Why eating organic food won’t help to save the planet

ORGANIC food is bad for the planet, a study has concluded.

Organic farming typically has up to 25 per cent smaller yields compared with conventional farming, found researchers from the University of British Columbia.

As a result, more land is needed to produce the same amount of food, which affects soil and water quality. It uses more energy, the condition of farm workers may not be better and its high prices put it out of reach for poorer consumers.

Dr Verena Seufert from the Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability said: “Organic is often proposed a holy grail solution to current environmental and food scarcity problems, but we found that the costs and benefits will vary heavily depending on the context.”

The study analysed organic crop farming across 17 criteria such as yield, impact on climate change, farmer livelihood and consumer health.

It was the first systematic review of the scientific literature on organic farming. The study argued in countries such as Canada where pesticide regulations are stringent and diets are rich in micronutrients, the health benefits of choosing organic may be marginal.

Professor Navin Ramankutty, the study’s co-author, said: “But in a developing country where pesticide use is not carefully regulated and people are micronutrient deficient, we think that the benefits for consumer and farm worker health may be much higher.”

Supporters of organic argue it is more sustainable and many chose it because of concerns over pesticide use and the belief it is more nutritious.

Dr Seufert said: “We need to stop thinking of organic and conventional agriculture as two ends of the spectrum. Instead, consumers should demand better practices for both so that we can achieve the world’s food needs in a sustainable way.”

The study was published in Science Advances.