Anticipating Impacts of Climate Change on Organic Agriculture

CAB Reviews 2012 7, No. 062 Review Anticipating impacts of climate change on organic agriculture Abdullah A. Jaradat* Address: United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, and Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, 803 Iowa Avenue, Morris, MN 56267, USA. *Correspondence: Email: [email protected], [email protected] Received: 28 August 2012 Accepted: 24 September 2012 doi: 10.1079/PAVSNNR20127062 The electronic version of this article is the definitive one. It is located here: http://www.cabi.org/cabreviews g CAB International 2012 (Online ISSN 1749-8848) Abstract Both conventional agriculture (CA) and organic agriculture (OA) are inextricably linked to climate and will impact and be impacted by climate change (CC). OA, unlike CA, encompasses heterogeneous agricultural management methods and practices, given its multiple origins around the world. Although it represents < 1% of the world’s agricultural production and about 9% of total agricultural area, OA is a globally growing, low-input, dynamic and knowledge-intensive production system. It provides a larger flow of multiple ecosystems services than, and differs fundamentally from, CA in the conceptual approaches that frame crop, animal and natural resources-management strategies. Organic farmers have fewer means to manage their production systems and they need greater expertise and more time to optimize the management of OA in the face of CC. The diverse OA-based agroecological systems (AESs), compared with CA, provide more regulatory functions that enable OA to adjust to changing environmental conditions; however, OA may experience larger inter-annual variability which is attributed to fewer short-term possibilities for controlling biotic and abiotic stresses. Nevertheless, small-scale organic farmers and communities are seemingly able to cope with weather fluctuations and climate extremes because of the self-regulating ability of OA and the enormous variability in internal adaptation strategies they have developed over time. However, vulnerability of OA to CC will eventually depend on the level of exposure and sensitivity to multiple biotic and abiotic stresses, and on its intrinsic buffering capacity for adaptation and mitigation. Long-term sustainability of OA in the face of CC is intractably linked to ecological sustainability. CC and ecological disturbances may force OA to undergo structural changes or adjustments as to land area; farm size and land tenure; farming complexity, crop–livestock integration, sustainable intensification and specialization; environmental stewardship; and labour intensity. Conventionalization, to the extent that it does not undermine its core principles, may become the only economically viable structural change option to adapt large-scale OA to CC. In order to minimize the impact of CC, OA needs to function within the broader context of multidisciplinary agro-ecological principles, while adopting scienti- fically based, resource-efficient and semi-closed AESs’ approach. The challenge facing OA is to develop measurable and reliable biophysical vulnerability indicators to prioritize adaptation and mitigation efforts at the farm and local levels. Keywords: Abiotic stress, Biodiversity, Climate change, Conventionalization, Ecosystem services, Indigenous knowledge, Genetic diversity Review Methodology: I searched the USDA-National Agricultural Library ‘Navigator’ with access to nine databases including AGRICOLA, AGRIS, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, among others, and contained > 44 million records. I used the listed keywords above and selected the most relevant and up-to-date references on the topic. http://www.cabi.org/cabreviews 2 CAB Reviews Introduction One of the major differences between conventional agriculture (CA) and OA is the degree to which the farmer After almost a century of development, organic agri- can control biotic and abiotic stresses, especially under culture (OA), a product of the organic movement climate change (CC) [21, 22]. OA can be more practical originally concerned with healthy soils, food and people in more difficult environments, where resources are [1, 2], has been embraced by the mainstream [3, 4] and scarce and cultivation is problematic [20]. OA started as a shows great commercial [5, 6], social [7–10] and envir- heterogeneous agricultural management method of crop onmental [4, 11] promise. However, the modern organic and livestock production owing to its multiple origins movement that has its roots in a ‘philosophy of life’ and around the world [18, 23]. It may have a higher resilience to not in the agricultural sciences [2] is radically different CC because it is more diversified than CA [24, 25] and can from its original form, with environmental sustainability potentially contribute to long-term resilience and stability now as its core [6, 12]. Its alignment with the wider of production under CC [26–28]. However, vulnerability environmental movement has resulted in principles that of OA to CC will eventually depend on the level of have a stronger environmental focus than those from the exposure and sensitivity to multiple biotic and abiotic first half of the 20th century [6, 13]. The publication of stresses [29, 30], and on its intrinsic buffering capacity ‘Silent Spring’ in 1962 was a key turning point for, and the for adaptation and mitigation [31–33]. This paper presents start of, both the modern organic and environmental a critical review assessing the state of knowledge and movements. During its formative years [3, 4] the organic anticipating the impact of CC on OA, offers research-based movement lacked confrontational tactics of many other guidelines as to where future efforts should be placed to social movements but worked on exemplars of alternative adapt OA to CC and outlines strategies that can be used agricultural practices and increasingly on providing organic by farmers to adapt OA to, and mitigate CC impact at the products. OA was destined to attain ecological balance farm level. through the design of farming systems, establishment of habitats and maintenance of genetic and agricultural Climate Change diversity [2]. The formation of a formal global network (i.e. The International Federation of Organic Agriculture Global change refers to interactions of the Earth’s Movements (IFOAM)) in 1972 is one of the landmarks in biogeophysical systems with human activities, involving the history of the organic movement. A range of radical land-use, climate, water and nutrient changes [29, 34]. environmental thinkers and activists clustered around it, The climate is changing and, for the foreseeable future, it ranging from eco-socialists to conservatives. Recently, will continue to have significant positive or negative however, the movement found itself a mover within, effects on agriculture and natural resources, including and tribune for, the protests against genetically modified water, soil, biodiversity, pests and pathogens [35–38]. organisms (GMOs), especially in North America [13], Changes in climate, as manifested by higher temperatures where it became dominated by corporate interests, and and heat waves, changes in precipitation patterns, somehow soon realized that trade-offs between envi- increased greenhouse gases (GHG) and their interactions ronmental benefits and social goods are difficult. with other environmental stresses are already affecting The global organic market for organic food and drinks the sustainability of agroecological systems (AESs) and was estimated at US$23 billion in 2006 [6] and at US$55 disrupting production [29, 39, 40]. Current knowledge billion in 2009 [14] of which North America and Europe suggests that CC will affect both biotic and abiotic factors collect almost equal portion of 97% of revenues, while in cropping systems, threatening crops’ sustainability only 3% are shared between 120 countries where OA and production [41]. Future CC could become a major is being practiced. Historically, increased cost of inputs and source of food insecurity to millions [42, 43], especially in fear over declining soil fertility were the main factors developing countries where different forms of resource- in converting to OA in developing countries, while envir- limited, low-input and OA are being practiced [18–21]. In onmental health and food quality concerns were pre- the predominantly arid AESs of the developing countries, dominant factors in converting in developed countries [15]. many crop plants and farm animals are near their phy- If it was not for the environmental movement, the siological limits for tolerating global warming and drought, organic movement was in decline during the 1950s, after and even small, let alone extreme, changes in abiotic losing the post-Second World War argument over the stress levels may have significant consequences on AES direction of agriculture [6]. Nevertheless, OA is develop- sustainability, ecosystem services and peoples’ livelihoods ing rapidly and is being increasingly practiced in many [26, 33, 39, 44–46]. countries in the developed [13, 16, 17] as well as in the developing world [18–21], with modest, but important contributions to feeding the world, especially in developing Certainty, uncertainty and CC countries [17]. The organically managed 31 million hec- tares represent less than 1% of the world’s agricultural A critical knowledge gap exists where the role of AESs production and about 9% of total agricultural area [17, 18]. [26, 27, 47–50] as well as other potential synergies and

Load more