UK study finds organic farming may be worse for biodiversity
A controversial new study from the UK has found that conventional farming is better for the environment than organic farming when food yields are taken into account.
The two year study by Prof Tim Benton, conservation expert at the University of Leeds, asked which production methods could increase food yields with the least impact on biodiversity.
With UN estimates that production must increase by 70% by 2050 to feed a growing population, experts around the world are desperately searching for the most environmentally friendly options.
In his unprecedented study, Prof Benton compared 192 fields on 32 farms in like-for-like conditions and concluded organic farms produced less than half as much food per hectare as ordinary farms.
He added the ''undoubted environmental benefits'' of organic farming were outweighed by the need to bring more land into production.
''We compared the same crops on the same land and found organic farming was half as productive as conventional methods. That means it would need twice as much land to produce the same amount of food,'' he said.
''So despite our results revealing biodiversity was 12% higher on organic farms, that would be negated when new land was bought into production to increase yields to conventional farm levels,'' said Prof Benton.
Prof Benton further warned a move to organic farming could increase demand for food from farms around the world with a poor environmental record.
''If the UK was completely organic we would need to bring more land into production that we don't have. That could well create demand from places like the Amazon,'' he said.
Prof Benton said organic methods did play a useful part of the land management mix for the less productive parts of the UK, but would not solve food security issues.
''Organic farming is undoubtedly good for biodiversity and has a role in our system. But when it comes to feeding the world, it is not the most environmentally friendly option,'' said Prof Benton.
