As the world is drastically growing in population size, it is expected “…to increase further to 11.2 billion by 2100” (DESA). With the exponentially growing amounts of mouths to feed, it is imperative that we find a way to keep producing as much food as possible in a way that prevents the degradation of the planet’s resources. Without a healthy planet, it will not be able to continually produce what we ask it to. Many believe that our current method of industrialized agriculture is the best way to go about feeding the planet, due to its ability to produce mass quantities of food. Yet, conventional tactics bring about many problems that are detrimental to both the planet and humans. Thus, we need to approach things in a healthier way which will implement sustainable methods. Although both sides ultimately want to find the best way to feed people, the proper path to take in this difficult journey would be to outlaw industrialized practices and enforce sustainable farming.
A valid and recurring concern seems to be that even if everyone were on board with sustainable methods, it would take a long a long time to convert all of the currently used industrial land to sustainable land. Though this is true, if we begin as soon as possible, then we have a very real chance at helping our families, friends, and the future generations. Nothing can be achieved without one’s best effort, and it may seem like a tiring road, but we should remember examples in history. The construction of the Hoover Dam was a never-attempted, massive undertaking, yet everyone cooperated and put their maximum efforts forward, thus allowing the project to finish two years earlier than expected. Our mentality toward this should be no different.
Ultimately, industrialized methods bring about many issues, the first of which is the implementation of monoculture; this plants only one type of crop over a large distance, thus reducing biodiversity among plants. Of course, there is no debate in whether conventional or sustainable produces more food. Conventional farming has always been able to produce larger quantities of food, yet “… we found the result that two agricultural diversification practices, multi-cropping and crop rotations, substantially reduce the yield gap…” to about nine percent percent less (Ponisio). Overall, this slight reduction in food production will not cause world hunger. There is still sufficient amounts of food to feed the planet, and in fact, there is currently a surplus of food being created. Yet even with this surplus, 1 billion people are still hungry while another billion are overweight, meaning that production is not being divided evenly nor justly.
As mentioned, crop rotation is an important topic regarding polyculture and is capable of reducing the food yield gap. While polyculture “involves the simultaneity of agricultural operations…” and plants multiple crops at once within the same area, crop rotation will divide the land into sections, and put different crops onto each plot, rotating them once a growing season finishes (Igbozurike). “The current consensus is that crop rotation increases yield and profit, and allows for sustained production” (Bullock). Say for example, a farmer plants a vegetable, a legume, a leafy green, and a fruit on four different plots. Once the first growing season is over, the nutrient nitrogen will have been exhausted because of the vegetables. This is when the farmer would rotate their produce and plant the legume where the vegetables were, allowing the nitrogen to be replenished. This constant rotation would allow a healthy, continuous cycle of using and replenishing nutrients for the soil, therefore allowing food to be grown for many years to come.
Yet, even with this convenient system, many still choose monocropping, where the soil’s nutrients will become depleted at a much quicker rate. The reason is because those plant roots will all grow to the same length in the soil, meaning that they are all aiming for the same resources. In addition, if one particular plant is susceptible to a certain pest or disease, then the majority of crops will die, leading to no profit for the farmer. This issue can be solved with another technique known as polyculture, which is used for its ability to form ecosystems, and are “preferable to monocultures for restoration activities” (Nichols). The abundant diversity of plants therefore provides for itself, which allows for a strong community of plants. In multi-cropping, the species are all looking for different resources, giving and taking what they need from each other. The great thing about this diversity are the contributions from the varying plants. If the farmer enforces multi-cropping, he will have something to fall back on financially, and still be able to sell the other produce, allowing our communities to continue being fed.
Furthermore, monocropping also heavily relies on synthetic chemicals and pesticides to keep pest populations under control. Sustainable methods will not use any form of chemicals or pesticides, and allow for natural pest control. Pests can ruin nearly any plant, which is why many modern food producers are supportive of chemicals and synthetic pesticides. It eradicates nearly all pests and allows the plants to keep growing. Unfortunately, the pest species that survive are the strongest ones, or the ones with beneficial mutations that allow for a resistance to the certain chemical. Natural selection will then come into play, and the most resistant organisms will reproduce and build an army of bugs who are not affected by the chemical. This is an enormous inconvenience, since thousands of dollars will constantly need to be invested into creating new insecticides which will no longer work within a few years time. “…[Therefore] we need to promote pest control through diversification, using methods of conservation…” (Ponisio). We can avoid this endless cycle with the method of Integrated Pest Management. IPM can ward off those annoying critters using traps and the simple biodiverse interactions in nature. These predator-prey relationships will allow the unwanted creatures to take care of themselves.
Aside from chemical pesticides, industrialized methods also uses another form of chemicals; these include fertilizers. Without fertilizers, the soil will remain malnourished. Yet when farmers become reliant on this resource, it is often used in excess. The matter at hand then becomes that the unnecessary, damaging compounds will run off the land when it rains. From the land, runoff moves down rivers and streams to the nearest oceans. Because of this, now both the land and the seas are being polluted.
As can be seen, our current way of producing food and taking care of the planet is not a viable way of living. Yet, we can do something to change all of this. Implementing positive methods that would favor both the planet and humans, will allow for reduced labor by letting nature carry out its natural processes. By eliminating nutrient depleting, weak monocultures for crop-rotation and multi-cropping, it will build a healthy cycle, prevent wasting money on pesticides which provide temporary solutions, and provide us food security for many years to come. Ultimately, sustainable agriculture is what would benefit everyone as a community, and should be the way of the future.