What do you think? Is large-scale organic a betrayal of the organics movement, or is it a natural (so to speak) next step towards revitalizing our food supply?
-
Brandon Davis
Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
What do you think? Is large-scale organic a betrayal of the organics movement, or is it a natural (so to speak) next step towards revitalizing our food supply?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
congo96, 
eddietastic, 
phoebe, and 28 others are discussing.
natashap 10:50 am on February 7, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
From my perspective, I don’t see how a larger organic farm is any different from a small one – as long as they are farming using the same practices, no pesticides, etc. But I can definitely see how someone who was part of the “Organic Movement” would think they are different, the whole point of the movement seems to be to return to small scale local produce and a larger more industrialized farm would go against those values – even if it met all the other “organic” criteria.
I do think that large organic farms could definitely hurt smaller ones though – I’m always somewhat skeptical of just buying food that has an organic label as the cost of getting certified is quite high and the requirements are very stringent – so smaller farms may be following all the steps, but can’t afford to get certified or might not be able to afford to do one of the requirements.
Olga F 11:19 pm on February 8, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Lately, organic produce has been made into a new money making phenomena. It used to be all good about, small and sustainable scale, good for health good for environment. what is it now? Large scale production, that requires massive amounts of plastic wrapping etc, in order to keep it fresh, because they bring it from around the world? so what good left about it? It also pollutes, it also uses harmful for the environment and possible health – plastic. Also, organic does not mean that there are no chemicals in the production. it just mean that up (i think) 90% is natural, no chemicals. yet, farmers are still allowed to use a bit of chemicals. in addition, they just charge much money money for it, which not everyone can afford. Have to be making a lot more than an average person to be able to eat only organic. so how fair is that? Organic used to be for people, No it is just another way for businesses to make money!
jenniefrench 3:42 pm on February 10, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In my opinion large-scale organic is still better than large scale non-organic farming, but not by much. Especially after reading Pollan’s article, I feel that while not using chemicals is fundamental to organic food, I also believe that sustainability is also key to what constitutes organic. We do, of course, need to find ways to feed the world’s population, and to do that organically would be amazing not only for our health, but also for the health of our planet. But we are being too short sighted – we are basing our systems on the ones we already have, ie CAFos, as opposed to looking at the big picture and honestly asking what is best for human health and welfare (as well as animal and environmental health and welfare) as opposed to allowing the economy and our greed determine how we feed our world.
msmith92 7:22 pm on February 11, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In my opinion, I think that large scale organic farming is not a betrayal of the organic movement as long as organic practices (ie. no pesticides) are kept up. However, I think that, as soon as there are so-called organic products that are really processed foods made with organic ingredients, that is a betrayal. We cannot expect that our agricultural systems will change quickly, so hopefully this is just a step along the way to having farms and agricultural practices that are truly in sync with the organic movement. I definitely agree with what jennie said above that the focus should be to sustainably produce food for the planet. Our agricultural systems will likely need to concentrate less on profits and more on what is best for the planet
kimzzzy 7:51 pm on February 11, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I do think large scare farming is a betrayal to the organic movement which is all about reaching sustainability. How do we become sustainable when we are incorporating machineries and once again relying on fuels to grow our crops? Large scale farming is heading towards the road of mass producing and money making. It is furthering out goal towards producing good quality food by respecting the environment it grows in. One of the main problem with large scale farming is that it farms on land that has been transformed into the generic industrialized farm land rather than to grow the crop in the natural state of the land.
bgibson 11:32 am on February 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I see large scale organic as the logical next step in the revitalization of food supply, although it is easy to see how the different value systems employed by international corporations and those who have been with the organic movement from the ground up would result in a perceived betrayal. However, I think we have to view this as positive progress that can be built upon. The challenge with large scale production and the money that accompanies it will be to ensure that organic foods remain true to those practices. With big money comes political pressure and I can see a slippery slope where regulations are relaxed and altered to benefit the big producers. Furthermore, I find it difficult to embrace the idea of organic oreos (Michael Pollans article) as having any part of the organic movement. The organic movement keys on ideas of sustainability and improved health, I don’t know that oreos embodies either of those ideas.
brandond 7:33 pm on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Sounds like a nice marketing idea – market unhealthy snack food as organic to appeal to eco-conscious eaters. Seems like one of many ways to make a profit off the organic label. If you had a choice, would you rather have an non organic over an organic oreo?
emilym 12:50 pm on February 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think that large scale organic farming is slightly preferable to non-organic large scale farming, but certainly represents a betrayal of the original organic movement. Large scale farming, even if it is organic, means that food is shipped further, which uses more energy and harms the environment, and also generally entails changing the land significantly more than small scale localized operations. The shift toward inclusion of processed food labeled as organic also betrays the movement’s original intent. However, large scale organic farming is unfortunately a logical step taken in our international capitalist system in which profit trumps morality. It makes sense that corporations such as Wal-Mart would twist the concept of the organic movement in order to turn more profits, but it is a shame that that change has occurred.
katehaxt 1:59 pm on February 13, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Yes, large scale organic farming and especially highly processed “organic” foods are definately a betrayal of the principles of the organic movement. Here in England there is this infuriating situation that many organic vegetables and fruit are sold in twice the packaging as non-organic versions. Then there is the overpackaged organic blueberries flown in from Argentina. This is just what happens with capitalism though. Now people who still value the original principales of the organic movement have to be savvy consumers, using farmers markets, sometimes foregoing the “organic” label for something local or in season etc. etc. You have to take the organic label with a grain of salt now, but I take a bit of comfort in the fact that the large scale organic farms, which are exploiting their workers and cutting corners to make profit just like the other industrial farm, are at least not exposing their workers or the nearby soil to toxic chemicals.
roypat 1:38 am on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
If the large-scale farming is going to happen either way to feed a large population, it’s inevitably better if it is done with less chemicals, pesticides, and is done “organically.” It’s something like turning on all the lights in your room but you’re using an energy saving compact bulb instead of an incandescent. Still using power which is “bad” in the sense of being an energy saving and sustainable individual, but it’s still better.
nytsuen 5:01 pm on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
In my opinion, large scale organic is not exactly a betrayal of the organics movement. The organics movement does criticize large scale farming; however, in order to feed the global population, we can’t always rely on small scale production. There’s a reason why there is large scale farming nowadays and that’s because we need to produce enough for the world . In the end, i don’t think that the main point is the process of farming and whether it’s a large or small scale production. I think what matters the most is the outcome of the production. Organic will always be better, maybe not significantly better, but better. However, a possible way to make it even better is to reduce the amount of packaging to make it more environmentally beneficial but then there’s the matter of transporting the produce from one country to the other. There definitely are environmental costs in the process of producing and shipping organic foods so is it worth it? Obviously the answer is ‘yes’ to the capitalist world because they have a new product/idea/morality that they can profit from.
brandond 7:46 pm on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Maybe the real question is if large-scale, industrialized agriculture is, in any way, able to produce food without there being some type of severe environmental consequences. It sounds like many of you would probably say no to this question. That being said, I wonder if any you think large-scale organic food could be an example of free-market, corporate economies finally getting something right (in ecological terms at least) for a change?
jaydee 10:41 pm on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I would say that it is a way of corporate economies getting it right, to a degree. I think in this day and age, reverting to small-farms on a large scale would have devastating effects on the economy and our personal way of living, but would provide us with a sustainable, more health-friendly food source. In contrast, industrialized farming provides a streamlined, fast way to supply food to the large population of people who need it, but is not beneficial for the health of us, the plants, or the land. Thus, it would seem that organic food produced in large scale is a compromise: a step in the direction to sustainable and healthy life-styles.
jonl 1:31 pm on February 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I definitely think it is a step in a better direction than chemicals and artificial fertilizers. I’d like to know more about the large scale organic farms. Sometimes, the reason it’s organic is because it didn’t use any of the chemicals that are listed in the “will make your harvest inorganic” list. The way society is set up right now (high demand, high population density), large-scale organic food does seem like the logical next step for those farmers.
hannahepperson 5:53 pm on February 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
What is curious to me, is that ‘corporate economies’ seem heavily dependent on the developments of small, vigorous communities that are generating culture and trying to give meaning to life… Let me explain. Take for example the trend of gentrification – a really cheap, derelict neighbourhood or city gets occupied and reimagined by a community of poor artists (think of brooklyn in new york, or berlin!) … they develop a unique, novel community, which attracts interest, intrigue, and soon – investment from business-minded people who see a good economic opportunity! Soon, the neighbourhood or city gets bought up, refurbished and sold to people who want to be part of a vibrant community. But when the place is developed, cleaned up and resold, the original community has been pushed to the periphery … where they start building a new community, a new culture … etc etc. I don’t think the parallel between gentrification and ‘organification’ is too much of a stretch. In both cases, the fierce culture of a small movement is essentially commodified and sold as a product that is deprived of its malignant properties.
Anyway, I don’t think you can’t simply buy your ideals, you also have to participate in them. Large-scale organic food production just seems like another quick-fix to ease the consciences of the concerned masses back into a state of righteous complacency.
brandond 11:01 pm on February 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I appreciate the sentiment in your last sentence Hannah. Like Jon, though, I would like to learn more about large-scale organic agriculture. I’d guess there has to be some idealistic large-scale organic operations going on, but it also seem like a lot of organic food is increasingly coming from big brand names. Maybe I will have to dig up a reading on large-scale organics for next time I teach this course.
hannahepperson 7:05 pm on February 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I just think there are so many more creative, innovative alternatives to consider and discovery. There are so many cool hybrid ‘urbagrarian’ movements popping up … it’s kind of unbelievable how much unproductive land there is in cities that can be ‘occupied,’ if you will … rooftops, vertical gardening, consensual community use of private property, laneway infilling, etc… I admittedly have a radical streak, which makes it difficult for me to optimistically consider ‘moderate’ aspirations akin to the industrialization of the organic movement…
erikaw 8:09 pm on February 14, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I wouldn’t say it’s a betrayal of the Organic Movement but I would say that it doesn’t follow the principles or belief systems behind organic food. Many people (including myself until recently) don’t realize how much depth is involved in Organic Food. It’s not just about not using pesticides – it’s about the health and nutrition of the food, the quality of soil, the health of the environment. Is processed Organic Food better for you than conventional organic food? Probably VERY minimally. It’s still processed. It still goes against nature – but at least for people that are not going to stop eating processed foods (yet!) there are better options, that may not be hurting the planet as much as others.
In regards to your latest post Brandon I do believe that Large-Scale Organic food can set an example. The world we live in will not be resorting to small scale anything very quickly, so at least you can support corporations that do have ethical backgrounds. And at least these large scale corporations have the power, money and ability to create and exhibit change that smaller low budget companies may not have.
sharonshi 12:51 am on February 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I think that a large-scale organic movement is not a betrayal but a progression. Organic food was said to create a healthier society, therefore, a large-scale movement is just speeding up that process. In short, yes, i do believe it is the next step towards revitalizing our food supply. However, one thing to beware of is the ability to “purchase” the right to be considered organic or healthy. As a result of potential market sales, organizations could try to bypass the system by buying into the organic movement while at the same time not offering 100% organic food. This would counter the objective of the organic movement and in end make the revolution a scheme to which large organizations use to manipulate consumers.
youngblutt 9:12 am on February 15, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I see the move to large-scale as a betrayal of the ideology of the organic movement but I do not mean to suggest that it is a backwards move in terms of long-term environmental sustainability. The popularization of the “movement” is a necessary step in the public awareness of other environmental issues.
At it’s inception, the “organic movement” shared the values of many other “movements” with an eye towards environmental sustainability and social equality. Due to the profit-seeking nature of unfettered market capitalism, the organic movement was gobbled up and endorsed to a larger scale which benefits certain aspects of sustainability, such as less processed chemical inputs in soil, while setting back other aspects, such as the carbon emissions from tilling, industry practices etc.
While it is encouraging to see the expanded public awareness and concern for the organic movement, I’d wager that most proponents of organic consumption are more interested in eating healthy than in promoting the social economic benefits that small scale farming would have on impoverished soils and communities. For me, the fact remains that profit-making means value loss for those that labour for production. It is simply not a sustainable means of production and it continues to cause inequalities. It will not last much longer.
paige 5:57 pm on February 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I do think modern organics have lost their way. I don’t think it has to do with the size of the operations though. As organic became more mainstream, it moved away from the local farm (yes increasing in size, but this was just a side reaction). As bigger companies get involved to keep up with the mainstream market, the wholesomeness is lost. Organics have turned corporate. I also think there needs to be a separation between organic vegetables/fruits/grains and organic animals. The welfare of organic animals may be compromised because they are not allowed to be given antibiotics when sick. The suffering of animals is certainly not sometime someone associates with the idea of “organic”
brenden 7:44 pm on February 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I do not believe that large scale organic is a betrayal of the organics movement. So long as operations continue to cultivate items which are grown without pesticides, harmful fertilizers and do not use genetically enhanced crops, I do not see the harm. Even though some others are arguing that organics have turned corporate, I feel that it’s besides the point. The focus is on organic foods, not local. Individuals concerned with the “wholesomeness” or “local spirit” of organic produce can obtain foods by visiting local farms and trying things like the 100 mile diet. For others however that are simply trying to obtain organic foods at reasonable prices, I feel that large scale production and corporatizing is a necessary evil and it is simply the next step in revitalizing our food supply.
lcoulthard 9:10 pm on February 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I understand that the large-scale farms are still using natural methods of production, but to me a major part of being called “organic” has to do with carbon footprint. If these large-scale organic farms are processing their own products, or even selling them to a processor to be shipped, they are participating in a likely international system that has implications for the environment. I do think that our food supply should come from organic sources, if we only used chemical fertilizers we would deplete the soil and contaminate groundwater frequently. With this all in mind, I think that the sustainable way to produce our food would have to be many local organic small farmers, and industrialized countries would have to wean away their acquired taste for exotic agricultural goods.
alyumam 9:40 pm on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I like your view regarding the carbon footprint organic products need to have as also your position about eliminating the taste for ´exotic´ goods (now days not very exotic).
At the same time I agree with, I believe he writes it, Berry´s article regarding the definition of organic food, which nowadays seems to be an Orwellian and forced definition : if the government says is organic, is organic. This relates to your position of the need to have a sustainable way of producing food.
midara 11:28 pm on February 16, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Considering if factory farming is organic or not depends on how people define what “organic” is. Personally I consider the method of farming to decide if a product/production process organic or not. This is to say that I am good with that as far as the large-scale organic farming is “organic” (i.e. soil nutrition, organic/natural fertilizer etc.). I do not think that as a betrayal of organics movement if the farming process has nothing in particular to harm the nature/soil environment.
However it is always true that larger-scale production will affect small-scale farming economically, and it is easy to predict farmers turning to larger scale production. Considering this the larger-scale production is said to be driving people away from interaction with the nature (which is not organic again); but I guess this is quite unavoidable, so I think as far as the ingredients are produced organically consumer like me have to agree that the processed food and large-scale organic still “organic”
tsung 12:16 am on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I don’t believe large- scale organic is a betrayal of the organics movement. Although I would understand why we might think it betrays the organic movement since the definition of organic has changed, however, we need to realize that as time passes, things will also change accordingly. There has been a constructed culture, principle, value and definition of what organic is – eg. Small scale farming and fresh. However, as organic produce becomes more popular and people realize that health must come first, demand will increase for the organic goods. In addition, we need to keep in mind that we live in an economic focused society, it is no surprise marketing organic has occurred. In a sense, the organic integrity still exists – using no pesticides and chemicals, however, as aforementioned, times change and in order to adapt accordingly, the organic structure will also change.
jlin 9:54 am on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Well, large scale anything in terms of exchange of goods usually translates to cheaper prices, so from consumer perspective, I would say large scale organic is a revitalization in that it makes organic goods not only a more environmentally friendly alternative but also economically feasible products to purchase. To me, organic isn’t about necessarily, small scale farming. More importantly, it’s about stopping the use of harmful chemicals in farming. Economy and agriculture are strongly interlinked in our society today…you can’t say reject organic food just because it aims to maximize the ways it could be marketed. Likewise, it would be wrong to completely reject something like economies of scale just to maximize the principles of the organics movement. There needs to be a balance, and I think large-scale organic is one of those things this balance is trying to seek.
sampethick 6:40 pm on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It’s hard to criticize organic farmers who are expanding their farms in order to grow economically. I kind of feel like they are trying to do the right thing by growing organic foods but they still (like everyone else) want to establish as comfortable a lifestyle as possible. As a growing population larger-scale farms are probably what is necessary to feed everyone, and I don’t think that the farmers of bigger organic farms are betraying the organics movement as long as they stay within the lines of what organic is; ie: no chemicals, pesticides and processing.
On the other hand though, as Michael Pollan points out huge companies such as Wal Mart are going to put a lot of pressure on bigger farms for low prices on organic food and this will have a very negative effect on the way that these farmers grow their food and farm their animals and the need to survive will dominate their actions; “pressures to cut corners will become irresistible.”
alyumam 10:03 pm on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I find the large-scale organic production despite not being completely sustainable,I do believe it may be a step towards the revitalization of food supply.At the same time it seems to be part of the process of creating conscience in the population.
Despite of that, regarding if this is a betrayal or not to the organic movement, I guess this relates to where do we observe this process. First of all we have to acknowledge the concern for its health the average individual in urban areas has,as well as perhaps the environment. I believe this is a positive step into creating the cultural change we have been talking about.
However, if we look to the marketing on organic products big organizations, corporations as well government groups have done, I believe this is part of the same uncontrolled business driven economy we are trying to rid and therefore signifies a total betrayal to the organics movement as well to ourselves.
Keaton Briscoe 11:05 pm on February 17, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I don’t really see how a large-scale organic farm is different that a small-scale organic farm other than the fact that more is produced in the same amount of time. The large-scale farm is still producing its food organically and not using pesticides or fertilizers etc. It may not be popular among the people of the “organic movement” as it does get away from the small, beautiful production of healthy food, though. I think that it is a step towards revitalizing our food supply, but I think this approach needs to be built upon in regards to packaging, shipping, etc.
yitailiu 10:03 pm on February 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
Large-scale organic is different from what the organics movement was seeking. The large-scale organic farms many still be organic if no pesticides or chemical fertilizers were used. Considering our present economical system, which aims for high productivity and high profit; with an increasing consumer demand for organic food, this enlargement of organic farms is expected. Even though the large-scale organic farms are not as ideal as the small ones, it is a step in changing our food supply options.
hoskinso 11:04 pm on February 20, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
It would be impossible for all farming to be of the small-scale organic type. Human population is too concentrated in urban areas, and we have come to rely on the complex web of producers, suppliers, marketers and consumers to fairly distribute goods. Small-scale farming is expensive and inefficient compared to large-scale. In rich countries there will always be a segment of consumers willing to pay extra for fresh free-run small-scale produce, but this is not suitable to feed the hungry billions who don’t have sufficient disposable income to spend on such luxuries. Industrial organic farming represents the best of both worlds, combining modern production techniques with the health and sustainability benefits of organic farming.
phoebe 2:21 pm on February 23, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
While large-scale organic may be a betrayal of the ideology of the organics movement, I find it to be a natural progression to revitalizing our food supply. As long as harmful pesticides and fertilizers aren’t used, this is a step in the right direction for agriculture. The problem that should be fixed however, is in making organics more accessible to a larger group of people. Currently, organics are known are being more expensive and harder to find than non-organically produced food. Perhaps with government support, more organic food could be spread to improve people’s health and nutrition. The small-scale ideology of the organic movement is unrealistic, particularly in places of highly concentrated urban centres. In places such as Tokyo or Vancouver, the price of land makes it unrealistic for everyone to have their own piece of land to farm. Thus, a certain amount of travel must be expected for the transportation of goods whether they are organic or not.
eddietastic 4:29 pm on March 5, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I feel like it would be impossible for us to farm organically in a large scale because of the sheer costs that go in to farming organic. If we were to farm organically it does not only mean that we cannot use pesticides and fertilizers which are not organic which may lead to worse soil or even pest problems. In addition the problem with organic farming is that there is a higher risk of farmers losing an entire crop due to problems with disease or germs .
congo96 8:00 pm on March 8, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply
I don’t think that large-scale organic production is necessarily a betrayal of the organic movement given that the food is actually organic.. Like the question raised at the end of the page if organic ingredients are used to make processed food then maybe yes it is a betrayal but if organic foods can stay organic even in mass production than it is the proper step to revitalizing our food supply