Agri 1

Week 9 to 12
Objective
1. Discuss practices and Approaches in Sustainable Agriculture
2. Determine Advantages and disadvantages between each approach

Pre competency

Explain briefly what you know about the following: Give a simple definition using your own words.

A. Biodynamic
Agriculture_____________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
B. Regenerative
farming________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
C. Nature and Natural
Farming________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
D. Bio- intensive
gardening______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
E. Integrated Pest
Management___________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
F. SALT integrated Farming
system_________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Introdunction

Biodynamic agriculture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Part of a series on

Anthroposophy

General

AnthroposophyRudolf SteinerIta WegmanAnthroposophical SocietyGoetheanum

Anthroposophically inspired work

Waldorf educationBiodynamic agricultureAnthroposophic medicineCamphill MovementEurythmy

Philosophy

Social threefolding

vte

World map of biodynamic agriculture (hectares)[1]

Biodynamic agriculture is a form of alternative agriculture very similar to organic farming, but it includes
various esoteric concepts drawn from the ideas of Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925).[2][3] Initially developed
in 1924, it was the first of the organic agriculture movements.[4] It treats soil fertility, plant growth, and
livestock care as ecologically interrelated tasks,[5][6][7] emphasizing spiritual and mystical perspectives.

Biodynamics has much in common with other organic approaches – it emphasizes the use of manures
and composts and excludes the use of synthetic (artificial) fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides on soil
and plants. Methods unique to the biodynamic approach include its treatment of animals, crops, and
soil as a single system, an emphasis from its beginnings on local production and distribution systems, its
use of traditional and development of new local breeds and varieties. Some methods use an astrological
sowing and planting calendar.[8] Biodynamic agriculture uses various herbal and mineral additives for
compost additives and field sprays; these are prepared using methods that are more akin to sympathetic
magic than agronomy, such as burying ground quartz stuffed into the horn of a cow, which are said to
harvest "cosmic forces in the soil".[9]

No difference in beneficial outcomes has been scientifically established between certified biodynamic
agricultural techniques and similar organic and integrated farming practices. Biodynamic agriculture
lacks strong scientific evidence for its efficacy and has been labeled a pseudoscience because of its
reliance upon esoteric knowledge and mystical beliefs.[10]
As of 2020, biodynamic techniques were used on 251,842 hectares in 55 countries, led by Germany,
Australia and France.[1] Germany accounts for 41.8% of the global total;[11] the remainder average
1750 ha per country. Biodynamic methods of cultivating grapevines have been taken up by several
notable vineyards.[12] There are certification agencies for biodynamic products, most of which are
members of the international biodynamics standards group Demeter International.

Contents

1 History

1.1 Origin of a theory

1.2 Geographic developments

2 Biodynamic method of farming

2.1 Biodynamic preparations

2.1.1 Field preparations

2.1.2 Compost preparations

2.2 Planting calendar

2.3 Seed production

3 Biodynamic certification

4 Effectiveness

5 Reception

6 See also

7 References

8 Further reading

8.1 Bibliography

9 External links

History

Origin of a theory
Rudolf Steiner, occultist philosopher and founder of "anthroposophic agriculture", later known as
"biodynamic".

Biodynamics was the first modern organic agriculture.[3][4][13] Its development began in 1924 with a
series of eight lectures on agriculture given by philosopher Rudolf Steiner at Schloss Koberwitz in Silesia,
Germany (now Kobierzyce in Poland).[14][15] These lectures, the first known presentation of organic
agriculture,[3] were held in response to a request by farmers who noticed degraded soil conditions and
a deterioration in the health and quality of crops and livestock resulting from the use of chemical
fertilizers.[16] The 111 attendees, less than half of whom were farmers, came from six countries,
primarily Germany and Poland.[3] The lectures were published in November 1924; the first English
translation appeared in 1928 as The Agriculture Course.[17]

Steiner emphasized that the methods he proposed should be tested experimentally. For this purpose,
Steiner established a research group, the "Agricultural Experimental Circle of Anthroposophical Farmers
and Gardeners of the General Anthroposophical Society".[18] Between 1924 and 1939, this research
group attracted about 800 members from around the world, including Europe, the Americas and
Australasia.[18] Another group, the "Association for Research in Anthroposophical Agriculture"
(Versuchsring anthroposophischer Landwirte), directed by the German agronomist Erhard Bartsch, was
formed to test the effects of biodynamic methods on the life and health of soil, plants and animals; the
group published a monthly journal, Demeter.[19] Bartsch was also instrumental in developing a sales
organisation for biodynamic products, Demeter, which still exists today. The Research Association was
renamed the Imperial Association for Biodynamic Agriculture (Reichsverband für biologisch-dynamische
Wirtschaftsweise) in 1933. It was dissolved by the National Socialist regime in 1941. In 1931 the
association had 250 members in Germany, 109 in Switzerland, 104 in other European countries and 24
outside Europe. The oldest biodynamic farms are the Wurzerhof in Austria and Marienhöhe in Germany.
[20]

In 1938, Ehrenfried Pfeiffer's text, Bio-Dynamic Farming and Gardening, was published in five languages
– English, Dutch, Italian, French, and German; this became the standard work in the field for several
decades.[19] In July 1939, at the invitation of Walter James, 4th Baron Northbourne, Pfeiffer travelled to
the UK and presented the Betteshanger Summer School and Conference on Biodynamic Farming at
Northbourne's farm in Kent.[21] The conference has been described as the 'missing link' between
biodynamic agriculture and organic farming because, in the year after Betteshanger, Northbourne
published his manifesto of organic farming, Look to the Land, in which he coined the term 'organic
farming' and praised the methods of Rudolf Steiner.[21] In the 1950s, Hans Mueller was encouraged by
Steiner's work to create the organic-biological farming method in Switzerland; this later developed to
become the largest certifier of organic products in Europe, Bioland.[5]: 5 

Geographic developments

Today biodynamics is practiced in more than 50 countries worldwide and in a variety of circumstances,
ranging from temperate arable farming, viticulture in France, cotton production in Egypt, to silkworm
breeding in China.[22]: 141  Demeter International is the primary certification agency for farms and
gardens using the methods. In 2020 Demeter International and the International Biodynamic Association
joined to become the Biodynamic Federation - Demeter International.

In the United States, biodynamic farming dates from 1926.[23] From 1926 through to 1938, 39 farmers
and gardeners in USA pursued biodynamic practices.[23] The Biodynamic Farming & Gardening
Association was founded in 1938 as a New York state corporation.

In Great Britain, biodynamic farming dates from 1927.[24] In 1928 the Anthroposophical Agricultural
Foundation was founded in England;[19] this is now called the Biodynamic Agriculture Association. In
1939, Britain's first biodynamic agriculture conference, the Betteshanger Summer School and
Conference on Biodynamic Agriculture, was held at Lord Northbourne's farm in Kent; Ehrenfried Pfeiffer
was the lead presenter.[21]

In Australia, the first biodynamic farmer was Ernesto Genoni[25] who in 1928 joined the Experimental
Circle of Anthroposophical Farmers and Gardeners, followed soon after by his brother Emilio Genoni.
[26] Ernesto Genoni's first biodynamic farm was at Dalmore, in Gippsland, Victoria, in 1933.[27] The
following year, Ileen Macpherson and Ernesto Genoni founded Demeter Biological Farm at Dandenong,
Victoria, in 1934 and it was farmed using biodynamic principles for over two decades.[28] Bob Williams
presented the first public lecture in Australia on biodynamic agriculture on 26 June 1938 at the home of
the architects Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin at Castlecrag, Sydney.[29] Since the
1950s research work has continued at the Biodynamic Research Institute (BDRI)[30] in Powelltown, near
Melbourne under the direction of Alex Podolinsky.[31] In 1989 Biodynamic Agriculture Australia was
established, as a not for profit association.

In France the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) was formed in 1972
with five founding members, one of which was the Swedish Biodynamic Association.[32]

The University of Kassel had a Department of Biodynamic Agriculture from 2006 to March 2011.[33]

Emerson College (UK) was founded in 1962 and named after Ralph Waldo Emerson, American poet and
transcendentalist. Since then it has held courses inspired by the philosophy and teachings of Rudolf
Steiner, including on biodynamic agriculture.

In Canada, there are currently three biodynamic organizations, The Society for Biodynamic Farming and
Gardening in Ontario, The Biodynamic Agricultural Society of British Columbia and the Association de
Biodynamie du Québec that are members of Demeter Canada.

Biodynamic method of farming

In common with other forms of organic agriculture, biodynamic agriculture uses management practices
that are intended to "restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony".[34] Central features include
crop diversification, the avoidance of chemical soil treatments and off-farm inputs generally,
decentralized production and distribution, and the consideration of celestial and terrestrial influences
on biological organisms.[34][35] The Demeter Association recommends that "(a) minimum of ten
percent of the total farm acreage be set aside as a biodiversity preserve. That may include but is not
limited to forests, wetlands, riparian corridors, and intentionally planted insectaries. Diversity in crop
rotation and perennial planting is required: no annual crop can be planted in the same field for more
than two years in succession. Bare tillage year round is prohibited so land needs to maintain adequate
green cover."[36]

The Demeter Association also recommends that the individual design of the land "by the farmer, as
determined by site conditions, is one of the basic tenets of biodynamic agriculture. This principle
emphasizes that humans have a responsibility for the development of their ecological and social
environment which goes beyond economic aims and the principles of descriptive ecology."[22]: 141–142 
Crops, livestock, and farmer, and "the entire socioeconomic environment" form a unique interaction,
which biodynamic farming tries to "actively shape ...through a variety of management practices. The
prime objective is always to encourage healthy conditions for life": soil fertility, plant and animal health,
and product quality.[22]: 141–142  "The farmer seeks to enhance and support the forces of nature that
lead to healthy crops, and rejects farm management practices that damage the environment, soil plant,
animal or human health....the farm is conceived of as an organism, a self-contained entity with its own
individuality,"[37]: 148  holistically conceived and self-sustaining.[34] "Disease and insect control are
addressed through botanical species diversity, predator habitat, balanced crop nutrition, and attention
to light penetration and airflow. Weed control emphasizes prevention, including timing of planting,
mulching, and identifying and avoiding the spread of invasive weed species."[36]

Biodynamic agriculture differs from many forms of organic agriculture in its spiritual, mystical, and
astrological orientation. It shares a spiritual focus, as well as its view toward improving humanity, with
the "nature farming" movement in Japan.[5]: 5  Important features include the use of livestock manures
to sustain plant growth (recycling of nutrients), maintenance and improvement of soil quality, and the
health and well-being of crops and animals.[16] Cover crops, green manures and crop rotations are used
extensively and the farms to foster the diversity of plant and animal life, and to enhance the biological
cycles and the biological activity of the soil.[34]

Biodynamic farms often have a cultural component and encourage local community, both through
developing local sales and through on-farm community building activities. Some biodynamic farms use
the Community Supported Agriculture model, which has connections with social threefolding.

Compared to non-organic agriculture, BD farming practices have been found to be more resilient to
environmental challenges, to foster a diverse biosphere, and to be more energy efficient, factors Eric
Lichtfouse describes being of increasing importance in the face of climate change, energy scarcity and
population growth.[38]

Biodynamic preparations
In his "agricultural course" Steiner prescribed nine different preparations to aid fertilization, and
described how these were to be prepared. Steiner believed that these preparations mediated terrestrial
and cosmic forces into the soil.[39] The prepared substances are numbered 500 through 508, where the
first two are used for preparing fields, and the other seven are used for making compost. A long term
trial (DOK experiment) evaluating the biodynamic farming system in comparison with organic and
conventional farming systems, found that both organic farming and biodynamic farming resulted in
enhanced soil properties, but had lower yields than conventional farming.[citation needed] Regarding
compost development beyond accelerating the initial phase of composting, some positive effects have
been noted:[12]

The field sprays contain substances that stimulate plant growth including cytokinins.[citation needed]
[clarification needed]

Some improvement in nutrient content of compost is evident from the ingredients included, but not
necessarily as a result of the practices and exact preparations as Steiner described them.[40]

Although the preparations have direct nutrient values, modern biodynamic practitioners believe their
benefit is to support the self-regulating capacities of the biota already present in the soil and compost.
[41] Critics of the practice have pointed out that no evidence or logic underlies the practices themselves,
which instead are dependent on magical thinking and debunked theories of Steiner himself. There is no
evidence that biodynamic practices have any benefit beyond the direct nutrients they add as fertilizer,
[40] which may itself be of smaller benefit than other traditionally organic or commercial fertilizers.[42]

Field preparations

Field preparations, for stimulating humus formation:

500: A humus mixture prepared by filling a cow's horn with cow manure and burying it in the ground
(40–60 cm below the surface) in the autumn. It is left to decompose during the winter and recovered for
use as fertilizer the following spring.[43]

501: Crushed powdered quartz stuffed into a cow's horn and buried in the ground in springtime and
taken out in autumn. It can be mixed with 500 but is usually prepared on its own. The mixture is sprayed
under very low pressure over the crop during the wet season, as a supposed antifungal.[44]

Compost preparations

The compost preparations Steiner recommended employ herbs which are frequently used in alternative
medical remedies. Many of the same herbs Steiner referenced are used in organic practices to make
foliar fertilizers, green manure, or in composting. The preparations Steiner discussed were:
502: Yarrow blossoms (Achillea millefolium) stuffed into the urinary bladders from red deer (Cervus
elaphus), placed in the sun during summer, buried in the ground during winter, and retrieved in the
spring.[45]

503: Chamomile blossoms (Matricaria recutita) stuffed into the small intestines of cattle, buried in
humus-rich earth in the autumn, and retrieved in the spring.[46]

504: Stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) plants in full bloom stuffed together underground surrounded on all
sides by peat for a year.[47]

505: Oak bark (Quercus robur) chopped in small pieces, placed inside the skull of a domesticated animal,
surrounded by peat, and buried in the ground in a place near rain runoff.[48]

506: Dandelion flowers (Taraxacum officinale) stuffed into the mesentery of a cow, buried in the ground
during winter, and retrieved in the spring.[49]

507: Valerian flowers (Valeriana officinalis) extracted into water.[50]

508: Horsetail (Equisetum).[51]

Planting calendar

The approach considers that there are lunar and astrological influences on soil and plant development—
for example, choosing to plant, cultivate or harvest various crops based on both the phase of the moon
and the zodiacal constellation the moon is passing through, and also depending on whether the crop is
the root, leaf, flower, or fruit of the plant.[52][53] This aspect of biodynamics has been termed
"astrological" and "pseudoscientific" in nature.[54][55][56]

Seed production

Biodynamic agriculture has focused on the open pollination of seeds (with farmers thereby generally
growing their own seed) and the development of locally adapted varieties.[57]

Biodynamic certification

The Demeter biodynamic certification system established in 1924 was the first certification and labelling
system for organic production.[5]: 5  As of 2018, to receive certification as biodynamic, the farm must
meet the following standards: agronomic guidelines, greenhouse management, structural components,
livestock guidelines, and post-harvest handling and processing procedures.[58]

The term Biodynamic is a trademark held by the Demeter association of biodynamic farmers for the
purpose of maintaining production standards used both in farming and processing foodstuffs. The
trademark is intended to protect both the consumer and the producers of biodynamic produce.
Demeter International an organization of member countries; each country has its own Demeter
organization which is required to meet international production standards (but can also exceed them).
The original Demeter organization was founded in 1928; the U.S. Demeter Association was formed in the
1980s and certified its first farm in 1982. In France, Biodyvin certifies biodynamic wine.[59] In Egypt,
SEKEM has created the Egyptian Biodynamic Association (EBDA), an association that provides training
for farmers to become certified.[60] As of 2006, more than 200 wineries worldwide were certified as
biodynamic; numerous other wineries employ biodynamic methods to a greater or lesser extent.[61]

Effectiveness

Research into biodynamic farming has been complicated by the difficulty of isolating the distinctively
biodynamic aspects when conducting comparative trials.[4] Consequently, there is no strong body of
material that provides evidence of any specific effect.[4]

Since biodynamic farming is a form of organic farming, it can be generally assumed to share its
characteristics, including "less stressed soils and thus diverse and highly interrelated soil communities".
[62]

A 2009/2011 review found that biodynamically cultivated fields:[62]

had lower absolute yields than conventional farms, but achieved better efficiency of production relative
to the amount of energy used;

had greater earthworm populations and biomass than conventional farms.

Both factors were similar to the result in organically cultivated fields.

Reception

In a 2002 newspaper editorial, Peter Treue, agricultural researcher at the University of Kiel,
characterized biodynamics as pseudoscience and argued that similar or equal results can be obtained
using standard organic farming principles. He wrote that some biodynamic preparations more resemble
alchemy or magic akin to geomancy.[9]

In a 1994 analysis, Holger Kirchmann, a soil researcher with the Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences, concluded that Steiner's instructions were occult and dogmatic, and cannot contribute to the
development of alternative or sustainable agriculture. According to Kirchmann, many of Steiner's
statements are not provable because scientifically clear hypotheses cannot be made from his
descriptions. Kirchmann asserted that when methods of biodynamic agriculture were tested
scientifically, the results were unconvincing.[63] Further, in a 2004 overview of biodynamic agriculture,
Linda Chalker-Scott, a researcher at Washington State University, characterized biodynamics as
pseudoscience, writing that Steiner did not use scientific methods to formulate his theory of
biodynamics, and that the later addition of valid organic farming techniques has "muddled the
discussion" of Steiner's original idea. Based on the scant scientific testing of biodynamics, Chalker-Scott
concluded "no evidence exists" that homeopathic preparations improve the soil.[64]

In Michael Shermer's The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, Dan Dugan says that the way
biodynamic preparations are supposed to be implemented are formulated solely on the basis of
Steiner's "own insight".[65] Skeptic Brian Dunning writes "the best way to think of 'biodynamic
agriculture' would be as a magic spell cast over an entire farm. Biodynamics sees an entire farm as a
single organism, with something that they call a life force."[66]

Florian Leiber, Nikolai Fuchs and Hartmut Spieß, researchers at the Goetheanum, have defended the
principles of biodynamics and suggested that critiques of biodynamic agriculture which deny it scientific
credibility are "not in keeping with the facts...as they take no notice of large areas of biodynamic
management and research". Biodynamic farmers are "charged with developing a continuous dialogue
between biodynamic science and the natural sciences sensu stricto", despite important differences in
paradigms, world views, and value systems.[22]: 147 

Philosopher of science Michael Ruse has written that followers of biodynamic agriculture rather enjoy
the scientific marginalisation that comes from its pseudoscientific basis, revelling both in its esoteric
aspects and the impression that they were in the vanguard of the wider anti-science sentiment that has
grown in opposition to modern methods such as genetic modification.[10]

Steiners theory was similar to those of the agricultural scientist Richard Krzymowski, who was teaching
in Breslau since 1922.[67] The environmental scientist Frank M. Rauch mentioned in 1995, concerning
the reprint of a book from Raoul Heinrich Francé, another source probably used by Steiner.[68]

See also

icon Agriculture and Agronomy portal

Agroecology

Alan Chadwick

Biointensive agriculture

Ehrenfried Pfeiffer

Permaculture
The Real Dirt on Farmer John – documentary on a conventional farm which converted to biodynamic
and community-supported agriculture

Wild farming
WHAT IS REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE?

In addition to a long list of incredible benefits for farmers and their crops, regenerative agriculture
practices help us fight the climate crisis by pulling carbon from the atmosphere and sequestering it in
the ground.

We know that to solve the climate crisis, business as usual will not cut it. Not in electricity production.
Not in industry. Not in transportation. And certainly not in agriculture.

The agriculture sector is one of the biggest emitters of CO2, the greenhouse gas (GHG) most responsible
for the changes we are seeing in our climate today. Together with forestry and other land use,
agriculture is responsible for just under 25 percent of all human-created GHG emissions.

But it also has a vital role to play in helping us end this crisis, and create a safe, sustainable future
without carbon pollution. One where we can provide our booming world population with fresh, healthy
food grown in a sustainable soil ecosystem.

Sure, it may seem like a contradiction. So don’t take it from us – take it from the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): “Leveraging the mitigation potential in the [Agriculture, Forestry and
Other Land Use] sector is extremely important in meeting emission reduction targets.”

But how?

We’ve got two words for you: regenerative agriculture.

HOW IT WORKS

In short, regenerative agriculture is a system of farming principles and practices that seeks to
rehabilitate and enhance the entire ecosystem of the farm by placing a heavy premium on soil health
with attention also paid to water management, fertilizer use, and more. It is a method of farming that
“improves the resources it uses, rather than destroying or depleting them,” according to the Rodale
Institute.

A great deal of emphasis is placed on looking holistically at the agro-ecosystem. Key techniques include:
Conservation tillage: Plowing and tillage dramatically erode soil and release large amounts of carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere. They also can result in the kind of bare or compacted soil that creates a
hostile environment for important soil microbes. By adopting low- or no-till practices, farmers minimize
physical disturbance of the soil, and over time increase levels of soil organic matter, creating healthier,
more resilient environments for plants to thrive, as well as keeping more and more carbon where it
belongs.

Diversity: Different plants release different carbohydrates (sugars) through their roots, and various
microbes feed on these carbs and return all sorts of different nutrients back to the plant and the soil. By
increasing the plant diversity of their fields, farmers help create the rich, varied, and nutrient-dense soils
that lead to more productive yields.

Rotation and cover crops: Left exposed to the elements, soil will erode and the nutrients necessary for
successful plant growth will either dry out or quite literally wash away. At the same time, planting the
same plants in the same location can lead to a buildup of some nutrients and a lack of others. But by
rotating crops and deploying cover crops strategically, farms and gardens can infuse soils with more and
more (and more diverse) soil organic matter, often while avoiding disease and pest problems naturally.
Always remember, bare soil is bad soil.

Mess with it less: In addition to minimizing physical disturbance, regenerative agriculture practitioners
also often seek to be cautious about chemical or biological activities that also can damage long-term soil
health. Misapplication of fertilizers and other soil amendments can disrupt the natural relationship
between microorganisms and plant roots.

The overriding theme: If you take care of your soil, it will take care of you.

According to Kiss the Ground, a nonprofit organization devoted to sustainable farming practices that
improve soil health, “If regenerative means: ‘renewal, restoration, and growth of cells, organisms, and
ecosystems,’ or ‘renewal or restoration of a body, bodily part, or biological system (as in a forest) after
injury or as a normal process,’ then regenerative agriculture is agriculture that is doing just that.”

The benefits of doing so are numerous: Regenerative agriculture practices increase soil biodiversity and
organic matter, leading to more resilient soils that can better withstand climate change impacts like
flooding and drought. Healthy soils beget strong yields and nutrient-rich crops. It also diminishes erosion
and runoff, leading to improved water quality on and off the farm.

Importantly, regenerative agriculture practices also help us fight the climate crisis by pulling carbon from
the atmosphere and sequestering it in the ground. (More on that below.)

THE CLIMATE CONNECTION

The health and vitality of soil everywhere, from the smallest backyard garden to the largest Midwestern
farm, plays an integral role in food production – and it’s threatened by the climate crisis.

In addition to rising temperatures that are themselves changing where and how things can be grown,
the climate crisis has fundamentally altered the water cycle around the world. The result is shifting
precipitation patterns and increased evaporation that causes more-frequent powerful rainfall events
and more severe droughts. In many areas, rainfall has become either increasingly abundant or in
desperately short supply, relative to longtime averages. It’s a classic case of feast or famine.

Extreme downpours can lead to polluted runoff and erosion because the ground simply isn’t able to
absorb the precipitation at the rate it’s falling. And at a certain point of inundation, plants can drown.
On the other end of the spectrum, less stable precipitation together with increased heat is causing more
and more drought, and in extreme circumstances near-desertification, leading to a complete loss of
farm production in some areas.

So, when it comes to agriculture, climate change is doing what it does best: exacerbating existing
problems to the point of crisis. But if a farmer is using regenerative methods and not disturbing the soil,
he or she is instead mitigating climate change effects by building organic matter. And the more organic
matter you have in the soil, the more water-holding capacity you have.

Not only does adopting regenerative agriculture practices help farmers deal with current climate change
impacts by making their farms more resilient and adaptive to what is happening around them now; it
allows them to take action to fight it long-term by being part of a larger solution to the crisis, through
carbon sequestration.

FARMS ARE MAKING THE SWITCH

Regenerative agriculture allows farmers to play an active role in mitigating an existential threat to their
livelihoods.

“We don’t have to wait for technological wizardry: regenerative organic agriculture can substantially
mitigate climate change now,” Rodale Institute writes.

When plants photosynthesize, they take carbon dioxide from the air and – using the sun’s energy, water,
and nutrients from the soil – transform it into carbon the plant uses to grow leaves, stems, and roots.
The excess carbon created through this process is transported down the plant and is stored in the
surrounding soil, sequestering the carbon in the ground. This carbon in the soil is known as soil organic
carbon and it feeds microbes and fungi, which in turn provide nutrients for the plant. Soil organic carbon
is the main component of soil organic matter, providing more structure to the soil and allowing it to
store more water.

Carbon can remain stored in soils for thousands of years – or it can be quickly released back into the
atmosphere through farm practices like plowing and tillage, where soil is prepared for planting by
mechanical agitation methods such as digging, stirring, and overturning.

For farmers, regenerative agriculture is thus a win-win – it’s an approach that leads to better, more
resilient crops grown using sustainable methods that at the same time fight a crisis that presents a
threat to all agriculture.

And that’s why some of the biggest brands in the world are going all in.

General Mills, makers of some of your favorite cereals, granola bars, and other foods, is taking a
multipronged approach to its support of regenerative agriculture. They’ve partnered with other
organizations to develop resources and training to help farmers work toward the widespread adoption
of soil health practices, including plans for “2 and 3-day soil health academies where famers will receive
education from leading technical experts” and a verified regenerative sourcing program for some of its
brands that will “allow consumers to easily identify food that has been sourced from farms verified to
increase water, soil, and climate health.”

LEARN MORE

In the end, Modern Farmer sums it up best: “This is how land should be taken care of and food should
be grown – with benefits for the environment and the consumer.”

It’s just that simple.

Read more about the climate crisis’ effect on the health of our soil – and the future of our food – by
downloading our free e-book, Right Under Your Feet: Soil Health and the Climate Crisis. In it, we get you
the facts on:

The impact of climate change on soil health.

What’s at stake.
What you can do to support a world where we can provide people with fresh, healthy food grown in a
sustainable soil ecosystem.

The climate changes, but these facts don’t. Download our free Soil Health and the Climate Crisis e-book
now.

Natural farming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

Masanobu Fukuoka, originator of the natural farming method

Natural farming (自然農法, shizen nōhō),[1] also referred to as "the Fukuoka Method", "the natural way
of farming" or "do-nothing farming", is an ecological farming approach established by Masanobu
Fukuoka (1913–2008). Fukuoka, a Japanese farmer and philosopher, introduced the term in his 1975
book The One-Straw Revolution. The title refers not to lack of effort, but to the avoidance of
manufactured inputs and equipment. Natural farming is related to fertility farming, organic farming,
sustainable agriculture, agroecology, agroforestry, ecoagriculture and permaculture, but should be
distinguished from biodynamic agriculture.

The system works along with the natural biodiversity of each farmed area, encouraging the complexity
of living organisms—both plant and animal—that shape each particular ecosystem to thrive along with
food plants.[2] Fukuoka saw farming both as a means of producing food and as an aesthetic or spiritual
approach to life, the ultimate goal of which was, "the cultivation and perfection of human beings".[3][4]
He suggested that farmers could benefit from closely observing local conditions.[5] Natural farming is a
closed system, one that demands no human-supplied inputs and mimics nature.[6]

Fukuoka's ideas radically challenged conventions that are core to modern agro-industries; instead of
promoting importation of nutrients and chemicals, he suggested an approach that takes advantage of
the local environment.[7] Although natural farming is considered a subset of organic farming, it differs
greatly from conventional organic farming,[8] which Fukuoka considered to be another modern
technique that disturbs nature.[9]

Fukuoka claimed that his approach prevents water pollution, biodiversity loss and soil erosion, while
providing ample amounts of food.[10]
Contents

1 Masanobu Fukuoka's principles

2 Yoshikazu Kawaguchi

3 No-till

4 Other forms of natural farming

4.1 Fertility farming

4.2 Native American

4.3 Nature Farming (Mokichi Okada)

4.4 Rishi Kheti

4.5 Zero Budget Farming

5 See also

6 References

7 External links

Masanobu Fukuoka's principles

In principle, practitioners of natural farming maintain that it is not a technique but a view, or a way of
seeing ourselves as a part of nature, rather than separate from or above it.[11] Accordingly, the
methods themselves vary widely depending on culture and local conditions.

Rather than offering a structured method, Fukuoka distilled the natural farming mindset into five
principles:[12]

No tillage

No fertilizer

No pesticides or herbicides

No weeding

No pruning
A young man helps harvest rice by hand at a natural farm in a production still from the film "Final Straw:
Food, Earth, Happiness"

A young man helps harvest rice by hand at a natural farm, in this production still from the film "Final
Straw: Food, Earth, Happiness"

Though many of his plant varieties and practices relate specifically to Japan and even to local conditions
in subtropical western Shikoku, his philosophy and the governing principles of his farming systems have
been applied widely around the world, from Africa to the temperate northern hemisphere.

Principally, natural farming minimises human labour and adopts, as closely as practical, nature's
production of foods such as rice, barley, daikon or citrus in biodiverse agricultural ecosystems. Without
plowing, seeds germinate well on the surface if site conditions meet the needs of the seeds placed
there. Fukuoka used the presence of spiders in his fields as a key performance indicator of sustainability.
[citation needed]

Fukuoka specifies that the ground remain covered by weeds, white clover, alfalfa, herbaceous legumes,
and sometimes deliberately sown herbaceous plants. Ground cover is present along with grain,
vegetable crops and orchards. Chickens run free in orchards and ducks and carp populate rice fields.[13]

Periodically ground layer plants including weeds may be cut and left on the surface, returning their
nutrients to the soil, while suppressing weed growth. This also facilitates the sowing of seeds in the
same area because the dense ground layer hides the seeds from animals such as birds.

For summer rice and winter barley grain crops, ground cover enhances nitrogen fixation. Straw from the
previous crop mulches the topsoil. Each grain crop is sown before the previous one is harvested by
broadcasting the seed among the standing crop. Later, this method was reduced to a single direct
seeding of clover, barley and rice over the standing heads of rice.[14] The result is a denser crop of
smaller, but highly productive and stronger plants.

Fukuoka's practice and philosophy emphasised small scale operation and challenged the need for
mechanised farming techniques for high productivity, efficiency and economies of scale. While his
family's farm was larger than the Japanese average, he used one field of grain crops as a small-scale
example of his system.

Yoshikazu Kawaguchi
Yoshikazu Kawaguchi at Akame Natural Farm School

Widely regarded as the leading practitioner of the second-generation of natural farmers, Yoshikazu
Kawaguchi is the instigator of Akame Natural Farm School, and a related network of volunteer-based
"no-tuition" natural farming schools in Japan that numbers 40 locations and more than 900 concurrent
students.[15] Although Kawaguchi's practice is based on Fukuoka's principals, his methods differ notably
from those of Fukuoka. He re-states the core values of natural farming as:

Do not plow the fields

Weeds and insects are not your enemies

There is no need to add fertilizers

Adjust the foods you grow based on your local climate and conditions

Kawaguchi's recognition outside of Japan has become wider after his appearance as the central
character in the documentary Final Straw: Food, Earth, Happiness, through which his interviews were
translated into several languages.[16] He is the author of several books in Japan, though none have been
officially translated into English.

Since 2016, Kawaguchi is no longer directly instructing at the Akame school which he founded. He is still
actively teaching however, holding open farm days at his own natural farm in Nara prefecture.[17]

No-till

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding
citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2012)
(Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Natural farming recognizes soils as a fundamental natural asset. Ancient soils possess physical and
chemical attributes that render them capable of generating and supporting life abundance. It can be
argued that tilling actually degrades the delicate balance of a climax soil:

Tilling may destroy crucial physical characteristics of a soil such as water suction, its ability to send
moisture upwards, even during dry spells. The effect is due to pressure differences between soil areas.
Furthermore, tilling most certainly destroys soil horizons and hence disrupts the established flow of
nutrients. A study suggests that reduced tillage preserves the crop residues on the top of the soil,
allowing organic matter to be formed more easily and hence increasing the total organic carbon and
nitrogen when compared to conventional tillage. The increases in organic carbon and nitrogen increase
aerobic, facultative anaerobic and anaerobic bacteria populations.[18]
Tilling over-pumps oxygen to local soil residents, such as bacteria and fungi. As a result, the chemistry of
the soil changes. Biological decomposition accelerates and the microbiota mass increases at the expense
of other organic matter, adversely affecting most plants, including trees and vegetables. For plants to
thrive a certain quantity of organic matter (around 5%) must be present in the soil.

Tilling uproots all the plants in the area, turning their roots into food for bacteria and fungi. This
damages their ability to aerate the soil. Living roots drill millions of tiny holes in the soil and thus provide
oxygen. They also create room for beneficial insects and annelids (the phylum of worms). Some types of
roots contribute directly to soil fertility by funding a mutualistic relationship with certain kinds of
bacteria (most famously the rhizobium) that can fix nitrogen.

Fukuoka advocated avoiding any change in the natural landscape. This idea differs significantly from
some recent permaculture practice that focuses on permaculture design, which may involve the change
in landscape. For example, Sepp Holzer, an Austrian permaculture farmer, advocates the creation of
terraces on slopes to control soil erosion. Fukuoka avoided the creation of terraces in his farm, even
though terraces were common in China and Japan in his time. Instead, he prevented soil erosion by
simply growing trees and shrubs on slopes.

Other forms of natural farming

Ladybirds consume aphids and are considered beneficial by natural farmers that apply biological control.

Although the term "natural farming" came into common use in the English language during the 1980s
with the translation of the book One Straw Revolution, the natural farming mindset itself has a long
history throughout the world, spanning from historical Native American practices to modern day urban
farms.[19][20][21]

Some variants, and their particularities include:

Fertility farming

In 1951, Newman Turner advocated the practice of "fertility farming", a system featuring the use of a
cover crop, no tillage, no chemical fertilizers, no pesticides, no weeding and no composting. Although
Turner was a commercial farmer and did not practice random seeding of seed balls, his "fertility
farming" principles share similarities with Fukuoka's system of natural farming. Turner also advocate a
"natural method" of animal husbandry.[22]

Native American

Recent research in the field of traditional ecological knowledge finds that for over one hundred
centuries, Native American tribes worked the land in strikingly similar ways to today's natural farmers.
Author and researcher M. Kat Anderson writes that "According to contemporary Native Americans, it is
only through interaction and relationships with native plants that mutual respect is established."[21]

Nature Farming (Mokichi Okada)

Main article: Nature Farming

Japanese farmer and philosopher Mokichi Okada, conceived of a "no fertilizer" farming system in the
1930s that predated Fukuoka. Okada used the same Chinese characters as Fukuoka's "natural farming"
however, they are translated into English slightly differently, as nature farming.[23] Agriculture
researcher Hu-lian Xu claims that "nature farming" is the correct literal translation of the Japanese term.
[23]

Rishi Kheti

In India, natural farming of Masanobu Fukuoka was called "Rishi Kheti" by practitioners like Partap
Aggarwal.[24][25] The Rishi Kheti use cow products like buttermilk, milk, curd and its waste urine for
preparing growth promoters. The Rishi Kheti is considered to be non-violent farming[26] without any

usage of chemical fertilizer and pesticides. They obtain high quality[citation needed] natural or organic
produce having medicinal values. Today still a small number of farmers in Madhya Pradesh, Punjab,
Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu use this farming method in India.[citation needed]

Zero Budget Farming

Zero Budget Farming is a variation on natural farming developed in, and primarily practiced in southern
India. It also called spiritual farming. The method involves mulching, intercropping, and the use of
several preparations which include cow dung. These preparations, generated on-site, are central to the
practice, and said to promote microbe and earthworm activity in the soil.[27] Indian agriculturist
Subhash Palekar has researched and written extensively on this method.

See also

diagram Systems science portal

icon Ecology portal

Agrarianism

Agroecology

Biomimicry

Conservation agriculture
Ecoagriculture

Ethnobotany

Forest gardening

Green manure (plants)

Holzer Permaculture

Hydroculture

Korean natural farming

No-dig gardening

No-till farming

What is integrated pest management?

Integrated pest management (IPM) combines the use of biological, cultural and chemical practices to
control insect pests in agricultural production.It seeks to use natural predators or parasites to control
pests, using selective pesticides for backup only when pests are unable to be controlled by natural
means.IPM should not be confused with organic practices.It does not discourage spraying chemicals; it
promotes spraying with selective pesticides only when the crop needs it, which generally means that
less pesticide is used.

Stuart Kearns, Manager of Farm Biosecurity Programs at Plant Health Australia, said: “For IPM to be
effective, producers need to be familiar with the life cycle and crop thresholds of pests, and to act when
pest numbers begin to impact on crop growth and cause economic damage.

”Beneficial insects are encouraged and their numbers are regularly measured using beat sheets, sweep
nets, traps or vacuums.

Definitions

Cultural control is the non chemical management of pests using manual or mechanical means to change
the soil and crop environment to discourage pest establishment.

Biological control is where predatory or parasitic insects and mites known as ‘beneficials’ or ‘good bugs’
help to control chewing and sucking insects that affect the quality and productivity of crops by killing
them or disrupting their breeding cycle.
Chemical control involves the use of pesticides in the management of pests. It is used in IPM when
biological and cultural control has not been enough to protect the productivity of the crop. Where
chemical control is required, selective insecticides are chosen which target the pest, leaving the
beneficial population unharmed.

“Patience is important. Although information about the density of insects in a field is recorded, action is
only taken when pests reach a specific threshold level.

“When a spray is used, it can sometimes be confined to a particular area of the field rather than across
the entire site,” said Mr Kearns.

Populations of predatory insects can build up at specific times of the season.. Over time these
beneficials can build up enough numbers to reach a stable population within the local farming system.

While IPM has been around for many years it has only been adopted to varying degrees within cropping
industries. Implementing an effective IPM program involves careful management of the interactions
between the crop, environment, primary and secondary pests, beneficials and a lot of patience.

“IPM is included in many best management practice programs, for example myBMP for cotton
producers.

“It’s is a process that may need to be changed several times within a season. It needs to be constantly
evaluated and refined to maximise the benefits,” said Mr Kearns.

The model below outlines some steps for implementing and evaluating IPM practices. Making best
possible use of available resources, expertise and consultants is essential in getting the balance right and
reaping the rewards that an effective IPM program can deliver.
Post competency
In your opinion which approach has a big impact to our Agriculture system at this moment and why?
You can cite examples and explain.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
.

References

1975 (in Japanese) 自然農法-わら一本の革命 (in English) 1978 re-presentation The One-Straw
Revolution: An Introduction to Natural Farming.
"Life and Death in the Field | Final Straw – Food | Earth | Happiness". www.finalstraw.org. Retrieved
2017-04-16.

Floyd, J.; Zubevich, K. (2010). "Linking foresight and sustainability: An integral approach". Futures. 42:
59–68. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2009.08.001.

Hanley, Paul (1990). "Agriculture: A Fundamental Principle" (PDF). Journal of Bahá'í Studies. 3 (1).
Archived from the original (PDF) on March 27, 2013. Retrieved April 28, 2014.

Colin Adrien MacKinley Duncan (1996). The Centrality of Agriculture: Between Humankind and the Rest
of Nature. McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. ISBN 978-0-7735-6571-5.

Trees on Organic Farms, Mirret, Erin Paige. North Carolina State University, 2001

Stephen Morse; Michael Stockin (1995). People and Environment: Development for the Future. Taylor &
Francis Group. ISBN 978-1-85728-283-2.

Elpel, Thomas J. (November 1, 2002). Participating in Nature: Thomas J. Elpel's Field Guide to Primitive
Living Skills. ISBN 1892784122.

What Does Natural Farming Mean? Archived 2011-07-20 at the Wayback Machine by Toyoda, Natsuko

Paull, John & Hennig, Benjamin (2020). A World Map of Biodynamic Agriculture, Agricultural and
Biological Sciences Journal. 6 (42): 114-119

Lejano RP, Ingram M, Ingram HM (2013). "Chapter 6: Narratives of Nature and Science in Alternative
Farming Networks". Power of Narrative in Environmental Networks. MIT Press. p. 155. ISBN
9780262519571.

Paull, John (2011). "Attending the First Organic Agriculture Course: Rudolf Steiner's Agriculture Course
at Koberwitz, 1924". European Journal of Social Sciences. 21 (1): 64–70.

Vogt G (2007). Lockeretz W (ed.). Chapter 1: The Origins of Organic Farming. Organic Farming: An
International History. CABI Publishing. pp. 9–30. ISBN 9780851998336.

Paul Kristiansen and Charles Mansfield, "Overview of organic agriculture", in Paul Kristiansen, Acram
Taji, and John Reganold (2006), Organic Agriculture: A global perspective, Collingwood, AU: CSIRO
Publishing

Ikerd, John (2010). "Sustainability, Rural". In Leslie A. Duram (ed.). Encyclopedia of