What conservationists need to know about farming

 

Farming is the basis of our civilization. Though the world’s population is increasing largely and is expected to rise from the present 7 billion people to 9 billion by the year 2050 (UNPD, 2011) thus the demand for farm products increases accordingly. The United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates that the demand for food will rise 70 percent worldwide between year 2005 and 2050 (FAO, 2009). The great challenge for our civilization is that, although we are dependent on farming, at the same time farming is the most nature damaging sector of human activity to the planet. This is because farms are not closed systems but affect the surrounding environment. Biodiversity and wildlife are often the trade-off for farming. Tackling these issues requires conservationists to explore the many consequences that decisions about agriculture have beyond the farm. While it is important to consider conservation values on farmland, consideration also needs to be given to; what sorts of species are found where, the abundance of each species, agricultural yields, and the relative proportions of intact habitat and high- and low-yielding farming. There is a pressing need to measure how biodiversity varies with farm yield but also to consider other ecosystem services. We need to develop methods for how best to limit the cost of farming across a group of benefits important to society. Also it is important to identify likely “winners” based on data and not ideology when it comes to agricultural methods.  Land-sharing, land-sparing, push-pull, breeding and genetic modification techniques must be considered and evaluated. Further governmental regulation and land-use planning should likewise be considered, but with the market and consumer power in mind.

We discussed the advantages and disadvantages of land-sharing versus land-sparing. A member of the group shared experience of land-sharing not always being the best solution for enhancing ecological processes.  The group agreed that the most sustainable agricultural method in a given situation will be context and scale dependent. With the article’s example of nearly no research existing on chicken farming’s effect on the environment due to required cropland etc., a question on biodiversity was raised; could organic chicken farming be more harmful for the biodiversity than the conventional mass-production? Also discussed was the possibility of offering credit for farming biodiversity in order to motivate farmers to enhance biodiversity on their farms, since some farmers do care and listen to the public reactions of environmental impacts. It was suggested that increased diversity of farming within a landscape will increase biodiversity, though with that comment a discussion arose about agriculture responding to the market and that it is nearly impossible to put a price on biodiversity value. In addition, the issues of the general public only caring about conserving the cute animals and the pictures landscape was brought up with the question of; how can we make biodiversity valuable to the public?

Is the trade-off for biodiversity measurable? Is the bottom-line for a trade-off, between biodiversity and economic wealth? If so, where does that leave conservationists and the science of ecology?  

References

Balmford, Andrew et al., 2012, what conservationists need to know about farming, Proceedings of The Royal Society Journal, Biological Science.

FAO, 2009, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, State of food insecurity in the world 2009, Rome, Italy.

UNPD, 2011, United Nations Population Division, World population prospects: the 2010 revision. New York, United States.