Can the Market Deliver 100% Organic Seed and Varieties in Europe?

This paper considers European organic seed as a market in the sense of economic theory and explores factors impacting seed supply and demand. Under the organic regulation, farmers have to use seed multiplied in organic farming or apply for a derogation. We evaluated the functioning of the organic seed market, based on case studies of seed supply chains for arable, vegetable and forage crops; a farmer survey; and a status-quo analysis of the organic seed sector from the European LIVESEED project. The organic seed market is characterised by small size, great diversity of crops grown, unsolved technical problems for some crops and limited capacity of breeding varieties adapted to organic farming conditions. Demand vastly outstrips supply for most crops, but strong regional and sector differences were observed. A lack of information about availability and price for organic seed is likely to act as barrier to investment. Full enforcement of the regulation to use only organic seed might have unforeseen consequences, such as a reduction of agrobiodiversity in organic farming, rather than supporting an increase in supply. We conclude that the market alone is not likely to deliver 100% organic seed and government intervention is justified.

The value of values-based supply chains: farmer perspective

In the last few decades, the emergence of mid-scale, intermediated marketing channels that fall between commodity and direct markets has attracted growing interest from scholars for their potential to preserve small and mid-sized farms while scaling up alternative agrifood sourcing. When such mid-scale supply chains are formed among multiple business partners with shared ethics or values related to the qualities of the food and the business relationships along the supply chain, they may be termed “values-based supply chains (VBSCs).” Most of the research on VBSCs to date has relied primarily on a case study approach that investigates the performance of VBSCs from the perspective of VBSC founders or leaders. In contrast, this research seeks out the perspectives of farmers who participate in VBSCs. A nationwide farmer survey conducted in 2017 offers original insights on farmer motivations for participating in VBSCs and how they are being used by farmers relative to other marketing channels. We find that VBSCs serve farms of all sizes. Overall, smaller farms were more likely to market a higher percentage of overall sales through their VBSC and more likely to rank their VBSC as one of the top three marketing channels in their portfolio. But it was the larger farms that were more likely to perceive VBSC-specific benefits. Our findings confirm that while there is a limited volume of product that such regional supply chains can currently handle, farmers view VBSCs as a valuable marketing option that aligns with their own values and preserves their product’s identity.

Methodology of Analyzing Maize Density Loss in Smallholder’s Fields and Potential Optimize Approach

Increasing plant density is a key measure to close the maize (Zea mays L.) yield gap and ensure food security. However, there is a large plant density difference in the fields sown by agronomists and smallholders. The primary cause of this phenomenon is the lack of an effective methodology to systematically analyze the density loss. To identify the plant density loss processes from experimental plots to smallholder fields, a research methodology was developed in this study involving a farmer survey and measurements in a smallholder field. The results showed that the sowing density difference caused by farmer decision-making and plant density losses caused by mechanical and agronomic factors explained 15.5%, 5.5% and 6.8% of the plant density difference, respectively. Changing smallholder attitudes toward the value of increasing the plant density could help reduce this density loss and increase farm yields by 12.3%. Therefore, this methodology was effective for analyzing the plant density loss, and to clarify the primary causes of sowing density differences and plant density loss. Additionally, it was beneficial to identify the priorities and stakeholders who share responsibility for reducing the density loss. The methodology has wide applicability to address the sowing density differences and plant density loss in other areas to narrow crop yield gaps and ensure food security.

Evaluating the Relationship between Fruit and Vegetable Growers Use of Plastic Biodegradable Mulches, and Environmental Stewardship and Labor Savings: The Case of Tennessee Fruit and Vegetable Farmers

The substitution of polyethylene (PE) mulch for plastic biodegradable mulches (BDMs) in fruit and vegetable production has the potential to reduce the negative environmental impacts associated with PE mulch use, and the overall sustainability of fruit and vegetable production. A better understanding of the factors associated with BDM use could inform efforts to promote the use of BDMs. The main goal of this study is to assess the correlation between the use of BDMs among fruit and vegetable farmers, and labor savings and environmental stewardship. Using data from a Tennessee fruit and vegetable farmer survey and probit regressions, this study evaluates the correlation between the use of BDMs, and the labor savings associated with the use of BDMs and farmer environmental stewardship, after controlling for farmer and farmer business characteristics. Results suggest that farm size, farmer environmental stewardship, and labor savings from BDM use are strongly correlated with the use of BDMs among Tennessee fruit and vegetable growers, specifically among those farmers who are more likely to have previous experience using PE mulch.

Impact of Ridge-Furrow Planting in Pakistan: Empirical Evidence from the Farmers Field

Wheat is planted through the broadcast method on 7.8 million ha and irrigated through low-efficiency flood basin irrigation methods. With decreased water availability, there is a need to adopt water use efficient planting techniques. The current paper uses two-year trials data set as well as farmer survey data to demonstrate benefits of ridge-furrow planting wheat and farmer perception regarding the technology in Pakistan. During 2014–15 and 2015–16, ridge-furrow planting of wheat was compared with farmer practice of planting on flat surface through broadcasting at 162 sites located in 15 districts of Pakistan. In a survey, 134 farmers shared their experiences about ridge-furrow planting. Data collected from field trials and demonstrations showed that better tillering and crop growth contributed towards 12% higher wheat grain yield with ridge-furrow planting in comparison with the farmer practice of flat planting in all 15 districts during both years. Furrow-irrigated ridge planting of wheat helped farmers in saving of 30–35% water in comparison with farmer practice. Farmers adopting ridge-furrow wheat planting earned USD 100.63 per hectare more profit than nonadopter farmers. Adoption of this technology on one million hectare can help in saving 1 million acre foot of water and produce additional 0.36 million tons of wheat per year.