Landscape Context Affects the Sustainability of Organic Farming Systems
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Landscape context affects the sustainability of organic farming systems Olivia M. Smitha,1, Abigail L. Cohenb, John P. Reganoldc, Matthew S. Jonesb, Robert J. Orpetb, Joseph M. Taylorb, Jessa H. Thurmanb, Kevin A. Cornella, Rachel L. Olssonb, Yang Geb,d, Christina M. Kennedye, and David W. Crowderb aSchool of Biological Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164; bDepartment of Entomology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164; cDepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164; dDepartment of Entomology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China; and eGlobal Lands Program, The Nature Conservancy, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Edited by Hans Herren, Millennium Institute, Washington, DC, and approved December 19, 2019 (received for review April 23, 2019) Organic agriculture promotes sustainability compared to conven- tainability metrics, such as crop yield and profitability, remains tional agriculture. However, the multifunctional sustainability largely unknown. While one meta-analysis assessed landscape benefits of organic farms might be mediated by landscape context. context effects on yields for organic and conventional farms, Assessing how landscape context affects sustainability may aid in it focused on biological pest control (20); studies have also targeting organic production to landscapes that promote high assessed effects of organic production on yield or profitability, biodiversity, crop yields, and profitability. We addressed this using but in a single country (14, 18). Studies that simultaneously a meta-analysis spanning 60 crop types on six continents that quantify landscape context effects on biodiversity, yield, and assessed whether landscape context affected biodiversity, yield, profitability benefits of organic farming are needed to identify and profitability of organic vs. conventional agroecosystems. We the landscape context(s) where organic agriculture may provide considered landscape metrics reflecting landscape composition the greatest multifunctional benefits to sustainability. (percent cropland), compositional heterogeneity (number and To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a global meta- diversity of cover types), and configurational heterogeneity analysis to quantify the effects of landscape context on the sus- (spatial arrangement of cover types) across our study systems. tainability of organic versus conventional agriculture using four Organic sites had greater biodiversity (34%) and profits (50%) socioecological sustainability metrics: 1) biotic abundance, 2) than conventional sites, despite lower yields (18%). Biodiversity gains increased as average crop field size in the landscape biotic richness, 3) crop yield, and 4) profitability. These metrics AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES increased, suggesting organic farms provide a “refuge” in inten- span ecological and economic dimensions of sustainability and sive landscapes. In contrast, as crop field size increased, yield gaps are key indicators for evaluating sustainability of farming systems between organic and conventional farms increased and profitabil- and directing policy (21, 22). We assessed how each metric ity benefits of organic farming decreased. Profitability of organic was affected by landscape metrics that reflected composition systems, which we were only able to measure for studies con- (amount of land cover types), compositional heterogeneity (di- ducted in the United States, varied across landscapes in conjunc- versity of land cover types), and configurational heterogeneity tion with production costs and price premiums, suggesting (spatial arrangement of land cover types) (13). The landscape socioeconomic factors mediated profitability. Our results show metrics were percent cropland (composition), crop field size biodiversity benefits of organic farming respond differently to (configurational heterogeneity), Shannon’s habitat diversity landscape context compared to yield and profitability benefits, suggesting these sustainability metrics are decoupled. More Significance broadly, our results show that the ecological, but not the eco- nomic, sustainability benefits of organic agriculture are most pro- Organic agriculture promotes environmental and socioeco- nounced in more intensive agricultural landscapes. nomic sustainability to a greater degree than conventional agriculture. However, it is unknown whether effects of organic agriculture | biodiversity | yield | profitability | meta-analysis agriculture on sustainability metrics such as biodiversity, crop yields, and profitability vary across the diverse landscapes rganic agriculture promotes socioecological sustainability where organic farming is practiced. We addressed this using a Owith practices such as crop rotation, natural pest manage- global meta-analysis spanning 60 crops. Organic sites had ment, diversified crop and livestock production, and addition of greater biodiversity than conventional ones, with the largest compost and animal manures in place of synthetic inputs (1). benefits in landscapes with large field sizes. In contrast, while Generally, organic farms produce lower yields than conventional organic sites also had greater profits, the largest benefits oc- farms (2, 3) but are more profitable (4). Organic agriculture also curred in landscapes with small fields. The ecological sustain- typically promotes biodiversity (5–7), natural pest control (8), ability benefits of organic agriculture are most pronounced in pollination (5), soil quality (9, 10), and energy efficiency (10) landscapes typified by more intensive agriculture, while eco- while reducing pesticide use and other negative externalities that nomic benefits are likely influenced by socioeconomic factors are associated with conventional agriculture (1). Due to recog- and yields. nition of these benefits and growing demand, organic farming Author contributions: O.M.S., A.L.C., J.P.R., M.S.J., R.J.O., J.M.T., J.H.T., K.A.C., R.L.O., Y.G., has experienced rapid growth, with global sales of organic foods C.M.K., and D.W.C. designed research; O.M.S., A.L.C., M.S.J., R.J.O., J.M.T., J.H.T., K.A.C., and beverages increasing by more than fourfold to $89.7 billion R.L.O., Y.G., and D.W.C. performed research; O.M.S. and D.W.C. analyzed data; and between 2001 and 2016 (11). O.M.S., J.P.R., and D.W.C. wrote the paper. Organic farming is practiced in 178 countries on six continents The authors declare no competing interest. (11). In turn, landscape context, such as the extent of crop This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. production and the diversity of crop and noncrop habitats Published under the PNAS license. around fields or farms, varies across systems. Increasingly, 1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: [email protected]. studies show landscape context can mediate effects of farming This article contains supporting information online at https://www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/ practices on biodiversity (5–7, 12–20). Yet, whether landscape doi:10.1073/pnas.1906909117/-/DCSupplemental. context mediates effects of organic agriculture on other sus- www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1906909117 PNAS Latest Articles | 1of9 Downloaded by guest on September 30, 2021 index (compositional heterogeneity), and patch richness (com- an experimental station) (SI Appendix, Table S15 and Figs. S2– positional heterogeneity) (SI Appendix, Fig. S1 and Tables S1– S9). However, some studies included data from multiple fields S6). While studies assessing effects of landscape context on across a gradient of landscape complexity. For these studies, we agroecosystems often focus solely on composition, it is recog- averaged landscape metrics across all sites sampled in the study nized that landscape composition, configurational heterogeneity, to represent the average landscape where the study was con- and compositional heterogeneity can mediate ecological pro- ducted. For each sustainability metric tested, our metadataset cesses on farms (13–19). For example, a study of 435 landscapes included a range of between-study landscape complexity gradi- along gradients of crop diversity and mean field size in Europe ents (SI Appendix, Figs. S2–S9). More simple landscapes were and Canada found that multitrophic biodiversity was more characterized by large crop fields, high percent cropland, low affected by crop field size than seminatural habitat (17). Sim- patch richness, and/or low Shannon’s diversity index, while ilarly, crop field size affected profitability of organic compared complex landscapes were characterized by small crop fields, low to conventional farms in GermanyafterWorldWarII(18).By percent cropland, high patch richness, and/or high Shannon’s including a diversity of landscape variables in analyses we were diversity index. able to test various mechanisms by which landscapes might For each sustainability metric we calculated log-response ra- affect sustainability of organic compared to conventional sys- tios as effect sizes comparing organic and conventional systems tems (12–17). (24). Data for biotic abundance and richness were the number of We hypothesized landscape context would mediate biotic individuals or taxa, respectively, for organismal groups in each abundance and biotic richness differences between organic and field or adjacent field borders. Our data spanned Archaea, ar- conventional systems (5–7, 12–20), increased biodiversity bene- thropods, bacteria, birds, earthworms, fungi, mammals, nema- fits of organic farming would lead to smaller yield gaps