Small-Scale Farming: A Global Perspective - benefits of small farms greater than those of large farms - Brief Article

PETER ROSSET ARGUES FOR SMALL FARMS IN THE NORTH...

In 1998, the US Department of Agriculture's National Commission on Small Farms published a landmark report on the importance of small-farms agriculture, and the necessity of both preserving small farms and promoting them for the future. Coming from one of the world's most pro-globalised farming governments, the report, A Time To Act, was extremely significant. Among the many benefits of small-farm agriculture, it listed:

* Diversity: small farms embody a diversity of ownership, of cropping systems, of landscapes, of biological organisation, of culture and traditions.

* Environmental benefits: responsible management of the natural resources of soil, water and wildlife on the 60 per cent of US farms below 180 acres in size produces significant environmental benefits.

* Community empowerment: decentralised land ownership tends to produce more, and more equitable, opportunities for rural people. Landowners who rely on local people, business and services are likely to be more responsible.

* Personal connection to food: farmers' markets, community-supported agriculture and other such schemes bring home to consumers where their food comes from, and what effect its production has on landscape and environment.

* Economic foundations: in many areas of the US, small farms are vital to the economy.

What is true for the US is true for much of the world. The fact is that, despite the generalised assumption that large, capital- and chemical-intensive farms are more productive and efficient than small farms, this is often not the case. One reason for this is that, because conventional methods of measuring 'productivity' and 'efficiency' are flawed, we are receiving the wrong answers to our questions.

Farm productivity is generally measured in terms of 'yield' - the production per unit area of a certain type of crop. Often, the highest yield of a single crop is obtained by planting it in a monoculture in a large field - hence, in these terms, large farms are often deemed more 'productive'. But while such a monoculture produces high yields of certain crops, it provides nothing else of use to either the farmer or the environment. When the total output of farms - the sum total of everything they produce - is used as a measurement, rather than yield, small farms often come out on top.

Even leading economists at the World Bank have now come round to the view that the redistribution of land from large to small farmers would lead to an increase in total productivity. Reasons for this include:

* Multiple cropping: small farmers are more likely to intercrop various crops on the same field and integrate crops and livestock, making more effective use of space and time than large mono cultures.

* Output composition: large farms tend to be land-extensive, while small farms tend to emphasise more labour- and resource-intensive use of land.

* Input use: large farms tend to use purchased inputs like agrochemicals, while small farms are more likely to use non-purchased inputs, like manure and compost produced on the farm.

Productivity, of course, is not the only issue in farming. More bushels of grain should not be the only goal of agriculture. And when considered in other areas, small farms are seen to be often more desirable than large farms.

All over the world, in rural communities dominated by large corporate farms, towns, small businesses and local amenities tend to die off. Often this is because the income earned by agriculture drains off into cities where the farm corporations are based, rather than circulating in the local economy. Where family farms predominate in the US, for example, there tends to be higher employment, more civic amenities, better services and more public participation in local life.

All this is not even to begin to mention other obvious benefits of small-farm agriculture, such as better environmental stewardship, more biodiversity, a more patchwork landscape, often less intensive chemical use, etc, or benefits that can accrue to general social welfare through land reform in favour of many owners of smaller properties.

When taken in the round, then, it is clear that the case for small farms is a strong one, and must be made loudly and persistently if the rural economy is to change for the better.

Dr Peter Rosset is Executive Director of Food First, based in the USA.

Farm facts

UK Government support for organic agriculture is just [pounds]16m out of a [pounds]3bn agriculture budget.

COPYRIGHT 2000 MIT Press Journals
COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group