Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old 10-04-2009, 10:00 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Default Can Organic Cropping Systems Be As Profitable As Conventional

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0406132600.htm

the abstract is at:
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/con...ract/101/2/288

the full text (WAY over my head!) is here
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/content/full/101/2/288

Chas
  #2   Report Post  
Old 10-04-2009, 10:32 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,096
Default Can Organic Cropping Systems Be As Profitable As Conventional

In article ,
chasndeb wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0406132600.htm

the abstract is at:
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/con...ract/101/2/288

the full text (WAY over my head!) is here
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/content/full/101/2/288

Chas


Jean-Paul Chavasa, Joshua L. Posnerb,* and Janet L. Hedtckeb
a Agriculture & Applied Economics Dep
b Agronomy Dep., University of Wisconsin, Madison
* Corresponding author ).
This article, the second in a series looking at the Wisconsin Integrated
Cropping Systems Trial (WICST), reports on the profitability of six
conventional and organic systems, with a focus on net returns and
associated risk exposure. Several pricing scenarios were compared to
evaluate the impact of government programs and organic price premiums.
When net return estimates are made using only neighboring elevator
prices (no government programs or organic price premiums), we found that
the no-till corn-soybean system [Zea mays L. and Glycine max (L.) Merr.]
was the most profitable grain system, and management intensive
rotational grazing (MIRG) the most profitable forage system. When
government programs and organic price premiums are included, returns
increased by 85 to 110% for the organic grain system (corn-soybean-wheat
+ red clover (Triticum aestivum L. + Trifolium pratense L.) and 35 to
40% for the organic forage system [companion seeded alfalfa with oat +
field pea (Medicago sativa L., Avena sativa L., and Pisum sativum L.),
hay, and then corn]. This places both organic systems with higher
returns than any of the Midwestern standards of no-till corn-soybean,
continuous corn, or intensive alfalfa production. Also, the results
indicate how risk exposure varied across systems. Interestingly, taking
risk into consideration did not drastically affect the ranking among
those systems. Our analysis shows that, under the market scenarios that
prevailed between 1993 and 2006, intensive rotational grazing and
organic grain and forage systems were the most profitable systems on
highly productive land in southern Wisconsin.

...........

So it looks the wacko's Billy and Charlie may be on to something. Yea I
know just a small sample but does it not feel right. Something that has
no marketability good in the end.

idea repeated in a different manner below.

Guess it is of more of import if you threw the weird idea of
sustainable into the equation. No oil no 5-10-10.....

Bill

Listening to with the windows open first time this spring.

Bhattiyali 4:56 Chinmaya Dunster And The Celtic Ragas Band Karma
Circles New Age 100 3 12/25/08 1:28 PM

--
Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA
Not all who wander are lost.
- J.R.R. Tolkien (1892-1973)

Some Hopi gardener said, "This is not about growing vegetables; it
is about growing kids."






  #3   Report Post  
Old 10-04-2009, 11:29 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,179
Default Can Organic Cropping Systems Be As Profitable As Conventional

In article ,
chasndeb wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0406132600.htm

the abstract is at:
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/con...ract/101/2/288

the full text (WAY over my head!) is here
http://agron.scijournals.org/cgi/content/full/101/2/288

Chas

Cutting to the chase:

Conclusion

.. . . "Our analysis explores the role of risk exposure and of its
associated cost (as measured by a risk premium) across systems. The more
diverse rotations were found to generate moderate risk exposure, with
risk premiums rarely more than 5% of returns
or significantly different among those systems.

This indicates that the management practices associated with the lower
input or organic systems are, overall, no less effective than those
associated with high input systems."

Simply put, organic produces as much as typical chemical base farm.
What it doesn't address is the environmental impact of chemical farming
and the cost of it's remediation.

Same ol' privatize the profit and socialize the cost.

Good article.
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI29wVQN8Go

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072040.html
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Conventional Wooden - V - Plastic Dalek Compost Bins 'Mike' United Kingdom 7 30-09-2007 01:37 PM
Polycultures, Natural Farming and Continuous No-Till Cropping Systems in Living Mulch [email protected] Permaculture 3 02-12-2005 11:38 PM
Asparagus cropping geoff United Kingdom 1 11-04-2003 08:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017