The Problems with Modern Agriculture
Fig. 1(A Harvester collecting wheat in a monoculture field- Source: EOS Data Analytics)
Monoculture is the cultivation of a single crop in a given area as defined by Oxford Languages (Shown in fig 1). The vast majority of the world’s farms are monocultures and many of these farms have been scaled to an industrial level in order to mass produce food and cash crops to feed the world and manufacture all kinds of goods. This type of agriculture, especially in America, rapidly expanded in the mid 20th century and has stood the test of time for many good reasons. Its potential for specialization makes it extremely efficient. Furthermore, monoculture farming allowed for the monetization of agriculture and is highly scalable. Due to all these factors, Industrial Agriculture was born. Dr. Mark Hathaway of The University of Toronto is a well known writer that has been practicing research, education and ecology for multiple decades. Here is what he has to say about Industrial Agriculture, “This new model of agricultural production uses a variety of chemical inputs (fertilizers and pesticides), seeks out economies of scale involving ever-larger plots of machine-cultivated land, employs specialized farms concentrating on one or a few crops or livestock species, and uses increasingly uniform varieties of seed and breeding stock (9).”
So, if Industrial Agriculture has all these benefits, what is so bad about it? Simply put, this type of farming is ravaging the ecology of Earth. Industrial Agriculture primarily focuses on gains we can make in the short term with little or no concern for the long term impact of these techniques. The intense use of the soil combined with the pesticides, herbicides, and machinery we are using to cultivate the land is killing off vital nutrients and organisms in the soil faster than they can be naturally replenished. This has resulted in mass soil deconstruction, erosion and loss of vital microbes and fertility. Furthermore, continuous turning over of the soil has resulted in massive carbon dioxide emissions during the cultivation cycle each year. Plants breathe carbon dioxide, pulling harmful emissions out of the air and sequestering it into the soil. However, each time we plow the soil, we release much of that carbon right back into the atmosphere. On top of that, the poor soil health, unnatural treatment of the crops and loss of the soil microbiome results in lower quality food being manufactured by nature. And if all that isn’t enough, Industrial Agriculture also ruins biodiversity, spreads toxic chemicals, and depletes water at a rapid rate.
Although the outlook may seem bleak right now, hope is not lost. Agricultural and technological advancements may be to blame for the rise of our monoculture, chemical based industrial agriculture system today, but these advancements have revealed to us techniques we can use to reverse the damaging effects of years and years of extractive farming. Rotating crops, planting cover crops and re- introducing biodiversity can revitalize damaged soil. Letting natural processes take place means we no longer have to use significant loads of pesticides and chemical fertilizers. Improved soil health also means higher quality crop yield and better tasting and more nutritious food. We can use modern technology such as no till plows to stop turning over the soil, drastically reduce carbon emissions and even sequester additional carbon from the atmosphere. There are even economic policies that can be put into place right now that would be a significant and impactful first step in improving the sustainability of our large-scale agricultural systems. And with a reorganization of our spending and labor, we can transition to this new, sustainable style of agriculture in a highly profitable and cost and resource efficient manner.
Monoculture vs. Permaculture
Fig. 2 (A permaculture garden- Source: Green Global Travel)
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Monoculture
As stated above, Monoculture is the cultivation of a single crop in a given area. There is much debate as to when we can trace its origins to, but University of Birmingham Professor of Environmental Humanities Frank Uekötter believes it began in Caribbean Sugar Plantations in the 17th century (13). Previous to this, crop rotation was the common practice with farmers who were farming for subsistence and rarely for surplus. However, with the increasing profitability of the agricultural market, farmers shifted to monoculture. Frank Uekötter also states, “Monoculture emerged as access to much larger distant markets made it increasingly profitable to specialize (12).” This ability to specialize is highly efficient for a variety of reasons. First, monoculture requires less laborers than other agricultural techniques and they can all succeed well with a fairly uniform, limited skillset. This means that farmers can spend less money hiring workers and can also spend less time training them. Also, workers with a specialized skill set are very good at the job they do, resulting in a highly efficient process of planting and harvesting. Furthermore, the mechanization of monoculture is very beneficial. Since monocultures only focus on one type of crop, it requires very few types of expensive equipment and since this equipment can perform most of the tasks needed to be done, it further reduces costs associated with hiring workers as the tasks no longer need to be done by hand. The final advantage of monoculture farming is its ease of scaling. Due to the low labor intensity and simplicity of monoculture, it does not take much to expand one’s farming operation and increase one’s crop yield.
Although the benefits of monoculture seem many, they pale in comparison to the drawbacks. First, monoculture is creating soil erosion at a catastrophic rate. The very concept of monoculture is harmful to soil. Planting and harvesting a singular crop over and over again on the same piece of land quickly depletes nutrients from the soil. The lack of crop rotation means that the soil never receives vital nutrients it needs from other plants and never has time to rest from producing one specific plant. Also, intensive farming for more and more people is leading to a steady increase in the rate of soil erosion. Take a look at figure 3, depicting the amount of soil, in tons, eroded each year in Kansas.
(Fig. 3- A graph depicting the amount of soil eroded, in tons, in Kansas between 2000 and 2017- Source: Kansas Soybeans)
Monoculture fields are also highly susceptible to infestations of harmful pests and weeds. Due to these organisms having a vast quantity of their favorite food source all in one spot, it makes sense that this is a problem somewhat unique to monocultures. To deal with this, farmers employ chemical pesticides and herbicides designed to kill insects and weeds. Unfortunately, these chemical treatments deplete vital micronutrients and kill other important microorganisms in the soil, reducing its fertility. Also, as certain insects develop a resistance to pesticides, farmers must increase their dosage, further harming the soil. On top of that, due to the loss of these vital nutrients and critical organisms, farmers also use chemical fertilizers to temporarily replenish the soil for their planting season, but these chemical fertilizers also harm soil in the long run. Soil erosion is one of the most dire environmental crises in our world right now, and it is not discussed enough. According to the Food and Agricultural Organization, we have already eroded 33% of our soil and that number could be 90% by 2050 (15). Soil erosion is going to increase exponentially as farmers are pushed onto less and less land to farm more intensely for an ever growing population, which is why that percentage of soil erosion could grow so rapidly.
Another high profile issue with monoculture is the level of carbon emissions it is creating. Plants breathe carbon dioxide and sequester it out of the atmosphere and store it in the soil. In fact, soil is an even bigger carbon sink than the atmosphere. So based on this, our agricultural techniques should be helping to draw carbon out of our atmosphere. However, our current techniques are making soil a net carbon emitter. Because of all that carbon stored in soil, every time farmers turn the soil over to plant a seed, they are releasing carbon into the atmosphere. Because of modern tilling, we are releasing more carbon into the atmosphere than can be naturally drawn down by plants. Average carbon content in soil has been reduced from 20% to 2% and it is estimated that “between 25 and 40 % of excess CO2 in the atmosphere today probably originates from the destruction of soils (9).” Furthermore, the scientists at Project Drawdown estimate that at least 50% of the carbon in Earth’s soil has already been released back into the atmosphere in recent decades (22). They also believe that we are missing out on between .4 to 1.4 metric tons, depending on the climate of the area, of carbon sequestration per hectare of land by not practicing conservation agriculture (22). Fig. 4 really gives perspective to how significant the emissions from our current agricultural methods are.
Fig. 4 (A pie chart showing the breakdown of emissions from agriculture/ agriculture related processes- Source No. 9)
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Permaculture
Permaculture is a regenerative agricultural movement focused on sustainability, environmentally friendly practices and resource management. It is a relatively new movement, traced back to the 1970s but has really seen significant acceleration over the last couple decades. The reason for this is that people have begun to wake up to the fact that our current agricultural techniques will not sustain us for much longer, given the environmental damage they are causing. Re-working our agricultural systems to fall under permaculture approaches could place us on a sustainable course for the long term. Some of these techniques include:
Crop Rotation and Diversity: Unlike monoculture, permaculture farmers are constantly rotating their crops from season to season. They use the same plot of land to plant different kinds of crops. This way, instead of depleting the soil of its nutrients, they are providing soil with the nutrients it needs from different plants while simultaneously giving it time to rest. Crop rotation also dramatically improves pest control, as they no longer have one giant source of their favorite food to target. One way of diversifying your land is by intercropping, planting multiple crops in the same space. This improves production and resource efficiency.
(Fig. 5- Crop rotation is the practice of changing the crops you plant on the same plot of land, as seen above- Source: U.S. Farmers and Ranchers Alliance)
Cover Crops and Perennials: “Cover crops such as clover, rye, or hairy vetch are planted during off-season times when soils might otherwise be left bare, while perennial crops keep soil covered and maintain living roots in the ground year-round. These crops protect and build soil health by preventing erosion, replenishing soil nutrients, and keeping weeds in check, reducing the need for fertilizers and herbicides. (6)”
(Fig. 6- A field making use of cover crops in the offseason- Source: Cover Crop Strategies)
Livestock and Crops Together: Traditionally, we have always kept livestock and crops on separate farms which has resulted in the beef market contributing to pollution, land erosion and resource use. However, integrating Livestock and Crops can help mitigate these problems. First, livestock can feed off the crops in these farms, reducing the need to intensively farm corn on monoculture fields which erodes soil. Also, consolidating your acreage reduces water use and reintegrating livestock and crops actually improves soil health.
(Fig. 7- Livestock grazing in an intercropped field- Source- Chico State)
Managing Whole Landscapes: In permaculture, even the parts of an ecosystem that aren’t cultivated are important for the farm. Monoculture largely requires large flat fields to work, whereas permaculture aims to take advantage of any kind of landscape. This can help control erosion as well as support other organisms that aid in the cultivation process.
(Fig. 8- A permaculture farm on a hillside surrounded by trees and brush- Source: GroCycle)
Permaculture, while very important for moving big agriculture along the path to sustainability, does come with associated challenges. For example, it is significantly more labor intensive than conventional farming. Much of the work cannot effectively be done with machines or specialized workers as monoculture farms can. However, if we create job retention and training programs, we can move workers from monoculture jobs to permaculture jobs without anyone being left behind. Another struggle with permaculture is that due to its newness and complexity, much of the world is very limited in its knowledge of how to operate this kind of agricultural system. This is why we must continue to globally expand permaculture education and expand knowledge to reach all parts of the world, teaching them how they can do this themselves. However, the commonly offered argument against permaculture is that it is not sufficiently profitable as a farming technique for large scale crop production. But, this myth can be dispelled by many examples of profitable permacultures of increasing scale. One place where permaculture especially thrives is in urban areas. Permaculture can be highly effective without vast amounts of space, making it ideal for big cities. Also, the lack of availability for fresh, organic food in big cities makes permaculture extremely valuable in these locations. Not to mention, there is a very large market for fresh food all around the world, not just in the U.S. One example of permaculture in an urban area comes from a village situated just outside a big city in Indonesia. 6 participants took part in a permaculture program where they grew snake beans, watermelon, cucumber and chili. The results were $465, $600, $380, and $800 in profit, respectively (17). Now, we have seen an example of an urban permaculture farm, but what about larger farms?
Case Study: New Forest Farm, 100 Acres: Mark Shepard is the CEO of Forest Agriculture Enterprises. His use of permaculture has allowed him to create a highly diverse, productive and profitable operation. “Trees, shrubs, vines, canes, perennial plants and fungi are planted in association to produce food (for humans and animals), fuel, medicines, and beauty. (7)” Also worth noting is the fact that Mark’s farm is completely powered by solar and wind. It is a shining example in favor of all things sustainable. Although Mark has other successful businesses, including setting up permaculture farms for others, 70% of his income still comes from the sale of produce, products and perennials. Furthermore, he gains another 5% of his income from farm tours and saves 5% on food expenses. (7)
Agricultural Technology for Sustainability
Fig. 9 (A No- Till Planter in operation- Source: No-Till Farmer)
No- Till Farming
Authors Mahdi Al-Kaisi, Mark Hanna and Michael Tidman from Iowa State University share that, “For newly mechanized farmers, tillage was a way to solve problems. Tillage was used for seedbed preparation, weed suppression, soil aeration, turning over cover crops and forages, burying heavy crop residue, leveling the soil, incorporating manure and fertilizer into the root zone and activating pesticides. (18)” The authors are correct in their claims. During the rise of Industrial Agriculture, these mechanical innovations revolutionized farming. The labor, time and money saved by relegating all these tasks to a machine was unparalleled. At the time, tillage was a godsend. However, unbeknownst to farmers at the time, it was decimating their soil‘s structure, nutritional quality and microbiome life.
Every time a plow makes a pass over a field , it is fracturing the soil, causing disruption of the soil structure which accelerates runoff and causes soil erosion. Tillers also negatively affect the soil’s ability to hold water as well as killing organic matter and microorganisms that are vital to the soil. On top of that, turning over the soil releases significant amounts of carbon that has long been sequestered in the soil back to the atmosphere. Finally, tillage disrupts crop residue. Crop residue eases the impact on the surface of soil from rain as it is coming down from the sky. Crop residue is also vital in supporting soil structure and a lack thereof causes the disruption of soil particles which can cover soil pores and seal the soil surface off from rain, which both the soil and plants need.
One technical innovation that can help mitigate the issues associated with tillage is zero till (or no- till) farming. Prior to the Agricultural Revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries, no till farming was the standard practice. However, as innovations in tilling made it more convenient and efficient than no till, agriculture trended in that direction. That trend has continued right through the modern day, although, now that we are realizing the dangers of tillage, no till, as an important technique, is beginning to resurface. No till is a method of farming that uses specialized equipment to open a slit in the soil, plant a seed in a small trench and then cover that trench to minimize the disruption to the soil. The benefits of no till farming are numerous, including reduced soil erosion, less disruption and compaction of the soil structure and improved soil health. Furthermore, no-till farming results in improved time and fuel efficiency, reduced carbon emissions and long run savings when compared to standard tillage.
Tilled soil is left highly vulnerable to soil erosion as the structure of the soil is constantly disrupted. After soil is turned over, the surface of the soil is left loose and likely to be eroded by wind or rain. However, no till practices are much better for maintaining soil structure and leave natural mulch covers from other crops on the soil surface.
No till farming also does not cause soil compaction the way that tillage does. This may be a bit confusing as you would think that because tillage leaves the surface of the soil loose, as previously stated, it would do the opposite of soil compaction. However, because tillage destroys the structure of the soil, the soil is left much weaker after it settles. Now the soil is no longer able to support the weight of the machines and people working on it and becomes compacted under that weight. Soil compaction is a problem because when the soil becomes too compact, it leaves no pores for water to flow through it and for plant roots to grow deeper. Farmers then till the soil again to loosen it up after it has become compact, further exacerbating the problem and causing more and more tillage and more and more compaction. Because no till leaves soil structure intact, these problems are much less likely to occur.
(Fig.10- Water and air flow through structured, porous soil vs compacted soil- Source: University of Wisconsin- Madison)
No till farming saves time, money and fuel. Conventional tillage requires farmers to make three or four passes over one row of a field whereas no till only requires one pass over each row of a field. This saves time and labor costs. Furthermore, no till farming is highly fuel efficient when compared to conventional tillage. “On average, farmers practicing continuous conventional till use just over six gallons of diesel fuel per acre each year. Continuous no-till requires less than two gallons per acre. Across the country, that difference leads to nearly 282 million gallons of diesel fuel saved annually by farmers who practice continuous no-till instead of continuous conventional till. Farmers who manage at least one crop in their rotation without tilling – seasonal no-till – save an additional 306 million gallons of fuel annually. (2)” Obviously, fuel is not cheap and these fuel savings leave lots of extra money in the pocket of farmers. If you’re wondering just how much; diesel prices were between $5.00- 5.50 in the summer of 2022 (23). This means at least 1.5 billion collective dollars saved.
Fig. 11 (A map of the U.S. showing fuel savings by region- Source No.2)
Figure 11 clearly demonstrates the relationship between increased conservation methods of tilling and fuel savings. The green bar shows fuel savings from continuous no-till, the blue bar from seasonal no-till, the yellow bar from continuous mulch and the red bar from seasonal conventional tillage. All fuel savings are being measured in millions of gallons. Pay the most attention to the green and blue bars as they focus on no till farming. While the amount of fuel saved per method is highly dependent on the frequency of use of each method, generally, the most fuel by far is being saved through continuous no- till and seasonal no- till with as much as 173 million gallons of fuel being saved between the two methods in the Northern Plains Region!
One of the biggest benefits of no till farming, and most important environmentally, is the reduced carbon emissions when compared to conventional tillage. Every planting season, the majority of farmers still begin tilling their fields. This leads to massive carbon emissions, in fact, agriculture is the single biggest contributor to carbon emissions in the world (Remember figure 4). This is unfortunate, considering how plants sequester carbon while they are growing, agriculture could and should be used to reduce the amount of total carbon in our atmosphere. No till can make this a reality. By using no till farming, we can reduce our carbon emissions to the point where plants are sequestering far more carbon than the soil is releasing. This way, we can achieve true carbon drawdown. NASA generated a supercomputer simulation of carbon that allows us to see, in real time, the amount of carbon being emitted and sequestered on Earth (If you could, please visit the attached Link).
Fig. 12 (A supercomputer generation displaying carbon emissions over the course of a year- Source no. 21)
The red clouds in fig. 12 show carbon being released into the atmosphere and the blue is carbon being sequestered from the atmosphere. Notice how the dates align with the cycles of farming. In April and May, there are huge red clouds, showing large amounts of carbon emissions from tilled farmlands. What are the majority of farmers doing during this time to create such emissions? They are tilling. However when June and July roll around, those clouds quickly turn blue as plants grow and breathe in carbon dioxide, taking it out of the atmosphere. Now imagine if more farmers utilized no till farming to minimize their carbon emissions. It could possibly be one of the largest solutions to repairing our atmosphere.
Economic Policies to Promote Sustainability
Fig. 13 (A graphic demonstrating the basic principle of carbon taxes which is charging individuals and companies based on emissions to create revenue- Source: PolicyEd)
One reservation many people have about making significant strides towards sustainability is that it feels like too much of a massive, insurmountable undertaking, as they have an idea that our way of life would have to do a complete 180. However, there are many things that can be done right now to take significant steps towards a sustainable future. For example, there are multiple government policies that can be used to encourage the reduction of carbon emissions among farmers.
Carbon Tax
Carbon taxes impose a direct tax on the amount of carbon dioxide one emits. This type of policy is highly effective in reducing emissions, encouraging switching to sustainable equipment and generating revenue for those that produce less carbon. One way that carbon taxes can be used effectively is by taxing emissions and then redistributing tax revenue equally to everyone. Using this method, those that emit the most have to pay the most in taxes and those that emit less make more money from the tax return. Governments could determine an average amount of emissions generated per amount of land cultivated and then tax based on that number. They could also reduce this number for land cultivated using sustainable agriculture equipment such as no till planters.
Cap and Trade
A similar alternative to a carbon tax system is a cap and trade system. In a cap and trade system, everybody is given permits to emit a certain amount of carbon. Those that emit less carbon can sell their excess permits for increased revenue while those that emit more carbon will have to buy more permits. Similar to a carbon tax system, those that emit the least will profit financially while those that emit the most will have to pay a cost. Either way, both encourage environmentally responsible behavior. Cap and trade systems are great for encouraging trade but can be flawed in the fact that the largest businesses can buy up all the permits at a nominal cost to them. Carbon tax systems are the most effective in reducing emissions, as even the most financially prosperous businesses can’t avoid the tax, but do not encourage commerce the same way that cap and trade systems do.
Where do we go From Here?
Fig. 14 (A large, intercropped field- Source: Organic Authority)
The road to sustainable agriculture takes many steps and will not be easy, but the solutions are there and are very plausible. If we look at many different areas of our agricultural systems, like government policy and how farmers cultivate their fields, with a willingness to reshape them, we can create a future that can feed generations to come sustainably. Switching to permaculture, adopting new technology and implementing policy to encourage responsible behavior are only a few things that we can do. Now, this whole blog may have been convincing, but I imagine many readers will still be left with the question; What can I do? Not everyone is a farmer and certainly not everyone is a politician. One of the most important things you, as a consumer can do, is to know where your products come from. I would implore everyone reading this to do a quick bit of research on the stores in their area and find out who gets their food from fresh, organic, regenerative farms. For example, where I live, there is a local farm called “Ard’s Farm.” Ard’s main goals, as stated on their website, are “providing quality food to the community in the most responsible way possible.” (24). One of the ways they do this is focusing on soil health. If I was going to buy any sort of produce or meat, I would buy it from Ard’s. If we, as consumers, are going to make a significant impact, we have to financially support the people who are doing the right thing. Sustainable agriculture is happening all around you. The movement is already underway. You just have to find them. If all these changes ever feel impossible, remember, there are working examples of all these ideas already being successfully implemented in the real world. Professor Mark Hathaway (from page 2) cites the example of Geoff Lawton, who took up his own project on flat, desert land near the Dead Sea. “On land with minimal rainfall, high salinity, and temperatures reaching up to 50 °C—and using only simple methods like digging ditches on contour, composting, cover crops, nitrogen-fixing trees, limited micro-irrigation, and the gradual expansion to fruit trees and other crops—this severely degraded land was turned into a fertile garden producing olives, figs, vegetables, dates, tilapia, chickens, and other farm animals within a single year while only using 20 % of the water consumed by the neighboring “conventional” farms based on industrial methods.” Mark Hathaway’s example shows the way things can be if we commit to regenerative agriculture. If we, as a nation, can come together with a single, comprehensive plan for sustainable agriculture and carry it out with conviction, the solution to our environmental problems as they relate to agriculture will be well within reach.
Bibliography
Dobberstein, J., & Gerlach, J. (2021, November 24). What you should know about no-till planters. No. Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://www.no-tillfarmer.com/articles/10520-what-you-should-know-about-no-till-planters
Creech, P. by E., Vibhav, S. C., Weaver, B., Ishihara, C., Williamson, B., Kozisek, D., Zhao, D. J., Ehmke, L., Gamradt, H., Winterboer, D., McGannon, J., Garuda, S., wallace, R., Schulte, J., Tom, Twilighten, S., Martin, I., Michael, & Hawksford, D. (2021, August 3). Saving money, time and soil: The Economics of No-till farming. USDA. Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2017/11/30/saving-money-time-and-soil-economics-no-till-farming
How to feed the World Without Killing Our Planet? Bees4life. (2022, July 2). Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://bees4life.org/bee-extinction/solutions/sustainable-farming/large-scale-farming#:~:text=Permaculture%20on%20a%20large%20scale,biodynamic%20farming%2C%20and%20sustainable%20agriculture.
Kenton, W. (2022, September 29). Carbon credits and how they can offset your carbon footprint. Investopedia. Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/carbon_credit.asp#:~:text=Investopedia%20%2F%20Sydney%20Saporito-,What%20Are%20Carbon%20Credits%3F,equivalent%20in%20other%20greenhouse%20gases.
Carbon tax basics. Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. (2021, October 21). Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://www.c2es.org/content/carbon-tax-basics/
What is sustainable agriculture? Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.). Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/what-sustainable-agriculture
Papprentice. (2018, June 4). What everybody should know about profitable permaculture farms. Permaculture Apprentice. Retrieved October 3, 2022, from https://permacultureapprentice.com/successful-permaculture-farms/
Barik, A. K., Chatterjee, A. K., Mondal, B., Datta, A., Saha, S., Nath, R., Bera, R., & Seal, A. (2014, April 1). Adoption of rational farming technology for development of a model for exploring sustainable farming practice in Farmer’s field. Organic Eprints – Adoption of Rational Farming Technology for Development of a Model for Exploring Sustainable Farming Practice in Farmer’s Field. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/32203/
Hathaway, M. D. (2015, May 6). Agroecology and permaculture: Addressing key ecological problems by rethinking and Redesigning Agricultural Systems – Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences. SpringerLink. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13412-015-0254-8
LAWRENCE H. GOULDER and ANDREW R. SCHEIN, Goulder, L. H., University, S., Schein, A. R., Economics, D. of, Berger, K. , L. Bovenberg, A., Burtraw, D. , W. Shobe, D. B. and, C. Carlson et al., Al., E., L. Rogers, T. M. D. and D., A. D. Ellerman and B. Buchner, C. Fischer and A. K. Fox, C. Fischer and L. Preonas, Fowlie, M. , H. Goulder, L., N. Stavins, L. H. G. and R., al., D. H., … Quirion, F. B. and P. (n.d.). Carbon taxes versus cap and trade: A critical review. Climate Change Economics. Retrieved October 17, 2022, from https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S2010007813500103
Liu, C. L. C., Kuchma, O., & Krutovsky, K. V. (2018, July 29). Mixed-species versus monocultures in plantation forestry: Development, benefits, ecosystem services and perspectives for the future. Global Ecology and Conservation. Retrieved October 28, 2022, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235198941830088X
Balogh, A., & Balogh, A. (2021, December 13). The rise and fall of monoculture farming. Horizon Magazine. Retrieved October 28, 2022, from https://ec.europa.eu/research-and-innovation/en/horizon-magazine/rise-and-fall-monoculture-farming#:~:text=By%20growing%20just%20one%20crop,activities%20like%20planting%20and%20harvesting.
Quest Contributor University of Birmingham, et al. “A Global History of Monoculture.” University of Birmingham, https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/quest/preserving-and-creating-culture/a-global-history-of-monoculture.aspx.
Monoculture farming explained: What are the pros and cons? EARTH OBSERVING SYSTEM. (2022, May 19). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://eos.com/blog/monoculture-farming/
Fao.org. Key messages | Global Symposium on Soil Erosion | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://www.fao.org/about/meetings/soil-erosion-symposium/key-messages/en/#:~:text=It%20can%20take%20up%20to,is%20eroded%20every%20five%20seconds.
Reintegrating land and Livestock. Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/reintegrating-land-and-livestock
Intelligent permaculture: A sustainable and profitable practice for tropical and maritime climate urban and peri-urban agricultural ecosystems. IEEE Xplore. (n.d.). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9732051
Authors: Mahdi Al-Kaisi Mark Hanna Michael Tidman. (n.d.). Frequent tillage and its impact on soil quality. Frequent tillage and its impact on soil quality | Integrated Crop Management. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/frequent-tillage-and-its-impact-soil-quality#:~:text=Since%20tillage%20fractures%20the%20soil,moved%20or%20%27splashed%27%20away.
Exapta Solutions, I. (2022, October 22). Advantages and disadvantages of no till farming, planting. No. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://notillagriculture.com/no-till-farming/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-no-till-farming/
Spears, S. (2018, October 15). What is no-till farming? Regeneration International. Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://regenerationinternational.org/2018/06/24/no-till-farming/
- Film: Kiss The Ground
- https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/regenerative-annual-cropping
Research Fellow: Sarah Eichler; Senior Fellows: Mamta Mehra. (2022, October 17). Regenerative annual cropping @ProjectDrawdown #climatesolutions. Project Drawdown. Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://www.drawdown.org/solutions/regenerative-annual-cropping
Kim Chipman and Megan DurisinBloomberg News. (2022, May 25). Farmers feel hit from Diesel’s surge, scarcity. AgUpdate. Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://www.agupdate.com/business/farmers-feel-hit-from-diesel-s-surge-scarcity/article_98308798-db9d-11ec-a671-67079cbe442b.html
Farm. Ard’s Farm Market. (2022, May 12). Retrieved December 7, 2022, from https://ardsmarket.com/farm/