Organic farming provides reliable environmental benefits but increases variability in crop yields: a global meta-analysis

To promote food security and sustainability, ecologically intensive farming systems should reliably produce adequate yields of high-quality food, enhance the environment, be profitable, and promote social wellbeing. Yet, while many studies address the mean effects of ecologically intensive farming systems on sustainability metrics, few have considered variability. This represents a knowledge gap because producers depend on reliable provisioning of yields, profits, and environmental services to enhance the sustainability of their production systems over time. Further, stable crop yields are necessary to ensure reliable access to nutritious foods. Here we address this by conducting a global meta-analysis to assess the average magnitude and variability of seven sustainability metrics in organic compared to conventional systems. Specifically, we explored the effects of these systems on (i) biotic abundance, (ii) biotic richness, (iii) soil organic carbon, (iv) soil carbon stocks, (v) crop yield, (vi) total production costs, and (vii) profitability. Organic farms promoted biotic abundance, biotic richness, soil carbon, and profitability, but conventional farms produced higher yields. Compared to conventional farms, organic farms had lower variability in abundance and richness but greater yield variability. Organic farms thus provided a “win-win” (high means and low variability) for environmental sustainability, while conventional farms provided a “win-win” for production by promoting high crop yields with low variability. Despite lower yields, and greater yield variability, organic systems had similar costs to conventional systems and were more profitable due to organic premiums. Our results suggest certification guidelines for organic farms successfully promote reliable environmental benefits, but greater reliance on ecological processes may reduce predictability of crop production

Identifying Farming Strategies Associated With Achieving Global Agricultural Sustainability

Sustainable agroecosystems provide adequate food while supporting environmental and human wellbeing and are a key part of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Some strategies to promote sustainability include reducing inputs, substituting conventional crops with genetically modified (GM) alternatives, and using organic production. Here, we leveraged global databases covering 121 countries to determine which farming strategies—the amount of inputs per area (fertilizers, pesticides, and irrigation), GM crops, and percent agriculture in organic production—are most correlated with 12 sustainability metrics recognized by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. Using quantile regression, we found that countries with higher Human Development Indices (HDI) (including education, income, and lifespan), higher-income equality, lower food insecurity, and higher cereal yields had the most organic production and inputs. However, input-intensive strategies were associated with greater agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast, countries with more GM crops were last on track to meeting the SDG of reduced inequalities. Using a longitudinal analysis spanning 2004–2018, we found that countries were generally decreasing inputs and increasing their share of agriculture in organic production. Also, in disentangling correlation vs. causation, we hypothesize that a country's development is more likely to drive changes in agricultural strategies than vice versa. Altogether, our correlative analyses suggest that countries with greater progress toward the SDGs of no poverty, zero hunger, good health and wellbeing, quality education, decent work, economic growth, and reduced inequalities had the highest production of organic agriculture and, to a lesser extent, intensive use of inputs

Organic Farming Provides Reliable Environmental Benefits but Increases Variability in Crop Yields: A Global Meta-Analysis

To promote food security and sustainability, ecologically intensive farming systems should reliably produce adequate yields of high-quality food, enhance the environment, be profitable, and promote social wellbeing. Yet, while many studies address the mean effects of ecologically intensive farming systems on sustainability metrics, few have considered variability. This represents a knowledge gap because producers depend on reliable provisioning of yields, profits, and environmental services to enhance the sustainability of their production systems over time. Further, stable crop yields are necessary to ensure reliable access to nutritious foods. Here we address this by conducting a global meta-analysis to assess the average magnitude and variability of seven sustainability metrics in organic compared to conventional systems. Specifically, we explored the effects of these systems on (i) biotic abundance, (ii) biotic richness, (iii) soil organic carbon, (iv) soil carbon stocks, (v) crop yield, (vi) total production costs, and (vii) profitability. Organic farms promoted biotic abundance, biotic richness, soil carbon, and profitability, but conventional farms produced higher yields. Compared to conventional farms, organic farms had lower variability in abundance and richness but greater yield variability. Organic farms thus provided a “win-win” (high means and low variability) for environmental sustainability, while conventional farms provided a “win-win” for production by promoting high crop yields with low variability. Despite lower yields, and greater yield variability, organic systems had similar costs to conventional systems and were more profitable due to organic premiums. Our results suggest certification guidelines for organic farms successfully promote reliable environmental benefits, but greater reliance on ecological processes may reduce predictability of crop production

Effects of restricting movement between root and canopy populations of woolly apple aphid.

Movement of insect pests between spatially subdivided populations can allow them to recolonize areas where local extinction has occurred, increasing pest persistence. Populations of woolly apple aphid (Eriosoma lanigerum [Hausmann]; Hemiptera: Aphididae), a worldwide pest of apple (Malus domestica [Borkhausen]), occur both below- and aboveground. These spatially subdivided subpopulations encounter different abiotic conditions, natural enemies, and control tactics. Restricting movement between them might be an effective management tactic to decrease woolly apple aphid persistence and abundance. We examined this possibility in the field, using sticky barriers to restrict upward woolly apple aphid movement to tree canopies, and in the greenhouse, using mulches and sand amendments to restrict downward movement to roots. In the field, blocking aphid movement up tree trunks did not decrease the number of colonies in tree canopies. Instead, sticky-banded apple trees had higher aphid colony counts late in the study. Earwigs, which are woolly apple aphid predators, were excluded from tree canopies by sticky bands. In the greenhouse, fewer root galls (indicative of aphid feeding) occurred on trees in sandy potting media and on those with mulch (wood chips or paper slurry). Our results suggest that upward movement is less important than other factors that affect aboveground aerial woolly apple aphid population dynamics. In addition, apple orchards planted in sandier soils or with mulches may be partially protected from woolly apple aphid root feeding

Landscape context affects the sustainability of organic farming systems

Organic agriculture promotes sustainability compared to conventional agriculture. However, the multifunctional sustainability benefits of organic farms might be mediated by landscape context. Assessing how landscape context affects sustainability may aid in targeting organic production to landscapes that promote high biodiversity, crop yields, and profitability. We addressed this using a meta-analysis spanning 60 crop types on six continents that assessed whether landscape context affected biodiversity, yield, and profitability of organic vs. conventional agroecosystems. We considered landscape metrics reflecting landscape composition (percent cropland), compositional heterogeneity (number and diversity of cover types), and configurational heterogeneity (spatial arrangement of cover types) across our study systems. Organic sites had greater biodiversity (34%) and profits (50%) than conventional sites, despite lower yields (18%). Biodiversity gains increased as average crop field size in the landscape increased, suggesting organic farms provide a “refuge” in intensive landscapes. In contrast, as crop field size increased, yield gaps between organic and conventional farms increased and profitability benefits of organic farming decreased. Profitability of organic systems, which we were only able to measure for studies conducted in the United States, varied across landscapes in conjunction with production costs and price premiums, suggesting socioeconomic factors mediated profitability. Our results show biodiversity benefits of organic farming respond differently to landscape context compared to yield and profitability benefits, suggesting these sustainability metrics are decoupled. More broadly, our results show that the ecological, but not the economic, sustainability benefits of organic agriculture are most pronounced in more intensive agricultural landscapes