Sergio Ferrari, 7/8/2025
Translated by Tlaxcala
A productive myth falls. Science proves that organic agriculture is effective. Criticism from large-scale conventional agriculture fades away.
Agroecology as a means of ensuring food sovereignty is one of the key proposals of La Vía Campesina
For decades, the debate on the present and future of agriculture has pitted two almost antagonistic visions against each other. On the one hand, the conventional model, focused on maximizing yields, which combines technology, agrochemicals, and huge monocultures. On the other, organic-bio or agroecological proposals, considered interesting but questioned for being “less productive.” Behind each vision are large-scale agro-export production and ecological alternatives defended, among others, by social movements in rural areas.
Rigorous fieldwork conducted over 47 years on 97 organic plots in Therwil, Switzerland, jointly sponsored by the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) and the Swiss Confederation's center of excellence for agricultural research (Agroscope), concluded that these plots achieved, an average yield equivalent to 85% of that of conventional plots and that this difference depends largely on the type of crop analysed. For example, organic soybeans achieved similar levels to conventional soybeans, and slight differences were recorded in forage crops such as clover grass and silage corn, while the difference was greater in the case of organic wheat and potatoes.
According to this study, known as DOC (D for biodynamic, O for organic, and C for conventional), the large gap between organic and conventional production has to do with the environmental impact of each. In fact, organic farming uses 92% less pesticides and 76% less mineral nitrogen than conventional farming. In organic crops, the reduction in the use of nitrogen fertilizers is the main factor in a much lower climate impact. Excess nitrogen from fertilizers is converted into nitrous oxide, a gas with significant negative consequences for the climate.
As the study states, it is true that the reduction in the use of fertilizers and plant protection products leads to greater yield variation in organic systems than in conventional systems, resulting in less stable productivity. However, the risk of water and food contamination (for humans and animals) with harmful substances is significantly lower.
The 8th edition of the Peasant Festival in Rondônia, Brazil, in July 2025 brought together all the diversity and richness of traditional peoples. Photo REC UNIR Research and Extension Group
Prestigious organic farming certification
Conventional farming, also known as industrial or traditional agriculture, involves the intensive use of external inputs such as synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, as well as improved seeds to maximize production. These crops are the cornerstone of the agro-export model of transnational corporations, particularly those in the food and agrochemical industries. This model focuses on efficiency and high productivity through modern technologies applied to large areas dedicated to monoculture, i.e., the planting of a single species on a huge area. Examples include soybeans, eucalyptus, oil palm, pine, corn, and sugarcane.
In addition to the large number of researchers dedicated to the DOC project, its importance lies in its nearly half-century of comparative studies and systematic data collection. These are essential elements in this type of research because the effects of converting a conventional agricultural system to a biodynamic or organic one only become apparent after a long time. This long “waiting period” is due, among other factors, to the slow pace of soil transformation processes, such as the accumulation of stable organic matter. To date, some 140 specialized scientific publications, as well as numerous master’s and doctoral theses, have drawn on the systematic findings of the DOC.
This study provides other
equally relevant conclusions. In organically cultivated soils, for example,
humus levels have been found to be approximately 16% higher, with up to 83%
more activity from soil organisms than in conventional plots. This is undoubtedly
a particularly positive effect for the soil, which is now better able to store
more water and reduce the impact of erosion. (Study here)
Theses confirmed in the Global South
The DOC’s research has
inspired similar initiatives in Switzerland, such as the FAST and Burgrain
projects (promoted by Agroscope), as well as in other countries. For example,
several long-term comparative trials of farming systems (or SysCom, for “System
Comparison”) such as those conducted by FiBL in Bolivia (cocoa cultivation),
India (cotton), and Kenya (a wider range of staple foods, mainly corn and
potatoes).
Other practical experiences
in Africa confirm the optimistic conclusions of the DOC study on organic
production. The Swiss non-governmental organization SWISSAID, with its local
partner in Tanzania, has promoted a research project that has conclusively confirmed
the benefits of the economic mechanisms identified by the Therwil study.
In a recent article, SWISSAID concluded that “after five years of transition, farmers participating in the CROPS4HD project have massively reduced their expenditure on external inputs.” This project aims to improve food quality and overall agricultural resilience by taking advantage of “orphan” or underutilized crops that nevertheless perform very well in marginal environments and also have high nutritional value.
Economic analysis reveals that, paradoxically, conventional farms have higher production costs per hectare due to their dependence on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, confirming the economic trap of excessive profits in agribusiness. SWISSAID explains that organic production redistributes profits among farmers, not among shareholders of transnational corporations and publicly traded agricultural companies. In the case of Tanzania, the farms that have made the most progress in the agroecological transition process have lower costs and higher net incomes, confirming that the relatively lower yield of 15% is more than offset by the benefits that remain in the hands of the producers. This economic reappropriation is accompanied by strategic diversification: the project develops “orphan” species, i.e., species with little or no plant breeding and no current export prospects, but which are very important for local food sovereignty, such as amaranth, millet, fonio, and Bambara beans. In this way, new locally controlled value chains have been created.
This relative productive independence is not only an advantage for the environment; it is also a fundamental lever for a different form of economic power at the service of direct farmers. In the conventional system, farmers are often the weak link in a value chain that is larger than themselves. As a result, they are subject to the volatility of fertilizer and pesticide prices, a market controlled by a handful of multinationals, while also suffering pressure from supermarkets on the selling prices of their own products. Much of the value these farmers generate is captured by their suppliers, processors, and distributors.
In a world facing climate
change, biodiversity loss, and market volatility, the promoters of this project
in Tanzania believe that farmers’ resilience and autonomy are no longer options
but imperatives. This is especially true in the most vulnerable countries of
the South, where every disruption in supply chains exacerbates food insecurity
among the population.
The disqualifications are
melting away. The myth that equates organic with higher costs is beginning to
fade. And organic is being projected not only as healthy and environmentally
friendly, but also as accessible to the popular economy.
