Modern Agriculture, Organic Farming and Consumer Responsibility

by Christopher Gooderham

 

This report was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Second Year leading to the Ecosystem Management Technician diploma at Sir Sandford Fleming College.

 

Introduction

Pollution is a byproduct of human activity. But, human activity leading to the needless perish of nonrenewable resources and the extinction of native species is simply irresponsible and unethical. While the North American agri-food industry, in alliance with multinational corporations, continues the immoral pursuit of the perfect genetically engineered food, consumers walk the isles ignorant of the affect of their purchases on environmental health. Modern agriculture, which includes the agri-food and agrochemical industries, has evolved into an aggressive monopoly revolving around big business and big profit. It threatens global ecosystems by pushing inadequately researched technologies like genetic engineering to increase productivity. It consumes fossil fuels faster than any other industry, contaminates ground water and reduces biodiversity. In contrast, organic farming, which incorporates human, soil and ecosystem health, endorses practices that promote maintenance of long-term soil fertility, reduce fossil fuel use, reduce pollution, recycle waste and conserve nonrenewable resources. It is a holistic, environmentally responsible farming system that monitors products from seed to harvest. Despite its benefits to human health, organic farming remains a mystery to most consumers who's main concern is price. Although taking responsibility to change a deteriorating environmental condition should be an act that governments can perform through enforcement and legislation, consumer action is needed to stop multinational-corporation dominance and exploit of our natural resources. We need to become responsible, educated consumers and support sustainable industries like organic farming.

 

Background

As international trade and global economies continue to push world products onto the shelves of superstores across western civilization, consumers will continue to play a dominant role in determining which industrial activities harm planet health and which fade into oblivion like the Great Auk. Whether it is child labor in India, rain forest removal in Brazil, or pesticide sprayed coffee in Columbia, consumers support the needless, destructive practices of the competitive, greed driven nations with their purchases. The very industry upon which Canada relies for cultural distinction, human health and nourishment is responsible for perhaps "the greatest environmental problem", according to sustainable farming advocate, Wes Jackson, "greater than toxic waste disposal or the destruction of the ozone layer" (Maser 1997). Genetically modified corn, soy, canola, and potato crops are becoming more frequent, yielding more product and profit. But they present concurrent solutions and problems to human health. While they feed more humans they poison more species. Consumers will perpetuate the decline of human, national and planetary health unless greater environmental education can lead to greater dollars spent on the sustainable industries.

Known in some places as ecological agriculture, organic farming is a holistic farming system whose primary goal is to optimize the health and productivity of interdependent communities of soil life, plants, animals and people. Organic farming practices do not use synthesized fertilizers, nor use chemical pesticides and biocides. Canadian Organic Growers (COG) -- a national information network for organic farmers, gardeners and consumers -- promotes organic farming methods along with the associated environmental, health and social benefits. COG's objective is to conduct research into alternatives to traditional chemical- and energy-intensive food growing practices. They give support, by providing a resource base and a forum, to all farmers and food growers interested in such alternatives. They assist the farmer, gardener, food processor and consumer, through education and demonstration, to better understand the value and integrity of organic foods. COG is also fostering the goals of a decentralized, bioregionally based food system which cuts transportation costs, bolsters local marketing systems and economics, and promotes greater regional food self-reliance (C.O.G., 1999). The emergence of organizations like COG will lead to greater distribution of information on human and environmental health. If it is in people's interest to improve their health and reduce their pollution, they will. Presently, organically grown food is more costly than mass-produced food from modern farms. But if consumers realize that the social costs of modern agriculture outweigh those of organic farming, perhaps the price will be overlooked.

 

Analyzing the Issue

So why does organic cost more? Prices for organic foods reflect many of the same costs as conventional foods in terms of growing, harvesting, transportation and storage. However, certified organic foods must meet stricter regulations so the process is often more labor and management intensive and farming tends to be on a smaller scale. Mounting evidence is demonstrating that if all the indirect costs of conventional food production (cleanup of polluted water, replacement of eroded soils, costs of health care for farmers and their workers) were factored into the price of food, organic foods would cost the same or more likely be cheaper. So why the scarce dispersal of organic foods? The Canadian Agri-industry is at stand still. The Policy Branch of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada has a mandate to provide the Government of Canada with timely information on the impacts that proposed new policies could have on the agricultural sector, or the outcome of changes to existing policies and programs. Increasing emphasis is being placed on the interrelationships between environmental stability and the farm management practices promoted by agricultural policies. However, to date there has been a lack of "quantitative tools", which could be used to address this issue. Economic stability is a priority over environmental integrity. The issue returns to consumer education, responsibility and action.

With credit to the information revolution, knowledge of technological, medical, scientific, and environmental studies is easily acquired. Journalist Andrew Adamson's May, 1999 report on the influence of genetically modified crops on Monarchs raises much concern about modern farming ethics.

A new study that suggests the pollen of a genetically modified variety of corn may be lethal to some monarch butterfly larvae is promising to refocus debate here in Canada over the use of genetic engineering technology in the production of food crops. The study, by researchers at Ithaca, New York's Cornell University, found that nearly half the monarch butterfly larvae they tested died after only four days of feeding on leaves dusted with the pollen of Bt-corn - a popular form of genetically engineered corn. In contrast, none of a group of identical larvae died after being fed leaves dusted with the pollen of non-genetically engineered corn plants. Bt-corn has been specifically engineered so that its tissues are toxic to several insect pests. It is not clear how often monarch butterfly larvae would be exposed to this level of genetically modified pollen. Nor is it clear whether the high death rate can be attributed directly to the genetic modifications in the corn, since the non-modified pollen used as a control in this study came from an unrelated species of corn. (Adamson, 1999)

Does inconclusive data mean we sit and watch scientists and politicians refocus debate over whether we risk potential disaster? Do we remain ignorant, allowing modern agriculture industry to continue eroding environmental health? According to Doug Powel, Professor at University of Guelph, the question is whether we have a regulatory system and a management system that's robust enough to take in new scientific information and use it in the field, not a question about risk to ecosystem or human health. But while our government debates over the capability of implementing robust management systems, it fails to recognize that environmental health is already at risk. Present genetically engineered food crops have been modified to grow more tolerant to biocides, allowing farmers' continued liberal application. A recent National Cancer Institute study found that farmers exposed to herbicides had a six times greater risk of contracting cancer than non-farmers (OFRF, 1998). So who wins this debate - the farmer, the agrochemical industry or medical practitioner? Genetically modifying crops is morally irresponsible, especially when presented with the inherent hazards to health and biodiversity of genetic engineering technology and modern farming practices. We need to wake up and smell the pesticides.

 

Conclusion

To refine the byproducts of human activity -- reduce contamination of groundwater, reduce fossil fuel use, reduce pollution -- we cannot rely solely on bureaucratic regulatory systems and policies to manage the health and welfare of the planet for future generations. Global economies and greed simply get in the way. In the eyes of business-driven enterprise, there seem to be short-term, economic disadvantages to organic farming. But long-term, ecological costs and disadvantages of modern agriculture have yet to be determined. The agri-food industry will change only as consumer action demands. Bioregional responsibility, self-reliance, education, and encouragement of sustainable industries like organic farming treat the cause of a deteriorating environmental condition not the symptoms. Our hope for a cure lies in responsible human behavior -- the greatest asset to the health of future generations and the stability of the global ecosystem.

 

List of References

Adamson, A. 1999. Genetically modified crops in Canada. http://www.exn.ca/html/templates/printstory.cfm

Canadian Organic Growers. 1999. http://www.gks.com/cog/cogab.html

GreenGable Organics. 1998 You need Organic Food. http://www.greengableorganics.com/why.htm

Ho, M. 1997. Genetic Engineered Foods: Oxford Centre for the Environment, Ethics and Society on 20 February, 1997. http://www.twnside.org.sg/souths/twn/title/mwho-cn.htm

Maser, C. 1997. Sustainable Forestry: Philosophy, Science, and Economics. 373pp.

Organic Farming Research Foundation. 1998. http://www.ofrf.org/about_organic/index.html