RE: Conventional or High Tech

Harris, Craig (Craig.Harris@ssc.msu.edu)
Tue, 15 Jun 1999 10:08:37 -0400

i agree with linington's comments, and would suggest further that there can
be a high technology version of organic . . . it doesn't use the synthetic
chemicals or gmo's that some high tech non-organic farmers use, but it may
use (1) a lot of refined monitoring of animal, plant, soil and environmental
characteristics; (2) very specific natural substances (e.g., biorational
pesticides); and (3) very complex manipulation and management of the
environment (e.g., introduced pest predators)
cheers,
craig

craig k harris
dept of sociology
429b berkey hall
michigan state university
east lansing michigan 48824-1111
u.s.a.
t: 517-355-5048
f: 517-432-2856

> ----------
> From: Dr Maggi Linington
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 June, 1999 08:58
> To: sanet-mg@ces.ncsu.edu
> Subject: Re: Conventional or High Tech
>
> RE Conventional or High Tech Farming
>
> In reply to Greg who thinks they can be used interchangeably.
> Maybe in the US but here we have a lot of farmers who are definitely
> not High tech, also not organic but could be called conventional (
> we subdivide them into a group called resource poor, but that is a
> subdivision) Let me suggest the following: Farming practise could
> possibly be grouped into three categories:
>
> 1. Conventional: uses normal farming practises, modernized a bit
> since Dad, but is still your country farmer type (this is the middle
> group).
>
> 2. Organic: they farm with only natural products, no pesticides etc
> etc They are to the "green or ecology" side of middle
>
> 3. High Tech: These guys use every new modern innovation possible,
> the latest growth stimulant, hybrid seed, milking device etc. They
> are the "modern" or "technological" side of middle
>
> I make this distinction since certain categories are more likely to
> farm in an unsustainable manner than others. I don't know about
> the US but here we have all 3 types of farmers, some of which could
> be classified as Sustainable agriculture and others not, and the
> classification is not necessarily dependent on which category they
> fall under.
>
> In my opinion: None of these three are necessarily bad or good, what
> makes good or bad is often the type of farming PRACTISE they
> exercise. (A lot of the organics will disagree, but then a lot of the
> other two disagree with the concepts that their methods are bad).
>
> When we talk about sustainable agriculture we should be careful to
> get our definitions correct. Sustainable does not equal organic only.
>
> Sustainability may be regarded as a process of change where the
> exploitation of resources is integrated with environmental concerns
> in order to enhance the potential of the resource to meet future
> human need. A sustainable agricultural system is one in which the
> goal is permanence (dynamic not static) is achieved through the
> utilization of renewable resources. Agricultural chemicals and
> mechanization still have a place, but also the use of
> green manuring, rotation with legumes and organic wastes (Poincelot,
> 1986 "Towards a more sustainable agriculture"
>
> Organic farming is a specific system of farming, the
> aim of which is to produce food of optimum quality in a manner
> beneficial to the environment and wildlife. Essentially it prohibits
> the use of synthetic chemicals, fertilisers, pesticides and
> herbicides. Farming is practised in accordance with organic standards
> which have been formulated for horticultural crops, cereals, grass
> and the production of livestock and products in farming (Dept Agric
> and food, Ireland)
>
> It seems to me that this list focuses mainly on organic and equated
> that form of farming to sustainable. In this country and hopefully
> elsewhere sustainable has a wider meaning than organic. Issues that I
> would have loved to have seen discussed would have been problems in
> helping resource poor farmers to become sustainable and factors that
> play a role, or similar questions and debates.
>
> My 2 cents (south african)
>
> Dr MJ Linington
> HEAD:Department Agricultural Sciences
> email:lngtn-mj@acaleph.vista.ac.za
> Snail Mail: Dept. Agricutural Sciences
> VUDEC, Vista University
> P/Bag X641, Pretoria, 0001
> Tel: 012 322 1303
> Fax: 012 322 3243
>
> To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
> "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
> To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
> "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
> All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
> http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail
>

To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail