Take home messages

• Future farming systems will be under intense scrutiny from many previously muted stakeholders.
• Multiple alternative farming systems will be promoted, not all of which have a basis of good agricultural science.
• Eight criteria are proposed by which alternative farming systems and their components can be objectively evaluated.
• Growers and their advisers must participate in the debate – otherwise poor decisions may be made which will not achieve local, national or global goals in food security, environmental outcomes or ensure the viability of farming enterprises.

Background

The farming systems which support life on earth were developed in the period 9 000–11 000 years ago in both the fertile crescent region of Mesopotamia and the highlands of South America. Their modern derivatives are now under intense scrutiny. The debate about the future of farming has moved out of the realm of growers and agricultural scientists, and into the mainstream, with those presenting strong and diverse views including climate scientists and activists, naturalists, politicians, international agencies such as the UN, FAO, CGIAR and aid organisations, food corporations and more. This is because the populous realise that farming systems can influence climate and the environment , food security, biodiversity, economic activity, the viability of farming businesses and rural communities, and the quality of life for farm and non-farm residents. A sample of these views will be included in the oral presentation. Amidst all these opinions, those of agricultural scientists are tending to be lost.

One of the most important changes in agricultural policy affecting farming systems came with the launch of the EU’s ‘Farm to Fork’ policy in May 2020 (Schebesta and Candel 2020). The 27 actions proposed in the strategy include the following:

• a 50% reduction in the use and risk of pesticides (with 2020 serving as the base year)
• a 20% reduction in the use of fertilisers, including manure
• a 50% reduction in sales of antimicrobials or antibiotics used for farm animals and aquaculture
• requiring 25% of agricultural land be farmed under organic practices (an increase current level of around 8%)
• a 10% reduction in farmland used for growing crops.

This policy will dramatically change EU agriculture and through European corporations such as banks, aid agencies, food corporations and others, will influence agricultural policy in other regions.

Method

Reviews of the scientific literature and internet content were conducted to ascertain trends in farming systems and their likely impacts. A series of metrics are proposed to measure the outcomes of adoption of the practices promoted under each of these systems.

Results and discussion

What field crop farming systems will contribute to world food production?

In this section, each of the candidate farming systems will be examined to ascertain their strengths and weaknesses and their likely impact. This is a very large subject area, so the comments are necessarily brief and selective.

Conservation agriculture

A definition: A farming system that promotes minimum soil disturbance (that is, no-till farming), maintenance of a permanent soil cover, and diversification of plant species (Source: FAO).

The majority of Australia’s current field crop agriculture would be described as “conservation agriculture”. The adoption and refinement of these systems have contributed to improvements in overall productivity, better integration and yields of break crops such as canola, chickpea and lentils, and greatly reduced soil loss due to wind and water erosion. However, two major challenges remain in a farming systems sense – the carbon cost of Scope 2 and 3 emissions arising from the nitrogen fertiliser used (GRDC 2016), and the inability to raise soil carbon under most conservation agriculture systems (Chan et al. 2011).

Organic/Biodynamic Agriculture

A definition: Organic and biodynamic systems rely upon crop rotations, use of residual crops, animal manures, legumes, green manures, mechanical cultivation, cultural control, minimal application of approved mineral-bearing rocks, and aspects of biological pest management to maintain soil productivity and tilth, to supply plant nutrients, and to control diseases, insects, weeds and other pests.

Organic farming systems have been promoted by individuals and organisations, but rarely by governments – until the EU released its Farm to Fork policy in 2020. Proponents argue that organic farming produces safer food and is softer on the environment by eliminating ‘harmful pesticides and fertilisers’ (Muller et al. 2017). So, what does the scientific literature tell us about organic field crop agriculture? Firstly, productivity levels are lower, and a working figure is around 70% of ‘conventional systems’ (Seufert et al. 2012), although some crops may be difficult to grow at all under organic practices (for example, canola in Europe). Further, organic agriculture may not achieve the positive greenhouse gas outcomes that its proponents hoped for (Smith et al. 2019). The direct consequence of more organic agriculture is that greater areas under cultivation would be required to produce sufficient food for the world’s population.

To achieve more productive organic systems, greater investment in science is required, especially in integrated pest management and plant nutrition. The EU, for instance, plans to redirect 30% of R&D directed to agriculture to improvement of organic systems.

Regenerative agriculture

A definition:Regenerative agriculture is any kind of farming that enables the restorative capacity of the earth. Regenerative agriculture preserves or improves the fertility of the soil, creates an abundance of food and other agricultural products, contributes to vibrant communities and equitable economies, and respects the ecology of the natural world. Fertile soil helps create nourishing food and, in turn, healthy people and robust communities (Source: Farmers without Borders).

Regenerative agriculture is a relatively new concept to some in the field crop industries., although some consider it a new name for an old concept. At first glance, the goals of regenerative agriculture sit well with the goals of many farming families whose aim is to pass the farm to the next generation in a better condition than they inherited it. However, populist versions of regenerative farming present mostly anecdotal evidence as to its merits and advocate no use of synthetic fertilisers and pesticides (for example, Massy 2020), which will inevitably lead to low productivity levels. Food corporations are also strong advocates of regenerative agriculture (for example, Unilever, Walmart, PepsiCo, General Mills) and after some missteps, are now promoting farming methods which have a stronger basis in science. The principles of regenerative agriculture are also receiving some serious scientific investigation with centres in Australia (for example, Southern Cross University and CSIRO) and internationally (for example, California State University).

Precision agriculture

A definition: Precision agriculture is a management strategy that gathers, processes and analyses temporal, spatial and individual data, and combines it with other information to support management decisions according to estimated variability for improved resource use efficiency, productivity, quality, profitability and sustainability of agricultural production (Source: www.ispag.org/about/definition).

Precision agriculture has been intensively studied and debated in Australia within GRDC and SPAA (Society of Precision Ag Australia) forums, and now makes a strong contribution to the farming systems adopted in Australia and globally. This trend looks likely to continue and these technologies will underpin many of the elements of good farming systems into the future.

Sustainable agriculture

A definition: Sustainable agriculture consists of environment friendly methods of farming that allow the production of crops or livestock without damage to human or natural systems. It involves preventing adverse effects to soil, water, biodiversity, surrounding or downstream resources, as well as to those working or living on the farm or in neighbouring areas (Source: Wikipedia).

Sustainable farming has become the most debated of the farming systems globally. Growers in Australia were first exposed to concepts around sustainable farming with the introduction of the ISSC (International Sustainability and Carbon Certification) audit scheme, via the Australian Oilseeds Federation, over 10 years ago for canola exported to the EU. Growers made a declaration through their National Grower Registry which stated their grain was ‘sustainably produced’ and this enabled sales into the premium EU markets. Over time, the conditions around the ISCC standards have become more demanding and individual growers are audited at random to ensure compliance with the tenets of the sustainable grain model. Audits cover many aspects of farm businesses including ISCC Grower Self-Assessment forms, grain sale contracts, production summaries, chemical/fertiliser inventory and usage records, seed purchase invoices, equipment calibration records, employment and training records, farm safety procedures and plans to manage farm waste, biodiversity and pollinators. Standards were raised further in September 2022 and now include a ‘no burn’ and 5% ‘set aside’ policy. Some growers have found these audits very challenging, requiring real and costly changes to their farm procedures and infrastructure, while other businesses have been well equipped to meet the guidelines with minimal changes. The schemes have expanded in the past two years to cover feed and malt barley and oats.

In the early years of the canola scheme, attractive premiums (circa $25 per tonne) were available for minimal changes to farming systems and minimal compliance costs. Premiums for barley have been $2 per tonne in 2021, which many growers viewed as insufficient incentive for the increased level of compliance required. In 2022, the premium for malt barley increased to $5 per tonne. Compliance costs for audits in 2021 ranged from $10 000 – $45 000 amongst three growers who were interviewed by the author.

There are many sustainability schemes around the world, but the Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (SAI) Platform is worth study as it is a global food and drink value chain initiative for sustainable agriculture which has a sophisticated evaluation protocol for farming systems. It is popular with many of the leading global food companies.

Currently, debate focuses on whether Australia should continue with the European sourced ISCC scheme which accredits and audits each individual grower, or move to a ‘whole of industry’ approach where the entire farming community in Australia adopts a sustainability framework (for example, Grain Growers Ltd – see References section).

Sustainable farming has gained huge momentum globally with support by the United Nations (see Sustainable Development Goals), governments, corporations (including food, farm supply, grain marketing and grain processing), political parties (for example, Australian Greens), and growers and their organisations. Farm advisers now need to understand the requirements, the implications for their clients’ businesses, and the commercial opportunities presented by accreditation.

How can farming systems be evaluated objectively?

So, with so many diverse views pulling growers and their advisers in many different directions, how should we objectively evaluate the farming systems and their components? In my view, the key goals must be measurable and objective, and include the following:

• enough food for 9.8 billion by 2050
• viable growers in thriving rural communities
• no new land for agriculture
• return significant landscapes to wild areas
• promote biodiversity
• maintain soil quality – no soil loss, maintain or increase soil organic carbon, slow the rate of acidification/salinisation, nutrients stay where you put them, promote a diverse soil microbiome
• net zero emissions
• use all the tools of modern science.

Conclusion

Farm advisers, agronomists and agricultural scientists who make up this forum must become familiar with alternative views on the future of farming systems and participate in the debate to ensure the public is well informed and that governments make good decisions on the future of our farming systems. Elements from all the farming systems discussed will contribute to meeting the global goals proposed.

References

Chan KY, Conyers MK, Li GD, Helyar KR, Poile G, Oates A, Barchia IM (2011) Soil carbon dynamics under different cropping and pasture management in temperate Australia: Results of three long-term experiments. Soil Research 49, 320-328.

Massy C (2020) ‘Call of the reed warbler: a new agriculture, a new earth.’ (University of Queensland Press: St Lucia).

Muller A, Schader C, El-Hage Scialabba N, Brüggemann J, Isensee A, Erb K-H, Smith P, Klocke P, Leiber F, Stolze M, Niggli U (2017) Strategies for feeding the world more sustainably with organic agriculture. Nature Communications 8, 1290.

Schebesta H, Candel JJL (2020) Game-changing potential of the EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy. Nature Food 1, 586–588.

Seufert V, Ramankutty N, Foley JA (2012) Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 485, 229-232.

Smith LG, Kirk GJD, Jones PJ, Williams AG (2019) The greenhouse gas impacts of converting food production in England and Wales to organic methods. Nature Communications 10, 4641.

Sustainable and regenerative sourcing 

How to incentivize food systems to meet the realities of the 21st century 

Reducing agriculture emissions through improved farming practices

Measuring for Success: Priming Australia for the next golden age of agriculture 

The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021 

A Grains Sustainability Framework – Behind Australian Grain

ISCC Certification with Sustainable Grain Australia 

Sustainable agriculture for a better world

Contact details

Andrew R Barr
Andrew Barr Consulting P/L
1285 Traeger Rd, Pinery SA 5460
0428 277085
arhebarr@baonline.com.au