Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T02:04:14.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic analysis of experimental organic agricultural systems on a highly eroded soil of the Georgia Piedmont, USA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2010

K.L. Jacobsen ,
C.L. Escalante  and
C.F. Jordan
K.L. Jacobsen*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University of Kentucky, N-318 Agricultural Sciences North, Lexington, KY40546, USA.
C.L. Escalante
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, 301 Conner Hall, Athens, GA30602, USA.
C.F. Jordan
Affiliation:
Odum School of Ecology, Ecology Building, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: krista.jacobsen@uky.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Information about the costs and labor requirements of experimental organic farming systems designed to restore highly degraded soils in the southeastern US are needed. Enterprise budgets were prepared for the production of okra, hot pepper and a corn/winter squash intercrop under 10 different production systems, nine of which were based on organic conservation tillage. A stochastic dominance analysis was conducted to determine the relative risk efficiency of the 10 systems over the course of the experiment in terms of productivity, profitability and carbon sequestration potential. Organic conservation tillage treatments had lower tractor labor and fuel costs than conventional treatments, due to the extensive tillage required in conventional vegetable farming. The subset of organic treatments receiving compost addition without additional mulches also demonstrated increases in soil carbon, an important driver of system productivity. Organic treatments had little pest and pathogen pressure, with the exception of Fusarium wilt in some treatments receiving straw mulch. Weed suppression by straw mulches reduced labor requirements by an average of 23%. Yields in all treatments were lower than conventional yields from other studies in the region, due to the degraded nature of the soil on the study site. However, net returns on high-labor, organic crops were over US$30,000 ha−1 in some treatments. The results of this work indicate that organic, conservation tillage systems can restore soil productivity and command high returns per hectare if labor requirements can be met.

Keywords

organic agriculturealley croppingconservation tillageenterprise budgetstochastic dominancesoilcarbonokrapepperswinter squash
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 296 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Dimitri, C. and Green, C. 2007. Recent growth patterns in the US organic foods market. In Wellson, A.J. (ed.). Organic Agriculture in the US. Nova Science Publishers, New York, NY. p. 2.Google Scholar
2United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. 2009. Data sets: organic production. Available at Web site http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/organic/ (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
3Boatright, S.R. and McKissick, J.C. 2005. 2005 Farm Gate Vegetable Report. AR-06-04. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
4Center for Agribusiness and Economic Development. 2006. Economic Importance of Vegetables in Georgia. EB-07-05. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
5Stevens-Garmon, J., Huang, C.L., and Lin, B.H. 2007. Organic demand: a profile of consumers in the fresh produce market. Choices 22:109–115.Google Scholar
6Chase, C., Smith, M., and Delate, K. 2006. Organic Crop Production Enterprise Budgets. FM 1876. Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
7Born, H. 2004. Enterprise Budgets and Production Costs for Organic Production. RL041. National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service, Fayetteville, AR.Google Scholar
8MALTAG Group. 2008. 2008 Organic Vegetable Budgets – Technical Cost Information. Available at Web site http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/budgets/printed/All%20veg%20buds%20-%20technical%20cost%20info.pdf (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
9Estes, E.A., Kleese, T., and Lauffer, L. 2003. North Carolina Organic Vegetable Production Cost Study 31. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.Google Scholar
10Rhoades, C.C., Nissen, T.M., and Kettler, J.S. 1998. Soil nitrogen dynamics in alley cropping and no-till systems on ultisols of the Georgia Piedmont, USA. Agroforestry Systems 39:31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Jordan, C.F. 2004. Organic farming and agroforestry: alley cropping for mulch production for organic farms of the southeastern United States. Agroforestry Systems 61–62(1):79–90.Google Scholar
12Jacobsen, K.L. and Jordan, C.F. 2009. Effects of restorative agroecosystems on soil characteristics and plant production on a degraded soil in the Georgia Piedmont, USA. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 24(3):186–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Kang, B.T. and Ghuman, B.S. 1991. Alley cropping as a sustainable system. In Moldenhauer, W.C., Hudson, N.W., Sheng, T.C., and Lee, S.W. (eds). Development of Conservation Farming on Hill Slopes. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Ankeny. p. 172–184.Google Scholar
14Rao, M.R., Ong, C.K., Pathak, P., and Sharma, M.M. 1991. Productivity of annual cropping systems on a shallow alfisol in semiarid India. Agroforestry Systems 15:51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Govindarajan, M., Rao, M.R., Mathuva, M.N., and Nair, P.K. 1996. Soil-water and root dynamics under hedgerow intercropping in semiarid Kenya. Agronomy Journal 88:513–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Long, A.J. and Nair, P.K.R. 1999. Trees outside forests: agro-, community, and urban forestry. New Forests 17:145–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Colditz, P.G. and Vavrina, C. 1999. Okra: Commercial Vegetable Production 627. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.Google Scholar
18Kelley, W.T., Granberry, D.M., and Boyhan, G.E. 2001. Soils and fertility. In Kelley, W.T. and Langston, D.B. (eds). Commercial Production and Management of Pumpkins and Gourds 1180. University of Georgia, Athens, GA. p. 11.Google Scholar
19Kelley, W.T., Boyhan, G.E., and Granberry, D.M. 2006. Lime and fertilizer management. In Kelley, W.T. (ed.). Commercial Pepper Production Handbook 1309. University of Georgia, Athens, GA. p. 17–21.Google Scholar
20Escalante, C.L. 2007. Cash Rents Paid for Georgia Farmland in 2007. University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service, Athens, GA. Available at Web site http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/pubs/comm/pdf/CASH%20RENTS%20PAID%20FOR%20GEORGIA%20FARMLAND%20IN%202007.pdf (verified March 9, 2010).Google Scholar
21University of Georgia Extension Agricultural and Applied Economics. 2008. 2008 Vegetable Budgets. Available at Web site http://www.tifton.uga.edu/veg/ (verified March 30, 2008).Google Scholar
22Born, H. and Baier, A. 2005. Record-Keeping and Budgeting Workbook for Organic Producers. National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service, Fayetteville, AR.Google Scholar
23Rodale Institute. 2008. New Farm Organic Price Report. Rodale Institute, Emmaus, PA. Available at Web site http://www.rodaleinstitute.org/Organic-Price-Report (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
24AgCenter Research and Extension. 2006. 2006 State unit prices. In Louisiana Summary Agriculture and Natural Resources. Louisiana State University, Lafayette, LA.Google Scholar
25Huang, C. and Litzenberger, R. 1988. Foundations for Financial Economics. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
26Anderson, J.R., Dillon, J.L., and Hardaker, B. 1977. Agricultural Decision Analysis, 1st ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. p. 65–108.Google Scholar
27Georgia Office of the United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2009. Georgia Statistics. Available at Web site http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Georgia/index.asp (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
28Infante, M.L. and Morse, R.D. 1996. Integration of no tillage and overseeded legume living mulches for transplanted broccoli production. Hortscience 31:376–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29Biazzo, J. and Masiunas, J.B. 2000. The use of living mulches for weed management in hot pepper and okra. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 16:59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30Carrera, L.M., Morse, R.D., Hima, B.L., Abdul-Baki, A.A., Haynes, K.G., and Teasdale, J.R. 2005. A conservation-tillage, cover-cropping strategy and economic analysis for creamer potato production. American Journal of Potato Research 82:471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Flanders, T. and Flanders, C. 2001. Okra Budget. University of Georgia, Tifton, GA. Available at Web site http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/budgets/excel/OKRA.xls (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
32University of Georgia Department of Agricultural Economics. 2008. Corn, Strip Tillage, Irrigated Budget. University of Georgia, Tifton, GA. Available at Web site http://www.ces.uga.edu/Agriculture/agecon/budgets/excel/Corn%20Irrigated%20Strip%20Till%202008.xls (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
33Jans, S. and Fernandez-Cornejo, J. 2001. The Economics of Organic Farming in the U.S.: The Case of Tomato Production. American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, August 2001.Google Scholar
34Barkley, A. 2002. Organic Food Growth: Producer Profits and Corporate Farming. 2002 Risk and Profit Conference, Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, August 2002.Google Scholar
35Friedman, D. 2003. Transitioning to Organic Production. Sustainable Agriculture Network. Available at Web site http://www.sare.org/publications/organic/organic.pdf (verified October 17, 2009).Google Scholar
36Altieri, M.A. 1995. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. 2nd ed. Westview Press, Inc., Boulder, CO.Google Scholar