the nutritional value of plant foods? Journal of The Science of Food andAgriculture 81, 924‐931. GUINOT‐THOMAS, P., JONDREVILLE, C., LAURENT, F., 1991: Comparison of milk from farms with biological, conventional and transitional feeding. Milchwissenschaft 46, 779‐782. HEATON, S., 2001: Organic Farming, Food quality and human health – A review of the evidence. Soil Association, Bristol, Great Britain, 87. KOEPF, H., PETTERSSON, B., SCHAUMANN, W., 1990: Bio‐Dynamic Agriculture: An Introduction. (SteinerBooks: Spring Valley). KÖPKE, U., 2003: Inﬂuence of organic and conventional farming systems on nutritional quality of food. Cakmak, I., Welch, RM. (eds). Impacts of Agriculture on Human Health and Nutrition. Encyclopaedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), developed under the auspices of the UNESCO. Oxford EOLSS Publishers, Oxford. http://www.eolss.net. KÖPKE, U., 2005: Organic Foods: Do they have a role? Elmadfa I (ed.): Diet Diversification and Health Promotion. Forum of Nutrition, Basel. Karger, 2005, vol 57, 62‐72. MÄDER, P., L. PFIFFNER, U. NIGGLI, U. BALZER, F. BALZER, K. PLOCHBERGER, A. VELIMIROV, J.M. BESSON, 1993: Effect of three farming systems (bio‐ dynamic, bio‐organic, conventional) on yield and quality of beetroot (Beta vulgaris L. var. esculenta L.) in a seven year crop rotation. Acta Hort. 339, 10‐31. MÄDER, P., HAHN, D., DUBOIS, D., GUNST, L., ALFÖLDI, T., BERGMANN, H., OEHME, M., AMADÓ, R., SCHNEIDER, H., GRAF, U., VELIMIROV, A., FLIEßBACH, A. AND NIGGLI, U., 2007: Wheat quality in organic and conventional farming: results of a 21 year field experiment. Journal of The Science of Food andAgriculture 87, 1826‐1835. MALUSÀ, E., E. LAURENTI, E. GHIBAUDI, L. ROLLE, 2004: Influence of organic and conventional management on yield and composition of grape cv. ‘Grignolino.’ Acta Hort. 640, 135‐141. MEIER‐PLOEGER, A., 1995: Das lebende Ganze ist mehr als die Summe seiner Teile – zur ganzheitlichen Erfassung der Lebensmittelqualität. Ökologie & Landbau 94, 6‐11. MONTAGU, K.D., K.M. GOH, 1990: Effects of forms and rates of organic and inorganic nitrogen fertilizers on the yield and some quality indices of tomatoes (Lycopersicon Esculentum Miller). New Zealand J. Crop Hort. Sci. 18, 31‐37. KONGSTED, A. G.; CLAUDI‐MAGNUSSEN, C.; HERMANSEN, J. E.; HORSTED, K. & ANDERSEN, B. H. (2011). Effect of breed on performance and meat quality of first parity sows in a seasonal organic rearing system. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 91: 2882‐2887. LUCARINI, M., M. CARBONARO, S. NICOLI, A. AGUZZI, M. CAPPELLONI, S. RUGGERI, G. DI LULLO, L. GAMBELLI, E. CARNOVALE, 2005: Endogenous markers for organic versus conventional plant products. Session VI Quality assessment. Agri‐Food Quality II: Quality management of fruits and vegetables. 306‐310. Lumpkin, H. PASCALE, S.D., R. TAMBURRINO, A. MAGGIO, G. BARBIERI, V. FOGLIANO, R. PERNICE, 2006: Effects of nitrogen fertilization on the nutritional value of organically and conventionally grown tomatoes. Acta Hort. 700, 107‐110.

PECK, G.M., P.K.ANDREWS, J.P. REGANOLD, J.K. FELLMAN, 2006: Apple orchard productivity and fruit quality under organic, conventional, and

183

integrated management. Hortscience 41, 99‐107. PORRETTA, S., 1994: Qualitative comparison between commercial “traditional” and “organic” tomato products using multivariate statistical analysis. Acta Hort. 376, 259‐270. RAUPP, J., 1998: Examination of some microbiological and biochemical parameters and tests of product quality used in a long‐term fertilization trial. Amer. J. Altern. Agr. 13, 138‐144. RAUPP, J., 1997: Yield, product quality and soil life after long‐term organic or mineral fertilization. W. Lockeretz (ed), Agricultural Production and Nutrition. Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy, March 19‐21, Boston, MA, 91‐101. REEVE, J.R., L. CARPENTER‐BOGGS, J.P. REGANOLD, A.L. YORK, G. MCGOURTY, L.P. MCCLOSKEY, 2005: Soil and winegrape quality in biodynamically and organically managed vineyards. Amer. J. Enol. Viticul. 56, 367‐376. REMBIALKOWSKA, E., 1999: Comparison of the contents of nitrates, nitrites, lead, cadmium, and Vitamin C in potatoes from conventional and ecological farms. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences. Vol. 8/49, No. 4, 17‐26. REN, H., H. ENDO, T. HAYASHI, 2001: The superiority of organically cultivated vegetables to general ones regarding antimutagenic activities. Mutation Res. 496, 83‐88. OSBOURN, S., 2000: The development of quality within Organic Farm Foods Ltd. Leatherhead Food Ra. Food Industry Journal 3 (1), 28‐33. SAMUEL, A.M., J. EAST, 1990: Organically grown wheat ‐ the effect of crop husbandry on grain quality. Aspects App. Bio. 25, 199‐208. SCHULZ, D.G., E. ZEDOW, U. KÖPKE, 1992: Determining the quality of organic produce: Extended quality parameters and quality index. U. Köpke, D.G. Schulz (eds). Organic agriculture, a key to a sound development and a sustainable environment. Proceedings of the 9th IFOAM Conference Nov.16‐21, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 338‐348. SCHULZ, D.G. & KÖPKE, U., 2007: The Quality Index: A holistic Approach to describe Quality of Food. In: Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Agricultural Production and Nutrition. Boston, Massachusetts, USA; March 19‐21, 1997. 47‐52. SCHULZ, D.G., KOCH, K., KROMER, K.‐H. & KÖPKE, U., 1997: Quality Comparison of Mineral, Organic and Biodynamic Cultivation of Potatoes: Contents, Strength Criteria, Sensory Investigations and Picture‐Creating Methods. In: Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Agricultural Production and Nutrition. Boston, Massachusetts, USA; March 19‐21, 1997. 115‐120. SCHULZOVA, V., J. HAJSLOVA, J. GUZIUR, J.A. VELISEK, 1999: Assessment of the quality of potatoes from organic farming. Agri‐Food Quality II: quality management of fruits and vegetables from field to table, 73‐75. SCHUPHAN, W., 1974: Nutritional value of Crops as influenced by organic and inorganic fertilizer treatments – Results of 12 years’ experiments with vegetables (1960‐1972). Qualitas Plantarum – Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 23 (4), 333‐358. SOIL ASSOCIATION (ED), 2001: Organic farming, food quality and human health. Soil Association, Bristol. STARLING, W., M.C. RICHARDS, 1993: Quality of commercial samples of organically grown wheat. Asp. Appl. Biol. 36, 205‐209. STARLING, W., M.C. RICHARDS. 1990: Quality of organically grown wheat and barley. Asp. Appl. Biol. 25, 193‐198. STOREY, T., R. HOGAN, J. HUMPHREYS, 1993: The growth, yield and quality of winter wheat and winter oats grown under an organic conversion regime. Aspects App. Bio. 36, 199‐204.

184

VOGTMANN, H., 1988: From healthy soil to healthy food: An analysis of the quality of food produced under contrasting agricultural systems. Nutr. Health 6, 21‐35. VOGTMANN, H., K. MATTHIES, B. KEHRES, A. MEIERPLOEGER, 1993: Enhanced food quality: Effects of composts on the quality of plant foods. Compost Sci. Utiliz. 1, 82‐100. BOURN, D., J. PRESCOTT, 2002: A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, Vol. 42(1), 1‐34. HARBORNE, J.B., 1999: Classes and functions of secondary products from plants. J.N. Walton, D.E. Brown (eds). Chemicals from plants – Perspectives on plant secondary products. Imperial; College Press, London, 1‐25. HUBER, M., (ed), 2007: Organic, more healthy? – A search for biomarkers of potential health effects induced by organic products, investigated in a chicken model. Louis Bolk Institute and FQH (Organic Food Quality and Health). LESTER, G.E., 2006: Organic versus conventionally grown produce: quality differences, and guidelines for comparison studies. HortScience Vol. 41(2), 296‐300. MAGKOS, F., ARVANITI, F., A. ZAMPELAS, 2003: Organic food: nutritious food or food for thought? A review of the evidence. Int. Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, Vol. 54(5), 357‐371. MAYER, A‐M., 1997: Historical changes in the mineral content of fruits and vegetables. British Food Journal, Vol. 99(6), 207‐211. WHITE, P.J., M.R. BROADLEY, 2005: Historical variation in the mineral composition of edible horticultural products. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, Vol. 80(6), 660‐667. WILLIAMS, C.M., 2002: Nutritional quality of organic foods: shades of grey or shades of green? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 61, 19‐ 24.

B 1 Distinguishing between product (nutritional quality) and process quality B 2 Plant products BLOKSMA, J., NORTHOLT, M., HUBER, M., VAN DER BURGT, G. & VAN DE VIJVER, L., 2007: A new food quality concept based on live processes. Cooper, J., Niggli, U. & Leifert, C. (eds). Handbook of organic food safety and quality, Woodhead Publishing Limited, Abington, 53‐73. VAN ELZAKKER, B. & NEUENDORFF, J., 2007: Quality assurance, inspection and certification of organic foods. Cooper, J., Niggli, U. & Leifert, C. (eds). Handbook of organic safety and quality, Woodhead Publishing Limited, 41‐52. GRINDER‐PEDERSEN, L., RASMUSSEN, S., BUGEL, S., JORGENSEN, L., DRAGSTED, L., GUNDERSEN, V. & SANDSTROM, B., 2003: Effect of diets based on foods from conventional versus organic production on intake and excretion of flavonoids and markers of antioxidative defense in humans. Journal of Agricultural And Food Chemistry 51, 5671‐5676. HAGLUND, A., JOHANSSON, L., BERGLUND, L. & DAHLSTEDT, L., 1999: Sensory evaluation of carrots from ecological and conventional growing systems. Food Quality And Preference 10, 23‐29.

HAGLUND, A., JOHANSSON, L. & DAHLSTEDT, L., 1998: Sensory evaluation of wholemeal bread from ecologically and conventionally grown wheat.

185

Journal of Cereal Science 27, 199‐207. HAGLUND, A., JOHANSSON, L., GAREDAL, L. & DLOUHY, J., 1997: Sensory quality of tomatoes cultivated with ecological fertilizing systems. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 27, 135‐145. KAHL, J., 2012: Organic food quality: from field to fork. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture 92, 2751‐2752. KAHL, J., BAARS, T., BUEGEL, S., BUSSCHER, N., HUBER, M., KUSCHE, D., REMBIALKOWSKA, E., SCHMID, O., SEIDEL, K., TAUPIER‐LETAGE, B., VELIMIROV, A. & ZALECKA, A., 2012: Organic food quality: a framework for concept, definition and evaluation from the European perspective. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture 92, 2760‐2765. KAHL, J., BUSSCHER, N. & PLOEGER, A., 2010: Questions on the validation of holistic methods of testing Organic Food Quality. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 27, 81‐94. LAIRON, D., 2010: Nutritional quality and safety of organic food. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 30, 33‐41. MAGKOS, F., ARVANITI, F. & ZAMPELAS, A., 2003: Organic food: nutritious food or food for thought? A review of the evidence. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 54, 357‐371. SEAL, C.J. & BRANDT, K., 2007: Nutritional quality of foods. Cooper, J., Niggli, U. &. L. C. (eds), Handbook of Organic Food Safety and Quality, Woodhead Publishing in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition, 25‐40. SOLTOFT, M., BYSTED, A., MADSEN, K. H., MARK, A. B., BUGEL, S. G., NIELSEN, J. & KNUTHSEN, P., 2011: Effects of organic and conventional growth systems on the content of carotenoids in carrot roots, and on intake and plasma status of carotenoids in humans. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture 91, 767‐775. SOLTOFT, M., NIELSEN, J., LAUREN, K. H., HUSTED, S., HALEKOH, U. & KNUTHSEN, P., 2010: Effects of organic and conventional growth systems on the content of flavonoids in onions and phenolic acids in carrots and potatoes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 58, 10323‐ 10329. THYBO, A., EDELENBOS, M., CHRISTENSEN, L., SORENSEN, J. & THORUP‐KRISTENSEN, K., 2006: Effect of organic growing systems on sensory quality and chemical composition of tomatoes, LWT‐Food Science and Technology 39: 835‐843. VELIMIROV, A., HUBER, M., LAURIDSEN, C., REMBIALKOWSKA, E., SEIDEL, K., BUGEL, S., 2010: Feeding trials in organic food quality and health research. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 90, 175‐182. WILLIAMS, C., 2002: Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 61, 19‐24. WOESE, K., LANGE, D., BOESS, C. & BOGL, K., 1997: A comparison of organically and conventionally grown foods ‐ Results of a review of the relevant literature. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 74, 281‐293. WORTHINGTON, V., 1998: Effect of agricultural methods on nutritional quality: A comparison of organic with conventional crops. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine 4, 58+. WORTHINGTON, V., 2001: Nutritional quality of organic versus conventional fruits, vegetables, and grains. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 7, 161‐173. B 2.1. Beneficial ingredients

186

PITHER, R., HALL. M.N., 1990: Analytical survey of the nutritional composition of organically grown fruit and vegetables. Technical Memorandum 597, MAFF Project 4350. B 2.1.1 Dry matter content HEATON, S., 2001: Organic Farming, Food quality and human health – A review of the evidence. Soil Association, Bristol, Great Britain, 87. B 2.1.2 Protein / amino acids EPPENDORFER, W.H., B.O. EGGUM BO., 1996. Fertilizer effects on yield, mineral and amino acid composition, dietary fiber content and nutritive value of leeks. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 49, 163‐ 174. B 2.1.3 Vitamines BERGAMO, P., E. FEDELE, L.IANNIBELLI, G. MARZILLO, 2003: Fat‐soluble vitamin contents and fatty acid composition in organic and conventional Italian dairy products. Food Chem. 82, 625‐631. LECLERC J., M.L. MILLER, E. JOLIET, G. ROCQUELIN, 1991: Vitamin and mineral contents of carrot and celeriac under mineral or organic fertilization. Biol. Agr. Hort. 7, 349‐361. NEUHOFF, D., VLATSCHKOV, M. & D. RAIGON, 2011: Comparison of the quality of conventionally and organically grown oranges in Spain. in: Proceedings of the 3rd Scientific Conference of ISOFAR, 28 SEPT ‐1. OCT 2011 in Namyangju, Republic of Korea, edited by Neuhoff et.al. 2011, Volume 1, Organic Crop Production, p. 487‐490. REMBIALKOWSKA, E., 1999: Comparison of the contents of nitrates, nitrites, lead, cadmium, and Vitamin C in potatoes from conventional and ecological farms. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences. Vol. 8/49, No. 4, 17‐26. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1998: Yield, vitamin and mineral contents of organically and conventionally grown potatoes and sweet corn. Ag. Ecosys. Environ 68, 207‐216. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1997: Yield, vitamin and mineral contents of organically and conventionally grown carrots and cabbage. Agr. Ecosys. Environ. 61, 155‐162. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1996: Yield, vitamin and mineral content of four vegetables grown with either composted manure or conventional fertilizer. J. Veg Crop Prod. 2, 13‐25. B 2.1.4 Fatty acids GUTIERREZ, F., T. ARNAUD, M.A. ALBI, 1999: Influence of ecological cultivation on virgin olive oil quality. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc. 76, 617‐621. PERRETTI, G., E. FINOTTI, S. ADAMUCCIO, R.D. SERA, L. MONTANARI, 2004: Composition of organic and conventionally produced sunflower seed oil. J. Amer. Oil Chem. Soc. 81, 1119‐1123. B 2.1.5 Mineral nutrients (major and trace elements) DEELL, J.R., R.K. PRANGE, 1993: Postharvest physiological disorders, diseases and mineral concentrations of organically and conventionally grown McIntosh and Cortland apples. Can. J. Plant Sci. 73, 223‐230. EPPENDORFER, W.H., B.O. EGGUM BO., 1996. Fertilizer effects on yield, mineral and amino acid composition, dietary fiber content and nutritive value of leeks. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 49, 163‐ 174.

187

HAJSLOVA, J., V. SCHULZOVA, P. SLANINA, K. JANNE, K.E. HELLENAS, C. ANDERSSON, 2005: Quality of organically and conventionally grown potatoes: four‐year study of micronutrients, metals, secondary metabolites, enzymic browning and organoleptic properties. Food Add. Contam. 22, 514‐534. LAIRON, D., N. SPITZ, E. TERMINE, P. RIBAUD, H. LAFONT, J. HAUTON, 1984: Effect of organic and mineral nitrogen fertilization on yield and nutritive value of butterhead lettuce. Qual. Planta. - Plant Foods Human Nutr. 34, 97-108. PEREZ-LOPEZ, A.J., LOPEZ-NICOLAS, J.M., NUNEZ-DELICADO, A., DEL AMOR, F.M., A.A. CARBONELL-BARRACHINA, 2007: Effects of agricultural practices on color, carotenoids composition, and minerals contents of sweet peppers, cv. Almuden. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55, 8158-8164. RYAN, M.H. J.W. DERRICK, P.R. DANN, 2004: Grain mineral concentrations and yield of wheat grown under organic and conventional management. J. Sci. Food Agr. 84, 207-216. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1998: Yield, vitamin and mineral contents of organically and conventionally grown potatoes and sweet corn. Ag. Ecosys. Environ 68, 207-216. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1997: Yield, vitamin and mineral contents of organically and conventionally grown carrots and cabbage. Agr. Ecosys. Environ. 61, 155-162. WARMAN, P.R., K.A. HAVARD, 1996: Yield, vitamin and mineral content of four vegetables grown with either composted manure or conventional fertilizer. J. Veg Crop Prod. 2, 13-25. SHIER, N.W., J. KELMAN, D.J. WHARTON, 1984: A comparison of crude protein, moisture, ash and crop yield between organic and conventionally grown wheat. Nutr. Reports Intern. 30, 71-77. B 2.1.6 Secondary metabolites, antioxidants, phytochemicals (taste, flavour) AKCAY,Y.D., H.K. YLDRM, U. GUVENC, E.Y. SOZMEN, 2004: The effects of consumption of organic and nonorganic red wine on low density lipoprotein oxidation and antioxidant capacity in humans. Nutr. Res. 24, 541-554. ASAMI, D.K., Y. J. HONG, D.M. BARRETT, A.E. MITCHELL, 2003: Comparison of the total phenolic and ascorbic acid content of freeze-dried and air- dried marionberry, strawberry and corn grown using conventional, organic, and sustainable agricultural practices. J. Agr. Food Chem. 5, 1237- 1241.

BAXTER, G.J., A.B. GRAHAM, J.R. LAWRENCE, D. WILES, J.R. PATERSON, 2001: Salicylic acid in soups prepared from organically and non‐organically grown vegetables. European Journal of Nutrition 40, 289‐292. BERGMANN, H., LIPPMANN, R., REINHOS, V., TIROKE, S., MACHELETT, B., 1999: Activation of stress resistance in plants and consequences for product quality. Journal of Applied Botany – Angewandte Botanik 73, 153‐161. CARBONARO, M., MATTERA ,M., 2001: Polyphenoloxidase activity and polyphenol levels in organically and conventionally grown peach and pear. Food Chem. 72, 419‐424. CARBONARO, M., M. MATTERA, S. NICOLI, P. BERGAMO, M. CAPPELLONI, 2002: Modulation of antioxidant compounds in organic vs. conventional fruit (peach Prunus persica L., and pear, Pyrus communis L.). Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 50, 5458‐5462.

188

CARIS‐VEYRAT C., M.J. AMIOT, V. TYSSANDIER, D. GRASSELLY, M. BURET, M. MIKOLAJCZAK, J.C. GUILLAND, C. BOUTELOUP‐DEMANGE, P. BOREL, 2004: Influence of organic versus conventional agricultural practice on the antioxidant microconstituent content of tomatoes and derived purees; Consequences on antioxidant plasma status in humans. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 52, 6503‐6509. DIMBERG, L.H., C. GISSÉN, J. NILSSON, 2005: Phenolic compounds in oat grains (Avena sativa L.) grown in conventional and organic systems. Ambio 34, 331‐337. EBATA, J., KAWAI, K., FURUKAWA, H., 1993: Inhibitory effects of dietary leafy vegetables on mutagens and on active oxygens. Bronzetti, G., Hayatsu, H., deFlora S., Waters, MD., Shankel, DM. (eds). Antimutagenesis and Anticarcinogenesis Mechanisms. III. New York, Plenum Press, 1993, 99‐102. EVERS, A.M., 1989: Effects of different fertilization practices on the carotene content of carrot. J. Agr. Sci. Finland. 61, 7‐14. GRINDER‐PEDERSEN, L., S.E. RASMUSSEN, S. BÜGEL, L.V. JØRGENSEN, L.O. DRAGSTED, V. GUNDERSEN, B. SANDSTROM, 2003: Effect of diets based on foods from conventional versus organic production on intake and excretion of flavonoids and markers of antioxidative defense in humans. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 51, 5671‐5676. GRONOWSKA‐SENGER, A., DUDEK, M., PIERZYNOWSKA, J., 1997: Assessment of the bioavailability of beta‐Carotene from certain vegetables grown by conventional and ecological methods. RocZN. PZH. 48 (2), 145‐148. HAMOUZ, K., CEPL, J., VOKAL, B., LACHMANN, J., PIVEC, V., 1999: Influence of environmental conditions and way of cultivation on the polyphenol and ascorbic acid content in potato tubers. Rostlinna Vyroba 45, 293‐298. HAJSLOVA, J., V. SCHULZOVA, P. SLANINA, K. JANNE, K.E. HELLENAS, C. ANDERSSON, 2005: Quality of organically and conventionally grown potatoes: four‐year study of micronutrients, metals, secondary metabolites, enzymic browning and organoleptic properties. Food Add. Contam. 22, 514‐534. HÄKKINEN, S.H., A.R. TÖRRÖNEN, 2000: Content of flavonols and selected phenolic acids in strawberries and Vaccinium species: influence of cultivar, cultivation site and technique. Food Res. Intl. 33, 517‐524. HARDER, L., L.P. CHRISTENSEN, B.T. CHRISTENSEN, K. BRANDT, 1998: Contents of flavonoids and other phenolics in wheat plants grown with different levels of organic fertilizer. Polyphenols Communications 98, 495‐496 HUKKANEN, A.T., T.P. MIKKONEN, K.R. MAATTA, A.R. TORRONEN, S.O. KARENLAMPI, H.I. KOKKO, R.O. KARJALAINEN, 2002: Variation in flavonol content among blackcurrant cultivars. Acta Hort. 585, 121‐ 124. KUMAR, R., KLEIN, D., KRUMBEIN, A. & KÖPKE, U., 2007: Product Quality of Greenhouse Tomatoes: Effect of Cultivars, Organic N‐Fertilization and Harvest Time. European Journal of Horticultural Science, 72 (1), p. 46‐51 ISHIDA, B.K., M.H. CHAPMAN, 2004: A comparison of carotenoid content and total antioxidant activity in catsup from several commercial sources in the United States. J. Agr. Food Chem. 52, 8017‐8020. JOHANSSON, L., HAGLUND, L., BERGLUND, L., LEA, P., RISIV, E., 1999: Preference for tomatoes, affected by sensory attributes and information about growth conditions. Food Quality and Preference 10, 289‐298.

KLEIN, D., GKISAKIS, V., KRUMBEIN, A., LIVIERATOS, I. AND KÖPKE, U., 2010: Old and endangered tomato cultivars under organic greenhouse

189

production: effect of harvest time on flavour profile and consumer acceptance. Int. J. Food Sci. Techn., 45, 2250‐2257. LEVITE, D., ADRIAN, M., TAMRN, L., 2000: Preliminary results of resveratrol in wine of organic and conventional vineyards. Proceedings 6th International Congress on Organic Viticulture, 2000, 257‐258. http://www.soel.de/inhalte/publikationen/s‐77.pdf. LOMBARDI‐BOCCIA, G., M. LUCARINI, S. LANZI, A. AGUZZI, M. CAPPELLONI, 2004: Nutrients and antioxidant molecules in yellow plums (Prunus domestica L.) from conventional and organic productions: a comparative study. J. Agr. Food Chem. 52, 90‐94. LUMPKIN, H.M., 2005: A comparison of lycopene and other phytochemicals in tomatoes grown under conventional and organic management systems. Tech Bulletin AVRDC, 34:48. MERCADANTE, A.Z., D.B. RODRIGUEZ‐AMAYA, 1991: Carotenoid composition of a leafy vegetable in relation to some agricultural variables. J. Agr. Food Chem. 39, 1094‐1097. MIKKONEN,T.P., K.P. MAATTA, A.T. HUKKANEN, H.I. KOKKO, A.R. TORRONEN, S.O. KARENLAMPI, R.O. KARJALAINEN, 2001: Flavonol content varies among black currant cultivars. J. Agr. Food Chem. 49, 3274‐3277. MITCHELL, A., HONG, Y‐J., KOH, E., BARRETT, D.M., BRYANT, D.E., DENSION, R. F., S. KAFFKA, 2007: Ten‐year comparison of the influence of organic and conventional crop management practices on the content of flavonoids in tomatoes. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55, 6154‐ 6159. MOSCATELLO, J.S., KOSTEWICZ, S.R., SIMS, C.A., 1996: Yield and carotene content of organically grown carrot. Proc. Florida State Horticult. Soc. 109, 299‐301. MWAJA, V.N., MASIUNAS, J.B., WESTON, L.A., 1995: Effects of fertility on biomass, phytotoxicity, and allelochemical content of cereal rye. Journal of Chemical Ecology 21, (1), 81‐96. NØRBAEK, R, D.B.F. AABOER, I.S. BLEEG, B.T. CHRISTENSEN, T. KONDO, K. BRANDT, 2003: Flavone C‐glycoside, phenolic acid, and nitrogen contents in leaves of barley subject to organic fertilization treatments. J. Agr. Food, 51, 809‐813. OLSSON, M.E., C.S. ANDERSSON, S. OREDSSON, R.H. BERGLUND, K.E. GUSTAVSSON, 2006: Antioxidant levels and inhibition of cancer cell proliferation in vitro by extracts from organically and conventionally cultivated strawberries. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 54, 1248‐ 1255. PEREZ‐LOPEZ, A.J., LOPEZ‐NICOLAS, J.M., NUNEZ‐ DELICADO, A., DEL AMOR, F.M., A.A. CARBONELL‐ BARRACHINA, 2007: Effects of agricultural practices on color, carotenoids composition, and minerals contents of sweet peppers, cv. Almuden. Journal of Agricultural And Food Chemistry 55, 8158‐ 8164. PREMUZIC, Z., M. BARGIELA, A. GARCIA, A. IORIO, 1998: Calcium, iron, potassium, phosphorus and vitamin C content of organic and hydroponic tomatoes. HortScience 33, 255‐257. REMBIALKOWSKA, E., HALLMANN, E., A. RUSACZONEK, 2007: Influence of processing on bioactive substances content and antioxidant properties of apple puree from organic and conventional production in Poland. Polish Journal of Food And Nutrition Sciences, 139-143. REN, H., H. ENDO, T. HAYASHI, 2001: Antioxidative and antimutagenic activitities and polyphenol content of pesticide-free and organically cultivated green vegetables using water-soluble chitosan as a soil modifier and leaf surface spray. J. Sci. Food Agr. 81, 1426-1432.

SOUSA, C., P. VALENTÃO, J. RANGEL, G. LOPES, J.A. PEREIRA, F. FERRERES, R.M. SEABRA, P.B. ANDRADE, 2005: Influence of two fertilization

190

regimens on the amounts of organic acids and phenolic compounds of tronchuda cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. Var. costata DC). J. Agr. Food Chem. 53, 9128-9132.

TAROZZI, A., S. HRELIA, C. ANGELONI, F. MORRONI, P. BIAGI, M. GUARDIGLI, G. CANTELLI‐FORTI, P. HRELIA, 2006: Antioxidant effectiveness of organically and non‐organically grown red oranges in cell culture systems. European J. Nutr. 45, 152‐158. TINTTUNEN, S., P. LEHTONEN, 2001: Distinguish organic wine from normal wines on the basis of concentrations of phenolic compounds and spectral data. European Food Res. Technol. 212, 390‐394. VEBERIC, R., M. TROBEC, K. HERBINGER, M. HOFER, D. GRILL, F. STAMPAR, 2005: Phenolic compounds in some apple (Malus domestica Borkh) cultivars of organic and integrated production. J. Sci. Food Agr. 85, 1687‐1694. WEIBEL, FP., BICKEL, R., LEUTHOLD, S., ALﬂDI, T., 1998: Are organically grown apples tastier and healthier? A comparative field study using conventional and alternative methods to measure fruit quality. Herregods M. (ed). Proceedings to the XXV International Horticultural Congress, Aug 2‐7, 1998. Acta Horticulturae 517, Part 7: Quality of Horticultural Products. Bruxelles, Belgium, 417‐427. YLDRM, H.K., Y.D. AKCAY, U. GÜVENC, E.Y. SÖZME, 2004: Protection capacity against low‐density lipoprotein oxidation and antioxidant potential of some organic and non‐organic wines. Intl. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 55, 351‐362. YOUNG, J.E., X. ZHAO, E.E. CAREY, R. WELTI, S. YANG, W. YANG, 2005: Phytochemical phenolics in organically grown vegetables. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 49, 1136‐1142. ZHAO, X. IWAMOTO, T., CAREY, E., 2007: Antioxidant Capacity of leafy vegetables as affected by high tunnel environment, fertilization and growth stage. J. Science of Food and Agriculture 87, 2692‐2699. FJELKNER‐MODIG, S., H. BENGTSSON, R. STEGMARK, S. NYSTROM., 2000: The influence of organic and integrated production on nutritional, sensory and agricultural aspects of vegetable raw materials for food production. Acta Agric. Scan. Section B, Soil Plant Sci. 50, 102‐113. HAJSLOVA, J., V. SCHULZOVA, P. SLANINA, K. JANNE,K.E. HELLENAS, C. ANDERSSON, 2005: Quality of organically and conventionally grown potatoes: four‐year study of micronutrients, metals, secondary metabolites, enzymic browning and organoleptic properties. Food Add. Contam.22, 514‐534. HANSEN, H., 1981: Comparison of chemical composition and taste of biodynamically and conventionally grown vegetables. Qual. Planta ‐Plant Foods Human Nutr. 30, 203‐211. HOGSTAD, S., E. RISVIK, K. STEINSHOLT, 1997: Sensory quality and chemical composition in carrots: A multivariate study. Acta Agr. Scan.Section B, Soil Plant Sci. 47, 253‐264. SCHULTZ, D.G., K. KOCH, K.H. KROMER, U. KÖPKE, 1997. Quality comparison of mineral, organic and biodynamic cultivation of potatoes: contents, strength criteria, sensory investigations and picture‐creating methods. W. Lockeretz (ed) Agricultural Production and Nutrition. Proceedings of an International Conference. Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy, March 19‐21, Boston, MA, 115‐ 120. B 2.2 Food safety: Undesirable/harmful ingredients B 2.2.1 Pesticide residues/xenobiotiocs/contaminants BAKER, B. P., BENBROOK, C. M., III, E. G., and K. L., BENBROOK, 2002: Pesticide residues in conventional, integrated pest management (IPM)

191

grown and organic foods: insights from three US data sets. Food Additives & Contaminants, 19 (5), 427‐446. B 2.2.2 Nitrate HAMOUZ, K., CEPL, J., VOKAL, B., LACHMANN, J., 1999: Inﬂuence of locality and way of cultivation on the nitrate and glycoalkaloid content in potato tubers. Rostlinna Vyroba 45, 495‐501. B 2.2.3 Heavy metals and toxic elements B 2.2.4 Mycotoxins DAMM, U., 2000: Bodenmykoflora in unterschiedlichen Bewirtschaftungssystemen des Weizens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Fusarium‐Arten. Arch. Acker‐Pfl. Boden 45, 509‐521. DÖLL, S.,VALENTA, H., DÄNICKE, S., FLACHOWSKY, G., 2002: Fusarium mycotoxins in conventionally and organically grown grain from Thüringia/Germany. Landbauforschung Völkenrode 52, 91‐96. KÖPKE, U., THIEL, B. & ELMHOLT, S., 2007: Strategies to reduce mycotoxin and fungal alkaloid contamination in organic and conventional cereal production systems. In: Cooper, J., Niggli, U. & Leifert, C. (eds.): Handbook of organic food safety and quality. Woodhead Publishing Ltd. Cambridge, England, p. 353‐391. SCHOLLENBERGER, M., ET AL. 1999: A survey of Fusarium toxins in cereal‐based foods marketed in an area of southwest Germany. Mycopathologica 145 (1), 49‐57. B 2.2.5 Human pathogens/microbial contaminants FISCHER‐ARNDT, M.T. & KÖPKE, U., 2007: Effect of weed management strategies on the risk of enteric pathogen transfer into the food chain and lettuce quality. In: Urs Niggli, Carlo Leifert, Thomas Alföldi, Lorna Lück & Helga Willer (Editors): Improving Sustainability in Organic and Low Input Food Production Systems. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress of the European Integrated Project Quality Low Input Food (QLIF), University of Hohenheim, Germany, 20‐23 March 2007, ISBN 978‐3‐03736003‐3, 189‐192. http://orgprints.org/9789/ E FISCHER‐ARNDT, M.T., NEUHOFF, D., TAMM, L. AND KÖPKE, U., 2010: ffects of weed management practices on enteric pathogen transfer into lettuce (Lactuca sativa var. capitata). Food Control 21, 1004‐1010. KÖPKE, U., THIEL, B. & ELMHOLT, S.,2007: Pre‐harvest strategies to ensure the microbiological safety of fruit and vegetables from manurebased production systems. In: Cooper, J., Niggli, U. & Leifert, C. (eds.): Handbook of organic food safety and quality. Woodhead Publishing Ltd. Cambridge, England, p. 413 – 429. WIEßNER, S., THIEL, B., KRÄMER, J. & KÖPKE, U., 2009: Hygienic quality of head lettuce: effects of organic and mineral fertilisers. Food Control 20, 881886 B 3 Animal products B 3.1 Beneficial ingredients

PINTEA, A.; DULF, F.; BUNEA, A.; MATEA, C. & ANDREI, S. (2012). Comparative analysis of lipophilic compounds in eggs of organically raised ISA Brown and Araucana hens. Chemical Papers 66: 955-963.

192

B 3.1.1 Fatty acids BAARS, T.; WOHLERS, J.; KUSCHE, D. & JAHREIS, G. (2012). Experimental improvement of cow milk fatty acid composition in organic winter diets. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 92: 2883-2890. JAHREIS, G., FRITSCHE, J., andH., STEINHART, 1997: Conjugated linoleic acid in milk fat: high variation depending on production system. Nutrition Research, 17(9), 1479‐1484. ELLIS, K. A., G. INNOCENT, D. GROVE‐WHITE, P. CRIPPS, W. G. MCLEAN, C. V. HOWARD, and M. MIHM, 2006: Comparing the Fatty Acid Composition of Organic and Conventional Milk. J. Dairy Sci. 89:1938–1950.

BAUMANN, D.E., BARBANO, D.M., DWYER, D.A., GRINARI, J.M., 2000: Technical note: Production of butter with enhanced conjugated linoleic acid for use in biomedical studies with animal models. J. Diary Sci. 83, 2422‐2425. BUTLER, G., NIELSEN, J. H., SLOTS, T., SEAL, C., EYRE, M. D., SANDERSON, R., and C., LEIFERT, 2008). Fatty acid and fat‐soluble antioxidant concentrations in milk from high‐and low‐input conventional and organic systems: seasonal variation. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 88(8), 1431‐1441.

FRENCH, P., STANTON, C., LAWLESS, F., O’RIORDAN, E.G., MONAHAN, F.J., CAFFREY, P.J., MOLONEY, A.P., 2000: Fatty acid composition, including conjugated linoleic acid, of .intramuscular fat from steers offered grazed grass, grass silage, or concentrate‐based diets. J. Anim. Sci. 78, 2849‐ 2855. HOIKKALA, A.; MUSTONEN, E.; SAASTAMOINEN, I.; JOKELA, T.; TAPONEN, J.; SALONIEMI, H. & WÄHÄLÄ, K. (2007). High levels of equol in organic skimmed Finnish cow milk. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research 51: 782-786. BERGAMO, P., FEDELE, E., IANNIBELLI, L., and G., MARZILLO, 2003: Fat‐soluble vitamin contents and fatty acid composition in organic and conventional Italian dairy products. Food Chemistry, 82(4), 625‐631. PETERSON, D.G., KELSEY, J.A., BAUMANN, D.E., 2002: Analysis of variation in cis‐9‐, trans‐11‐conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) in milk fat of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 85, 2164‐2172. TRES, A.; O'NEILL, R. & VAN RUTH, S. M. (2011). Fingerprinting of fatty acid composition for the verification of the identity of organic eggs. Lipid Technology 23: 40-42. B 3.1.2 Protein ENDER, K., PAPSTEIN, H.‐J., NÜRNBERG, K., WEGNER, J., 1997: Muscle and fat related characteristics of grazing steers and lambs in extensive systems. Prod. EU‐workshop on ‘Effect of extensification on animal performance and product qualitiy’. 14‐16 May, Melle‐Gontrode, Belgium. BONANNO, A.; TORNAMBÈ, G.; DI GRIGOLI, A.; GENNA, V.; BELLINA, V.; DI MICELI, G. & GIAMBALVO, D. (2012). Effect of legume grains as a source of dietary protein on the quality of organic lamb meat. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 92: 2870-2875. B 3.1.3 Taste, flavor HORSTED, K.; ALLESEN-HOLM, B. H.; HERMANSEN, J. E. & KONGSTED, A. G. (2012). Sensory profiles of breast meat from broilers reared in an organic niche production system and conventional standard broilers. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 92: 258-265.

193

SAKOWSKI, T.; KUCZYNSKA, B.; PUPPEL, K.; METERA, E.; SLONIEWSKI, K. & BARSZCZEWSKI, J. (2012). Relationships between physiological indicators in blood, and their yield, as well as chemical composition of milk obtained from organic dairy cows. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 92: 2905-2912. STERGIADIS, S.; LEIFERT, C.; SEAL, C.J.; EYRE, M.D.; NIELSEN, J.H.; LARSEN, M.K.; SLOTS, T.; STEINSHAMM, H. & BUTLER, G. (2012). Effect of feeding intensity and milking system on nutritionally relevant milk components in dairy farming systems in the North East of England. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 60: 7270-7281. Van Ruth, S.; Alewijn, M.; Rogers, K.; Newton-Smith, E.; Tena, N.; Bollen, M. & Koot, A. (2011). Authentication of organic and conventional eggs by carotenoid profiling . Food Chemistry 126: 1299 - 1305. B 3.1.4 Authentication of organic origin B 3.2 Food safety: Undesirable/harmful ingredients B 3.2.1 Pesticide residues/xenobiotics/contaminants VRIES, M. D.; KWAKKEL, R. & KIJLSTRA, A. (2006). Dioxins in organic eggs: a review . NJAS ‐ Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 54: 207 ‐ 221 B 3.2.2 Pharmaceutical residues YOUNG, R., COWE, A., NUNA, C., HARVEY, J., MASON, L., 1999: The use and misuse of antibiotics in UK agriculture Part 2, Published by Soil Association, Bristol, UK.. B 3.2.3 Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) B 4 Holistic/Complementary Methods B 4.1 Feeding experiments BALDINGER, L.; BAUMUNG, R.; ZOLLITSCH, W. & KNAUS, W. F. (2011). Italian ryegrass silage in winter feeding of organic dairy cows: forage intake, milk yield and composition. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 91: 435-442.

PLOCHBERGER, K., 1989: Feeding experiments. A criterion for quality estimation of biologically and conventionally produced foods. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 27, 419‐428.

PLOCHBERGER, K., VELIMIROW, A., 1992: Are food preference tests with laboratory rats a proper method for evaluating nutritional quality? Biol.

194

Agric. Hortic. 8, 221‐233. PRECHT, D., MOLKENTIN, J., 1997: Effect of feeding of conjugated cis‐9‐, trans‐11‐octadecanoic acid and other isomers of linoleic acid in bovine mild fats. Nahrung 41 (6), 330‐335. VELIMIROV, A., K. PLOCHBERGER, U. HUSPEKA, W. SCHOTT, 1992: The influence of biologically and conventionally cultivated food on the fertility of rats. Bio. Agr. Hort. 8, 325‐337. B 4.2 Post‐harvest effects AMODIO, M.L., COLELLI, G., HASEY, J., A.A. KADER, 2007: A comparative study of composition and postharvest performance of organically and conventionally grown kiwifruits. J. Of the Science of Food and Agriculture (in press). BARTH, M.M., WESTON, L., ZHUANG, H., 1995: Influence of clomazone herbicide on postharvest quality of processing squash and pumpkin. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 43, 2389‐2393. CAYUELA, J.A., J.M. VIDUEIRA, M.A. ALBI, F. GUTIERREZ, 1997: Influence of the ecological cultivation of strawberries (Fragaria_ Ananassa cv. Chandler) on the quality of the fruit and on their capacity for conservation. J. Agr. Food Chem. 45, 1736‐1740. DEELL, J.R., R.K. PRANGE, 1993: Postharvest physiological disorders, diseases and mineral concentrations of organically and conventionally grown McIntosh and Cortland apples. Can. J. Plant Sci. 73, 223‐230. B 4.3 Picture‐forming methods ATHMANN, M., 2011: Produktqualität von Salatrauke (Eruca sativa L.) und Weizen (Triticum aestivum L.): Einfluss von Einstrahlungsintensität, Stickstoffangebot, Düngungsart und Hornkieselapplikation auf Wachstum und Differenzierung. PhD Thesis, Bonn University; Bonn, 310 pp. ATHMANN, M. & U. KÖPKE, 2011: Product quality of rocket (Eurca sativa L.) as a function of light intensity and nitrogen supply. In: Neuhoff, D., Sohn, S.M., Ssekyewa, C., Halberg, N., Rasmussen, I.A. and J. Hermansen (eds.): Organic is Life – Knowledge for tomorrow. Proceedings of the third scientific conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR), held at the 17th IFOAM Organic World Congress in cooperation with the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement (IFOAM) and the Korean Organizing Committee (KOC). 28. September – 1. October in Namyangju, Korea. Volume 2: Socio‐Economy, Livestock, Food Quality, Agro‐Ecology and Knowledge Dissemination: 166‐169 ZALECKA, A., 2006: Entwicklung und Validierung der Steigbildmethode zur Differenzierung von ausgewählten Lebensmitteln aus verschiedenen Anbausystemen und Verarbeitungsprozessen. PhD Thesis, University Kassel, Kassel, 271 pp. ANDERSEN, J.‐O., KAACK, K., NIELSEN, M., THORUP‐KRISTENSEN, KR., LABOURIAU, R., 2011: Comparative study between biocrystallization and chemical analyses of carrots (Daucus carota L.) grown organically using different levels of green manures. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 19, 29 – 48.. ANDERSEN, J.‐O., HENRIKSEN, C:B., LURSEN, J., NIELSEN, A.A:, 1999: Computerised image analysis of biocrystallograms originated from agricultural products. Computers and electronics in agriculture, 22, 51 – 69. FRITZ, J., ATHMANN, M., KAUTZ ,T., KÖPKE, U., 2011: Grouping and classification of wheat from organic and conventional production systems by combining three image forming methods. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 27, 320‐336.

HUBER, M., ANDERSEN, J.O., KAHL, J., BUSSCHER, N., DOESBURG, P., MERGARDT, G., KRETSCHMER, S., ZALECKA, A., MEELURSAN, A., PLOEGER, A., NIEROP, D., VAN

195

DE VIJVER, L. , BAARS, E., 2010: Standardization and validation of the visual evaluation of biocrystallizations. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 27 (1), 25‐40. KAHL, J., 2006: Entwicklung, in‐house Validierung und Anwendung des ganzheitlichen Verfahrens Biokristallisation für die Unterscheidung von Weizen‐, Möhren‐ und Apfelproben aus unterschiedlichem Anbau und Verarbeitungsschritten. Habilitation Thesis, Kassel University, Kassel, 272 pp. KAHL, J., BUSSCHER, N., MERGARDT, G., MÄDER, P., DUBOIS, D., PLOEGER, A., 2008: Authentication of organic wheat samples from a long‐term trial using biocrystallization. Proceedings of the Second Scientific Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research, Modena, Italy. (Institute of Organic Agriculture: Bonn), 742‐745. STRUBE, J., STOLZ, P., 2002: Fluoreszenz‐Anregungs‐Spektroskopie zur Bestimmung der Qualität von Äpfeln aus ökologischem Anbau. 37. Vortragstagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Qualitätsforschung 2002, Universität Hannover. B 5 Models for describing food quality BRYANT, JP., CHAPIN , FS., KLEIN, DR., 1983: Carbon/nutrient balance of boreal plants in relation to vertebrate herbivory. OIKOS 40, 357‐368. LORIO, P.L., 1986: Growth‐differentiation balance: a basis for understanding southern pine beetle‐tree interactions. Forest Ecol. Man. 14, 259‐ 273. B 6 Effects on human well‐being other than physical or chemical ones (link to process quality) FAIN, N.M., LEWIS, N.M., 2002: Wellness – the holistic approach to health. J. Family Consumer Sciences 94 (7), 6‐9. ANTONOVSKY, A., 1979: Health, stress and coping: New perspectives on mental and physical well‐being. San Francisco. HORRIGAN, L., LAWRENCE, R.S., WALKER, P., 2002: How sustainable agriculture can address the environmental and human health harms of industrial agriculture. Environmental Health Perspectives 110 (5), 445‐456. B 7 Recommendation ? C 1 Process quality GEIER, U., FRIEBEN, B., GUTSCHE, V. &KÖPKE, U. , 2000: Ecobalance of organic and integrated apple production in Hamburg. In: ALFÖLDI, T., LOCKERETZ, W. & NIGGLI, U. (eds): Proceedings 13th International IFOAM Scientific Conference, 28 to 31 August 2000, Convention Center Basel, Switzerland, 166. TAMM, L., KÖPKE, U., COHEN, Y. & LEIFERT, C, 2007: Development of strategies to improve quality and safety and reduce cost of production in organic and ´low input` crop production systems. In: Urs Niggli, Carlo Leifert, Thomas Alföldi, Lorna Lück & Helga Willer (Editors): Improving Sustainability in Organic and Low Input Food Production Systems. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress of the European Integrated Project Quality Low Input Food (QLIF), University of Hohenheim, Germany, 20‐23 March 2007, ISBN 978‐3‐ 03736‐003‐3, 151‐157. http://orgprints.org/10626 C 1.1 Life cycle assessment DE BACKER, E., AERTSENS, J., VERGUCHT, S. & STEURBAUT, W., 2009: Assessing the ecological soundness of organic and conventional agriculture by means of life cycle assessment (LCA) A case study of leek production. British Food Journal 111, 1028‐1061.

196

BOGGIA, A., PAOLOTTI, L. & CASTELLINI, C., 2010: Environmental impact evaluation of conventional, organic and organic‐plus poultry production systems using life cycle assessment. Worlds Poultry Science Journal 66, 95‐114. VAN DEN BROEK, R., TREFFERS, D.‐J., MEEUSEN, M., VAN WIJK, A., NIEUWLAAR, E. & TURKENBURG, W., 2001: Green energy or organic food? A life‐cycle assessment comparing two uses of set‐aside land. Journal of Industrial Ecology 5, 65‐87. GEIER, U & KÖPKE, U., 1998: Comparison of Conventional and Organic Farming by Process‐Life Cycle Assessment. A Case Study of Agriculture in Hamburg. In: CEUTERICK, D. (ed.): International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment in Agriculture, Agro‐Industry and Forestry. Proceedings International Conference 3‐4 December 1998, Brussel, Belgium, 1998/PPE/R/161. 31‐38. HAAS, G., WETTERICH, F., KÖPKE, U., 2001: Comparing intensive, extensified and organic grassland farming in southern Germany by process life cycle assessment. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 83, 43‐53. HAAS, G., WETTERICH, F. & GEIER, U., 2000: Life Cycle Assessment Framework in Agriculture on the Farm Level. Int. J. LCA Vol. 5 No. 6 2000. ecomed publishers, Landsberg, Germany, 345‐348. HAAS, G., WETTERICH, F. & GEIER, U., 2000: Life cycle assessment of intensive, extensified and organic grassland farms in southern Germay.In: ALFÖLDI, T., LOCKERETZ, W. & NIGGLI, U. (eds): Proceedings 13TH INTERNATIONAL IFOAM SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE, 28 TO 31 AUGUST 2000, CONVENTION CENTER BASEL, SWITZERLAND, 157. HAYASHI, K., 2013: Practical recommendations for supporting agricultural decisions through life cycle assessment based on two alternative views of crop production: the example of organic conversion. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 331‐339. KIMMING, M., SUNDBERG, C., NORDBERG, A., BAKY, A., BERNESSON, S., NOREN, O. & HANSSON, P. A., 2011: Life cycle assessment of energy self‐sufficiency systems based on agricultural residues for organic arable farms. Bioresource Technology 102, 1425‐1432. KÖPKE, U., COOPER, J., PETERSEN, H.L., VAN DER BURGT G.J.H.M. & TAMM, L., 2008: QLIF Workshop 3: Performance of Organic and Low Input Crop Production Systems. Environmental Impacts and Economic Differences in grassland based Organic Dairy Farms in Germany – Modelling the Extremes. In: Daniel Neuhoff, Niels Halberg, Thomas Alföldi, William Lockeretz, Andreas Thommen, Ilse A. Rasmussen, John Hermansen, Mette Vaarst, Lorna Lueck, Fabio Caporali, Henning Hogh Jensen, Paola Migliorini, Helga Willer (Editors): Cultivating the future based on science, Vol. 2 Livestock, Socio‐Economy and Cross Disciplinary Research in Organic Agriculture.Proceeding of the Second Scientific Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR), Modena, Italy 18‐20 June 2008, 836‐839. KÖPKE, U, HAAS, G. & GEIER, U., 1999: Environmental Impacts of Organic Agriculture: Postitive Effects Analysed by Process‐Life Cycle Assessment. In: GOTWALD, A. (ed.) 1999: Organic Farming in the European Union – Perspectives for the 21st Century. Proceedings of a conference held 27th and 28th May 1999 in Baden / Vienna. Vienna: EuroTech Management, 67‐72. KONG, D., SHAN, J., IACOBONI, M. & MAGUIN, S. R., 2012: Evaluating greenhouse gas impacts of organic waste management options using life cycle assessment. Waste Management & Research 30, 800‐812. LEIFERT C., KÖPKE, U., BONDE, M., STANLEY, R., HAMM, U., WYSS, G., ÖLMEZ, H., BENBROOK, C., HAJSLOVA, J., LUECK, L. & COOPER, J., 2008: QLIF Workshop 2: Safety of foods from organic and low input farming systems. Environmental Impacts and Economic Differences in grassland based Organic Diary Farms in Germany – Modelling the Extremes. In: Daniel Neuhoff, Niels Halberg, Thomas Alföldi, William Lockeretz, Andreas Thommen, Ilse A. Rasmussen, John Hermansen, Mette Vaarst, Lorna Lueck, Fabio Caporali, Henning Hogh Jensen, Paola Migliorini, Helga Willer (Editors): Cultivating the future based on science, Vol. 2 Livestock, Socio‐Economy and Cross Disciplinary

197

Research in Organic Agriculture.Proceeding of the Second Scientific Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR), Modena, Italy 18‐20 June 2008, 832‐835. MACRAE, R. J., LYNCH, D. & MARTIN, R. C., 2010: Improving energy efficiency and GHG mitigation potentials in Canadian organic farming systems. Sustainable Agriculture 34, 549‐580. NEMECEK, T., DUBOIS, D., HUGUENIN‐ELIE, O. & GAILLARD, G., 2011: Life cycle assessment of Swiss farming systems: I. Integrated and organic farming. Agricultural Systems 104, 217‐232. PAGE, G., 2011: Modeling carbon footprints of organic orchard production systems to address carbon trading: An approach based on life cycle assessment. Hortscience 46, 324‐327. SCHAU, E. M. & FET, A. M., 2011: Assessing the ecological soundness of organic and conventional agriculture by means of life cycle assessment (LCA) ‐ a case study of leek production (Vol. 111, pg 1028, 2009). British Food Journal 113, 809. THOMASSEN, M. A., VAN CALKER, K. J., SMITS, M. C. J., IEPEMA, G. L. & DE BOER, I. J. M., 2008: Life cycle assessment of conventional and organic milk production in the Netherlands. Agricultural Systems 96, 95‐107. VENKAT, K., 2012: Comparison of twelve organic and conventional farming systems: A life cycle greenhouse gas emissions perspective. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 36, 620‐649. C 1.2 Regulation C 1.2.1 EU standards C 1.2.2 NOP standards C 1.2.3 NSAA standards C 1.2.4 Other standards

198

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 8

General human well‐being ‐ consumers satisfacion

Authors: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Hamm and Sally Yip

www.isofar.org

199

Content

A Mission: ...... 202 B. Contents ...... 203 M Material exhibited: ...... 205 M 1 In the hall – Consumers’ perception on organic food products ...... 205 M 2 Middle of the hall – Characteristics and traits of organic consumers ...... 206 M 2.1 Organic product features...... 206 M 2.2 Pricing ...... 206 M 2.3 Promotional messages ...... 206 M 2.4 Organic food availability ...... 206 M 2.5 Out‐of‐home consumption ...... 206 B 1 Does “the” organic consumer exist? ...... 207 B 1.1 Overall characteristics ...... 207

B 1.2 Socio‐economic measures of organic consumers ...... 207 B 1.3 Beliefs of organic consumers ...... 207

B 1.4 Purchasing motivations of organic consumers ...... 207 B 2 How do consumers perceive the features of organic products? ...... 207 B 2.1Product quality ...... 207 B 2.2 Package ...... 208 B 2.3 Organic labels ...... 208 B 2.4 Product range ...... 208 B 3 How do consumers perceive the price of organic products, and what are consumers willing to pay? ...... 208 B 3.1 Perception of prices ...... 208 B 3.2 Knowledge on prices ...... 208 B 3.3 Consumers’ willingness to pay ...... 208

200

B 3.4 Enterprises’ strategies of how to set prices ...... 209 B 4 How can the particularities of organic products be communicated? ...... 209 B 4.1 Advertisement ...... 209 B 4.1 Sales promotion ...... 209 B 4.3 Public relations ...... 209 B 4.4 Industry sponsoring ...... 209 B 5 Where to shop organic? Consumers’ expectations towards the distribution of organic products ...... 209

B 5.1 Organic product distribution in general ...... 210 B 5.2 Direct from farm ...... 210

B 5.3 Weekly local/fresh/wet markets ...... 210 B 5.4 Specialties stores ...... 210 B 5.5 Conventional retail ...... 210 B5.6 Internet ...... 210 B 6 Consuming organic out of home, what do consumers expect? ...... 211 B 6.1 School and hospital canteens ...... 211 B 6.2 Café and restaurants ...... 211 B 6.3 Food stalls and food trucks ...... 211 C. Organoleptic and haptic experience: ...... 211 IMPRINT ...... 213 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 213

201

Hall No: 8

Title: General human well‐ being ‐ Consumers satisfacion

A Mission:

Giving detailed insight into…

 The roles of consumers in the development of Organic Agriculture with an emphasis on attitudes and perception on products, prices, consumer expectations, availability and information

Consumers play a crucial role in the market for organic products. They help to determine the need of Organic Agriculture in the food industry. Routinely, consumers who choose organic over conventional products are willing to pay premium prices for their food choices. Yet, organic is one of the fastest growing agricultural markets in many parts of the world, which demonstrates the importance of understanding the reasons why consumers purchase organic products. Organic consumers carry certain characteristics, which are different to normal common consumers. By understanding these specific characteristics of organic consumers such as their demographics and lifestyles, the information will aid the organic food industry to develop manufacturing concepts for organic food.

Consumers’ expectations and satisfactions towards organic food are also important topics to assess their reasoning behind purchasing organic over conventional products, which are examined by four aspects. These four aspects are product features, pricing policies, promotional and communication messages and distribution channels in organic food. Additionally, out‐of‐home organic consumption is also an interesting topic to evaluate

202

consumers’ perception in organic food available in restaurants, canteens and other individual gastronomy.

B. Contents

The goal is to introduce organic consumers to the general public with a deeper understanding of their characteristics and perceptions of organic products. The characteristics of an organic consumer will be illustrated through the topics of socioeconomic measures, beliefs and purchasing motivations; hence, they will outline organic consumers’ reasoning behind their food choices.

There are many influencing key factors that a consumer considers before purchasing any organic products, which will be explored through the topics of organic product features, pricing, promotional messages and availability of organic food.

 Organic food features provide details on consumer expectations with regards to product specifics such as taste, size, packaging, additional benefits, animal welfare, fair trade and others.

 Pricing outlines how consumer perceives the price of organic food products such as their price perception, price knowledge, willingness to pay and price acceptance.

 Promotional messages refer to the communication and advertisement of organic food products such as food packaging, sales, promotion, public relations, online communication, product placement and so on.

 Availability of organic products describes where consumers find and purchase their organic food ranging from food supermarkets, health stores, and local fresh markets to online purchase.

203

 Lastly, the demand of out‐of‐home organic food consumption is shown to demonstrate consumers’ interest in consuming organic food in food establishments such as restaurants, café, hospitals, canteens, food trucks and others.

The hall shall display:

 Characteristics and traits of an organic consumer

 Consumers’ perception in organic product features, pricing, promotional messages and availability of organic products

 Consumer demands, practices and trends towards out‐of‐ home organic food consumption

The hall shall provide insights and examples of organic food products and organic food retailers from different countries such as South Korea, Thailand, China, Australia, New Zealand, United States, Canada, Germany, Switzerland and others. Pictures, posters, tables, figures and scientific information will be presented on the characteristics of organic consumer, their reasoning behind purchasing organic food and the influencing factors of organic food choices based on organic product features, willingness to pay, organic promotional messages and availability of organic products.

204

Overall view:

Organic consumers: Who are they? What characteristics of those are different to an average consumer? And, why do they buy organic food? Organic products: What expectations do organic consumers have towards product features, pricing, promotional messages and product availability? Out‐of‐home consumption: What are organic consumers’ perception of product range and pricing of organic food available in out‐of‐home setting?

Delivered messages:

Organic consumers: who are they and why do they purchase organic food? – Understanding consumers’ perception on organic food products

M Material exhibited:

M 1 In the hall – Consumers’ perception on organic food products

Display pictures of organic food retailers, consumers purchasing organic food, organic fruits and vegetables, organic food packaging and organic food labels that are currently available in the global market:

205

M 2 Middle of the hall – Characteristics and traits of organic consumers

M 2.1 Organic product features

M 2.2 Pricing

M 2.3 Promotional messages

M 2.4 Organic food availability

M 2.5 Out‐of‐home consumption

Display pictures of consumers and their family purchasing organic food, baskets of organic food, and organic gardens and farms:

Figure 1. Layout of Hall 8 Consumer (Source: Own illustration) Insights will be given on the following topics:

206

B 1 Does “the” organic consumer exist?

Characteristics and traits of organic consumers

B 1.1 Overall characteristics

Gives general descriptions of who organic consumers are

B 1.2 Socio‐economic measures of organic consumers

Outlines the factors of education, income and occupation of organic consumers

B 1.3 Beliefs of organic consumers

Describes the specific beliefs organic consumers have such as no GMO products, animal welfare, fair trade, seasonal food and others

B 1.4 Purchasing motivations of organic consumers

Defines the emotions and motives of organic consumers when they choose organic products

B 2 How do consumers perceive the features of organic products?

Consumer perception of organic features

B 2.1Product quality

Outlines nutrients, taste, size, color and other attributes of organic products

207

B 2.2 Package

Illustrates recycled material packaging, degradable packaging, “green” packaging and others

B 2.3 Organic labels

Deals with manufacturer brands, organic labels (governmental or private) and special claims

B 2.4 Product range

Explains the different variety of organic food categories available in the market such as fresh produce, processed food and others

B 3 How do consumers perceive the price of organic products, and what are consumers willing to pay?

Consumers’ expectation towards the product price of organic foods

B 3.1 Perception of prices

Describes how organic consumers understand and reason with organic product pricing

B 3.2 Knowledge on prices

Outlines how the price information of organic products is processed compared to conventional products

B 3.3 Consumers’ willingness to pay

Investigates the maximum price in which an organic consumer is willing to pay

208

B 3.4 Enterprises’ strategies of how to set prices

Defines the price positioning and price differentiation of organic food companies

B 4 How can the particularities of organic products be communicated?

Communication of the specific characteristics of organic foods

B 4.1 Advertisement

Outlines advertisement channels such as in‐store advertisement, magazine prints, TV commercials and others.

B 4.1 Sales promotion

Describes in‐store tasting, coupons, free product vouchers and others

B 4.3 Public relations

Explores organic products promotions through trade shows such as BioFach, conferences, health talk shows and others

B 4.4 Industry sponsoring

Looks at specific industries that support organic products

B 5 Where to shop organic? Consumers’ expectations towards the distribution of organic products

Consumer expectations towards the availability of organic products

209

B 5.1 Organic product distribution in general

Describes where to purchase organic products

B 5.2 Direct from farm

Explores the option of buying organic products through community‐support agriculture, organic farms and others

B 5.3 Weekly local/fresh/wet markets

Describes purchasing organic food from fresh food market such as farmer’s market and wet markets

B 5.4 Specialties stores

Outlines the sale of organic products through health food stores, organic supermarkets and others

B 5.5 Conventional retail

Looks into the availability of organic products in conventional retail shops (e.g. supermarkets)

B5.6 Internet

Investigates the sale of organic products through online channels directly from manufacturers, farmers and online stores

210

B 6 Consuming organic out of home, what do consumers expect?

Consumer demands towards out of home consumption of organic products

B 6.1 School and hospital canteens

Provides organic food availability in canteens of school and hospitals

B 6.2 Café and restaurants

Details the sale of organic products in coffee shops, food courts, café and restaurants

B 6.3 Food stalls and food trucks

Provides organic food availability in food stalls and food trucks

C. Organoleptic and haptic experience:

 Food sampling booths of organic food products from different food categories such as organic apple juice (to provide people the experience of tasting, feeling, touching and seeing food)

 Voice recording of organic consumers from different countries explaining their reasons of purchasing organic food in a few simple sentence

 Interactive boards of organic food statistics, figures and scientific information in which the public can flip or push a panel to reveal answers to questions (For example: The question of “Where can you buy organic food in United

211

States?“ displayed on a panel of the interactive board and the public can flip open the panel to reveal the answer of “Major grocery chains such as Wal‐Mart, Kroger, Whole Foods Market or local health food stores”.)

 Inviting organic companies from different countries to share their product offerings and company brochures and placing them on shelves for visual display (for example, Alnatura’s products (Germany) and Shandiz Natural Foods’ products

212

IMPRINT

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

213

Hall 1 General human well-being - Consumers satisfacion A Mission B 1 Does “the” organic consumer exist? AERTSENS, J.; VERBEKE, W.; MONDELAERS, K.; VAN HUYLENBROECK, G. (2009): Personal determinants of organic food consumption: a review. In: British Food Journal 111 (10), p. 1140–1167. AHMAD, S.; JUHDI, N. (2010): Organic food: A study on demographic characteristics and factors influencing purchase intentions among consumers in Klang Valley, Malaysia. In: International Journal of Business and Management 5 (2), p. 105–118. CHAKRABARTI, S. (2010): Factors influencing organic food purchase in India – expert survey insights. In: British Food Journal 112 (8), p. 902– 915. CHEN, J.; LOBO, A. (2012): Organic food products in China: Determinants of consumers’ purchase intentions. In: The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 22 (3), p. 293–314. CHEN, M. F. (2007): Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in Taiwan: Moderating effects of food-related personality traits. In: Food Quality and Preference 38, p. 1008–1021. CHINNICI, G.; D’AMICO, M.; PECORINO, B. (2002): A multivariate statistical analysis on the consumers of organic products. In: British Food Journal 104 (3/4/5), p. 187–199. CHRYSSOHOIDIS, G.M.; KRYSTALLIS, A. (2005): Organic consumers„ personal values research: Testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale and implementing a value-based segmentation task. In: Food Quality and Preference 16 (7), p. 585–599. FOTOPOULOS, C.; KRYSTALLIS, A. (2002): Purchasing motives and profile of the Greek organic consumer: a countrywide survey. In: British Food Journal 104 (9), p. 730–765. FOTOPOULOS, C.; KRYSTALLIS, A.; ANASTASIOS, P. (2011): Portrait value questionnaire's (PVQ) usefulness in explaining quality food-related consumer behavior. In: British Food Journal 113 (2), p. 248–279. GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2008): Factor and cluster analysis of willingness to pay for organic and non-GM food. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 39 (2), p. 26–39. GIL, J.M.; GRACIA, A.; SÁNCHEZ, M. (2000): Market segmentation and willingness to pay for organic products in Spain. In: International Food and Agribusiness Management Re-view 3 (2), p. 207–226. JANSSEN, M.; HEID, A.; HAMM, U. (2009): Is there a promising market „in between‟ organic and conventional food? Analysis of consumer preferences. In: Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24 (03), p. 205–213. LEA, E.; WORSLEY, T. (2005): Australians’ organic food beliefs, demographics and values. In: British Food Journal 107 (11), p. 588–869. LOCKIE, S.; LYON, K.; LAWRENCE, G.; GRICE, J. (2004): Choosing organics: A path analysis of factors underlying the selection of organic food among Australian consumers. In: Appetite 43, p. 135–146. LOCKIE, S.; LYON, K.; LAWRENCE, G.; MUMMERY, K. (2002): Eating ‘green’: Motivations behind organic food consumption in Australia. In:

214

Sociologia Ruralis 42 (1), p. 23–40. MANAGI, S.; YAMAMOTO, Y.; IWAMOTO, H.; MASUDA, K. (2008): Valuing the influence of underlying attitudes and the demand for organic milk in Japan. In: Agricultural Economics 39 (3), p. 339–348. MANN, S.; FERJANI, A.; REISSIG, L.; AYALA, T. (2011): What matters for consumers of organic wine in Switzerland? Gewisola-Vortrag. Braunschweig, 29.09.2011. MCEACHERN, M.; MCCLEAN, P. (2002): Organic purchasing motivations and attitudes. Are they ethical? In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 26 (2), p. 85–92. NGOBO, P.V. (2011): What drives household choice of organic products in grocery stores? In: Journal of Retailing 87 (1), p. 90–100. PERSURIC, A.S.I.; TEZAK, A. (2009): The influence of socio-demographic characteristics of tourists on their interest for organic food in Istria, Croatia. In: Agricultural Economics 55 (6), p. 296–305. QUAH, S.H.; TAN, A. (2009): Consumer purchase decisions of organic food products: an ethnic analysis. In: Journal of International Consumer Marketing 22 (1), p. 47–58. ROITNER-SCHOBESBERGER, B.; DAMHOFER, I.; SOMSOOK, S.; VOGL, C. (2008): Consumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand. In: Food Policy 33 (2), p. 112–121. SABA, A.; MESSINA, F. (2003): Attitudes towards organic foods and risk/benefit perception associated with pesticides. In: Food Quality and Preference 14 (8), p. 637–645. SCARPA, R.; DEL GIUDICE, T. (2004): Market segmentation via mixed logit: Extra-virgin olive oil in urban Italy. In: Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization 2 (1), p. 1–20. ŠTEFANIC, I.; ŠTEFANIÆ, E.; HAAS, R. (2001): What the customers really want. Organic food market in Croatia. In: Bodenkultur 52 (4), p. 243– 248. STEVENS-GARMON, J.; HUANG, C.L.; LIN, B.-H. (2007): Organic demand: A profile of consumers in the fresh produce market. In: Choices 22 (2), p. 109–116. STOBBELAAR, D.J.; CASIMIR, G.; BORGHUIS, J.; MARKS, I.; MEIJER, L.; ZEBEDA, S. (2007): Adolescents' attitudes towards organic food: A survey of 15- to 16-year old school children. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 31 (4), p. 349–356. STOLZ, H.; STOLZE, M.; HAMM, U.; JANSSEN, M.; RUTO, E. (2010): Consumer attitudes towards organic versus conventional food with specific quality attributes. In: NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 58 (3-4), p. 67-72. STOLZ, H.; SCHMID, O. (2008): attitudes and expectations of organic wine. Organic wine and viticulture conference. Levizzano, Italy, 2008. Online available under http://orgprints.org/13974/. THØGERSEN, J. (2009): The motivational roots of norms for environmentally responsible behavior. In: Basic & Applied Social Psychology 31 (4), p. 348–362. TORJUSEN, H.; BRANTSÆTER, A.L.; HAUGEN, M.; LIEBLEIN, G.; STIGUM, H.; ROOS, G.; HOIMBOE-OTTESEN, G.; MELTZER, H. (2010): Characteristics associated with organic food consumption during pregnancy; data from a large cohort of pregnant women in Norway. In: BMC public health 10 (775), p. 1471–2458.

215

WELSCH, H.; KUHLING, J. (2009): Determinants of pro-environmental consumption: The role of reference groups and routine behavior. In: Ecological economics 69 (1), p. 166–176. WESTERLUND LIND, L. (2007): Consumer involvement and perceived differentiation of different kinds of pork - a means-end chain analysis. In: Food Quality and Preference 18 (4), p. 690–700. WIER, M.; O'DOHERTY JENSEN, K.; ANDERSEN, L.M.; MILLOCK, K. (2008): The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared. In: Food Policy 33 (5), p. 406–421. WIER, M.; ANDERSEN, L.M.; MILLOCK, K.; O'DOHERTY JENSEN, K.; ROSENKVIST, L. (2005): Perceptions, values and behaviour: The case of organic foods. In: Agriculture and Human Values. Online available under http://orgprints.org/5004/. YIN, S.; WU, S.; DU, L.; CHEN, M. (2010): Consumers’ purchase intention of organic food in China. In: Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 90 (8), p. 1361–1367 ŽAKOWSKA BIEMANS, S. (2011): Polish consumer food choices and beliefs about organic food. In: British Food Journal 113 (1), p. 122–137. B 2 How do consumers perceive the features of organic products? ANDERS, S.; MOESER, A. (2008): Assessing the demand for value-based organic meats in Canada: A combined retail and household scanner-data approach. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies32 (5), p. 457–469. ANNETT, L.E; MURALIDHARAN, V.; BOXALL, P.C.; CASH, S.B.; WISMER, W.V. (2008): Influence of health and environmental information on hedonic evaluation of organic and convention-al bread. In: Journal of Food Science73 (4), p. 50–57. BOTONAKI, A.; POLYMEROS, K.; TSAKIRIDOU, E.; MATTAS, K. (2006): The role of food quality certification on consumers' food choices. In: British Food Journal 108 (2), p. 77–90 CONNOR, D.; CHRISTY, R. (2004): The organic label: How to reconcile its meaning with consumer preferences. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 35 (1), p. 40–43. GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2008): Factor and cluster analysis of willingness to pay for organic and non-GM food. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 39 (2), p. 26–39. GOTSCHI, E.; VOGEL, S.; LINDENTHAL, T.; LARCHER, M. (2010): The role of knowledge, social norms, and attitudes toward organic products and shopping behavior: Survey results from High School students in Vienna. In: The Journal of Environmental Education 41 (2), p. 88–100. HALL, M.(2008): The Marketing of Organic Products: An Instrumental/Symbolic Perspective. In: Journal of Food Products Marketing 14 (3), p. 1– 11. HAMM, U. (2007): Consumer acceptance of organic sausages produced without curing agents. In: Fleischwirtschaft 87 (11), p. 126–130. HEARNE, R.R.; VOLCAN, M. (2005): The use of choice experiments to analyze consumer preferences for ecolabeled and organic produce in Costa Rica. In: Quarterly Journal of Inter-national Agriculture 44 (4), p. 381–397. HILL, H.; LYNCHHAUN, F. (2002): Organic milk: attitudes and consumption patterns. In: British Food Journal 104 (7), p. 526–542. JANSSEN, M.; HAMM, U. (2011): Consumer perception of different organic certification schemes in five European countries. In: Organic Agriculture 1 (1), p. 31–43.

216

KIESEL, K.; VILLAS-BOAS, S.B. (2007): Got organic milk? Consumer valuations of milk labels after the implementation of the USDA organic seal. In: Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization 5 (4). KLOECKNER, H.; LANGEN, N.; HARTMANN, M. (2010): The role of taste perception for the success of country of origin labeling in the case of organic pepper. Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s 2010, AAEA, CAES & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting. Denver, Colorado, USA, 25.07.2010. KUHLMANN, H.; EVERETT-JONES, J. (2006): The organic food market in Japan. In: Australia Organic Journal Autumn 2006, p. 20–21. LINDER, N.S.; UHL, G.; FLIESSBACH, K.; TRAUTNER, P.; ELGER, C.E.; WEBER, B. (2010): Organic labeling influences food valuation and choice. In: NeuroImage 53 (1), p. 215–220. LOUREIRO, M.L.; MCCLUSKEY, J.J.; MITTELHAMMER, R.C. (2001): Assessing consumer preferences for organic, eco-labeled, and regular apples. In: Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 26 (2), p. 404–416. PADEL, S.; SMITH, L.; JANSSEN, M. (2010): Are shoppers aware of organic certification logos? Organic Research Centre Bulletin. Online available under http://orgprints.org/18323/. PAULL, J. (2008): The greening of China’s food – Green food, organic food and eco-labelling. Online available under http://orgprints.org/13563/. PEETSMANN, E.; LUIK, A.; KALL, K.; VETEMAA, A.; MIKK, M.; PEEPSON, A. (2009): Organic marketing in Estonia. In: Agronomy Research 7 (2), p. 706–711. PERRINI, F.; CASTALDO, S.; MISANI, N.; TENCATI, A. (2010): The impact of corporate social responsibility associations on trust in organic products marketed by mainstream retailers. A study of Italian consumers. In: Business Strategy and the Environment 19 (8), p. 512–526. POUTA, E.; HEIKKILÄ, J.; FORSMAN-HUGG, S.; ISONIEMI, M.; MÄKELÄ, J. (2010): Consumer choice of broiler meat: The effects of country of origin and production methods. In: Food Quality and Preference 21 (5), p. 539–546. ROKKA, J.; UUSITALO, L. (2008): Preference for green packaging in consumer product choices - Do consumers care? In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 32 (5), p. 516–525. SHAHARUDIN, M. R.; PANI, J.J.; MANSOR, S. W.; EILAS, S.J. (2010): Factors affecting purchase intention of organic food in Malaysia’s Kedah State. In: Cross-Cultural Communication 6 (2), p. 105–116. SIRIEIX, L.; GROLLEAU, G.; SCHAER, B. (2008): Do consumers care about food miles? An empirical analysis in France. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 32 (5), p. 508–515. SQUIRES, L.; JURIC, B.; CORNWELL, T.B. (2001): Level of market development and intensity of organic food consumption: cross-cultural study of Danish and New Zealand consumers. In: Journal of Consumer Marketing 18 (5), S. 392–409. STOLZ, H.; STOLZE, M.; HAMM, U.; JANSSEN, M.; RUTO, E. (2010): Consumer attitudes towards organic versus conventional food with specific quality attributes. In: NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 58 (3-4), p. 67-72. WESTERLUND LIND, L. (2007): Consumer involvement and perceived differentiation of different kinds of pork - a means-end chain analysis. In: Food Quality and Preference 18 (4), p. 690–700. WIER, M.; O'DOHERTY JENSEN, K.; ANDERSEN, L.M.; MILLOCK, K. (2008): The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared. In: Food Policy 33 (5), p. 406–421.

217

ZHANG, F.; HUANG, C.L.; LIN, B.-H.; EPPERSON, J.E. (2008): Modeling fresh organic produce consumption with scanner Data: A generalized double hurdle model approach. In: Agri-business 24 (4), p. 510–522. ŽIVÌLOVÁ, I. (2005): Current situation of demand for organic products in the Czech Republic. In: Agricultural Economics - Czech 51 (7), p. 304– 308. ŽIVÌLOVÁ, I.; JÁNSK, J. (2006): The possibilities of organic food market's development in the Czech Republic. In: Agricultural Economics - UZPI (Czech Republic) 52 (7), p. 321–327. B 3 How do consumers perceive the price of organic products, and what are consumers willing to pay? ABRAMS, K.M.; MEYERS, C.A.; IRANI, T.A. (2010): Naturally confused: consumers‟ perceptions of all-natural and organic pork products. In: Agriculture and Human Values 27 (3), p. 365–374. ALDANONDO-OCHOA, A.M.; ALMANSA-SÁEZ, C. (2009): The private provision of public environment: Consumer preferences for organic production systems. In: Land Use Policy 26 (3), p. 669–682. ARYAL, K.; CHAUDHARY, P.; PANDIT, S.; SHARMA, G. (2009): Consumers’ willingness to pay for organic products: A case from Kathmandu Valley. In: Journal of Agriculture and Environment 10, p. 15–26. BATTE, M.T.; HOOKER, N.H.; HAAB, T.C.; BEAVERSON, J. (2007): Putting their money where their mouths are: Consumer willingness to pay for multi-ingredient, processed organic food products. In: Food Policy 32 (2), p. 145–159. BHATTA, G.D.; DOPPLER, W.; BAHADUR K.C.K. (2010): Urban demand for organic tomatoes in the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. In: Middle East Journal of Scientific Research (4), p. 199–209. BOCCALETTI, S.; NARDELLA, M. (2000): Consumer willingness to pay for pesticide-free fresh fruit and vegetables in Italy. In: The International Food and Agribusiness Management Re-view 3 (3), p. 297–310. BOND, C.A.; THILMANY, D.D.; BOND, J.K. (2008): What to choose? The value of label claims to fresh produce consumers. In: Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 33 (3), p. 402–427. BUDAK, F.; BUDAK, D.B.; KACIRA, O.O.; YAVUZ, M.C. (2005): Turkish consumers' responses to organically farmed seafood. In: Journal of Applied Sciences (7), p. 1192–1195. BUNTE, F.; VAN GALEN, M.; KUIPER, E.; BAKKER, J. (2007): Limits to growth in organic sales. Price elasticity of consumer demand for organic food in Dutch supermarkets. Agricultural Economics Research Institute. CANAVARI, M.; NOCELLA, G.; SCARPA, R. (2005): Stated willingness-to-pay for organic fruit and pesticide ban. An evaluation using both web- based and face-to-face interviewing. In: Journal of Food Products Marketing 11 (3), p. 107–134. CHANG, J.B.; LUSK, J.L. (2009): Fairness and food choice. In: Food Policy 34 (6), p. 483–491. CHARATSARI, C.; TZIMITRA K.I. (2007): Insight into consumers willingness to expend extra time. In: New Medit 6 (1) p. 22-27. CRANFIELD, J.; DEATON, B.J.; SHELLIKERI, S. (2009): Evaluating consumer preferences for organic food production standards. In: Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 57 (1), p. 99–117 DRANSFIELD, E.; NGAPO, T.M.; NIELSEN, N.A.; BREDAHL, L.; SJODEN, P.O.; MAGNUSSON, M.; CAMPO, M. M.; NUTE, G. R. (2005): Consumer choice and suggested price for pork as influenced by its appearance, taste and information concerning country of origin and

218

organic pig production. In: Meat Science 69 (1), p. 61–70. GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2011): The effect of information on consumers' willingness to pay for natural and organic chicken. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 35 (3), p. 282–289. GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2008): Factor and cluster analysis of willingness to pay for organic and non-GM food. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 39 (2), p. 26–39. HILL, H.; LYNCHHAUN, F. (2002): Organic milk: attitudes and consumption patterns. In: British Food Journal 104 (7), p. 526–542. JAMES, J.S.; RICKARD, B.J.; ROSSMAN, W.J. (2009): Product differentiation and market segmentation in applesauce: Using a choice experiment to assess the value of organic, local, and nutrition attributes. In: Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 38 (3), p. 357–370. JONAS, A.; ROOSEN, J. (2008): Demand for milk labels in Germany: Organic milk, conventional brands, and retail labels. In: Agribusiness (New York) 24 (2), p. 192–206. KREMEN, A.; GREENE, C.; HANSON, J. (2007): Organic produce, price premiums, and eco-labeling in U.S. farmers' markets. In: Organic agriculture in the U.S. 13, p. 55-69. KRYSTALLIS, A.; ARVANITOYANNIS, I.; CHRYSSOHOIDIS, G. (2006a): Is there a real difference be-tween conventional and organic meat? Investigating consumers' attitudes towards both meat types as an indicator of organic meat´s market potential. In: Journal of Food Products Marketing 12 (2), p. 47–78. KRYSTALLIS, A.; FOTOPOULOS, C.; ZOTOS, Y. (2006b): Organic consumers' profile and their willing-ness to pay (WTP) for selected organic food products in Greece. In: Journal of International Consumer Marketing 19 (1), p. 81–106. LOUREIRO, M.L.; HINE, S.(2002): Discovering niche markets: A comparison of consumer willingness to pay for local (Colorado grown), organic, and GMO-free products. In: Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 34 (3), p. 477–487. MAGNUSSON, M.K.; ARVOLA, A.; HURSTI, U.-K.; ÅBERG, L.; SJÖDÉN, P.-O. (2001): Attitudes to-wards organic foods among Swedish consumers. In: British Food Journal 103 (3), p. 209–227. MONDELAERS, K.; VERBEKE, W.; VAN HUYLENBROECK, G. (2009): Importance of health and environment as quality traits in the buying decision of organic products. In: British Food Journal 111 (10), p. 1120–1139. NAPOLITANO, F.; BRAGHIERI, A.; PIASENTIER, E.; FAVOTTO, S.; NASPETTI, S.; ZANOLI, R. (2010a): Effect of information about organic production on beef liking and consumer willingness to pay. In: Food Quality and Preference 21 (2), p. 207–212. NAPOLITANO, F.; BRAGHIERI, A.; PIASENTIER, E.; FAVOTTO, S.; NASPETTI, S.; ZANOLI, R. (2010B): Cheese liking and consumer willingness to pay as affected by information about organic production. In: Journal of Dairy Research 77 (3), p. 280–286. O'DONOVAN, P.; MCCARTHY, M. (2002): Irish consumer preference for organic meat. In: British Food Journal 104, p. 3-5. OLESEN, I.; ALFNES, F.; BENSZE RØRA, M.; KOLSTAD, K. (2010): Eliciting consumers„ willingness to pay for organic and welfare-labelled salmon in a non-hypothetical choice experiment. In: Livestock Science 127 (2-3), p. 218–226. RICHTER, T.; BAPST, B.; MEILI, E. (2002): Bio Weide-Beef. Beef brand with high consumer benefit. In: Agrarforschung 9 (10), p. 424–429.

219

SAKAGAMI, M.; SATO, M.; UETA, K. (2006): Measuring consumer preferences regarding organic labelling and the JAS label in particular. In: New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Re-search 49 (3), p. 247–254. SHAHARUDIN, M. R.; PANI, J.J.; MANSOR, S. W.; EILAS, S.J. (2010): Factors affecting purchase intention of organic food in Malaysia’s Kedah State. In: Cross-Cultural Communication 6 (2), 105–116. SIRIEIX, L.; KLEDAL, P. R.; SULITANG, T. (2011): Organic food consumers' trade-offs between local or imported, conventional or organic products: a qualitative study in Shanghai. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies35 (3). Online available under http://orgprints.org/18532/ SMITH, T.A.; HUANG, C.L.; LIN, B.-H. (2009): Does price or income affect organic choice? Analysis of U.S. fresh produce users. In: Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 41 (3), p. 731–744. SOLER, F.; GIL, J.M.; SÁNCHEZ, M. (2002): Consumers‟ acceptability of organic food in Spain. Results from an experimental auction market. In: British Food Journal 104 (8), p. 670–687 STOLZ, H.; STOLZE, M.; HAMM, U.; JANSSEN, M.; RUTO, E. (2010): Consumer attitudes towards organic versus conventional food with specific quality attributes. In: NJAS – Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 58 (3-4), p. 67-72. TRANTER, R.B.; BENNETT, R.M.; COSTA, L.; COWAN, C.; HOLT, G.C.; JONES, P.J.; MIELE, M.; SOTTOMAYPR, J. (2009): Consumers' willingness-to-pay for organic conversion-grade food: Evidence from five EU countries. In: Food Policy 34 (3), p. 287–294. VAN DOORN, J.; VERHOEF, P.C. (2011): Willingness to pay for organic products: Differences be-tween virtue and vice foods. In: International Journal of Research in Marketing 28 (3), p. 167–180. VAN LOO, E.; CAPUTO, V.; NAYGA, R.M.; MEULLENET, J.F.; CRANDALL, P.G.; RICKE, S.C. (2010): Effect of organic poultry purchase frequency on consumer attitudes toward organic poultry meat. In: Journal of Food Science 75 (7). WEST, G.E.; GENDRON, C.; LARUE, B.; LAMBER, R. (2002): Consumers' valuation of functional properties of foods: Results from a Canada- wide survey. In: Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 50 (4), p. 541–558. ZHANG, F.; EPPERSON, J.E.; HUANG, C.L.; HOUSTON, J.E. (2009): Organic price premiums paid for fresh tomatoes and apples by U.S. households. Evidence from Nielsen Homescan Data. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 40 (3), p. 105–114. B 4 How can the particularities of organic products be communicated? ABRAMS, K.M.; MEYERS, C.A.; IRANI, T.A. (2010): Naturally confused: consumers’ perceptions of all-natural and organic pork products. In: Agriculture and Human Values 27 (3), p. 365–374. BUNTE, F.; VAN GALEN, M.; KUIPER, E.; BAKKER, J. (2007): Limits to growth in organic sales. Price elasticity of consumer demand for organic food in Dutch supermarkets. Agricultural Economics Research Institute. COOK, G.; REED, M.; TWINER, A. (2009): “But it„s all true!": Commercialism and commitment in the discourse of organic food promotion. In: Text & Talk 29 (2), p. 151–173 GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2006): Influencing consumer purchase likelihood of organic food. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 30 (2), p. 155–163. GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2004): The impact of message framing on organic food purchase likelihood. In: Journal of Food Distribution Research 35 (3), p. 19–28.

220

GIFFORD, K.; BERNARD, J.C. (2011): The effect of information on consumers' willingness to pay for natural and organic chicken. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 35 (3), p. 282–289. GRØNHØJ, A. (2006): Communication about consumption: a family process perspective on 'green' consumer practices. In: Journal of Consumer Behaviour 5 (6), p. 491–503. HAMM, U. (2007): Consumer acceptance of organic sausages produced without curing agents. In: Fleischwirtschaft 87 (11), p. 126–130. JONES, P.; COMFORT, D.; HILLIER, D. (2007A): What's in store? Retail marketing and corporate social responsibility. In: Marketing Intelligence & Planning 25 (1), p. 17–30. JONES, P.; COMFORT, D.; HILLIER, D. (2007B): Marketing and corporate social responsibility with-in food stores. In: British Food Journal 109 (8), p. 582–593. LOCKIE, S. (2006): Capturing the sustainability agenda: Organic foods and media discourses on food scares, environment, genetic engineering, and health. In: Agriculture and Human Values 23 (3), p. 313–323. MESÍAS, F.J.; MARTÍNEZ CARRASCO, F.; MARTÍNEZ, J.M.; GASPAR, P. (2011): Functional and organic eggs as an alternative to conventional production: A conjoint analysis of consumers' preferences. In: Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 91 (3), p. 532–538. NAPOLITANO, F.; BRAGHIERI, A.; PIASANTIER, E.; FAVOTTO, S.; NASPETTI, S.; ZANOLI, R. (2010): Effect of information about organic production on beef liking and consumer willingness to pay. In: Food Quality and Preferences 21 (2), p. 207–212. PEARSON, D.; HENRYKS, J. (2008): Marketing Organic Products: Exploring some of the pervasive issues. In: Journal of Food Products Marketing 14 (4), p. 95–108. SHAHARUDIN, M. R.; PANI, J.J.; MANSOR, S. W.; EILAS, S.J. (2010): Factors affecting purchase intention of organic food in Malaysia’s Kedah State. In: Cross-Cultural Communication 6 (2), p. 105–116. SHENG, J. P.; SHEN, L.; QIAO, Y., YU, M.; FAN, B. (2009): Market trends and accreditation systems for organic food in China. In: Trends in Food Science & Technology 20, p. 396–401. YOUNG, J.A. (2001): Communicating with cod and others--Some perspectives on promotion for expanding markets for fish. In: Aquaculture Economics and Management 5 (5-6), p. 241–251. ŽIVÌLOVÁ, I.; JÁNSK, J. (2007): The conditions of organic market development. In: Agricultural Economics - UZPI (Czech Republic) 53 (9), p. 403–410. B 5 Where to shop organic? Consumers’ expectations towards the distribution of organic products AERTSENS, J.; MONDELAERS, K.; VAN HUYLENBROECK, G. (2009a): Differences in retail strategies on the emerging organic market. In: British Food Journal 111 (2), p. 138–154. AKBARI, M.; ASADI, A. (2008): A comparative study of Iranian consumers' versus extension experts' attitudes towards agricultural organic products (AOP). In: American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences (3), p. 551–558. BAOURAKIS, G.; KOURGIANTAKIS, M.; MIGDALAS, A. (2002): The impact of e-commerce on agro-food marketing. The case of agricultural cooperatives, firms and consumers in Crete. In: British Food Journal 104 (8), p. 580–590.

221

CERJAK, M.; MESIÆ, Ž.; KOPIÆ, M.; KOVAÈIÆ, D.; MARKOVINA, J. (2010): What Motivates Consumers to Buy Organic Food: Comparison of Croatia, Bosnia Herzegovina, and Slovenia. In: Journal of Food Products Marketing 16 (3), p. 278–292. CHANG, H.-S.; ZEPEDA, L. (2005): Consumer perceptions and demand for organic food in Australia: Focus group discussions. In: Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 20 (3), p. 155–167. CLARKE, N.; CLOKE, P.; BARNETT, C.; MALPASS, A. (2008): The spaces and ethics of organic food. In: Journal of Rural Studies 24 (3), p. 219– 230. CRANDALL, P.G.; FRIEDLY, E.C.; PATTON, M.; O'BRYAN, C. A.; GURUBARAMURUGESHAN, A.; SEIDEMAN, S.; RICKE, S.; RAINEY, R. (2010): Estimating the demand for organic foods by consumers at farmers' markets in northwest Arkansas. In: Journal of Agricultural & Food Information 11 (3), p. 185–208. ESSOUSSI, L.H.; ZAHAF, M. (2009): Exploring the decision-making process of Canadian organic food consumers. Motivations and trust issues. In: Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 12 (4), p. 443–459. ILBERY, B.; COURTNEY, P.; KIRWAN, J.; MAYE, D. (2010): Marketing concentration and geographical dispersion. A survey of organic farms in England and Wales. In: British Food Journal 112 (9), p. 962–975. JONES, P.; CLARKE-HILL, C.; SHEARS, P.; HILLIER, D. (2001): Retailing organic foods. In: British Food Journal 103 (5), p. 358–365. KREMEN, A.; GREENE, C.; HANSON, J. (2007): Organic produce, price premiums, and eco-labeling in U.S. farmers' markets. In: Organic agriculture in the U.S. 13, p. 55-69. MONOTTI, C. (2008): Future chocolate market growth in four EU countries. In: British Food Journal 110 (7), p. 671–690. MOORE, O. (2006): Understanding postorganic fresh fruit and vegetable consumers at participatory farmers‟ markets in Ireland. Reflexivity, trust and social movements. In: International Journal of Consumer Studies 30 (5), p. 416–426. MUTLU, N. (2007): Consumer attitude and behaviour towards organic food. Cross-cultural study of Turkey and Germany. Master Thesis. University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart. Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets. PADEL, S.; MIDMORE, P. (2005): The development of the European market for organic products: insights from a Delphi study. In: British Food Journal 107 (8), p. 626–646. SIRIEIX, L.; KLEDAL, P.R.; EL NAGGAR, A.; AUERSALMI, M. (2008): Organic consumers in the Egyptian metropolis of Cairo. Online available under http://orgprints.org/14737/. VANDERGEEST, P. (2005): Natural markets: remaking food and agriculture in Southeast Asia. 2005 Conference of the Canadian Council for Southeast Asian Studies. York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2005. WIER, M.; CALVERLEY, C. (2002): Market potential for organic foods in Europe. In: British Food Journal 104 (1), p. 45–62. B 6 Consuming organic out of home, what do consumer demands? BOCCHI, S.; SPIGAROLO, R.; MARCOMINI, N.; SARTI, V. (2008): Organic and conventional public food procurement for youth in Italy. In: Bioforsk Report 3 (42), p. 1–48. CALLOT, P. (2004): From the past to the future catering business in France. In: Tourism Review 59 (4), p. 21–26.

222

LØES, A.; NÖLTING, B. (2009): Organic school meal systems – towards a more sustainable nutrition. In: Agronomy Research 7 (Special issue II), p. 647–653. MIKKELSEN, B. E. (1993): Organic foods in catering. Online available under http://orgprints.org/2748/. MIKKELSEN, B. E.; KRISTENSEN, N. H.; NIELSEN, T. (2002): Organic foods in catering – the Nordic perspective. In: Nutrition & Food Science 93 (3), p. 24–26. MIKKOLA, M. (2008): Organic and conventional public food procurement for youth in Finland. In: Bioforsk Report 3 (41), p. 1–26. NIELSEN, T.; NÖLTING, B.; KRISTENSEN, N. H.; LØES, A-K. (2009): A comparative study of the implementation of organic food in school meal systems in four European countries. Online available under http://orgprints.org/16670/. POST, A.; SHANAHAN, H.; JONSSON, L. (2008): Food processing: barriers to, or opportunities for, organic foods in the catering sector? In: British Food Journal 110 (2), p. 160–173. RIMMINGTON, M. (2003): Organic food – too good to eat? In: Hospitality Review 5 (3), p. 13–18.

223

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 9

Organic lifestyle

Author: Prof. Dr. Sang Mok Sohn

www.isofar.org

225

Content A. Mission ...... 229 B. Contents ...... 229 B 1 Introduction ...... 229 B 2 The Complete Organic Life ...... 230 B 3 Organic Farming ...... 231 B 3.1 Why Go Organic ...... 231 B 3.2 Secret of eternal life ...... 232 B 3.3 Embrace biodiversity ...... 233 B 3.4 Tools of the trade ...... 234 B 3.5 Narture Nature ...... 236 B 3.6 Preventing pollution ...... 237 B 3.7. Bursting with vitality ...... 239 B 3.8 Be kind to animals ...... 240 B 3.9 The Voice of reason ...... 242 B 3.10 Mapping Out Organics ...... 243 B 3.11. Organics around the World ...... 246 B 3.12 Looking local Going global ...... 248 B 3.13 The Natural Food Link ...... 250 B 3.14. Your questions answered ...... 251 B 4 Organic Food ...... 253 B 4.1 Why eat Organic...... 253 B 4.2 Your questions answered ...... 254 B 4.3 Fresh is Best ...... 255 B 4.4 A Taste of Summer ...... 257 B 4.5. Focus on Corn ...... 259 B 4.6 A Winter Wonderland ...... 261 B 4.7 Power plants ...... 263 B 5. Organic Baby Care ...... 264 B 5.1. Why organic baby care ...... 264

226

B 5.2. A spoonful of goodness ...... 265 B 5.3. Wrapped in organics ...... 270 B 6 Organic Health & Beauty ...... 275 B 6.1 Why go organic ...... 275 B 6.2. A dose of good medicine ...... 277 B 6.4. A natural, smile and more ...... 285 B 7 Organic Gardening ...... 290 B 7.1 Why go organic ...... 290 B 7.2 What is organic gardening? ...... 291 B 7.3 Plotting for success ...... 293 B 7.4 Down to earth ...... 295 B 7.6 Magic carpets ...... 308 B 7.7 Head for the boarder ...... 309 B 7.7 Good enough to eat ...... 311 B 7.8 Fruits of success ...... 314 B 8 Organic Home & Office ...... 315 B 8.1 Why to organic ...... 315 B 8.2 Your questions answered ...... 317 B 8.2 Reduce and recycle ...... 319 B 8.3 A clean sweep ...... 321 B 8.3 Into the interior ...... 324 B 8.4 Focus on wood ...... 327 B 8.5 Structurally sound ...... 330 B 8.6 Design for life...... 332 B 8.7 Why wear organic ...... 336 B 8.8 The fabric of society ...... 337 B 8.9 Focus on cotton ...... 342 B 8.10. Why go organic ...... 344 B 8.11 Pet subjects ...... 346 B 8.12 Why organic finance ...... 351

227

B 8.13 Making your money count ...... 352 B 9 Organic green space, educational facility & health care .. 355 B 9.1 ...... 355 B 9.2 scope ...... 355 C Film Theatre ...... 356 IMPRESS ...... 359 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 359

228

Hall No: 9

Title: Organic lifestyle

A. Mission Giving extensive and detailed information to  What is organic lifestyle  Organic food and drink  Organic baby care  Organic health and beauty  Organic Gardening  Organic home and office

B. Contents Hall entrance design: Organic Food including vegetable, fruit and drinks, Organic Textiles, Organic Cosmetics, Organic paint and paper, Organic Gardening etc Delivered message: Organic Lifestyle – Welcome to the organic lifestyle which is a bright new start to your life. Organic Living enables you to make positive, feel‐good choices about every aspect of your life, from the food you eat to where you bank, and aims to help you to get more out of your life, easily and naturally, by making simple choices and changes for the better. Whether you choose to buy organic food, want the best start for your baby, go organic in your garden or choose more eco‐friendly options in your home, we sincerely hope Organic Living will give you all the inspiration you need.

B 1 Introduction 1 The organic way is about moving forward and finding new and better solutions. It is both visionary and pragmatic. At its heart, the message is very simple: respect nature, and nature will be your best friend; and cooperation at all levels, rather than destruction or domination, makes the best sense and bears lasting fruits. As millions of people worldwide are discovering daily, the organic way is the better way ‐ better for us and for our environment ‐ and

1 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

229

offers a positive, modern, and progressive, sustainable blueprint for the world in which we live. At the dawn of our new century we have everything to play and live for. Never before has consumer power been so important. As the debate over the genetic modification of our world has shown, we can shape the world we live in if we want to, and we can make our views and wishes count. What is so exciting is that we have so much choice, and that the organic option is now a reality for everyone. Greener, cleaner, safer, and more socially responsible alternatives are now ours. The more we choose to buy into them and support the organic world, the happier and more secure our planet and everyone’s future will be. We are already well on our way. The world is going organic fast and the organic torch has been well and truly lit. Consumers are its torchbearers and are trailblazing the way. Organic Living celebrates this. We hope it brings you much enjoyment and a lifetime's organic health and happiness. Whoever and wherever we are, we and our planet deserve nothing less. Photo: Eco‐architecture building Photo: Green herbs Photo: Organic sheep on the green grass field Photo: Butterfly Photo: Children eat cheese cake Photo: Colorful red herbs Photo: Tea drinking patio in herb garden Photo: Organic pig Photo: Organic restaurant where people eating lunch Photo: Organic pumkin

B 2 The Complete Organic Life 2 In these sections, we introduce you to what the organic lifestyle is all about, giving advice on where to start and on how you can make simple changes to your life for the better. Here you can read about some of the many inspiring producers, manufacturers, and entrepreneurs who are bringing organic life to our doorsteps. The organic lifestyle celebrates the naturally good things in life. You can eat, drink, wear, paint, and invest in organic. Organic living is a powerful force for change: we can be part of tomorrow’s solutions rather than yesterday’s problems. By buying into it, we each make a world of difference every time we

2 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

230

Following an organic lifestyle creates a better quality of life for you, those around you and the planet. Photo: Small sheep standing first time after birth Photo: Mom and her boy making bread in fireplace Photo: Fresh baked bread Photo: Herbs Photo: Water glass with blue color

B 3 Organic Farming 3 Photo: Wheat harvested fresh

B 3.1 Why Go Organic Going organic is better for you and better for the environment, since it is helping to reverse the ecological destruction that has been taking place since the middle of the 20th. By going organic and choosing eco‐friendly options when you can, you will not only be helping to care for the environment in a wider sense and to limit the ecological damage that has taken place during recent years, but you will also become part of a social, economic, and environmental lifestyle that is finding fairer, more sustainable solutions for the future. Buying organic supports organic farming and the wide range of benefits it brings. Choosing the organic option also means supporting a system that campaigns against genetically modified (GM) crops and that is itself determined to be GM‐free. Photo: leek grown organically in organic field

THE HEART OF THE MATTER Organic farming is a system of agriculture that works in partnership with nature rather than against it. Unlike modern, industrialized agriculture, it does not seek to dominate or abuse natural systems, but to work in harmony with them. At its heart is the belief that agriculture is our primary healthcare system and that there is a direct link between the health of the soil, that of the crops and animals raised on it, and ultimately that of the people fed and supported by it. This is why, for an organic farmer, it is health and vitality rather than yields that matter most. This means doing everything possible to nurture nature and to use farming practices that leave the environment in good shape.

3 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

231

A ROLE MODEL FOR THE FUTURE Organic practices vary from country to country and organic farmers work in many different ways. All, however, share the same basic holistic aims and beliefs, based on respect for all living organisms. This approach embraces every aspect of cultivation and production, encouraging biodiversity and supporting local lifestyles. It also addresses wider eco‐issues such as waste and energy conservation. In short, organic farming is the rock on which the foundations of the eco‐lifestyle are built. Supporting it is the best way we can help to secure a better and healthier future for ourselves and the planet. •ORGANIC farmers work with nature rather than agriculture it. •NATURE is respected and protected. •BIODIVERISITY is encouraged. •ANIMALS are reared in humane conditions. •POLLUTION is kept a minimum.

B 3.2 Secret of eternal life As Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, the nation that destroys its soil destroys itself. The soil is the greatest environmental asset we have in the world, and healthy soil is fundamental to sustainable agriculture. Take a brief look at this magical substance and it is easy to see why and how organic farming, which is based on maintaining rather than destroying soils, is so important for the future of the world. Organic farmers have long understood the value of healthy soil and know that good soil structure is crucial to the overall quality and health of their soil. Poor soil structure leads to increased soil erosion, which can cause ecological havoc with far‐reaching consequences. Photo: seedling

A WORLDWIDE WEB Our soil comprises a soil food web a complex eco‐system that involves animals, plants, insects, and microbes. In one gram of healthy soil, for example, there may be more than 10,000 species and a billion or more living organisms, most of which are microbes. It is these millions of soil bacteria and fungi, invisible to our eyes, that are especially important in breaking down nutrients, creating a living bridge between plant roots and minerals, and improving crop vigor and pest and disease resistance. Artificial fertilizers and pesticides have an adverse impact on the soil‐food web, resulting in reduced nutrient cycling and crop vigor. Ironically, this leads to increased use of fertilizers and pesticides, forcing the whole soil eco‐system into a spiral of decline.

232

The fertility of the soil is the future of civilization Sir Albert Howard, THE SOIL AND HEALTH, 1947

WEIGHING UP THE EVIDENCE The Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania has one of the longest‐running Farming Systems Trials™ comparing organic and conventional agriculture in the world. Soils in the organic and conventional plots appear very different due to the higher leve1 of soil organic matter present in the organically managed soils. Their research shows that organic soils not only have a better physical structure, with more biological activity and a larger, more stable balance of organic matter, but also retain water better and use nitrogen more efficiently than non‐organic soils. Photo: Comparison of soil structure between organic and conventional field

FEEDING THE WORLD: THE COST TO THE LAND Since 1960 around 30% of the total crop land worldwide has been lost because of soil erosion by wind and water. In Mexico, for instance, it is estimated that only nine percent of the arable topsoil is left. Mechanized modern farming literally stripmines the soil, weakening it forever, leaving it extremely vulnerable to permanent erosion by wind and water. One ecological consequence of this is that local agrochemical pollutants end up in rivers and oceans far away. The environmental group, Ecology Action, have calculated that, for every pound of food produced in this way in the US, up to 2.75 kg of soil are lost forever through wind and water erosion, while in China they estimate the loss is closer to 18 kg of soil per pound of food produced. In some areas, such as this devastated landscape in Bolivia, the land remaining has barely enough soil left to produce even a modest crop.

B 3.3 Embrace biodiversity Biodiversity literally means “living” diversity, and is derived from the ancient Greek word bias, or “life”. It is our world’s collective natural inheritance, belonging to no one in particular and to everyone in general Functioning as a natural bank of sustainability, biodiversity is the means by which our planet adapts, evolves, and regenerates itself. Until recently this rich reservoir was able to provide for all our basic necessities, such as food, water, shelter, and clothing, in addition to enriching our souls and imagination with its sheer wonder and variety. It is vital to preserve it for, without it, we are, quite literally, dead. Worldwide the wholesale destruction of biodiversity through intensive farming practices, industrial

233

pollution, and abuse of pesticides, and the dramatic loss of many traditional crop varieties, is becoming critical. The threat of genetically modified crops and their impact on the planet’s natural genetic pool is yet to be calculated. While modern, large‐scale agriculture relies on standardization (with a consequent loss of biodiversity), the goal of organic farms is to coexist with nature creating healthy and diverse eco‐systems. The abundance of biodiversity is testament to their success. Photo: red cherry is waiting for harvest Photo: White cows are very sleepy in the grassland

VARIETY IS THE SPICE OF LIFE On organic farms, measures to protect and improve biodiversity go hand in hand with conservation, and both are integral to organic standards. This means operating mixed farms with the widest diversity of crops or livestock possible, creating new habitats by planting indigenous trees and hedges, building beetle banks and ponds, and creating wild flower banks. Agricultural practices are adapted to ensure maximum shelter for wildlife, so hedges are left to grow, wide field margins encourage wild flowers to flourish and create wildlife “corridors” , and stubble is left on the fields to provide food and shelter for the birds. Organic farmers make use of traditional and local breeds of animals and crops, including beautiful species such as White Park cattle, the oldest breed in the UK, descended from the original wild white cattle that roamed the land 2,000 years ago. Unusual varieties of many fruits and vegetables, such as chilies, are also cultivated. This helps to ensure that genetic diversity is maintained. Photo: colorful herbs and wild plants

EASY STEPS TO HELP PROTECT BIODIVERSITY + Buy organic food + Grow traditional and local varieties of plants |n your garden + Say NO to genetically engineered food and crops + Join local and national wildlife and conservation organizations

B 3.4 Tools of the trade Organic farming is a holistic system. Sustainable crop rotations, maintenance of biodiversity, and optimum crop health that is achieved by building soil fertility are the founding principles upon which it is based.

234

•Rotations lie at the heart of soil fertility and good farm management •Soil fertility is built up with composted manures, homemade compost and green manures such as Clover •Pests and diseases are kept in check using natural predators and preventative measures Organic farming is as varied as nature itself and no two organic farms are ever the same. In conventional farming, artificial chemicals provide most of the answers; in organic farming, it is the farm itself and the way it is managed that counts. Within conventional agriculture, dependency on regular inputs of artificial chemicals largely dictates how each farm is managed and also enables farming to become customized and highly specialized. On organic farms, the opposite is true. Organic farms are constantly changing and evolving, so organic farmers need to be creative and innovative, finding new solutions and techniques, and adapting to the seasons, the soil and the overall dynamics of their farms each year. The aim of organic farmers is to run their farm by working in harmony with nature rather than battling against it.

RINGING THE CHANGES Rotating crops, animals and soil‐enriching plants on the land, often in a five‐ or seven‐year rotation cycle, lies at the heart of organic farming principles. Crops and animals are rotated to prevent disease buildup and soil imbalance. Green manures help build soil fertility. Clover leys (a short‐term crop of grasses and clover) also provide first‐class grazing for animals. Photo: red herbs which is fully blooming

NATURAL ALLIANCES Total control of pests and diseases is impossible, even with pesticides. On organic farms the aim is to keep pests and their natural predator populations in balance. Biodiversity and an absence of artificial pesticides help natural predators to flourish, so pests and diseases are usually far less of a problem on organic farms than on conventional ones. Farmers monitor their crops in the field more dosely, time sowings to avoid major pest attacks, and choose resistant varieties. Organic farmers also have a different approach to weeds, using various control methods such as mulches or growing canopy crops. In some vineyards and orchards weeds provide protection for the soil and a habitat for natural predators. Annual weeds are never wasted, but are ploughed in or left on the ground to rot down naturally. Photo: Wheat ears with natural predator

235

Thirty years of havoc “Politicians, selfish landowners, and giant companies have wreaked havoc in the countryside for the past 30 years. Lousy food, bankrupt farmers, unemployed farm workers, and ruined wildlife reserves are now the norm. salmonella in eggs, antibiotic resistance in animals, cruel livestock systems, and pesticide contamination are the consequence. Farming can once again become a celebration of natural goodness, as we|| as a profitable business. But that means resisting the corporate takeover of the food chain. |t means buying food that |S organic, humanely reared, and locally produced. And it means the government should switch sides, and start backing farmers, consumers, and the environment instead of corporations, chemicals and GMOs.” CHARLES SECRETI, D|RECTOR, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

The health of man, beast, plant, and soil is one indivisible

B 3.5 Nature It has been proven without doubt that organic farming is good for the environment and wildlife. If you have a sound ecology, then everything thrives and is in balance

Loss of the song thrushes “The last 40 years has been an age of intensive and specialized farming. We’ve got cheap, plentiful food … and much less wildlife: three out of four skylarks gone, for example, along with two out of three song thrushes and four out of five gray partridges. We know organic farming can be better for farmland birds and other wildlife. We want to see more UK farmland being farmed organically ‐ and to make sure that farmers are rewarded both during the conversion period to organic farming and afterwards, because of the environmental benefits they deliver” GRAHAM WYNNE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS (RSPB)

Organic farming offers the best blueprint for safeguarding our planet’s biodiversity for future generations. Unlike conventional agriculture, protecting the environment, nurturing nature, practicing conservation techniques, minimizing pollution, and maximizing recyclable resources are not optional extras but an

236

integral part of organic farming principles and standards. This is because, as organic farmers understand only too well, if you have a sound ecology, then the whole system thrives. Many of the techniques organic farmers use are very simple and are being taken up by “green” local authorities. They can be practiced in your own garden and home to。 Photo: bird on the tree

LIVING CONSERVATION Organic farms are havens for wildlife and for traditional species of wild flower such as corn cockle, poppies, corn marigold, and violets. Organic farmers treasure their ancient hedge banks, stone walls, meadows, woodlands, and other traditional habitats such as moorland, healthland and wetlands in the UK.

SAFE IN THEIR HANDS Organic standards include conservation measures that protect these havens while improving the natural features of the land. Old farm buildings are protected and provide valuable wildlife habitats, especially for barn owls, bats, swallows, and house martins. Wide field margins provide shelter and food for the animals, birds, and insects they attract. Ponds are a valuable conservation resource and another magnet for wildlife, so organic farmers clear and maintain existing ponds and create new ones wherever possible. Ancient woodlands are prized as essential for preserving the landscape and diversity of the species. Planting native trees, taking the time to ensure that sowing, mowing, and harvesting cycles do not disturb groundnesting birds and taking daily inspiration from nature’s wonderful diversity are all part and parcel of an organic farmer’s life. Photo: red poppy

B 3.6 Preventing pollution Pollution of our land, water, and air, whether it is through toxic chemicals or intensive agricultural practices, is a modern Scourge and a critical problem worldwide that affects everyone ‐ Every year there are an estimated 3 million acute pesticide‐ related poisonings, resulting in 220,000 deaths ‐ Roughly 170 pesticides have been linked to major immune diseases such as cancer and allergies, and to infertility and problems in feta| development ‐ Worldwide use of artificial nitrate fertilizer has grown by nearly sevenfold since the 1960s, yet it now ranks as a number one pollutant

237

‐ In the US, insecticide use alone has increased tenfold, yet crop losses have almost doubled Organic standards ban polluting practices and try to prevent pollution by not permitting the use of artificial fertilizers or pesticides. The standards also require that organic farmers do everything possible to minimize any unavoidable pollution and there are strict rules, for instance, governing the spreading of farmyard manures on the land and preventing any possible run‐offs into water supplies

MANURE MADNESS Every year intensive livestock farming produces huge quantities of nitrogen‐rich manure. Because artificial nitrogen is used to fertilize the land, and livestock is usually housed indoors, manure is regarded as a waste product and officially recognized as a serious disposal headache, since these “manure mountains” are often spread very heavily on small areas of land. This leaches high levels of nitrogen‐rich discharges into the environment, polluting rivers and drinking water and posing a major threat to aquatic life. Organic farming frequently combines livestock and crops on the same farm. As a result, manure is a valuable resource. It is responsibly managed by composting and returned to the land in ways that cause minimal possible pollution.

NITROGEN NIGHTMARES Artificial nitrates that superficially made the world a lush, green place and led to large increases in yields now rank as number one pollutants. Worldwide usage has increased by nearly sevenfold to 80 million tons per year, even though in developed countries crop yields reached a plateau in the 1980s and extra fertilizer applications have had no further effect. Around two thirds of the nitrogen fertilizers applied to crops do not get absorbed and leach into the environment, where they have devastating effects on local water systems and soil quality. Photo: Small stream which can be used for drinking water

PESTICIDE PERILS Worldwide use and abuse of artificial pesticides, and the perils associated with it, makes for horrific reading. These highly toxic, hazardous, and invisible grim reapers of modern agriculture have invaded our land, seas, and air, and cause incalculable environmental damage, destroying biodiversity everywhere. Despite the fact that pest populations have risen, that pest and plants regularly develop resistance to pesticides, that pesticides once declared “safe” are repeatedly withdrawn or banned and that

238

some persist in the eco‐system for decades, each year we continue to pour another 2‐2.7 billion kg of them into the environment. And we still lose as many crops now as before they were introduced. Pesticides are in our food, drinking water, and in the food chain at every level. The cocktail effect of ingesting tiny amounts of them has never been investigated: what we do know is the average daily diet now contains traces of thirty of them and that residues on individual food samples vary wild. Photo: Tractor spraying pesticide

B 3.7. Bursting with vitality Organic farmers believe that growing crops organically provides the best possible way to produce healthy food. New research is now opening up the debate on crop health further. Health as a birthright “The birthright of al| living things is health. This |aw is true for soil, plant, anima|, and man; the health of these four is one connected chain.” SIR ALBERT HOWARD, LIVING EARTH Just as a person needs good nutrition and the right environment in order to flourish, so does a plant if it is to be healthy and radiate vitality. Though self‐evident to many, until recently this and the potential consequences it may have for overall human health have been difficult to illustrate. New research in Switzerland, Denmark, and Germany by scientists developing a holistic approach to crop health is revealing some fascinating new insights that, if proven, may have far‐reaching consequences. Photo: red tomatoes harvested fresh

THE APPLIANCE OF SCIENCE We know that every plant is a living pharmacy full of thousands of chemical substances that are present in minute quantities, christened “secondary metabolites”. Very little is known about these chemicals, but research in Denmark by Dr. Bodil Sogaard has found that one group of metabolites, the phenols, are antioxidants many times more powerful than vitamin C. Studies show that organic plants have a greater diversity and quantity of phenols and, since nitrogen seems to suppress them, plants grown with artificial fertilizers have far fewer. One study at the Swiss Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) showed that organic apple samples had over 18 percent more phenolic compounds than conventionally grown samples. Another study found much higher levels of phenols in organic wines than in their conventional equivalents. If these results are confirmed, the consequences for global agricultural systems that rely on nitrogen fertilizers could be significant.

239

GETTING THE PICTURE Another exciting area of research uses advanced crystalization techniques. Studies involving analyses of hundreds of crystalization pictures, show that those of organically and biodynamically grown food samples exhibit more regular patterns than their conventional equivalents. These studies have also shown that crystalization pictures of fresh organic foods have a more regular pattern than processed organic foods, as do those of natural vitamin C compared with its synthetic equivalent. The implications of these differences and other related studies are not yet fully clear. What is clear, however, is that health cannot be measured in a test tube and that a holistic approach to crop health may deepen our understanding of the relationship between us, our soil, and our health and highlight the positive role that organic farming plays in ensuring that our food is as healthy as possible. Photo: Crystalization techniques to identify the organic and conventional food

B 3.8 Be kind to animals For an organic farmer, the natural health and welfare of his or her stock is paramount, and management practices are designed to keep animals as happy, healthy, and stress‐free as possible. Raising organic livestock is labor‐intensive and requires considerable dedication and time, but ensures the livestock are as healthy and stressfree as possible. Organic farmers and their customers believe that this approach to animal welfare, in which the needs of the animal come first, is more satisfying for the farmer and the consumer, and results in better meat and dairy products. Animal welfare begins even before birth and, wherever possible, organic animals are raised on farms from closed herds (a closed herd is self‐regenerating and retains its own female breeding stock). Any animals that are bought into a farm’s herd must come from other organic farms (except day‐old chicks) and have a full ” audit trail” of traceability. Organic animals are reared on natural milk, not milk replacer, and are weaned at an older age than in conventional systems in order to build up their natural immunity. Photo: Two sheep laughs

ROOM FOR EXPRESSION Intensive rearing methods and high stocking densities do not form part of the organic philosophy. Animals must have ample natural bedding and be given conditions that allow them to express their natural behavior. Generally, organic animal~ spend much of their time outside and many farmers keep their animals in family groups.

240

NATURALLY NURTURED Organic animals graze exclusively on organic pastures and are fed only appropriate, natural, non‐GM feeds, all or most of which must be organic. Animals on organic farms receive no routine antibiotics, wormers, or other medication, and all synthetic growth‐promoting agents are prohibited. Good health is maintained through good feeding and husbandry, and natural and homeopathic remedies are encouraged.

HAPPIER ENDINGS Wherever possible, animals from organic farms are slaughtered in locally. The maximum time allowed for traveling to a slaughterhouse is eight hours. Provision for food and water must be given, and animals are slaughtered in small numbers. To avoid contamination or accidental mix‐up with other, non‐organic carcasses, organic animals are usually the first to be killed and they must be identifiable at all times. With the exception of poultry (as one‐day‐ old chicks), only animals that have been born and raised on organic holdings are allowed to be sold as organic meat, and must have a comprehensive audit trail of traceability from farm to table.

ROUTINE ANTIBIOTICS ‐ THE GASE AGAINST Rearing animals intensively puts unnatural stresses on them. As a result they are more likely to become ill, and so are frequently or routinely dosed with antibiotics to prevent and treat disease. In addition, antibiotics are also used extensively as growth promoters, so that most intensively reared cattle and virtually all growing pigs and broiler chickens receive them in their feed throughout their lives. Growth‐promoting antibiotics also kill most natural bacteria in farm animals but not all strains of salmonella. The incidence of food poisoning from salmonella is still rising, and the strains of bacteria responsible for this are routinely found in intensively farmed animals. Overuse of antibiotics in this way is resulting in widespread bacterial resistance to antibiotics, causing the development of new strains of disease that are not treatable with current antibiotics and pose a continuing threat to human health. Routine use of these valuable medicines is banned in organic farming. Photo: Chicken in the cage

241

B 3.9 The Voice of reason Genetic engineering is the single most important issue of our lifetime. It raises questions on many different levels, including environmental, social, ethical, and political. “The choice “Industrial, intensive farming now faces a choice between escalating its war on nature by embracing GM technology, or changing direction, to work with the grain of nature. Corporations are desperate for the profits GM products will bring them, but we decide what we want to buy. Scientists find rearranging nature very exciting, but we have to decide between right and wrong. And in a historic victory over big science and big business, people worldwide are saying no to GM food. This is a victory who enjoy good, healthy food.” PETER MELCHETT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GREENPEACE

For many scientists, genetic engineering offers the ultimate prize: control of life itself and an Aladdin’s cave of scientific possibilities. For the agrochemical and pharmaceutical companies, it offers undreamed of profits and domination of the world’s food and seed supply. For intensive farmers, it offers a new technological quick‐fix to the problems that nitrates and pesticides were supposed to solve but have not. It is also the biggest gamble we have ever taken, which ‐ if it goes wrong ‐ could have devastating consequences for our health and our planet. Once released, GMOs can never be recalled ‐ that is the problem. At the heart of these issues lies a debate on democracy and fundamental human rights, on who “owns” nature, and on whether, as the UK's Prince of Wales argues, by tampering with nature in this way we are entering realms that belong to God alone.

BEYOND THE POINT OF RETURN The genetic engineering genie is already out of the bottle. The question is: what do we use it for, and who should own and control it? Its use in medicines ‐ to find treatments for previously incurable conditions, for example ‐ for consenting individuals in properly controlled and closed conditions is a very different matter from the colonization of the environment with “Frankenstein” crops that could never exist outside a laboratory and whose long‐term effects are unknown. There is no doubt, too, that although consumers have said a resounding N 0 to GM foods, we and our children continue to be used as unwitting guinea pigs, and our environment continues to bε used as an open‐air laboratory. Many animal feeds already contain GM corn or soy, many cosmetics and health supplements have been produced using GM derivatives. GM field crop trials are already polluting the environment; many beekeepers, for example,

242

can no longer guarantee that their honey is GM‐free. The question we have to ask is: is this right? The organic movement has said that GM crops have no place in organic agriculture and it offers people the only realistic non‐GM choice. Is it right that all farmers who wish to stay GM‐free are threatened too? The outcome of this debate will determine the world we shall inhabit ‐ and inherit ‐ for ever more. Choosing the organic option, and supporting organizations that campaign for the right to say NO, will help to ensure that the world gets the breathing space it deserves. Photo: Soybean grown organically

WHAT IS BEING GENETICALLY ENGINEERED Not on|y ... Animals, Bacteria, Coffee, Cosmetics, Cotton, Drugs, Fish Food crops such as corn and soy, Livestock feeds, Trees, Lawns, Plants, and seeds, Vines, Vitamins But also ... Biological weapons, Contraceptives Humans (germ‐line therapy on embryos, which is still in its infancy), Plastics, starches, and industrial chemicals

B 3.10 Mapping Out Organics The organic revolution is happening worldwide and providing a powerful force for agricultural change everywhere. Demand for organic food is at an all‐time high: global growth is expected to reach up to 20 percent each year for next decade or more, and to account for between two and five percent of all food sales worldwide.

United States of America The number one organic producer worldwide, with 5,670 km2 of certified organic farmland. The annual rate of market growth is 15~20%, with the market currently worth $6.6 billion and expected to rise to more than $13 billion by 2003. Major exports: fruit and vegetables, grain, and animal feeds and processed products.

Mexico High‐quality Mexican organic coffee is a favorite with European coffee drinkers. Major exports: coffee, fruit, avocados, and vegetables.

Cuba Organic agriculture was adopted as part of its official policy in 1990. Growing for domestic consumption, Cuba had become self‐

243

sufficient in basic vegetables and fruit by 1996 and more than 80% of its pest control had become based on biological controls.

Brazil Organic production is steadily increasing. Brazil is a major source of non‐GM soy. In 1999 the state of Rio Grande do Sol made history by banning all field trials of GM soy and prohibiting any GMO releases in the state other states in Brazil are attempting to follow suit Major exports: fruit and soy.

Argentina A rising star:‘ 85% of Argentinean organic crops are exported, including organic beef. Several major new fruit plantations have been set up and further expansion is planned. Exports: flax, sunflower seeds, apples and pears, citrus fruits, olive oil, and wine. Photo: World map

Denmark Nearly 50% of households buy organic foods and organic milk is the norm. Major exports: pork and dairy products.

Sweden Over 10% of agricultural |and is already organic, and the country |S on target for 20% by 2005. Major exports: meat (especially pork) and dairy foods.

Germany The largest organic market in Europe, accounting for one third of a|| European organic meat and dairy products, and second only to the US worldwide, with over 8,000 organic producers, the highest per capita consumption of organic food and drink in Europe, and, after Italy, the second largest and area in Europe under organic cultivation and in conversion. Exports: beer, meat, dairy foods, processed foods, baby foods, condiments, and cosmetics.

Switzerland With over 7% of land area (4,500 farms) already under organic cultivation, organic farming and food are major growth markets‘ Main production is dairy products; 25% of the milk sold by a major Swiss supermarket chain is organic, which expects that 20% of all its product categories will be organic in the near future.

United Kingdom The UK has the fastest‐growing organic market in Europe. An Organic Food and Farming Targets Bill proposes a target of 30%

244

agricultural land and 20% of food consumed to be organic by 2010. Currently just over 1% of land is farmed organically Demand far outstrips supply and 70% of organic products are imported.

India A|| types of organic food produced for the domestic market. Much of India’s biodiversity has already been destroyed. In the 1950s more than 30,000 varieties of rice were grown in India. Today seed‐ saving initiatives such as the Navdanya Project attempt to secure the remaining 600 varieties. Main exports are tea, coffee, spices, nuts, cotton, and herbal cosmetics.

China A large area of central China has just been earmarked for organic production. Currently has 10,000 acres of certified organic and producing more than 30 types of organic produce for export. Due to consumer demand, China’s first organic shops are opening in Shanghai.

Japan The organic market is currently worth $2.5 billion dollars and is growing fast About 2.5% of agricultural land is already under organic cultivation Demand out‐strips supply imports are largely from New Zealand, Australia, and the US. Roughly 40% of the population belong to a natural food buyers' cooperative.

Australia The land area under organic cultivation is currently 4.2 million acres, and is set to double within 10 years. The country’s biggest export market is Japan, especially for organic beef. Production of organic wine is steadily increasing. Vegetables are a major organic crop, as are oil and grain crops.

New Zealand Organic food and farming is the fastest‐growing sector of the market, and the area of |and farmed organically is expected to increase to 30% by 2010. Major exports: kiwi fruits, apples, and processed vegetables. New Zealand also produces organic avocados, wine, and citrus fruits.

Egypt Organic agriculture began here in 1978, when a biodynamic farm was estab|1shed in the desert. Since then more than 180 organic farms have been set up. Major exports: vegetables, including early new potatoes, cotton, and medicinal herbs.

245

Burkina Each year 10,000 mango growers in Burkina produce 50,000 tons of organic mangos for expo to Europe fresh or as dried mango slices. Its other major export crop is organic sesame seeds.

B 3.11. Organics around the World Large and small organic farmers, individuals and cooperatives, pioneers, and traditionalists ‐ all share the same vision of growing healthy food and making eco‐friendly products in ways that will sustain us and our planet.

Ripe, fresh dates from California, sugar cane grown under the blue skies of Mauritius, fragrant teas from Sri Lankan hillsides, fruity olive oils from traditional Spanish olive groves, rare coffees from Papua New Guinea, heady organic wines from New Zealand ‐ organic food and drink comes from all corners of the globe and stands for quality and enjoyment. Pure, natural lotions, potions, and soaps can help to keep you clean. Soft organic cotton clothing and bedding, and beautiful furniture and floors made with wood from sustainable forests, can add another dimension to your home. The richness of diversity, as shown below, is a crucial defining element that sets organic farmers apart from the rest. Knowing that what you buy comes from real individuals, whose daily efforts enrich the world in which we live, is a treasure we can all rejoice in, and something to be celebrated every time we shop.

THE DUCK PATROL Introducing ducklings into rice paddy fields, the brainchild of Mr. Furuno, a small organic farmer in Fukuoka, Japan, has revolutionized the lives of thousands of peasant farmers in southeast Asia. The ducklings do the weeding, and they eat insects and other pests. They also oxygenate the water as they paddle, helping to make the rice plants grow strong, as does the natural fertilizer of the ducklings’ droppings. Once the rice is ready to harvest, the ducks are removed and fattened up on waste rice grains from the rice‐polishing plant. After laying eggs, which are hatched to provide more ducklings for the next season, the ducks are sold, providing extra income for the farmers. Except for the small amount of waste rice grain, they are entirely self‐sustaining. Yields have increased by 20‐50 percent using this method, weeding time saved is 240 person‐hours per acre, and farmers’ incomes have doubled. Each year Mr. Furuno’s farm of about two acres produces about seven tons of rice, 30 ducks, 4,000 ducklings, and enough vegetables to support 100 people. He has not patented his

246

method and shares his ideas freely through videos, lectures, and teaching. Photo: Duck‐rice system in paddy field

TIME FOR TEA The Iddalgashinne biodynamic tea estate is set in breathtaking scenery, 2,000 m above sea level in the Beragala Hills of the Uva district in Sri Lanka. Protected by virgin rainforests, this is a beautiful green jumble of biodiversity that produces top notch teas. The estate has a workforce of 1,400 people, its own nursery school, house‐building programs and three medical centers. It is currently in transition to community ownership under the “Social Action Plan” program. As a biodynamic plantation, the growers use a lunar calendar to help them determine the best time for operations such as planting and pruning. They also use specific biodynamic preparations made on the estate to treat the tea bushes and soil. Worms are supplied with green manures and coconut waste to generate compost for the tea bushes. Other worms are fed with beneficial herbs to produce “worm bath water” that is applied in tiny, homeopathic quantities as a plant tonic. The tea is handpicked and hand‐rolled according to traditional practices in the plantation’s own tea factory. Sri Lanka produces other organic teas of remarkable quality. The island as a whole does not use pesticides, except as a spot treatment, and has been leading the way in natural predator control since the 1960s by encouraging beneficial insect populations with measures such as growing sunflowers and providing shaded areas for wasps that attack the Tortrix moth. Photo: Woman picks the tea leaves

CRIMSON TIDE Ameriean growers are restoring their cranberry bogs to their former glory ‐ organically. Cranberries are native to North America and used to grow wild until cultivated varieties were developed, spawning a multi‐million dollar business. At Cranberry Hill Organic Farm, in Massachusetts, the farmers grow traditional cranberry varieties and preserve their natural habitat, which provides a refuge for birds, insects, and pond life. It is hard work all year round. During the coldest winter month the bogs are flooded with clean spring water to protect the cranberry vines from cold. Sand is then spread to help the vines root more easily. In late spring, the bogs are flooded again for 30 days to retard pests. and weeds, and throughout the summer the bogs are hand‐weeded. Unlike conventional cranberry producers, organic growers use no pesticides and feed vines only with organic nutrients. In the autumn

247

the berries are harvested with wooden scoops and picking machines, then cleaned, sorted, and packed on site. They are sold fresh throughout the US and are beginning to appear in Europe as well as in Japan and Taiwan. Organic cranberries are also dried and juiced for use all year round.

Rights & wrongs “There is a misconception that organic farming is the same as subsistence or ‘traditional’ farming. Nothing is further from the truth. Organic farming is modern, progressive, and a blueprint for sustainability. It is the wrong strategy to try and feed the world by depleting the soil, polluting the environment, or introducing genetic engineering. We must ensure that people can feed themselves ... only organic farming has the right approach to this and seeks to find solutions that last.” BERNWALD GE|ER, DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF ORGANIC AGRICULTURE MOVEMENT

THE PIG TALE At the Herrmannsdorfer Landwerkstatten, near Munich in Germany, the link between farmer and consumer is complete. The pigs roam outside in good weather, retiring to stalls when the conditions are bad. About 15‐30 pigs share a stall, grouped according to age. They lead a happy life and are treated with respect and care. The pigs feed on leftovers from other operations on the farm, such as unsold bread from the shop, scraps from the restaurant, and mash from the beer‐making process. Animals are slaughtered humanely on site and processed immediately to make the farm’s acclaimed, preservative‐free sausages, liverwurst, salamis, and traditionally cured hams, which are served in their own restaurant or sold in their farm shop and in other local shops and supermarkets. The owner of this inspirational farm, the pioneering Karl Ludwig Schweisfurth, aims to run a “zero emission” farm where everything is recycled. All organic waste, including that from the pigs, goes to a Biogas recycling plant, where bacteria purify its liquid content back into clean water and transform the nonliquid waste into fertilizer, which is plowed back into the land, and methane gas, which powers_ a generator to produce heat and electricity. Photo: German old pig

B 3.12 Looking local Going global Foods and goods produced locally offer a sustainable way forward. Buying organic and fairtrade foods and goods helps local

248

communities to flourish and is something in which all of us can become involved.

LOCAL FOOD LINKS There are many ways you can get involved in the Go Local programs ‐ Boxed food plans ‐ Farmers' markets ‐ Farm shops ‐ Women’s institute markets ‐ Food cooperatives ‐ City farms ‐ Community gardens, and orchards ‐ Subscription farms and community‐owned farms ‐ Local food directories

Food produced and consw11ed locally can be fresher, healthier, and more economical than produce that has been transported for long distances, and often has less packaging too. Buying local produce helps communities to thrive, restores trust, and reconnects consumer to farmer. It lets buying food be a pleasurable and meaningful experience again. The Go Local movement is a worldwide initiative that involves national and local campaigns as well as community and farming projects. Find out about local food links and boxed food plans. Contact your tourist board or local authority and ask for their local food directory. Supermarkets are also starting to stock local food ‐ ask yours to do the same. Photo: Organic vegetables in local market

GLOBAL GO LOCAL Local and sustainable food links are developing in many countries. Farmers’ markets, for example, began in the US in the 1970s and have been a roaring success. There are now more than 2,500 of them here in the US, generating over $1 billion annually for growers. The Seikatsu Club, an organic consumer cooperative in Japan set up by a group of Japanese women, now has 153,000 members. The Bio Co‐op consumer cooperatives in France, started in 1987, are run by and for local organic consumers, with more than 160 branches.

“PLANT A SEED AND GROW A COMMUNITY” In the past farms have usually been under private ownership. Now projects such as subscription farming and community farms in cities and in rural areas enable people to get actively involved, to become social investors and to reap a share of the harvest. Already

249

well established in the US and Japan, subscription farming is a variation on boxed food plans where you pay in advance for a share of the harvest, which is then divided up as a weekly box. Members also help with growing, harvesting, and packing. Community‐ owned farms are variation popular in many countries. These allow you to part‐own a local farm by buying a modest amount of shares. Members can help with the day‐to‐day running of the farm, which is owned cooperatively. City farms and community gardens are run for and by local communities and bring the country to the city. They range from nature gardens, ecological parks, and allotments to demonstration city farms. All provide a haven for wildlife and a green focus for local communities, especially children. Many grow and sell their own organic produce. The UK, for example, has over 250, involving over 300,000 local people and attracting 3 million visitors a year. Photo: Boy carries new born sheep Photo: 2 Girls feed ducklings

By supporting organic farmers, we will be able to create a sustainable future for ourselves and our planet. HELEN BROWN|NG OBE, CHAIRMAN, THE SOIL ASSOCIATION

B 3.13 The Natural Food Link Organic farms all over the world provide living proof that organic farming works. Duchy Home Farm, on the Prince of Wales’s Highgrove Estate in the UK, is one of the many thousands that provide daily inspiration for us all. The Prince of Wales is one of Britain’s best‐known organic farmers. Like many thousands of people who care about the environment and believe we have a responsibility to look after our planet, he has spoken out and championed environmental causes for over thirty years. He began converting the Duchy Home Farm at Highgrove, Gloucestershire, in 1986, and today it is fully organic, providing high‐quality food for the local community and beyond.

THE PRINCE’S ORGANIC EXAMPLE Like every organic farm, Duchy Home Farm works with, rather than against, nature. Permanent grass strips 2 m wide that surround every field, and acres of new broadleaf woodland, along with hedges that create new green lanes, ensure an abundance of natural predators. To further protect biodiversity, the farm keeps six rare breeds: Hebridean and Cotswold sheep, Large Black pigs, and Gloucester, Irish Moiled and Aubrac cattle. As an organic demonstration farm, Duchy Home Farm is visited regularly by

250

farmers wanting to convert to organic methods, as well as by scientists and politicians. Independent research has confirmed that ‐ like countless other organic farms ‐ the Prince’s organic farm is more beneficial to wildlife, causes less pollution and, once conversion is complete, is more profitable than similar conventional farms. Photo: The prince of Wales, Charles, looks at the wheat ears in his organic farm

DEVELOPING THE NATURAL FOOD LINK Duchy Home Farm’s organic produce is distributed widely. Its organic vegetable box program supplies 150 local families each week. Milk from the farm, which is sold through the Organic Milk Suppliers Co‐operative, finds its way into Yeo Valley yogurts and Alvis Brothers cheese. Duchy Home Farm’s rye is taken to nearby Shipton Mill for milling and from there on to be made into organic bread. Its lamb and beef are sold through local and national butchers and the Organic Meat Co‐operative, and its pork is used to produce Duchy Originals organic bacon and sausages. This organic and natural food and beverage brand, launched by the Prince in 1992, was set up to facilitate the production of the highest‐quality food and drink products. All its profits are donated to the Prince’s Charitable Foundation. The range also features Duchy Originals award‐winning organic cookies. Photo: Healthy cows are grazing in the grassland

B 3.14. Your questions answered What does it really mean to be “organic”? How much does organic farming really differ from conventional methods? How worldwide is this approach? Here are some clear answers to common questions.

What does “organic” actually mean? Organic farmers are those who farm according to organic principles. They are inspected and certified annually by an approved certification body such as Farm Verified Organic. Organic foods, drinks, and goods are produced from certified organic crops and ingredients. By law, only certified foods or goods can be sold as “organic”

Do organic farmers use pesticides? A small number of predominantly natural pesticides are allowed in certain circumstances. Because all pesticides ‐ whether natural or synthetic ‐ are harmful, organic farmers must often seek written consent from their certification body before using them. All permitted

251

pesticides are subject to constant review and will be removed from the permitted list as soon as better natural controls are developed.

Do organic standards vary from country to country? Yes. Different countries have different growing conditions and practices that must be taken into account. However, all standards must conform to basic legal requirements, as laid down in statutory regulations such as those of the European Union. Some certifying bodies, such as the Soil Association, in the UK, may set additional standards above the legal minimum required

Are organic yields always lower and if so, why? Organic farmers operate extensive systems, which means they keep fewer animals on a given area, and some of the available land is used to build up natural fertility, for example by growing green manures that cannot be used for grazing or sold as a crop During the conversion period, withdrawal of artificial fertilizers and pesticides can also cause reduced yields1initially. Once established, however, organic farms are highly productive and yields match or sometimes even exceed conventional equivalents

Do organic farmers use only traditional methods? No. Organic farming uses the best of the old with the best of the new and is constantly refining and developing new sustainable agricultural solutions that will be of long‐lasting benefit to farming and to the environment.

Are antibiotics banned from organic farms? No. Conventional medication ‐ including antibiotics ‐ must always be and is always given where it is necessary to prevent suffering. On organic farms animals are treated on an individual basis however and the withdrawal time before the animal can then be sold is at least twice as long (or even three times as long under certain rules) as the withdrawal times for conventionally raised animals.

What does “bio‐dynamic farming” mean? This specialized organic approach to farming and gardening founded in 1924, treats every farm and garden as unique and self‐sustaining, in balance with soil, plant, animal, and cosmic processes, and operates worldwide. Biodynamic farmers and gardeners use special sprays and compost preparations that act as catalysts, and a lunar calendar to determine when to sow and harvest. Their goods will be labeld accordingly.

252

Can organic farming feed the world? We already have enough food to feed the world. The reasons so many go hungry are poverty, the politics of distribution, and a global economic framework that considers growing for profit more important than feeding people. Considering the massive environmental problems caused by conventional agriculture, organic farming is the only system which is ever likely to feed and sustain the world in the long term.

B 4 Organic Food 4 Photo: Fresh leeks grown organically

B 4.1 Why eat Organic The first step to an organic lifestyle is to start enjoying some of huge variety of organic foods you can now buy. In doing so you are choosing the healthiest option for you, your family, and the environment. Photo: Fresh radish in corbeil

Like organic farming, organic food offers you so much more than just food grown without artificial pesticides or fertilizers and animals not raised in intensive conditions or propped up with antibiotics. You will also find that when you switch to organic produce you will start to discover more about how your food is produced and the people who produce and sell it, which will add to your cooking and eating pleasure. As you begin to realize what eating organic can offer, you will become increasingly aware of the welfare and environmental issues surrounding modern food production. Not many people, for example, automatically think of buying organic bananas or coffee, but read the profiles and you, too, will be converted. As well as feeling a sense of well‐being and make things better for all of us and our environment. It was not so long ago that organic food was dismissed as a niche – and therefore exclusive – market. All that has changed. Today organic food is mainstream and available in every major supermarket. There is so much variety, and organic food is so widely available, that there is something to suit everyone. And do not presume that organic food is expensive – you will always find items that match your budget.

4 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

253

Getting Started You do not need to switch to a totally organic diet to begin enjoying its fruits. Whether you start with a loaf of organic bread from the supermarket or a bunch of freshly harvested organic carrots from a framer’s market, the same positive action will generate tha same positive feelings. Many people comment on the flavor of organic food and, once you begin eating it on a regular basis, you will want to adopt your diet, shopping habits, and budget to enable you to choose as much as possible. This section explains everything you need to know to get you started. Buy at least one organic item every time you shop Start with every staples like bread, milk, potatoes, and pasta Try something vew every week Go local for best value by joining a boxed food program or visiting a farmer’s market

B 4.2 Your questions answered

Do organic foods last as long as non‐organic? This varies. Because no post‐harvest chemicals are used, some organic fresh produce does not last as long as non‐organic, but often its lower water content and its nonforced growth mean it may actually last longer. Foods such as sausages and chilled goods contain no artificial preservatives and should be enjoyed as soon as possible. Manufactured organic foods have a shelf life similar to their non‐organic equivalents.

Do organic foods taste better than non‐organic? Because organic foods are grown naturally and not forced, generally speaking they are likely to have a better flavor than their non‐organic equivalents. Numerous taste tests confirm this, as do the thousands of people who regularly eat organic foods. However, because taste is a personal thing, and depends on a range of factors, a better taste cannot be guaranteed.

Why are organic foods potentially healthier? Organic foods are foods you can trust and feel good about, and eating them brings many benefits. Uniquely, they contain no hydrogenated fats, artificial additives, flavorings, or preservatives, as well as being produced without the use of artificial pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or routine antibiotics. In addition, organic fresh produce generally has lower nitrate levels and can have higher mineral and vitamin C content.

254

What about the cost? Organic foods represent the true cost of growing nutritious, high‐ quality produce. Foods grown using modern intensive methods may be cheap, but have very high health, social, and environmental costs, like that of cleaning up water pollution. Unfortunately, organic foods are often unfairly judged against mass‐produced foods, which distorts the value for money ratio. However, the increasing production and availability of organic foods is rapidly making them more affordable.

Do organic foods contain any additives? Organic foods are processed with the minimum processing necessary for each type of foodstuff. A limited number of natural processing aids, such as ascorbic acid (vitamin C) or guar gum, are approved and will be clearly labeled on the packaging. All are under constant review and no new processing aid is added without the closest scrutiny.

Are organic maufactured foods entirely organic? The vast majority of organic foods on sale are 100% organic. However, standards allow for a small proportion of some nonorganic ingredients to be used temporarily, in certain circumstances. Any nonorganic ingredient will be clearly labeled as such on the packaging. What about GM foods? Organic standards exclude genetically modified organisms (GMOs) of any kind from the growing, processing or manufacture of organic foods. This ban includes all derivatives as well as the GM enzymes used to make rennet for vegetarian cheese. Many organic manufacturers also test their products independently to ensure GM purity.

B 4.3 Fresh is Best Photo: Fresh harvested radish grown organically

Good health begins with including as much wholesome fresh produce as possible in our daily diet. Nutritionists recommend that we eat at least five portions of fresh fruit and vegetables every day. Fresh produce is central to a healthy diet and for most people this now means choosing organic whenever possible. Happily, production of organic fresh produce is rising exponentially worldwide, which means that availability has improved enormously. Major retailers stock organic fruit and vegetables, as do many independent shops and smaller chains. Organic supermarkets have the largest selection, while local organic boxed

255

food plans offer the best value. If you have a garden, the ideal solution, of course, is to grow your own.

AVAILABILITY Because it is grown naturally, there is more seasonal variation in organic produce than in conventional. Also, since some crops grow better organically in some countries than others, imported organic produce will always play an important role and help make up any shortfall. However, unlike conventional crops, organic crops always benefit the local people and local environment. In most counties up to 80% of fresh produce is imported, more of which could be home‐ grown. The main obstacle is lack of government support, which means growers are converting more slowly than those in countries where government support is strong.

FOR APPEARANCE’S SAKE Organic produce is not uniform, but is a celebration of nature’s individuality. Nor is cosmetic perfection desirable (up to 80 percent of pesticides are said to be used to ensure blemish‐free crops). This means there is a greater variability in size and shape in organic fruit and vegetables and sometimes more surface blemishes. Generally, too, you can expect two main differences in the eating quality of organic and nonorganic produce: a greater intensity and sweetness, and more texture. Organic beauty is thus more than skin‐deep and it is health and taste that matter most.

ORGANIC STANDARDS Al| fresh vegetables and fruit labeled “organic” must, by |aw, be grown according to the following standards: • Crops are grown without the use of artificial fertilizers or pesticides • Generally, the required conversion period to organic methods is two years (for ground crops) or three years (for perennials) • Appropriate crop rotation is practiced for ground crops to break pest and disease cycles, and to help maintain soil fertility and structure • No post‐harvest chemical treatments are used • Fertility is provided by natural organic manures, composts and fertilizers • No use of GM seeds or other materials is permitted

256

tomatoes are available locally grown or you can grow them yourself. In winter they are usually shipped from California and other warmer climes. The riper the tomatoes are, the better the flavor, and, at their best, organic tomatoes have a firm texture and a sweet, intense flavor. Cherry tomatoes are naturally sweeter than other types and have the highest vitamin C content. Photo: Organic tomatoes in tomato plant

B 4.4 A Taste of Summer Photo: 2 green beans in bean plant

Blue skies and sunny days bring forth a wealth of variety of good things to eat. Fresh organic summer produce is packed with natural goodness, is quick to prepare and a joy to eat. Whether you buy them straight from the farm gate, through a boxed food plan, or at the supermarket, the great variety of organic summer vegetables means there is something for everyone.

Summer roots Seasonal bunches of organic turnips, radishes, beets, and summer carrots are a delight. Very often they come with their leaves attached ‐ an extra bonus. No need to peel, just washing with a brush. For added eye appeal, do not cut off the whiskery roots of baby root vegetables. Local boxed food producers often grow yellow and striped varieties of organic beets, as well as kohlrabi. Baby beet leaves are as tender as spinach and can be eaten raw, as in salads, or cooked. Cook’s tip Cook baby carrots and turnips in butter with a few chopped herbs. A pinch of organic sugar also brings out their sweetness.

Lettuce Organic lettuces have more heart and soul than most conventional lettuces, and are closer in taste and texture to home‐grown lettuces. The majority of conventionally grown lettuces are cultivated by highly intensive methods, often hydroponically. Organic lettuces are always grown in soil; they are allowed to grow at a natural rate and have natural resilience. In summer, locally grown organic lettuce is easy to come by. If buying from a local grower you may need to discard the outer leaves, and watch out for the occasional friendly insect or slug. Imported organic lettuces from other countries are available most of the year. Popular organic varieties are Little Gem and the various red and green frilly varieties such as red leaf and green leaf. Prepackaged organic salad packs are also becoming popular. Unlike many conventional packaged salads, they are not washed in chlorine. They may be washed with very dilute

257

solutions of citric acid to help keep them fresh, but this does not aff1εct the flavor. In summer you can grow organic lettuces for yourself very easily.

Tomatoes Conventional greenhouse tomatoes are grown using biological controls instead of artificial pesticides these days, but only organic tomatoes are all cultivated in soil and fed naturally. In summer tomatoes are available locally grown or you can grow them yourself. In winter they are usually shipped from California and other warmer climes. The riper the tomatoes are, the better the flavor, and, at their best, organic tomatoes have a firm texture and a sweet, intense flavor. Cherry tomatoes are naturally sweeter than other types and have the highest vitamin C content.

Peas & beans Organic producers cultivate a wide variety of peas and beans, ranging from sugar snap peas, snow peas, lima beans and yellow, purple, and green French beans all the way through to drying beans such as borlotti beans, which are all available seasonally. Organic French beans, sugar snap peas, and snow peas, both locally grown and imported, are now available throughout most of the year. Organic peas are full of flavor but, because they are grown naturally, they do not necessarily all ripen at the same time, and this can cause variations in tenderness.

Broccoli & cauliflower Organic broccoli has real flavor and vibrancy while organic cauliflower has beautifully creamy curds with extra flavor to match. Broccoli is known as a “superfood” and a powerful antioxidant. Both are available for most of the year, either grown in the US or imported. Other than a careful check for insects in the folds of the curds, they need no preparation, except dividing into florets. Store both in the salad drawer of the refrigerator. They are best eaten as soon as possible, although freshly harvested cauliflower will keep in good condition stored cold for up to a week.

Spinach A recent research study found organic spinach samples to have almost 100 percent more iron and manganese than conventional samples. Like other organic green leafy produce, it is also lower in nitrates. So choose organic spinach when you can. It does not store well and should be eaten as soon as possible. Wash thε leaves well just before cooking.

258

Fennel Fennel produced organically has a powerful flavor and is extra‐ crunchy. It will often be misshapen, and its outer leaves may be slightly tough use these for soups and stocks. Locally grown organic fennel is available in the US from summer to late autumn, but organic fennel, imported from warmer climates, is available for most of the year. Cook’s tip For the best summer salad, slice fennel thinly and dress with olive oil and finely chopped tarragon or olives. In autumn combine with finely sliced organic oranges. Photo: Organically grown fennel

Eggplants & peppers Organic peppers and eggplants are becoming commonplace. A range of varieties is cultivated by local growers , often for boxed food plans, but for the retail market they might be imported. Peppers will ripen naturally and further develop their flavor, so store at room temperature and not in the refrigerat or. Both are superb cooked on the barbecue and can be grown at home in pots.

Avocados Delicious, highly nutritious, and rich in vitamin E and essential fatty acids, organic avocados are a popular choice and many growers in California and Mexico are converting to organic methods. The main varieties are Hass and Fuerte, which are both readily available in the US for most of the year. Perfect for salsas, instant dips, salads, lunches, and dinners, these offer good all around value ‐ no organic home should be without them.

Garlic Fresh summer garlic is much easier on the digestion than the dried version, and is wonderful roasted or pureed. Local growers offer freshly harvested organic garlic in summer ‐ perfect for barbecues, pesto, and garlic mayonnaise (aioli). Organic garlic is often grown locally but is also shipped from other states year‐ round. You can easily grow garlic organically at home.

B 4.5. Focus on Corn Organic corn ‐ corn on the cob ‐ is a real treat, with a rich flavor and natural creamy sweetness. Summer barbecues would not be the same without it. Organic corn, or maize, meanwhile, is a golden treasure in a world increasingly threatened by genetic modification. Originating in Central and South America, corn is one of the earliest known domestic crops and has been in cultivation for thousands of

259

years. Modern varieties are usually yellow, but traditional varieties come in a range of colors, from orange, red, and brown to a deep purple‐blue or black. Starchy varieties, used for flour, polenta, popcorn, corn breads, tortillas, cornflakes, and animal feed, are known as maize, while sweet varieties are known just as corn.

Big business In the US, maize is a major commodity crop, grown as intensively as wheat and used extensively in animal feeds and in processed foods. The eco‐facts are: + In 1945 no insecticides were used on maize, which was grown in rotation with other crops. Today, half the maize grown is cultivated as a monocrop and the use of insecticides has increased 1,000‐fold. +In 1945 the corn rootworm pest was not a problem. Since using pesticides, crop losses from this pest have risen from 3 1/2 % to 12 %. + About a third of the maize grown in the US is genetically engineered to contain bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a soil bacterium used by organic growers to control caterpillars and other pests. Cultivation of the genetically modified (GM) maize will inevitably cause insect resistance to Bt over time, robbing organic growers of one of their most valuable natural insecticides. In an attempt to stop the rapid development of the resistance that is already building up, conventional maize farmers in Mississippi are prohibited from growing more than half their crop with Bt maize. Photo: Red corns

The GM threat GM maize is already widely grown in the US. Because it can cross‐ pollinate with non‐GM corn varieties, including corn, this has created an important precedent in the fight to be GM‐free. Research has confirmed that pollen travels much further than previously thought. This means that, under current regulations, GM maize field trials in the UK and the rest of Europe pose a threat to the purity of all organic and non‐GM corn. Riverford Farm in Devon, which runs one of the UK’s most successful organic boxed food plans, is a case in point. In 1999 12 acres of its organic corn were threatened with contamination from nearby GM maize trials, and the grower was in danger of losing his organic status for his crop. Increasingly this is happening to other organic farmers too. In the casε of the UK, the Soil Association is campaigning for all growers of non‐GM varieties of corn to be properly protected from GM contamination. Buying organic and choosing not to buy processed foods containing

260

conventional corn ingredients is the best way of ensuring our organic corn remains GM‐free. Photo: Tractor sprays pesticide

NATURE’S WAY Organic corn is nature's sunshine in a cob. Herbicides are forbidden, so organic growers will hand‐weed, or use weed‐ brushing machines until the crop is growing well. In the UK pests are not generally a major problem. The ripe cobs are picked by hand and the stubbles are ploughed back into the soil where they rot down to provide organic matter. Corn is a seasonal crop available from mid‐ to late summer. It is usually sold with its leaves and brown “tassle”, and is a favorite vegetable at farmer’s markets all over the country. Photo: Yellow corn grown organically

B 4.6 A Winter Wonderland There are few better ways to brighten those cold winter months than by enjoying the depth of flavor and healthy boost you can get from organic winter vegetables ‐ the ultimate comfort foods. The ever‐increasing range of organic winter vegetables now available both imported and home‐grown, means that it has never been easier to choose organic, whatever the season. Photo: 3 Carrots

Celery Organic celery has good flavor and a loud crunch. It is perfect for crudites and is one of the best vegetables for adding flavor to casseroles and salads. Widely grown in the US, it is also imported. Fresh American home‐grown organic is best, especially the deep green varieties, which have a superb flavor, although the outside stalks may be tougher. Celery stores well for up to two weeks in the refrigerator.

Winter roots Taste freshly dug organic carrots, parsnips, beets, or celeriac and you will rediscover the true earthy sweetness of root vegetables. Carrots are the most popular organic vegetable and locally grown carrots can usually be found in supermarkets or farmer’s markets, all year round. Unwashed roots last better than washed ones and all should be stored dry, in the dark, or in the refrigerator, and removed from any plastic bags first.

261

Leeks One of the best winter vegetables, organic leeks often come with more green flag (leaves) and, if freshly dug, will probably need careful washing. They are available from early autumn onwards. The outer tough green flags on leeks should be discarded, but the inner green leaves can be cooked with the white part. Photo: Sprouting broccoli

Dark greens These include organic cabbages, purple and white sprouting broccoli, Brussels sprouts, spring greens, Swiss chard, spinach beet, and vivid green and purple kales. When freshly harvested, all are generally superb. All, too, contain fistfuls of vitamins and antioxidants. Always a favorite gardener’s vegetable, and popular on here in the US, thanks to farmer’s markets, organic Swiss chard is becoming more common in the US and may soon appear in supermarkets. Organic Brussels sprouts often come attached to their stalks ‐ a sure sign of freshness. Organic cabbages will store well for a week or so in the refrigerator. Other greens should be eaten in their prime. You may well find the occasional insect lurking within, so remember to check them carefully. Photo: Red cabbage

Chinese leaves Farmer’s markets often have a large assortment of peppery Chinese leafy vegetables such as mizuna mustard, komatsuna, and chrysanthemum greens. Examine the leaves and use as soon as possible. Small, tender leaves are good for salads; otherwise, shred and stir‐fry for a couplw of minutes with ginger, garlic, and soy sauce, or with a sweet‐and‐sour Chinese sauce. Photo: Pumpkin

Squash Squash are the winter vegetable par excellence. They store well until spring have a rich, satisfying flavor, a dense, smooth texture, are highly nutritious, and are easily digestible too. The orange‐ fleshed varieties such as Dumpling and Acorn are the best. Organic squash is easy to grow at home and is a common sight at farmer’s markets. Some varㅓitiεs may also be available in supermarkets.

Sprouting seeds These are one of the healthiest and easiest ways to add vitamins to your winter salads. Look out for organic bean sprouts, alfalfa, chickpeas, and mixed bean sprouts in the refrigerated aisle of the supermarket. Always use them as soon as possible

262

Mushrooms The development of organic cultivated mushrooms has been a great success, though changes to European Union regulations may mean Europeans will soon have fewer available. At the moment, they are an organic stalwart, readily available all year round, and a good first choice for everyone. Varieties include organic brown caps, buttons, creminis, and shiitake. Except for the latter, they are cultivated naturally on composted straw in specialized mushroom sheds and take five to six weeks to grow. Cultivating mushrooms organically requires the highest standards, with the spent compost being recycled for use as a soil conditioner and fertilizer.

Potatoes Taste tests consistently show that many people find organic potatoes to be superior in flavor. If you eat the skins, always choose organic, since these are not sprayed with any post‐harvest insecticides or sprout suppressants ‐ although remember that this means that the potatoes will not keep as long. Organic potatoes are easy to find. Popular commercial varieties include Yukon Gold, red, and fingerlings. Local growers and farmer’s markets often sell traditional and heritage varieties. Organic potatoes are grown in Germany, Holland, Austria, Spain, and France, and organic new potatoes in Egypt, Israel, Italy, and Morocco. Photo: Potatoes

Winter salads Salad leaves provide a bright note and are as important for health in winter as in summer. Farmer’s markets often carry a selection of leaves, including a wide variety of multi‐colored, slightly bitter‐ tasting chicories.

B 4.7 Power plants Organic herbs and spices are a “must” for all your cooking. They are available both fresh and dried and can be relied on for their quality and purity.

Organic herbs and spices are neither grown with artificial nutrients or pesticides nor allowed to be irradiated. They are a high‐value, labor‐intensive crop sourced worldwide from over 30 countries, including Madagascar, the US, Egypt, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Turkey, Hungary, Indonesia, Spain, and Pakistan. The industry is small and personal, with growers, specialist importers, and experts working closely together to ensure the highest standards.

263

Herb gardens In the US fresh culinary organic herbs are now available most of the year. Local growers often sell by the bunch at farmer’s markets; otherwise they are shipped from other locations. There are several brands of dried organic herbs and spices to choose from. All have either been grown to organic standards or are “wild‐crafted”, which means they have been harvested from isolated places under strict regulations that ensure purity and the preservation of the natural habitat. One organic expert, Hambleden Herbs, based in Somerset, is Britain’s leading organic herb and spice company. It sources worldwide and offers more than 500 organic herb and spice products, including herbal teas, infusions, culinary herbs, and mulling spices. It has its own drying barn and also grows 100 varieties of medicinal herbs from which it produces its own fresh herbal tinctures made on the farm. Photo: Gentlemen cut the herbs in herb garden Photo: Lady pick the herb leaves

B 5. Organic Baby Care 5 Photo: organic toys

B 5.1. Why organic baby care The ever‐increasing availability of organic foods and products means that organic parenting is now a reality. Parents today have the chance to offer their children the best possible organic start in life. Photo: baby eats organic food

We all want the best for our children, and it is natural for us to want to protect and nurture them as well as possible. Providing your baby with high‐quality nourishment and a secure environment in which to grow is a huge responsibility. As many thousands of parents will testify, it is becoming increasingly clear that an organic approach is the best way to feed and care for your baby.

5 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

264

TOXIC LEGACY OR HEALTHY FUTURE?’ The dangers that threaten us all from toxic chemicals. loom even larger for our babies and children. In the food that you feed them, the products. you use to bathe and soothe them, and the diapers and clothes in which you wrap them, you are unwittingly in danger of exposing them to a potentially harmful cocktail of toxic chemicals. It is in the critical stages of growth and development that they are most susceptible to the dangers posed by pollutants. Growing evidence suggests that what children eat and how they are cared for during the‐ early stages of their lives has a direct and lasting. On their later health and development .. Many health problems. associated with children may be due to the effects of toxins on their w파1erable immune systems, and exposure to· chemicals in food and consumer goods has been linked directly to susceptibility to illness and diseases in later life.

A QUESTION OF CHOICE If choosing the organic option for our babies and children is an investment in their present and future health and happiness, then the availability of organic foods and baby products means that this choice is now easy to make. And what better time is there, too, than when we start to consider the well‐being of our children and our role as parents, for us to make positive choices about our own diet and lives?

• Feed your baby or toddler with pure organic foods • Soothe your baby's skin with natural products • Wrap your baby in soft, natural, toxin‐free organic f abrics • Tuck your baby into warm organic bedding at night

B 5.2. A spoonful of goodness It is never too early to start. Many parents are finding that choosing healthy organic food is best for their baby.

265

When it comes to protecting your baby by choosing organic food, you can never start too early. Just as an organic farmer who prepare the seeds and soil to provide the best chances for a strong and healthy crop, so parents can ensure the optimum It is never too early to start. Many parents are finding that choosing healthy organic food is best for their baby health of themselves and their offspring by eating organic prior to conception. Pre‐ conception programs that include following a diet of organic wholefoods have helped many couples worldwide conceive healthy babies born after healthy pregnancies. This is an important time when food quality should not be compromised. Photo: toddler eats organic food

Feeding for two The familiar warnings about the harmful effects of smoking, drinking alcohol, or taking drugs during pregnancy all clearly point to the link between a mother’s lifestyle and the health of her developing baby. Although the uterus would seem the safest environment in which a baby can grow, it is while he or she is there that any toxins in your food may have an effect. Evidence suggests that chemicals used in nonorganic food production can affect the development of babies in the uterus and possibly lead to lowered immunity and health problems later in life. By eating organic foods, you can help to protect your baby. Photo: You make a organic food for your baby

Breast‐feeding Breast‐feeding is the most natural and wholesome way of feeding your baby because of the key nutritional elements in breast milk. It contains natural fatty acids and antibodies that can reduce the risk of infection and improve immunity. Regrettably, the presence of traces of artificial chemicals in breast milk is unavoidable. Choosing to eat organic foods yourself is likely to help reduce the levels of these.

266

Formulas When, for whatever reason, breastfeeding is not possible, baby milks and formulas are available, which are made from cow’s milk that has been technically modified to replicate, as far as is possible, the complex and unique nutritional

Spooning it in While there is no doubt that the best and most economical way to feed your baby organic foods is to make your own, using pre‐prepared versions only as a back up, organic pre‐prepared baby foods offer a useful combination of convenience and peace of mind. No surprise, then, that organic baby food is the fastest‐ growing sector of the organic food industry and over one

267

third of all baby foods sold in the UK, for example, are organic. All baby foods are covered by legislation that bans the use of colorings, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, and added salt. But only organic baby foods are guaranteed free of ingredients grown with agrochemicals that may turn up as residues in their conventional counterparts. Organic baby foods are also leading the way in introducing new high‐quality, ingredients into the recipes and using clearer labeling information.

THE DIFFERENCES THAT COUNT + Eating organic food during your pregnancy helps to avoid passing potential toxins to your baby while he or she is in the uterus + The breast m파g of mothers who eat organic foods that have no pesticide inputs is likely to contain less pesticide residues than the breast milk of those who eat food from agrochemical farming + Only organic baby foods are certified to contain ingredients that are grown without any artificial fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, growth hormones, and antibiotics + Organic baby foods come with a guarantee that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have not been used in any ingredient Photo: boy eats organic food himself

Delicate bodies The immaturity of babies' organs and body systems means that they are highly susceptible to the effects of toxins. Babies and young children also have a high potential exposure to toxins due to the large volumes and limited range of foods they eat. Compared to their body weight, they eat far more food than older children or adults, and the types of food they eat are limited to milk, fruit, and vegetables ‐ precisely those foods in which residues are most often detected. This all means that you cannot afford to compromise on what you feed your baby.

268

Es & GMOs Although the use of E‐number additives is prohibited in all baby foods, they are present in a variety of nonorganic family foods that might find their way into your baby’s diet. Hot dogs, for example, are often used as a child moves into the toddler stage. But the average hot dog contains over 7 nonfood additives, and some contain up to 15. Organic standards prohibit the use of most of these, so choosing organic is preferable. Many parents are concerned about the use of baby food ingredients that may have been genetically modified. If the fears that some scientists have over genetically modified foods are realized, babies and young children may be the first to suffer because the immaturity of their immune, digestive, and other body systems makes them more vulnerable.

Buying organic Organic baby food represents the cost of producing food you can trust. The good news is that increased demand and production means more affordable prices. Organic baby foods are now widely available through a variety of retailers and there are many brands to choose from. There is also a wide variety of foods to consider ‐ vegetarian and non vegetarian, meals, cereals, and baby pasta, drinks and juices, desserts, and yogurts. But be sure to survey the label carefully it is strongly recommended that baby food should not contain added sugar, even if it is organic. Some organic baby food brands also use small amounts of nonorganic ingredients.

THE CHOICE IS YOURS There is an ever‐growing range of organic baby foods available. Baby Organix paved the way in the UK in 1992. Since then, Hipp from Germany and Olvarit from Nutricia in Holland have joined in. The Boots chain, in the UK, sells its own range and some supermarkets are following suit. Simply Organic of the UK, Babynat of France, and Eco‐ Baby of Holland are all orgamic and are in many health food shops and supermarkets.

269

PIONEERING SPIRIT Baby Organix is the pioneering brand that helped to set up the organic baby food market in the UK. It was launched in 1992 by mothers Lizzie Vann and Jane Dick, who set out to revolutionize baby foods by making pure baby foods that taste of real food, using ingredients you would find in your kitchen rather than industrial processing aids. The company is committed to organic farming and works closely with the organic farms responsible for supplying the produce that goes into its baby foods. It is ensures that the company’s products are made using only the highest‐quality ingredients, which are listed in percentages on the side of the jars. Subsequently Lizzie has also launched Organix Favourites, a range of high‐quality organic foods for older children. All the Organix foods contain no fillers, milk powders, added sugars, emulsifiers, or flavorings. Photo: people harvest the organic pumpkin from field, and transport

Organic baby food is a sure way of giving your child the very best start in life ‐ an introduction to the pleasures and benefits of eating well. Lizzie Vann, Founder, The Organix Children’s Food Comapny

B 5.3. Wrapped in organics Having chosen to feed your baby organic foods, the natural next step is to ensure that your baby care products, bedding, and even toys are as safe and natural as they can be.

The speed at which the range of organic baby care products is growing means that demand is rising and prices are falling. This is good news for all parents who want the best for their babies.

270

Diapers A diaper is the one item of clothing your baby spends the most time in, so it is important to choose the right type. In recent years many parents have moved away from traditional cloth diapers, since disposables seem to offer a quicker, more convenient option. However, governments and environmentalists are becoming increasingly concerned about the effects of disposable diapers on both health and the environment. As well as chemical additives, including bleaches, lotions, plastics, and perfumes, most disposable diapers contain a layer of super‐absorbent gel in the fluff pulp. Small beads of this gel can escape from the diaper and come in contact with a baby’s skin or even the mouth. Furthermore, disposables are non‐biodegradable. In the UK, they make up more than four percent of total ho usehold waste, but cannot be flushed or composted, and they are dumped in landfills where they can take 200 years to decompose. During your baby’s diaperwearing lifetime you will use roughly 5,500 diapers ‐ that’s an estimated cost of over $1500 to you, and an environmental cost of more than 2,755 lb (1,250 kg) of non‐biodegradable waste. A better choice for your baby’s health and the environment is to use cloth diapers. There are plenty of varieties to choose from, and diaper laundry friendly laundry detergents. If you do choose disposables, try to find the most healthy and environ‐ mentally friendly varieties that can be found at many specialty markets. In the US several brands of eco‐friendly diaper are avail‐ able from health shops, by mail order or in pharmacies. Tushies disposables, produced here in the US, are free of chemical gels, latex, dyes, and perfumes. Weenees, an Australian diaper, has a reusable outer pant with a disposable inner pad. These pads are free from plastic, but do contain an absorbent chemical gel. Another variation is Moltex Oko, a disposal diaper from Germany that uses recycled pulp in its construction and is un‐ bleached, but also uses a chemical gel for added absorbency.

271

Photo: Organic towel and eco‐friendly laundry detergents

Baby wipes Most commercial baby wipes for your baby’s bottom contain alcohol or other ingredients that can irritate a baby’s skin. The best baby wipe for both your baby and the environment is a washable wipe, preferably made from organic or undyed cotton. Buy a dozen or so washable wipes, available from most cloth diaper companies, and use then with a homemade wipe solution or water. The following recipe can be used to make an effective, soothing wipe: • 50 ml distilled water • 15 ml vinegar • 30 ml aloe vera gel • 15 ml calendula oil • 1 drop lavender essential oil • 1 drop tea tree essential oil • The vinegar and essential oils will act as a preservat ive, so you can store the solution for up to six weeks .

Diaper rash Most babies will get diaper rash at some time. Usually it is caused by prolonged contact with soiled diapers, but it may also be a symptom of teething, or of a reaction to new foods or to detergents, perfumes, or other chemicals used in some disposable diapers, wipes, or lotions. Even if you use super‐absorbent disposables they still need to be changed frequently to help prevent diaper rash. There are natural products that may help protect against diaper rash by creating a barrier between your baby’s skin and urine, and powders can help prevent rashes. Avoid powders containing cosmetic talcum powder, since the fine particles can get into babies' lungs. Instead, use a natural powder made from cornstarch or arrowroot. Perhaps the best cure for diaper rash is fresh air, so let your baby go without a diaper as often as you can.

272

Soaps Your new baby’s skin requires very little more than water for the first few weeks. There is no need to interfere with a baby’s perfect skin as it has very few chances to get dirty. Once you do need to start using soap, use a moisturizing natural olive oil soap sparingly and rinse it off well. When buying baby care products bear in mind that the skin absorbs much of what is put on it, so check the list of ingredients carefully and avoid anything artificial. If organic ingredients are used the products do tend to work out more expensive, but remember ‐ a little goes a long way. There are currently no regulations covering what can legally be certified as “organic” toiletries but in the UK, for example, companies such as Green People, Neal's Yard, and Weleda are working alongside the Soil Association to set regulations and standards.

Baby clothes Natural fibers will allow your baby’s skin to breathe. The best fabrics tc dress your baby in are cotton, wool, or silk ‐ preferably organic. Conventional cotton is one of the crops most heavily treated with artificial pesticides, and in some countries cotton has also been genetically engineered or treated with formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. Only wool from organically reared sheep is guaranteed to have not been dipped in organophosphates. By avoiding conventionally produced clothing you may be able to help alleviate many allergic and asthmatic symptoms as well as skin problems in your child. There are quite a few companies, here in the US, that offer organic baby clothing. Many use as many organic materials as possible such as organic cotton and organic dyes. Organic clothes are usually more expensive than their conventional equivalents, so you may prefer to choose only a few items of organic clothing. If you do, concentrate on those that your baby will wear next to the skin, such as undershirts and onesies. If you do not buy organic cotton or voolen clothing, try to at least

273

use only those that are licensed under American or other European regulatory organizations. Clothing with these certificates has been tested for chemical processing and will be free of formaldehyde, vaxes, bleaches, and other harmful chemicals. Photo: organic textile and blanket

Bedding Most new conventional cot mattresses will have been treated with fire‐ and water‐retardant chemicals. These chemicals may cause respiratory problems and skin allergies. Organic cotton and wool mattresses for cots are available from a variety of mail order companies and, for a little more money, offer more peace of mind. A more affordable alternative might be a natural futon, that is stuffed with organic cotton or wool. If you decide to buy a new conventional mattress, try to avoid one filled with polyurethane foam and also be sure to allow it to “off‐gas” in a well‐ventilated room for several days before allowing your baby to sleep on it. Try to make sure that what is closest to your baby’s skin is organic or untreated fabric. Organic or untreated cotton sheets, for example, and wool blankets are quite easy to find through mail order companies and some retailers.

Accessories Even getting out and about with your baby can be an organic experience, thanks to the range of strollers, baby slings, and even car seats made using organic fabrics that are available. The price of some of these larger items is substantial, but a smaller item such as a baby sling requires only a relatively minor investment. Lamb skins are a very popular item on most new parents’ shopping lists, and those made from organically reared sheep are available. With the ban on the use of organophosphate dips still only voluntary, it is important to ensure that your baby’s lamb skin does not come from a sheep that has been exposed to these chemicals. Organic lamb skins

274

we have been naturally tanned using mimosa rather than by synthetic tanning methods.

Toys One of the rewards of going organic is knowing that even the toys you give your baby are free of harmful chemicals. Toys are the things your baby is most likely to suck or chew, so it is wise to know what they are made of. Soft PVC toys contain chemicals that may be harmful. Many manufacturers have pledged to stop making toys with PVC but there is, as yet, no ban in the US. The best toys are those made using natural materials, such as natural wooden toys and organic cotton animals, which make great playmates. Photo: organic toy in box

B 6 Organic Health & Beauty 6 Photo: organic soap in different colors

B 6.1 Why go organic Once you have started eating organic food, it is only a matter of time before you will think about the cosmetics you put on your skin ‐ which are, after all, “skin foods" ‐ and your approach to health and well‐being.

When it comes to beauty rituals like skin care, make‐up, and bathing, there is one very good reason for taking a more natural approach ‐ because the skin drinks in what you apply to it. If you have ever wondered where a body lotion goes when you massage it in, the answer is: some evaporates and some is absorbed not only into your skin, but also into the bloodstream. If you avoid artificial chemicals in your daily diet, the logical next step is to “green” your beauty regime. And if you are concerned not

6 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

275

only about your own health but that of 난1e environment, it makes sense to seek out cosmetics that are sustainably produced ‐ avoiding, for instance, ingredients such as mineral oil and petrolatum, which are nonrenewable resources.

INVESTIGATE ALTERNATIVES Food for thought, meanwhile, is the fact that many medicines are produced by the very same companies that make pesticides, herbicides, and other agrochemicals. When we are critically ill, those medicines can be lifesavers. But many of us reach for painkillers, sleeping pills, or even cough medicines on a daily basis when there are excellent nature‐based alternatives that people used for centuries before modern medicines were developed.

TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR HEALTH For many people, just taking a more active approach to health ‐ minimizing stress, getting enough exercise and eating plenty of fresh, wholesome, organic food ‐ has the biggest effect of all, making history of many of the day‐to‐ day health issues that have us 파1ing up to see the doctor. And an added effect of ea따g organically is simply becoming more aware of food’s impact on the body and mind ‐ both positive and negative. This should make it easier for us to take charge of our own health instead of relying on those over the‐counter or prescribed medicines, and taking up so much of our valuable time at the doctor’s. • Become a label reader and avoid products with lon g lists of ingredients • Discover complementary therapies to promote opti mum health • Let food be your medicine by eating a balanced diet based on organic fruit, vegetables, grains, and legu mes • Make simple cosmetics at home using fresh organic ingredients

276

B 6.2. A dose of good medicine When you are ill, it is all too easy to reach for the pills. A more positive approach is to think “holistically” about your health ‐ how your diet, lifestyle, and healthcare choices can promote your well‐being.

Most drugs are synthetic chemicals. Some may contain active plant elements, but it is usually cheaper to synthesize them in a laboratory. This also “standardizes” medicines, so that drugs manufacturers can be certain of an exact dose every time. In nature the seasons, the weather and the maturity of a plant are all variables that can potentially alter a plant’s potency.

Popping pills Today, we have become used to “a pill for every ill” ‐ quick‐fix solutions to health problems that enable us to be back at our desks, or caring for our families, as quickly as possible. As a result, drugs are massively over‐prescribed ‐ with potentially disastrous effects. When antibiotics were first introduced, for instance, they were hailed as a miracle, saving literally millions of lives. But their over‐ use is leading to ever more virulent “superbugs”, which threaten us with spiraling epidemics and unknown ills. In many cases doctors are merely responding to patients’ demands for some kind of prescription when they come to the doctor’s office, even for a flu or a cold ‐ both viruses for which antibiotics are entirely ineffective.

Well‐being Organic living takes a more positive, proactive approach to health. True health is not just the absence of illness, but a feeling of energy and vitality that comes from taking a “holistic” approach to our body, mind, and lifestyle. Part of this can be achieved through diet: eating three balanced meals a day and minimizing your intake of alcohol, caffeine, and unhealthy snacks. Another vital element in this holistic approach is stress reduction: finding ways of slowing down in a speeded‐up world. The

277

reason for this is not only so that we sail through life more calmly and capably without snapping at everyone around us, but also because evidence is emerging of a link between our state of mind and the health of our bodies. Research suggests that stressed people are more vulnerable to illness ‐ from minor ailments like colds right through to cancer. Today, the concept of “psycho‐ neuroimmunology” ‐ in simple terms, how the mind affects our physical state ‐ has gained wide acceptance. So it is absolutely vital to find ways to switch off and relax. There is no doctor’s prescription for this, and the method w퍼 be different for each of us, whether it be yoga, a daily walk, massage, or playing the piano. However, if the activity is aerobic ‐ such as swimming or running ‐ you get a double benefit, giving your heart a workout while you are de‐ stressing. Also, the healing power of sleep should also not be underestimated.

THE IMPORTANCE OF WATER Drinking enough water is often underestimated or written off as merely a supermodel’s eccentricity ‐ they all swear by it, insisting it delivers clearer s퍼n and a natural “glow”. Enough water ‐ 1.5 litres a day, preferably mineral water or filtered ‐ does more than keep the body’s system flushed and functioning, but helps our brain, too. If you have ever experienced an uncomfortably dry mouth ‐ having to speak in public, perhaps ‐ then it is worth thinking about the fact that your brain, too, is suffering from the same dehydration. Keeping well hydrated makes it easier to think, and when we can think clearly, we feel less stressed. These “positive spirals” are what we should all be aiming for in the quest for better health. Photo: pouring the crystal clear drinking water in glass

Detoxification If you are worried about the toxins going into your body, you are probably also worried about the toxins that are already stored there. In fact, most of us have a frightening array of chemicals in our systems; in research, individuals

278

have shown levels of chemicals which have long since been banned. Can detoxing get rid of them? Up to a point. Experts such as Dr. Udo Erasmus believe that eating a healthy balance of “good” fats and oils can help to maintain healthy liver function, flushing toxins from the system, whereas “trans‐fats” ‐ present in hydrogenated fats and oils (which are actually banned in organic production) ‐ interfere with the liver’s ability to detox. These “good” oils, or essential fatty acids (EFAs), are found in oily fish, evening primrose oil, or, for ease, a pre‐ mixed blend of what are known as omega 6 and omega 3 EFAs, which are also available organically. Photo: red tea in glass

Treatments Finding a drug‐free way to stay healthy is important ‐ not just to minimize our exposure to chemicals, but as a positive step towards well‐being. But each of us is an individual; what works for your best friend may not be the perfect solution for you. Selection requires an element of trial and error, so do not give up on complementary medicine just because one technique does not work for you. In many cases, these therapies also cost money, requiring us to prioritize optimum health above, say, a long‐haul holiday or a new car ‐ choices that only we can make for ourselves. Photo: herb oil treatment

COMPLEMENTARY OPTIONS Here are some of the most easily accessible therapies that you could try: + Acupuncture ‐ the insertion of fine needles (painlessly, in most cases) into the body’s “energy channels”, to balance energies and restore health and vitality. + Aromatherapy ‐ involves massages with scented oils to relax the mind and body. Its de‐stressing effects have become so widely acknowledged

279

that it is being used in hospitals and other medical institutions. + Flower Remedies ‐ the use of healing essences, distilled from flowers. + Herbalism ‐ the use of herbs to treat illnesses. Herbalism was originally based on herbs grown in the West, but has since expanded to include the use of herbs from around the world. + Homeopathy ‐ the use of minute amounts of natural substances to treat mind and body imbalances. + Naturopathy ‐ can be a combination of diet, osteopathy, and hydrotherapy (water therapy), used to treat illness and boost good health. It is particularly effective for some chronic illnesses such as premenstrual tension and irritable bowel syndrome. + Reflexo|ogy ‐ the pressure‐point massage of energy points on the feet that relate to different organs in the body. + Traditional Chinese Medicine ‐ the prescription of Chinese herbs, based on a different system of diagnosis and health analysis to that of Western doctors. The herbs can be boiled to make a “tea” at

A NATURAL MEDICINE CABINET Instead of reaching for an over the‐counter remedy, why not try the alternatives below? These are more natural than anything you will find in a pharmacy. If symptoms persist, consult your doctor or natural health practitioner. + Aloe vera may help to heal minor burns and cuts and to soothe sunburn. You can squeeze the juice directly from the leaf of the plant, or use an over‐the‐cow1ter cream or gel. + + Arnica gel or ointment is a remedy for strained and aching muscles. Homeopathic arnica is good to have in your medicine cabinet to take

280

after trauma or shock, and for swift wound‐ healing. + Chamomile tea is considered good for indigestion, anxiety, insomnia, headaches, and premenstrual symptoms. + Clove oil is a highly effective natural painkiller, especially for toothache. + Echinacea is an immune stimulant. It is useful if you are feeling run‐down, and is available as a herb, in capsules or as an easy‐to‐take tincture. + Eucalyptus oil opens up breathing passages to relieve colds: dilute a few drops in hot water for a steam inhalation or add a few drops to a hot bath. + Feverfew and white willow bark are natural painkillers. You can sometimes find them mixed together in capssules. + Lavender essential oil may help ease anxiety, insomnia and minor burns: use in a diffuser or add to a bath. (Lavender and tea‐tree essential oils are the only ones that can be used neat on the skin.) + Tea‐tree essential oil is an incredibly effective antiseptic: dab it on to wounds, cuts or spots to conquer local infection. + Valerian is regarded as an effective alternative to prescription sleeping pills. Look for valerian‐ based sleep remedies.

6.3 Not just skin deep cosmetics companies can use terms like “natural” and “organic” much more freely than producers of food or medicine. Your skin absorbs much of what you put on it, so you need to be careful which products you use.

When it comes to cosmetics, “natural” is an incredibly confusing term. Just how natural is natural? The answer is, in many cases, not very natural at all. In several

281

countries, only one percent of the ingredients have to be derived from nature for that word to be used. In fact, according to Dr. Jurgen Klein, founder of the Australian company Jurlique, one of the most natural skin care ranges available, “natural is the most abused term in the cosmetics industry today.” Now that organic food is popular, the word “organic” is also being hijacked by the conventional cosmetics industry. Since, as yet, the industry is not bound by the same sort of organic regulations as the food industry, it is hard for the shopper to tell what is really organic, and what may contain just a tiny amount of organic herbs, topped up with chemicals. However, a few companies are honest enough to list the percentage of organic ingredients in their products. The one product you may find carrying an organic symbol is toothpaste, which can now be certified, in the UK, by the Soil Association if it meets their strict food criteria. Photo: organic cosmetics

Your skin is precious There are important reasons for turning to “greener” cosmetics. It is easy to regard skin as just a covering for your body’s organs, but in fact the skin itself is the body’s largest organ. And in the last decade, the medical profession has done a huge turnaround. Not so long ago, they were telling us that the skin was a one‐way street: sweat, oil, water, and toxins came out, but skin was basically as impermeable as a raincoat. Now all that has changed. Talk to doctors today and they describe skin as a “sponge” ‐ which is why it is now being used as a delivery system for patches to wean smokers off cigarettes or to apply drugs like hormone replacement therapy. According to Charlotte Voght, founder of the British cosmetics brand the Green People’s Company, women may absorb up to 2 kg of chemicals through their skin every year. Indeed, Rob McCaleb, president of the Herb Research Foundation in Boulder, Colorado, insists that “as much as 60 percent of any substance applied to the skin is absorbed into the body. So you should choose your

282

cosmetics with as much care as the foods you eat. ” In this section you can find easy steps that you can take right now to make the shift towards more organic, more natural skincare. And it is important to remember that your purse has a lot of power. In the same way that support for organic food companies has vastly widened the choice of what is available, encouraging more farmers to go organic as they see the market’s potential, soaring sales of natural cosmetics will make beauty companies ‐ maybe even the big ones ‐ start to think about change, too. So it is worth buying organic beauty products when you see them. Photo: organic skin cream

Bodycare When it comes to body care, for instance, the square footage of body skin means that you’re potentially exposed to a much higher level of chemicals than, say, via your light nightly dab of eye cream. (The sheer speed with which you get through a bottle of body lotion should tε11 you that.) So, instead of creams, try moisturizing the body with oils such as jojoba, almond, or grapeseed, to which a few drops of essential oils have been added. That way, you will avoid the long list of preservatives which go into many body creams and lotions, since many essential oils are naturally preservative. Nevertheless, keep bottles away from sunlight to maximize their shelf‐life and prevent them becoming rancid. Photo: lady washes her face

Lipstick Another product to put high on your natural and organic shopping list is lipstick. According to the founder of the American natural cosmetics company Aveda, Horst Rechelbacher, lipstick wearers consume anything from one and‐a‐half to four tubes of lipstick in a lifetime. Companies making natural alternatives include Aveda, Jurlique, and Dr. Hauschka

283

Avoiding petrochemicals You happily put gas in your car. But did you realize that you are almost certainly putting it on your face and body, too? Propylene glycol, mineral oil, and petrolatum figure high on the ingredients list of most skin care, body care, and hair care products, and even many of the big name, so‐called “natural products" are based on petrochemicals. Petroleum derived ingredients are among the most common preservatives used in the cosmetics industry. Even though the amount that goes into a moisturizer is probably tiny compared to the fuel used to drive to the shop to buy it, by continuing our reliance on petrochemicals we head down a one‐way street that ends with environmental disaster. Globally, we should be increasing plant growth and decreasing pollution. Switching from fossil fuel derived ingredients to plant elements is an important and easy step in the process. They may be more expensive ‐ naturally derived alternatives can cost up to 10 or 20 times more than petrochemical ingredients ‐ but they are actually cheap if we consider the environmental cost. In reality, ingredient costs are usually only a small part of the final bill you pay for a beauty or personal‐care product. Packaging, manufacturing costs, transportation, even tax all add a lot more to the price of any product. So look for products that say “free of petrochemicals” or no petrochemical ingredients" on the label. You may pay a bit more ‐ but think of it as an investment in our planet.

DR. HAUSCHKA Organic beauty is nothing revolutionary for Dr. Hauschka, the German beauty manufacturer whose fans include Cher, Jerry Hall, and Jack Nicholson. It has been producing “holistic” cosmetics for more than 30 years, using the most exacting methods: harvesting flowers at dawn to capture their full “life force” ' ensuring that workers are in the right “calm and meditative" mood before making the products, and even cleaning bowls with feathers. There can be few other companies that put as much care and

284

thought into a jar of face cream. Dr. Hauschka himself was a chemist and creator of herbal remedies who was highly influenced by Dr. Rudolf Steiner ‐ a pioneer of natural living who believed in creating a balance between the physical and spiritual worlds in every area of daily living, treating the mind and spirit as well as the body to ensure total well‐being.

METHODS & INGREDIENTS Ingredients come not only from the company’s own fields and approved farms, but also from local hedgerows and woodlands. They are grown and harvested in line with the principles of biodynamic agriculture, which takes organic growing one stage further. Traditionally, foresters cut wood at different times of the month, depending on what the wood was to be used for. For example, Stradivarius made sure the wood for his violins was cut only during certain phases of the moon; Dr. Hauschka applies the same philosophy to its skin creams. In the Same way, a facial or other treatment from a Dr. Hauschka practitioner will be tailored not only to each individual but also to the time of day and the season. In a world where cosmetics are, in some cases, created by ex‐NASA scientists using 21st‐century technology, Dr. Hauschka’s back‐to‐nature approach proves that it is possible to create effective skin care ‐ and, most recently, make‐up ‐without resorting to the use of undesirable synthetic preservatives and chemicals. Photo: Rose herb

B 6.4. A natural, smile and more If you are concerned about the products you use on your skin, you should be even more careful about those you choose for your teeth, nails, or Scalp. The products you use can contain a range of synthetic chemicals.

285

As with skin care, body care products and make‐up, it is still difficult to find all‐natural ‐ or even as‐natural‐as ‐ possible ‐ shampoos and toothpastes. But if you are choosing to go organic because you are concerned about your own health, and not just that of the planet, you may decide that it is even more important to seek out an organic toothpaste than a moisturizer or a mascara. The reason? Some parts of the body, including the gums and scalp, are more absorbent than others, making it easier for chemicals to pass into the bloodstream.

Toothpaste It is logical that a toothpaste should be the first nonfood product in the world to be given an organic symbol; after all, it goes in our mouths and some, inevitably, gets swallowed. In fact, if someone has gum disease, with gums that bleed, it is a real short‐cut for the chemicals in toothpaste to get into the bloodstream. However, in the quest for whiter, brighter smiles, many toothpastes have gone the op posite, high‐tech route by adding chemicals like fluoride. Although fluoride can help fight tooth decay, it has been linked to an increase in bone fractures, and natural health experts believe it interferes with the body’s balance of calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc. Of course, life is full of compromises. We constantly have to make decisions about what matters to us, and change our shopping habits accordingly. You might choose to follow your dentist’s advice to use a fluoride toothpaste ‐ or instead, choose a natural toothpaste and take other positive steps to prevent cavities. These might include cutting out sugar, getting plenty of vitamins, flossing your teeth regularly, and eating calciumrich foods like dried peas and beans, dark, 1εafy greens (including beet and turnip tops and kale), and canned fish. In many places, fluoride is added to the water supply ‐ so you cannot avoid it simply by switching toothpastes. However, you can remove all traces of this chemical from the water that comes out of the tap by using a reverse osmosis water filter fitted in your kitchen.

286

Photo: Organic toothpaste

Nails When it comes to nail products, hardeners, and polishes are, by definition, chemical‐based. There is just no such thing as a natural nail polish, let alone an organic one. However, there are a couple of common ingredients which have been linked with allergies ‐ in particular toluene and formaldehyde. You may not associate the use of nail polish with, for instance, itchy eyes or a face rash, but sensitivity to these ingredients is not restricted to the nail area, because we touch our faces so often. The good news is that it’s getting easier all the time to find polishes which are free of toluene and formaldehyde, so seek these out. If the reason you choose to wear polish is because your nails tend to flake and break, they can actually be strengthened over time by rubbing the same oil you use on your body into the cuticles and nail bed every night. As the nails grow out, they will be stronger and more flexible ‐ in contrast to nails on which nail hardener has been used, which tend to become more brittle, snapping easily. Photo: Natural nail polish

Bath & shower Instead of using detergent‐based foams and gels, which can dry the skin, try switching instead to aromatherapy based bath oils. These are products in which essential oils have been blended into “carrier” oils. Essential oils act as natural preservatives in these blends, so artificial chemical preservatives are unnecessary. Oils also replenish skin, leaving it silky. You can buy bath foams and gels blended in natural food stores, or learn to blend your own. Another natural option is bath salts infused with aromatherapy oils.

Bath & shower Instead of using detergent‐based foams and gels, which can dry the skin, try switching instead to aromatherapy based bath oils. These are products in which essential oils

287

have been blended into “carrier” oils. Essential oils act as natural preservatives in these blends, so artificial chemical preservatives are unnecessary. Oils also replenish skin, leaving it silky. You can buy bath foams and gels blended in natural food stores, or learn to blend your own. Another natural option is bath salts infused with aromatherapy oils. Photo: Organic cosmetics

TEN THINGS YOU DO NOT WANT IN YOUR NATURAL COSMETICS + Artificial colors ‐ several colors permitted in cosmetics are thought, by some experts, to be potential carcinogens. In particular, steer clear of the colors FD&C Red No. 6 and D&C Green No. 6. A natural‐colored product does not mean it has no artificial colors, but avoiding rainbow shades should minimize your exposure to artificial dyes. + Formaldehyde ·an effective preservative used in nail hardeners, nail polish, and many cosmetics; however, skin reactions can be quite common, and some doctors worry about other more serious long‐term effects. + lmidazolidinyl urea ‐ a widely used synthetic cosmetic preservative (and the second most commonly identified preservative causing contact dermatitis, according to the American Academy of Dermatology). + Fragrance ‐ the synthetic fragrances used in cosmetics may have as many as 200 ingredients, which do not have to be labeled separately. Some of the problems potentially caused by these chemicals are dizziness, rashes, hyperpigmentation, skin irritation, and more. However, “fragrance‐free” is not a way of avoiding the problem, because smell‐masking chemicals will usually have been added. Look

288

for the words “natural fragrance" or choose products whose scent comes from essential oils. + lsopropyl alcohol ‐ an antibacterial solvent, derived from petroleum (which may also be used in anti freeze). + Methyl paraben ‐ one of the most widely used preservatives. It may trigger irritation on sensitive skins (as can butyl, ethyl, and propyl paraben), and there is now some suggestion that these may all possibly be xenestrogens, or potential “gender bender" chemicals. Methylisothiazolinone ‐ a preservative with a greater‐than‐normal potential for causing allergic reactions or irritation. + Paraffin ‐ used in cold creams, wax‐based hair removers, eyebrow pencils, and a variety of other cosmetics. It is quite commonly derived from petroleum or coal. + Propy|ene glycol ‐ other than water the most common moisture‐carrying vehicle in cosmetics. Although it is possible to derive propylene glycol from vegetable glycerine, it is more usually derived from petroleum. + Sodium lauryl sulphate ‐ a commonly used detergent and emulsifier that may cause drying of the skin. This is because it has a degreasing effect, which can cause irritation

The producer

AN INDIVIDUAL APPROACH “We use soap every day‐ so why not try to make it in a way that is less harmful to the earth’s resources?'’ says Nickki Clark of Woodspirits, who produces handmade, almost‐good‐enough‐to‐eat soap in a South London warehouse. Since soap began to be mass‐produced in the late 19th century, manufacturers have taken out its natural glycerine to make a harder bar that has a longer shelf life. “Handmade soap retains the glycerine, so it

289

doesn’t last as long ‐ but it makes for a much gentler and more moisturizing, bar,” explains Nickki, whose soaps use food‐grade olive and coconut oils, added therapeutic aromatherapy ingredients such as juniper and lavender, and natural colors such as ultramarine. Photo: How to make organic cosmetics, i.e. soap

TRADITIONAL TECHNIQUES “After you’ve worked with natural ingredients for a while, you begin to realize why manufacturers use chemicals. Producing a perfect bar every time is just not possible.” Nevertheless, Nickki would not dream 0f changing the way she makes soap and trading her wooden paddle for high‐tech machinery. “It’s more like cooking than manufacturing,” she explains. Because everything is handmade, things can go wrong. However, scraps and failures are not wasted; they are chopped and re‐mixed to make a multicolored product called Salad Bar.

B 7 Organic Gardening 7 Photo: watering kettle

B 7.1 Why go organic Organic gardens come in all shapes and sizes. They are packed with a wide variety of plants and reflect not just the diversity of nature, but also the diversity of the people who look after them. Photo: clay pots for gardening

Your garden is your own personal bit of paradise, where you are free to express yourself in any way you want. You might like to create your own floral wonderland or a productive plot for fresh fruit and vegetables. The priority could be a play area for the children or a relaxing haven in which to unwind after a hard day's work. Or you might want to do your bit for conservation: with

7 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

290

natural areas rapidly dwindling in many areas, our yards and gardens can be valuable nature reserves, and organic methods support and attract wildlife. Whatever you want from your yard and garden areas, you can do it organically.

THE MEETING PLACE A garden is where people and nature meet most directly. You only have to sit in any garden for a few minutes to notice some of the many creatures that call it home. And of course there are all the small‐to‐microscopic creatures which we tend to forget about ‐ the ladybugs, for example, which are eating aphids and other pests; the microscopic fungi and bacteria that are processing plant remains to recycle their goodness for growing plants; the bacteria vacuuming up nitrogen from the air to feed your garden. These creatures are all part of nature’s plan ‐ without them our gardens would not grow. So, rather than a confrontation and collision, it is sensible to make that meeting with nature mutually beneficial, which is where organic gardening comes in. The basic idea of organic gardening is to harness and promote natural systems as far as possible, while also employing a wide range of other “nature‐friendly” techniques to get what we want from the garden. If that all sounds much too complicated, take heart ‐ it is not, as this chapter makes clear. If you are new to organic gardening, why not join a local or national organic gardening group? Seeing is believing, too, so why not visit an organic garden open to the public for inspiration? Some of the resources listed in the back of this book will be happy to direct you to gardens near you.

• Cultivate plants that support and attract wildlife • Choose eco‐friendly products for your garden • Visit an organic garden or two for inspiration • Join a local or national organic gardening group

B 7.2 What is organic gardening? Organic gardening is an approach to gardening that emphasizes the importance of observing and cooperating with natural cycles, minimizing pollution, and promoting sustainability.

ORGANIC GARDENING + Respects the environment + Produces healthy food + Encourages Wildlife

291

+ Recycles waste + Reduces pollution + Builds on traditional good gardening practice + Embraces new technology where appropriate + Makes use of local resources

CONSUMER POWER ‐ BUY ORGANIC There is an increasing range of products available for the organic gardener to purchase, including soil mixes, manures, fertilizers, pest controls, plants, seeds, and bulbs. It is not always easy to decide which particular brand or product to buy for an organic garden, as gardening products are not covered by the laws which regulate organic food certification and sale. The word “organic” can be used simply to mean “of living origin”, and this may appear on fertilizers, manures, and similar items. Such products may, or may not, be suitable for use in an organic garden. Manure from a battery chicken farm, for example, could be labeled “organic” but, because it comes from an intensive farming system and is likely to contain unwanted pollutants, it would not be appropriate to use it in an organic garden. If in doubt, check with the supplier or manufacturer. Some brands do, however, carry a recognized organic symbol‐ which means that it has been certified by a registered organic body. Make them as your first choice. Seeds, bulbs, and plants that have an organic symbol will have been produced according to commercial organic standards. Several seed companies are now able to supply organically grown seed, seed potatoes, and bulbs, and the range of varieties grows every year. Organic ornamentals and vegetable transplants are less commonly found. Keep asking, to let your usual supplier know that the demand is there and that your money will follow. Photo: Organic cucumber

GARDEN HARDWARE Gardening is not just about soil and plants ‐ there is the fence, the garden furniture, the playsurface materials, and so on to consider, not forgetting the charcoal used in the barbecue. Again, there are no definitive standards covering this aspect of gardening as yet, although these we probably come as producers react to consumer demands. Where possible, exercise your purchasing power to buy products with low environmental impact, researching and considering the energy and pollution involved in production and distribution. Photo: Herbs and wild flowers

292

THE ORGANIC GARDENER’S SHOPPING BASKET + Select products that carry a recognized organic symbol where possible + Buy timber from sustainable sources, not tropical hardwoods that are nonsustainable + Choose products that are based on recycled and renewable ingredients + Use locally produced compost from green waste Grow wildflower seeds of US origin + Avoid peat and products containing peat + Reject any animal manure products from intensive farming systems + Never buy bulbs taken from the wild or stone taken from ecologically sensitive areas

B 7.3 Plotting for success Whether you are making changes to an existing garden, or starting afresh, it is worth spending a little bit of time on planning and preparation when you go organic.

• Grow your own organic fruit and vegetables at a fraction of t he cost of store‐bought ones • Create a safe play area for children and pets, free from pesti cides and weed killers • Help the local environment by recycling garden and househ old waste: more than 50 percent could be composted or othe rwise recycled in an organic garden • Produce pesticide‐free flowers to cut for the • house: many cut flowers sold are grown With heavy pesticid e treatments • Help save a peat bog or a rainforest: organic gardeners avoi d using peat or other materials whose production has had a negative impact on the environment

The best thing about organic gardening is that all of us can do it, no matter what our age, background or interests. The best way to start is to make a commitment to using organic methods throughout the whole garden. Use the checklist to find out how organic you already are and to establish what simple steps you can take to improve the organic status of your garden. The ideal organic garden will be attractive and easy to look after. It will also have the minimum possible negative impact on the environment. The best way to achieve this is by thoughtful and imaginative planning.

293

DESIRES & NECESSITIES What you actually want from your garden will depend on your individual circumstances and personal taste. A busy professional is most likely to appreciate low‐maintenance features, while for others priorities might include, for example, a place to contemplate wildlife, grow vegetables, or accommodate a wading pool. Almost all of us need a hose, and all organic gardens, regardless of size or style, will definitely benefit from a compost pile. Ask yourself what the most important elements are in a garden for you personally. Consider these carefully, be realistic about what can be achieved and do not hesitate to ask opinions of anyone who will share the garden. Photo: Herb garden Photo: Herb flowers

ADAPT & SUCCEED A successful organic garden will make the most of the natural features that already exist, developing these rather that trying to overcome them. A damp area might be an ideal spot for a bog garden, for instance, while salt‐tolerant plants we flourish in a seaside garden and an infertile lawn would be a good place to develop a wildflower meadow. Careful observation of your garden will help you find out what plants will thrive in its particular conditions.

THE BEST LAID PLANS Planning for success at the design stage can definitely help you avoid problems later on. Choose plants that suit your site to give them the best chance for healthy growth. Thorough preparation before planting or laying paths will help to prevent weeds emerging. Careful selection of plants and provision of habitats that attract wildlife will help boost your garden's natural defences.

GARDEN WITH STYLE Organic methods apply to all sorts of gardening styles, from a tiny city rooftop terrace to a vast natural wild flower meadow ‐ and everything in between, too. The way you choose to garden depends to a large extent on how much time you actually want to devote to gardening, the energy and resources you have available, and what pleases you. Let your imagination run riot: there are no limits.

Baskets, tubs, and containers these are excellent for a moveable display of flowers all year round, and are essential for a yard or patio. Some vegetables and herbs are

294

also suitable for growing in different types of container. Be sure to provide adequate water and liquid feed during the growing season.

Climbers, trellises, and bowers make use of the vertical nature of climbing plants to cover walls and fences, and to provide fragrant shade on garden structures. Try colorful gourds as an interesting alternative to flowering plants.

Herb spiral or wheel organic herbs are a “must” for the kitchen. Growing them in a spiral shape shows off their ornamental value beautifully, or you could use the shape of a wheel to form a simple and effective design.

Raised beds permanent structures can be raised to waist height. This not only brings plants within convenient reach, but also creates different levels in a garden. Lower, less elaborate beds are

TIPS ON GROW|NG ORGANICALLY Would you answer “yes” to most of the questions below? If so, you are well on the way to having an organic garden. Do you …… • Make your own compost? • Collect |eaves to make leafmold? • Use mulches to control weeds? • Use organic fertilizers? Recycle garden waste? • Save kitchen scraps for the compost pile? • Grow plants to attract beneficial insects? • Buy organic seeds or plants? • Provide habitats, food and shelter for wildlife? • Use rotation when growing vegetables? • Use organic growing media? • Grow green manures?

Organic gardeners try to avoid ... • Using weed killers • Using slug pellets • Using peat Burning autumn leaves • Fertilizing plants with nonorganic fertilizers

B 7.4 Down to earth The soil is a living organism that needs our respect and attention if it is to remain in top condition. Healthy soil rewards you with beautiful, vibrant plants and lies at the very heart of organic gardening.

295

Common organisms that live in the soil Comments Comments

Ants help soil structure; some can sting; may encourage aphids

Bacteria and fungi help soil structure; recycle nutrients; some types are harmful to plants

Beetles eat pests

Centipedes eat pests

Earthworm help soil structure; recycle nutrients

Millipedes eat some plant roots; recycle nutrients

Mites recycle nutrients; eat pests; some can damage plants

Nematodes some species can be pests; recycle nutrients

Slug and snails eat plants, but recycle nutrients

Spides eat pests

Healthy soil lies at the very foundations of good organic practice for both farmers and gardeners alike. If it is properly nurtured, your soil will reward you with a garden teeming with life and strong, healthy plants. Photo: Structure of healthy soils

296

ALIE & WRIGGING As well as mineral particles of different sizes, soil contains water, plant roots, air, decaying organic matter, and living organisms. The organisms that live in the soil are very important in creating and maintaining its health. Their job is to recycle plant and animal remains, breaking them down into forms that plants can make use of and absorb as nutrients.

A MATTER OF TIME Soil texture refers to the different sizes of the mineral particles in the soil. There is nothing you as a gardener can do to alter the basic texture of your soil, which is formed by the weathering of rocks over thousands of years. Sand and clay are the two extremes of soil texture and most soils contain a mixture of these in varying proportions.

WHAT TYPE ARE YOU? The type of soil you have will determine which sort of plants will grow best in it and how you need to look after it. To find out which you have in your garden, dig up a handful of soil. If dry, add just enough water to make it hold together. Rub it between your fingers, examine it carefully, and then compare it to the chart.

THE JAM JAR TEST Another test you can do to find out more about the soil in your garden involves filling a jar about two‐ thirds full with soil. Add enough water to fill the jar to the top and then secure the lid firmly. Shake thoroughly, then let the contents to settle. Do not be surprised if this takes a day or so. The soil will settle into layers, with the largest particles (sand) at the bottom and the smallest (clay) on the top. Any bits floating on the surface will be organic matter. This simple test gives you a rough idea of the different proportion of particles in your soil.

STRUCTURALLY SOUND The way that mineral particles are combined with other components in the soil is known as structure. Good soil structure is essential because it enables you to get the best possible results from your soil, whatever soil type you have. Unlike soil texture, structure is definitely something that can be affected by the way you treat it ‐ for better or worse.

THE BENEFITS OF A COMPOST PILE + It improves soil structure + It provides long‐term nutrients in a stable form

297

+ It helps protect plants against diseases + It reduces the need for bonfires + It is free and saves money on bought products + It keeps waste away from landfill sites + It protects natural resources because it can be used instead of peat

CREATING A COMPOST PILE Compost is a valuable and essential resource for the organic garden. It is the best tonic your garden can have, and it is free if you make your own. There are many ways you can make your own compost. One of the quickest is to gather a lot of suitable material and construct a pile all at once. Many gardeners, however, find it more convenient to add material to their compost pile a little at a time, as and when it becomes available. This method produces good compost, although it may take 12~18 months, depending on the weather, to generate anything usable for the garden. Photo: Compost making Photo: Compost file

CHOOSING A CONTAINER There are many different types of compost containers available to buy or make. Here are some points to consider when making your choice: Weight ‐ too light and it may blow over; too heavy and it becomes hard to move. Cover ‐ essential to keep moisture and warmth in, but to ensure rain stays out. Base ‐ one that is open to the ground for drainage is easiest to manage. Appearance ‐ choose something that suits the style of your garden. Location ‐ easy access is important, with enough space to maneuvre

USING COMPOST Your compost is ready to use when all trace of the original ingredients has disappeared and it is dark and crumbly with a sweet, earthy smell. There may also be some small red worms present, which help to produce a finely textured material. Use compost on those areas where you are going to grow plants that require a high level of nutrients. It is best applied to the soil in spring rather than autumn; otherwise, winter rain might wash out the nutrients. As a general guide, normal application rates are one barrowful to roughly 5 m2 of soil, repeated annually.

298

WHAT CAN YOU PUT ON YOUR COMPOST PILE? Anything that has once lived will decompose, but this does not necessarily make it suitable for inclusion in a compost pile. Do not put synthetic materials on your compost pile, since they do not break down. Success depends on balancing soft, sappy materials with tougher, more fibrous ones. Cat litter or dog feces, Chicken manure, Diseased plant material, Farmyard manure, Grass clippings, Household cardboard (egg boxes, cereal packages), Kitchen scraps, Mature garden waste, Meat or fish scraps, Newspaper, Perennial weeds, Soft prunings, Large, woody prunings, Young garden weeds

SLOWLY DOES IT Many gardeners make their compα3t using this method, which is slow but sure + Gather a good mixture of materials to make layers roughly 30cm deep at a time. + Add materials to the pile, spread them out evenly and firm them down very gentil or not at all. + Add water if the materials are very dry, then cover. + Continue to add material a bit at a time, balancing soft and tough ingredients + Check and adjust moisture levels as necessary. Excess moisture makes the pile + Sludgy and smelly; to little slows decomposition. + The oldest material at the bottom of the pile will be ready first. If using a bin or a box, lit off the lid or remove the front as appropriate. Then separate the top and bottom layers retaining the mature bottom layer, which should be dark and crumbly. + Return the rest to the pile, ready to start adding new material on top + Speed up the process by turning the pile frequently, adding new material regularly, and using garden soil or compost starter to add the organisms that decompose the materials.

The quality of the food you eat comes from the quality of the soil it is grown in. W.E. Shewell‐Cooper, MBE, Soil, Humus and Health, 1975

299

INTRODUCING GREEN MANURES You can actually grow plants that enrich and protect your soil. Known as green manures, there are many types, suitable for different seasons and situations. Green manures help to protect the so|| from wind and rain. They reduce weeds and, when incorporated into the soil, provide valuable organic matter and plant nutrients

GROW YOUR OWN GREEN MANURE Green manures can be grown throughout the year. You can grow them on bare areas of soil during the winter. In summer, cultivate them between different crops of vegetables. Growing them improves the fertility of your soil and prevents weeds talcing over on any land you have that is not being used. Sowing Preferred type Winter hardy Comments time Mustard March – + very quick‐growing needs moist soil no (Sinapsis alba) September + susceptible to clubroot + bright lavender/blue Phacelia tolerates most March – flowers attract bees and (Phacelia sometimes types September hoverflies tanacetifolia) + good weed control Buckwheat + deep‐rooted March – (Fagopyrum tolerates soils no + flowers attract August esculentum) hoverflies Winter field beans September– + not drought‐tolerant likes heavy soil yes (Vicia faba) November + poor weed control

Crimson c|over + large red flowers attract Dis|lkes heavy March – bees sometimes ( Trifolium soil August + vigorous growth habit incarnatum) Grazing rye + extensive root system ( Secale cereale) + good weed control Tolerates most August – + best dug in when young yes types October + do not use before sowing fine seed (it inhibits germination) March – + rapid growth habit Winter tares likes slightly May and yes + will not thrive on dry (Vicia sativa) heavy soil July ‐ or acid soil September

300

WHAT ELSE WORKS? Other recycled materials you can use to improve your soil include: Local compost ‐ contact your local authority, as many operate programs that compost their green waste to produce a useful soil conditioner. Autumn leaves gather leaves to make leafmold, either stacking them in a wire‐mesh container or stuffing them into heavy paper sacks for roughly 12 months (making sure the leaves stay moist). Spread the resulting leafmold freely on your soil to improve its structure. Grass clippings ‐ use as a mulch around your plants to control the weeds and improve the soil structure. You can leave your clippings on the lawn to recycle their nutrients. Perennial weeds ‐ Gather them up and store them in an isolated pile, keeping the weeds wet. When they have completely rotted, add them to the compost pile to take advantage of their valuable nutrients.

FEEDING TIME A healthy soil that has regular applications of compost or other bulky material will normally be able to supply all the nutrients your plants need. However, you may sometimes find it necessary to provide extra nutrients in the form of fertilizers. This may be just because you do not have enough compost available, or it may be necessary due to the particular demands of a plant or to correct major deficiencies in the soil. Fertilizers suitable for use in an organic garden are normally broken down gradually by the natural processes of dεcomposition, rather than providing the “quick fix" of available nutrients that most other fertilizers offer. When buying fertilizer products, be sure to look out for those with organic certification. Organic fertilizers can be derived from animal, plant, or mineral origin, such as the common types listed here: Animal‐based fertilizers ‐ pelletted chicken manure, fish, blood, and bone meal, hoof and horn meal, wool or sheep waste, worm compost Plant‐based fertilizers ‐ hop waste, vinash (a byproduct of the sugar beet industry), seaweed meal, other recycled products Mineral‐based fertilizers ‐ rock phosphate, limestone

FLUIDS THAT FERTILIZE In organic gardens, liquid feeds are usually only used for plants growing in containers. Liquid feeds include liquid manure, fish

301

emulsion, and comfrey liquid. Use them diluted as a foliar spray or apply them directly to the soil. You can also use seaweed extract as a liquid tonic, although it does not contain enough major nutrients to be a fertilizer. It does have a good range of minor nutrients, though, so is excellent as a plant tonic and growth stimulant. Use it as a foliar spray to give plants a boost. Photo: Comfrey

MAKING YOUR OWN COMFREY LIQUID Comfrey is easy to grow, but needs quite a bit of space, so is not suitable for tiny gardens. Comfrey liquid is an excellent fertilizer for plants with flowers or fruit. But be warned ‐ It is also very smelly. METHOD • Cut some comfrey |eaves and stuff them into a nylon net bag or • Leave them loose • Place the leaves in a large bucket, trashcan or barrel with a t ightfitting lid • Cover the leaves with water and put the |id on the container • Let to soak for four to six weeks • Strain off the liquid for use ‐ it should be about the color of weak tea; if it is much darker, dilute it with water

7.5. Defense of the domain All gardeners want to keep their gardens healthy and as free of pests and diseases as possible. Organic gardeners, however, do not resort to harsh pesticides, preferring to work with nature rather than against it.

The organic approach to pests and diseases is to copy the way nature deals with them, as well as using other strategies to promote healthy plants. Organic gardeners let nature assist them in the defence of their gardens, encouraging natural predators such as birds, who can help keep the insect pest population at bay, and using labor saving tricks such as mulching to control weeds and protect the soil.

BEAT THE WEEDS In an organic garden the aim is to control those weeds that threaten to overwhelm your plants, not to eliminate every one from the garden. Any plant can become a weed if it is growing in the wrong place or starts to take over. Different types of weeds need different measures. Annual weeds have shallow roots, so you can easily hoe

302

or dig them out by hand, but they may also produce carpets of seedlings. Perennial weeds have deep or creeping roots that are harder to dig out. Unfortunately, just removing the top growth from these will not stop them regrowing. There are no chemical weed killers suitable for use in an organic system, so controlling the weeds in your garden relies on forking out, mulching, handweeding, hoeing, and cultivation. You may also find a flame weeder useful on hard surfaces and to kill seedlings.

MULCHING FOR WEED CONTROL A mulch helps you control weeds by excluding light and therefore preventing plant growth. Some mulches are biodegradable, giving them the added benefit of improving the soil as they break down. These loose mulches need to be about 10‐15 cm deep. You can choose various types of mulch to create different effects, including gravel chippings, bark chips, and straw. Mulching fabrics can be particularly effective. You can use newspaper or cardboard, or buy materials such as flax matting. These allow water and air through while keeping weeds down. Mulch fabrics are usually covered with a thin layer of loose mulch to keep them in place, prolong their life, and improve their appearance. Photo: strawberry on the straw mulching

CLEARING THE WAY Digging the weeds in is a quick method of clearing ground that is practical for small areas, as long as all the roots of perennial weeds are removed. On larger areas you might prefer laying a mulch on top of the weeds instead. Heavy‐duty black plastic and thick cardboard topped with leaves and straw are both suitable, or you can buy mulching fabrics. Leave the mulch in place from spring to autumn to kill annual weeds and give perennial weeds a real setback. Any that remain can be dug out by hand, or you can keep the mulch in place for another six months or so. Top off biodegradable mulches as they decay. Remove black plastic after six months; replace it if necessary after a month or so, to allow the soil to breathe and rain to soak it.

PESTICIDE‐FREE PEST CONTROL There are plenty of steps you can take to limit the populations of common pests in your garden while still avoiding the use of artificial pesticides. Encouraging the natural enemies of pests can help, for example, so do your best to attract these beneficial creatures into your garden. Adjusting growing conditions, meanwhile, can help to limit the spread of diseases in your garden.

303

In addition, there is a range of defensive measures you can take to protect your plants. By using a combination of these methods, it is possible to have a healthy garden without resorting to pesticides. Small amounts of pests and diseases will not affect the health of your plants too seriously. If they get out of control, don’t panic ‐ there are some natural pest controls that can be used to help save a plant. All plants do better in some gardens than others, so if a particular pest or disease is a problem in your area, try something different instead. Photo: flog Photo: birds Photo: lacewings Photo: ladybugs

KNOW YOUR FRIENDS Learn to recognize your natural allies and encourage them into your garden. Most of them will benefit from a garden that is not too neat and tidy, but you do not need to create a jungle. Shelter can be provided among undergrowth, tussocky grass, and hollow stems of herbaceous plants. Insects can be enticed into the garden by growing particular flowers. Many beneficial creatures are very sensitive to toxic chemicals, so avoid using sprays or poisons of any kind. BATS + eat insect pests + attract them by growing plants that attract insects and by putting up bat boxes

BIRDS + eat insects pests on plants and in the soil + attract them by providing food, water, and shelter: some can damage plants, but it is still worth encouraging them into the garden, protecting susceptible plants with nets or other methods

Centipedes + the adults eat soil‐living and insect pests

FROGS & TOADS + eat slugs; toads also eat snails and woodlice + attract them by building a pond and providing damp, secure places for shelter

GROUND & ROVE BEETLES + the adults and larvae eat slugs and other soil‐living pests

304

+ attract them by keeping your soil covered with mulches and providing bricks or tiles for shelter

HOVERFLIES + the larvae eat aphids + attract them by growing particular flowers to feed the adults

LACEWINGS + The larvae eat aphids, caterpillars, scale insects and other pests + attract them by growing particular flowers to feed the adults and providing shelter for hibernation

LADYBUGS + eat aphids such as greenfly and blackfly + attract them by growing a patch of nettles in a corner of your garden and providing shelter for hibernation

BE ATTRACTIVE Mix these attractive plants in among a|| the flowers, shrubs, and vegetables throughout your garden Not only will they be appreciated for their appearance, but their simple, open flowers will provide easy access to pollen and nectar for beneficial insects. + Annual convolvulus (Convolvulus tricolor) + Baby blue‐eyes (Nemophila insignis) + California poppy (Eschscholzia californica) + Corn chamomile (Anthemis arvensis) + Cornflower (Centaurea cyanus) + Corn marigold (Chrysanthemum segetum) + Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) + Poached egg p|ant (Limnanthes douglasii) +Pot marigold (Calendula officinalis) + Yarrow (Achillea millefolium)

PREEMPTIVE STRATEGIES Prevention is definitely the best form of defense when it comes to your garden. Aim to prevent problems from arising in the first place, and develop long‐term strategies that will promote plant health throughout thε whole garden. Make sure you look after your soil, since it is the starting place for healthy plant growth. Healthy plants are in a better position to withstand and recover from attack by pests and disease than weaker specimens. Photo: flower attract honey bees

305

Give them a good start ‐ make sure your seedlings and transplants have the best growing conditions at all times. Never let them outgrow their pots or cell packs. When buying plants, avoid weak, straggly, or root‐ bound ones.

Maintenance ‐ once established, make sure plants don’t run short of nutrients or moisture by improving the soil and using mulches.

Do not crowd them ‐ provide enough space for plants to grow to their full potential; overcrowding means competition for light, water, and nutrients, and makes it easier for pests or diseases to spread.

Location is everything ‐ choose plants that will match the conditions you can provide. Acid‐loving plants will struggle if the soil is too alkaline, for instance, while sun‐loving plants will not thrive in a dark, damp corner.

Put on a variety show ‐ a garden full of different plants all growing together is closer to a natural environment than regimented rows of the same thing. This makes it easier for the beneficial and harmful creatures to maintain a natural balance between each other. Mixed planting also looks attractive, giving a relaxed, informal feel to a garden.

Cut out the rot ‐ carefully remove diseased material as soon as you spot it, to prevent it spreading. Do not add seriously diseased material to your compost pile.

Keep your eyes open ‐ regularly inspect your plants and you are more likely to prevent problems getting out of control. Infection or infestation is more easily dεalt with in the early stages. Removing pests by hand in the early stages is an efficient control method.

Build up your defenses ‐ use protection such as fences, nets, and cloches to prεvent pest damage. Crop covers such as horticultural fleece or mesh are useful against insects; set traps for slugs, earwigs, and sowbugs; and use scaring devices to deter birds, moles, and cats.

306

Organic gardening is often a cheaper, more economical way to garden and it's so much more satisfying: a way to get close to nature. Thelma Barlow, Organic Gardening with love, 1992

Choose resistant varieties some varieties are naturally less susceptible to certain pests or diseases, and some have been specially developed to enhance these qualities. Check with your suppliers for resistant varieties of flowers, fruit, and vegetables. Ring the changes ‐ do not grow vegetables from the same family in the same place year after year since this can encourage the buildup of pests and diseases. The same principle applies when replacing roses and fruit trees or bushes.

Timed to perfection choose your sowing tin1e carefully to avoid the periods when some pests and diseases are most active. Carrot rust fly and pea moth are two pests that can be controlled by sowing either early or late to avoid the main egg‐laying periods.

BIOLOGICAL CONTROLS Biological controls can be bought to help with pest control. These are living creatures that are available commercially. They are harmless to humans, pets, and beneficial creatures. Some are suitable only for use in your greenhouse or conservatory, while others can also be used outside. They are most effective if used at the earliest stages of infestation and are very sensitive to any sprays, even the ones described in our chart. Biological controls are mostly available by mail order and need to be used immediately on, or soon after, delivery.

SPRAYING DOS & DON’TS + Do identify precisely what the problem is + Do select the appropriate treatment + Do follow the manufacturer's instructions and use only as directed on the label + Do spray in calm weather to avoid spray drift + Do not spray where bees are present; wait until dusk when the bees are less active

THE LAST RESORT The sprays suitable for an organic system are generally of plant origin and biodegrade quickly. They are not completely harmless to

307

beneficial creatures, so use them only as a last resort and do not rely on sprays alone to keep plants healthy

PRODUCT TYPE USE AGAINST CAUTION

Poisonous to fish, plant‐based liquid aphids; sawfly; ladybugs, other Rotenone or powder spider mites; thrips beneficial insects aphids; spider mites; Harmful to ladybugs lnsecticidal liquid based on harmful to ladybugs and may damage soap fatty acids whitefly, and other insects some plants Do not use on young Liquid based on Aphids; scale insect; Plant oil plants, begonias, canola oil spider mite; thrips; whitefly and fuchsias

Poisonous to fish Plant‐based liquid Aphids; flea beetles; Pyrethrum and or powder small caterpillars beneficial insects

Caused damage to some Powdery mildew; Sylphur Powder or liquid plants; harmful to scab on fruit beneficial insects

B 7.6 Magic carpets Photo: Green carpet like lawn

There is nothing quite like strolling barefoot across a beautiful lawn and feeling the grass between your toes ‐ especially if it is organic. A healthy organic lawn goes one step further. Organic gardening is all about gardening for the future of the earth. One individual with a digging fork and a small garden can make a real difference.

A lush organic lawn is a beautiful feature in a garden of any size. If you want to keep your organic lawn in top condition, your best bet is to encourage the grass to grow well. This may involve a little bit of effort sometimes, such as raking hard in autumn to help remove dead material from the surface or spiking any compacted ground

308

with a fork or mechanical aerator to loosen it up, but the results will be worth the time and energy expended. No matter how dry the weather, you can save yourself time and resources by not watering your lawn. Resist the urge ‐ even if it starts looking brown, it will certainly recover once rain arrives.

OFF TO MOW Your choice of lawnmower will depend on the size and condition of your lawn. An old‐fashioned push‐mower will produce the least pollution and, as an added bonus, provide you with maximum exercise. While suitable for a small lawn, however, this type of push‐mower is not practical for long grass or rough, uneven areas, even if you are particularly energetic. Cutting too severely will weaken your grass, allowing weeds to flourish. For a general‐purpose lawn, you should aim to cut the grass to about 3 cm in height. Contrary to popular opinion, the clippings can usually be left to lie on the lawn to provide nutrients as they break down. The exception is when the weather is cold and damp, or when the clippings are very long. In such cases you should add the clippings to the compost pile or use them as a mulch instead. How often you need to get the lawnmower out depends on the season and weather. Cut your lawn when the grass reaches about 4.5 cm in height, rather than sticking to a rigid timetable.

THE NEED TO WEED Relax ‐ there is no harm in allowing a few weeds within your lawn. If it is well managed, most of the weeds will be crowded out by strongly growing grass anyway. Flat, spreading weeds such as plantain and dandelion should be dug out with a strong knif1ε, making sure to remove as much of the roots as possible. If you have moss growing in your organic lawn, it is an indicator that the growing conditions are not right for the grass. The soil may bε compacted, waterlogged, hungry, or too acidic, or the site may be too shady. To control moss effectively, identify and eliminate the cause.

B 7.7 Head for the boarder Trees, shrubs, and flowers of all kinds have a role to play in your organic garden. Not only do they provide a beautiful display to please the eye, they can also provide natural habitats for wildlife.

In addition to providing stunning visual appeal, the presence of a rich variety of plants in your garden can actually increase the

309

overall diversity of the garden and provide an environment that is of benefit to birds, insects, and other types of wildlife, too. You could try growing scented flowers, herbs, and foliage to add another sensory dimension to your garden. To enjoy the perfumes of these plants to the full, grow them in a place where you can brush against them to release their scent. There are many types of vegetable that can also add another level of interest, having aesthetic as well as edible appeal. You can grow them either interspersed among other plants in your borders or in a separate vegetable patch designed for beauty as well as function. Know your limitations ‐ choose plants that suit your site and soil, and that fit the space available. The barriers and control methods that are suitable for preventing pests in a vegetable garden may not be visually appealing in an ornamental garden, so you may need to consider using some of the alternative methods suggested for promoting plant health and controlling pests and diseases. Photo: Herb and wild flowers Photo: Red rose

All plants will benefit from careful soil preparation before planting. Weed the whole area thoroughly, paying particular attention to the removal of deep‐rooted perennial weeds. Add some bulky organic material to improve the structure of your soil and to provide enough nutrients. Water thoroughly‐ at planting, and remember to continue to water frequently until the plants are established.

TREES&· SHRUBS These add height to a garden and create a permanent framework as well as providing shade and a variety of habitats that attract birds and other wildlife. Organic growing tips + Use loose or fabric mulch to control weeds when the plants are young Remove dead, damaged, or diseased parts promptly + Prune to encourage flowering, and to control size and shape where appropriate

HEDGES A filter for wind and noise, hedges create shelter for tender plants and provide food and shelter for wildlife. Organic growing tips + Choose native species for maximum wildlife benefit + Use loose or fabric mulch to control weeds when the plants are young + Avoid disturbing nesting birds by not pruning in spring

310

+ Allow leaves to gather at the bottom of the hedge to provide a wildlife habitat

HERBACEOUS PERENNIALS Available to suit all soils and situations, they produce seeds for birds in autumn, provide hibernation sites for insects, and produce nectar and pollen that attract bees, butterflies, and beneficial insects. Organic growing tips + Lift and divide clumps every three to four years to avoid congestion + Use loose mulches for weed control and water retention + Leave stems and seed heads standing through the winter for wildlife benefit and to provide visual interest

ANNUALS These come in a wide range to suit all soils and situations and flower for only one year, thus offering a quick way to provide changing color in the garden. They may self‐seed in some cases, returning the following year without any need for resowing. The nectar and pollen that they produce attracts bees, butterflies, and beneficial insects. Organic growing tips + Weed thoroughly before sowing or planting + Hand‐weed or hoe during the early stages of growth + Allow the seeds to form after flowering to encourage self‐ seeding

Work with nature and nature will work with you. Dick kitto, composting, 1984

B 7.7 Good enough to eat The taste of fresh organic vegetables, taken straight from the garden to the kitchen, has to be experienced to be fully appreciated. Growing your own produce is very satisfying, great fun, and definitely healthy.

When you grow your own vegetables, you have the peace of mind of knowing exactly how they have been produced, and can choose your favorite crops and varieties, including unusual ones not easily found in stores. Best of all, anyone can do it. You do not need to be an expert, nor have a huge garden to grow food. Many vegetables can be grown among your flowers and shrubs, appreciated for their

311

appearance as well as their edible qualities. Even if you do not have a garden at all, window boxes, pots, or organic growing bags can produce herbs, salads, and some vegetables. Photo: green lettuce, red lettuce, tomatoes and cucumber

THE CHOICE IS YOURS It is much better to start small and succeed than to get disheartened bεcause you cannot manage to look after a huge plot. Be realistic about how much time and energy you can actually devote to growing vegetables. Decide what you and your family like to eat. There is no point in growing row after row of fantastic radishes, for instance, if no one is going to touch them. Many gardening catalogues supply organically grown seeds, and sometimes plants too. Others supply seeds that, while not organic, will at least not have been treated with pesticides after harvest. Organic gardening groups are a good source of information about the local availability of organic seeds and plants. Most vegetables grow best in a sheltered, sunny position, but some, such as beets and spinach, do well in partial shade. If you do not have suitable conditions at home, or need more space, it may be worth thinking about renting an allotment.

Once you’ve bitten into your first home‐grown, sun‐ripened tomato, fresh from the vine, you’ll be hooked Pauline pears, HDRA – The organic oranization

WINTER GREENS + Land cress ‐ similar to watercress, very hardy, strong flavor + Winter purslane ‐ mild flavor, succulent |eaves, flowers also edible + Mizuna ‐ peppery flavor, deeply cut |eaves + Giant red mustard ‐ hot flavor, moderately hardy + Mache ‐ mild flavor; leaves and flowers edible

SUMMER SALADS + Arugula ‐ strong, peppery flavor + Bibb leaf lettuce ‐ mild flavor, many different varieties + Cress ‐ strong, hot flavor, quick‐growing + Endive and chicory ‐ Slightly bitter flavor, many different varieties + Leaf radish ‐ special variety that produces leafy growth rather than roots, similar flavor to the usual radishes

312

GETTING A GOOD START Root crops should be sown directly into their growing position. Most other hardy crops can either be sown direct or given a head start by sowing in pots or trays indoors. Tender crops, however, will need to be started off indoors. You can also buy young plants that are ready for transplanting. Some organically grown ones are now available. Photo: seedlings of organic vegetables

FROM THE GARDEN TO THE TABLE Make sure you provide seedlings and transplants with enough water at the beginning. After that, if the soil has good structure, most crops should not need extra water in normal conditions. Keep your plants free from weeds by regular hand‐weeding and hoeing, especially in the early stages. Most crops taste best when young and tender, so harvest just as they reach maturity and enjoy them as soon as possible. Photo: organic potatoes

EASY LEAVES ALL YEAR ROUND Harvesting a regular supply of fresh, organic green leaves from your garden throughout the year is a simple matter of planning. Summer leaves are so easy to grow and come in some delicious varieties. Seeds should bε sown from late spring to mid‐summer, resowing every three to four weeks for a continuous supply of leaves. Sow thickly in shallow drills, up to 3 cm deep and 10‐15 cm wide, and harvest when about 10 cm high. The leaves can be harvested with scissors or a sharp knife, then left to grow back two to three times. You can also grow some delicious salad herbs. Fresh greens are particularly welcome in winter. Many are good in salads, stir‐fries, or soups. Sow them directly into the soil in late summer, then thin the seedlings to the required spacing specified on the packet. These plants will survive until late autumn and some will last right through to spring in a mild winter. It is best to provide protective covers in bad weather.

SUMMER SALAD HERBS FOR CONTAINERS + Chervil ‐ delicate, ferny leaf, mild anise flavor + Cilantro – harvest young to prevent seeds forming + Nasturtium ‐ peppery flavor, flowers and leaves edible, tumbling habit good for baskets + Dill ‐ feathery graygreen leaves, traditionally used with fish + Basil ‐ comes in a range of sizes, colors, and flavors, a “must” for tomato salads and pest.

313

+ Summer savory ‐ leaves and flowers edible, good with fresh or dried beans. Grow these even if you try nothing else. All can be used raw in salads, or added to soups and sauces where they enhance summer cooking with fresh, distinctive flavors. Sow from |ate spring to mid‐ summer or buy young plants Use a general‐purpose organic potting compost and make sure that your container has good drainage. Provide adequate water to prevent them setting seed prematurely.

B 7.8 Fruits of success Photo: organic apples Photo: organic cherry

Growing organic fruit brings great satisfaction and is a luxury we can all afford. Your efforts will be rewarded with crops of delicious fruit.

It takes a little bit of time to grow fruit but, within a couple of years of planting, you will be able to harvest sweet, succulent organic fruit for eating fresh and for turning into mouth‐watering pies, tarts, and other desserts. Some fruits can be carefully stored for winter, while others can be frozen to provide fruit out of season, or made into delicious jams and chutneys.

FAVORABLE CONDITIONS Fruit trees and bushes are going to be in the ground for a long time, so they need a fertile soil that will retain moisture but not get waterlogged. If your soil is less than perfect, you can improve it by adding bulky organic material not just to the planting hole, but to the whole surrounding area. Remove all perennial weeds and mulch after planting to prevent weeds returning and to help retain moisture. Water your plants well when they are first planted and continue to water them in dry periods for the first couple of years. The best site will be as sunny as possible. Although some fruit can tolerate shady sites, most grow best in full sun. Shelter is also important. Strong winds can cause damage, and discourage pollinating insects at flowering time. Hedges make excellent windbreaks, but you may need to put up temporary barriers while they become established.

YOUR NATURAL ALLIES Beneficial creatures are welcome in the organic fruit garden to help with pest control. Attract them by growing a range of flowering plants in among the tree and bushes.

314

SPACE ‐ THE NONEXISTENT FRONTIER You do not need a huge garden to grow fruit. Modern varieties of fruit are quite compact, which makes it possible to include tree and bush fruit in even the smallest of gardens. Fruit trees and bushes can also be grown against walls and fences as cordons and espaliers, making attractive screens to divide a garden in addition to providing delicious fruit. Dwarf varieties and unusual containers further broaden the range of possibilities.

PEACHES IN A POT What could be nicer than an elegant little potful of blossoms in spring followed by a mini‐harvest of succulent home‐grown peaches? Varieties of naturally dwarf peaches are perfect for growing in pots and will look good in a garden, in a sunny little courtyard, or even on a city roof terrace. When fully grown they will reach about 1.5‐2 m, and produce up to a dozen fruits each year. Little pruning is required, but you must be careful to water your trees regularly to ensure the fruits do not split while they are growing. Plant your peach tree in a general purpose organic potting mix. Provide good drainage at the bottom of the pot, and change the potting mix each year in autumn. Leave your tree outdoors until autumn, bringing it under cover soon after leaf drop until late winter or early spring where temperatures drop well below freezing. Photo: organic strawberry Photo: organic pear

B 8 Organic Home & Office 8 Photo: organic paints Photo: natural paints

B 8.1 Why to organic The route to global survival, through equity and sustainability, is marked by lifestyle changes, small and large, dramatic and subtle, and by technical fixes, radical solutions, and practical compromises at home and at work.

8 Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA

315

Since the Industrial Revolution, Western consumer society has progressed along an unsustainable path that everyone else in the world seems drawn to follow. There are a number of ways, however, in which each of us can contribute to reducing the environmental impact of our homes and lifestyles by making considered consumer choices and by choosing sustainable, eco‐friendly options.

GLOBAL SOLUTIONS We have all witnessed the darker consequences of the modern consumer society: the contamination of the air, earth, and water the poisoning of our own bodies by barely restrained pollution and the plunder of not just our own environment, but that of the rest of the world. The environmental answer to these problems can be summed up in two words: equity ‐ the fair distribution of the earth’s resources among its peoples ‐ and sustainability ‐ the use and replenishment of resources at a rate that does not deplete natural supplies. If we can consume less and we can use sustainable alternatives, these ain1s can be achieved. In the home and office this means maximum energy conservation and efficiency ‐ using insulation and efficient boilers, for example, and replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy sources such as solar power.

GOING ORGANIC IN THE HOME & OFFICE There are many simple things that all of us can do to make a start on the road to sustainability, based on our day‐to‐ day behavior and our choices as consumers. For example, rather than buying all your food and household goods from the supermarket, why not explore local, sustainable options? When making purchases of all kinds, make informed choices and look for eco‐friendly alternatives. And at the end of a product’s life, seek methods of recycling. These ideas, as well as those for using energy and resources more responsibly, can also be applied to our working environments.

• Choose eco‐friendly or recyclable alternatives such

316

as long‐life bulbs • Make sure that electrical equipment is turned off w hen not in us • Try to recycle whenever you can • Use sustainable materials and renewable energy so urces at home • Recycle your office’s waste paper and photocopier cartridges

B 8.2 Your questions answered You want to live in an eco‐friendly home → where do you start? Each time you buy a product for your home or office, ask yourself these questions: → What is it made of? → Where does it come from? → How does it work?

How do I know whether something is organic? Look at the labels. When buying timber look for the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) logo or other certification. On other goods, a fair trade logo may mean they are environmentally friendly, but does not guarantee organic production. Look for labels of organic certification bodies and efficiency rating on electrical goods.

How do I run a “green” office or business? The benefits of an energy‐efficient workplace can also contribute to the profitability of a business. Obey the general rule: reduce, reuse, recycle. Switch off electrical equipment rather than leaving it on standby. And if you are looking to improve the environmental performance of your business, get advice from a local energy advice organization.

317

How do I make a “green” home? This is much easier than you might think. Every tin1e something in your house needs replacing or improving, there will be an eco‐friendly alternative for you to choose to gradually make your house a bit “greener”. From insulation to draft‐proofing, flooring to paint, there are organic products or methods of recycling that can help.

Do eco‐friendly products cost more? Sometimes, but not if you consider the cost to the environment. Small eco‐friendly producers are often unable to match the economies of scale of larger companies, so their products are not as cheap. The more we buy eco‐friendly products, however, the bigger the demand will be and the cheaper products 、mil become. Paying out more initially can save you money over time, too ‐ with solar panels for water heating, for example.

Can I buy renewable energy? Yes. This is getting easier than it used to be. Some local electricity suppliers now operate “green” tariffs under which you can pay a small premium to ensure your electricity comes from a renewable source or supports the development of renewables. In some countries you can buy your electricity from a company which specializes in electricity from renewable sources.

What is sustainable forestry? Sustainable forestry is a system ensuring well‐managed forests that conform to environmental criteria including the protection of biodiversity, water resources, and soil structure. As well as social considerations, sustainable forestry also recognizes the land rights of indigenous peoples.

Where can I go if I want to ask more questions? Look in the directory at the back of this book to find lots of contacts who can help you to live and work organically. If you have a general question about where to go next, try

318

one of the nonprofit organizations in this book’s directory. Many have a comprehensive directory of environmental organizations, consultants, companies, and visitor centers as well as details of books and courses.

What does sustainable mean? Sustainability is the practice of methods of living and working which do not deplete the planet’s resources ‐ whether those resources are minerals, fossil fuels, plant and animal species, or the air we breathe and the water that ensures the continuance of life. In essence, being sustainable means taking out only what we can put back in.

Where can I learn about e〔 o‐friendly building? One source of information is the US Green Building Council. The USGBC is a nonprofit consensus coaltion of the building industry that promotes eco‐friendly policies similar associations are listed internationally on the internet – try searching under “environmental” or “alternative building”

Where can I buy recycled products? You can find recycled products in your local resale shops (Salvation Army stores, for instance), and health food stores. Look out for eco‐friendly catalogues and other mail order or on파1e specialist environmental group catalogues many of which are available on the internet.

B 8.2 Reduce and recycle Many of the earth’s resources are finite, and these are disappearing at an alarming rate. To create a sustainable planet we need to reduce the pollution we create and stop squandering the earth’s natural reserves.

319

We are using irreplaceable fossil fuels and precious nonrenewable materials to manufacture endless products and materials. The burning of fossil fuels, and use of chemicals, and other toxic materials in manufacturing processes, is also causing huge pollution problems. As well as the obvious problems in manufacturing and transporting goods, we are also creating huge waste problems when we throw them away. Most trash that is not reused or recycled goes to landfill sites. These are unsightly, smelly, environmentally damaging places, and are rapidly becoming full. We need to reduce the volume of trash we send to landfill sites. Fortunately, this is possible, and it is perfectly feasible to reduce domestic trash by 90 percent.

Less trash The first step is to try to reduce the amount of waste you create in the first place. This can range from lifestyle choices such as resisting the temptation to buy things you do not need, to practical steps such as choosing products with less packaging, carrying your own reusable shopping bag, and buying in bulk. Reuse things or repair them where possible. With a bit of imagination things can often be reused as something else rather than being thrown away. Recycle everything you cannot reuse: cans, glass, paper, fabrics, and some plastics. We can also recycle organic waste. Organic waste is a problem in landfill sites as it cannot break down properly. Composting it returns the vital nutrients to the soil, turning a waste problem into a practical environmental solution. We all happily take our bottles, cans, and newspapers to be recycled, but seem to be less confident about recycling plastics ‐ probably because recycling facilities for plastics have not been widely available, and possibly because there are so many different types of plastic in use. Most plastic materials are now number coded to make recycling easier.

320

The type of plastic recycling facilities offered by local authorities varies. Some have plastic banks” that will take any type of plastic. 0thεr banks will only accept polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles, which can be recycled indefinitely, while others collect all the different types separately. Photo: recycling system

Use recycled Of course, for recycling to work there has to be a market for products made from recycled materials, so try to actively choose to buy them too. This not only supports the economics of recycling but also reduces our use of raw materials and the amount of pollution created. Happily, there is a huge range of recycled products available, from electrical equipment to toilet paper. All paper products, both for the home and the office, are now widely available in recycled versions. There are also increasing numbers of recycled glass and plastic products available. Plastic is even made into fleece clothing by the Patagonia clothing company. In the office all the general recycling rules apply, but there are some specific challenges. Help people in the office to separate out their trash by having clearly marked and easily used containers for the different types of trash. Electronic equipment can usually be recycled, and ink cartridges can often be returned to the manufacturer for refilling. Paper is usually the biggest waste stream and incoming resource to offices. By using both sides ‐ recycling it and buying recycled paper, you can help close the loop.

B 8.3 A clean sweep Thanks to increasing public awareness of environmental issues, just about any chemical cleaning product will now have an “eco” alternative, from laundry detergents to dishwashing liquids, and bathroom cleaners.

321

A look in most households’ kitchen cupboards will reveal a range of different cleaning, washing, and pest‐control products, often made up of unfamiliar chemicals. Where our predecessors would have used vinegar, beeswax, or plant‐based soaps, we now have “modern” chemical cleaning products, many of which are petroleum based and contain phosphates, organochlorines, and synthetic perfumes and colorings. With this cocktail of chemicals being flushed down our drains, plants, wildlife, and the human population suffer the effects. However, as public awareness of environmental issues has grown, demand has increased for a range of eco‐friendly cleaning and washing products. Initially only found in health and health food stores, many of these products have now made their way onto the supermarket shelves. Photo: Clean with natural” alternatives” alternatives Choosing these products is a good place to start. There are many “natural” alternatives which predate commercial products, such as vinegar and water to clean windows or remove lime scale, and lemon juice to polish brass and silver. A general cream cleaner may do for both the kitchen and the bathroom. Where you do need to use detergents, use them in moderation. Many eco‐friendly cleaning products work just as well as their conventional alternatives. One of the most popular ranges is produced by Ecover, a Belgian company. Some shops buy products in bulk and will then decant products into the container you return to them, meaning less packaging and less waste.

Reducing your use of chemical products will make your house a safer place and benefit the wider environment.

322

labeling As companies become aware that labeling their products as biodegradable or environmentally friendly could be a favorable selling point, it becomes more difficult for the consumer to establish which products are truly,_:' .. green” . The European Union (EU) Ecolabeling program is taking a step towards solving this problem. The program reduces the confusion by using Life Cycle Analysis. This looks at every stage in the manufacture, use, and disposal of a product, to identify those which do less damage to the environment. Currently, the only household cleaning products for which EU Ecolabel criteria have been developed are laundry detergents and dishwasher detergents, but criteria for floor cleaners and other cleaning products are under development. pest control Cleaning products are not the only chemicals in use around the house ‐ we also use fly sprays, mouse poisons, head lice controls, and flea powders. While effective at killing the pests, they are likely to be hazardous to human health too. Where nonchemical alternatives can be used instead, they should be. Conventional mouse traps or ones that catch the mice live are just as effective as poisons and will not pass poisons on up the food chain. Conditioner and a comb for head lice are just as effective as chemical lice shampoos.

THE DIFFERENCES THAT COUNT + Eco‐friendly cleaning products use natural, vegetable‐based cleaners that break down more quickly and more completely than petroleum based detergents + Alternative, eco‐friendly products will not have been tested on animals + Eco‐friendly alternatives do not contain phosphates, which affect the nutrient balance of

323

water life +Enzymes (which can be irritants and cause asthmatic reactions) are not used in eco‐ friendly cleaning products + Cleaning products that are eco‐friendly do not contain optical bleaches (which can cause mutations in microorganisms) or organochlorines (which can be toxic and carcinogenic)

B 8.3 Into the interior There are a number of golden rules you should follow to help you make environmentally friendly choices ‐ whatever the product. Some of these are technical fixes, some are lifestyle choices.

The impact on the environment of our homes and offices is significant. Often we think of environmental damage as being done by industry. But among those industries are the domestic building and household product sectors in which we, as consumers, play a huge part. The more we try to make some lifestyle changes, the more we will reduce our impact on the planet. can work towards using less of the world’s resources by cutting down on the amount we buy and use, and by choosing products and materials that are environmentally friendly. This includes looking at the raw materials used, the energy involved in manufacture, transportation and use, and what will happen to the products when their useful life is over. One method of assessing this environmental impact is Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), which takes a “cradle‐ to‐grave” approach. At the moment the tools for measuring LCAs are crude and full analyses have not been carried out for every product, nor is there full agreement on methodology for doing LCAs. However, it is worth bearing in mind as a general concept. More information is needed to make a reasoned judgement, and a number of certification programs can help this.

324

Photo: Organic cotton and textile items furniture There is a wide range of furniture made with the least environmental impact possible: from hand‐crafted pieces made from reclaimed or sustainably grown timbers such as teak, sycamore, and cherry to upholstered furniture using 100 percent organic fibers. A certification mark on wooden furniture and household products will ensure that the wood comes from managed woodlands rather than from endangered forests. flooring Most environmentally friendly products used for flooring are also aesthetically pleasing ‐ terracotta tiles, coir matting, cork floors, and even linoleum, which is made of totally natural materials. Companies such as Crucial Trading and Fired Earth stock a wide range of natural floorings. As a bonus, with any of the above you will lessen any allergy problems caused by dust mites. But if you really cannot live without carpet, the best options are wool and natural mixes that are unbleached and colored with natural dyes and have jute or burlap backing in place of foam. Photo: Clay tiles in floor fabric You can deck every room of your house with eco‐friendly fabrics , from the towels in your bathroom to the sheets on your bed, and from the napkins on the table to the cushions on your sofa. Though essentially a “natural” material, conventionally grown cotton is usually treated with vast amounts of artificial pesticides and herbicides. The alternative is organically grown, unbleached cotton or other materials such as hemp or wool. Items labeled “easy care” or “noniron” may have had their fibers treated with formaldehyde, so avoid these when you can. Choose undyed, unbleached products and, if you cannot find unbleached, look for those bleached with hydrogen

325

peroxide rather than chlorine bleaches. For comforters and pillows, buy natural down or feather rather than polyester‐filled. health Recent years have seen a huge growth of interest in the relationship between health and buildings. Sick Building Syndrome and the increase in allergies, medical hypersensitivity, and asthma ‐ notably in children ‐ have spurred this on. We are all too often subjected to an unhealthy environment, living in houses that contain hundreds of different chemicals in everything from the insulation in the roof to the food we eat; we are exposed to external air and water pollutants; we make and are subjected to incessant noise ‐ all of which may lead to health problems power As the number of electrical appliances in the average household increases, so does the amount of power that we use usually from fossil‐fuel power stations that contribute to global warming. A few simple steps can reduce your power consumption. Energy‐efficient (compact fluorescent) light bulbs, though more expensive initially than conventional light bulbs, will last longer and save money on your electricity bills. Buy energy‐efficient appliances and always look for efficiency ratings on household appliances like dishwashers, washing machines, and ranges to find the most efficient. However, while a double‐door refrigerator may be efficient for its size it will use far more energy than a smaller one at a lower rating. In the office, look closely at equipment you buy. The new liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors are compatible with all standard personal computers and a 38cm LCD screen uses much less energy than a standard cathode ray tube ‐ typically 18watts as opposed to approximately 200 watts. Photo: Energy saving LED bulbs

326

ENERGY‐SAVING IDEAS + Avoid putting more water in the pot than you need. + Use a clothes line where possible, rather than a tumble drier. + Boil water for cooking in a tea kettle first, since it is more efficient than the stove‐top and saves energy. + Use a toaster ‐ it is more efficient than your grill and does not waste heat . + Avoid using battery‐powered appliances. A wind‐ up radio gives you h떠f an hour of power for only 25 seconds of winding. Buy a wind‐up watch instead of a battery‐powered watch. + Use a dynamo‐powered light when out on your bike at night, or flashing light‐emitting diode (LED) lights, which are the most efficient and use the smallest batteries. + Opt for rechargeable batteries if you cannot avoid batteries altogether. But do not use them in smoke alarms as they run down suddenly. Be careful when disposing of batteries ‐ ask your local authority if they have a collection point. + Save water by making sure that you do not leave taps running, and take showers rather than baths. Install a lowflush toilet (which can save up to 90 percent of your flushing water) or divert rainwater for toilet flushing.

B 8.4 Focus on wood Although the depletion of our natural forests represents an ongoing environmental tragedy, there is a lot you can do to make sure that the wood you use in your home comes from sustainably managed forests.

327

Wood is infinitely flexible and adaptable No other material can meet the requirements of so many different building elements, from structural support, flooring, doors, and windows, to decorative finishes and furniture. It is easily accessible to DIY enthusiasts and professional builders alike. And there are also environmental advantages to using timber, the most important being that it is a renewable resource. The value of our forests is incalculable. As climate change becomes established, what is left of the world's forests can be seen as an increasingly important reservoir of carbon dioxide, which would otherwise be released into the atmosphere. As well as effectively storing carbon dioxide, forests trap air pollution, prevent soil erosion, store and filter surface water, and support a multitude of plant and animal species. Nonsustainable forestry worldwide is responsible for loss of biodiversity, clearfelling, monoculture, and damage to soil structure, not to mention the loss of local people’s land rights. We are all familiar with the loss of tropical rainforests ‐ currently being cleared at the rate of 142 million acres every year ‐ but the felling of old‐growth forests in northern hemisphere territories such as Canada, Scandinavia, and Russia is causing many of the same problems in their local environments. Photo: Cutting the trees Photo; Timbers collected forest futures To counter these problems a genuinely independent certification system guaranteeing ecological sensitivity and sustainability was established in 1993. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is a nonprofit organization whose membership comprises environmentalists, timber traders, indigenous peoples’ organizations, community forestry groups, forest workers' unions, forestry professionals, and retail companies. The FSC is the only worldwide organization offering a credible timber certification scheme for all types of forest, and receives

328

support from Friends of the Earth, the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), and Greenpeace among others. Certification is carried out by independent organizations that are accredited, evaluated, and monitored by the FSC. Two certifiers have been accredited in the UK: the Sociere Generale de Surveillance (SGS) Forestry under its “Qualifor” program, and the Soil Association with its “Woodmark” program. The credibility of this program is enhanced by the Soil Association’s experience of certifying organic farming and food. A wide range of forests has been certified to FSC standards, and many wood‐based products from these, including paper, furniture, wallpaper, and various DIY materials are now available. Just shop wisely and look for accreditation symbols from certifiers on any timber and wood or paper products you buy.

STAMP OF APPROVAL The FSC publishes a set of criteria by which it judges certification, including environmental considerations such as the protection of biodiversity, water resources, and soil structure, and social considerations such as the rights of indigenous peoples and forestry workers. Regular inspections of forests and processing plants are carried out to maintain standards. There are currently nine certified forests in the UK, covering nearly 6,000ha.

SUPPLIERS A group of companies known as the 95+ Group and coordinated by the WWF, has pledged to meet cert때 targets on sourcing sustainably produced timber. Of the popular highstreet names, Great Mills aim to stock only certified products by the end of 2000, Do It All plan to do the same by 2005, and B&Q reached 99% of its target of a 100% certified range of stock by early 2000.

329

B 8.5 Structurally sound So, if you have just bought or built your new house, and would like to make sure that it is a healthy environment to live and work in, how do you go about decorating an organic, eco‐friendly environment?

There are as many choices of decorative finish in an eco‐ friendly building as there are convention alternatives. paints Let’s start with the walls. Normal practice is to use vinyl emulsion on walls and ceilings, and oil‐based gloss on internal and external woodwork. But concerns about the effects on human health of exposure to volatile compounds (now labeled on paint cans as VOC content or rating) in such paints have led to them gradually being replaced by water‐based vinyls. However, these may be more damaging to the environment in their production. All paints and stains are either wateror solvent‐based. Natural or organic paints and stains use plant‐based dyes, solvents, and fillers – renewable resources that will biodegrade. All solvents are designed to evaporate ‐ this is how paint dries. Although some people do have an allergic response to the solvents in natural paints, this is far less common and serious than for petrochemical solvents. Another bonus with plant‐based solvents is that they react with the natural oils and resins in untreated wood, creating a chemical bond and a breathable finish, rather than an impervious coating that is can crack and flake. In an organic living space you have several options. Use unpainted finishes where possible, and instead of vinyls use limewash or mineral‐ or plant‐based paints for walls and ceilings, and mineral masonry paint for outside. There are a variety of organic paints and stains, wood waxes, and linseed oils for use on internal and external woodwork. Paints produced by some companies, for example, are not solvent‐based, have no added lead, and are virtually odorless ‐ and the cans are recyclable and

330

reusable. Other companies make organic paints and varnishes using natural plant oils and waxes, plant‐based solvents and earth and mineral pigments. Make sure to look, and ask for, eco‐friendly paint and varnish brands. Photo: Organic paints

DIY The same cautionary principles apply when buying other DIY products such as glues, adhesives, and building materials. Composite boards, such as medium‐density fiberboard (MDF), may seem to save trees, but are a less humanfriendly option. The majority of MDFs consist of very small pieces of wood glued together, and it is the glue that is usually the problem environmentally. Plywood is glued together using formaldehyde (a known animal and probable human carcinogen), and chipboard is glued together with ureaformaldehyde (which can cause skin irritation and breathing difficulties). Look for the alternatives: softboard, mediumboard, and hardboard are all made by felting wood fibers and bonding them using heat and pressure. No synthetic glues are used. insulation If you are looking to insulate your attic or walls, there are a number of natural alternatives coming onto the market. Some alternatives are is made from surplus books, newspapers, and telephone directories. Sheep’s wool is another possibility, and it is hoped that a wool insulation product will soon be available. Its insulation value is similar to that of mineral fibers. Also, it is slow to ignite and tends to melt away from any fire source and self‐ extinguish.

331

B 8.6 Design for life Whether you are designing a new house or office from scratch, adapting an existing property, or modernizing a listed building, eco‐friendly options can open new doors and vistas. building your own house with organic living in mind, the most important decision is to choose a site that lends itself to sustainability. Once a house is built it can be remodeled, but you are stuck with your site. There are a number of features you should be looking for (many of which will apply when buying an existing property too). Houses and offices should be designed with their end users in mind ‐ imagine a company of lawyers, dealing with confidential matters, finding themselves in an open plan office. Consider carefully which rooms will be used by whom and for what. With reference to architecture, “organic” can mean many things. It can refer simply to non‐rectangular form; it can suggest a deeper reverence for the earth (as in the dynamic earthbound designs of Frank Lloyd Wright); it can be a belief that architecture can have a profound effect on our growth and behavior (as in the works of Rudolf Steiner). Then there is the Chinese school of feηg shui, at the center of which is the notion of designing surroundings to facilitate the free and healthy flow of ch’i, or “life force”. Whatever your depth of belief in arts such as feηg shui, designs incorporating its principles do seem to result in more balanced, peaceful environments. How healthy is your “organic” space going to be? Lighting, ventilation, and choice of power sources will all have an effect. A healthy house provides good daylight and sunlight year round, and is well insulated and draft‐proof, but well ventilated too. It avoids underground water courses or contaminated soil, and will also minimize the dangers from electromagnetic fields from external sources such as overhead power lines, and internal sources of high voltage, such as television or computer monitors.

332

Photo: Solar panels on the roof Photo: Solar greenhouse and chairs

BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE HOME + Plan the house to use as little fossil fuel as possible. Use materials that did not require huge energy resources to generate or transport, and that will not cause a waste problem or pollution on demolition. +Aim to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy from the sun (passive and active solar heating, electricity from photovoltaic cells), biofuels, wind, and hydro power. + Optimize your use of solar energy: a site should be able to see the sun all year‐round, so check your winter sun levels, as they are vital to maximizing the solar energy availability. In a city it is best to buy property with a south‐ facing back garden: there will be less shade and you can add passive and active solar structures ‐ such as a conservatory or solar panels ‐ without too many worries over planning constraints + Construct a garden that requires minimal water, with drought‐resistant species and mulches. Collect all rainwater, and use soakaways for any surplus rainwater so that the water table is replenished (especially important in cities where tarmac surfaces are prevalent). + Hills, other buildings, and trees can protect a house from prevailing winds or funnel them towards it. Shelter to the west and northeast is generally useful. + Recycle nutrients and reduce your water use by using on‐site sewage treatment systems. There are many safe and hygienic options, such as compost toilets and reed‐bed effluent treatment.

333

+ Minimize and reuse ‐ minimize refuse from your house by storing and reusing materials and composting on site. Where possible use local recycling progrms. + Use as little fossil fuel energy as you can to reach your workplace. H you cannot work from home, travel by public transportation or bicycle. insulation Thermal comfort demands regulation of many factors, from physical activity to humidity, clothing to air temperature and movement. In high humidity the body loses its ability to cool down effectively, and even in warm conditions air movement may be sensed as a cold draft because it increases cooling of the body by convection and evaporation. In the US a large percentage of the drafts that infiltrate houses occur through faulty construction, although a certain amount of ventilation is required in all homes. Make sure all doors and windows are sealed properly and closed tightly against any seals. Check that plaster shrinkage has not left a gap between windows or doors and the adjoining walls; check for gaps between floorboards, skirting boards, and floors, and around pipes and loft hatches. If you can, install a buffer zone between living space and the outside, such as an enclosed porch or greenhouse that acts as an air lock when you venture out. lighting We all like a room full of daylight, especially if there is some sunshine, and particularly if the light is coming from more than one direction. Good daylighting can also save energy, since it replaces electric lighting. However, a balance must be found between the saving on electric lighting and heat loss from the windows, since they will lose heat at about six times the rate of a wall. Office buildings are good candidates for this kind of energy saving since they are rarely used at night. So how big should a window be? Visit rooms that feel comfortable and imitate the size and position of the windows and the

334

rooms’ proportions and finishes. Windows should be double‐ or tripleglazed. Where you do need electric light, use the most efficient and long‐lasting light bulbs available and only light those rooms that are actually in use. Photo: Putting solar panels on roof Photo: Wood house Photo: Eco‐friendly architecture building eating Solar heating is the first choice for heating any space since it is nonpolluting, but on a domestic scale it is rather impractical. Biofuels ‐ waste wood or biogases such as methane ‐ are the next best choice, since their carbon dioxide output is balanced by that taken to grow them sustainably. These are followed by gas, the cleanest fossil fuel, then oil, coal, and finally electricity. Gas and oil boilεrs will always be able to generate heat faster than those using fuels such as wood and coal. They can run at higher efficiencies without the danger of clogging up with the products of combustion. electricity If you have no choice but electricity, you can now opt, in the UK, to buy renewably generated electricity from the “grid” . If your offices or company use more than 100KW per year, you can negotiate to buy your supply from any source you wish. Cheltenham and Gloucester College, for example, buys all its electricity from a local supplier, the Renewable Energy Company. This company generates electricity using methane gas from a waste tip. A large number of domestic users can buy their electricity on a green tariff. In the right circumstances you can supply your own power ‐ photovoltaic solar cell arrays are now being integrated into all sorts of buildings. However, currently the cost of a unit of PV electricity is about ten times that of one bought from the “grid” for the domestic user.

335

B 8.7 Why wear organic Many of us wrestle with “What to wear?”, but take a moment to consider the wider implications of the clothes we choose and the impact they may be having on our bodies, on the people who made them and on the planet.

You probably already tend to choose clothes made from natural fibers because they feel good and allow your body to breathe. But did you know that a conventional cotton T‐shirt takes 150g of pesticides to produce? Photo: Organic textiles

SOFTLY DOES IT The good news is that organic farming and sustainable production methods are not just being applied to the food that we eat, but to other agri‐based commodities such as cotton, linen, and wool. While this may be of direct benefit to those who suffer from skin allergies or are chemically sensitive, it is important to all of us who want the products we buy to have been grown and manufactured with environmental consideration. It is a bonus when you discover that the care that goes into growing the fibers at an agricultural level is supported by extra care and quality control right through the manufacturing process. This results in the softest fabrics imaginable. Look for natural, pure and nontoxic fabrics in the close‐ to‐the‐body‐clothes you wear such as underwear, socks, leggings, and T‐shirts, or choose organic cotton bed linens and snuggle up to natural comfort. Look, also, for fabrics that, if bleached, dyed, or printed, have used environmentally responsible, low‐impact methods such as hydrogen peroxide bleaches and dyes that do not contain heavy metals.

• Wear organic fabrics closest to your skin • Look for pure, non‐toxic fabrics • Ask salespeople about how their fabric and clothes are made

336

• Avoid crease resistant finishes • Keep your dry‐cleaning to a minimum

B 8.8 The fabric of society There is a great range of organic and eco‐friendly fabrics available through shops and mail order. From organic cotton underwear to garments made from hemp and recycled fabrics ‐ the choice is yours.

It is now possible to find eco‐friendly alternatives to many conventionally produced fabrics. Textiles such as hemp and organic cotton are being increasingly used in clothing and soft furnishings, and some companies are even developing garments made from recycled fabrics and plastics.

Wool Compared to conventionally grown cotton, conventional wool production uses far fewer chemicals in its manufacturing process. When made into garments, wool is warm in winter, cool in summer, water‐resistant on the outside, absorbent on the inside, and naturally flame resistant. Wool is highly receptive to dyes, so natural, plant‐based dyes are a realistic alternative to synthetics in textile production. Wool also naturally repels dirt, thus cutting down on the environmental impact of constant laundering throughout a garment’s life. Because wool is a by‐product, it fits well into a sustainable farming system, and because the manufacturing process is relatively uncomplicated, it lends itself to small‐scale production and craft‐based industry. Look for 100% pure new wool garments such as naturally dyed, hand‐knitted sweaters, and products such as blankets and throws from small‐scale weaving enterprises. Felt‐making is another wool‐based craft industry that has gained popularity as designers have

337

redefined the craft to produce beautiful felted wool fabrics for hats, shoes, and clothes. Some people seem to be allergic to wool but, as nearly all conventionally produced wool is routinely mothproofed with chemicals, it is possible that some of these people are allergic to the moth‐proofing rather than the wool. Unless the woolen products you are buying have been certified as organic in countries such as the Netherlands, Germany, or New Zealand, wool produced in the UK can only be sold as “coming from organic sheep” . This means that the wool comes from sheep raised on organic farms, but tells you nothing about the processes the wool has been subjected to after leaving the sheep. This situation is soon to change with the drafting of UK organic textile standards by the Soil Association. Wool that is organically certified, here in the US, is guaranteed to come from farms where no organophosphate dips have been used on the sheep. Once shorn, the wool is washed without the use of chemicals or bleaches, using soap flakes to remove the lanolin and dirt. It is not chemically treated with mothproofing or flame‐ retardant finishes. Organically certified wool is made into blankets and bedding. It is knitted, often with silk, into fine soft jersey for baby clothes and underwear. Traditionally made, untreated Harris Tweed is made into smart city wear. Sheep skins from organically reared sheep, tanned without the use of harmful chemicals such as chrome, are used to make baby bedding and toys. Photo: Organic cotton Photo: Organic wool Photo: organic hemp

Hemp Hemp is one of the oldest and most versatile plants known to man. It was cultivated for thousands of years throughout the world, primarily as the raw material from which paper, rope, and canvas were made. Due to its strength and weatherproof qualities, hemp was hugely

338

important to the European economy for the manufacture of sails and rigging for sailing ships, and for nets, flags, uniforms, and work clothes. In the 19th century the mechanization of cotton manufacturing meant that it became possible to produce cotton fabrics more easily and cheaply than hemp, thanks to the labor‐intensive processes involved in hemp production. Then jute imported from India began to compete with and replace hemp as the fiber from which ropes and rough industrial fabrics such as sacking were made. In the 20th century two factors contributed to the almost total obliteration of the hemp industry. The first of these was the banning of hemp‐growing, initially in the US in the late 1930s, and then throughout most of the rest of the world, because of its association with marijuana. Although industrial hemp does not contain sufficient concentrations of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the narcotic ingredient in marijuana, to work in the same way as marijuana, the hemp plants were sufficiently similar in appearance to the drug‐producing plants to effect a ban. At the same time, the growth in the production of synthetic textiles replaced some of the industrial applications for which hemp’s strength had previously had importance, and the industry in Europe and America died. That is not the end of the hemp story, however. Hemp cultivation was never banned in China and eastern European countries such as Romania, and these countries are still important sources for hemp fabrics. In the West cultivation of hemp is rapidly rising again as its environmental advantages are increasingly recognized ‐ hemp is now regarded as the environmentally friendly fiber. Hemp is undoubtedly farmed without the use of toxic chemicals, even in China and the former Soviet bloc. It grows without the use of pesticides, and its roots penetrate deep into the soil, helping to improving soil structure. Hemp also returns a high proportion of nutrients to the soil, as its leaves and roots are left to rot

339

down after harvesting. It is therefore ideal as a rotation crop in a sustainable organic farming system. In fact, farmers have consistently reported higher yields from other crops such as wheat when they have been planted on land after hemp. Although hemp from China has tested negative for chemical residues, currently there is none that has been certified as organic. Meanwhile Europe, particularly Germany, has enthusiastically re‐embraced hemp as an increasingly important eco‐fiber and, with the application of modern processing techniques, is producing hemp fabric that is finer and softer than its Chinese counterpart. Some of it is certified organic. Hemp is used to make beautiful clothes that successfully combine environmental considerations with a radical fashion statement. Similar in appearance to linen, hemp makes stylish shirts, jackets, and suits. Hemp is made into excellent hard‐wearing jeans ‐ in fact, Levi Strauss’s original jeans were said to be made from hemp and Levi Strauss is now trying to reintroduce the idea. Hemp is also used to make sturdy and practical bags, backpacks, wallets, slippers, canvas shoes, and even sneakers.

Cotton Cotton accounts for nearly half of all the textiles produced in the world today and for a rapidly growing organic industry. Cotton actually grows in several different colors, which can be used to make the ultimate ecofriendly fabrics, since they are created without the need for dyes.

Silk Silk is made from the fine long filaments spun by the silkworm when it makes its cocoon. The silkworm, which is really a caterpillar, is fed entirely on mulberry leaves. The worms are killed when the cocoons are heated in water to release the filaments from the gums that hold it together. Silk is the longest and finest natural textile fiber ‐ with the highest tensile strength ‐ known to man. It is spun and made into lustrous and fine fabrics that are

340

warm in winter, cool in summer and accept dyes more readily than most other fibers. Silk is a huge industry in China. Japan, Thailand, and India also produce silk, although much of the fabric they weave now is made with Chinese yarn. It is hard to ascertain to what extent, if at all, chemicals are used in the farming of mulberry leaves in China. Reputable eco‐fabric importers test chinese silk for purity from chemical residues so, if you want to be sure, check that the eco‐clothing manufacturer in question sources their silk from one of these importers. Photo: Organic silks Photo: Organic socks Photo: Organic T‐shirts

Recycled fabrics The next time you take your old clothes down to your local Salvation Army, do not be embarrassed to include items in a bad condition. If they do not think they will be able to sell them in their shops, they may sell the garment on to recycling merchants. There the garments are sorted by color and fiber content and sold on to mills who specialize in shredding, re‐spinning, and weaving, or knitting recycled fabrics. Italy has been home to a thriving recycled wool industry for years and, in the UK, innovative fabrics from all kinds of different fibers ‐ and mixes of fibers ‐ are being developed. Here, in the US an exciting development in recycling technology has enabled polyester fabrics to be made from fibers extruded from recycled plastic bottles. Photo: Recycled fabrics

The produces AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH Based in Ventura, California, Patagonia make clothing for a variety of activities with an emphasis on durability and innovation. The company cares about the impact of its materials and manufacturing, Processes on the environment, donating 1% of sales or 10% of pre‐tax profits, whichever is greater, to environmental causes.

341

Patagonia uses organic cotton and hemp, and makes most of its fleece garments from post consumer recycled (PCR~) plastic, which brings significant environmental 'savings and advantages. Most of its dyes are low‐impact; many fabric finishes are free of formaldehyde and chlorine. The company’s stores and facilities also incorporate a variety of eco‐friendly building techniques.

To us, quality means more than how a garment looks or functions; it also includes the Way it affects the environment. Yvon Chouinard, Founder, Patagonia Clothing Company

B 8.9 Focus on cotton

Naturally kinder for you and for the environment, the growing range of organically certified cotton fabrics offers you the natural choice next to your skin and is helping to improve standards of living for others.

One of the world’s most widely traded commodities, cotton accounts for roughly half of all the textiles produced worldwide. Although cotton has been successfully promoted as “pure” and “natural”, the modern production and processing of conventional cotton is far from natural. natural fibers Conventionally farmed cotton is one of the world’s most intensively produced crops, treated with a barrage of chemicals, including fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators, and defoliants. In response to growing environmental, economic, and social concerns, both in the developed and the developing world, many cotton farmers and manufacturers have converted to sustainable production methods. Organic cotton was first grown in

342

the late 1980s by a cooperative in Turkey that wanted to demonstrate that sustainable farming methods need not be limited to food production. The cultivation of organic cotton soon spread to the US, where some conventional growers were starting to worry about the rapid escalation of pesticide use, and to Peru, where organic cotton was seen as a radical solution for subsistance farmers for whom coca had previously been the only cash crop. Egypt has become another primary producer of organic cotton, with projects such as the Sekem biodynamic initiative growing organically and supporting communities. As demand easily outstrips supply, cultivation of organic cotton is increasing worldwide Photo: Organic toy making company Photo: Organic pants

Cotton traders Because the cotton production chain from grower to consumer is complex, and environmental hazards occur throughout its length, organic textile standards have been developed to govern the use of chemicals on the farm and throughout the manufacturing process. Thus consumers can be sure that the cotton in the organically certified products they buy was not only grown using sustainable farming methods, but bleached without the use of chlorine bleaches and dyed without the use of environmentally damaging toxic dyes. Some producers grow colored cotton, eliminating the need for dyes altogether. Organic cotton is often knitted into jersey fabrics, since this avoids some of the environmental impact associated with the use and subsequent removal of yarn strengtheners in the weaving process. Many of the clothes that are available ‐ made from soft, stretchy organic cotton jersey ‐ are the garments we wear next to our skin: underwear, socks, and T‐shirts. Some companies, such as Patagonia, are committed to using only organic cotton in their garments. Other manufacturers, such as Levi, Gap, and Nike, are blend

343

organic cotton with conventional cotton to support the organic cotton market. Photo: Organic cotton pod Photo: Organic yarn

THE DIFFERENCES THAT COUNT + It is estimated that conventional cotton accounts for nearly 25% of the total global insecticide market: organic farming methods do not place farm workers at risk of exposure to toxic chemicals, and do not reduce soil fertility or pollute groundwater + Organic cotton is not genetically modified: GM cotton has been grown here in the US since 1996 + Farmers in the developing world grow organic cotton in rotation with food crops, enable them to feed their families and animals at the same time as producing a valuable cash crop for export + Fabrics made from organic cotton are not colored using heavy metal dyes, bleached with chlorine bleaches, or treated with formaldehyde + Organic cotton is kinder to you and to the environment: by choosing it, consumers are supporting sustainable practices and processing methods, and helping to secure better conditions for plantation workers

B 8.10. Why go organic With so many American households owning at least one pet, they are a key part of our lives. Our pets bring us great joy, and caring for them is important.

Owning a pet is a great responsibility, but brings great rewards. Just as you care for your children, it is up to you to feed and care for your pet, and to provide it with a safe, stimulating environment. How you choose to nurture your pet has a major effect on its health and happiness, so it is good to know that many of the choices you make for yourself and your family you can make for your pets too.

344

The choices are easy to make, and there is plenty of information to help you. Photo: Dog

FEEDING YOUR PETS When we start to question the effects of artificial substances in our own food, it is only natural to consider what goes into the foods we give our pets. Most owners who routinely feed their animals cans and packages of processed pet foods might be surprised to learn that these are permitted to contain over 100 chemical additives. It may be less of a surprise to know that our pets are, in fact, just as susceptible as we are to the effects of any pesticides, fertilizers, and additives used in food production. Happily, it is as easy to convert our pets’ diets to organic as it is our own, and most domestic pets can be fed on same organic foods, including fruit, vegetables, and meats, that we might choose for ourselves. There is, however, a growing number of organic processed pet foods coming on to the market, particularly for dogs and cats, giving you the convenient option when circumstances dictate Photo: Organic horse keeping Photo: Organic cat Photo: Organic pet feedstuff

YOUR PET'S HEALTH & ENVIRONMENT A balanced organic diet should ensure your pet’s good health. When illnesses do occur, however, there are plenty of alternatives to conventional treatments to consider. Herbalism, homeopathy, and aromatherapy are as effective on animals as on humans, although it is always wise to seek specific veterinary advice. There are also natural alternatives and guidelines to consider when looking after your pets and giving them a healthy, happy environment. • Feed your pets a balanced diet of fresh organic food s where possible, according to species specific requi rements

345

• Seek out • natural healthcare alternatives to conventional trea tments for pets • Create a safe and healthy environment for your pet to enjoy • Control dog fleas with an essential oils spray or a h erb‐packed collar

B 8.11 Pet subjects Our pets and animals are dependent upon us for almost all of their needs so how we feed and nourish them and how we care for them will have a strong influence on their health and happiness.

What we feed our pets and animals is probably the single most important factor in their health and well‐being. General rules are that fresh food is always best, variety is important and compatibility with an animal’s species specific needs is vital. Some countries have organzations that provide common‐sense principles concerning your pet’s nutrition and health. The British Association of Holistic Nutrition and Medicine (BAHNM), for example, has a holistic symbol program, through which the symbol is awarded to products whose full ingredients have been certified compatible with the target species. The BAHNM is also able to advise on using other non‐certified foods and products. However, freedom from the traces of artificial chemicals found in conventional foods should also be a key consideration and, as in humans, this is where organically produced foods play a key role. For authentication of organic pet food and supplements, the pet food certified are the ones to look out. Different symbols require different levels of stringency in what is meant by “organic”, although these parameters are regularly updated. The threat of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is present for animal foods as it is for human foods, so

346

choosing organic is the best way to fight this threat and say NO to GMOs.

Feeding dogs Although the commercial pet food industry has thrived by producing food to a theoretically adequate formula of basic nutrients, a diet of solely canned or bagged dry food is no more enjoyable or nutritionally desirable for your dog than it would be for you. Like many processed foods, the average dog foods often contain many of the artificial flavorings and chemical additives that we should all try to avoid. By and large, giving a dog a lot of what we eat ourselves is the soundest way to good nutrition, with organic alternatives being the most healthy option. This means feeding your dog a balanced diet that includes fruit and vegetables. These are musts for dogs, as only around a third of their diet should be made up of meat. A variety of forms and types of fruit and vegetables is valuable, from raw chunky to raw grated and even lightly cooked vegetables. Add organic herbs such as freshly chopped garlic, watercress, parsley, and powdered kelp and you have a really tasty and well formulated diet. In addition, dogs should have, if possible, raw organic bones and pieces of raw organic meat for chewing on, and raw “green” tripe. As the demand for organic food continues to rise, organic canned and dried pet foods are becoming more available in some specialty stores. They are not advisable for full‐ time use but for occasional feedings they are preferable to non‐organic products. It is also a good idea to prepare your own organic treats or offer slices of raw organic carrot or squares of organic bread or toast. Photo: healthy dog Photo: Healthy rabbit Photo: Healthy cat face

347

PET FOOD PLATTERS It is best to use ceramic, clay, stoneware, or enamel feeding receptacles for your pet. Food bowls made of plastic are not a good idea, since the chemical itself and the dense dyeing matter usually used to color it can leach into food and water quite easily. The toxic effects of such materials are well‐proven, and many dogs have benefited from disposal of their plastic bowls.

SOURCING & STORING FOOD Since it is always best to feed your pets fresh, unprocessed foods when you can, it is probably wise not to indulge in the habit of bulk‐buying if you can avoid it. Suitable foods can be deep‐frozen, such as raw meat ‐ organic if possible. Food containers should be rat‐proof and not prone to condensation. Dried organic foods, such as dog biscuits, should be stored in a cool, dark and dry place. feeding cats Although the same basic principles for feeding dogs apply to cats, they do have some special considerations. Unlike dogs, cats are dependent on some meat or fish in their diet, due to the essential amino acids these contain. Cats struggle to tolerate some vegetables, such as the onion family, including garlic. Cats' oral and dental health is just as dependent on meat and bones to chew as dogs’, but they are very susceptible to salmonella food poisoning. Foods must be fresh, therefore, and careful hygiene in preparation is vital. Organic canned and dried cat foods are available for occasional use. Look out for a wide range of organic cat food on the internet. feeding birds Domestic caged birds are necessarily even more dependent upon us than uncaged animals. Each species has different nutritional requirements. If possible, buy organic seeds for your birds and organic fresh fruit particular to each species' natural home.

348

Choosing organic foods when you can is the best way to keep your pets healthy and happy. Christoper Day, Holistic Veterinary Surgeon

feeding horses The dietary considerations for horses are more complex than for dogs and cats. All the same principles apply, however: foods should be fresh, varied, compatible with the species, and, when possible, organically produced. Feeding your horse grains is not desirable, unless you are making up for the energy requirements of very strenuous work schedules. Hay should be from organic land if possible, or at least from ground that has not been treated with artificial fertilizers. The horse is a strictly herbivorous species and horses should never be fed foods and supplements containing animal products. It is best, too, to avoid molasses and other sugary materials, including sugar beet. Most of the commercially produced foods currently available fall short of these common‐sense requirements. Accurate and careful reading of the bags will tell the full story, and it is advisable to read labels in detail. Chaffs are usually coated in molasses, even if you do not expect them to be. Most compound feeds contain molasses, and some contain animal products. Some feeds contain preservatives and other artificial additives to accommodate milling and storage. The best diet for a horse is organic grass or hay, or at least grass or hay from ground that has not been treated with artificial fertilizers. If this needs supplementing, herbs should be selected to source extra vitamins and minerals. If grain is required, oats and bran can be used, provided that adequate calcium rebalancing is practiced, for example by the addition of ground limestone or limes tone flour. Barley can be offered if the horse needs to gain weight, and boiled linseed or cooked linseed cake is a useful energy, protein, and oil supplement. Be wary of the many herbal supplements now available for horses. This is a lucrative market,

349

because people want to do the best for their horses, but the marketing can be misleading. Some have names or labels that imply medical benefits that have not been substantiated. pet health The area of pet health care products is one that many pet owners find very confusing. Although advice abounds, it can often seem conflicting and may be offered out of a vested interest. If your animal appears healthy, and if he or she is on a wholesome, preferably organic, diet, then nutritional or health supplements should not be necessary. If the animal is not healthy, you should seek the advice of a veterinarian who is well versed or preferably qualified in the specialist areas of natural medicine, nutrition, and holistic thinking. Although, ‘;as is the case for humans, conventional medicines are useful for treating some diseases, for others “alternative” treatments can offer a more natural option. Homeopathic medicines are available over‐the‐counter for most first‐ aid indications, and Bach’s Rescue Remedy can be of invaluable support for conditions of sudden onset, such as shock, fright or panic. Herbs such as skullcap and valerian or the application of lavender oil can help in times of anticipated stress, but always seek veterinary advice first. supplements There are some occasions when supplements, including vitamins and herbs, may be advised. Vitamin B may relieve stress and Vitamin C may help connective tissues and the immune system. Herbal echinacea can support the immune system in times of challenge, and garlic is good for deterring worms, and as a disinfectant, insect repellent, and immune stimulant. In the case of blood‐ related conditions, such as anemia, an integrated homeopathic and nutritional approach is required rather than some off‐the‐shelf concoction. If pasture land or hay for horses is not of high quality, then .a formula of herbs should be put together for your horse, depending on its

350

special needs. If such things as hoof formation go wrong, again an integrated homeopathic and nutritional program is needed. In cases of arthritis in dogs, cats, and horses, natural medicines can be used, but there is also a range of magnetic devices available, although it is not very easy to tell in advance which patients will be helped and which ones will not.

B 8.12 Why organic finance Photo: 20 coins

Investing in eco‐ethical finance is the feel‐good, positive way to make your money work for you and what you believe in. It is the win‐win, caring, sharing, street‐wise form of finance.

The concept of eco‐ethical finance first began in the 1970s and has now blossomed into the fastest‐growing sector of the money market. In the UK, where eco‐finance is booming, eco‐ethical investments exploded to 2.5 billion pounds in the 1990s and are expected to triple by 2005.

A PROFITABLE PARTNERSHIP Eco‐ethical finance has nothing to hide and conducts its business in a totally transparent way. Eco‐ethical finance places business, social, ethical, and environmental needs in genuine partnership. Unlike conventional alternatives, eco‐ethical finance benefits everyone and everything ‐ especially the environment ‐ and it is this qualitative difference that makes it unique. Though both systems use mostly the same investment vehicles, conventional finance only looks at financial return and security. Eco‐ ethical finance looks at the social and environmental effects as well.

351

Eco‐ethical finance works in exactly the same way as conventional finance. It offers just as many options, the rates are just as competitive, and the quality of service and level of advice and expertise are often better. Research shows that the track records of eco‐finance investments match those of their nonethical counterparts, thus proving that finance with a heart can make you money too.

SHARED IDEALS As with organic food and farming, and fair trade, eco‐ ethical finance offers people a sense of personal involvement and shared ideals. And because different people feel strongly about different issues, eco‐ethical finance allows you to tailor your investments to suit your personal ethical or environmental portfolio. It is, in short, the finance for today’s caring consumers who want to invest in the future. It could be the most positive and rewarding step of your life.

• Open an account with a “green” bank • Buy fairly traded goods where possible • Invest in eco‐ethical finance – the positive way to m ake money work for you • Tailor your investments to suit your ethical portpol io

B 8.13 Making your money count One in three consumers is already using purse power to bring about worldwide environmental and social improvements, helping to create a better world for everyone.

Saving and investing your money in eco‐ethical programs, and choosing to spend it on organic, eco‐friendly and ethically sound goods is a simple way to help the market

352

to grow and flourish ‐ over five million workers, for example, are supported by fair trade programs, and organic food is the fastest‐growing sector of the food market in many countries. “Green” tourism is another development that is having a major impact, since tourism is the world’s biggest industry Photo: floor and windows of eco‐architecture building

INVESTING IN A BETTER WORLD Saving with ethical finance companies who invest positively also has a direct effect on what happens in the future. Investing your money in pension funds with socially responsible criteria has an added effect and puts pressure on companies with negative criteria to make changes. More than 400,000 people now use credit unions. These enable people living or working in the same place to save and borrow at affordable rates. Micro‐finance has helped millions of people and businesses to find their feet. In the UK, the largest, The Prince’s Trust, has helped 35,00(〕 young people between the ages of 18 and 30 start over 30,000 businesses. In Bangladesh the Grameen Bank, founded by an economics professor, Mohammed Yunus, in the 1970s, has helped millions to escape from poverty. It makes loans to people mainly women ‐ with less than half an acre of land. Also gaining official recognition are alternative currencies, based on people’s worth and skills. “Time Banks" and “Time Money" programs, such as Fair Shares or Time Dollar here in the US, allow you to use your time as money. Local currencies for local people operate at village level and in cyberspace on the internet, while another program, the Local Exchange Trading System (LETS), is a European skill‐swapping currency that enables people to earn credit by trading their skills. Saving and investing your money in eco‐ethical programs, and choosing to spend it on organic, eco‐friendly and ethically sound goods is a simple way to help the market to grow and flourish ‐ over five million workers, for

353

example, are supported by fair trade programs, and organic food is the fastest‐growing sector of the food market in many countries. “Green” tourism is another development that is having a major impact, since tourism is the world’s biggest industry.

ECO‐ETHICAL BANKS Socially responsible banks offer a full range of services and various saving options. They approach “green” finance in two broad ways: + Negative ‐ banks that avoid financing or investing in companies and projects that have a negative impact on the environment and the community. + Positive ‐ banks that only finance or invest in companies and projects that have a positive impact on the environment and the community. Triodos Bank invests only in ventures that are ecologically and socially sustainable as well as financially sound. The only main street bank to cater seriously to the eco‐ethical investor is the Cooperative Bank. Its policy is determined in consultation with customers. Its Customers Who Care program campaigns on various issues and has raised funds for several organizations. It also has an internet banking service, Smile.

“ECO” CREDIT CARDS These offer everyday shoppers an easy, simple way to support an organization that you believe in every time you shop. Hundreds exist, including those issued by HDRA ‐ the organic organization, Oxfam, and the Centre for Alternative Technology. The Co‐operative Bank’s Greenpeace Affinity card is the only biodegradable one on the market.

TRIODOS BANK Founded in 1980, Triodos Bank has offices in the Netherlands, the UK, and Belgium. Organic food and farming, renewable energy, social housing, fair trade, and micro‐credit are given high priorities. Its patnership

354

savings accounts include the Organic Saver and Earth Saver. Triodos Match is a green business angels “matching service”, bringing green investors together with like‐ minded intrepreneurs who are looking for finance for their businesses. The bank publishes regular newsletters and a complete list of project financed. Its new Dutch eco‐ office in Utrechtseweg fits in perfectly with its green surroundings. The design was lnfluenced by the bank's aim of constructing the most sustainable, low‐energy building possible.

B 9 Organic green space, educational facility & health care

B 9.1 Today, the consumer is increasingly aware of environmental issues, and he looks for green space, educational facility, and health care establishment providing quality service given with the utmost respect for the environment and organic.

One of the main challenges for professionals eager to meet this request is to create well‐being spaces of quality where products, services, equipments and facilities are environmentally friendly and respectful to humans.

B 9.2 scope

Green spaces  Organic spa  Organic wedding  Organic celebration party  Organic hotel  Organic resort facility  Organic restaurant  Organic cafe

Educational facilities  Organic kindergarten  Organic university campus

355

Health care establishments  Organic care house after maternity  Organic institution for aged  Organic medicinal care

C Film Theatre

Display in 3D Theater:

C 1 Central Film Hall for 250 seats: ‘Organic Lifestyle’ ‐ display 3 D animation film for 20 minutes Message: Showing the audience what is organic lifestyle and how to enjoy it in our daily life - What is organic lifestyle - Organic food and drink - Organic baby care - Organic health and beauty - Organic Gardening - Organic home and office

C 2 Introductory Short films for 10 minutes each relevant corner:  Organic kindergarten  Organic care house after maternity  Organic university campus  Organic spa  Organic institution for aged  Organic wedding  Organic celebration party  Organic hotel  Organic restaurant  Organic cafe  Organic resort facility  Organic medicinal care

356

C 3 Videos Display in each panel:  Diverse videos and YouTubes related with organic lifestyle - Joan Dye Gussow: This Organic Life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zPP4g4jdW4 - Organic Food Delivery from Beyond Organic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpaexY7JaKw

357

358

IMPRESS

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

359

Hall 9 Organic Lifestyle General

National Organic Directory Community Alliance with Family Farmers (CAFF). www.caff.org The Organic Pages. Organic Trade Association’s 1998 North American Resources Directory. 272 pages Rachel Carson (1962): Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin. Repr. Penguin 1999 Ronnie Cummins, Ben Lilliston (2000): Genetically Engineered Food; A Self‐Defense Guide For Consumers. Marlowe & Company Sierra. The Sierra Club Magazine. www.sierraclub.org Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA. 1 Introduction

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA. 2 The Complete Organic Lifestyle

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA. 3 Organic Farming Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Organic Life. Monthly Magazine Queen. Seoul. Republic of Korea Environmental‐Friendly Agriculture. Agronomy and Horticulture. Seoul. Republic of Korea Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

360

4 Organic Food and drink

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Smith‐Spangler, C; Brandeau, ML; Hunter, GE; Bavinger, JC; Pearson, M; Eschbach, PJ; Sundaram, V; Liu, H; Schirmer, P; Stave, C; Olkin, I; Bravata, DM (September 4, 2012). "Are organic foods safer or healthier than conventional alternatives?: a systematic review.". Annals of Internal Medicine 157 (5): 348–366. PMID 22944875. Renee Elliott, Eric Treuille(2000): Organic Cookbook. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Dangour AD et al (2009) Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 92(1):203‐210 Rodale and Staff (2000): Prevention’s Health Cook. Rodale Press. USA Magkos F et al (2006) Organic food: buying more safety or just peace of mind? A critical review of the literature Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 46(1): 23– 56 | pmid=16403682 Natural Life Magazine. www.life.ca/index.html "The Food Standards Agency’s Current Stance". Archived from the original|archiveurl= requires |url= (help) on March 31, 2010. Sophie Goodchild for the London Evening Standard. July 29, 2009 Organic food 'no healthier' blow. Robert Johnson(1993): The Consumer’s Guide to Organic Wine. Pasichnyk. 1993 Mothers & Others For Livable Planet. The Green Kitchen Handbook. NY. USA. Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

5 Baby Care

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Jayni Chae(1995): Blueprinty for a Green School. Schloastic Vicki Lanski(1995): Baking Soda: Over 500 Fabulous, Fun, and Frugal Uses You’ve Probabley Never Thought of. The Book Peddlers. Lizzie Vann(2000): Organic Baby & Toddler Cookbook. Dorling Kinersley Publishing. NY. USA Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

361

6 Organic Health and Beauty

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Susan Miller (1995): The Natural Soap Book: Making Herbal and Vegetable‐based Soaps. Storey Communications. Ruth Winter (1999): A Consumer’s Directory of Cosmetic Ingredients. Three Rivers Press. Begley, Ed (2008). Living Like Ed: A Guide to the Eco‐Friendly Life. Clarkson Potter. p. 197. ISBN 978‐0‐307‐39643‐3. Plunkett, Jack W. Plunkett's apparel and textiles industry almanac. Plunkett Research Ltd. pp. 48–49. ISBN 978‐1‐59392‐110‐1. Martínez‐Torres, Maria Elena (2006). Organic coffee: sustainable development by Mayan farmers. Ohio University Press. pp. 119– 120. ISBN 978‐0‐89680‐247‐6. http://www.o2wear.com/Organic‐Clothing_a/263.htm EJF. (2007). The deadly chemicals in cotton. Environmental Justice Foundation in collaboration with Pesticide Action Network UK: London, UK. ISBN No. 1‐904523‐10‐2. Lauresn, S. E., Hansen, J., Knudsen, H. H., Wenzel, H., Larsen, H. F., & Kristensen, F. M. (2007). EDIPTEX: Environmental assessment of textiles. Danish Environmental Protection Agency, working report 24. "Bamboo: Facts behind the Fiber".

Schor, Juliet (2003). Sustainable planet: solutions for the twenty‐first century. Beacon Press. p. 59. ISBN 978‐0‐8070‐0455‐5.

Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

362

7 Organic Gardening

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Eliot Coleman(1996): The New Organic Grower: A Master’s Manual of Tools and Techniques for the Home and Market Gardener. Chelsea Green. Pippa Greenwood(1999): Pippa’s Organic Kitchen Garden. Dorling Kinersley Publishing. NY. USA Organic Gardening. Rodale Press. www.organicgarden.com Kitch Gardening. The Taunton Press. CT. USA Organic Life. Monthly Magazine Queen. Seoul. Republic of Korea Environmental‐Friendly Agriculture. Agronomy and Horticulture. Seoul. Republic of Korea Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

8 Organic Home and Office

Lynda Brown (2000): Organic Living. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA Interior Concerns. A biomonthly newsletter that provides information for designers, archtects, builders, and homeowners on environemntla products, issues, and inductry changes Recycling Nework. www.grn.com David Pearson(1996): The Natural House Catalog: Everything You Need to Create on Environmentally Friendly Home. Simon & Schuster. Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA. 8.10 Organic Pet care

Nina Anderson(1996): Are You Poisoning Your Pet? A Gidebook on How Our Lifestyle Affect the Health of Our Pets. Safe Goods. Martin Godlstein(1999): The Nature of Naimal Healing: the Path to Our Pet’s Health, happiness, and Longevity. Alfred A. Knopf Pat Lazarus(1999): Keep Your Pet Health the Natural Way. Keats Publishing Sheherazade Goldsmith (2010): A Slice of Organic Life. Dorling Kindersley Publishing. NY. USA.

363

Goesan County Chungbuk Province, Republic of Korea

WORLD ORGANIC EXPO (WOE) 2015

Hall 10

Practical skills for Organic Agriculture

Author: Prof. Dr. Sang Mok Sohn

www.isofar.org

365

Content

A. Mission ...... 370 B. Contents: ...... 370 B 1. Organic Farming ...... 370 B 1.1 Why Go Organic ...... 375 B 1.2. Secret of eternal life ...... 376 B 1.3. Principles of Organic Farming ...... 377 B 1.4. The Productivity of Organic Farming ...... 379 B 1.5. The Economics of Organic Farming ...... 380 B 1.6. The Global Environment ...... 381 B 1.7. Climate change and Organic Agriculture ...... 383 B 1.8. The sustainability of organic farming ...... 383 B 1.9. World trends in Organic Agriculture ...... 385 B 2 What is Organic Food ...... 392 B 3 Why Buy Organic ...... 395 B 4 Why Choose Organic ...... 397 B 5 Feeding the Soil ...... 397 B 5.1 Green Manure ...... 397 B 5.1.3Green manure crop categories ...... 400 B 5.2 Cover Crops ...... 403 B 5.3. Compost – The Key to Living Soil ...... 407 B 6 Manure Management and Composting ...... 410 B 6.1 Composting ...... 410 B 7 Nutrient Leaching and Organic Agriculture ...... 414 B 8 Crop Rotation and Design ...... 414 B 8.1 Crop Rotation ...... 414 B 8.2. Designing a crop rotation ...... 419 B 8.3. Crop rotation defined by organic farmers ...... 423 B 9 Intercropping and Companion Planting ...... 425 B 9.1 Intercropping ...... 425 B 9.2 Companion Planting ...... 426 B 10 Biodiversity and Organic Agriculture ...... 440 B 11 Pest and Disease ...... 440

366

B 11.1 Pesticides Risk ...... 440 B 11.2. Pest and Disease Management ...... 441 B 12 Weed Management ...... 445 B 12.1 Prevention is better than cure ...... 445 B 12.2 Mechanical methods of weed control ...... 448 B 12.3. Are weeds always a problem? ...... 451 B 12.4 Weeds as indicators of soil conditions ...... 451 B 12.5 Solutions to some weed problems ...... 452 B 13 Purchased Soil Amendments ...... 453 B 13.1 Mineral fertilizers ...... 453 B 13.2 Micronutrient fertilizers ...... 454 B 13.3 Biological agents ...... 454 B 14 Organic Gardening Step by Step ...... 455 B 14.1 Secrets for Organic Vegetable Garden ...... 455 B 14.2 Secrets for Organic Lawn Care ...... 459 B 15 Rice farming system with duck and snail ...... 461 B 15.1 Duck‐rice farming , ...... 461 B 15.2 Snail‐rice farming , ...... 464 B 15.3 Azolla–rice farming ...... 466 B 15.4 Rice‐fish farming ...... 466 B 16. Stockless Organic Farming ...... 468 B 17 Organic Beekeeping ...... 468 B 18 Wild Collection ...... 469 B 19 Organic Aquaculture ...... 470 B 20 Organic Animal Husbandry ...... 471 B 20.1 Objectives of organic animal husbandry ...... 472 B 20.2 Roles played by animals ...... 472 B 20.3 Nutrition and Feeding ...... 473 B 20.4 Basic Nutrients in Animals Feeds ...... 473 B 20.5 Feeding Tips ...... 475 B 20.6 Animal Housing ...... 475 B 20.7 Animal Breeding ...... 476 B 20.8 Factory Farming ...... 476

367

B 21 Organic Pasture and Grazing ...... 478 B 21.1 Organic Pasture ...... 478 B 21.2. About the 10 Steps ...... 479 B 21.3. Shade for Grazing Animals ...... 485 B 22 Organic Ranch and Polutry ...... 486 B 22.1 Ranch ...... 486 B 22.2 Poultry ...... 487 B 23 Processing and Packing ...... 488 B 23.1 Manufacturing of organic products and packing ...... 488 B 23.2 Storage of organic products ...... 490 B 23.3 Transportation of organic products ...... 490 B 24 Animal welfare ...... 491 B 25 Certification and Marketing ...... 493 B 25.1 Certification agencies ...... 493 B 25.2 Requirements for certification ...... 493 B 25.3 Marketing ...... 494 B 26 Organic Food and Milk Quality ...... 495 B 26.1 Food quality and safety of organic food ...... 495 B 26.2 Milk Quality on Organic Dairy Farms ...... 496 B 27 Transition ...... 503 B 27.1 Convert gradually ...... 503 B 27.2 Problems specific to the transition ...... 504 B 27.3 Prepare yourself adequately ...... 505 B 28 Consumer Trends ...... 506 C Film Theatre ...... 510 IMPRESS ...... 512 CONTACT/COORDINATION ...... 512

368

369

Hall No: 10

Title: Pratical skills for Organic Agriculture

A. Mission Giving extensive and detailed information to  What is organic farming  What is organic & why choose organic  Organic plant production  Organic animal production

B. Contents: Hall entrance design: Organic Farming, Composting, Rotation, Legumes, Organic Seeds, Bio‐diversity, Organic Animal Production, Animal Welfare Delivered message: Organic Agriculture – Main aim of the hall is to display what is organic agriculture, why we need it, why choose organic, the practical skills to cultivate crops and raise the animal organically and etc. Organic farming is a form of agriculture that relies on techniques such as crop rotation, green manure, compost and biological pest control. Organic farming uses fertilizers and pesticides but excludes or strictly limits the use of synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, plant growth regulators such as hormones, livestock antibiotics, food additives, genetically modified organisms, human sewage sludge, and nanomaterials. Organic agricultural methods are internationally regulated and legally enforced by many nations.

B 1. Organic Farming 9 The principal methods of organic farming include crop rotation, green manure, compost, biological pest control, and mechanical cultivation. These measures use the natural environment to enhance agricultural productivity: legumes are planted to fix nitrogen into the

9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming

370

soil, natural insect predators are encouraged, crops are rotated to confuse pests and renew soil, and natural materials such as potassium bicarbonate and mulches are used to control disease and weeds. Hardier plants are generated through plant breeding rather than genetic engineering

What is Organic Farming? Organic farming is a modern, sustainable farming system which maintains the long‐term fertility of the soil and uses less of the Earth's finite resources to produce high quality, nutritious food. Organic techniques have been developed from an understanding of and research into soil science, crop breeding, animal husbandry and ecology. The maintenance of soil fertility relies principally on the use of legumes, crop rotations, the application of composted animal manures and ground rock minerals. Weeds are controlled by mechanical methods while pests and diseases tend not to be a problem due to the inherent biodiversity in the system. Artificial fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators and livestock feed additives are prohibited. Whilst the sector is still a very small part of overall food production, organic farming is expanding at a dramatic rate and is set to be the most exciting sector within the agricultural industry. With long‐term financial support now confirmed by the government this trend is set to continue for the foreseeable future. Organic farming refers to ecologically‐based production systems used to produce food and fiber. Organic farming may be most widely known for what it is not; however, it is more important to define organic farming by what it is. Organic farming can be defined by the proactive, ecological management strategies that maintain and enhance soil fertility, prevent soil erosion, promote and enhance biological diversity, and minimize risk to human and animal health and natural resources. Many kinds of farm products are produced organically including vegetables, fruit, herbs, grains, meat, dairy, eggs, fibers, and flowers When consumers buy Certified Organic farm products, they can be certain that they are supporting farmers who take their stewardship roles so seriously that they have voluntarily accepted strict Federally‐regulated standards: 1) Certified Organic farming systems are the ONLY farming systems that are REQUIRED by organic regulation to use an integrated package of management practices that maintain or improve the natural resources of the farm, including soil and water quality

2) Certified Organic farming systems are the ONLY farming systems that are REQUIRED by organic regulation to rely

371

preferentially on preventative management practices to reduce the possibility of weed, insect, and disease problems, and to preferentially use nontoxic physical and mechanical methods to manage pest problems if they do occur; ONLY when these practices are insufficient to prevent or control crop pests, weeds, and diseases can organically‐approved materials be used in Certified Organic farming systems

3) Certified organic farming systems are the ONLY farming systems that are REQUIRED by organic regulation to undergo a rigorous annual oversight and certification process to enforce these natural resource protection and pest‐prevention requirements

Organic Regulations Unlike most food assurance schemes, organic food production is subject to statutory control. Once a producer or processor decides to become involved in organic food production and processing, they become subject to organic regulation. 1) That each member state must establish a Control or Inspection Authority to implement the law in the state; 2) How organic products (made of essentially plant ingredients intended for human consumption) must be labelled; 3) How the agricultural ingredients must be produced; 4) What inputs are permitted for soil fertilising and conditioning and pest and disease control; 5) How organic products must be processed; 6) What additional non‐organic ingredients, non‐agricultural materials such as additives and processing aids can be used;

What Does "Certified" Organic Mean? All products that bear an organic label or advertise organic ingredients must meet or exceed the regulatory standards, regardless of the country of origin. Certified organic farming systems produce and process products to uniform standards, comply with record‐keeping requirements and have been verified as compliant with the regulatory standards by an independent state or private organization that is accredited by authority.

What is the Value of Organic Products to Consumers? Researchers have studied consumer preferences for, willingness to pay for, and perception of value of organic products. Organic consumers are diverse in age and gender as well as social, economic, and educational status.

372

They purchase organic products for a variety of reasons including taste, environmental and social benefits, and a belief that organic products are healthier.

Organic is booming ~ Seventy‐three percent of mainstream supermarket chains nationwide now carry some organic products. (Food Marketing Institute)

~ Fifty‐six percent of those who buy organic products get them from mainstream supermaket chains. (The Organic Consumer Profile, Hartman Group, 2000)

~ The organic industry topped six billion domestically in 1999. (American Demographics)

~ The organic industry has grown by at least 20 to 25 percent each year since 1990. The conventional grocery industry grows by 3 to 5 percent per year. (American Demographics)

~ Fifty‐seven percent of restaurants nationwide with entrées over $24 offer organic selections. And it's offered it in 29 percent of restaurants where entrées average $15. (National Restaurant Association)

~ Big companies, like Heinz, Gerber, and General Mills are entering the organic business. (Los Angeles Times)

~ Seventy‐five percent of food industry executives think that organic is the most promising business opportunity in their industry today. (Food Marketing Institute)

~ Convenience foods are some of the fastest growing categories of organic food today. (Gene Kahn, CEO, Small Planet Foods)

~ In China, organic is a $1.6 billion industry, and it's been growing at an average of 41 percent per year for the last seven years ‐‐ which is almost double the growth rate of organic in the United States. (Datamonitor)

~ Europe and the United States are the two largest global markets for organics. Japan is third. Germany is by far the largest market in Europe, accounting for more than 35 percent of total European sales. (International Trade Centre: UN and WTO Organic Food and

373

Beverage: World Supply and Major European Markets market study)

And Did You Know... ~ Texas has more certified organic acreage than any other state. In fact, approximately 10 percent of the nation's total organic acreage is in Texas. (USDA)

~ Most farmers convert to organic because it is a way for them to keep their farms viable. (Bob Scowcroft, Organic Farming Research Foundation)

~ Eighty‐seven percent of organic farms ‐‐ even ones that supply big companies with ingredients ‐‐ are small family farms, not corporate owned. (Third Biennial National Organic Farmers' Survey ‐‐ OFRF)

~ Seventy‐two percent of Americans reported they would eat seasonally and locally if it meant getting food with fewer pesticides; 57 percent said they'd accept higher prices for this food. (Consumer study funded by Philip Morris and American Farm Bureau Federation) ~ So far the big players coming into the organic marketplace have not hurt the small family farmers ‐‐ but actually helped them, because the big companies buy the majority of their organic supplies from small family farms. (Bob Scowcroft, Organic Farming Research Foundation)

~ Companies like Whole Foods and Wild Oats buy much of their produce from local farmers and much of their dairy products from farmer co‐ops. (Margaret Wittenburg, Quality Assurance Research Director for Whole Foods Market, Inc.)

~ A fifteen‐year study by Rodale Institute concluded that yields for organic crops were no smaller than for those farming with chemicals ‐‐ and organic crops significantly decrease groundwater pollution. (Rodale Institute)

~ A consumer group, the Organic Consumers' Association (OCA), is lobbying the government to push for 30% of the nation's farming to be done organically by the year 2010. (Ben Lilliston, Communications Director, OCA)

~ Smaller regional operations have a much higher brand identity in their markets than national brands. In the recent Hartman

374

consumer study, only 1 percent of people could name any national organic brands. (The Organic Consumer Profile, Hartman Group)

B 1.1 Why Go Organic Going organic is better for you and better for the environment, since it is helping to reverse the ecological destruction that has been taking place since the middle of the 20th. By going organic and choosing eco‐friendly options when you can, you will not only be helping to care for the environment in a wider sense and to limit the ecological damage that has taken place during recent years, but you will also become part of a social, economic, and environmental lifestyle that is finding fairer, more sustainable solutions for the future. Buying organic supports organic farming and the wide range of benefits it brings. Choosing the organic option also means supporting a system that campaigns against genetically modified (GM) crops and that is itself determined to be GM‐free.

375

•BIODIVERISITY is encouraged. •ANIMALS are reared in humane conditions. •POLLUTION is kept a minimum.

B 1.2. Secret of eternal life As Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, the nation that destroys its soil destroys itself. The soil is the greatest environmental asset we have in the world, and healthy soil is fundamental to sustainable agriculture. Take a brief look at this magical substance and it is easy to see why and how organic farming, which is based on maintaining rather than destroying soils, is so important for the future of the world. Organic farmers have long understood the value of healthy soil and know that good soil structure is crucial to the overall quality and health of their soil. Poor soil structure leads to increased soil erosion, which can cause ecological havoc with far‐reaching consequences.

376

FEEDING THE WORLD: THE COST TO THE LAND Since 1960 around 30% of the total crop land worldwide has been lost because of soil erosion by wind and water. In Mexico, for instance, it is estimated that only nine percent of the arable topsoil is left. Mechanized modern farming literally stripmines the soil, weakening it forever, leaving it extremely vulnerable to permanent erosion by wind and water. One ecological consequence of this is that local agrochemical pollutants end up in rivers and oceans far away. The environmental group, Ecology Action, have calculated that, for every pound of food produced in this way in the US, up to 2.75kg of soil are lost forever through wind and water erosion, while in China they estimate the loss is closer to 18 kg of soil per pound of food produced. In some areas, such as this devastated landscape in Bolivia, the land remaining has barely enough soil left to produce even a modest crop.

B 1.3. Principles of Organic Farming Organic agriculture is a system of farming based on ecological principles ‐‐ hence the terms biological or ecological farming which are also used to describe this production method. The goal of organic agriculture is to create a sustainable agriculture system. Many believe it is potentially more environmentally‐ sustainable and economically‐viable than other systems of farming. Organic farmers use many traditional techniques but they also have access to and use new technologies and information from the developing fields of ecology, microbiology and related sciences. Thus there is nothing old‐fashioned about organic agriculture; it is the branch of agriculture in which some of the newest developments in food production are occurring. Because organic farming systems are complex, they defy a simple definition. • “Organic farming seeks to create ecosystems that achieve sustainable productivity and provide weed and pest control, through a diverse mix of mutually‐dependent life forms, through recycling of plant and animal residues and through crop selection and rotation, water management, tillage and cultivation. Soil fertility is maintained and enhanced by a system which optimizes soil biological activity as the means to provide nutrients for plant and animal life as well as to conserve soil resources”.

Organic farmers attempt to incorporate the laws of natural ecosystems into both the farm design and their approach to

377

problem solving. Three principles are described here to illustrate how an organic farm functions within an ecological framework.

The principle of interdependency The most important principle that underlies organic agriculture was stated simply by the German scientist and poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. "In living nature nothing happens which is unconnected to the whole." We are just beginning to understand the extent of this interconnectedness. For example, only recently have scientists discovered the extent to which global climate is regulated by an intricate web of mutually‐dependent life forms, of which humans are a part. The organic farmer regards the farm unit as an ecosystem and recognizes that a change to one part of the system may upset the many complex interrelationships that exist within the unit, which in turn can have repercussions beyond the farm boundaries. For example, high nitrogen levels in the soil often stimulates heavy weed growth and can contaminate the groundwater with nitrates. The organic farmer addresses the problem by planting a crop that will utilize the nitrogen, preventing it from leaching into the groundwater and creating a more normal balance of soil nutrients.

The principle of diversity Natural ecosystems have a diverse, intricate web of life that establishes checks and balances which suppress outbreaks of pest species. Organic farmers are aware that, because of labor requirements and resource limitations, it is not practical to copy the diversity of a natural system. They achieve a compromise by using complex rotations with a variety of crops, by maintaining natural habitats on the farm, and by limiting livestock numbers so that the balance between crops and livestock is maintained. The diversity of crops and livestock gives the organic farmer flexibility and a diverse income (for example, if conditions one year are unfavorable for one crop, another crop or livestock operation will usually do well). The diversity also creates an ecosystem that has biological checks and balances that help prevent any one species of insect, weed or disease from becoming a problem. • [photo: Natural habitats are an important part of an organic farm]

The principle of recycling Natural ecosystems are characterized by a continual growth, decay and recycling of nutrients. Through the process of photosynthesis, the primary producers ‐‐ the green plants ‐‐ use solar energy to

378

convert carbon dioxide, water and soil nutrients into carbohydrates and proteins. Plants are eaten by herbivores and insects, which are in turn consumed by carnivores or predators. The nutrients that have been incorporated into the bodies of these organisms will be recycled by the actions of the decomposers ‐‐ the bacteria, actinomycetes and fungi ‐‐ most of which operate in the upper layers of the soil. The organic farm cannot entirely duplicate the natural ecosystem, but the organic farmer uses the natural system as a model and works towards self‐sufficiency on the farm by recycling the nutrients on the farm. Plant and animal residues are returned to the soil to help build biological fertility, thereby minimizing the quantity of soil amendments that must be purchased. Finally, and central to the principles of organic farming, is the concept that the productivity of the farm starts with the soil. A well‐ balanced and biologically‐active soil will provide the crop with sufficient nutrients for optimum growth and yields, with a minimum of pest and disease problems. Photo: Principles of organic agriculture

B 1.4. The Productivity of Organic Farming A study published in 1990 made "two hundred and five comparisons ... of yields from organic and conventional farming systems..... Data from 26 crops and two animal products, in the form of the ratio of organic to conventional yields, were normally distributed with a mean of 0.91, a standard deviation of 0.24 and a modal value between 0.8 and 0.9. More than one‐half of the comparisons of milk production and bean yields had ratios greater than 1.0, i.e. higher yields from organic than conventional systems. There was no evidence to show that the organic systems had any effect on year‐to‐year variability in yield, either climate‐induced or caused by any transitional or conversion effects." The study also discussed procedural difficulties in comparing the productivity of organic with other farming systems. or 95~100%, A US survey published in 2001 analyzed 150 growing seasons of data on grain and soybean crops and concluded that organic yields were 95~100% of conventional yields. A study spanning two decades was published in 2002 and found a 20% smaller yield from organic farms using 50% less fertilizer, 97% less pesticide, and energy input was 34% to 53% lower. A 2003 study found that during drought years, organic farms can have yields 20‐40% higher than conventional farms. Organic farms are more profitable in the drier states of the United States, likely due to their superior drought performance.

379

Organic farms survive hurricane damage much better, retaining 20 to 40% more topsoil and smaller economic losses at highly significant levels than their neighbors. A study published in 2005 compared conventional cropping, organic animal‐based cropping, and organic legume‐based cropping on a test farm at the Rodale Institute over 22 years. The study found that "the crop yields for corn and soybeans were similar in the organic animal, organic legume, and conventional farming systems". It also found that "significantly less fossil energy was expended to produce corn in the Rodale Institute’s organic animal and organic legume systems than in the conventional production system. There was little difference in energy input between the different treatments for producing soybeans. In the organic systems, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides were generally not used". As of 2013 the Rodale study was ongoing and a thirty year anniversary report was published by Rodale in 2012. A 2007 study compiling research from 293 different comparisons into a single study to assess the overall efficiency of the two agricultural systems has concluded that "organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base." The researchers also found that while in developed countries, organic systems on average produce 92% of the yield produced by conventional agriculture, organic systems produce 80% more than conventional farms in developing countries, because the materials needed for organic farming are more accessible than synthetic farming materials to farmers in some poor countries. This study was strongly contested by another study published in 2008 which stated, and was entitled, "Organic agriculture cannot feed the world" and said that the 2007 came up with "a major overestimation of the productivity of OA" "because data are misinterpreted and calculations accordingly are erroneous." Diagram and Photo: Productivity of organic agriclture

B 1.5. The Economics of Organic Farming The economics of organic farming, a subfield of agricultural economics, encompasses the entire process and effects of organic farming in terms of human society, including social costs, opportunity costs, unintended consequences, information asymmetries, and economies of scale. Although the scope of economics is broad, agricultural economics tends to focus on maximizing yields and efficiency at the farm level. Economics takes an anthropocentric approach to the value of the natural world: biodiversity, for

380

example, is considered beneficial only to the extent that it is valued by people and increases profits. Some entities such as the European Union subsidize organic farming, in large part because these countries want to account for the externalities of reduced water use, reduced water contamination, reduced soil erosion, reduced carbon emissions, increased biodiversity, and assorted other benefits that result from organic farming. Traditional organic farming is labor and knowledge‐intensive whereas conventional farming is capital‐intensive, requiring more energy and manufactured inputs. Organic farmers in California have cited marketing as their greatest obstacle. Photo: Economics of organic farming

B 1.6. The Global Environment Organic farming helps prevent topsoil erosion, improves soil fertility, protects groundwater, and conserves energy. There is evidence of drawbacks linked to current popular practices: 1) Nearly 40% of the world’s agricultural land is seriously degraded, undermining both present and future production capacity, according to scientists at the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Land degradation can have significant on‐ and off‐site effects on income and environmental quality, and can take a number of forms, including soil nutrient depletion, agrochemical pollution, and soil erosion. 2) In a study published in Science, scientists headed by University of Minnesota ecologist David Tilman concluded that continued expansion of the industrial farming model for the next few decades "has the potential to have massive, irreversible environmental impacts." Extrapolating past trends in land, irrigation and agrochemical use and assuming a human population that is wealthier and 50% larger than currently, scientists predicted that in 50 years, there would be a 2.4 to 2.7‐fold increase in nitrogen‐ and phosphorus‐driven eutrophication of terrestrial, fresh water and near‐shore marine ecosystems, seriously degrading biodiversity and fishery yields. The study also concluded that humans and other organisms would be exposed to markedly elevated levels of pesticides. A global survey of groundwater pollution shows that a toxic brew of pesticides, nitrogen fertilizers, industrial chemicals, and heavy metals is fouling groundwater everywhere. "Groundwater contamination is an irreversible act that will deprive future generations of one of life’s basic resources," according to Payal Sampat in a Worldwatch paper.

381

Groundwater contamination is already widespread, from high levels of pesticides in wells in California’s San Joaquin Valley to excessive nitrates in groundwater in four northern Chinese provinces. The paper notes that in China’s Yunnan Province, farmers are trying to address the problem by eliminating the use of fungicides and planting more diverse varieties of the grain.

There is much evidence that organic can help counteract such detrimental effects: 1) Reiterating the value of organic agriculture, a report from the July 2000 FAO Regional Conference for Europe pointed out that organic farming can help reduce ground and surface water contamination, and can safeguard drinking water supplies. 2) Organically grown crops use less fossil energy than conventional crops, according to findings from a 21‐year field trial initiated by the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) in Switzerland. Begun in 1978 in Therwil, Switzerland, the DOK trial compares the consequences of organic, biodynamic, and conventional farming systems in a randomized plot trial.

3) Organic methods are as efficient, economical and financially competitive as conventional methods, and better for the soil and the environment, according to a report documenting findings from The Rodale Institute’s long‐term Farming Systems Trial™ comparing crops under conventional and organic management. A report looking at the first 15 years of the trial shows that after a transitional period of about four years, crops grown under organic systems yield as well as, and sometimes better than, those grown conventionally. In years of drought, organic systems can actually out‐ produce conventional systems. In addition, organic systems showed significant ability to absorb and retain carbon, raising the possibility that agricultural practices might play a role in reducing the impact of global warming.

4) In Germany, several water utilities now pay farmers to switch to organic operations because such conversion costs less than removing farm chemicals used in conventional agriculture from water supplies.

382

B 1.7. Climate change and Organic Agriculture Organic agriculture emphasizes closed nutrient cycles, biodiversity, and effective soil management providing the capacity to mitigate and even reverse the effects of climate change. Organic agriculture can decrease fossil fuel emissions and, like any well managed agricultural system, sequesters carbon in the soil. The elimination of synthetic nitrogen in organic systems decreases fossil fuel consumption by 33% and carbon sequestration takes CO2 out of the atmosphere by putting it in the soil in the form of organic matter which is often lost in conventionally managed soils. Carbon sequestration occurs at especially high levels in organic no‐till managed soil. Agriculture has been undervalued and underestimated as a means to combat global climate change. Soil carbon data show that regenerative organic agricultural practices are among the most effective strategies for mitigating CO2emissions. However, critics of organic farming methods believe that the increased land needed to farm organic food could potentially destroy the rainforests and wipe out many ecosystems.

B 1.8. The sustainability of organic farming

Natural biotopes, species and landscape Many organic farmers will take good care of natural biotopes and species on their farm, because they feel it is right, but also because the farm system benefits predators, antagonists. However, they don't have to. In many countries there is no formal requirement to maintain natural habitats and landscape features or take special measures for species. When organic farming grows further, there may be more farmers who shift to organic purely for economic reasons, with no eye for nature. In my country there are large organic farms, which look the same as conventional farms. They cause much less pollution, they will support more insect life, but they do not contribute much to wildlife preservation. Mechanical weeding in the spring is very damaging to bird's nests. Changes to cropping patterns have impacts, e.g. loss of winter stubble to winter crops leads to fewer skylarks. Message: organic farming is always better for soil‐biodiversity, often better for nature surrounding the farm, often better for landscape. But conventional farms will often score higher on nature conservation and landscape if they participate in special agri‐ environment schemes. Organic farms are, therefore, NOT the top of the bill for nature and landscape.

383

Energy and greenhouse gas emissions Organic farming uses much less energy per hectare than conventional farms. The input of fuels is generally somewhat higher due to mechanical weeding. However, this is more than compensated by the fact that no fertilisers and pesticides are used, the production of which costs large amounts of energy. In glasshouses, the difference is less marked; per unit of production energy use is even higher in organic greenhouses. There currently are no international standards for organic greenhouse production, although there are moves towards such standards in the UK and the Netherlands.

Transport A forgotten element in the calculation of energy use is transport. Transport of raw materials and farm produce will remain a large environmental impact of organic farming. The aim is or course to close cycles, i.e. to bring inputs, production and consumption closer together. But there will be quite some transport of fodder, possibly also of manure. Farm produce is increasingly exported. Hungary exports 90% of its organic production. The Netherlands sells 70% of its vegetable production elsewhere in Europe. Consumers can buy apples from Argentina, Israel, South Africa. It is clear that the net environmental gain of such a purchase is negative. Naturally, buying a conventionally grown apple from South Africa is worse. But my message is: organic products are not automatically green.

Water use Organic farmers will usually be modest in using water. Irrigation may also be less necessary, as the plants are deeply rooted. But a vegetable farmer in central Spain converting to organic production still has a big negative impact on the environment if he continues to grow water‐dependent crops, using up limited resources of groundwater.

Animal welfare Animals on organic farms have a much better life than those on conventional farms. It is all the more regretful that once they leave the farm, they are often treated exactly the same as "regular" farm animals. They suffer the same stress, the same transport, the same treatment in slaughterhouses. Photo: Animal welfare

Dealing with the environmental impact It is clear that the image of organic farming being green should be supported and further developed. Therefore, it is important to

384

further reduce the environmental and animal welfare impacts. A few suggestions: ‐ Organic standards should take up some of these issues, either compulsory or as guidelines. Energy use and waste production in greenhouse horticulture are clear examples of where new standards are needed.

‐ Sustainable water use is generally dependent on the regional situation. Therefore, it should be subject to regional or national environmental and planning law. Regional governments and national organic standards can prescribe of stimulate certain types of crops in certain regions. On the produce side this is also true, but that will be difficult. In the end it is more desirable to increase exports of organic than of conventional products. But PR should be honest in the message, not claiming great environmental benefits for product transported by plane.

‐ The animal welfare issue related to transport of live animals can effectively be addressed by further regionalisation. The EU regulation sets a ceiling at 4hours or 300km of transport of live animals. This benefits the local economy and prevent spread of animal diseases.

‐ Landscape and nature. It is recommended that some of these become compulsory. But it is as important that such activities are shaped so that they can be compensated under agri‐environment measures.

B 1.9. World trends in Organic Agriculture As organic farming becomes a major commercial force in agriculture, it is likely to gain increasing impact on national agricultural policies and confront some of the scaling challenges faced by conventional agriculture. Growth of organic farmland since 2000

385

The World of Organic Agriculture 2008 • Global turnover with organic products 2006: almost 40 billion US Dollars in 2006

• 69 countries have a regulation, 21 are drafting

• one more than 468 certifiers

• organic wild collection area: more than 33 million hectares

Worldwide Organic • 30.4 million hectares of agricultural land are managed organically

• 12.4 million hectares are in Australia

• Growth in all continents

386

Organic land area: Europe

387

Organic Farming in Developing Countries • 8.8 million hectares are in developing countries (Countries on the DAC List)

• This is almost a third of the world organic land

• Only few developing countries have more than 1% share of the agricultural land

• Export is a major activity; this is also reflected in the land use pattern: Permanent crops (coffee, tropical crops) and permanent grassland (meat from Latin America) play an important role

388

United States

 Organic food is the fastest growing sector of the American food industry.

 Organic food sales have grown by 17 to 20 percent a year in the early 2000s while sales of conventional food have grew only about 2 to 3 percent a year. The US organic market grew 9.5% in 2011, breaking the $30bn barrier for the first time, and continued to outpace sales of non‐organic food.

 In 2003 organic products were available in nearly 20,000 natural food stores and 73% of conventional grocery stores.

 Organic products accounted for 3.7% of total food and beverage sales, and 11.4% of all fruit and vegetable sales in the year 2009.

 As of 2003, two thirds of organic milk and cream and half of organic cheese and yogurt are sold through conventional supermarkets.

 As of 2012, most independent organic food processors in the USA had been acquired by multinational firms.

Canada

 Organic food sales surpassed $1 billion in 2006, accounting for 0.9% of food sales in Canada.  Organic food sales by grocery stores were 28% higher in 2006 than in 2005.  British Columbians account for 13% of the Canadian population, but purchased 26% of the organic food sold in Canada in 2006.

Austria

 In 2011, 7.4% of all food products sold in Austrian supermarkets (including discount stores) were organic. In 2007, 8,000 different organic products were available.

389

Italy

 Since 2000, the use of some organic food is compulsory in Italian schools and hospitals. A 2002 law of the Emilia Romagna region implemented in 2005, explicitly requires that the food in nursery and primary schools (from 3 months to 10 years) must be 100% organic, and the food in meals at schools, universities and hospitals must be at least 35% organic.

Poland

 In 2005 7 percent of Polish consumers buy food that was produced according to the EU‐Eco‐regulation. The value of the organic market is estimated at 50 million Euros (2006).

Romania

 70%~80% of the local organic production, amounting to 100 million Euros in 2010, is exported. The organic products market grew to 50 million Euros in 2010.

Ukraine

 In 2009 Ukraine was in 21st place in the world by area under cultivation of organic food. Much of its production of organic food is exported and not enough organic food is available on the national market to satisfy the rapidly increasing demand. The size of the internal market demand for organic products in Ukraine was estimated at over 5 billion euros in 2011, with rapid growth projected for this segment in the future. Multiple surveys show that the majority of the population of Ukraine is willing to pay more to buy organic food. On the other hand, many Ukrainians have traditionally maintained their own garden plots, and this may result in underestimation of how much organically produced food is actually consumed in Ukraine.

 The Law on Organic Production was passed by Ukraine's parliament in April of 2011, which in addition to traditional demands for certified organic

390

food also banned the use of GMOs or any products containing GMOs. However, the law was not signed by the President of Ukraine and in September of 2011 it was repealed by the Verkhovna Rada itself. Attempts to pass a new law on organic food production took place throughout 2012.

United Kingdom

 Organic food sales increased from just over £100 million in 1993/94 to £1.21 billion in 2004 (an 11% increase on 2003). In 2010, the UK sales of organic products fell 5.9% to £1.73 billion. 86% of households buy organic products, the most popular categories being dairies (30.5% of sales) and fresh fruits and vegetables (23.2% of sales). 4.2% of UK farmland is organically managed.

Cuba

 After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, agricultural inputs that had previously been purchased from Eastern bloc countries were no longer available in Cuba, and many Cuban farms converted to organic methods out of necessity Consequently, organic agriculture is a mainstream practice in Cuba, while it remains an alternative practice in most other countries. Although some products called organic in Cuba would not satisfy certification requirements in other countries (crops may be genetically modified, for example), Cuba exports organic citrus and citrus juices to EU markets that meet EU organic standards. Cuba's forced conversion to organic methods may position the country to be a global supplier of organic products.

391

B 2 What is Organic Food

Organic food is about more than just a label. It is about methods of farming and food production which are kind to the environment, concerned for animal welfare and thought to be healthier for humans to eat. If you buy organic food you are helping to support a system which benefits you, the farmer or processor producing it, the animals raised on farms and the countryside. Here are some common questions and answers about organic food:

Q. Is organic food really more healthy? A. Some studies say ‘yes’, others say ‘not necessarily’. So far there is little conclusive scientific evidence. One good example is that research has shown that organic milk contains almost two‐thirds more omega 3 fatty acids, which are good for unborn children and may combat heart disease and the effects of arthritis.

Q. Does organic food actually taste better? A. Anecdotally, most people will say a resounding ‘yes’. It’s a point that is hard for scientists to prove though, because it’s so subjective. You have to decide for yourself.

Q. Does organic production benefit farmers? A. Yes – in many ways. Lots of farmers say they feel empowered by organic systems, which make them use their brains (not chemicals) to solve problems. Because there are only very limited pesticides allowed in organics, farm workers should be at less risk from exposure to chemicals. Growing organic produce can also open up new markets for farmers.

Q. Why is organic farming better for animals? A. The welfare of animals is one of the key principles of organic farming and their well‐being is written into the regulations organic producers must follow. Animals are held at lower stocking densities than non‐organic and must have access to the outdoors (weather permitting) and an appropriate diet at all times. While organic systems aim to avoid using antibiotics in animals, they are allowed (in fact, required) if the health or welfare of the animal is at risk or they are the only way to restore its full health. While on antibiotics, and for a period afterwards, that animal’s product must not be sold as organic. This withdrawal period for organic products is twice as long as that for non‐organic ones.

392

Q. Are ‘organic’ animals ‘free range’? A. Yes, but with even more benefits. All animals raised organically are automatically free‐range because the rules demand it. They must have access to the outdoors (weather permitting) and be held below certain stocking densities. In addition, there are all the other benefits of the organic system, explained throughout this document.

Q. Can organic food contain genetically modified (GM) elements? A. Genetic modification of plants and animals goes against the principles of organic food and farming. No GM inputs are allowed in the organic system and if they are found in produce it cannot be sold as organic.

Q. Why is organic farming better for the countryside? A. Organic farming uses less intensive methods to produce food and encourages diversity of wildlife. Reports have shown that, for instance, certain types of bird are starting to flourish around organic farms. Strict controls on the types of pesticides, and when they can be used, drastically reduces the leaching of harmful elements into water courses and damage to wildlife (insects, for example). Organic farmers use effective systems of crop rotation to improve soil fertility and remove pests and disease

Q. Can organic farmers use pesticides and other chemicals? A. Only a limited list of pesticides is approved for use in organic farming, where there are no natural or system‐based alternatives, and then as a last resort. Organic farmers do not use herbicides, instead they rely on crop rotation, well‐timed cultivation, hand or mechanical weeding and carefully selecting crop varieties.

Q. Do organic farmers use antibiotics on their animals? A. Not routinely, as can be the case in other types of farming. Instead organic farmers try to use holistic methods wherever possible. However, if antibiotics are necessary, on the advice of a vet, to prevent or reduce an animal’s suffering, or to return it to full health, they must be given. The welfare of the animal becomes the main concern. While on antibiotics, and for a period afterwards, that animal’s product must not be sold as organic. This withdrawal period for organic products is twice as long as that for non‐organic ones.

Q. Why does organic food cost more? A. The shelf or farm gate price of organic food is higher for a number of very good reasons. It costs more to produce because it is

393

more labour intensive, crops are grown less often in the same piece of ground and animals are held at lower stocking densities, for their well‐being. The careful controls placed on organic production (including the licensing system) add to the costs of production and organic source materials, such as seeds and animal feeds, cost more than non‐organic versions. But we should always bear in mind that organic farming does not have costly environmental impacts, such as the expense of cleaning up polluted water courses and treating drinking water to remove chemicals used in non‐organic production

Q. Where is the best place to buy organic produce? A. Organic food is now widely available and where you buy it is a matter for you. If you can get it from a local farmer, who perhaps runs a box delivery scheme, you will be helping them to make a decent living (no middlemen taking a big cut), cutting down on environmentally harmful packaging, reducing the road or air miles food has to travel and generally supporting your community. However, we recognise that supermarkets have good ranges of organic food and are convenient for many people.

Q. Can anyone just claim to be an organic producer? A. Definitely not. Organic is the only system of farming in the UK which must meet legal requirements to use the name. Anyone calling their product organic must be inspected and certified by a body like Organic Farmers & Growers. When they are licensed, organic products must show a certification number on the label. Anyone claiming to be organic who does not have a license is breaking the law. Imported goods will carry the mark of the certification body of the country in which they were produced.

Q. Isn’t organic farming just an old‐fashioned way of doing things? A. The answer to this is ‘yes and no’. Organic farming draws on thousands of years of farming knowledge and experience, instead of relying on chemicals created in the last fifty years or so. Farmers have to be creative in solving problems and in the ways they market their produce. So, in many ways, organics are at the cutting edge of farming and food sales and setting an example for a sustainable future. Old techniques are combined with the latest research and scientific backing.

Q. Is organic produce better than that from non‐organic farms? A. Most non‐organic farmers also care about the countryside and the welfare of their animals and it would be unfair to suggest

394

otherwise. However, we think that organic methods take care for the environment, animals and the end product to an even higher level, giving the consumer the choice to eat food produced in this sustainable way.

Q. Does organic food carry greater risks of food poisoning? A. Organic food must meet all of the safety and quality standards applied to non‐organic foods. Critics of organic farming sometimes claim that because organic farmers use farmyard manure, there is a greater risk of pathogen contamination on organic crops. However, farmyard manure is also extensively used in non‐organic farming, but with less strict controls than are applied to organic methods. It has also been claimed that because organic farms don’t routinely use antibiotics this allows bacteria (particularly E.coli) into the food chain. But research has shown that overuse of antibiotics may have resulted in resistant strains of E.coli in non‐organic production. There is evidence to suggest that organic animals build up a natural resistance to these bacteria.

B 3 Why Buy Organic

It’s smart for natural environment Certified organic farmers are committed to maintaining standards which protect the health of land, air, water, animals, wildlife, and people. • Certified Organic food is grown and raised in ways that resp ect natural environment. • Healthy soil, wise use of water, and a balanced farm ecosyste m are hallmarks of organic agriculture. That means cleaner air, safer drinking water and healthier food chains around the world.

It’s health‐wise for you and your family Organic food is grown without synthetic herbicides, pesticides, hormones, or genetically modified organisms (GMOs). And that may mean it has long‐term health benefits for you and your family. For example, a 2003 study from the University of Washington showed that children eating mainly organic food had less exposure to organophosphorus pesticide residues, which may be linked with neurological and growth problems.

395

It tastes great! From Sooke Harbour House to Bishops and other fine restaurants around the world, today’s top chefs seek organic food for outstanding flavour and quality. They’re not alone ‐ over half of current organic consumers also believe organic food tastes better, according to Synovate Research. Even some scientists conclude that organic food is tastier. A six‐year study conducted by Washington State University soil scientist John Reganold found that organically grown apples tasted noticeably sweeter. The study was published in the respected British journal, Nature, in April 2001. Photo: Great taste in organic fruit Photo: Great taste in organic vegetable

It’s animal‐friendly Certified organic meat, dairy and poultry products come from farms following strict standards for the humane treatment of animals. Organically‐raised animals are fed a certified organic diet. They are never fed the by‐products of other animals, and never given artificial hormones. And, for a farm to be certified, its animals must be allowed outside for fresh air and exercise. The result? Some certified organic milk cows have a productive life expectancy two or three times that of their commercial counterparts! Photo: Animal welfare

Guaranteed Goodness Organic food is purely natural ‐ grown without artificial chemicals, hormones, or genetically modified or engineered organisms (GMOs). It is grown by farmers who care about the health of land, air, water, animals, wildlife, and people. Certified organic farmers are committed to maintaining these standards, and have the verification to show they uphold their commitment. Photo: Organic food with non‐GMO

Join a growing movement The fact is, over 50% of European and North Americans now buy organic food some or all of the time. The majority of organic shoppers purchase their organic foods at mainstream grocery stores, although farmer’s markets and other direct‐to‐consumer sales continue to be important sources for regular and frequent organic consumers.

396

Nationally, MAFF Korea estimates organic retail sales will grow by 30~35% a year.

B 4 Why Choose Organic Why choose organic food over conventional food?

Organic Food: - optimizes the health of plants, animals (including your pets) and people. - is produced without the use of artificial pesticides, antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers and is hormone free. - is not genetically modified. - has a larger amount of beneficial vitamins, minerals, essential fatty acids and antioxidants. - has the potential to lower incidences of common conditions such as heart disease and allergies. - may taste better than conventional, but this is up to each individual to decide on.

Organic Farming: - saves energy. Conventional farming uses more petroleum than any other single industry; consuming 12% of the country's energy supply. - involves humane treatment to animals. Animals are usually raised free‐range and never confined to overcrowded feed pens.

B 5 Feeding the Soil

B 5.1 Green Manure

A green manure cover crop, or plowdown crop, is any crop that is turned into the soil to add organic matter, nitrogen or other nutrients.

397

B 5.1.1 Advantages of green manure crops

• Green manures, in the case of legumes, fix nitrogen and contribute to farm nitrogen needs. • Green manure crops help discourage the growth of weeds. The slow release of mineralized nitrogen from green manures favors the crop rather than the weeds. • Green manures tend to be vigorous plants that can out‐compete weeds and effectively displace them from their ecological niche. • When green manures are turned into the soil and decompose, they provide nutrition for soil organisms, thus protecting and enhancing the soil’s biological activity. • The root mass of a green manure crop loosens and aerates the soil, consequently improving the soil structure. • The roots and top growth maintain or increase the organic matter content of the soil, which improves soil tilth. Green manure crops cover the soil in between successive grain crops, thus protecting the soil against wind and water erosion. As little as 30% ground cover will significantly reduce soil losses in winter. • The rooting activity of green manures facilitates drainage in wet areas, and the shading and mulching restricts soil moisture evaporation which is particularly useful in dry conditions. However, this advantage needs to be balanced with the loss of moisture that can result from transpiration in drier climates. • Green manure crops reduce soil compaction. They lessen the impact of rainfall and vehicle traffic. • Green manures soak up potentially‐leachable nutrients thus tightening up the on‐farm nutrient cycle. The nutrients are then held by the green manure until it is turned under. During decomposition, the nutrients will be released to the following crop. • Green manure crops provide a habitat for pollinators and other beneficial insects Photo: Green manure Photo: Soil incorporation

B 5.1.2 Considerations The choice of green manure and whether to seed a green manure must also take into account the following factors: • Seed cost and availability vary considerably. For example, red clover is inexpensive, imported hairy vetch seed is currently more costly, requiring an investment of $20‐30/acre because of increasing demand and lack of availability. Oilradish seed is less expensive and with a seeding rate of 17 kg/ha, cost is not

398

prohibitive. Many farmers are producing their own seed to reduce costs. • Seeding, maintenance and incorporation requires extra time, labor and fuel. • Green manures may harbor pests and plant disease so a good rotation should be followed. For example, do not grow a cruciferous green manure if growing main crops of the same family. Also note that some diseases such as white mould (Schlerotinia) can have several host families such as crucifers, beans and sunflowers. • Some cover crops are difficult to turn under and may require repeated tillage which will accelerate organic decomposition and soil erosion. An example is rye which has a heavy residue and should be incorporated fairly early in its growth to avoid this problem. • While the green manure residue decomposes, there may be a short period when nitrogen will be unavailable to the following crop. This may temporarily interfere with seeding. Waiting 2‐3 weeks before planting the main crop usually minimizes this problem. • Residue of any sort can become allelopathic to the following crop and may interfere with seed germination. Again, delaying planting will minimize this problem. • Living or winter‐killed green manure can retard spring soil‐ warming by acting as a mulch. This, in turn, can delay or retard growth of temperature‐sensitive crops such as corn. • Some green manure crops, such as oilradish and buckwheat will become a weed in the succeeding crop if they are allowed to set seed.

Questions are often raised about the feasibility of taking land out of production for a crop that will not bring direct revenue. Despite the lack of immediate financial gain from growing green manures, organic farmers consider this material an essential part of their farm ecosystem. Crop rotations are designed so that the green manure crops are grown in between cash crops, thus still gaining soil‐conserving benefits without detracting from the cash crops. Examples of practices that balance the needs of cash crops with green manures include: 1) Undersowing a green manure such as red clover with small grains. On the Prairies, yellow sweet clover is underseeded into cereals, flax and safflower. 2) Overseeding a green manure such as red clover or rye grass into corn at last cultivation. 3) Interseeding a crop such as hairy vetch into a maturing winter cereal stand.

399

Using these methods, the green manure does not compete with the crop but can get established and will continue to grow after the grain crop is harvested, at a time when the soil would otherwise be vulnerable to erosion and weed encroachment

B 5.1.3Green manure crop categories Green manures are referred to by a number of names, according to their primary function at any one time. But, green manures always perform a multitude of functions on the farm and when choosing which to grow, the more functions the green manure can perform, the better. 1) Cover crops 2) Catch crop / nutrient conserving crops 3) Break crops 4) N‐fixing green manures 5) Smother crops 6) Allelopathic crops 7) Bee habitat

Cover crops Cover crops protect the soil from wind and water erosion by covering it and, because they form a mulch, they greatly reduce annual weeds in the next growing season. They are frequently used to cover the soil over winter either alive or as a dead, dense mat. They can also be used in summer, especially when a crop fails because of adverse weather. Examples include red and sweet clover, hay or pasture seedings, hairy vetch, winter cereals and buckwheat. A volunteer crop seeded from harvest losses, can also be a cover crop. On the Prairies, organic farmers use annual legumes as cover crops for at least part of the season rather than leaving summer fallow bare. Indian Head lentils and Sirius peas have been developed for this purpose.

Catch crop / nutrient conserving crops A catch crop has a brief period of growth and is either worked in after the main crop has been taken off or planted between two main crops. The crop protects the soil from erosion and minimizes nutrient loss from the soil through leaching. Also, because it is not harvested, it can enrich the soil by adding organic matter, nitrogen or other nutrients. Examples of catch crops are oilradish, red clover and buckwheat. Applications of compost or liquid manure are made to catch crops which soak up a lot of nutrients and immobilize them in their tissues. These nutrients become available to the next crop in the rotation as the plant residues decompose. Farmers have found that

400

oilradish is particularly effective in storing nutrients. Within the forages, reed canary grass is good but it can be difficult to control, so rye or rye grass may be a better choice. Some rapidly growing catch crops are useful because they accumulate large amounts of organic matter in a short time. Again, oilradish is an good example; under ideal conditions, it is possible to yield 10 tons of green matter per acre, 45 days after seeding.

Photo: Catch crop

Break crops A green manure that breaks the life cycle of pests, weeds or diseases is know as a break crop. Effectiveness increases with the length or frequency of the breaks. The term is not commonly used but is a useful concept to remember when planning rotations.

N‐fixing green manures Legumes are the most important of the green manure crops. They fix nitrogen from the air, add organic matter to the soil and also enhance the cycling of phosphorus. Examples are red clover, alfalfa, sweet clover, vetch and most hay and pasture legume species. An additional benefit of the deep‐rooted alfalfa, vetch or sweet clovers is their ability to loosen compacted subsoils. Photo:N‐fixing green manure

Smother crops When a green manure is grown primarily to control weeds, it is called a smother crop. It is characterized by its extremely dense, vigorous and rapid growth and is usually chosen with specific weeds in mind. For example, fall rye is used against quack grass because its vigorous growth in spring coincides with the growth cycle of quack grass. Other examples of smother crops are oilradish, reportedly good against yellow nutsedge, and buckwheat.

Allelopathic crops Some crops produce natural chemical toxins which retard germination and inhibit the early growth of weed species. Examples are rye and yellow sweet clover.

Bee habitat Examples of green manures that provide good bee habitats are sweet clover and buckwheat.

401

B 5.1.4 Nutrient benefits of green manures Nutrients absorbed by green manure crops or those retained within crop residues after harvest, are gradually released or "mineralized" when the crop is incorporated into the soil and subsequently decomposes. The time when the nutrients will be released can be influenced by the C/N ratio, moisture content, particle size of the soil, method of incorporation, soil nitrogen levels and temperature

Nitrogen The ability of legumes to fix nitrogen from the air is invaluable. Alfalfa and sweet clover will probably fix more nitrogen than hairy vetch or red clover but the amount is variable dependent on several factors. About 30~50 per cent of this nitrogen is available to the next crop while much of the remainder is incorporated into the soil organic matter and is released gradually in succeeding years. Timing of plowdown will influence the total amount of nitrogen that is fixed. For example, if you plan to plow red clover in the fall, delay as late as possible as it continues to fix nitrogen until late October. A rule of thumb is that incorporating a vigorous stand of alfalfa will supply most of the nitrogen for a following crop of corn, however, the amount of nitrogen fixed will vary depending in the residual soil nitrogen. Legumes are "lazy" crops and prefer to take up their nitrogen from the soil rather than going through the energy‐ expensive process of nitrogen fixation. As available soil nitrogen levels increase with soil biological activity, the rate of nitrogen fixation is reduced. Some examples of nitrogen contributions reported by researchers include: 3‐year‐old stand of alfalfa ‐‐ 110 kg/ha red clover plowdown ‐‐ 45 kg/ha, 75 kg/ha hairy vetch ‐‐ 65 kg/ha yellow sweet clover ‐‐ 56 kg/ha, 140 kg/ha Rye, crucifer and grass crops can also absorb excess soluble nitrogen and other nutrients from the soil that would otherwise be lost to leaching. This not only improves soil nutrient efficiency, but also reduces nitrate contamination of groundwater. It should be noted that the N from the green crop can be leached out of a warm sandy soil if there is a long, wet period between incorporation of the green manure crop and the establishment of the the following crop.

Phosphorus Nitrogen‐fixing legumes, buckwheat and oilradish are very efficient at utilizing insoluble soil phosphorus, which is accumulated in their

402

tissues and made more accessible to the following crop. Green manures also accumulate potassium, calcium and micronutrients. If a green manure includes a high percentage of legumes, or if it is an immature green plant, the C/N ratio is narrow. Decomposition will be rapid, causing a swift release of carbon dioxide. This benefits crop growth and by producing carbonic acid, helps lower the pH of alkaline soils, increasing the availability of phosphates and micronutrients. Photo:Smother crops

B 5.1.5 Seeding Enough seed should be used to insure a complete cover. Generally a greater quantity should be used than would be needed under theoretically‐ideal conditions. When broadcasting rather than drilling, higher seeding rates are used. Higher rates should also be used when planting later than recommended, in a rough seed bed or in weedy or sloping erosion‐prone land. Rates for individual crops are recommended as followsings. • Alfalfa 11~17 kg/ha . • Buckwheat 55~110 kg/ha . • Hairy vetch 16~28 kg/ha • Oats 60~110 kg/ha • Oilradish 10~17 kg/ha . • Red clover DC 11~17 kg/ha • Rye 70~110 kg/ha For mixtures of legumes and non‐legumes, reduce the non‐legume rate by 50 per cent and the legume by 20~35 per cent.

B 5.1.6 Methods of incorporation The beneficial effect of the green manure crop on the following crop will depend upon the microbial activity in the soil when the green crop is incorporated, and whether there is sufficient air present in the soil for aerobic decomposition. Some farmers pre‐cut green manure while others simply incorporate it directly into the soil. 1) If the green manure is not pre‐cut, partially incorporate it int o the top few inches of the soil with a disc or chisel plow. 2) When there is lush growth, clip the green manure crop down to the root area.

B 5.2 Cover Crops The recipe for abundant harvests of nutritious and beautiful flowers, herbs and vegetables begins with high quality, organically‐

403

grown seeds and an adequate supply of water, sunlight and nutrients. Of course, a good dose of enthusiasm and hard work is necessary as well, but the real key to success rests with garden soil that is alive.

It All Begins with The Soil Living, breathing soil, containing organisms ranging from microscopic bacteria to eight‐inch long night crawlers is essential for sustaining healthy, vigorous plants. While there are many good organic fertilizers and foliar sprays such as our EarthJuice and Maxicrop that act primarily on the plants themselves, if we act on the time‐honored adage "feed the soil," we will discover that applying compost and growing cover crops are sustainable, effective, and inexpensive ways of building fertile soil and growing healthy crops. Gardeners who improve soil in this manner work in harmony with nature's complex cycles where the remains of decaying plants and animals are broken down and reabsorbed by living plants and animals. This circle of birth, death, and rebirth is the basis for all life on our planet.

Renewing and Protecting the Garden with Cover Crops Cover crops are plants that are grown specifically for soil improvement, contributing greatly to the overall health and beauty of the garden. Relatively easy to grow, cover crops accumulate nutrients in their tissues, die, decompose, and become nourishment for future plants. They can be harvested and turned directly into the soil, or added to a compost pile and later applied as finished compost. All that is required of us as gardeners and farmers is to prepare the soil to receive the seed of these humble plants. Nature does the rest. In addition to providing essential organic matter and nutrients, cover crops also provide protection from the detrimental effects of soil erosion and surface crusting. After fall harvest, bare gardens exposed to the damaging effects of wind and water often find their soil rapidly reduced to mere "dirt." Many crops such as winter rye, hairy vetch, and Austrian winter pea can be planted in late summer or early fall to create a protective mat of growth before winter dormancy. Early the following spring, when soil temperatures in many places are barely above freezing and the ground is a mix of thawing snow, ice and mud, these hardy cover crops resume active growth. It is during this spring period that cover crops established the previous year are particularly beneficial.

404

They not only continue to prevent soil erosion, but produce prodigious amounts of nutrient rich organic matter at a time when most garden space is unused. This fresh organic matter, when turned into the soil, sustains an active and richly diverse community of soil‐dwelling organisms including bacteria, actinomycetes, fungi, centipedes, springtails, mites, millipedes, spiders, beetles and earthworms... each of which perform very specific functions vital to higher plants, including: + Producing vitamins and other growth‐enhancing compounds + Transforming nitrogen from the air to a plant‐available form on the roots of legume plants + Increasing plant uptake of soil phosphorus + Controlling outbreaks of soil pathogens + Releasing carbon dioxide which is then absorbed by plants to form new plant tissue + Creating more soil aeration and distributing nutrients throughout the soil by means of tunneling and burrowing Cover crops are also a very effective way of suppressing weeds. For example, spring growth from an over‐wintered hairy vetch crop can prevent early season weeds such as mustard or quackgrass from getting established. During the summer, buckwheat can grow two feet tall in just a few weeks, leaving the ground underneath nearly weed‐free and in excellent condition for planting the next vegetable or flower crop. Cover crops also provide a ground cover throughout the year that prevents the loss of nutrients downward beyond the rooting zone. Nutrients captured by the cover crop can be used by the next crop. Cover crop roots also increase soil aeration and water‐holding capacity‐‐two of the most important physical properties of a healthy soil environment.

Choosing the Right Cover Crop There are hundreds of cover crop species. The selections we offer are among the most reliable and effective. All are widely adaptable and will enhance any garden ecology. A cover crop works best when it improves the soil and doesn't interfere with the garden's primary plants—flowers, herbs and vegetables. Perennial cover crops, which can occupy a piece of land for up to several years, are one of the most effective means of restoring soil health. However, many of us cannot afford to take land out of primary crop production for a long period of time. Instead, we can grow shorter term, annual cover crops that attain full growth within weeks or months.

405

Annual cover crops can be planted during three distinct time niches throughout the year: Early spring, summer, and late summer/mid‐ fall. Early spring plantings of fava beans, field peas and oats, for example, attain maximum growth by early to mid‐summer. These crops can then be cut and turned into the soil, left on the surface as a mulch in preparation for a fall crop (such as broccoli or lettuce), or made into compost. Cover crops that are planted during the summer, such as buckwheat, cowpea or sorghum, fill the second time niche. These crops have a role to play in‐between spring crops such as radishes, and fall crops such as lettuce. The third time niche starts with a late summer to mid‐fall planting of hairy vetch, winter pea, or rye, for example. These crops establish in the fall, go dormant during the winter, resume vigorous growth in the spring. They are then plowed under or cut for a surface mulch in late spring/early summer to make way for flowers, herbs and vegetables.

Successfully Integrating Cover Crops Into the Garden Through reading, experimentation, and observation, the creative gardener will learn many possible ways to work with cover crops. Some, such as rye, hairy vetch and clovers can be sown directly into a live, standing crop (e.g. corn, lettuce, cabbage) so that they become fully established ground covers by the time the first crop is harvested. Others that germinate and grow quickly, such as oats and buckwheat, may be used as nurse crops to shelter a succeeding crop planted directly into the cover crops. For example, buckwheat may be planted between hills of squash. Four to six weeks later, it can be cut and used as a mulch around the young plants. Overlapping life cycles of different plants allows for efficient use of space and time. Sometimes it works best to plant two or more cover crops together rather than a single species. For example, a mixture of rye and/or oats with hairy vetch will produce more organic matter than growing vetch alone. The rye or oats also act like a trellis for the vetch so that it will grow vertically and make cutting it easier. Once a cover crop has attained most or all of its growth, it can be managed in a variety of ways. Hairy vetch, for example, can be cut and plowed or forked under before it has reached full maturity to facilitate an early season planting of corn. For maximum organic matter and nitrogen contribution, however, you must wait for the vetch to begin blooming and cut it with a sharp knife, scythe, or sickle at the soil surface. The roots will release nitrogen below ground and the rest can be left as a nitrogen‐rich mulch into which

406

transplants can be set. Cover crops can also be harvested and added to the compost pile where their nutrient‐rich organic matter will transform into valuable compost

B 5.3. Compost – The Key to Living Soil Composting is the process by which raw organic materials are transformed, primarily by bacteria and fungi, into a stable, nutrient‐ rich substance known as humus. Humus is chemically complex, spongy, porous and retains a high concentration of essential nutrients that are readily accessible to the roots of plants. Humus occurs naturally when plant and animal remains in marshes, forests, and grasslands break down over the span of centuries. Humans can hasten this process by constructing piles of various organic materials, and providing adequate moisture and aeration. Replenishing our soils with mature compost (i.e. humus) is the best way of building long‐term soil fertility and ensuring an abundant harvest. Compost improves virtually all physical, chemical, and biological conditions of the soil. High‐quality compost helps create healthy, living soil teeming with earthworms, microbes and a vast array of available nutrients that produce robust plants resistant to pests and diseases. Compost‐created humus provides plant roots with the proper combination of nutrients without overwhelming them with any particular one; something which frequently occurs with soluble chemical fertilizers. Compost also contains essential trace minerals that plants need. And it is an excellent way of recycling organic materials. Some of the other advantages offered by composting are: + Certain elements, particularly nitrogen, can leach out of a plant's root zone. Fortunately, the robust microbial communities present in compost stabilize nitrogen (as well as phosphorus and sulfur) in their bodies. When compost is added to the garden, these organisms die and slowly release nitrogen back to the plants. + The addition of organic matter through composting increases the soil's ability, particularly those with a sandy texture, to act like a sponge and retain water. Runoff and soil erosion are reduced. + The structure of clay soils is improved. Compost adds airspaces and loose, crumb‐like aggregates, which prevent soil clumping. During the composting process, when temperatures in the pile reach 130 to 140 degrees F, most soil pathogens and viable weed seeds are eliminated.

407

+ Finally, there is nothing else quite as satisfying as holding good compost in your hands, smelling its rich, earthy smell and then turning it into your garden, knowing that you are giving your soil the gift of life.

Photo: Compost file Photo: Composting process

Combining Science and Art in the Compost Pile Composting is somewhat of an alchemical practice. While many techniques exist, there are some basic steps common to all composting situations. + Organic materials are collected and stacked in layers that alternate carbon‐rich matter (straw, leaves, sawdust, pine needles, corn stalks, dried weeds) with nitrogen‐rich matter (freshly‐cut cover crops, kitchen scraps, grass clippings, fresh weeds, manure from herbivores). + Carbon is the primary energy source for micro‐organisms while nitrogen is the building block for proteins which provide the structure for microbial cells. The most active fermentation occurs when the raw ingredients' carbon to nitrogen ratio is about 25:1. + Add soil to enhance decomposition and to reduce any unpleasant odors. It is important to turn the pile occasionally with a fork and to keep it moist in order to maintain a high level of biological activity. + Avoid composting meat, dairy products, and any materials such as sewage sludge, kitty litter and leather wastes that may contain pathogens or toxins.

There are two main phases in the composting process: a "hot" and a "cold" phase. In the hot phase, initial decomposition is aerobic (requiring oxygen). As bacteria begin consuming raw organic material, their population rapidly increases and large amounts of carbon dioxide are released. This generates heat, which destroys harmful pathogens and many weed seeds. In the hot phase, which lasts a few days or a week, steam can often be seen rising off the compost pile on a cool morning.

The compost pile becomes partially anaerobic (without oxygen) and temperatures drop during the cold phase as various bacterial species transform the raw organic material into stable humus. A large portion of the original organic material has been converted to carbon dioxide at this point, while the remaining material has collapsed into a much more compact pile, eliminating most of the

408

air spaces. Further decomposition is now carried out by fungi, earthworms, and actinomycetes—microorganisms with unique antibiotic properties.

Getting Started A compost pile can be started anytime, even in winter, although materials will decompose much more quickly in warm weather. The amount of time it takes for compost to be ready for the garden varies from two months to two years depending on the type of raw materials and inoculant used, the amount of water and air present, the frequency of turning the pile, and weather conditions. Bio‐ intensive agriculture advocates adding large amounts of soil to the compost pile to activate decomposition. Our Rugged Composter and Compost Tumbler provide ideal solutions for suburban gardeners and for expeditiously making small batches of quality compost. You also might like to explore the fascinating world of vermiculture with our worm farm.

Monitoring the Compost + Whatever method you adopt, it is important to consistently monitor the pile. + If it is not heating up, add more nitrogenous material. + A compost pile may also not heat up because it is too dry. + If it is too wet, it lacks air and should be turned. + If the pile smells of ammonia, it has too much nitrogen and needs more carbonaceous material. + Use a Compost Thermometer and prevent your pile's temperature to exceed 140 degrees Fahrenheit as beneficial microorganisms will begin to be destroyed. Turn your pile before this happens.

Finished, Mature Compost Is a Wonder to Behold It is a perfectly balanced fertilizer with an ideal ratio of carbon to nitrogen. You can add it to the garden in any amount without burning your plants or poisoning the soil. Our gardens gain the greatest benefit when we apply compost to cover crops. The combination of compost and cover crops produces the very best fertilizer for our plants, an elegantly simple, effective means of enlivening our soils and ensuring a successful garden.

409

B 6 Manure Management and Composting

Manure is a valuable resource on an organic farm. Livestock are inefficient in extracting nutrients from feedstuffs; typically, 75~90 per cent of major nutrients that are fed to livestock pass directly through the animal into the manure. The extent to which these nutrients can be returned to the soil and made available to subsequent crops will depend on the way the manure is stored and handled. Organic farmers rarely apply raw manure to their fields; they use composted manure. The composting process imitates the decomposition of organic matter on the surface layer of the soil to turn raw manure into humus. Composted manure slowly releases its nutrients into the soil, enhancing the soil microbiological life, whereas the highly‐soluble nutrients in raw manure are quickly leached away and can damage both the soil biology and the crop. Standards for organic production allow the use of manure that has been stacked and aged for at least six months unless it has been brought in from off the farm, in which case composting is required. Raw manure can also be used but only on perennials or crops not for human consumption. Raw and aged manure should be spread when the soil is warm enough (i.e., when plants are growing) for the micro‐organisms to be active.

B 6.1 Composting

Composting is the process of decomposing organic matter, whether manure, crop residue or municipal wastes, by a mixed microbial population in a warm, moist aerobic environment. The organic matter is decomposed by the successive action of bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes. In the final stages of decomposition, redworms assist in the production of stable humus which is the final stage of the composting process. Young compost that has not reached the stable humus stage, will be high in effective humus and available nutrients but low in stable, colloidal humus. Mature compost, which is close to the final decomposition stage, will have a higher proportion of stable humus, and will be considerably reduced in bulk. Compost at various stages, from young to fully‐aged, may be used according to the needs of the soil and the crop. The nutritive and other benefits of the material will depend very much on the source materials, the conditions under which it was made and the maturity of the compost when it is applied. Young or

410

medium compost will encourage biological activity in the soil. Mature compost will make a greater contribution to soil organic matter levels and soil structure. In general, however, the process results in a net improvement to soil fertility, compared to an application of manure. For example, a field application of 30t of farmyard manure might supply 3t of stable humus after a 4~5 year breakdown period. The same material applied as about 22t of young to medium compost supplies about 4t, or applied as 15t of mature compost supplies 5t of stable humus after the same period.

Advantages of composting The additional storage and handling requirements involved in the production of compost are offset by the advantages of compost to the organic farmer. These advantages are as follows: 1. Compost supports and encourages the growth of earthworms, bacteria, fungi and other micro‐organisms and adds organic matter to the soil. In this way, compost improves the biological, physical and chemical properties of the soil. In comparison, raw manure also adds organic matter but can cause a period of disruption to the soil life by creating an imbalance of nutrients. 2. Manure is acidic; composting increases the pH of the material which can help make the soil a better environment for plant growth. 3. The composting process stabilizes the volatile nitrogen of raw manure into large protein particles and thereby reduces losses. 4. Compost returns nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium, calcium, magnesium and the micronutrients back to the soil. Amounts vary, but a well‐prepared mature compost may contain 7.5~15 kg/t N, 2.5~5 kg/t P2O5 and 15kg/t K2O. 5. The nutrients from mature compost are released to the plants slowly and steadily. The benefits will last for more than one season. 6. The nature of the material and the fungal/actinomycete mycelia contained in the compost and stimulated in the soil by its application help to bind the soil particles into crumbs, greatly increasing the stability of the soil to wind and water erosion. 7. Compost has a lower density, 400~600 kg/m3 compared with typical manure that may be 400~1000 kg/m3. Handling is easier and fewer trips are made to the field. 8. Odor is reduced. 9. Weed seeds are reduced by a combination of factors including the heat of the compost pile, rotting and premature germination. (Any weeds found growing on the pile should be destroyed before they go to seed.) 10. Fly eggs are killed and plant and animal pathogens are reduced if the high heat method of composting is used to raise the

411

temperature of the pile to 60°C. 11. Raw manure is one of the primary culprits for pollution of the waterways, and odor from farms is considered an increasing problem in the rural areas. Composting raw manure reduces these problems.

Methods Making good compost depends on having the proper sources of nutrients with a balance of carbon and nitrogen, keeping the pile of compost moist and making sure that there is adequate aeration. The compost pile can heat up to 60~70°C due to the microbial activity. However, high temperatures will result in substantial losses of nitrogen in the form of ammonia gas. Farmers with many years experience at compost‐making recommend that temperatures are kept below 50°C to avoid overheating and nutrient losses. Diagram and Photo: Temperature in composting process

Materials to compost The most commonly used materials for the compost pile are manure mixed with livestock bedding. When the bedding (which is predominantly carbon) is mixed with the raw manure (which is an excellent source of nitrogen), you achieve the balance of carbon to nitrogen (25~35:1) needed to begin the composting process. Bedding materials vary in their C:N ratio from about 80:1 in straw to 200:1 or more in sawdust or shavings. Bedding with a high content of wasted hay, typical for sheep pens, will have a lower C:N ratio. If the bedding : manure ratio is high, and the manure is very dry as with horse operations, it might be beneficial to water the material with a high N additive such as liquid manure imported from a hog operation. In practice, this is difficult to do. Provided that it contains no hazardous substances and the correct C:N and moisture balance can be maintained, virtually any organic material can be composted. If any of the following can be obtained without transportation expenses, add them to your compost pile ‐‐ sawdust, nursery wastes, fruit and vegetable residue from processing plants, feathers, grass and lawn clippings, vegetable market wastes, garden wastes, leaves, wood shavings and even seaweed. But, before using such materials, satisfy yourself that they are uncontaminated by heavy metals or others toxins. Adding clay soil is also a good idea. The clay will help reduce nitrogen losses by holding any liberated ammonia within the heap until the micro‐organisms can stabilize the volatile nitrogen

Temperature

412

Microbial activity generates heat and the pile can warm to about 60~70°C within one week if the hot composting method is used; then decrease over a few weeks. To keep the temperature at 40~50°C and reduce the loss of nutrients, manure should be stored so that some decomposition takes place before it is put into windrows. Adding soil will also keep the temperature lower. Overheating stops microbial action and causes excessive nutrient loss, hence temperatures over 60°C should be avoided. Temperatures above 55°C may be desirable if there are disease problems in the barn. The temperature in the pile can be monitored with a temperature probe 0.5‐1m long and corrective action taken if necessary. Overheating may indicate deficient moisture levels, too much N or too much C. In cold weather, warmer conditions can be maintained by covering the pile with black plastic. This will also prevent nutrient loss by leaching. Photo: Temperature during composting making

Turning the pile Turning the pile is not needed if optimum conditions are met. Some people advocate turning the pile to speed the decomposition process and obtain mature compost in about 10 weeks. This, however, will also likely cause high nutrient losses; turning may be required to improve conditions. The simplest method is to use a front‐end loader to push the piles over and reform them. Using the manure spreader will do a better job of remixing the compost. Commercial‐brand compost turners are available but are not essential for making good compost. Photo: Turning the pile

Moisture and aeration The moisture content of the pile will often determine if turning is necessary; it should be about 50 per cent. If a moisture meter is not available this can be tested by squeezing the material in your hand ‐ ‐ if it glistens and small moisture droplets appear, the moisture content is sufficient. Beginners at composting tend to have piles that are either too dry or too wet. If the pile is too moist, water replaces the air in the pile leading to anaerobic conditions. Turning the pile to reintroduce air changes the pile from an anaerobic to an aerobic system. The smell of the compost should be your guide; it should be sweet‐smelling. An unpleasant smell indicates that anaerobic decomposition is taking place. If you are in a wet area, either build a roof over the pile or cover the pile with straw or black plastic to avoid leaching of potash and trace elements.

413

On the other hand, if the pile is too dry, biological activity will cease. In this case, water will have to be added. This is best done when the compost is being turned.

B 7 Nutrient Leaching and Organic Agriculture

Excess nutrients in lakes, rivers, and groundwater can cause algal blooms, eutrophication, and subsequent dead zones. In addition, nitrates are harmful to aquatic organisms by themselves. The main contributor to this pollution is nitrate fertilizers whose use is expected to "double or almost triple by 2050". Organically fertilizing fields "significantly [reduces] harmful nitrate leaching" over conventionally fertilized fields: "annual nitrate leaching was 4.4~5.6 times higher in conventional plots than organic plots". The large dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is caused in large part by agricultural runoff: a combination of fertilizer and livestock manure. Over half of the nitrogen released into the Gulf comes from agriculture. This increases costs for fishermen, as they must travel far from the coast to find fish. Nitrogen leaching into the Danube River was substantially lower among organic farms. The resulting externalities could be neutralized by charging 1 euro per kg of released nitrogen. Agricultural runoff and algae blooms are strongly linked in California.

Photo: Nutrient leaching

B 8 Crop Rotation and Design

B 8.1 Crop Rotation

Build the perfect rotation schedule to nourish the soil and improve your crops.

Crop rotation is a systematic approach to deciding which crop to plant where in your vegetable garden from one year to the next. Crop rotation is very important to organic farmers who grow crops on a large scale and of varying importance to home gardeners. There are general principles of crop rotation that can help you make these decisions, but in the end, each farmer and gardener devises a

414

unique crop rotation plan depending on which crops they grow and in what amounts. The goals of crop rotation are to help manage soil fertility and also to help avoid or reduce problems with soil borne diseases and some soil‐dwelling insects, such as corn rootworms.

Crop rotation is the practice of growing a series of dissimilar/different types of crops in the same area in sequential seasons. Crop rotation gives various benefits to the soil. A traditional element of crop rotation is the replenishment of nitrogen through the use of green manure in sequence with cereals and other crops. Crop rotation also mitigates the build‐up of pathogens and pests that often occurs when one species is continuously cropped, and can also improve soil structure and fertility by alternating deep‐rooted and shallow‐rooted plants.

Definitions in crop rotation (CR) terminology (PHILLIPS 2001)

No English term for Fruchtfolgeglied, the basic module of CR

Carefully designed sequence of crops in which the Crop rotation succession is highly beneficial The partitioning of crops in time on one field in particular Cropping plan (time) The succession of crops in time on one field in particular Crop sequence (time) The frequency of cropping the same crop on the same field, usually expressed as once in a number of years, Crop frequency for instance 1 out of 3. 1:3, meaning once every three years One year of the crop rotation succession and the crop(s) Crop rotation block (course) in that specific crop rotation year

The layout of the farm over the available space, the Agro-ecological layout of the farm partitioning

The network of natural and specifically managed areas Ecological infrastructure on the farm to provide habitats and (transport) corridors for flora and fauna

definitions in crop rotation terminology.ppt 12/12/00 CD

415

Aims and Principles

• Crop diversity- efficient and essential tool for self-regulation • Maintain yield stability of all crops instead of maximizing yield of only a few cash crops • Designing multifunctional crop rotation based on the ecological, social and economic situation of a farm • Designing a rotation cheapest environmentally sound measure • Rotation design: key element of organising SA

• KÖPKE 2005

Balancing soil fertility Different crops have different nutrient requirements and affect soil balance differently. Some, like corn and tomatoes, are heavy feeders that quickly deplete soil nitrogen and phosphorus. Thus, if you plant corn in the same spot year after year, that plot of soil will run low on nitrogen and phosphorus more quickly than other parts of your garden will. By changing the location of corn each year, you'll be able to renew the plot where it grew the preceding year, so your soil won't get out of balance. There are other crops that also use up nitrogen rapidly. They tend to be the leafy and fruiting crops, such as lettuce, cabbage, and tomatoes. In contrast, root vegetables and herbs are light feeders. Peas, beans, and other legumes add nitrogen to the soil but need lots of phosphorus. The general rule of thumb for balancing out soil nutrients is to avoid planting the same general category of crop (root, legume, and leafy/fruiting) successively in the same place. It's best to follow nitrogen‐fixing legumes such as peas or beans with nitrogen‐loving leaf or fruiting crops such as lettuce or tomatoes. Then, follow the heavy feeding crops with light‐feeding root crops.

416

Disease and pest prevention If you have a large home garden, you may want to plan your crop rotation on the basis of plant families rather than on nutrient needs. This can help in your overall program of avoiding diseases and pests, because crops in the same botanical family tend to suffer from the same pest and disease problems. For example, Colorado potato beetles like to eat potato plants, but they also enjoy feasting on tomato leaves and eggplant foliage. Since these beetles overwinter in the soil, if you plant eggplant in a spot where you grew potatoes the year before, you could be inviting a beetle problem for your eggplants from the day they're planted. Likewise, several serious bacterial and fungal diseases overwinter in plant debris in the soil. Lengthy rotations are sometimes necessary to control chronic soil borne problems. Bean anthracnose fungus can persist in soil for up to three years, so a four‐year rotation is needed to keep the disease at bay. The same holds true for such fungal diseases as Fusarium wilt and Verticillium wilt. A few problems, such as club root, persist in the soil for even longer, so rotation is less useful for controlling them.

Choosing your crop rotation plan If you have a small garden, you may not be able to set up an effective rotation by crop family. That's also true if you grow only a few kinds of crops. In that case, stick to a basic soil‐balancing rotation. But if you have a large plot and grow many different crops, you may enjoy the challenge of setting up a rotation by crop family. Refer to the chart on the previous page to learn which crops belong to the same family. Keep in mind that cover crops can be included in a rotation plan to discourage specific types of pests and to improve soil. For example, beetle grubs thrive among most vegetables, but not in soil planted in buckwheat or clover. A season of either crop can greatly reduce grub populations and at the same time will increase soil organic matter content.

Rotating Vegetable Families Susceptibility to pests and diseases runs in plant families. Leave at least two, and preferably three or more, years between the times you plant members of the same crop family in an area of your garden. When planning a rotation scheme, refer to this rundown of the seven family groups most often planted in vegetable gardens along with ideas for rotating them.

417

1) Onions, garlic: Rotate with legumes; avoid planting in soil with undecomposed organic matter. 2) Carrots, parsnips, parsley, dill, fennel, coriander: Moderate feeders. Precede with any other plant family; condition soil with compost before planting. Follow with legumes or heavy mulch. 3) Broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, kale, kohlrabi, radishes, turnips: High level of soil maintenance required for good root health. Heavy feeders precede with legumes; follow by first cultivating the soil to expose pests for predation, then spread compost. 4) Cucumbers, gourds, melons, squash, pumpkins, watermelons: For improved pest control, precede with winter rye or wheat; follow with legumes. 5) Beans, peas, clovers, vetches: Beneficial to soil; few pest problems. Rotate alternately with all other garden crops when possible. 6) Wheat, oats, rye, corn: Plant before tomato‐ or squash‐family crops to control weeds and improve soil's ability to handle water. 7) Eggplant, peppers, potatoes, tomatoes: Heavy feeders with many fungal enemies. Precede with cereal grain or grass; follow with legumes.

418

B 8.2. Designing a crop rotation Crop rotation is one of the most powerful tools that a farmer has for controlling weeds and maintaining fertility. Because organic farming places such a high priority on a well‐designed crop rotation, Section II of this handbook focuses exclusively on this one aspect of farming. The key to a good rotation is to have a diversity of crops ‐ crops that are from different plant groups, that are seeded at different times and that have different nutrient demands. It is important to understand the principles of crop rotation so they can be adapted to your own farm. Unfortunately, copying a rotation used on a successful organic farm will not necessarily work because every farm is unique. When choosing a crop to make up your crop rotation design, assess each crop in light of how many functions it can perform. These include: ‐ economic value as a cash crop ‐ importance as livestock feed ‐ role in building up the soil organic matter ‐ provision of adequate cover to protect the soil from erosion

419

‐ contribution or drain on the soil’s nutrient level ‐ ability to compete successfully with weeds ‐ inherent pest resistance ‐ possibility of its labor demands conflicting with other duties on the farm.

Legume crops, for example, can perform many functions. Legume forages are animal feed and can also be a seed crop. They help control weeds and pests and supply nitrogen for the crops that follow. Buckwheat can be grown as a cash crop and is also grown to control weeds and to accumulate phosphorus. Also its high fibre residue improves soil aeration and adds to the soil’s organic matter. Rye can be grown as a cover crop and to provide ample straw for bedding and composting; its allelopathic properties will help control weeds. This section will discuss the various factors that should be taken into consideration when setting up a crop rotation so that the various crops complement each other to form an efficient production sytem. It contains a detailed worksheet to help farmers design a rotation that will meet their individual needs.

Optimizing crop rotation: main targets (Köpke 2004)

420

Pratical design of a multifunctional crop rotation

1. Select and characterise potential crops with respect to; a) production-ecological characteristics, marketability and profitability (soil, climate, infrastru cture, market, auctions, industry, labour-, capital- and machinery demand etc.),

b) which genetically and phytophatologically related group they belong to (legumes, crucifers etc.) ,

c) their potential role concerning; a) prevention and control of pests, diseases, weeds (resistance, tolerance, and required or possibl e control measures), b) physical soil fertility (especially effect on soil structure on compaction-susceptible soils), c) chemical soil fertility (N need, -offtake, - transfer, organic matter supply), d) cropping period and soil cover (soil protection for erosion-susceptible soils).

2. Design of the rotation with a maximum of positive and a minimum of negative interactions between the cro ps. Take into account: a) prevention and control of pests and diseases by the crop rotation composition: crops, frequencie s and sequence,

b) soil fertility in the broadest sense and in particular organic matter and N dynamics,

c) diversification impulses / options (pest, disease and weed control),

d) feasibility crop sequence in terms of harvest time, crop residues and volunteers from preceding crops,

e) agronomic optimal use land, labour and equipment.

Wiesengut experimental farm: Steps to optimize crop rotation

Location: 50° 48‘North, 7°17‘West; 160 m above sea-level; 780 mm, 9,8°C; sandy loam soil with gravel layers Fluvisol (FAO) or Udifluvent (USDA); 6 plots in 42ha arable inner dam area; 20 grassland outer dam area. Crop options: potatoes, red clover, winter wheat, winter rye, faba beans, spring wheat, vegetables , (kale) Underseeds/catch crops: cruciferae Steps III III IV 1. Winter rye 1.Winter rye 1.Winter rye 1.Winter rye underseed: red clover underseed: grass/clover underseed : grass/clover underseed : grass/clover

2. Red clover 2. Grass / clover mixture 2. Grass / clover mixture 2. Grass / clover mixture

3. Winter wheat 3. Oats 3. Potatoes 3. Potatoes

4. Faba beans 4. Faba beans 4. Winterwheat 4. Winter wheat stubble seed: mustard

5. Potatoes 5. Potatoes 5. Faba beans 5. Faba beans underseed/stubble seed: underseed/stubble seed: oil radish mustard 6. Oats 6. Winter wheat 6. Oats 6. Spring wheat

421

Quality production as a function of crop rotation

crop rotation

prevention soil fertility pest and diseases

healthy and vital crops cropping systems fertilisation

crop protection soil cultivation

nature management quality production

(WIJNANDS 1999) Designing and testing crop rotations

Rotation design: Strategies to reduce soil-nitrate losses

Underseed/ Winter rye Grass/ Underseed/ Faba catchcrop: Spring underseed: catchcrop/ Winter clover Potatoes beans white grass/clover 2nd cash mustard wheat mixture crop wheat

3 3 3 3

3 3

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

422

B 8.3. Crop rotation defined by organic farmers

Roy Brubaker: “A planned succession of crops (cash and cover) chosen to sustain a farm’s economic and environmental health.”

Don Kretschmann: “Rotation is the practice of using the natural biological and physical properties of crops to benefit the growth, health, and competitive advantage of other crops. In this process the soil and its life are also benefited. The desired result is a farm which is more productive and to a greater extent self‐reliant in resources.”

5 acres 5 acres 3 acres, beds

Calvert’s Gift Farm Pleasant Valley Farm Four Winds Farm

Jack Gurley, MD Paul & Sandy Arnold, NY Polly & Jay Armour, NY

Winter Garlic Mulch Oats

Spring Lettuce Potatoes OR Tomatoes* Y1 Winter Squash Summer Beans

Fall Radish Straw Mulch Garlic Spinach Winter Winter Rye (in alternate beds**) Spring Carrots Y2 Winter Squash (in alternate beds) Summer Straw Mulch

Fall Soybeans Beans OR Turnips Straw Mulch Winter Winter Rye

Oats Spring Lettuce Beans Y3 Summer Fava Beans Winter Squash (with hay mulch) Fall Brassicas Compost

Winter Vetch Mulch Direct-seeded Quick Crops/ Spring Small-Seeded Greens/Radishes Tomatoes Y4 Beets Summer Cukes (mulched Lettuces Garlic with straw) Fall Radishes

Winter Winter Rye

Spring Return to Year One Return to Year One Y5 Tomatoes (with hay mulch) Summer

Fall Mulch

*This rotation switches between potatoes and tomatoes in alternate cycles. **This rotation is designed around alternate beds.

423

Even Star Organic Farm Riverbank Farm Golden Russet Farm

Brett Grohsgal, MD David Blyn, CT Will Stevens, VT Winter Crimson Clover Wheat OR Oats Hay Spring Tomatoes OR Peppers Y1 Buckwheat Summer Brassicas

Red Winter & Lettuce Fall Clover Brassicas (strip crop) Oats and Peas Winter Red Clover Oats

Spring Okra-Flowers-Basil Multiple Crops in Strips: Onions, Spinach, Y2 Beets, Radish, Salad Mix, Lettuce, Peas Summer Potatoes Winter &, Lettuce Vetch Carrots, Beets & Lettuce Fall Brassicas (strip crop)

Vetch Winter Winter Rye Wheat (overseed) Spring Cucurbits Y3 Tomato / OR Cucumber/ Pepper / Summer Zucchini / Melon on Eggplant on Winter Squash plastic Crimson Winter & Lettuce plastic and Summer Vetch Fall Clover Brassicas (strip crop)

Winter Winter Rye Wheat (overseed) Red clover Spring Oats and Peas Y4 Summer Brassica Lettuce Red Winter & Lettuce Greens and Sweet Corn / Summer “Smalls”* Fall Clover Brassicas (strip crop)

Rye Winter Oats (and compost) Garlic

Spring Spring “Smalls”* Y5 Return to Year One Flowers Lettuce Summer Summer Fallow

Fall Rye Wheat OR Oats 10 acres 12 acres 12 acres

Farmer comments + None have a rigid rotation + Use deeply internalized knowledge of fields and crops, and own rules of thumb that are site specific + Many have contingency plans, often focused on what NOT to do + All have clear sense of priorities

424

B 9 Intercropping and Companion Planting

B 9.1 Intercropping

Intercropping is the practice of growing two or more crops in proximity. The most common goal of intercropping is to produce a greater yield on a given piece of land by making use of resources that would otherwise not be utilized by a single crop. Careful planning is required, taking into account the soil, climate, crops, and varieties. It is particularly important not to have crops competing with each other for physical space, nutrients, water, or sunlight. Examples of intercropping strategies are planting a deep‐rooted crop with a shallow‐rooted crop, or planting a tall crop with a shorter crop that requires partial shade. Inga alley cropping has been proposed as an alternative to the ecological destruction of Slash‐ and‐burn farming. When crops are carefully selected, other agronomic benefits are also achieved. Lodging‐prone plants, those that are prone to tip over in wind or heavy rain, may be given structural support by their companion crop. Creepers can also benefit from structural support. Some plants are used to suppress weeds or provide nutrients. Delicate or light sensitive plants may be given shade or protection, or otherwise wasted space can be utilized. An example is the tropical multi‐tier system where coconut occupies the upper tier, banana the middle tier, and pineapple, ginger, or leguminous fodder, medicinal or aromatic plants occupy the lowest tier. Intercropping of compatible plants also encourages biodiversity, by providing a habitat for a variety of insects and soil organisms that would not be present in a single‐crop environment. This in turn can help limit outbreaks of crop pests by increasing predator biodiversity. Additionally, reducing the homogeneity of the crop increases the barriers against biological dispersal of pest organisms through the crop. The degree of spatial and temporal overlap in the two crops can vary somewhat, but both requirements must be met for a cropping system to be an intercrop. Numerous types of intercropping, all of which vary the temporal and spatial mixture to some degree, have been identified. These are some of the more significant types:

1) Mixed intercropping, as the name implies, is the most basic form in which the component crops are totally mixed in the available space. 2) Row cropping involves the component crops arranged in alternate rows. Variations include alley cropping, where crops are

425

grown in between rows of trees, and strip cropping, where multiple rows, or a strip, of one crop are alternated with multiple rows of another crop. 3) Intercropping also uses the practice of sowing a fast growing crop with a slow growing crop, so that the fast growing crop is harvested before the slow growing crop starts to mature. This obviously involves some temporal separation of the two crops. 4) Further temporal separation is found in relay cropping, where the second crop is sown during the growth, often near the onset of reproductive development or fruiting, of the first crop, so that the first crop is harvested to make room for the full development of the second.

Photo: Typicalintercropping in Wiesengut Experimental Farm of University of Bonn Photo: Companion crops

B 9.2 Companion Planting

Companion planting is the planting of different crops in proximity (in gardening and agriculture), on the theory that they assist each other in nutrient uptake, pest control, pollination, and other factors necessary to increasing crop productivity. Companion planting is a form of polyculture. Companion planting is used by farmers and gardeners in both industrialized and developing countries for many reasons. Many of the modern principles of companion planting were present many centuries ago in cottage gardens in England and home gardens in Asia.

• ALFALFA: Perennial that roots deeply. Fixes the soil with nit rogen, accumulates iron, magnesium, phosphorous and pota ssium. Withstands droughts with it's long taproot and can i mprove just about any soil! Alfalfa has the ability to break up hard clay soil and can even send its' roots through rocks! No w that is a tenacious plant! Alfalfa is practically pest and dise ase free. It needs only natural rainfall to survive. • AMARANTH: A tropical annual that needs hot conditions to flourish. Good with sweet corn, it's leaves provide shade givi ng the corm a rich, moist root run. Host to predatory ground beetles. Eat the young leaves in salads. • ANISE: Licorice flavored herb, good host for predatory wasp s which prey on aphids and it is also said to repel aphids. Det ers pests from brassicas by camouflaging their odor. Improv es the vigor of any plants growing near it. Used in ointments

426

to protect against bug stings and bites. Good to plant with co riander • ASPARAGUS: Friends: Aster family flowers, dill ,coriander, c arrots, tomatoes, parsley, basil, comfrey and marigolds. Avoi d: Onions, garlic and potatoes. • BASIL: Plant with tomatoes to improve growth and flavor. B asil also does well with peppers, oregano, asparagus and pet unias. Basil can be helpful in repelling thrips. It is said to rep el flies and mosquitoes. Do not plant near rue or sage. • BAY LEAF: A fresh leaf bay leaf in each storage container of beans or grains will deter weevils and moths. Sprinkle dried leaves with other deterrent herbs in garden as natural insect icide dust. A good combo: Bay leaves, cayenne pepper, tansy and peppermint. For ladybug invasions try spreading bay l eaves around in your house anywhere they are getting in an d congregating. They should leave. • BEANS: All bean enrich the soil with nitrogen fixed form the air, improving the conditions for whatever crop you plant aft er the beans are finished. In general they are good company f or carrots, celery, chards, corn, eggplant, peas, potatoes, bras sicas, beets, radish, strawberry and cucumbers. Beans are gr eat for heavy nitrogen users like corn and grain plants becau se the nitrogren used up by the corn and grains are replaced at the end of the season when the bean plants die back. Fren ch Haricot beans, sweet corn and melons are a good combo. Summer savory deters bean beetles and improves growth an d flavor. Keep beans away from the alliums. • BEET: Good for adding minerals to the soil. The leaves are co mposed of 25% magnesium making them a valuable additio n to the compost pile if you don't care to eat them. Beets are also beneficial to beans with the exception of runner beans. Runner or pole beans and beets stunt each other's growth. C ompanions for beets are lettuce, onions and brassicas. Beets and kohlrabi grow perfectly together. Beets are helped by ga rlic and mints. Garlic improves growth and flavor. Rather tha n planting invasive mints around beets use your mint clippin gs as a mulch. • BORAGE: Companion plant for tomatoes, squash, strawberri es and most plants. Deters tomato hornworms and cabbage worms. One of the best bee and wasp attracting plants. Adds trace minerals to the soil and a good addition the compost pi le. The leaves contain vitamin C and are rich in calcium, pota ssium and mineral salts. Borage may benefit any plant it is gr owing next to via increasing resistance to pests and disease. It also makes a nice mulch for most plants. Borage and straw

427

berries help each other and strawberry farmers always set a few plants in their beds to enhance the fruits flavor and yield . Plant near tomatoes to improve growth and disease resista nce. After you have planned this annual once it will self seed. Borage flowers are edible. • BROCCOLI: Companions for broccoli are: Basil, Bush Beans, Cucumber, Dill, Garlic, Hyssop, Lettuce, Marigold, Mint, Nast urtium, Onion, Potato, Radish, Rosemary, Sage, Thyme and T omato. Celery, onions and potatoes improve broccolis' flavor when planted near it. Broccoli loves plenty of calcium. Pairin g it with plants that need little calcium is a good combination such as nasturtiums and beets as this frees up the calcium in the soil for the broccoli. Put the nasturtiums right under the broccoli plants. Herbs such as rosemary, dill and sage help re pel pests with their distinct aromas. Foes: Grapes, strawberr ies, mustards and rue. • BUCKWHEAT: (Member of the family Polygonaceae) Accum ulates calcium and can be grown as an excellent cover crop a ka green manure. Buckwheat’s shallow white blossoms attra ct beneficial insects that control or parasitize aphids, mites a nd other pests. The beneficials it attracts include the followi ng: hover flies (Syrphidae), predatory wasps, minute pirate bugs, insidious flower bugs, tachinid flies and lady beetles. Fl owering may start within three weeks of planting and contin ue for up to 10 weeks. Buckwheat will take up phosphorus a nd some minor nutrients that are otherwise unavailable to p lants. These nutrients are released as the residue of the buck wheat breaks down and are then available for later crops. Th e fine root makes topsoil loose and friable with only minimal tillage. • CABBAGE: Celery, dill, onions and potatoes are good compa nion plants. Celery improves growth and health. Clover inter planted with cabbage has been shown to reduce the native c abbage aphid and cabbageworm populations by interfering with the colonization of the pests and increasing the number of predatory ground beetles. Plant Chamomile with cabbage as it Improves growth and flavor. Cabbage does not get alon g with strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, eggplants, rue, grap es, lettuce and pole beans. • CARROTS: Their pals are leaf lettuce, onions and tomatoes. Plant dill and parsnips away from carrots. Flax produces an oil that may protect root vegetables like carrots from some p ests. One drawback with tomatoes and carrots: tomato plant s can stunt the growth of your carrots but the carrots will stil l be of good flavor.

428

• CELERY: Companions: Bean, cabbage family, leek, onion, spi nach and tomato. Flowers for celery: cosmos, daisies and sna pdragons. Foes: Corn, Irish potato and aster flowers. Carrots can be infected with aster yellow disease from asters • CHAMOMILE, GERMAN: Annual. Improves flavor of cabbage s, cucumbers and onions. Host to hoverflies and wasps. Accu mulates calcium, potassium and sulfur, later returning them to the soil. Increases oil production from herbs. Leave some f lowers unpicked and German chamomile will reseed itself. Roman chamomile is a low growing perennial that will toler ate almost any soil conditions. Both like full sun. Growing ch amomile of any type is considered a tonic for anything you g row in the garden. • CHARDS: Companions: Bean, cabbage family, tomato, onion and roses. Don't overlook chard's value as an ornamental pla nt in flower beds or wherever you have room for it. Don't gr ow chard near cucurbits, melons, corn or herbs. • CHERVIL: Companion to radishes, lettuce and broccoli for i mproved growth and flavor. Keeps aphids off lettuce. Said to deter slugs. Likes shade. • CHIVES: Improves growth and flavor of carrots and tomatoe s. A friend to apples, carrots, tomatoes, brassica (broccoli, ca bbage, mustard, etc) and many others. Help to keep aphids a way from tomatoes, mums and sunflowers. Chives may drive away Japanese beetles and carrot rust fly. Planted among ap ple trees it helps prevent scab and among roses it prevents b lack spot. You will need patience as it takes about 3 years for plantings of chives to prevent the 2 diseases. A tea of chives may be used on cucumbers and gooseberries to prevent dow ny and powdery mildews. Avoid planting near beans and pe as. • CHRYSANTHEMUMS: C. coccineum kills root nematodes. (th e bad ones) It's flowers along with those of C. cineraruaefoli um have been used as botanical pesticides for centuries. (i.e. pyrethrum) White flowering chrysanthemums repel Japanes e beetles. To the right is a picture of the painted daisy from which pyrethrum is extracted. • CLOVER: Long used as a green manure and plant companion and is especially good to plant under grapevines. Attracts ma ny beneficials. Useful planted around apple trees to attract p redators of the woolly aphid. Clover interplanted with cabba ge has been shown to reduce the native cabbage aphid and c abbageworm populations by interfering with the colonizatio n of the pests and increasing the number of predator ground beetles.

429

• COMFREY: This is one amazing plant. Accumulates calcium, phosphorous and potassium. Likes wet spots to grow in. Co mfrey is beneficial to avocado and most other fruit trees. Tra ditional medicinal plant. Good trap crop for slugs. Excellent c ompost activator, foliage spray, nutrient miner. Comfrey is tr uly essential to all gardens. • CORIANDER (Cilantro, Chinese Parsley etc.): The leaves o f this plant are Cilantro. When left to flower and go to seed th e dried tan seeds are Coriander, a familiar spice. It is a memb er of the carrot family. Repels harmful insects such as aphids , spider mites and potato beetle. A tea from this can be used as a spray for spider mites. Partners coriander are for anise, caraway, potatoes and dill. • CORN: Amaranth, beans, cucumber, white geranium, lamb's quarters, melons, morning glory, parsley, peanuts, peas, pota to, pumpkin, soybeans, squash and sunflower. A classic exam ple is to grow climbing beans up corn while inter‐planting p umpkins. The corn provides a natural trellis for the beans, p umpkins smother the weeds and helps corn roots retain moi sture. Corn is a heavy feeder and the beans fix nitrogen from air into the soil however the beans do not feed the corn whil e it is growing. When the bean plants die back they return ni trogen to the soil that was used up by the corn. A win‐win sit uation. Another interesting helper for corn is the weed Pig's Thistle which raises nutrients from the subsoil to where the corn can reach them. Keep corn away from celery and tomat o plants by at least 20 feet. • CUCUMBERS: Cucumbers are great to plant with corn and b eans. The three plants like the same conditions: warmth, rich soil and plenty of moisture. Let the cucumbers grow up and over your corn plants. Cukes also do well with peas, beets, ra dishes and carrots. Radishes are a good deterrent against cu cumber beetles. Dill planted with cucumbers helps by attract ing beneficial predators. Nasturtium improves growth and fl avor. Keep sage, potatoes and rue away from cucumbers. It i s said that cucumbers don't do well planted next to tomatoes . We have never had a problem with planting them next to ea ch other. • DAHLIAS: These beautiful, tuberous annuals that can have u p to dinner plate size flowers repel nematodes • DILL: Improves growth and health of cabbage. Do not plant near carrots, caraway, lavendar or tomatoes. Best friend for l ettuce. The flower heads of dill are one of the best nectar sou rces for beneficial insects in the garden attracting hoverflies, predatory wasps and many more. Repels aphids and spider

430

mites to some degree. Also may repel the dreaded squash bu g! (scatter some good size dill leaves on plants that are subje ct to squash bugs, like squash plants.) Dill goes well with lett uce, onions, cabbage, sweet corn and cucumbers. Dill does at tract the tomato horn worm so it would be wise to plant it so mewhere away from your tomato plants. Do plant dill in an a ppropriate spot for the swallowtail butterfly caterpillars to f eed on. Even their caterpillars are beautiful. • EGGPLANT: Plant with amaranth, beans, peas, spinach, tarra gon, thyme and marigold. Eggplant is a member of the nights hade family and does well with peppers as they like the sam e growing conditions. • FENNEL: Fennel is not friendly and is allelopathic to most ga rden plants, inhibiting growth or causing them to bolt. It act ually kills many plants. Dill is the only thing you can plant wi th fennel. Other than that plant it by it's self. On a positive no te the foliage and flowers attract beneficials such as ladybug s, syrphid flies, tachninid flies, beneficial parasitoid wasps an d hoverflies Fennel is a good flea repellent. An old saying say s to "plant fennel near your kennel" to deter fleas. Dried fenn el leaves provide additional flea repelling insurance when pu t inside the dog house or kennel. • FLAX: Plant with carrots, and potatoes. Flax contains tannin and linseed oils which may offend the Colorado potato bug. F lax is an annual from 1‐4 feet tall with blue or white flowers that readily self sows. • GARLIC: Plant near roses to repel aphids. It also benefits ap ple trees, pear trees, cucumbers, peas, lettuce and celery. Pla nt under peach trees to help repel borers. Garlic accumulates sulfur: a naturally occurring fungicide which will help in the garden with disease prevention. Garlic is systemic in action a s it is taken up by the plants through their pores and when g arlic tea is used as a soil drench it is also taken up by the pla nt roots. It has value in offending codling moths, Japanese be etles, root maggots, snails, and carrot root fly. Researchers h ave observed that time‐released garlic capsules planted at th e bases of fruit trees actually kept deer away. It's certainl y worth a try! Concentrated garlic sprays have been observe d to repel and kill whiteflies, aphids and fungus gnats among others with as little as a 6‐8% concentration! It is safe for us e on orchids too. • GRAPES: Hyssop is beneficial to grapes as are basil, beans, g eraniums, oregano, clover, peas, or blackberries. Keep radish es and cabbage away from grapes. Planting clover increases the soil fertility for grapes. Chives with grapes help repel aph

431

ids. Plant your vines under Elm or Mulberry trees. • HEMP: Repels many types of beetles which attack brassicas. • HORSERADISH: Plant in containers in the potato patch to ke ep away Colorado potato bugs. Horseradish increases the dis ease resistance of potatoes. There are some very effective in sect sprays that can be made with the root. Use the bottomle ss pot method to keep horseradish contained. Also repels Bli ster beetles. We have observed that the root can yield anti‐fu ngal properties when a tea is made from it. • HYSSOP: Companion plant to cabbage and grapes, deters ca bbage moths and flea beetles. Do not plant near radishes. Hy ssop may be the number one preference among bees and so me beekeepers rub the hive with it to encourage the bees to keep to their home. It is not as invasive as other members of the mint family making it safer for interplanting. • KOHLRABI: May be planted with cucumber, mint, onion, ore gano, sage, chives and thyme.. Kohlrabi and beets are perfect to grow with one another! Do not plant kohlrabi with pole b eans, pepper, strawberry or tomatoes. • LAVENDER: Repels fleas and moths. Prolific flowering laven der nourishes many nectar feeding and beneficial insects. La venders can protect nearby plants from insects such as whit efly, and lavender planted under and near fruit trees can det er codling moth. Use dried sprigs of lavender to repel moths. Start plants in winter from cuttings, setting out in spring. • LEEKS: Use leeks near apple trees, carrots, celery and onion s which will improve their growth. Leeks also repel carrot fli es. Avoid planting near legumes. • LEMON BALM: Sprinkle throughout the garden in an herbal powder mixture to deter many bugs. Lemon balm has citron ella compounds that make this work: crush and rub the leav es on your skin to keep mosquitoes away! Use to ward off sq uash bugs! • LETTUCE: Does well with beets, broccoli, bush beans, pole b eans, carrots, cucumbers, onion, radish and strawberries. It grows happily in the shade under young sunflowers. Dill and lettuce are a perfect pair. Keep lettuce away from cabbage. C abbage is a deterrent to the growth and flavor of lettuce. • LOVAGE: Improves flavor and health of most plants. Good h abitat for ground beetles. A large plant, use one planted as a backdrop. Similar to celery in flavor. • MARIGOLDS: (Calendula): Given a lot of credit as a pest dete rrent. Keeps soil free of bad nematodes; supposed to discour age many insects. Plant freely throughout the garden. The m arigolds you choose must be a scented variety for them to w

432

ork. One down side is that marigolds do attract spider mites and slugs. 1) French Marigold (T. patula) has roots that exude a substan ce which spreads in their immediate vicinity killing nemato des. For nematode control you want to plant dense areas of them. There have been some studies done that proved this nematode killing effect lasted for several years after the pla nts died back. These marigolds also help to deter whiteflies when planted around tomatoes and can be used in greenho uses for the same purpose. Whiteflies hate the smell of mari golds. Do not plant French marigolds next to bean plants. 2) Mexican marigold (T. minuta) is the most powerful of the insect repelling marigolds and may also overwhelm weed r oots such as bind weed! It is said to repel the Mexican bean beetle and wild bunnies! Be careful it can have an herbicidal effect on some plants like beans and cabbage. • MARJORAM: As a companion plant it improves the flavor of vegetables and herbs. Sweet marjoram is the most commonl y grown type. • MELONS: Companions: Corn, pumpkin, radish and squash. O ther suggested helpers for melons are as follows: Marigold d eters beetles, nasturtium deters bugs and beetles. Oregano p rovides general pest protection. • MINT: Deters white cabbage moths, ants, rodents, flea beetle s, fleas, aphids and improves the health of cabbage and toma toes. Use cuttings as a mulch around members of the brassic a family. Mint flowers attract hoverflies and predatory wasp s. Earthworms are quite attracted to mint plantings. Be caref ul where you plant it as mint is an incredibly invasive peren nial. We have found that placing peppermint cuttings (fresh or dried) where mice are a problem is very effective in drivi ng them off! • MORNING GLORIES: They attract hoverflies. Plus if you wan t a fast growing annual vine to cover something up morning glory is an excellent choice. • NASTURTIUMS: Nasturtium is an excellent companion for many plants. It is a companion to radishes, cabbage family pl ants (cabbage, collards, cauliflower, kale, kohlrabi, broccoli a nd mustards), deterring aphids, squash bugs, and striped pu mpkin beetles, and improving growth and flavor. Plant as a b arrier around tomatoes, cabbage, cucumbers, and under frui t trees. Deters wooly aphids, whiteflies, cucumber beetles an d other pests of the cucurbit family. Great trap crop for aphi ds (in particular the black aphids) which it does attract, espe cially the yellow flowering varieties. It likes poor soil with lo

433

w moisture and no fertilizer. Keeping that in mind there is n o reason not to set potted nasturtiums among your garden b eds. It has been the practice of some fruit growers that planti ng nasturtiums every year in the root zone of fruit trees allo w the trees to take up the pungent odor of the plants and rep el bugs. Studies say it is among the best at attracting predato ry insects. It has no taste effect on the fruit. A nice variety to grow is Alaska which has attractive green and white variegat ed leaves. The leaves, flowers and seeds of nasturtiums are a ll edible and wonderful in salads! • OKRA: (Hibiscus esculentus) Plant lettuce around your okra plants and they will shade the lettuce in the summer giving y ou some more growing time. Okra also does well with peppe rs and eggplants as it helps protect these brittle stemmed pl ants from high winds. It also gets along with basil, cucumber s, melons, and black eyed peas. For planting with the peas pl ant your Okra first. When the okra is up and established plan t the peas around the edges of the okra planting. You may fin d that the peas are far less bothered by aphids when near ok ra. • ONIONS: Planting chamomile and summer savory with onio ns improves their flavor. Other companions are carrot, leek, beets, kohlrabi, strawberries, brassicas, dill, lettuce and tom atoes. Intercropping onions and leeks with your carrots conf uses the carrot and onion flies! Onions planted with strawbe rries help the berries fight disease. Keep onions away from p eas and asparagus. • OPAL BASIL: An annual herb that is pretty, tasty and said to repel hornworms! Like the other basils it also does well with peppers, oregano, asparagus and petunias. Keep away from r ue and sage. • OREGANO: Can be used with most crops but especially good for cabbage. Plant near broccoli, cabbage and cauliflower to repel cabbage butterfly and near cucumbers to repel cucumb er beetle. Also benefits grapes. • PARSLEY: Allies: Asparagus, carrot, chives, onions, roses an d tomato. Sprinkle the leaves on tomatoes, and asparagus. Us e as a tea to ward off asparagus beetles. Attracts hoverflies. L et some go to seed to attract the tiny parasitic wasps and ho verflies. Parsley increases the fragrance of roses when plant ed around their base. Rose problems? Mint and parsley are enemies. Keep them well away from one another. • PARSNIPS: Plant them along with bush bean, garlic, marigol ds, onion, pea, pepper, potato and radish. Parsnips like frequ ent, regular watering, so do not plant them with anything th

434

at prefers a drier soil. Like many root vegetables, parsnips ta ste their best when harvested after a few light frosts which c auses them to convert their starch into sugars. • PEACH TREE: Grape, Garlic, Onion and Asparagus may be pl anted under or near peach trees. In particular garlic may hel p repel peach tree borers which are a big problem for peach growers. Keep Potato, Tomato and Raspberry away from pea ches. • PEAS: Peas fix nitrogen in the soil. Plant next to corn. Compa nions for peas are bush beans, bole beans, carrots, celery, chi cory, corn, cucumber, eggplant, parsley, early potato, radish, spinach, strawberry, sweet pepper, tomatoes and turnips. D o not plant peas with chives, gladiolus, grapes, late potatoes or onions • PEPPERMINT: Repels white cabbage moths, aphids and flea beetles. It is the menthol content in mints that acts as an inse ct repellant. Bees and other good guys love it. • PEPPERS, BELL(Sweet Peppers): Plant peppers near tomat oes, parsley, basil, geraniums, marjoram, lovage, petunia and carrots. Onions make an excellent companion plant for pepp ers. They do quite well with okra as it shelters them and prot ects the brittle stems from wind. Don't plant them near fenn el or kohlrabi. They should also not be grown near apricot tr ees because a fungus that the pepper is prone to can cause a lot of harm to the apricot tree. Peppers can double as ornam entals, so tuck some into flowerbeds and borders. Harvestin g tip: The traditional bell pepper, for example, is harvested g reen, even though most varieties will mature red, orange, or yellow. Peppers can be harvested at any stage of growth, but their flavor doesn't fully develop until maturity. • PEPPERS, HOT: Chili peppers have root exudates that preve nt root rot and other Fusarium diseases. Plant anywhere you have these problems. While you should always plant chili pe ppers close together, providing shelter from the sun with ot her plants will help keep them from drying out and provide more humidity. Tomato plants, green peppers, and okra are good protection for them. Teas made from hot peppers can b e useful as insect sprays. Hot peppers like to be grouped wit h cucumbers, eggplant, escarole, tomato, okra, Swiss chard a nd squash. Herbs to plant near them include: basils, oregano, parsley and rosemary. Never put them next to any beans, br occoli, cabbage, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts or fennel. • PETUNIAS: They repel the asparagus beetle, leafhoppers, ce rtain aphids, tomato worms, Mexican bean beetles and gener al garden pests. A good companion to tomatoes, but plant ev

435

erywhere. The leaves can be used in a tea to make a potent b ug spray. • POACHED EGG PLANT: Grow poached egg plant with tomat oes, they will attract hover flies and hover flies eat aphids. • POTATO: Companions for potatoes are bush bean, members of the cabbage family, carrot, celery, corn, dead nettle, flax, h orseradish, marigold, peas, petunia, onion and Tagetes marig old. Protect them from scab by putting comfrey leaves in wit h your potato sets at planting time. Horseradish, planted at t he corners of the potato patch, provides general protection. Alyssum makes a perfect living mulch for them. Don't plant t hese around potatoes: asparagus, cucumber, kohlrabi, pump kin, rutabaga, squash family, sunflower, turnip and fennel. K eep potatoes and tomatoes apart as they both can get early a nd late blight contaminating each other. • PUMPKINS: Pumpkin pals are corn, melon and squash. Mari gold deters beetles. Nasturtium deters bugs, beetles. Oregan o provides general pest protection. Again dill may help repel those frustrating squash bugs. See squash entry for more tip s. • RADISH: One of the workhorses for the garden. Companio ns for radishes are: radish, beet, bush beans, pole beans, carr ots, chervil, cucumber, lettuce, melons, nasturtium, parsnip, peas, spinach and members of the squash family. Why plant radishes with your squash plants? Radishes may protect the m from squash borers. Anything that will help keep them aw ay is worth a try. Radishes are a deterrent against cucumber beetles and rust flies. Chervil and nasturtium improve radish growth and flavor. Planting them around corn and letting th em go to seed will also help fight corn borers. Chinese Daiko n and Snow Belle radishes are favorites of flea beetles. Plant these at 6 to 12 inch intervals amongst broccoli. In one trial, this measurably reduced damage to broccoli. Radishes will l ure leafminers away from spinach. The damage the leafmine rs do to radish leaves does not stop the radish roots from gr owing, a win‐win situation. Keep radishes away from hyssop plants, cabbage, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts and turnips. R adishes are a good indicator of calcium levels in the soil. If yo u radish grows and only produces a stringy root you need ca lcium. • RHUBARB: A good companion to all brassicas. Try planting cabbage and broccoli plants your rhubarb patch watch them thrive. Rhubarb protects beans against black fly. Some other interesting companions for rhubarb are the beautiful columb ine flowers, garlic, onion and roses! It helps deter red spider

436

mites from the columbines. A spray made from boiled rhuba rb leaves, which contain the poison oxalic acid may be used t o prevent blackspot on roses and as an aphicide. • ROSEMARY: Companion plant to cabbage, beans, carrots an d sage. Deters cabbage moths, bean beetles, and carrot flies. Use cuttings to place by the crowns of carrots for carrot flies. Zones 6 and colder can overwinter rosemary as houseplants or take cuttings. • RUE: Deters aphids, fish moths, flea beetle, onion maggot, sl ugs, snails, flies and Japanese beetles in roses and raspberrie s. Companions for rue are roses, fruits (in particular figs), ra spberries and lavender. To make it even more effective with Japanese beetles: crush a few leaves to release the smell. Has helped repel cats for us. You should not plant rue near cucu mbers, cabbage, basil or sage. A pretty perennial with bluish‐ gray leaves. May be grown indoors in a sunny window. Rue may cause skin irritation in some individuals. • RYE: An excellent use of plant allelopathy is the use of mow‐ killed grain rye as a mulch. The allelochemicals that leach fro m the rye residue prevent weed germination but do not har m transplanted tomatoes, broccoli, or many other vegetables . • SAGE: Use as a companion plant with broccoli, cauliflower, r osemary, cabbage, and carrots to deter cabbage moths, beetl es, black flea beetles and carrot flies. Do not plant near cucu mbers, onions or rue. Sage repels cabbage moths and black fl ea beetles. Allowing sage to flower will also attract many ben eficial insects and the flowers are pretty. There are some ver y striking varieties of sage with variegated foliage that can b e used for their ornamental as well as practical qualities. • SPINACH: Plant with peas and beans as they provide natural shade for the spinach. Gets along with cabbage, cauliflower, celery, eggplant, onion, peas, strawberries and fava bean. Pla nt spinach with squash. It's a good use of space because by t he time squash plants start to get big the spinach is ready to bolt. • SOYBEANS: They add nitrogen to the soil making them a go od companion to corn. They repel chinch bugs and Japanese beetles. Why not try soybeans, they are good for you. They a re many tasty ways to prepare them. • SQUASH: Companions: Beans, corn, cucumbers, icicle radish es, melon, mint, onions and pumpkin. Helpers: Borage deters worms, improves growth and flavor. Marigolds deters beetle . Nasturtium deters squash bugs and beetles. Oregano provid es general pest protection. Dill may repel the squash bug tha

437

t will kill your squash vines. Generously scatter the dill leave s on your squash plants. Keep squash away from potatoes. • SWEET POTATOES: Sweet potatoes are not the same as reg ular potatoes. They are a member of the morning glory famil y. "Regular" potatoes are a member of the Solanaceae family which is the same as tomatoes, peppers etc. Aromatic herbs such as dill, thyme, oregano etc. are some of the plants that work well with them. Summer savory helps to confuse and p erhaps repel the Sweet potato weevil. They do well with roo t crops: beets, parsnips and salsify. Bush beans and regular p otatoes are companions to them also. Alyssum makes a perfe ct living mulch for them. A few, only a few, pole beans may b e planted with them and left to grow on the ground with the potato vines. Keep them away from squash. The problem wit h sweet potatoes and squash is they will compete with each other as they both like to spread out. In fact that is the gener al problem with sweet potatoes‐ they take up so much room and need full sun. Another idea is to grow them in a containe r. For your reference: you could grow a single sweet potato p lant in a box or tub that is at least 12" high and 15" wide. Use a light, porous soil mix. Place a stake or trellis in the center t o support the vine which grow up and outwards. • STRAWBERRY: Friends are beans, borage, lettuce, onions, s pinach and thyme. Foes: Cabbage, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower and kohlrabi. Allies: Borage strengthens resistan ce to insects and disease. Thyme, as a border, deters worms, • SUMMER SAVORY: Plant with beans and onions to improve growth and flavor. Include it with sweet potatoes. Discourag es cabbage moths, Mexican bean beetles, sweet potato weevi l and black aphids. Honey bees love it when it is in bloom. • SUNFLOWERS: Planting sunflowers with corn is said by som e to increase the yield. Aphids a problem? Definitely plant a f ew sunflowers here and there in the garden. Step back and w atch the ants herd the aphids onto them. We have been doin g this for years and it is remarkable. The sunflowers are so t ough that the aphids cause very little damage and you will h ave nice seed heads for the birds to enjoy. Sunflowers also at tract hummingbirds which eat whiteflies. Talk about a symbi otic relationship! • SWEET ALYSSUM: Direct seed or set out starts of sweet aly ssum near plants that have been attacked by aphids in the pa st. Alyssum flowers attract hoverflies whose larva devour ap hids. Another plus is their blooms draw bees to pollinate ear ly blooming fruit trees. They will reseed freely and make a b eautiful groundcover every year.

438

• TANSY: Plant with fruit trees, roses and raspberries keeping in mind that it can be invasive and is not the most attractive of plants. Tansy which is often recommended as an ant repel lant may only work on sugar type ants. These are the ones th at you see on peonies and marching into the kitchen. At least for us placing tansy clippings by the greenhouse door has ke pt them out. Deters flying insects, Japanese beetles, striped c ucumber beetles, squash bugs, ants and mice! Tie up and han g a bunch of tansy leaves indoors as a fly repellent. Use clippi ngs as a mulch as needed. Don't be afraid to cut the plant up as tansy will bounce back from any abuse heaped on it! It is a lso a helpful addition to the compost pile with its' high potas sium content. • THYME: Deters cabbage worms. Wooly thyme makes a won derful groundcover. You may want to use the upright form of thyme in the garden rather than the groundcover types. Thy me is easy to grow from seeds or cuttings. Older woody plan ts should be divided in spring. • TOMATOES: Tomato allies are many: asparagus, basil, bean, carrots, celery, chive, cucumber, garlic, head lettuce, marigol d, mint, nasturtium, onion, parsley, pea, pepper, marigold, po t marigold and sow thistle. One drawback with tomatoes and carrots: tomato plants can stunt the growth of your carrots b ut the carrots will still be of good flavor. Basil repels flies an d mosquitoes, improves growth and flavor. Bee balm, chives and mint improve health and flavor. Borage deters tomato w orm, improves growth and flavor. Dill, until mature, improve s growth and health, mature dill retards tomato growth. Ene mies: corn and tomato are attacked by the same worm. Kohl rabi stunts tomato growth. Keep potatoes and tomatoes apar t as they both can get early and late blight contaminating eac h other. Keep apricot, dill, fennel, cabbage and cauliflower a way from them. Don't plant them under walnut trees as they will get walnut wilt: a disease that attacks tomatoes growing underneath these trees. • TURNIP: Peas are good companions for turnips due to their nitrogen fixing in the soil. Cabbage does well with turnips be cause of the turnip's tendency to repel certain pests. Do not plant potatoes, radishes or other root vegetables near your t urnips. These vegetables will compete for nutrients with the turnips and reduce crop size and yield. Other plants that do not do well with turnips are delphinium, larkspur and musta rd. • Watermelon: May be planted in between hills of corn. Grow them with corn, nasturtiums, peas, sunflowers, squash, cucu

439

mbers, pumpkins and radishes. Nasturtium helps to deter bu gs and beetles. Oregano provides general pest protection. • WHITE GERANIUMS: These members of the pelargonum fa mily draw Japanese beetles to feast on the foliage which in t urn kills them.

B 10 Biodiversity and Organic Agriculture

A wide range of organisms benefit from organic farming, but it is unclear whether organic methods confer greater benefits than conventional integrated agri‐environmental programs. Nearly all non‐crop, naturally occurring species observed in comparative farm land practice studies show a preference for organic farming both by abundance and diversity. An average of 30% more species inhabit organic farms. Birds, butterflies, soil microbes, beetles, earthworms, spiders, vegetation, and mammals are particularly affected. Lack of herbicides and pesticides improve biodiversity fitness and population density. Many weed species attract beneficial insects that improve soil qualities and forage on weed pests. Soil‐bound organisms often benefit because of increased bacteria populations due to natural fertilizer such as manure, while experiencing reduced intake of herbicides and pesticides. Increased biodiversity, especially from beneficial soil microbes and mycorrhizae have been proposed as an explanation for the high yields experienced by some organic plots, especially in light of the differences seen in a 21‐year comparison of organic and control fields. Biodiversity from organic farming provides capital to humans. Species found in organic farms enhance sustainability by reducing human input (e.g., fertilizers, pesticides).

Photo: Bio‐diversity in organic farm Photo: Bio‐diversity in organic vineyard

B 11 Pest and Disease

B 11.1 Pesticides Risk

Unlike conventional farms, most organic farms largely avoid synthetic pesticides Some pesticides damage the environment or with direct exposure, human health. Children may be more at risk than adults from direct exposure, as the toxicity of pesticides is frequently different in children and adults.

440

The five main pesticides used in organic farming are Bt (a bacterial toxin), pyrethrum, rotenone, copper and sulphur. "Fewer than 10% of organic farmers use botanical insecticides on a regular basis, 12% use sulfur, and 7% use copper‐based compounds." Reduction and elimination of chemical pesticide use is technically challenging. Organic pesticides often complement other pest control strategies.

Photo. A sign outside of an organic apple orchard in Pateros, Washington reminding orchardists not to spray pesticides on these trees.

B 11.2. Pest and Disease Management Organic farmers do not usually have major problems with insects and plant diseases in field crops. There are two factors working in the organic farmer’s favor. Plant and insect diversity is greater in the more complex agro‐ecosystem, and plants fertilized by slow‐ release compost are more resistant to insects and disease. Problems with insects and disease can usually be traced to either the health of the soil or inappropriate crop rotation.

441

1. A diverse ecosystem is the first line of defense A crop grown as part of a rotation will not be as vulnerable to pests. Growing the same crop, or those susceptible to the same disease, in the same place, results in the progressive build‐up of disease organisms in the soil. Rotations break the life cycle of pest species. For example, corn rootworm is only a problem if corn is grown in the same place two years running. The vast majority of insects cause no economic damage, and the best form of pest control is to have a balance of pests and predators on the farm. Providing a range of habitats to encourage a diverse population of wildlife on the farm, including spiders, birds, frogs and toads, will help to control pest species. A range of shelter and food can be provided for the predators and parasites by intercropping (having two crops grow together like grains and legumes, or corn and beans), strip cropping (e.g., strips of row crops alternating with forage species), keeping hedgerows (rows of natural bush surrounding the fields) and even allowing some weeds grow in the field. Some weeds can have a positive effect on the dynamics of beneficial insects; parasitic wasps for example, are attracted to weeds with small flowers. Research has shown that outbreaks of certain crop pests are more likely in weed‐free fields. Obviously, care is needed to avoid weed competition with the crop, and some weeds could favor the pest, so each situation needs to be looked at separately. In some cases, mowing weeds at the field edge results in beneficials moving into the crop where they are needed. Some plant species act as attractants for certain insects, and growing that plant together with the production crop, or around the edge of the field or along the fence rows can benefit your production crop. For example, sawflies prefer to lay their eggs in bromegrass rather than spring wheat, and as the bromegrass also harbors many of the native parasites of the sawfly, few sawflies survive. In cases where a crop is disliked by a pest insect, the crop can be used as a barrier. Planting yellow sweet clover around the edge of a wheat field has been suggested as a means of preventing grasshoppers from moving into the wheat.

[photo: Strip cropping]

2. Maintaining a balance of nutrients in the soil The importance of a balanced source of fertilizer on the health of the soil cannot be over‐emphasized. There is a great deal of anecdotal evidence that organic farms have a lower incidence of disease. One explanation for this is that the slow release of

442

nutrients from compost and green manures maintains the biological balance in the soil. A disturbed mineral balance in the soil and subsequently in the plants can lead to metabolic disorders in livestock. For example, grass tetany in livestock occurs most frequently when grazing heavily‐fertilized pastures. It is caused by low blood magnesium, resulting from deficiencies of magnesium in the forage brought about by high levels of nitrogen and potassium in the soil. It is important to match crops to the fertility level of the soil. After a high nitrogen plowdown, do not grow oats; plant a crop that is a heavy feeder. Weak crops or crops lush from too much nitrogen are more attractive to pests and fungal disease. The reproductive rates of most pest insects are proportional to the supply of certain amino acids in their diet. Excess fertility increases the supply of these amino acids in plant tissue and the pest numbers increase too rapidly for natural enemies to control. Low levels of soil nitrates reduce the incidence of pest outbreaks. Research at Tunworth Farm in Nova Scotia demonstrated how the interactions between soil, weeds and insects on an organic farm are important for the natural control of pests. Weeds in fababeans provided habitat for lady bugs and other natural enemies of the aphid and also helped to lower soil nitrogen. Low levels of soil nitrate minimized luxury uptake of N by the fababeans, keeping reproductive rates of the aphids low so infestations were effectively controlled before the pod‐fill stage when they are most damaging to the crop. Yields were higher than in weed‐free plots. If there were high levels of soil nitrogen weeds reduced yields.

[Illustration: fababeans or ladybug line drawing]

3. Environmental conditions Adverse environmental conditions can put crops under stress, making them more vulnerable to pests and diseases. Proper management can modify these conditions or prevent them from arising, making the environment more amenable to crops. Select the appropriate field for the crop. Moisture ‐‐ too little or too much ‐‐ can be a source of stress. If crops are drought‐stressed, they are more vulnerable to insects. On the other hand, if alfalfa is planted in poorly drained soil, it will be vulnerable to root rot such as Phytophthora. Environmental management can provide optimum growing conditions. Plant windbreaks to modify air flow, help snow retention and conserve moisture. Research has shown that yields increase 10 per cent in corn and 20 per cent in soybeans in the lee of windbreaks

443

up to a distance of 12 times the height of the barrier on the downwind side and 5 times on the windward side.

photo: Farm windbreak]

4. Preventative management Other management practices will help in pest control. 1) Change the planting date to avoid certain problems. For example, barley yellow leaf is transmitted by aphids. Late planting of winter wheat and early seeding of spring grains will help avoid infection. 2) Use sound, clean, high‐quality seed from disease‐free fields. Seed cleaning is crucial because debris associated with seed, like plant residue and weed seeds, can carry diseases. 3) Seeding disease‐resistant varieties is helpful but not the final answer. Disease‐resistant varieties for many of the rusts and smuts are available.

5. Grain storage Insects and fungi can multiply rapidly in moist grain but if the grain is dry and temperatures are low there should be no problems. Insects do not develop in grain with temperatures below 18°C; however, a temperature of 5‐10°C is best for long term storage. Aeration will help dry and cool down grain. Bins should be thoroughly cleaned with a good vacuum cleaner before storing new grain. Moulds are more troublesome in moist grain and therefore if the grain has more than14 per cent moisture, it will need aeration. As the air outside the bins drops in temperature, condensation may develop on the inside wall of the bins, creating an environment favorable for moulds. Aeration is necessary if this happens. A perforated drainage pipe with the end capped can be stretched across the bin and around the perimeter, and then connected to a fan on the outside which will circulate air in the bin. A fan with a one‐half horsepower motor will work well. Diatomaceous Earth (DE) is used for insect control by some organic farmers when storing grain. Empty bins can be treated by lightly coating walls and floor, especially around the circumference and at the door, or it can be added to the grain as it is being stored. Products containing DE are registered for use in grain handling and storage areas but present regulations prevent the adding of any powder to grain destined for export or to be delivered into the commercial grain elevator system. There are beneficial insects that

444

will control insect pests in stored grain but none of these biological controls are registered for use in organic regulations.

B 12 Weed Management

During the transition period from conventional to organic agriculture, weeds are often one of the biggest problems encountered by farmers. With careful management, these problems can be overcome. A well‐designed crop rotation and soil‐ improvement program which increases and maintains the biological activity of the soil will ensure a vigorous crop and reduced competition from weeds. Weeds are only a problem if they reduce crop yields or cause harvesting problems. The organic farmer does not expect entirely clean fields but sees the farm as an ecological system that has a diversity of plants, where the crop is the dominant species. The techniques used to control weeds focus on giving the crop a head start rather than eliminating all species of weeds. An understanding of the life cycle of problem weeds, including the depth of seed germination, time of emergence, growing habits and the vigor of its rhizome, will help the farmer decide what control measures are appropriate and when to use them.

B 12.1 Prevention is better than cure

Prevention is always easier than trying to find a cure. Improving soil conditions on your farm is the first step in eliminating weed problems. Weeds may tolerate compaction and drainage problems better than many crops. As a result, weeds are more competitive and problems more severe. Similarly, high levels of soluble nutrients can stimulate greater weed growth. Maintaining favorable soil conditions for microbial activity is the preferable "first line of defence" against weeds. A biologically‐active soil with good drainage will improve the vigor of the crop and reduce weed problems. If the crop gets off to a good start and forms a dense canopy, it can usually compete successfully with weeds during the growing season.

1) Crop rotation Crop rotation is the key to both soil improvement and effective weed control. The rotation can include specific crops to control

445

problem weeds in particular fields. Crops suffer the most from weeds that share similar growth patterns. For example, Shepherd’s‐ purse thrives in fields of winter wheat because its life cycle is identical to that of the grain. By rotating crops with different nutrient and management requirements in the same field, weed life cycles are disrupted. Cool season canopy crops are alternated with warm‐season row crops which can provide more cultivation opportunities. Clover or forage crops discourage some weeds by shading and lessen the reproductive success of others because they are cut for hay before the seeds ripen. Inclusion of competitive smother crops or allelopathic crops in the rotation provides further control options. Photo: Crop rotation Photo: Allelopathic crops

2) Smother crops and cover crops Buckwheat is an example of a smother crop that grows rapidly and forms a dense canopy which slows weed establishment. Fall‐ planted cover crops or over‐wintering production crops will greatly reduce weeds in the next growing season. If the soil is left bare, weeds will grow. Farmers have observed that cover crops incorporated in the spring provide better weed control than those that are winter‐killed. This may be because the cover crop has a mulching effect or because of toxins ‐‐ an allelopathic effect ‐‐ produced by the cover crops. Photo: Smother crop Photo: Cover crop

3) Allelopathic crops Some plants, like rye and sunflowers, produce natural, chemical toxins which inhibit the growth of other plant species. This phenomenon is known as allelopathy and can be used to assist in weed control. For example, rye used as a fall cover crop can be effective in suppressing quack grass. The inhibitory effect on weeds diminishes when rye is disked into the soil rather than left on the surface. Sunflowers, and small grains such as oats and wheat, release toxins either as root exudate or from decaying plant materials. Sunflowers seem to maintain their weed‐suppressing ability when incorporated into the soil.

446

4) Nurse crops Nurse crops, such as oats and barley, used in the year of establishing forages help prevent weeds from establishing before the forage becomes dominant. Photo: Nurse crop

5) Crop selection Crops can be selected for their ability to compete or adapt to weeds. Fast‐growing canopy crops and tall crops with extra leaf area are more competitive than vegetables. Barley is more tolerant of weed competition than wheat, and wheat can tolerate weeds better than oats. Select vigorous varieties; some farmers have found that taller varieties, such as Rodney oats, compete more readily with weeds than the newer, shorter‐stemmed varieties.

6) Crop management Producing vigorous competitive crops is the soundest, most economical method of control. It is important to match the fertility of the soil with the crop needs. A common mistake leading to problems with annual weeds, such as pigweed and lamb's quarters, is overfertilizing. Nitrogen management is important. If there are high levels of soluble N when growing grain legumes, the balance is tipped in favor of the weeds and a lot of cultivation is necessary to keep weeds from reducing bean yields. If a field is being seeded down, conditions should give the advantage to the underseeding in order to control weeds. Use of composted manure rather than raw manure will reduce weeds, but heavy applications of young compost will also create problems as it is relatively high in soluble nutrients. Heating during the composting process will kill many of the weed seeds. The degree of competition between the crop and the weeds can also be altered by manipulating a number of other factors: • Time of seeding: Small grains and small seeded legumes sh ould be seeded early in the spring so that they can become e stablished and successfully compete with weeds, that germi nate later. If germination coincides with the first flush of we eds there will be intense competition. For other crops such a s beans, planting should be delayed until soil temperatures f avour rapid germination. This also allows time for tillage op erations to eliminate cool‐weather weeds. • Row spacing: Row width is reduced so that the leaf canopy closes in fast and shades out weeds. However, closer spacing between rows should be balanced with leaving rows wide en ough for cultivation.

447

• Seeding rate: Organic farmers recommend a high seeding ra te for a denser stand to shade out weeds and leave fewer em pty spaces where weeds can get established. For example, in Ontario, soybeans are sown 21~29 seeds/m for a high densi ty stand in 55~71cm rows. Another example is the seeding r ate for oats. If you have weed problems, sow oats at 2~3 bu/ acre, rather than 1.5~2 bu/acre. Use the lower rate if you ar e underseeding the oats with a forage crop. Always sow clea n seed. Other preventative measures include the mowing of f ence lines, roadsides, waste areas and adjacent pastures to p revent weeds seeding and spreading into adjacent fields. Ti ming is important. Mow when weeds are most vulnerable; a nnuals at first flower, and perennials when reserves are low est between full leaf and flowering. Maintain a close watch o ver the fields during the growing season ‐‐ removal of a few plants by hand will require little effort and prevent trouble i n the future. Annual weeds produce large amounts of seed a nd the seedbank of small‐seeded weeds may be measured in thousands per square metre of soil. For example, pigweed (A maranthus retroflexus) produces 110,000 seeds per plant. It is advisable to clean all tillage and harvesting machinery before moving from one area to another.

B 12.2 Mechanical methods of weed control

Weeds have the greatest impact on yields in the early stages of crop establishment. If the weeds are controlled during this period, the crops have time to produce enough biomass to compete for nutrients and sunlight. A variety of tillage options are available to the farmer. The exact timing of the operations will be determined by the weather and the condition of the soil, but it is important to watch the fields closely and work when the weeds are small. Crop injury and poor weed control are a result of cultivating at the wrong time or with poorly‐adjusted equipment. Excessive tillage should be avoided as it may dry out the soil, accelerate losses of organic matter or cause compaction. Light tillage operations to control weeds in standing crops have a minimal negative impact on the soil.

[Photos: Blind harrowing; Rotary hoe; Weeder harrow; Mid‐ mounted cultivator; and Inter‐row cultivation]

448

1) Pre‐plant tillage / false seed bed Tillage promotes weed germination by exposing dormant seeds to oxygen. Therefore, tillage immediately prior to planting creates tremendous weed pressure on the crop. However, the crop will have the advantage if the weeds are allowed to germinate and then killed by a second tillage operation immediately before seeding. Use a rod weeder or light harrows which stir up only the top inch of soil and do not bring up more weed seeds. If weed pressure if high, the operation can be repeated before seeding row crops or buckwheat. This technique is also effective when used in early fall to germinate next year's weeds which will then be winter‐killed; planting a cover crop may be more beneficial.

2) Ridge tillage Ridge tillage can be used effectively to control weeds and to reduce tillage operations. Ridges are built at last cultivation in a corn crop, or later in the summer or early fall after a green manure or forage stand. They can be lightly seeded with an annual cover crop. In the spring the planter sweep will remove the top inch of soil together with any crop residue and weeds from the ridge, leaving a weed‐free seed bed.

3) Pre‐emergent tillage or blind harrowing Blind harrowing is done at the critical moment after the crop has been planted, has sprouted but has not yet emerged. The field is harrowed to kill the weeds which have already sprouted. The crop will emerge shortly afterwards, having gained a competitive edge on the next generation of weeds. If the crop leaf has already appeared it will not be able to break through if it is covered by soil. A planting depth of 5 cm is recommended if blind harrowing is to be used. This technique is effective in controlling broadleaf annual weeds in cereal crops. When used with row crops, it gives the crop a lead on emerging weeds until the plant is large enough to withstand other mechanical controls. A rod weeder or any type of harrow can be used, but do not use this method if the crop has been underseeded with grass or legumes. If necessary, underseeding can be delayed until after harrowing.

4) Rotary hoe A rotary hoe is often used for pre‐emergent tillage in crops such as corn and soybeans, as well as for control of weeds once the crop has emerged.

449

It is commonly used about 5~7 days after planting and again 7~10 days later. The action of the hoe lifts and mixes the soil, uprooting small weeds less than 2.5 cm tall. Weeds are killed more easily when they are in the white stage before they break through the soil surface. Speeds of 10‐20 km/hr are required, and best results are obtained if the soil is dry and the operation is carried out in late morning or afternoon. If the soil is moist, the hoe may transplant seedlings. The rotary hoe is also used to break up soil crust before the crop emerges.

5) Weeder harrow The weeder or flex‐tine harrow is used once the crop has emerged, at the 4th leaf stage in cereals that are not underseeded and in row crops such as corn and soybeans that are 15 cm high. The springy tines of the harrow are gentle enough not to harm the crop while uprooting or covering the smaller weeds. Photo: Weeder harrow

6) Inter‐row cultivation Inter‐row cultivation, also called scuffling, of row crops uproots small weeds and cuts off larger weeds once the crop is about 10 cm high. Again, the emphasis should be on cultivating before the weeds become a problem ‐‐ small weeds are easiest to control. Straight rows and a uniform crop stand will make the job easier. Various types of equipment can be used; front‐ or mid‐mounted cultivators allow more precision. Often equipment needs can be met by retooling machinery already on hand. It is important to maintain a good working edge or point on all the soil engaging parts of the cultivator. Use the appropriate equipment for the crop at the correct speed, depth and spacing. Cultivating too deeply or too closely to the row can result in root pruning. Two or three cultivations early in the season will probably be all that is required. The first pass is critical and should leave adequate soil adjacent to the row which can be moved into the row to smother or bury weeds there without damaging the crop. Once plants are about knee high, cultivation will likely damage the crop. For maximum weed control in row crops, use of the rotary hoe or weeder harrow should precede inter‐row cultivation.

7) Flame weeding Flame weeding is gaining in popularity for spot weeding and in‐row weeding and it can be combined with cultivating between the rows. Gas pressure and ground speed are used to control the heat at which the weeds will be killed without damaging the crop.

450

Staggered burners direct high heat to the base of the crop for about one‐tenth of a second. The heat expands the water in the weeds, bursting the cell walls. In three or four days, they are brown and dead. The best results are obtained on hot dry days when the weeds are small. Flaming can also be used before planting, after seed bed preparation has stimulated the germination of weed seeds, to give a 60~70 per cent reduction in weeds. Photo: Flame weeding

B 12.3. Are weeds always a problem? The presence of weeds should not automatically be judged as damaging. At a certain point, weeds affect yield and harvestability and increase the cost of handling and storage of grain, but below that point they can have a beneficial effect. The tolerance level of weeds depends on the crop and on how the soil nutrients are being managed. Weeds do have a role to play. They can collect and hold leachable nutrients, which will be made available to following crops when the weeds decompose. They cover and protect the soil, conserve moisture, increase the organic matter content and bring up minerals from the subsoil. They also harbor beneficial insects. Many of the above‐mentioned benefits can also be achieved with cover crops which are more efficient than weeds and do not self‐ seed. It may be a mistake to let weeds grow unless they are very carefully managed.

B 12.4 Weeds as indicators of soil conditions

Weed type and concentration are responses to the condition of the soil. Some people believe they can be used as indicators of what's wrong or what's right with the soil. Increasing numbers of any weed or distinct groups of weeds are usually a bad symptom. In years of drought, weeds appear that are rarely seen under normal conditions. Some observations are reported below; however this is an area where more research is needed to examine the relationships between weed species, nutrient balances and trace mineral availability.

451

1) Quack grass (variously known as twitch grass, couch grass o r scutch grass) ‐‐ soil compaction at the soil surface, a hardp an or crusty surface; calcium deficiency. 2) Milkweed and thistles ‐‐ deep soil compaction, with milkwee d favoring moist land and thistles growing in drier condition s with low humus levels. 3) Chickweed ‐‐ incomplete decomposition of organic matter. ( Researchers in Nova Scotia reported that chickweed predom inated in soils when there were problems with phytotoxicity , that is when plant residues produced substances which inhi bited growth of the following crop.) 4) Ragweed ‐‐ "complexed" or unavailable potassium. 5) Silvery cinquefoil ‐‐ dry shallow soil. 6) Docks and sorrels ‐‐ waterlogged or poorly drained acidic so il. 7) Lamb’s quarters, pigweed, nettles ‐‐ tilled or cultivated soil with high fertility or humus, unless weeds are pale and stunt ed, then low fertility. 8) Hawkweeds and knapweed ‐‐ acidic soil.

B 12.5 Solutions to some weed problems

Canada thistle is usually controlled by establishing a vigorous, dense stand of alfalfa or red clover. The forage is clipped three times in the growing season which reduces the rhizome sugars of the Canada thistle to the point where the plant is critically weakened. If there is a very serious problem, the land is left fallow for a cleaning phase. The Canada thistle is allowed to regrow, and is then cultivated or mowed down, up to four or five times.

Wild oats are an annual weed whose seeds can remain dormant in the soil for many years. Often a problem in fields of small grains, wild oats can be controlled by having row crops and/or forages in the rotation before seeding to small grains and by blind harrowing spring‐planted cereals. Other control techniques include undersowing cereals or delaying planting so that the early germinating wild oats are killed by tillage before seeding.

Milkweed is best controlled with a rotation of alfalfa or red clover, or spring planted buckwheat.

Quack grass is controlled by exhausting its root reserves by timely cultivation. Following harvest, the infested area should be worked,

452

stimulating the rhizomes to new growth. Cultivation is repeated as the plant shows 10 cm of new growth. Other strategies are to cultivate in the spring and plant a green manure crop of buckwheat, followed by fall rye, or to interplant rye grass into the row crop.

Most farmers successfully control weeds using a combination of techniques but emphasis should be placed on improving soil conditions rather than relying on mechanical means. B 13 Purchased Soil Amendments

Mineral fertilizers, micronutrient fertilizers and biological agents are most important during the period of transition while the soil is withdrawing from chemical inputs and adapting to organic agriculture. Once the soil fertility and nutrient cycles have been established, amendments are seldom used.

B 13.1 Mineral fertilizers

Organic certification programs do not allow the use of synthetically‐produced, highly‐soluble fertilizers. Also prohibited are some naturally‐occurring products with undesirable characteristics. One example is muriate of potash; it is highly‐ soluble and has a salinizing effect. And, some materials are restricted. Check the standards of the certification agency in your area. Most ecologically‐acceptable sources of mineral fertilizers are slow‐acting rock powders which have less energy‐intensive methods of production. Rock powders are non‐toxic to soil organisms, and there is less danger of burning plant roots or of salt build up. Unrefined rock powders also contain micronutrients. The more finely‐ground the rock minerals, the greater the surface area from which nutrients can be liberated by the biological processes in the soil. Rock powders either substitute for mineral nutrients which are naturally‐deficient in the soil or replace the nutrients that leave the farm as cash crops. When only the grain or seed leaves the farm, the majority of nutrients used by the plant can be returned to the soil. If hay crops are sold, however, there is a major loss of organic matter and nutrients from the farm system. Replacing these nutrients may be difficult and costly. Long‐range planning is necessary to obtain the most effect from rock powders. One of their disadvantages is that large quantities are needed to provide nutrients for the crop's immediate need.

453

They are much more effective as a long‐term reserve of nutrients. For example, an application of one ton of hard rock or colloidal phosphate per acre should satisfy crop requirements for 4‐5 years. When deciding whether to buy rock powders, keep in mind that they are ineffective in soil that has a low level of biological activity and that the minerals become unavailable in alkaline soils. Rock powders can be added to compost to help increase the nutrient availability or be spread directly on the field. For greatest effectiveness, apply rock phosphate prior to seeding clovers, alfalfa or buckwheat because these plants are able to make good use of phosphate in this form.

B 13.2 Micronutrient fertilizers

It is possible for plants to absorb a limited quantity of micronutrients through the cuticle (skin) of the leaf. During the transition period, organic farmers use foliar sprays such as liquid seaweed extract to correct certain micronutrient problems. The foliar sprays supply small quantities of nitrogen, calcium, magnesium, boron, zinc and iron to the plants. The effectiveness of the spray depends on air temperature, light levels, surface pH, energy availability and leaf surface moisture. For example, foliar sprays should be applied to soybeans during the early mornings or evenings when temperatures are below 26C, to take advantage of the natural processes that assist the intake of nutrients. When temperatures are moderate, spraying is best done in the evening or during days of high humidity. If the foliage is dry and water vapor is leaving the cells rapidly, there is little chance of the nutrients being absorbed.

B 13.3 Biological agents Organic farmers are well aware of the crucial part played by microbial soil life in building soil structure, in nutrient release and in disease and weed control. There are products on the market that can accelerate the development of these beneficial bacteria. While some of these products are advantageous in the transitional years, most long‐time organic farmers agree that using compost along with green manures, appropriate tillage and an adequate crop rotation will maintain bacterial activity at its optimum level without purchased biological agents. If a legume crop is being grown in a field for the first time, or if the soil has a low bacteria population, adding Rhizobia bacteria to

454

legumes will encourage nitrogen fixation. Each Rhizobium species is effective with only one legume species. When legumes are inoculated with the appropriate bacteria, cell division is stimulated, and nodules which have active bacteria populations form on the roots of the legumes. The nitrogen fixation occurs directly within the nodule. Rhizobia inoculant is available in powder, liquid or granular form and should be stored in a cool area; the bacteria are killed by heat. It is important to have the seed well mixed with the inoculant so that every seed is inoculated. A different symbiotic relationship at the biological level, this time between plants roots and fungi, has also been investigated with a view to developing a commercial product. A group of fungi called vesicular‐arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (VAMs), have been shown to penetrate the inner area of plant roots and extend the surface area of the roots. In this way, VAMs increase the roots' ability to absorb moisture and nutrients. VAM fungi are thought to dramatically increase the ability of some plants to absorb normally unavailable phosphorus. Natural populations have been severely depleted in soils where applications of phosphorus fertilizer have been high. Photo: Biological agents Photo: VAM Photo: Rhizobium agents for soybean B 14 Organic Gardening Step by Step

B 14.1 Secrets for Organic Vegetable Garden

Imagine harvesting nearly half a ton of tasty, beautiful, organically grown vegetables from a 15‐by‐20‐foot plot, 100 pounds of tomatoes from just 100 square feet, or 20 pounds of carrots from just 24 square feet. Yields like these are easier to achieve than you may think. The secret to superproductive gardening is taking the time now to plan strategies that will work for your garden. Here are seven high‐yield strategies gleaned from gardeners who have learned to make the most of their garden space.

455

1. Build up your soil. Expert gardeners agree that building up the soil is the single most important factor in pumping up yields. A deep, organically rich soil encourages the growth of healthy, extensive roots that are able to reach more nutrients and water. The result: extra‐lush, extra‐ productive growth above ground. The fastest way to get that deep layer of fertile soil is to make raised beds. Raised beds yield up to four times more than the same amount of space planted in rows. That’s due not only to their loose, fertile soil but also to efficient spacing—by using less space for paths, you have more room to grow plants. Raised beds save you time, too. One researcher tracked the time it took to plant and maintain a 30‐by‐30‐foot garden planted in beds, and found that he needed to spend just 27 hours in the garden from mid‐May to mid‐October. Yet he was able to harvest 1,900 pounds of fresh vegetables—that’s a year’s supply of food for three people from about 3 total days of work! How do raised beds save so much time? Plants grow close enough together to shade out competing weeds, so you spend less time weeding. The close spacing also makes watering and harvesting more efficient.

2. Round out your beds The shape of your beds can make a difference, too. Raised beds are more space‐efficient if the tops are gently rounded to form an arc, rather than flat. A rounded bed that is 5 feet wide across its base, for instance, will give you a 6‐foot‐wide arc above it—creating a

456

planting surface that’s a foot wider than that of a flat bed. That foot might not seem like much, but multiply it by the length of your bed and you’ll see that it can make a big difference in total planting area. In a 20‐foot‐long bed, for example, rounding the top increases your total planting area from 100 to 120 square feet. That’s a 20 percent gain in planting space in a bed that takes up the same amount of ground space! Lettuce, spinach, and other greens are perfect crops for planting on the edges of a rounded bed.

3. Space smartly To get the maximum yields from each bed, pay attention to how you arrange your plants. Avoid planting in square patterns or rows. Instead, stagger the plants by planting in triangles. By doing so, you can fit 10 to 14 percent more plants in each bed. Just be careful not to space your plants too tightly. Some plants won’t reach their full size—or yield—when crowded. For instance, when one researcher increased the spacing between romaine lettuces from 8 to 10 inches, the harvest weight per plant doubled. Overly tight spacing can also stress plants, making them more susceptible to diseases and insect attack.

4. Grow up! No matter how small your garden, you can grow more by going vertical. Grow space‐hungry vining crops—such as tomatoes, pole beans, peas, squash, melons, cukes, and so on—straight up, supported by trellises, fences, cages, or stakes. Growing vegetables vertically also saves time. Harvest and maintenance go faster because you can see exactly where the fruits are. And upward‐bound plants are less likely to be hit by fungal diseases thanks to the improved air circulation around the foliage. Try growing vining crops on trellises along one side of raised beds, using sturdy end posts with nylon mesh netting or string in between to provide a climbing surface. Tie the growing vines to the trellis. But don’t worry about securing heavy fruits—even squash and melons will develop thicker stems for support.

5. Mix it up Interplanting compatible crops saves space, too. Consider the classic Native American combination, the “three sisters”—corn, beans, and squash. Sturdy cornstalks support the pole beans, while squash grows freely on the ground below, shading out competing weeds. This combination works because the crops are compatible. Other compatible combinations include tomatoes, basil, and onions; leaf

457

lettuce and peas or brassicas; carrots, onions, and radishes; and beets and celery.

6. Succeed with successions Succession planting allows you to grow more than one crop in a given space over the course of a growing season. That way, many gardeners are able to harvest three or even four crops from a single area. For instance, an early crop of leaf lettuce can be followed with a fast‐maturing corn, and the corn followed by more greens or overwintered garlic—all within a single growing season. For instance, an early crop of leaf lettuce can be followed with a fast‐maturing corn, and the corn followed by more greens or overwintered garlic—all within a single growing season. To get the most from your succession plantings: Use transplants. A transplant is already a month or so old when you plant it, and so will mature that much faster than a direct‐seeded plant (one grown from seeds sown in the garden). Choose fast‐maturing varieties. Replenish the soil with a ¼‐to‐½‐inch layer of compost (about 2 cubic feet per 100 square feet) each time you replant. Work it into the top few inches of soil.

7. Stretch your season Adding a few weeks to each end of the growing season can buy you enough time to grow yet another succession crop—say a planting of leaf lettuce, kale, or turnips—or to harvest more end‐of‐the‐season tomatoes. To get those extra weeks of production, you need to keep the air around your plants warm, even when the weather is cold, by using mulches, cloches, row covers, or coldframes. Or give heat‐loving crops (such as melons, peppers, and eggplants) an extra‐early start by using two “blankets”—one to warm the air and one to warm the soil in early spring. About 6 to 8 weeks before the last frost date, preheat cold soil by covering it with either infrared‐transmitting (IRT) mulch or black plastic, which will absorb heat. Then, cover the bed with a slitted, clear plastic tunnel. When the soil temperature reaches 65° to 70°F, set out plants and cover the black plastic mulch with straw to keep it from trapping too much heat. Remove the clear plastic tunnel when the air temperature warms and all danger of frost has passed. Install it again at the end of the season, when temperatures cool.

458

B 14.2 Secrets for Organic Lawn Care ‐ Step by step ‐

• Use a push mower! It • Set your mower to is quiet and does not mow high. Long pollute. Keep it sharp blades of grass and oiled. develop deep roots.

• Leave clippings on • GVRD poster at our your lawn to provide garden showing lawn nitrogen and care tips. moisture. Mow often.

459

• Conserve water! • Use a hand weeder Water thoroughly but not herbicides. less often - a Develop a tolerance maximum of one for weeds. hour a week.

• Aerate by hand in • Overseed with grass May or September to seed. reduce soil compaction.

460

http://homepage.mac.com/cityfarmer/Pho toAlbum25.html

• GVRD poster at our garden reviewing natural lawn care.

B 15 Rice farming system with duck and snail

B 15.1 Duck‐rice farming 10, 11

A method of rice farming that relies on ducks to eat insects and weeds has been in the news recently. The "aigamo method" of growing rice was developed in 1989 by Takao Furuno, a farmer in Fukuoka Prefecture, and it allows for the production of healthy and delicious rice while relying on less labor than previous methods. From its beginnings in Japan, it has made its way to rice‐growing countries like South Korea, China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Thailand, and even to faraway Iran. Rice grown using this method is more resistant to typhoons and other problems, and some farmers who have begun using it have called it a "gift from God."

10 http://web‐japan.org/trends01/article/021022sci_r.html 11 http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/blog/how‐ancient‐chinese‐ farmers‐had‐it‐right‐all‐/blog/38534/

461

Photo: Aigamo ducks swimming in a rice paddy

Organic Rice

In rice duck farming in China, ducks are raised on rice paddies and feed on pests and weeds. Which means the farmer doesn't have to use earth and water‐ravaging chemical pesticides and herbicides on their plants. The ducks also churn up the water with their feet helping to get more oxygen to the rice plants roots, thereby boosting growth. Duck droppings are also an excellent, natural fertilizer for rice plants. Rice duck farming is already an Asia‐wide success story.

The aigamo in Japanese is a cross‐breed of wild and domestic ducks. The aigamo method for growing rice involves releasing aigamo ducklings into a rice paddy about one or two weeks after the seedlings have been planted. Between 15 and 20 of these birds are needed for every 1,000 square meters of farmland. Also necessary is a shelter where the ducklings can rest and take refuge from rain. In order to protect them from dogs, cats, weasels, and crows, the field should be surrounded by an electric fence and protected from above by fishing line.

The ducklings help the rice seedlings grow by eating both insects and weeds that get in the way. The farmer can then grow the rice without using pesticide or herbicide. He or she is also free from the back‐breaking work of bending over to pull weeds by hand. The ducklings' droppings become an important source of natural fertilizer. In addition, they stir up the soil in the rice paddy with their feet and bills, a process that increases the oxygen content of the soil, making it more nutritious for the seedlings. And when it comes time to harvest the rice in the fall, the ducks have grown fat and can be sold for meat. By allowing farmers to grow crops organically and also raise ducks to sell as meat, the aigamo method really does kill two birds with one stone.

462

Helping Farmers Financially In countries across Asia, where people are reflecting on the overuse of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, the aigamo method of raising healthy and delicious rice is attracting attention, and many farmers have begun to use it. This method is beneficial from a cost standpoint in that farmers will no longer have to purchase expensive chemical fertilizers or pesticides. And the fact that extra money can be made when the fully grown ducks are sold off is another factor that many find appealing.

The aigamo is a cross between the kamo (wild duck) and the ahiru (domestic duck). Because kamo are migratory, it was believed that using ahiru would be better for agriculture. According to some experts, though, aigamo have come to be used because they produce a large amount of tasty meat and are easier to obtain than ahiru.

Furuno, the pioneer of the aigamo method of growing rice, has visited Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam in an effort to introduce the method. New technology and new ideas are being tried in various areas, and Japan has begun to receive feedback from the farmers

463

themselves.

However recent research showed that duck‐rice shows the water contamination in terms of nitrate and ammonium nitrogen in the irrigation outlet and strong odor of duck dung even in the neighboring or surrounding field were detected due to high number of ducks introduced in the duck‐rice system.

Photo: Duck‐rice farming in Hongseong/ Korea

B 15.2 Snail‐rice farming 12, 13

Golden Apple Snail (GAS), Pomacea canaliculata (Lamarck) is a dreaded pest of the rice plant because of its rapid and new invasions in Asia and North America. It is listed in the “100 World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species” of the Global Invasive Species Group Database (ISSG, www.issg.org/database). In an attempt to control GAS, pesticide misuse and abuse by farmers have caused serious economic, social, and environmental impacts, biodiversity loss, and health hazards to rice farming communities. Ten years after its introduction, the cumulative costs of GAS invasion were between US$425 million and US$1.2 billion. However, some organic farmers in Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines do not kill GAS but employ them to feed on aquatic weeds in rice fields, thus saving expenses on herbicides. The benefit from using GAS as a biological weeding agent far exceeds that of ducks or carps for paddy weeding.

Organic farming in Korea helps in increasing the nation’s produce as the country advocates for healthier environment and better agricultural produce by 2015. And rice yields produced through organic method were “very good” and that it effectively controlled weeds and improved soil’s health according to Korean scientist, Dr.Lee.

12 http://www.philrice.gov.ph/?page=resources&page2=news&id=36 13 Joshi, R. C.; Martin, E. C.; Wada, T. and Sebastian, L. S. (2005) Role of Golden Apple Snail in Organic Rice Cultivation and Weed Management. Paper at: Researching Sustainable Systems - International Scientific Conference on Organic Agriculture, Adelaide, Australia, September 21-23, 2005

464

“We have high (rice) yield (even if we do organic) because we are able to supply the plant nutrients, meet fertilizer demands, and have excellent crop protection techniques,” Lee, a researcher in the RDA’s Department of Crop Life Safety of the National Academy of Agricultural Science, said.

Korea’s organic approach include the use of green manure and rice herbicide‐free farming, which incorporates, plastic film mulching, and rice systems such as rice‐snail, rice‐duck, and rice‐bran.

Among Korea’s alternative technologies, PhilRice scientists and experts expressed interest in adopting the rice‐bran farming system should strategies be devised to cut down the technology cost. Estimates show that a farmer would shell out P25, 000 worth of bran to adequately fertilize a hectare.

In Korea, Lee said the bran is converted to powder‐form or pellets and scattered into the paddies during the planting season to help prevent weed growth and boost nutrient content of the soil.

“About 2,500 k of rice bran is needed in a hectare. However, this rice bran alone cannot fully fertilize the soil so it must be coupled with other organic materials,” Lee explained.

With the effect of organic farming in Korea and the country’s implementation on sustainable agriculture programs, Dr. Lee, Sang Guei, center director for Korea’s scientific and technical cooperation project in the Philippines, encouraged knowledge sharing between countries.

Korea is assisting the Philippines on its goal to nail rice self‐ sufficiency by 2013 through the project, Korean Project for International Agriculture Center, being hosted at PhilRice’s Experimental Station in Science City of Munoz, Nueva Ecija.

To be implemented until 2013, the center will host trainings on rice and rice‐based cropping systems and farm mechanization for Filipino researchers, extension officers, and farmers. Korea will also send its experts and scientists to PhilRice while qualified Filipino rice workers will be trained in Korea.

Photo: Snail‐rice farming Photo: Snail egg in rice leaves

465

B 15.3 Azolla–rice farming Salvinia natans order/Azolla family/ Azolla genus of aquatic fern symbioses with blue‐green alga (Anabaena azollae). Its nitrogen fixing activity is higher than that of legumes owing to blue‐green alga and it is utilized as green manure by burying. 6 species & 2 subspecied of Azolla are distributed in the world.

Though it has been said that 2 species, Azolla filiculoides and A.pinnata, live in Japan, A. rubra seems to also live. Azolla is extinguished by agricultural chemical recently and it is not observed recently at one's side. It is one of "plant in the crisis of extinction".

The nutrient composition of a kind of Azolla was analyzed, and it seems that it is substitutive to 20% of feed of pig and Tilapia. When Azolla is added in "hybrid duck‐ rice farming system", it is utilized as feed for hybrid duck and remainder of the Azolla is utilized as green manure by burying it into paddy rice field. Yield of brown rice and productivity of hybrid duck are improved by introducing Azolla into hybrid duck‐rice farming system.

Photo: Azolla‐rice farming

Photo: Azolla

B 15.4 Rice‐fish farming14 For over 1,200 years farmers in Southern China have been employing rice fish farming. Recent scientific research from Zhejiang University has shown that paddies which simultaneously raise fish require 68% less chemical pesticide use and 24% less chemical fertilizer use than the monoculture rice system. Like ducks, the fish feed on pests and weeds. This method has been designated a "globally important agriculture heritage system" by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

14 http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/blog/how‐ancient‐chinese‐ farmers‐had‐it‐right‐all‐/blog/38534/

466

467

B 16. Stockless Organic Farming

Stockless organic farming consists of organic farming methods that do not use livestock or animal products. Stockless organic growers do not keep domesticated animals and do not use animal products such as farmed animal manures or animal parts (bone meal, blood meal, fish meal). Emphasis is placed on using green manures instead. Stock‐free farming may use organic or non‐organic farming techniques. However, most detailed discussions of stock‐free agriculture currently focus on stock‐free organic variants.

Photo: Rotation plan for stockless farm

B 17 Organic Beekeeping

+ The territory where organic bee keeping takes place must have a 3‐ kilometer diameter for flying. Organic and conventional bee keeping can not be practiced at the same time on the same territory. + Bee keeping products can be marketed as “organic products” if the related organic agriculture regulations have been applied for at least one year. + If a beekeeping operation obtains permission previously from an accredited organization, its conventional bee colonies can be used for transition to organic beekeeping operation. + Bee colonies obtained from bee keepers who does not operate according to the Provisions of Organic Agriculture and Implementation can be used in a one‐year transition period. + The renewal of the colonies, according to the provisions of legislation on non‐organic farming, bee and the drone of 10% per year, subject to place hives in organic production, organic production units can be made. This case transition period will not be implemented. + Enough natural nectar for bees, nectar and pollen sources must be available and access to water. + Production of nectar and pollen sources located within 3 km radius of the organically produced products or consist of natural vegetation. + At the end of the season the bees in the winter in order that a sufficient amount of honey and pollen left sleeve. + Beekeeping for disease prevention; resistant suitable must be selected races.

468

+ Despite the protective measures, the colonies become sick or damaged, it must be taken immediately to treatment, and if necessary, separate colonies should be isolated from the sleeve. + Varroa bee for malware, formic acid, lactic acid, acetic acid, oxalic acid and menthol, thymol, camphor okaliptol or available. + Harvesting of beekeeping products is prohibited during the destruction of bees in honeycombs. + Honey harvest insect repellent chemical synthetic substances are prohibited. + Beehive beehives are placed in areas with the recorded information. Barrels are located within the knowledge of a body authorized moved from place to place. + Harvesting of beekeeping products is prohibited during the destruction of bees in honeycombs. + Honey harvest insect repellent chemical synthetic substances are prohibited. + Fields are placed in hives with hives information should be recorded. Moved from place to place within the knowledge of where a body authorized beehives. + Beehives and bee products, the risk to the environment from natural materials should not bring. + Can not paint barrels of chemical dyes. + The new framework should be provided for the wax, organic production units. the use of beeswax, organic production units are not taken, based on analyzes may be permitted by the authorized organization. + Eyes on the offspring can not be milked in the frames of honey. + Frame, hives, honeycomb materials, such as protection from pests, the equipment and containers, cleaning and transportation of products or materials may be used only prescribed in the Regulation of Organic Agriculture. + Quarantine measures in areas of pesticide applied and the aircraft can be made of organic beekeeping.

Photo: Organic Beekeeping Photo: Organic honey

B 18 Wild Collection

Organic features forests, natural areas and agricultural areas, which grows naturally in the edible parts of plants and collection;

469

+ Collection area, three years before the collection process of the Regulation on Organic Farming Principles and Practices should not be treated with products other than products. + The collection area must not have had a fire in the last two years. + The collection area must not be burned stubble. + Acquisition of necessary approval from relevant organizations before the above information has been confirmed and must be taken. + The collection in the field of protection of natural habitats and species should be balance.

During harvest the natural environment; + The technical tools and equipment used for harvesting must not constitute the ecological destruction and pollution. + Manual collection materials will not disrupt the structure of the organic product. Collection materials must be hygienic.

B 19 Organic Aquaculture

+ To perform cultivation on the properties of water, entrepreneur, or control and / or certification body authorized by the organization to the appropriateness of the analysis is confirmed by applying. If there is contamination, the problem can be made without eliminating the production of aquatic products. + Farming unit, which is an important source of pollution in the settlement should not be, or stream bed. Water to be used in business, the receipt be stable source of ecological balance. Pool area at least 5% of production at fish farms on the type of intervention is possible without the development of natural vegetation. + The aquaculture permit from the Ministry following the control and / or the entrepreneur who makes a contract with the certification body is the process of transition. + Water production, environmental protection must be appropriate, waste should not harm the environment, biological diversity is encouraged, with the choice of species and sub‐species adapted to local conditions and capacities should be taken into consideration, all precautions should be taken for the protection of the water structure. + Water organisms produced in accordance with the rules of organic farming, organically produced feed and feed additives used in feed. Fish fillets with synthetic ingredients not natural coloring methods available.

470

+ to ensure that the nutritional requirements of fishery products, nutritional supplements necessary to use some of the vitamins and minerals control and / or authorization to be granted certification based on your ticket can be used. Age of feeds is not allowed. + Feed and other nutrients derived from genetically modified derivative products or in part, may not contain additives and supplemental materials. + Must comply with the rules of organic agriculture in the area where fish feed. + Inventory control by species to breeding density and / or certification is determined by your ticket. + Training requirements as fish species should enable natural behavior. Shipping phase, adverse climate conditions and the use of liquid oxygen are prohibited except for hatcheries. + Organic aquaculture, genetically altered animals.

Photo: Organic aquaculture Photo: Organic feedstuff for organic aquaculture Photo: Organic shrimps Photo: Organic sushi Photo: Smoked salmon from organic aquaculture

B 20 Organic Animal Husbandry Notes compiled by: Bernard Wainaina – DIRECTOR, PROFARMS

Organic animal husbandry is defined as a system of livestock production that promotes the use of organic and biodegradable inputs from the ecosystem in terms of animal nutrition, animal’s health, animal housing and breeding. It deliberately avoids use of synthetic inputs such as drugs, feed additives and genetically engineered breeding inputs. Livestock farming is an important part of organic farming systems, and it is an explicit goal of organic farming to ensure high levels of animal health and welfare (AHW) through proactive and appropriate management of breeding, feeding, housing and species specific husbandry. A goal in organic livestock farming is to minimise the use of veterinary medicines to improve food quality and protect the environment, and to do this by improving livestock living conditions rather than using alternative medical treatments. Key values influencing organic livestock production are naturalness, harmony at all levels of production, use and recirculation of local resources and the precautionary principle.

471

The concepts of "positive health and welfare" are incorporated in regulation of organic production. The farmer must ensure that farm animals as much as possible can perform natural behaviours and live natural lives, but at the same time he/she must intervene when necessary and at first signs of disharmony in the herd.

B 20.1 Objectives of organic animal husbandry To raise animals in a system that takes into consideration the wider issues of environmental pollution, human health on consumption of animal products allowing them to meet their basic behavioral needs and reduce stress. Diversify in keeping as many types of livestock on the holding as each furnishes different nutrients at the household level. For example special attention should be given to rabbits and poultry as income generated from this enterprise goes directly to the disadvantaged segments of the population e.g. women and children. Their nitrogen rich manure is used to increase vegetable production in the kitchen gardens thus improving the family diet. Other like donkeys are useful in transport thus reducing the consumption of non‐renewable sources of energy e.g. petroleum based fossil fuels. Exploit the natural behavior of animals in their production systems to reduce stress e.g. chicken like perching at night and perching rails should be provided for this purpose. They should also be raised in deep litter system that allows them to scratch for ants and worms and dust bathe. Dark secluded nest should be provided as the like laying in dark secluded places. Goats being browsers in nature like having their forage suspended high enough so that they can attain an upright posture e.t.c. Use of low external input which lessen the cost of production and allow for a sustainable system of production since most materials can be recycled in the farm and also locally available Bridging of nutrients gap in soil, crops and animals i.e. animals feed on crops and cultivated crops by products. The animal’s waste in form of farmyard manure is composted and taken back to the soil to replenish the lost soil nutrients through cultivation. This ensures the completion of nutrient cycle in the ecosystem.

B 20.2 Roles played by animals They provide food to human in forms of meat, milk and honey. They utilize lands that are not suitable for cultivation to produce animas product foods of high value e.g. arid and semiarid areas,

472

rocky and hilly topographies. Ruminants are able to convert waste crop by‐products in high value human food. They can be used to generate income when their surplus products are sold for cash. They also play the role of insurance in families where they are sold in case of emergencies like sickness and other eventualities that require immediate funds that may not have been planned for. They play a social cultural role in terms of wealth expression, prestige, payment of dowry and other social obligations like worship. They provide energy through draft power and domestic fuel e.g. dry cow dung and biogas. They play an essential role in closing the carbon and nitrogen cycle in the ecosystems by provided in manure used for fertilizing the soil. The ash obtained by burning dung is incorporated in compost manure to provide nutrient for crops.

B 20.3 Nutrition and Feeding Farm animals require good diet for efficient production of the intended products, growth and maintenance. Organic Farming systems aims at growing and producing most of the animal feeds in the farm to enable sustainable production and minimize the risk of contamination of these feeds by chemicals which may be in use at other sources where such where such feeds may be procured. Farm production of animal’s feeds also promotes the achieving of the basic objective of organic farming which is use of low external inputs. The daily ration for all farm animals should contain an average of 70% carbohydrates, 25

B 20.4 Basic Nutrients in Animals Feeds

CARBOHYDRATES:

Provide the animals with energy for maintenance of body health such as during work, gestation, production of meat, milk and eggs. Ruminants are able to obtain their basic carbohydrate requirements from forages and pastures by use of rumen microbes, which enable them to break down fibrous cellulose into energy giving units. This is however not possible in non‐ruminant animals like pigs and poultry. Donkeys however do well on a ruminant diet.

473

No‐ruminants obtain their carbohydrates mainly from cereal grains. Such as maize, wheat and their industrial by‐products like maize germ and wheat bran, tubers e.g. cassava and sweet potatoes. Feeding of grains and tubers in ruminants should be restricted to an average of 2kg for big animals like cows and 200gms to small ruminants like sheep and goats to avoid excessive production of acids during their digestion due to fermentation process.

PROTEINS: Are needed in the animal’s body for growth and repair of tissues. The lack of proteins in the diet rations lead to poor growth rate, reduced production of milk, eggs e.t.c, loss of weight and late maturity for growing animals. Leguminous fodder is a good source of protein for most livestock. Examples include: desmodium, leucenia, calliandra and sesbania species of legumes. Free‐range chickens are able to obtain their proteins by picking ticks,insects, and worm earthworm from the environment. Earthworms to feed chicken can be multiplied by mixing a small amount of the soil containing earthworms with fresh cow dung and dry leaves in a half a drum which is kept moist by covering with an old sisal sack. The worms multiply quickly and after about two to three weeks, they can be harvested and fed to the chickens. Pigs can be fed with human left over (swill) which contains proteins from human diet. Swill may be boiled with offal’s from slaughter houses to fortify its protein content and kill diseases causing micro‐organisms that may be present.

VITAMINS: Are only needed in small amount in animals mainly for prevention of diseases. They are plentiful in young green pasture or fodder, kales, and young amaranth which has not seeded residues of fruit peels from the kitchen may also act as a good source of vitamins. • MINERAL SALTS: Provided essential minerals in the animal body such as calcium and phosphorus, which are necessary for egg shell formation, bone formation, muscle contractions, synthesis of hormones and enzymes e.t.c. Their deficiency from the body results in rickets, reduce growth, soft brittle bones that fracture easily, difficult birth, low egg and milk production, retained afterbirth e.t.c. Animals also develop the ‘Pica’ habit, which leads to eating strange things like cloths, rags, bones, soap, metal sheets e.t.c. Minerals are available from some plant like amaranths (pigweed), stinging nettle (urtica dioica), solanum nigrum (Black night shade), ox gonium sinnathuum (conge – KIK), curcubitae spp (pumpkin leaves).Mixing

474

equal parts of dry leaves from these plants and grinding them to a smooth powered will provide for most minerals in livestock when placed in a mineral box and fed ad‐labium.

Fats and oils: provide a layer of insulation below the skin for protection against cold. They also facilitate the absorption of vitamins in the body. Sunflower seeds provide a good source of fat for cattle, pigs, poultry and rabbits. Seeds of croton tree are also good source of fat.

WATER: While water may not be treated as a true nutrient, it is essential for providing a medium through which other nutrients are absorbed and assimilated in the body. It is also responsible for giving shape and turgidity to most tissue of the body. Clean water which is free from contamination with chemicals and disease causing agents should be provided to the animals ad‐labium. Salty water with a lot of natural minerals is not suitable to livestock as it limits the intake.

B 20.5 Feeding Tips + Ensure easy access to feed and water to encourage intake. + Offer a wide variety of foods daily to meet nutrients need. + Provides forage and water at all times to increase production. + Limit the intake of concentrates for ruminants to prevent metabolic diseases. e.g acidosis. + Supplement the animals diet with feed sources that are rich in mineral and vitamins to protect the animals from diseases. + In the range lands, practice proper stocking rate to avoid destroying the environment through overgrazing. + Allow time for regeneration of pasture by having short grazing periods followed by period of rest. + Don’t use fire for bush clearing as it leads to loss of a wide variety of protein rich and medicinal plant that help balance the animals diet. Trees and shrubs should be preserved so as to provide shade, other trees like Acacia species drop protein rich pods that benefit ruminants directly.

B 20.6 Animal Housing Appropriate housing for livestock aims at achieving the following basic requirements. + Space large enough for sufficient free movement. + Sufficient fresh air and natural daylight through adequate ventilations.

475

+ Protection against the vagaries of the weather e.g. excessive sunlight, heat, rain and wind. + Enough lying and resting area according to the species and the size of the animals. + Natural bedding material for large animals should be provided. + Fresh water and feed should be provided for when designing livestock houses by incorporating feed rough and water troughs. + The housing should be designed in a way to allow for easy and efficient collection of manures for composting. + A gentle slope is essential in livestock houses to facilitate drainage. + Livestock housing should be able to keep away predators while not compromising the ventilation aspects especially for poultry. + Use of cheap locally available materials is especially emphasized in organic animal husbandry. Organic animal husbandry emphasizes on a compromise between total confinement of animals as is the case in zero grazing and free range as the best solution especially in the low potential areas where land sizes are bigger and therefore there is more grazing space. Animals for example can spend the day grazing freely and then be on zero grazing at night for security. Photo: Organic animal house

ANIMAL HEALTH CARE IN ORGANIC ANIMAL HUSBANDRY: Use of traditional therapies that utilize remedies derived from medicinal plants is emphasized in organic animal husbandry to avoid use of antibiotics that are chemically based. A deeper study of animal health care is a topic on itself in this workshop and more details will be covered there.

B 20.7 Animal Breeding Organic animals husbandry stresses on avoiding of genetically engineered materials for breeding purposes. Artificial insemination is allowed as a restricted practice.

B 20.8 Factory Farming Factory farming poses dangers to human health and animal welfare, particularly in developing countries, according to a report out today. The document, by the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA), is to be presented to a World Health Organisation conference in Mexico this week.

476

It warns that industrial animal agriculture has acted as a "launch pad" for diseases such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE), avaian flu and Nipah virus. Scientists predict that as industrial farming continues to move into tropical environments, the risk from disease that can jump the species barrier, is growing. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, the spread of one such disease, avian flu may have been facilitated by the rapid scaling up of poultry and pig operations and the enormous geographic concentration of livestock from industrial farms in Thailand, Vietnam and China. The outbreak recently spread to Malaysia and has so far cost billions of dollars and the loss of over 100 million chickens in South East Asia. Factory Farming remains the fastest growing method of animal production worldwide, with developing countries set to be the world's leading producers of meat by 2020. However the crowded and often unsanitary conditions in factory farms can make ideal breeding grounds for disease. Leah Garces, WSPA campaigns director and co‐author of the report, Industrial animal agriculture‐the next global health crisis?, said: "Much is at stake if we fail to ensure the health and welfare of the animals that we farm. "Intensive farming practices that have become the subject of increasing controversy and legislation in Europe and North America are being exported into the developing world. "This is causing widespread suffering to farm animals, as well as often presenting an increasing disease risk to animals and humans. We need to stop this cruelty in its tracks if we are to have a fighting chance of preventing further disease outbreaks." Intensively farmed animals are often routinely fed antibiotics. According to the WHO, such widespread use of these drugs in the livestock industry is helping to breed antibiotic resistant microbes and making it harder to fight diseases amongst both animals and humans e.g salmonella and E.coli alike. The European Commission's Scientific Steering Committee has proposed to ban all antibiotic growth promoters from 2006, due to concern over antibiotic resistance. However, the use of antibiotics continues to rise globally and use by poultry producers has risen by over 300% per bird since the 1980s. In a recent statement the American Public Health Association called for a moratorium on the building of new industrial animal farms until more scientific data on their risks had been collected.

477

WSPA argues the WHO and other public institutes to ensure that policy advice does not promote or otherwise encourage the growth of industrial animal agriculture. WSPA is calling for industrial animal farming to be phased out in favour of more humane and sustainable farming on public health and animal welfare grounds. WSPA's recommendations include: + A halt to the expansion of factory farms. + The adoption of humane and sustainable forms of farming. + A global ban on the use of antibiotic growth promoters and production enhancing hormones. WSPA is promoting, through the World Farmwatch campaign, the adoption of safe, humane and sustainable production systems such as free range and organic.

Photo: Factory farming system

B 21 Organic Pasture and Grazing

B 21.1 Organic Pasture Learn how to comply with the new organic regulations known as the Access to Pasture Rule

The organic regulations also offer quantifiable measurements for tracking ruminant feed intake from pasture during the times of year and further clarification on required ruminant animal living conditions. One of the requirements is that farmers provide all ruminants over the age of six months with an average of not less than 30% of their dry matter intake from pasture during the grazing season. The Rule continues to require farmers to keep records of feedstuffs they purchase and grow, along with a complete list of feed rations for each class of animal. These numbers allow farmers to estimate the amount of feed provided from pasture (on a dry matter basis) as part of their Organic System Plans. This article demonstrates the "subtraction method" to determine the dry matter demand (DMD) and dry matter intake (DMI) for each of your groups of animals. You will use this information to calculate pasture dry matter intake. You will also need to determine the length of the grazing season on your farm to calculate the DMI from pasture for all classes of livestock, averaged over the entire grazing season. These calculations will help you determine if you have adequate pasture to meet the requirements of the new Rule.

478

Note, you may want to review the Access to Pasture Rule New and Revised Definitions to familiarize yourself with the definitions of some of the terminology we use.

Photo: Organic pasture

B 21.2. About the 10 Steps Following are 10 steps to help you determine the percent DMI from pasture for each animal group along with other considerations needed to comply with the new Pasture Rule:

Step 1. Categorize groups of animals by feeding group. First, you need to categorize your animals by "class," or perhaps an easier term to understand might be "feeding groups." These groups are animals that share a similar stage of life or production and will each need their DMD and DMI calculated separately to determine if the management of each of your groups complies with the requirement of not less than 30% dry matter intake from pasture during the grazing season. Examples of classes or feeding groups include: weaned calves from the age of six months to 12 months; bred heifers; high producing lactating cow group; low producing lactating cow group (note these "high" and "low" groups would only have to be calculated separately if they are being fed different rations and are housed/fed in separate groups); dry cows; weaned lamb group; beef steer group; etc. Each group being fed a different ration for a significant period of time on your farm will be considered a different class or feeding group. Therefore, you need to determine the DMD and DMI for each of these groups, including the percent DMI from pasture. Since the dry matter demand of feeds would be different among younger, smaller animals (heifers) and older ones (dry cows), you may need to separate these two groups into separate calculations, even if they are fed the same ration. High and low producing cows, if they are housed and fed different rations, also require separate calculations. Check with your certifier to learn about how they prefer animal groupings determined. Once you have determined the feeding groups on your farm, the number of animals per group, and established the average weight and production characteristics of animals within each group, you can move to Step 2. Later on in this article, you will use this information to determine how much dry matter from each of the various feedstuffs is being fed to each group.

479

Step 1 Example: Feeding Group

Number of Animals Other Animal Type Average Weight in Group Characteristics

Jersey‐‐ milkers 50 1200

Step 2. Determine length of grazing season. The length of the grazing season will vary from one part of the country to another, and from farm to farm. The grazing season as defined in the new pasture rule is not the same as the growing season. You will need to describe the grazing season in your annual Organic System Plan (OSP). The Grazing Season, as defined by the NOP, is as follows. The period of time when pasture is available for grazing, due to natural precipitation or irrigation. Grazing season dates may vary because of mid‐summer heat/humidity, significant precipitation events, floods, hurricanes, droughts or winter weather events. Grazing season may be extended by the grazing of residual forage as agreed in the operation's organic system plan. Grazing season may range from 120 days to 365 days, but not less than 120 days per year. It is required that the grazing season be no shorter than 120 days (and can vary from 120 to 365 days depending on the location of your farm). The grazing season may be interrupted or non‐ continuous depending upon the year and geographical location. The actual length of the grazing season for a given farm can be determined based upon your experience and/or historical documentation of grazing days on your farm. Additional information on grazing season length in your area may also be available from local USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) grazing specialists, Cooperative Extension personnel, or private grazing consultants. The anticipated length of the grazing season should be written into the Organic System Plan and the actual grazing season should be recorded at the end of each season. Once you have determined the length of the grazing season on the farm, the certifier will review this information and determine if this grazing season is reasonable for your farm's location. The Rule requires that the pasture plan include a description of the “...cultural and management practices to be used to ensure pasture of a sufficient quality and quantity is available to graze through out the grazing season…”. This, along with the Rule's definition of grazing

480

season, means that some farmers will need to use irrigation to assure that pastures provide adequate feed during the grazing season. Good grazing management practices will be needed in all areas of the country so that pastures are able to provide "sufficient quality and quantity" throughout the grazing season.

Figure 1. An example of the grazing season illustrated for one beef operation.

Step 3. Predict dry matter demand (DMD) for each group of animals. Dry matter demand is the amount of dry matter that an animal is expected to eat. More specifically, it is the expected amount of dry matter intake for each animal class (feeding group). Dry matter is the feed (forage, grain, etc.) without the moisture included‐‐the dry matter portion of the feed contains the nutrients and the rest is water. The amount of dry matter (nutrients) an animal is predicted to require each day is called Dry Matter Demand (DMD) and is dependent on the class of animal, its stage of life, production characteristics and its weight. DMD will also be dependent on factors like feed quality, availability, the environment, and the animals themselves. There are several ways to calculate DMD for your groups of animals. First, you can keep track of the actual total amount of dry matter fed to each class of animal during the non‐grazing season. This method can work only if there are not significant changes in DMD between the grazing season and non‐grazing season. Second, you can estimate DMD in pounds per head per day or as a percentage of body weight. Estimates are available on DMD

481

Step 3 Example: DMD Lactating dairy cows weighing 1200 lbs. DMD for this example is predicted to be 3% of body weight in DMI per day. Average Animal Group DMD Weight Jersey‐‐ 0.03 x 1200 = 36 milkers

Step 4. Determine dry matter intake (DMI) from dry matter fed (dry matter other than pasture) for each group of animals. In this step, you need to determine how much DMI is being fed from NON‐pasture feeds. This is referred to as "dry matter fed”, the rule states that, "...dry matter fed does not include dry matter grazed from residual forage or vegetation rooted in pasture.“ As a reminder, DMI is the amount of homegrown or purchased feed that an animal consumes per day. Remember, dry matter refers to feed without the water. For example, if you are feeding haylage that is 65% moisture, it only has 35% dry matter, meaning that 1,000 pounds of haylage sitting in the bunk is equal to 650 pounds of water and 350 pounds of dry matter.

Step 5. Determine DMI from pasture for each group of animals. As mentioned earlier, this article will determine DMI from pasture using the subtraction method. This calculation "estimates" the DMI of your cows from pasture based on the total DMD minus the amount of DMI from non‐pasture sources. DMD (Step 3) – Total pounds of DMI from NON‐pasture feed (Step 4) = Pounds of DMI from pasture.

482

For example, if DMD is 36 pounds per cow; and DMI from hay and grain is 14.29 pounds, you calculate the DMI from pasture as follows. 36 lbs (DMD) – 14.29 lbs (DMI other, non‐pasture sources) = 21.71 lbs DMI from pasture. Again the calculations used in this article use the subtraction method to determine DMI from pasture. You may also confirm your calculation and/or determine the actual amount of intake from pasture through direct paddock/field measurements. Direct measurement of pasture dry matter can be done in several ways including clipping/weighing, rising plate measurement, and the use of a pasture stick, among other methods. These methods all require some training and equipment but can be a useful part of assessing if the pastures are able to provide enough dry matter.

Step 5 Example: DMI from Pasture

DMI from Non‐Pasture DMD DMI from Pasture Feed 36 ‐ 14.29 = 21.71 lbs

Step 6. Calculate the percent (%) DMI from pasture. To calculate the percent of dry matter from pasture, divide the number of pounds of DMI from pasture (from Step 5) by the total DMD (Step 3), then multiply by 100 to convert the value to a percent. This formula establishes how much of the total dry matter required by the cow is coming from pasture. Following our example: 21.71 lbs DMI from pasture ÷ 36 lbs (DMD) x 100 = 60.31% Dry Matter Intake from Pasture.

Step 7. Average the DMI from pasture over entire the grazing season for each group of animals. DMI from pasture is to be calculated as an average over the entire grazing season for each class of animals. For each group, a DMI calculation is done at several points during the grazing season. The percent (%) DMI numbers (from Step 6) are averaged over the total length of the grazing season. If you don't change your ration during the entire grazing season, you only need to do one DMI calculation. If you adjust the amounts and types of feed fed from sources other than forage grazed from pasture several times during the grazing season, then you will make several calculations of percent (%) DMI during the grazing season and average them.

483

What if you feed only pasture to some of your groups? The pasture rule requires that records and a DMI calculation be done for all groups of animals, so even if you feed nothing other than pasture you still need to document that. This can be done by keeping a record of your non‐grazing season ration, a record of when you switch to the all‐pasture grazing season ration, and a record of when you switch back to the non‐grazing season ration. In this situation, the percent (%) DMI from pasture is 100% during the grazing season, but records are still needed to verify this.

Step 8. Evaluate—are all groups meeting the 30% standard over the entire grazing season? Adjust if needed. Now that you have finished the calculations, it is time to evaluate if your grazing plan will provide enough DMI to meet the rule. Do you have sufficient quantity and quality to graze throughout the grazing season and to provide all groups with an average of not less than 30% of their DMI from grazing? If not, here are some options to consider to increase the amount of available pasture: Improve your grazing system to increase the productivity of the pastures. Convert land which is currently mechanically harvested to pasture. Reduce the number of animals in the grazing group by sending heifers and dry cows to other pasture areas such as rented land or custom grazing farms. Be sure that any new pastures are also certified organic. If none of these options are enough to increase DMI from pasture to meet the rule, the total herd size may need to be reduced.

Step 9. Maintain record‐keeping. According to the National Organic Program, certain records need to be maintained to comply with the Rule. For example, you must keep a record of the dry matter needs for each group of animals, as well as documentation of the feed ration for each group of animals that shows the dry matter percentage of each type of feed in the ration. You will need to demonstrate compliance through your Organic System Plan (OSP). You must include a pasture management plan and the proper pasture and feed records to demonstrate compliance.

Be sure to check with your certifier to learn what documentation they need. Your certifier may have specific templates they want you to use so it is important to check with your certifier first. • Examples of records you may need to keep include the following

484

• Purchased, harvested and left‐over feed inventories. These may include average weights of hay bales, and number of tons of fee d stored in silos and bunkers. • Feed and ration records by feeding group class of animals. • Grazing records (including the beginning of grazing season, end of grazing season, interruptions of grazing season). • Temporary exemptions (check with your certifier!). • Grazing plan. • Pasture map. • Grazing plan. As with all recordkeeping, this activity and the unique information you gain about the feed you give your animals can aid you to farm more effectively and efficiently, and can help improve the economic viability of your operation, in addition to complying with the organic regulation.

Step 10. Review the requirements; check with your certifier! Since this is a significant new regulation, there may be differences of interpretation from certifier to certifier during this first year of implementation. It is not unusual for a producer to be unaware of the full details, or to have differences of opinion with the inspector and/or the certifier. During your inspection and/or in your communications with your certifier, do not be shy to ask how their paperwork is presented in the organic regulations. It might be helpful to both you and your inspector to check with your certifier at the beginning of the grazing season or while writing your Organic Systems Plan, that your calculations are correct. This will help both you and the certifier maintain confidence that they are requiring the same activities and documentation from farm to farm. There are many resources out there to assist and advocate for the producer and we encourage producers to take the time to understand the regulation as written and know what is required. Some additional resources can be found on this website, as well as other websites including those for the organic regulations.

B 21.3. Shade for Grazing Animals When the temperature rises above 75°F, grazing livestock benefit from shade and cooling. Shade can be as simple as trees planted in or on the border of pastures. During early afternoon, there should be a minimum of 25 square feet of shade per animal. This can be challenging when intensively grazing small paddocks with many cattle. One solution is to allow easy access to barns during the hottest part of the day when cattle are not as apt to be actively grazing.

485

Some producers use portable shades made from pipe frames topped with shade cloth. These shades can be towed from pasture to pasture and used in bedded corrals.

An example of mobile shade structure for grazing animals

B 22 Organic Ranch and Polutry

B 22.1 Ranch

When a ranch is converted to organic livestock production, the Regulations on Organic Farming must be followed on the land where feed crops are produced to feed the livestock on this ranch.

+ The transition period mentioned in the Organic Farming Regulations must be pursued for each livestock and for pasture and/or the land where feed crops are produced to feed the livestock. + Livestock complying with the following conditions may be used as organic breeding animals: It should be brought from organic farms, fed only with organic feeds, genetically unmodified, resistant to environment, climate conditions, and diseases.

486

+ For organic livestock production; local conditions shall be considered when selecting breeding livestock species and strains which are resistant to diseases. + When getting started to organic livestock production and if a sufficient number of breeding animals can not be purchased to form a herd, livestock produced by following conventional animal husbandry methods may be used for the herd by complying with Organic Farming Regulations after getting permission from a control agent. + Only natural insemination is permitted in organic farming. Embrio transfer can not be practised. Artificial insemination in organic farming is permitted if the sperm is obtained, stored, and used only by natural methods. + Animals in organic ranches should reach pastures, outing or walking areas. The number of livestock on per unit of land, should be limited to produce enough manure for crop production in each crop production unit. + Animals in the same unit of an organic farming operation shall be raised according to the Organic Farming Regulation. Animals not raised according to this Regulation can be raised within the same operation if the facilities and lands are separated and the animals come from the same race. + Animals coming from the same race, but not raised according to the Principles of Organic Agriculture Regulation can not be kept on the same pastureland with the animals raised according to the Regulation. + Barns and open areas where livestock are kept should be suitable to the conditions mentioned in the Principles of Organic Agriculture Regulation. + Every farm raising organic animals and animal products should keep entry and exit records for each animal and the cure or treatments the animals receive.

B 22.2 Poultry

When a poultry operation is converted to organic poultry production, the land where all feed crops produced to feed the animals are subject to the organic crop production rules within the Organic Agriculture Regulation.

+ Chicks for egg production can not be older than 18 weeks, broiler chicks can not be older than 3 days of age when they left the farm they are originated.

487

+ Animal byproduct feeds should comply with related organic farming regulations. + Antibiotics, coccidiosits, medicals and growth or production stimulators can not be used for poultry feeding. + Feeds can not be produced by using feed additives, subsidiary materials in feed production, genetically modified organisms or their derivatives + Conventional feeds and organic feeds can not be produced at the same time in the same factory. Organic feed must be labeled. + Organically and conventionally produced feeds should be stored at physically different locations. + Equipment used for organic feed production should be separated completely from the equipment used for conventional feed production. + Adequate number of animals should be placed in each section of an organic poultry operation to prevent health problems caused by crowd, + When an animal is wounded or become sick although all precautionary measures are taken, the animal should be isolated in a different location and cured immediately. In an organic poultry operation, genetic structure of poultry can not be modified and genetically modified animals can not be used in organic animal production as breeding material. Genetic improvement Technologies are not permitted to be used in animal breeding. Growth or + Use of growth or production improvement materials, and in order to control reproduction or other purposes, the use of hormones or similar substances is prohibited. However, hormones, can be used as a treatment application of a veterinarian on unhealthy animals. + Free walking and outing areas or open + Free promenades, open air navigation fields or open areas of shelter, the local weather conditions and related species, depending on the rain, wind, sun, and should provide adequate protection against extreme heat.

B 23 Processing and Packing All organic products, processing, packaging, transportation and marketing of all enterprises that will operate in the realization of the control and certification procedures and according to the field of activity required to take certificate of Organic Operation

B 23.1 Manufacturing of organic products and packing + Processing and packaging of organic products shall be complied with.

488

+ Processed food or food‐producing entrepreneurs, or outsource critical processing steps of processors based on the systematic identification of the appropriate forms and procedures will update them. Implementation of procedures and processed products must always be guaranteed by compliance with the rules of organic production. + Entrepreneur or outsource processors of organic products during processing, mixing or contamination of the organic products are not appropriate regulation to prevent and take necessary measures to protect the quality of the organic product and with its internal reporting procedures, and processed‐to‐date record of all amounts required to provide access. + Entrepreneur, processing or storage of products in non‐organic, all action is complete, or separately at different places to perform the activities. Substances or products are not allowed to protective measures should be taken to avoid any risk of contamination, by applying the appropriate hygiene measures, their effectiveness should be monitored and work should be recorded.

Entrepreneur of non‐organic products and take adequate measures against possible interference or changes in the supply of organic products in the identification, organic and non organic products store at the same time. Enterprising harvest days, hours, circuit and date and time information in the records of the amount accepted, and allows authorized organization. the processing of organic products other than wine; the Regulation on Organic Farming Principles and Practices of Organic Processed Foods used the manufacture of products, materials and products of microorganisms and enzymes normally used in food preparations, natural aromatic substances and preparations, drinking water and salt, meat and egg colors, stamps, legally permissible, minerals, vitamins and amino acids used. Organic food feed or processing of raw materials and the use of ionizing radiation is prohibited. Organic products, genetically modified organisms or products derived from these organisms should be made use of. Organic farming method produced vegetable, animal and fishery products and organic raw materials; semi finished or finished products of organic matter in the nature of modification

489

B 23.2 Storage of organic products Storage of organic products must be complied with. Other rules regarding the storage of organic products is given below: + Organic products, storage areas, to allow for the recognition of products that are not eligible under the Regulation on the Implementation, the challenge will not smudge or substances to interfere with the identification numbers and to ensure that the party should be organized and organic insulation materials used in fields related to the products are stored and cooling equipment must be selected by considering the purpose. Pre‐and post‐ processing of non‐organic products, organic products must be stored in a separate place or in a separate time. + Separate storage as possible in the absence of organic products entrepreneur takes measures to prevent the confusion with conventional products.

Case studies of entrepreneurs and non‐organic and organic products, agricultural products and food storage facilities store the other in case of: + Organic agricultural products, other non‐organic agricultural products and / or food items should be stored separately. + To identify non‐organic products and all types of interference should be taken to prevent or to change. + Appropriate cleaning measures should be taken prior to storage of organic products, by controlling their activity, the records must be kept by entrepreneurs. + Organic products organic feature of the product during storage and disinfection methods used in medicine to lose. + Storage of organic products, organic products feature materials and substances to lose and unnatural practices should be used. + Enterprising and stored by the storage conditions of the input and output quantities of organic products and to the history records must be kept on a regular basis. These records are signed by the authorized organization of entrepreneurs, and the confirmation of the schedule by a copy of the entrepreneur, the other copy is stored by the body authorized. + Organic crop and animal production units, storage of the entries are not allowed in this regulation is prohibited.

B 23.3 Transportation of organic products Entrepreneurs should provide transportation of organic products to the other units including wholesalers and retailers, with appropriate packages and tools and without any disruption or

490

damage to their packages and labels, according to the Principles and Implementations of Organic Farming as following phrases; + Name and adress of Entrepreneur or Seller in different situations, + Product Name accompanied by Organic Product certificate or if it is animal products, List of Feed Components + Name and code number of the authorized organization which controls the entrrpreneur, + During the transportation of organic product, informations and documents which are needed by the organization are moved with product to complete control. Informations about transportation, are proved with written documentations. Accounts have shown the balance between incoming and outgoing products. + During the transportation, Organic Agriculture Certificate are kept

In the following cases, Packages do not have to be transported via closed transportation vehicles. Direct transportation between the entrepreneurs which are subject to Organic Control System, While transporting product with the document which is containing required information, If both the carrier and recipient entrepreneurs keep written records about transportation process which is under the control of authorized organization. The person who accepting the product, if it is necessary, is authorized to control the packaging and examines compliance of labeling. After checking the compliance of label informations and other documents accompanied with product, adds the result of comparison to the results. During the transportation of organic feed and feed raw materials, some measures should be taken and written records should be kept to prevent them to mix with conventional feed and feed raw materials by the entrepreneur.

B 24 Animal welfare

Organic livestock producers are leaders in making a strong committment to ethical and responsible care of the animals they raise for food. Organic Certifying Bodies across the country and the Canadian National Standard all require strict adherence to humane handling of livestock, high‐quality feeding and health care, and provision of housing and social conditions that maximize the expression of natural behaviours.

491

The consuming public is increasingly concerned about the quality of life given to the animals they eat, and more and more consumers are therefore purchasing meat products from organic producers. The articles in this section present some of the evidence that exists in the scientific literature, as well as practical advice for organic livestock producers and information for the consuming public.

Photo: Animal house practicing for animal welfare

Concepts of Animal Health and Welfare in Organic Livestock Systems 4 new ethical principles of organic agriculture was developed to guide its future development: the principles of health, ecology, care, and fairness. The key distinctive concept of animal welfare in organic agriculture combines naturalness and human care, and can be linked meaningfully with these principles. In practice, a number of challenges are connected with making organic livestock systems work. These challenges are particularly dominant in immature agro‐ecological systems, for example those that are characterized by industrialization and monoculture. Some of the current challenges are partly created by shortages of land and manure, which encourage zero‐grazing and other confined systems. Other challenges are created in part by the conditions for farming and the way in which global food distribution systems are organized, e.g., how live animals are transported, how feed is traded and transported all over the globe, and the development of infrastructure and large herds. We find that the overall organic principles should be included when formulating guidelines for practical organic animal farming. This article explores how the special organic conceptions of animal welfare are related to the overall principles of organic agriculture. The aim is to identify potential routes for future development of organic livestock systems in different contexts and with reference to the specific understanding of animal welfare in organic agriculture. We include two contrasting cases represented by organic livestock systems in northwestern Europe and farming systems in tropical low‐income countries; we use these cases to explore the widely different challenges of organic livestock.

Photo: Transportation system for organic livestock farm

492

B 25 Certification and Marketing

Since the late 1970s, organic certification body have been certifying eligible organically‐grown foods. The demand for certification, which is essentially a seal of approval, arose out of a need to accurately describe an environmentally‐sound production process and to assure consumers that organic producers and merchants followed strict quality standards. Certification protects farmers by validating that they are strictly following organic production procedures. In some cases, the term "organic" has been loosely used in the marketplace and there is potential for fraud. With certification, there is added confidence in the marketplace and consumers benefit when there is less possibility of misleading advertising. Certification also opens up the opportunity for expansion into the export market. Exporters and importers of organic food now demand that organic farm products be certified, as do wholesalers, processors and retailers.

B 25.1 Certification agencies Organic certification began in the early 1980's. The first organizations to certify farmers were BCS, Eco‐Cert, Demeter and Control Union. There now are more than 650 certification groups with some differences in standards and verification procedures. There are more similarities between the standards than there are differences. The basic unifying principles of all the certification standards are that the farming techniques used should be sustainable and soil‐building and that no synthetically‐produced, fast‐release fertilizers or pesticides have been used for at least three years

Photo: Organic logos of international certification body

B 25.2 Requirements for certification The farmer must belong to a certification agency. 1) The farmer submits a completed questionnaire about the farm, along with farm records, to the certification agency's certification committee. 2) The certification agency will consider a crop and the field on which it was grown for organic certification if a minimum of three years has passed without the use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides.

493

3) The farmer must make a commitment to follow soil‐building management techniques. 4) A third‐party inspector hired by the agency will make an on‐farm assessment. This assessment usually takes about half a day. The inspector may also conduct spot checks at any time. The inspector submits a comprehensive report to the certification committee. 5) The certification committee makes a decision based on the inspector’s recommendations. 6) If a crop is certified, the farmer may sell the produce as "certified organic" after paying annual dues and licensing fees. The cost of the license varies with the expected volume of sales. Official labels and stickers can then be purchased from the agency.

B 25.3 Marketing The market for organic crops has fluctuated in recent years with surpluses of some commodities and a strong demand for others. It would be a mistake for any farmer to move to organic production solely to take advantage of the market. Growing the same crop year after year with only the addition of a winter cover crop is not a viable option in organic farming, however good the market. Certification agencies will no longer permit such practices. Many farmers have taken marketing into their own hands. Some have added small milling operations to their farm enterprise; others have formed co‐operatives which own processing and handling facilities. Growers must be prepared to put in extra work to provide a high‐quality product if they want a premium price for their crop. When crops are grown on contract to manufacturers of organic products, ensure that the variety and quality grown will meet the buyer's demands. Most farmers will find that some of their crops will be sold in the conventional market or used for livestock feed.

Some marketing boards allow for separate marketing of organic products; others demand that there be no exception to the general pooling of the commodity. Contact the local commodity board to determine its policy. Wheat and barley grown in western Canada for export or human consumption in Canada must still be marketed through the Canadian Wheat Board. Procedures are in place to ensure that organic grains remain separate from conventional and that premiums are negotiated directly between the buyer and producer.

494

" .... I never suggest that someone who wants to take advantage of a premium to market his grain to go for it because there has to be a personal commitment to changing your farming practices. So I think I would suggest people look at it not from a market‐driven way, but from a change in attitude to the earth and dealing with the environment."

Dave Reibling, Oak Manor Farms

B 26 Organic Food and Milk Quality

B 26.1 Food quality and safety of organic food

The weight of the available scientific evidence has not shown a consistent and significant difference between organic and more conventionally grown food in terms of safety, or nutritional value. In 2009 a review of all the relevant research comparing organic to conventionally grown foods was carried out by United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency which concluded: No evidence of a difference in content of nutrients and other substances between organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products was detected for the majority of nutrients assessed in this review suggesting that organically and conventionally produced crops and livestock products are broadly comparable in their nutrient content... There is no good evidence that increased dietary intake, of the nutrients identified in this review to be present in larger amounts in organically than in conventionally produced crops and livestock products, would be of benefit to individuals consuming a normal varied diet, and it is therefore unlikely that these differences in nutrient content are relevant to consumer health. A 2009 review of potential health effects conducted for the UK Food Standards Agency analysed eleven articles, concluding, "because of the limited and highly variable data available, and concerns over the reliability of some reported findings, there is currently no evidence of a health benefit from consuming organic compared to conventionally produced foodstuffs. It should be noted that this conclusion relates to the evidence base currently available on the nutrient content of foodstuffs, which contains limitations in the design and in the comparability of studies." Individual studies have considered a variety of possible impacts, including pesticide residues. Pesticide residues present a second

495

channel for health effects. Comments include, "Organic fruits and vegetables can be expected to contain fewer agrochemical residues than conventionally grown alternatives; yet, "the significance of this difference is questionable". Nitrate concentrations may be less, but the health impact of nitrates is debated. Lack of data has limited research on the health effects of natural plant pesticides and bacterial pathogens. The higher cost of organic food (ranging from 45 to 200%) could inhibit consumption of the recommended 5 servings per day of vegetables and fruits, which improve health and reduce cancer regardless of their source.

B 26.2 Milk Quality on Organic Dairy Farms Organic farming is a management system that requires the integration of cultural, biological and mechanical practices that foster the recycling of resources, promote ecological balance and conserve biodiversity. Administration of antibiotics, hormones, growth‐promoters and most synthetic medications are prohibited in animals producing organic food and fiber. However, these treatments cannot be withheld just to maintain the animal's organic status. Animal welfare must come first. However, if an animal receives a prohibited substance, that animal must be removed from organic production forever. Organic rules elsewhere in the world differ from the United States regulations. Organic livestock production in the European Union (EU) is governed by EU Regulation 1804/99 and went into effect in 2000. Individual EU member states may have more stringent rules for their countries. EU organic regulations require that animals on organic farms have more living space, regular outdoor access and be fed a diet relying heavily on forage although there is an allowance for up to 5% of the feed to come from conventional sources until 2008. Prophylactic use of antibiotics (e.g., blanket dry cow treatment) is prohibited, but antibiotics may be used for treatment of disease as long as withdrawal times are prolonged (usually twice the label recommendation). The Canadian standard is a blend of European and U.S. regulations. Antibiotics are permitted for emergency use only. Milk must be withheld but the animal can retain its organic status.

Photo: Organic milk quality

The European Picture As in the U.S., bovine mastitis is a major concern for dairy farmers, both conventional and organic. Little has been published regarding

496

milk quality and udder health on organic dairies in the U.S. More information is available from the European Union, but their organic standards differ from that of the U.S. in that restricted antibiotic use, coupled with extended withholding times, is allowed. Bulk milk Somatic Cell Counts (SCC) do not differ tremendously between organic and conventional dairies. Bennedsgaard et al. evaluated cow health and milk quality on Danish conventional, long‐established organic farms, moderately old organic farms, and newly converted organic farms and concluded that the longer a herd is managed under organic production, the better its milk quality. Nauta et al. categorized farms in the Netherlands in a similar manner and evaluated health and milk quality in first calf heifers. In contrast to the Danish study, first calf heifers on long established organic farms had relatively poorer milk quality than newly converted or conventional farms. Multiple studies report that clinical mastitis treatments are fewer on organic dairies than on conventional dairies; however, most studies evaluated clinical mastitis rates based on number of treatments recorded by the dairy farmers. Many European countries require that all antibiotic treatments be recorded in a national database but none to date require the recording of alternative botanical and homeopathic treatments. These latter treatments predominate on organic farms, so clinical mastitis may be underestimated on organic farms.

Milk Quality on U.S. Organic Herds No formal studies have studied milk quality on US organic dairies in depth, although a few authors have included limited milk quality data in publications. Tikofsky, et al. (2003) reported, in a study on antimicrobial susceptibility of Staphylococcus aureus, that bulk milk SCC for organic farms in New York averaged 273,000 cells/ml, while bulk milk from similarly sized conventional herds included in the study averaged 559,300 cells/ml. In a survey on management practices and antibiotic usage, Zwald et al. surveyed 99 conventional farms and 32 organic farms and classified farms according to six SCC levels. Eighty‐five percent of organic farms had bulk milk SCC less than 400,000 cells/ml; 53% had bulk milk SCC less than 300,000 cells/ml. A large private organic dairy in the Western U.S. recently analyzed two years' of bulk milk SCC tests (n=3,359 bulk milk samples) for its herd of 4,000 Holstein cows. Bulk milk SCC averaged 270,525 cells/ml (range 100,000~964,000 cells/ml; median=100,000 cells/ml). Finally, a study compared milk quality from four different milk processors in Maine over a ten‐month period. Dairies shipping to

497

the organic processors averaged an SCC of 283,000 cells/ml; farms shipping to the four conventional processors averaged 207,000 cells/ml, 313,000 cells/ml, 322,000 cells/ml and 416,000 cells/ml. Also as a part of the previous study, 46 organic farms were surveyed. Sixty‐seven percent of organic farmers employed the California Mastitis Test (CMT) regularly to evaluate milk quality; the majority of these producers did not use the CMT when they were conventional. Eleven percent of farms regularly participate in a DHIA cell counting program. Once problem quarters are identified, 60% of farms milk them separately with a quarter milker and feed that milk to calves or discard. Eighty‐five percent of organic respondents used iodine based pre‐dips and post‐dips and 90% used individual paper towels.

Udder Health Management on Organic Dairies The National Mastitis Council's (NMC) Ten Point Plan has been advocated for years to help producers achieve and maintain high milk quality. However, U.S. organic farming methods preclude the use of dry cow antibiotic treatment, as well as lactational antibiotic treatment under any circumstances. Therefore, intensely monitoring udder health for the early detection of new mastitis cases, as well as proactively adapting management strategies are essential for organic dairies. An adaptation of the NMC plan, for farmer education, is provided below.

Eight Steps to Better Udder Health

1. Set Farm Specific Udder Health Goals These will vary from farm to farm depending on the challenge facing the farm, the certifying agency, and producer philosophy. Realistic, achievable goals for the majority of farms are: If contagious mastitis is present in a herd planning to transition to organic dairy production, all efforts should be made to identify, treat, and/or cull infected animals prior to transition. Strep ag is a highly contagious mastitis: even a few cows infected with Strep ag in a small herd (<30 cows) can cause bulk milk SCC to exceed the regulatory limit. Strep ag responds well to antibiotic treatment, so it is best to eradicate it before you begin to ship organic milk. In established organic herds, contagious mastitis can be more of a headache, but it can be managed with continued effort and monitoring. Alternative therapy regimens usually yield disappointing results and are often impractical for use in large numbers of animals.

498

A suggested management plan is: + Culture composite milk samples from all lactating cows in the herd. + Identify (colored legbands) all cows infected with contagious mastitis (Strep ag, Staph aureus, Mycoplasma). + Cull older lactation, high SCC, open, and/or clinical animals. + In freestall operations, group contagious mastitis cows in separate pen and always milk this group last. + In tiestall or stanchion operations, segregate contagious mastitis cows to one area of the barn and always milk last or with a unit designated just for use on contagious mastitis cows. + Prevent transmission during milking: wear gloves, apply post dip well (1% iodine is recommended), use single service towels (no common rags or sponges). + Continually culture dry cows and heifers and segregate if positive. CMT cows weekly and hold out of tank when high. + Control flies in barn. + Manage yard areas to minimize contact with mud, manure, and moisture. Provide clean, dry bedding in loafing areas. + Ensure that adequate amounts of bioavailable selenium, vitamin E, and other trace minerals are included in the ration for all stages of lactation.

Photo: Organic animal house with freestall

2. Implement a Plan to Regularly Monitor Udder Health This can most easily be done with regular cell count testing through the Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA), but effective monitoring with a strip cup, visual observation, and a CMT test can also achieve goals. Once a month, evaluate the udder health of all lactating animals. Cows with high cell counts on two consecutive DHIA tests or two monthly CMT tests should be cultured so they can be milked last, monitored, managed with an alternative therapy, or culled. Clinical mastitis cases should also be cultured so that intervention opportunities in the environment can be instituted. Semi‐annual meetings with your certifier, veterinarian, and nutritionist to evaluate the current mastitis control program and review udder health goals are advised.

3. Proper Milking Procedures A proper milking routine should be instituted at all milkings and be followed by all milkers. Cows crave consistency so having a standardized procedure will reduce stress and enhance milk

499

letdown and milkout. Components of a good milking procedure include the following.

Udder wash/Predip: Teats should be washed or predipped and wiped clean before units are attached. Single use towels should be used on each cow. Do not share towels among cows, as this will spread mastitis. Forestripping: Removing 3~4 squirts of milk from each teat prior to milking helps stimulate the milk letdown response. Cows will milk out faster and on‐time of the milking unit will be decreased so that damage to teat ends will be minimized. Forestripping also allows you to identify clinical mastitis earlier and also removes milk in the teat end that is higher in bacteria and somatic cells. Forestripping should be done into a cup or into the gutter so that bedding and hands do not become contaminated with milk. Gloves: Gloves (either nitrile or latex) should be worn at milking time to reduce the risk of spreading mastitis on hands. Gloved hands are more easily disinfected between cows or when contaminated with milk or manure than bare skin Milking order: Cows infected with contagious mastitis should be identified permanently (leg bands) and milked last or with a unit designated just for them at each and every milking. Overmilking/machine stripping: It is not necessary to get every drop of milk out of the cow's udder. Leaving the units on the cow when milk flow is low or pulling down on units will damage teat ends: keratin that develops at the teat end and has some natural antibacterial properties will be removed. Overmilking will also cause eversion of the teat sphincter and development of scar tissue which leads to multiple problems. The teat sphincter and its ability to close between milkings is the first line of defense against mastitis so we must keep teat ends healthy. Scars and cracks that damage teat ends are more likely to be colonized by S. aureus and will increase the risk of mastitis. Post milking teat dipping: Attention to the selection and application of post milking teat dip is of utmost importance in herds with contagious mastitis. If an uninfected cow is unknowingly milked after an infected cow, contagious bacteria are deposited on the milk film on the teat surface. There they will multiply and move toward the teat end in an attempt to infect. Applying post milking teat dip to at least two‐thirds of each teat will kill bacteria before they have a chance to multiply and spread on the milk film. Teat dips should contain at least 10% teat skin conditioners to maintain udder health and prevent chapping and cracking.

500

4. Maintain Milking Equipment Regularly The mechanical milking system should be evaluated by a qualified individual at least twice yearly and dynamic testing should be performed while the system is operating. Vacuum fluctuations, due to liner slips, flooding, inadequate vacuum reserve, and poorly functioning regulators, are likely to force bacteria up the teat end during milking and increase the risk of mastitis. Rubber milking liners should be replaced every 1200 cow milkings or every 60 days, whichever comes first. Rubber used longer than this deteriorates and will develop microscopic cracks and ridges that hold mastitis bacteria even through the wash cycle. Other rubber parts (hoses, tubes, gaskets) should be inspected regularly and replaced when worn.

5. Evaluate Dry Cow Management Although dry cow antibiotic therapy is not permitted in organic dairy production, this is still an important time for udder health improvement and rejuvenation of milking tissue. Energy intake should be reduced one week prior to dry off so that milk production is decreased. At dry off, the udder should be milked out one final time and the teat ends dipped with post milking teat dip twice daily for two weeks after dry off. It takes about two weeks for the keratin plug to seal the teat end and prevent the development of new infections during the dry period. Until those plugs form, we need to do our best to sanitize the teat end and prevent contamination by keeping the cow in a clean dry environment. As the cow dries up, changes occur in the mammary secretions that kill bacteria (increases in lactoferrin and alpha‐lactoglobulin, increases in antibody levels) and help resolve existing infections. Nutrition of the dry cow is also important especially as she reaches the pre‐ fresh period. At this time, selenium and vitamin E levels become important for support of the immune and reproductive systems and to ensure the birth of a vigorous calf. The National Research Council recommends that 0.3 ppm per head per day of selenium and at least 1500 IU of vitamin E per head per day be fed. For continued udder health benefits, supplementation of selenium and vitamin E is recommended throughout lactation. A clean comfortable environment is important to prevent new environmental infections and to prevent teat injuries. When cows are housed inside in winter, stalls should be scraped frequently and sufficient amounts of clean, dry bedding should be available. Pasture environments for dry cows in the summer are generally preferred but wet areas around ponds and streams should be fenced off so that they do not become muddy loafing areas.

501

6. Institute Biosecurity and Culling Guidelines Bringing new animals into an established herd is a risk for introducing many diseases (BVD and Johne's to name a few) besides mastitis into your herd. Spending a little money up front to ensure the cows entering your herd are healthy may save thousands in disease eradication dollars. As mentioned before, multiple bulk tank samples should be cultured for both the usual mastitis bacteria and Mycoplasma. If this is not possible, new additions should be milked separately and cultured as soon as possible once they are added to the farm. Although farm‐raised heifers are generally thought to be safe to introduce, they may also be infected and warrant similar segregation and testing protocols. As contagious mastitis cows are identified, strategic culling methods should be used to slowly reduce the prevalence in your herd. Milk these cows separately. Place cows infected with contagious mastitis on the "Do Not Breed" list. As soon as possible, remove cows with continued high cell counts or scarred and abscessed bags. For herds with a high prevalence of Staph aureus cows that need to reduce bulk milk cell counts as soon as possible, infected quarters should be identified by culture and dried off to prevent that milk from entering the bulk tank and food supply.

7. Environment A clean, dry comfortable environment is essential to good mastitis control. Properly sized, maintained and well‐bedded stalls will prevent teat damage that may lead to S. aureus mastitis. Contagious mastitis cows should be segregated to one area of the barn so that infected milk that leaks onto bedding does not become a reservoir of potential problems for healthy cows. Since flies have been shown to spread mastitis, in particular S. aureus and A. pyogenes, good fly control is essential for the prevention of mastitis.

8. Young stock and Replacements Replacement animals are the future of the herd and are a key element in maintaining low bulk milk SCC in herds battling contagious mastitis. If we can keep this group clean and healthy, the farm's financial future is ensured. Contagious mastitis can be spread to youngstock via two ways when whole milk is fed to calves. Staph aureus and Strep ag bacteria in milk can live in the tonsils and other immune tissues of the mouth for up to two weeks post weaning. If calves are housed together during this period and cross‐suckle, contagious mastitis bacteria can be introduced into the juvenile udder and eventually that heifer may freshen with contagious mastitis. Also, if calves are allowed to roam in the barn, they may nurse from a cow infected

502

with contagious mastitis and then suckle from a non‐infected cow thereby spreading mastitis. Even in herds where cross‐suckling is not a problem, flies feeding from milk buckets and then on skin and hair, may also spread contagious mastitis bacteria to the juvenile udder. Again, fly control is important. In herds that have problems with contagious mastitis and are feeding waste milk, a number of preventive measures are recommended. Calves should be separated while on milk and for two weeks after weaning. This is best accomplished via calf hutches but can also be accomplished by tying calves apart. Good fly control is essential during the summer months. If possible, pasteurize milk before feeding to calves. Although this does not sterilize the milk, it will drastically reduce the number of infective organisms. In herds with a known contagious mastitis problem, culture first calf heifers as they freshen. This allows you to identify infected cows early and segregate them. Alternative therapies which enhance the immune system may have more of an effect if infections are caught early. B 27 Transition This chapter deals with the practical considerations involved in converting a conventional farm into an organic farm. When making the transition from conventional to organic agriculture, farmers realize that their approach to farming changes. Organic farmers see the farm as a complex system where every part of the farm interrelates with every other part and, in turn, each part of the farm affects the whole farm and consequently the whole ecosystem of which it is a part. Organic farmers place their emphasis on the health and nutrient balance of the soil rather than on the nutrient demands of the crops. Organic farmers are also united by a fundamental philosophical conviction that the farm system must be self‐sustaining ‐‐ that is, ecologically sound, economically viable and socially responsible.

B 27.1 Convert gradually Some farmers go "cold turkey" and convert their whole farms to organic methods overnight. This is definitely not recommended because the farmer needs time to learn new management skills and the soil needs time to rebuild itself. We suggest you go through the transition slowly, converting sections of your farm in stages. Some farmers have taken up to 10 years to convert the entire farm. Others have done it sooner, as they become comfortable with the new system and different management techniques. A gradual approach to the transition period will help maintain production and minimize financial risk. Although organic farms

503

compare favorably with conventional ones in profitability, some farmers have reported a reduction in yield during the transition. However, the decline is greater with some crops, such as corn and some fruits and vegetables, than with others such as barley or red clover. Reduced yields were more likely when chemicals were suddenly withdrawn from land that had been farmed for a long period with synthetic fertilizers and pesticides. It will take a minimum of three years without the use of synthetic fertilizers or pesticides before your crops can be considered organic. During this time, premium prices will not be available and in any case they should not be relied upon for the viability of the farming operation. While input costs will be lower, it is possible that a more diversified cropping system and new management practices will create a need for different equipment and additional storage facilities.

B 27.2 Problems specific to the transition The state of your land will determine how smooth the transition will be. If the soil has been severely depleted of organic matter and is seriously compacted, building it up will be your first priority. Only when the soil has been restored will you be able to see significant responses to organic management techniques. Use of a good crop rotation, compost, green manures and soil amendments will assist this process. Certain problems should be anticipated during the transition period between conventional and organic. Until a good rotation is established to break pest cycles, assist weed control and improve the soil and nutrient cycling, weeds and pests may be problems when herbicides and pesticides are withdrawn. The severity of the problems is usually only transitory. Well‐established organic farmers repeatedly report that these problems become controllable or disappear altogether. A common mistake during the transition is for farmers to be so concerned with having enough nitrogen that they inadvertently apply it in excess, in the form of manure or other organic inputs. Excessive nitrogen, regardless of source, is likely to suppress biological activity (including mycorrhiza’s role in the uptake of phosphorous), reduce nodulation in legumes, give a competitive advantage to the weeds over the crops and increase the incidence of pests and disease. While it is possible to farm organically without livestock, the presence of livestock greatly simplifies sound soil management and reduces dependence on purchased fertilizers. Cycling nutrients and energy through livestock means that the farmer can have both a

504

source of income and avoid depleting the nutrient reserves on the farm. If manure is not available, the cash crop farmer focuses on plant residues from green manures and cover crops in the rotation to provide the organic matter for the soil. The cash crop farmer should place a greater reliance on soil tests to determine the specific needs for other soil amendments such as rock powders. Outside sources of compost or fertilizer may be needed.

Photo : Converting programs to organic farm

B 27.3 Prepare yourself adequately There is a possibility that at the beginning of the transition you will not feel very sure of yourself or of the decisions that you are making. Learning new techniques and becoming familiar with different crops will initially be more demanding of your time and management skills. Making the transition is not easy and will require a strong commitment on your part if it is to succeed. Read as much as possible on the subject and attend courses and conferences. Organic farmers are usually prepared to help and support each other and share their hard‐won information. Join an organic farming organization and, most importantly, visit farmers who have made the transition. The support of other organic farmers will be invaluable.

Photo : A field day on an organic farm

Plan carefully and keep records. Many farmers find conducting their own on‐farm research helps them determine which methods work best for them, but it is only useful if you remember to record the results. Information from soil tests, records such as crops planted, compost applications, yields and weed problems can be recorded directly on a map of the farm each year for easy reference. The design of a rotation suited to your farm is probably the most important part of your conversion plan. Section 2 of the Handbook has been designed to assist with this process.

"It probably takes a little keener management for organic farming because there aren't as many experts around to advise you on various problems you may run into. So you have to develop your own systems that work well for you and your management ability." Dave Reibling, Oak Manor Farms

505

"Don't expect the impossible and go into it with the idea that you're going to make it work." Gerry Poechman, Ger‐Mar Farms

B 28 Consumer Trends G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea

New consumer profiles

Three Mega-trends

• Indulgence • Convenience • Health and Wellness General well-being

The health care market is drastically growing: 280 billion € worldwide

506

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea Market segments and buyer groups I

1. „Hardcore-greenies“ Small convinced, environmentally-aware group which has to a large extent internalised the principles of ecological agriculture, differentiation from mainstream, products unprocessed of regional origin; high willingness to pay; small financial possibilities,

Smallest group of the „Bio-affines“ (60 % of population) 3 - 5% of consumers

2. „Health-conscious epicures“ (LOHAS: Lifestyle of Health and Sustainability) Slightly bigger group with very high demands concerning product qualities and authenticity, convenience (convenient shopping, selective choice, eco worldwide , high willingness to pay for superior quality only

5 - 10% of consumers

1 and 2: 15% of consumers are responsible for 75% of sale

Hamm 2007

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea

Maslow‘s hierachy of needs NOW: Consumption: self-realization exceeds basic needs

Need for selfactualisation

Need for Experience purpose, meaning and realising all inner selfactualisation potentials.

Experience purpose, Esteem Need meaning and realising all The need to be a unique individual with self-respect inner potentials. and to enjoy general esteem from others. Esteem Need The need to be a unique individual Love and belonging needs with self-respect and to enjoy general The need for belonging, to receive and give esteem from others. love, appreciation, friendship. Love and belonging needs The need for belonging, to receive and give love, Security Need The basic need for social security appreciation, friendship. in a family and a society that Security Need protects against hunger The basic need for social security in a family and a and violence society that protects against hunger and violence Physiological needs Need for food, water, The physiological needs shelter The need for food, water, shelter and clothing and clothing

507

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea Change of values

• LOHAS and Neo-Ecology • Representatives: Madonna, Anita Roddick, Brad Pitt • Lifestyle changes fashion

Healthy, Pleasure, Fair -> Buying sustainability

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea Bionade

• From crash to success • No flash in the pan, massive interest

Market development:

2002/3: 2 million bottles per year 2004 7 million bottles per year 2005: 20 million bottles per year 2006: 70 million bottles per year 2007: 200 million bottles per year http://www.mixology.eu/blog/bionade-der-sackgasse

508

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea

The bio market is saturated?

• Change of paradigms • Niche market -> rigorous Bill$$.-market • Growth through development -> Growth through competition • Product-driven -> market-driven • Fragmentation of the buying public -> differentiation of offer • Increase in pleasure buyers and quality buyers

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea

Learning from the fragmentation of the market

• Recognition •Trust • Preference • Credibility of promises • Relevance for target group • Differentiation from competitors

509

G Food Show International Organic Seminar November 20, 2008, Seoul, Korea

Regionalisation

• Rhythmiser • Fair starts at the front door • Demand for: - Qualitative premium food - Attractive culture - Integrated rural development

C Film Theatre

D Film Display in 3D Theater and Video Display:

D.1 Central Film Hall: ‘Organic Agriculture’ ‐ display 3 D animation films for 20 minutes in 2 central film halls Message: Film 1 (in Theatre 1 which has 250 seats): Showing the audience what is an organic agriculture and how to grow crop organically Film 2 (in Theatre 2 which has 250 seats): Showing the audience what is an animal welfare and how to raise animal organically

D.2 Introductory Short films for 5 minutes each relevant corner:  Organic seed  Rotation and organic farming  Biodiversity and organic farming  Optimum fertilization of organic agriculture

510

 Pest, disease and weed management in organic agriculture  GMO  Productivity of organic agriculture

D.3 Videos Display in each panel:  Diverse videos and YouTubes related with organic agriculture topics 1) Grass‐fed beef: http://www.grassfedtraditions.com/grass_fed_beef.htm 2) Grass‐fed chicken:: http://www.grassfedtraditions.com/pastured_poultry.htm?u tm_source=adcenter&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Pou ltry 3) The Store Wars – Organic food versus chemical and GMOs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfTQergr29M 4) Peration Whole Foods Hidden Camera GMO Sting – Bait Organic, Switch to GMO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yReJn3vHACk 5) GMO Foods in America – Health Documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i8ZMFJG3wE 6) What is Organic Food? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhIZWhJtY8w 7) What is Organic? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BebNsezt6r0 8) Organic Dairy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxReCnxHy54 9) Organic Dairy – Noonan Farms http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9‐sODnWUISY 10) Innovations on an Organic Dairy: Successful Calf Rearing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cnh5rMA0a4 11) Organic Farming: Can It Feed Us (Part 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3ciISvqpTo 12) Organic Farming: Can It Feed Us (Part 2) 13) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKeApQPgFa0 14) Duck‐rice farming in Japan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNR_3GeUoqI

511

IMPRESS

Layout: Hannah Becker Christian Dahn Susanne Geuer

512

Hall 10 Organic Agriculture General 1 Organic Agriculture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_farming

Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development of the European Commission What is organic farming

Paull, John (2011) "Nanomaterials in food and agriculture: The big issue of small matter for organic food and farming", Proceedings of the Third Scientific Conference of ISOFAR (International Society of Organic Agriculture Research), 28 September ‐ 1 October, Namyangju, Korea., 2:96‐99.

Paull, John "From France to the World: The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM)", Journal of Social Research & Policy, 2010, 1(2):93‐102.

"Definition of Organic Agriculture". IFOAM. Retrieved 2008‐09‐30.

Paull, John (2011) "The Uptake of Organic Agriculture: A Decade of Worldwide Development", Journal of Social and Development Sciences, 2 (3), pp. 111‐120.

Willer, Helga; Kilcher, Lukas (2011). the organic world homepage "The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends". Bonn; FiBL, Frick: IFOAM. Organically grown food provides health benefits http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0052988 For more information on organic agriculture http://www.extension.org/organic%20production What is the Value of Organic Products to Consumers? http://www.extension.org/organic%20production Organic Farming – You Tube • Organic Gardening with Charles Dowding

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EktX‐vISBow

513

• Organic Gardening with Peter Bennett

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ua6Or0‐W9W4 Cover Cropping Techniques – You Tube • Cover cropping Techniques – Easthampton, MA, USA

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4eR_eUttPE • Over Cropping Techniques – Edgewater Farm, NY, USA

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpBC8tyDF64

1.1. Why go organic 1.2. Secret of etenal life 1.3. Principels of organic farming Altieri, Miguel, Agroecology: The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture, 2nd ed., Boulder, CO, Westview Press, 1987, 160 pp. Hanley, P., ed., Earthcare: Ecological Agriculture in Saskatchewan, Earthcare Group, Wynward, Sask., 1980, 236 pp. Hill, Stuart B., Towards an Alternative Agriculture, 1976, Ecological Agriculture Project, MacDonald College, Que. Hodges R.D., Who needs inorganic fertilizers anyway? The case for Biological Agriculture, Inst. of Biological Husbandry, Suffolk, England, 1978, 24 pp. Lampkin, Nicolas, Organic Farming, Farming Press, Ipswich, U.K., 1990, 701 pp. Odum, E.P., Fundamentals of Ecology, 2nd ed., Philadelphia, PA, Saunders, 1959, 546 pp. 1.4. The Productivity of Organic Farming

Welsh, Rick (1999). "Economics of Organic Grain and Soybean Production in the Midwestern United States". Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture.

Stanhill, G. (1990). The comparative productivity of organic agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment. 30(1‐2):1‐26

Mader, et al.; Fliessbach, A; Dubois, D; Gunst, L; Fried, P; Niggli, U (2002). "Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic Farming".

514

Science 296 (5573): 1694–1697. doi:10.1126/science.1071148. PMID 12040197.

Lotter, D. W., Seidel, R. & Liebhardt W. (2003). "The performance of organic and conventional cropping systems in an extreme climate year". American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18 (03): 146–154. doi:10.1079/AJAA200345.

Welsh (1999) The Economics of Organic Grain and Soybean Production in the Midwestern United States.

A study of 1,804 organic farms in Central America hit by Hurricane Mitch: Holt‐Gimenez, E. (2000) Hurricane Mitch Reveals Benefits of Sustainable Farming Techniques. PANNA.

Pimentel DP et al (2005) Environmental, Energetic, and Economic Comparisons of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems Bioscience 55(7): 573‐582.

Badgley C, et al (2007) Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22(2):86‐108. Cited in article by Catherine Brahic for New Scientist, July 12, 2007. Organic farming could feed the world 1.5. The Economics of Organic Farming

Staff, IFOAM, 2009. Misconception Number 38: Organic farmers can only survive because they get subsidies; the system is not fit for economic competitiveness. The organic sector is eating tax‐payers money and it goes into the pockets of a few manipulative individuals.

Halberg, Niels (2006). Global development of organic agriculture: challenges and prospects. CABI. p. 297. ISBN 978‐1‐84593‐078‐3.

Strochlic, R.; Sierra, L. (2007). Conventional, Mixed, and “Deregistered” Organic Farmers: Entry Barriers and Reasons for Exiting Organic Production in California. California Institute for Rural Studies. 1.6. The Global Environment "Land Degradation in the Developing World: Issues and Policy Options for 2020," by Sara J. Scherr and Satya Yadav, in The Unfinished Agenda: Perspectives on Overcoming Hunger, Poverty and Environmental Degradation, International Food Policy Research Institute, 2001. Also, "Resources, Technology, and Public and Private Choices," by Keith Wiebe, in Who Will Be Fed in the 21st Century? Challenges for Science and Policy, International Food Policy Research Institute, 2001. Science, April 13, 2001, cited in WorldWatch, September/October 2001, page 8. "Deep Trouble: The Hidden Threat of Groundwater Pollution," by Payal Sampat, Worldwatch Paper 154, December 2000. "Food Safety and Quality as Affected by Organic Farming," 22nd FAO Regional Conference for Europe, Porto, Portugal, July 24‐28, 2000, Agenda Item 10.1. FiBL Dossier: Organic farming enhances soil fertility and biodiversity, August 2000.

515

The Rodale Institute Farming Systems Trial™: The First 15 Years, by Cass Petersen, Laurie E. Drinkwater, and Peggy Wagoner, the Rodale Institute, 1999.

"Deep Trouble: The Hidden Threat of Groundwater Pollution," by Payal Sampat, Worldwatch Paper 154, December 2000. 1.7. Climate change and organic agriculture

Meleca (2008). The Organic Answer to Climate Change.

Goldberg, Bob. "The Hypocrisy of Organic Farmers". AgBioWorld. Retrieved 2007‐10‐10.

Leonard, Andrew. "Save the rain forest ‐‐ boycott organic?". How The World Works. Retrieved 2007‐10‐10.

1.8. The sustainability of organic farming

Lockeretz, William, Ed. Organic Farming An International History. CAB International. Cambridge, MA. 2007. Kuepper, George and Gegner, L. "ATTRA Publication #IP170 : Organic Crop Production Overview:Fundamentals of Sustainable Agriculture". National Center for Appropriate Technology. August 2004. National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service. "Organic Livestock Workbook."National Agricultural Library, USDA. 2007. "Fact Pages: Organic Farming." European Commission Directorate General for Agriculture and Rural Development. (Europa Website). 2007. Accessed online April 2008. "Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Marketing and Labelling of Organically Produced Foods." The Codex Alimentarius Commission and the FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. 1999. Accessed online April 2008. "National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service. Organic Livestock Workbook". National Agricultural Library, USDA 2007. Gogoi, Pallavi. “Wal‐Mart’s Organic Offensive.” Business Week. March 2006. Howard, Pill. "Organic Industry Structure: Private Label Brands." Michigan State University. January 2008. Accessed online April 2008. Demitri, Carolyn, and Catherine Green. “Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market,” USDA Economic Research Service September 2002. "Organic farming produces same corn and soybean yields as conventional farms, but consumes less energy and no pesticides, study finds." Cornell

516

University. July 2005. 1.9. World trends in Organic Agriculture

FiBL,OTA. "Organic Market Growth ‐ Facts and Figures". Retrieved 2012‐01‐18.

Bauernzeitung (RollAMA survey). "Bio hat Zukunft, aber auch viele Probleme". Retrieved 2012‐01‐19.

SixtyTwo International Consultants. "The organic food market in Poland: Ready for take‐off". Archived from the original on 2007‐ 09‐27. Retrieved 2007‐10‐08.

"Organic Farming in the European Union" (PDF). European Commission. p. 30. Retrieved 2012‐01‐19.

Cult Market Research. "Piata de produse bio din Romania in cifre". Retrieved 2012‐01‐18.

Centro de Ingeniería Genética y Biotecnología de Cuba. "DirecciÓn de Investigaciones Agropecuarias". Archived from the original on 2007‐09‐27. Retrieved 2007‐10‐08.

Caroline Scott‐Thomas for FoodNavigator‐USA.com, April 24, 2012. US organic market continues to outpace conventional food sales growth Recent Growth Patterns in the U.S. Organic Foods Market

Hansen, Nanette (2004). "Organic food sales see healthy growth". MSNBC. Retrieved 2006‐06‐20.

Warner, Melanie. "What Is Organic? Powerful Players Want a Say". New York Times: Nov. 1, 2005.

Greene, Catherine; Dimitri, Carolyn (2003). "Organic Agriculture: Gaining Ground". USDA Economic Research Service. Retrieved 2006‐06‐20.

"Industry Statistics and Projected Growth". Organic Trade Association. June 2010. Retrieved 2011‐05‐28.

Strom, Stephanie (July 7, 2012). "Has ‘Organic’ Been Oversized?". The New York Times. Retrieved July 8, 2012.

Macey, Anne (2007). "Retail Sales of Certified Organic Food Products in Canada in 2006. Organic food is not all organic. only food

517

labeled with a 100% organic sticker are pesticide‐free/" (PDF). Organic Agriculture Center of Canada. Retrieved 2008‐04‐09.

Typisch.at (RollAMA survey). "Bio‐Aufwärtstrend in Österreich". Retrieved 2012‐01‐19.

Soil Association. "Organic market report 2011". Retrieved 2012‐01‐18. 2 What is organic food

Canavari, Maurizio & Olson, Kent D., ed. (2007). Organic food: consumers' choices and farmers' opportunities. Springer

Duram, Leslie A. (2010). Encyclopedia of Organic, Sustainable, and Local Food. ABC‐CLIO

Givens, D. Ian et al. (2008). Health Benefits of Organic Food: Effects of the Environment. CABI.

Gussow, Joan Dye (2002). This Organic Life: Confessions of a Suburban Homesteader. Chelsea Green Publishing.

Guthman, Julie (2004). Agrarian Dreams: The Paradox of Organic Farming in California. University of California Press.

Hamilton, Denis; Crossley, Stephen (editors) (2004). Pesticide residues in food and drinking water. J. Wiley.

Nestle, Marion (2007). Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health. University of California Press.

PAN‐UK (2008). Pesticides on a Plate. PAN‐UK (UK).

Pretty, J. N., et al. (2006). "Resource‐Conserving Agriculture Increases Yields in Developing Countries". Environmental Science and Technology 40 (4): 1114–1119.

Scialabba, Nadia && Hattam, Caroline, ed. (2002). Organic agriculture, environment and food security. FAO, United Nations.

Stokstad, Erik (May 2002). "Organic Farms Reap Many Benefits". Science 296 (5573): 1589.

Watson, David H. (editor) (2004). Pesticide, veterinary and other residues in food. Woodhead Publishing.

518

Williams, Christine (2002). "Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green?". Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. pp. 19–24.

http://www.helpguide.org/life/organic_foods_pesticides_gmo.htm http://www.redbookmag.com/recipes‐home/truth‐about‐organic‐foods 3 Why buy organic British journal, Nature, in April 2001. www.nature.com http://www.eatingwell.com/food_news_origins/organic_natural/why_buy_organic_7_questions_about_organics_answered http://savemylifedrrima.com/why‐buy‐organic/ 4 Why choose organic http://www.organicfooddatabase.net/why‐choose‐organic‐food.php http://www.health‐liberty.org/sites/healthliberty/gmo.aspx 5 Feeding the soil

Fargione J, and D Tilman. 2002. "Competition and coexistence in terrestrial plants". Pages 156‐206 In U. Sommer and B Worm editors, Competition and Coexistence. Springer‐Verlag, Berlin, Germany. [1]

Linker, H.M.; D.B. Orr and M.E. Barbercheck. "Insect Management On Organic Farms". Center for Environmental Farming Systems. Retrieved 1 January 2013.

Watson CA, Atkinson D, Gosling P, Jackson LR, Rayns FW. (2002). "Managing soil fertility in organic farming systems". Soil Use and Management 18: 239–247. doi:10.1111/j.1475‐2743.2002.tb00265.x. Retrieved 2009‐05‐29. Preprint with free full‐text.

Gillman J. (2008). The Truth About Organic Farming.

Ingram, M. (2007). "Biology and Beyond: The Science of ‘‘Back to Nature’’ Farming in the United States.". Annals of the Association of American Geographers 97 (2): 298–312. doi:10.1111/j.1467‐8306.2007.00537.x.

Fließbach, A.; Oberholzer, H.; Gunst, L.; Mäder, P. (2006). "Soil organic matter and biological soil quality indicators after 21 years of organic and conventional farming.". Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 118: 273–284.

519

5.1. Green manure Altieri, Miguel, Agroecology: The Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture, 2nd ed. Boulder, CO, Westview Press, 1987

Pieters, A. J., Green Manuring, Principles and Practice, John WIley & Sons Inc., New York, NY, 1927

Reid, K., Cover Crops in Conservation Farming, OMAF Factsheet, August 1990

The New Farm's Cover Crop Guide, The New Farm Magazine, Emmaus, PA, April 1988

Warman, P., The Basics of Green Manuring, MacDonald J. 40(1): 3‐6, 1981 5.2. Feeding the soil – Cover crop 5.3. Compost – The key to living soil

Materials for composting ‐ University of Illinois extension, retrieval date: 3/12/2009

"Compost Made Simple". Greenmi.net. Retrieved 21 October 2010.

"Composting ‐ Compost Microorganisms". Cornell University. Retrieved 6 October 2010.

Morel, P. and Guillemain, G. 2004. Assessment of the possible phytotoxicity of a substrate using an easy and representative biotest. Acta Horticulture 644:417–423

Itävaara et al. Compost maturity ‐ problems associated with testing. in Proceedings of Composting. Innsbruck Austria 18‐21.10.2000

Lindsay, Jay (12 June 2012). "Japanese composting may be new food waste solution". AP. Retrieved 13 November 2012.

Zhang, W., Han, D. Y., Dick, W. A., Davis, K. R., and Hoitink, H. A. J. 1998. Compost and compost water extract‐induced systemic acquired resistance in cucumber and Arabidopsis. Phytopathology 88:450‐455.

Tränkner, A. 1992. Use of agricultural and municipal organic wastes to develop suppression to plant pathogens. in: Biological Control of Plant Diseases. E. C. Tjamos, G. C. Papavizas, and R. J. Cook, eds. Plenum Press, New York.

Jenkins, J.C. (2005). The Humanure Handbook: A Guide to Composting Human Manure. Grove City, PA: Joseph Jenkins, Inc.; 3rd

520

edition. p. 255. ISBN 978‐0‐9644258‐3‐5. Retrieved April 2011.

"Vermicomposting: Indoor Composting with Earthworms". Retrieved 201‐06‐26.

Lazcano, Cristina; Gómez‐Brandón, María; Domínguez, Jorge (2008). "Comparison of the effectiveness of composting and vermicomposting for the biological stabilization of cattle manure". Chemosphere 72: 1013–1019.

Coyne, Kelly and Erik Knutzen. The Urban Homestead: Your Guide to Self‐Sufficient Living in the Heart of the City. Port Townsend: Process Self Reliance Series, 2008.

Cleaning up heavy metals using worms, International: mining.com, 2012, retrieved 3 October 2012

Heckman, J. 2006. A history of organic farming: transitions from Sir Albert Howard’s War in the Soil to USDA National Organic Program. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 21:143–150.

"San Francisco Signs Mandatory Recycling & Composting Laws". Retrieved 19 September 2010.

Tyler, Aubin (21 March 2010). "The case for mandatory composting". The Boston Globe. Retrieved 19 September 2010.

U.S. Government Printing Office. 1998. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations. Title 40, part 503. Standards for the use or disposal of sewage sludge. Available at: http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi‐bin/text‐ idx?c=ecfr&SID=ef0e4bc903a2845519f1d9129ad7eef7&rgn=div5&view=text&node=40:31.0.1.2.42&idno=40 Retrieved 30 March 2009. 6 Manure Management and composting

"Manure". Bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2012‐11‐14.

"Spontaneous Combustion of Manure Starts 200‐Acre Blaze 1/08/07 |". abc7.com. Retrieved 2010‐08‐07.

staff (2007‐07‐12). "Livestock Antibiotics Can End Up in Human Foods". Ens‐newswire.com. Retrieved 2012‐11‐14. 7 Nutrient leaching and OA

Tilman, D; Fargione, J; Wolff, B; D'antonio, C; Dobson, A; Howarth, R; Schindler, D; Schlesinger, WH et al. (2006‐03‐21).

521

"Forecasting Agriculturally Driven Global Climate Change". Science 292 (5515): 281–4

Kramer, SB; Reganold, JP; Glover, JD; Bohannan, BJ; Mooney, HA (2006‐03‐21). "Reduced nitrate leaching and enhanced dentrifier activity and efficiency in organically fertilized soils". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (United States National Academy of Sciences) 103 (12): 4522–7.

Alföldi, Thomas; Lockeretz, William; Niggli, Urs; Movements, International Federation of Organic Agriculture (2000). Environmental impact and macro‐economic feasibility of organic agriculture in the Danube River Basin. Proceedings of the 13th International IFOAM Conference, p. 160‐163. ISBN 978‐3‐7281‐2754‐9. Retrieved 2007‐11‐04.

Beman, M. (March 2005). "Agricultural runoff fuels large phytoplankton blooms in vulnerable areas of the ocean" (PDF). Nature 25(2). Retrieved 2007‐11‐04. 8 Crop rotation and design

J.J Butt, Daily life in the age of Charlemagne, p.82‐83

http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventors/carver.htm

Powell, J.M., William, T.O., (1993). "An overview of mixed farming systems in sub‐Saharan Africa". Livestock and Sustainable Nutrient Cycling in Mixed Farming Systems of Sub‐Saharan Africa: Proceedings of an International Conference, International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA) 2: 21–36.

Unger PW, McCalla TM (1980). "Conservation Tillage Systems". Advances in Agronomy 33: 2–53.

Rose CW, Freebairn DM. "A mathematical model of soil erosion and deposition processes with application to field data".

Loch RJ, Foley JL (1994). "Measurement of Aggregate Breakdown under rain: comparison with tests of water stability and relationships with field measurements of infiltration". Australian Journal of Soil Research 32: 701–720.

Carroll C, Halpin M, Burger P, Bell K, Sallaway MM, Yule DF (1997). "The effect of crop type, crop rotation, and tillage practice on runoff and soil loss on a Vertisol in central Queensland". Australian Journal of Soil Research 35: 925–939.

522

Littleboy M, Silburn DM, Freebairn DM, Woodruff DR, Hammer GL (1989). "PERFECT. A computer simulation model of Productive Erosion Runoff Functions to Evaluate Conservation Techniques". Queensland Department of Primary Industries. Bulletin QB89005.

Huang M, Shao M, Zhang L, Li Y (2003). "Water use efficiency and sustainability of different long‐term crop rotation systems in the Loess Plateau of China". Soil & Tillage Research 72: 95–104. 9 Intercropping and companion planting 9.1. Intercropping Elkan, Daniel. Slash‐and‐burn farming has become a major threat to the world's rainforest The Guardian 21 April 2004

Trenbath, B.R. 1976. Plant interactions in mixed cropping communities. pp. 129–169 in R.I. Papendick, A. Sanchez, G.B. Triplett (Eds.), Multiple Croppi ng. ASA Special Publication 27. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.

Mt. Pleasant, Jane (2006). "The science behind the Three Sisters mound system: An agronomic assessment of an indigenous agricultural system in the northeast". In John E. Staller, Robert H. Tykot, and Bruce F. Benz. Histories of maize: Multidisciplinary approaches to the prehistory, linguistics, biogeogr aphy, domestication, and evolution of maize. Amsterdam. pp. 529–537.

Miguel Angel Altieri; Clara Ines Nicholls (2004). Biodiversity and Pest Management in Agroecosystems, Second Edition. Psychology Press.

Andrews, D.J., A.H. Kassam. 1976. The importance of multiple cropping in increasing world food supplies. pp. 1–10 in R.I. Papendick, A. Sanchez, G.B. T riplett (Eds.), Multiple Cropping. ASA Special Publication 27. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI. 9.2. Companion planting

Mt. Pleasant, Jane (2006). "The science behind the Three Sisters mound system: An agronomic assessment of an indigenous agricultural system in the northeast". In John E. Staller, Robert H. Tykot, and Bruce F. Benz. Histories of maize: Multidisciplinary approaches to the prehistory, linguistics, biogeography, domestication, and evolution of maize. Amsterdam. pp. 529–537.

"Cabbage caterpillars". Royal Horticultural Society. Retrieved 10 February 2013.

"Pest control / Companion planting". Notcutts. October 27, 2010. Retrieved 2010‐10‐27.[

Horticulture Research International, Wellesbourne : "Insects can see clearly now the weeds have gone". Finch, S. & Collier, R. H. (2003).

523

Biologist, 50 (3), 132‐135

"The Self‐Sufficient Gardener Podcast‐‐Episode 24 Companion Planting and Crop Rotation". Retrieved 2010‐08‐13.

"Pacific Northwest Nursery IPM. Flowers, Sweets and a Nice Place to Stay: Courting Beneficials to Your Nursery". Oregon State University. Retrieved 11 February 2013. 10 Bio‐diversity and OA

Hole, D.G.; Perkins, A.J.; Wilson, J.D.; Alexander, I.H.; Grice, P.V.; Evans, A.D. (2005). "Does organic farming benefit biodiversity?". Biological Conservation 122 (1): 113–130. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2004.07.018.

Gabriel and Tscharntke 2006 Gabriel D, Roschewitz I, Tscharntke T & Thies C (2006). Beta diversity at different spatial scales: plant communities in organic and conventional agriculture. Ecological Applications 2011‐2021.

Bengtsston, J.; Ahnstrom, J.; Weibull, A. (2005). "The effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta‐ analysis.". Journal of Applied Ecology 42 (2): 261–269. doi:10.1111/j.1365‐2664.2005.01005.x.

Blakemore, 2000

van Elsen, T. (2000). "Species diversity as a task for organic agriculture in Europe". Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 77 (1‐2): 101–109. doi:10.1016/S0167‐8809(99)00096‐1.

Perrings et al., C; Jackson, L; Bawa, K; Brussaard, L; Brush, S; Gavin, T; Pascual, U; De Ruiter, P et al. (2006). "Biodiversity in Agricultural Landscapes: Saving Natural Capital without Losing Interest". Conservation Biology 20 (2): 263–264. doi:10.1111/j.1523‐1739.2006.00390.x. PMID 16903084. 11. Pest and Disease

IFOAM. Criticisms and Frequent Misconceptions about Organic Agriculture: The Counter‐Arguments, Misconception Number 7.

Pottorff LP. Some Pesticides Permitted in Organic Gardening. Colorado State University Cooperative Extension.

524

Marking, L. L. and T. D. Bills. 1976. Toxicity of rotenone to fish in standardized laboratory tests. U. S. Dept. Interior, No. 72. 11 pp.

Panov, A., S. et al. 2005. Rotenone model of Parkinson disease: multiple brain mitochondria dysrunctions after short term systemic rotenone intoxication. J. Biol. Chem. 280: 42026‐42035

Sherer, T. B, et al. 2003. Mechanism of toxicity in rotenone models of Parkinson's disease. J. Neuroscience 34: 10756‐10764.

Jones, D. 1998. Piperonyl butoxide: the insecticide synergist. Academic Press, London. 323 pp. 11.1. Pestcides risk

Hester, Ronald (2007). Biodiversity under threat. Royal Society of Chemistry. p. 16.

"Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children". Nap.edu. 2003‐06‐01. Retrieved 2012‐06‐12.

Multiresidue Analytical Procedure for Insecticides Used by Organic Farmers. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 1998.

Beckerman, Janna. "Using Organic Fungicides". Planet Natural. Retrieved 2009‐02‐05.

Pesticides, agriculture and the environment(12 December 2005) Written by: Collective Scientific Expertise Unit, Communications Department / Unit: Collective Scientific Expertise Unit / Date of creation: 19 January 2006 / Date of last update: 18 February 2009

EJF. (2007). The deadly chemicals in cotton. Environmental Justice Foundation in collaboration with Pesticide Action Network UK: London, UK. ISBN 1‐904523‐10‐2.

"Trends in the Potential for Environmental Risk from Pesticide Loss from Farm Fields". USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. Archived from the original on 2007‐07‐12. Retrieved 2007‐09‐29.

Kemper, Katherine (2010). Addressing Add Naturally. Xlibris, Corp. pp. i. 11.2. Pest and disease management 12 Weed management

525

Kathleen Delate and Robert Hartzler. 2003. Weed Management for Organic Farmers. Iowa State University Extension Bulletin 1883.

Robert J. Kremer and Jianmei Li. 2003. Developing weed‐suppressive soils through improved soil quality management. Soil & Tillage Research 72: 193‐202.

Mark Schonbeck, Virginia Association for Biological Farming. Last Updated: March 23, 2010. An Organic Weed Control Toolbox.

Szykitka, Walter (2004). The Big Book of Self‐Reliant Living: Advice and Information on Just About Everything You Need to Know to Live on Planet Earth. Globe‐Pequot. p. 343. ISBN 978‐1‐59228‐043‐8.

Pimentel D et al. (1997) Environmental and Economic Costs of Soil Erosion and Economic Benefits of Conservation Science 267(52010):1117‐1123

Staff, Green.View (2008‐08‐11). "Stuck in the mud". The Economist.

David R. Huggins and John P. Reganold. (2008) No‐till: The Quiet Revolution Scientific American July 2008 Issue:70‐77

Pimentel D et al. (2005) Environmental, Energetic, and Economic Comparisons of Organic and Conventional Farming Systems. BioScience 55(7):573‐82

Glenn Geiger and Harold Biellier. 1993. Weeding With Geese. University of Missouri Extension Bulletin G8922. 13 Purchased soil amendments Gershuny, G. & Smillie, J., The Soul of Soil: A guide to Ecological Soil Management, Gaia Services, Erle, Que., 1986, 109 pp. Parnes, R., Fertile Soil: A Grower's Guide to Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers, AgAccess, Davis, CA, 1990, 190 pp. 14 Organic gardening step by step 14.1. Secrets for organic vegetable garden 14.2. Secret for organic lawn care http://homepage.mac.com/cityfarmer/PhotoAlbum25.html 15 Rice farming system with duck and snail Duck‐rice farming http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/blog/how‐ancient‐chinese‐farmers‐had‐it‐right‐all‐/blog/38534/

526

http://web‐japan.org/trends01/article/021022sci_r.html http://orgprints.org/4398/ Lee, Yong Hwan; Lee, Sang Min; Choi, Doo Hoi; Lee, Sang Kae and Sohn, Sang Mok (2005) Odor and Irrigation Water contamination by Duck‐Rice System and its Effect in Weed Control, Rice Growth and Yield. Paper at: Researching Sustainable Systems ‐ International Scientific Conference on Organic Agriculture, Adelaide, Australia, September 21‐23, 2005 Snail‐rice farming Okuma, M., K. Tanaka, and S. Sudo. 1994. Weed control method using apple snail (Pomacea canaliculata) in paddy fields. Weed Research, 39: 114‐ 119. Rejesus, B. M., A.S. Sayaboc, and R.C. Joshi. 1988. The distribution and control of the introduced golden apple snail (Pomacea spp.) in the Philippines. In: Proc. of the Symp. on the Introduction of Germplasm and Plant Quarantine Procedures, Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), 14‐15 Dec. 1988. Pp 213‐223. Wada, T., R. C. Joshi, and Y. Yusa. 2002. Experiences of Japanese rice farmers with apple snail, Pomacea canaliculata (Lamarck) for paddy weeding in transplanted rice: A video documentation. Paper presented at the Seventh Int. Congress on Medical and Applied Malacology, 21‐24 Oct. 2001, Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines, 22 p. Yusa, Y., T. Wada, and K. Takahashi. 2003. Apple Snails in Japan: Their Problems, Control Strategies and Possible Benefit. Paper presented at the Korean‐Japan Joint Conference on Applied Entomology and Zoology, 28‐31 May, 2003, Grand Hotel, Haeundae, Busan, South Korea, 105 p. http://www.philrice.gov.ph/?page=resources&page2=news&id=36

Joshi, R. C.; Martin, E. C.; Wada, T. and Sebastian, L. S. (2005) Role of Golden Apple Snail in Organic Rice Cultivation and Weed Management. Paper at: Researching Sustainable Systems ‐ International Scientific Conference on Organic Agriculture, Adelaide, Australia, September 21‐23, 2005 Azolla‐rice farming SHIOMI NOBUYUKI (2000): Feed utilization of Azolla plants and their introduction to "the hybrid duck‐rice farming system"of paddy rice. Agriculture and horticulture 75(2):287~293. Rice‐fish farming http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/blog/how‐ancient‐chinese‐farmers‐had‐it‐right‐all‐/blog/38534/ 16 Stockless organic farming "Introduction to veganics". Veganic Agriculture Network. 14 March 2010. Definition of 'stock‐free' used within the Stock‐Free Organic Standards p2 17 Organic beekeeping Natural Beekeeping:Organic Approaches to Modern Apiculture, Chelsea Green Publishing. 2nd Edition, March 21. 2013. 340pages Top‐Bar Beekeeping: Organic Practices for Honeybee Health. Les Crowder, Heather Harrell. Chelsea Green Publishing. 192Pages http://organicbeekeeping101.com/ http://www.organic‐beekeeping.net/ 18 Wild collection 19 Organic aquaculture

527

Bergleiter, Stefan; Willer et al. (2008), "Organic Aquaculture", The World of Organic Agriculture., Frick; ITC, Geneva: IFOAM, Bonn and FiBL

Aarset, Bernt; Suzanna Beckmann, Enrique Bigne, Malcolm Beveridge, Trond Bjorndal, Jane Bunting, Pierre McDonagh, Catherine Mariojouls, James Muir, Andrea Prothero, Lucia Reisch, Andrew Smith, Ragnar Tveteras and James Young. "The European consumers’ understanding and perceptions of the "organic" food regime: The case of aquaculture". British Food Journal (Emerald Group Publishing Limited) 103 (2): 93–105.

Mansfield, Becky (June 2006), "Organic views of nature: The debate over organic certification for aquatic animals", Sociologia Ruralis 44 (2): 216–232

Ribeiro, Laura; Soares, Florbela; Cunha, Maria Emília; Pousão‐Ferreira, Pedro (20–21 January 2010), "Organic Aquaculture: a strategy for valorisation of semi‐intensive aquaculture?", International Workshop on Sustainable Extensive and Semi‐intensive Aquaculture Production in Southern Europe, Tavira, Portugal: Stiftung Ökologie & Landbau (SÖL)

"New organic aquaculture rules a route to a more sustainable and profitable future for aquaculture". European Commission Fisheries. 30 June 2010.

"Organic Aquaculture", The International Centre for Research in Organic Food Systems (ICROFS), 2007–2010 http://www.icrofs.org

Downey, R, Developing Organic Standards for Molluscan Shellfish

"Organic Aquaculture: What's in a Label?", The Fish Site, 2008, archived from the original on December 2008

Martin, Andrew (28 November 2006). "Free or Farmed, When Is a Fish Really Organic?". The New York Times.

Real, Natalia (11 September 2010), "Organic aquaculture laws go into effect", Fish Info & Services Co.Ltd (FIS), archived from the original on 2010‐07‐09

Real, Natalia (11 September 2010), "Proposed organic aquaculture standards opposed", Fish Info & Services Co.Ltd (FIS), archived

528

from the original on 2010‐01‐09

[Gonzálvez] (2007), "Organic Farming in Spain 2007", FiBL http://www.organic‐europe.net

Diver, Steve (2006). Aquaponics—Integration of Hydroponics with Aquaculture. ATTRA. http://www.agrisk.umn.edu/cache/ARL01479.pdf.

Rönnbäck, Patrik (December 2003), "Critical analysis of certified organic shrimp aquaculture in Sidoarjo, Indonesia.", Swedish Society for Nature Conservation(SSNC)

Pelletier, N; Tyedmers, P (2007), "Feeding farmed salmon: Is organic better?", Aquaculture 272 (2): 399–416

Birt, Benjamin; Rodwell, Lynda D.; Richards, Jonathan P. (2009), "Investigation into the sustainability of organic aquaculture of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua)", SSPP 5 (2)

Lunger, Angela N.; Craig, S. R.; McLean, E. (June 2006), "Replacement of fish meal in cobia (Rachycentron canadum) diets using an organically certified protein", Aquaculture 257 (1‐4): 393–399,

The Soil Association (May 2009), "UK Organic Aquaculture Market Report 2009", The Fish Site, archived from the original on 2010‐07‐09

"Feed World News: Organic salmon". Feed International 15 (4): 10–12. 1994. 20 Organic animal husbandry

Encyclopaedia Brittanica http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/25739/animal‐husbandry.

Jarman, M.R.; Grahame Clark, Caroline Grigson, H.P. Uerpmann, M.L Ryder (1976). "Early Animal Husbandry". The Royal Society 275 (936): 85–97.

Pykala, Juha (2000). "Mitigating Human Effects of European Biodiversity Through Traditional Animal Husbandry". Conservation Biology 14 (3): 705–712.

529

Pykala, Juha (2000). "Mitigating Human Effects of European Biodiversity Through Traditional Animal Husbandry". Conservation Biology 14 (3): 705–712.

"Farming Rice With Ducks: Organic Growing Method Spreads Across Asia". Japan Information Network. Retrieved 8 May 2013.

Monteny, Gert‐Jan; Andre Bannink, David Chadwick (2006). "Greenhouse Gas Abatement Strategies for Animal Husbandry, Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment". Agriculutre, Ecosystems, and Environment 112 (2‐3): 163–170. 21 Organic pasture and grazing Turner, L. W. 2000. Shade options for grazing cattle. Agricultural Engineering Update, AEU‐91. University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension. Available online at: http://www.bae.uky.edu/Publications/AEUs/aeu‐91.pdf 22 Animal welfare 23 Organic ranch and polutry

"Clouds on the Organic Horizon". CropWatch. Retrieved 14 March 2007.

Sethurama, G. International Encyclopedia of Agricultural Science and Technology. Mittal Publications. p. 16.

"Organic Foods Standards and Labels: The Facts". USDA. Retrieved 14 March 2007.

- Organic Ranch http://www.grassfedtraditions.com/grass_fed_beef.htm - Organic Polutry http://www.grassfedtraditions.com/pastured_poultry.htm?utm_source=adcenter&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Poultry 24 Processing and packing

530

Smith‐Spangler, C; Brandeau, ML; Hunter, GE; Bavinger, JC; Pearson, M; Eschbach, PJ; Sundaram, V; Liu, H; Schirmer, P; Stave, C; Olkin, I; Bravata, DM (September 4, 2012). "Are organic foods safer or healthier than conventional alternatives?: a systematic review.". Annals of Internal Medicine 157 (5): 348–366.

Magkos F; Arvaniti, F; Zampelas, A (2006). "Organic Food: Buying More Safety or Just Peace of Mind? A Critical Review of the Literature". Critical reviews in food science and nutrition 46 (1): 23–56.

Bourn D, Prescott J (January 2002). "A comparison of the nutritional value, sensory qualities, and food safety of organically and conventionally produced foods". Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 42 (1): 1–34. doi:10.1080/10408690290825439. PMID 11833635.

Kouba, M (2003). "Quality of organic animal products". Livestock Production Science 80: 33–40. doi:10.1016/S0301‐ 6226(02)00318‐4.

Blair, Robert. (2012). Organic Production and Food Quality: A Down to Earth Analysis. Wiley‐Blackwell, Oxford, UK. ISBN 13: 9780813812175

Williams, C. M. February 2002. Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 61(1): 19– 24

Comparison of composition (nutrients and other substances) of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs: a systematic review of the available literature, Food Standards Agency. These studies reviewed all of the relevant research published in peer‐reviewed journals between 1 January 1958 and 29 February 2008 (excluding articles that did not have an English abstract). One was a 'comparison of composition (nutrients and other substances) of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs'.

Dangour A et al (2009) Comparison of putative health effects of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs Report for the UK Food Standards Agency 25 Certification and marketing

CAP2020 ‐ Organic Farmin in Brazil ‐ Participatory Certification and Local Markets for Sustainable Agricultural Development

Setboonsarng, S. 2008. Can Ethical Trade Certification Contribute to the Attainment of the Millennium Development Goals? A Review of Organic and Fair‐Trade Certification. Discussion Paper 115. ADBI, Tokyo.

531

"Labeling organic products". U.S. Department of Agriculture. October 2012. Retrieved 3 April 2013.

Text copied from "National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances". Agricultural Marketing Service. Retrieved 15 June 2011.

Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labeling of organic products with regard to organic production, labeling and control

European Commission » Agriculture and Rural Development » Organic Farming: Questions and Answers

Meirelles, Laércio. "Certification of Organic Products". Central Ecologico. Retrieved 1 September 2011.

"National import regulations and the fact that the international certification bodies charge high fees for assessing and certifying farmers tend to drive development towards agribusiness, with plantations run by major multinational companies. Therefore a more local system for trade in farm products and their certification brings a range of advantages for farmers(...)." http://www.naturskyddsforeningen.se/upload/Foreningsdokument/Rapporter/engelska/organic‐farming‐in‐brazil.pdf

Ifad.(2003)The Adoption of Organic Agriculture Among Small Farmers in Latin America and the Caribbean.Thematic Evaluation. http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/public_html/eksyst/doc/agreement/pl/organic.htm#1.

"OCA Files Complaint with USDA's National Organic Program Against 'Organic Water' Scheme". Organic Consumers Association, 18‐Feb‐ 2004. Retrieved 4‐Mar‐2006. The USDA decision was summarized in a formal letter dated 9‐Mar‐2005: USDA Final Decision 030905. Retrieved 19‐Apr‐2006. In August 2005, the USDA did extend NOP coverage to non‐food products: "Organic Consumers Association: USDA Yields in Battle Over Access of Personal Care to National Organic Program; Organic Non‐Food Products Qualify, Says USDA". Retrieved 21‐Apr‐2006.

"Purity of Federal 'Organic' Label Is Questioned" article by Kimberly Kindy and Lyndsey Layton in The Washington Post July 3, 2009

Strom, Stephanie (July 7, 2012). "Has ‘Organic’ Been Oversized?". The New York Times. Retrieved August 14, 2012. 26 Organic food and milk quality

532

review.". Annals of Internal Medicine 157 (5): 348–366.

Kouba, M (2003). "Quality of organic animal products". Livestock Production Science 80: 33–40.

Blair, Robert. (2012). Organic Production and Food Quality: A Down to Earth Analysis. Wiley‐Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

Williams, C. M. February 2002. Nutritional quality of organic food: shades of grey or shades of green? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 61(1): 19– 24

Dangour A et al (2009) Comparison of putative health effects of organically and conventionally produced foodstuffs Report for the UK Food Standards Agency

Curl, C. L. et al. (March 2003). study "Organophosphorous Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets". Environmental Health Perspectives, 111(3). Retrieved 2007‐11‐03.

Lu, Chensheng et al. (February 2006). "Organic Diets Significantly Lower Children's Exposure to Organophosphorus Pesticides" (PDF). Environmental Health Perspectives 114(2). Retrieved 2007‐11‐04.

l'Hirondel, J. and J.‐L. l'Hirondel. 2002. Nitrate and man: toxic, harmless or beneficial? CABI, Wallingford. 168 pp.

Smith‐Spangler, C; et. al. (2012). "Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives?: A Systematic Review"

533

(PDF). Annals of Internal Medicine 157 (5): 348

Forman J, Silverstein J (November 2012). "Organic foods: health and environmental advantages and disadvantages". Pediatrics 130 (5): e1406–15. doi:10.1542/peds.2012‐2579.

Blair, Robert (2012). Organic production and food quality : a down to earth analysis. Ames, Iowa: Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 163– 180. ISBN 978‐0‐8138‐1217‐5.

Palupi E, Jayanegara A, Ploeger A, Kahl J (November 2012). "Comparison of nutritional quality between conventional and organic dairy products: a meta‐analysis". J. Sci. Food Agric. 92 (14): 2774–81.

Dangour AD, Dodhia SK, Hayter A, Allen E, Lock K, Uauy R (September 2009). "Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review". Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 90 (3): 680–5.

William Neuman (December 29, 2011). "As Supply Dwindles, Organic Milk Gets Popular". The New York Times. 27 Transition Cleary, A. & Martin R., From Conventional to Ecological Agriculture ‐ A Guide to Transition, COG Ottawa Reference Series, RS6/90, Canadian Organic Growers, Ottawa, Ont., 1990, 8 pp. Kirschenmann, F., "Putting a System Together and Making it Work", Synergy, Summer 1990 MacRae, R.J., Hill S.B., Mehuys, G.R. & Henning J., Farm Scale Agronomic and Economic Conversion from Conventional to Sustainable Agriculture, Ecological Agriculture Projects Research Paper #9, MacDonald College of McGill University, Ste‐ Anne‐de‐Bellevue, Que., 1989 28 Consumer trends Ulrich Koepke, Institute of Organic Agriculture, University of Bonn, Germany

534

535