Organic dairy production: A review

Organic farming aims to create an integrated, humane, environmentally and economically sustainable agricultural system. For organic dairy systems, the fulfilment of these aims requires the understanding and integration of a number of systems components including land use (mixed or dairy only) and stocking rate; grassland and forage production, including quantity and quality; potential milk yield and milk quality; animal nutrition (largely farm based) and health; environmental sustainability such as farm nutrient balance; the financial status of the farm, including enterprise performance, fixed costs and labour use, and farm income and profit; and finally the policy environment in which organic dairy systems operate. This review discusses worldwide research undertaken into each of these key components of organic dairy production systems. As converting organic dairy systems are often considerably different to established organic systems, both the converting and developed organic dairy system are discussed in this paper.

Marketing organic products: Exploring some of the pervasive issues

This article explores the marketing of organic products. It identifies the issues that pervade the national, organisational, and individual differences within the global organic industry. These are discussed using the marketing mix framework of product, price, promotion, and place of distribution. It concludes that a large percentage of customers, who are spread throughout the community, purchase organic products, most of whom only purchase it occasionally. The most important attributes of organic products are health, quality, and environment. Promotion of these benefits has the potential to demonstrate that, even at the higher price, they still offer value for money.

The effects of minimal tillage, contour cultivation, in-field vegetative barriers and crop residues on phosphorus and sediment yields

Runoff, sediment, total phosphorus and total dissolved phosphorus losses in overland flow were measured for two years on unbounded plots cropped with wheat and oats. Half of the field was cultivated with minimum tillage (shallow tillage with a tine cultivator) and half was conventionally ploughed. Within each cultivation treatment there were different treatment areas (TAs). In the first year of the experiment, one TA was cultivated up and down the slope, one TA was cultivated on the contour, with a beetle bank acting as a vegetative barrier partway up the slope, and one had a mixed direction cultivation treatment, with cultivation and drilling conducted up and down the slope and all subsequent operations conducted on the contour. In the second year, this mixed treatment was replaced with contour cultivation. Results showed no significant reduction in runoff, sediment losses or total phosphorus losses from minimum tillage when compared to the conventional plough treatment, but there were increased losses of total dissolved phosphorus with minimum tillage. The mixed direction cultivation treatment increased surface runoff and losses of sediment and phosphorus. Increasing surface roughness with contour cultivation reduced surface runoff compared to up and down slope cultivation in both the plough and minimum tillage treatment areas, but this trend was not significant. Sediment and phosphorus losses in the contour cultivation treatment followed a very similar pattern to runoff. Combining contour cultivation with a vegetative barrier in the form of a beetle bank to reduce slope length resulted in a non-significant reduction in surface runoff, sediment and total phosphorus when compared to up and down slope cultivation, but there was a clear trend towards reduced losses. However, the addition of a beetle bank did not provide a significant reduction in runoff, sediment losses or total phosphorus losses when compared to contour cultivation, suggesting only a marginal additional benefit. The economic implications for farmers of the different treatment options are investigated in order to assess their suitability for implementation at a field scale.

Consumers' willingness-to-pay for organic conversion-grade food: Evidence from five EU countries

In recent years, in overall value, the EU has become a net importer of organic food to supply increasing demand. Financial support for farmers during the conversion period has been made to help expand organic production as this was seen as a barrier to conversion. Meanwhile, farmers have been marketing products produced in this conversion period and labelled as such, the extent to which is described here for the UK, Portugal, Denmark, Ireland and Italy. Consumers' attitudes towards, and willingness-to-pay for, conversion-grade food in these countries is examined. It was found that consumers would be prepared to pay a premium for conversion-grade produce of around half the premium for organic produce with vegetables attracting a higher premium than meat. Finally, the potential of policies for marketing conversion-grade products to encourage more conversion is examined, together with barriers to achieving this. It is concluded that barriers to marketing such products, particularly from retailers, will be formidable. Thus, alternative policies are suggested. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Budgetary implications of, and motives for, converting to organic farming: Case study farm business evidence from Great Britain

This paper explores the financial implications of converting to organic farming in Great Britain through a case study of farmers considering conversion in 2002. Most study farmers were motivated to convert for financial, not ideological or life-style reasons; organic meat production was the most common planned enterprise, although those choosing to produce milk, vegetables and cereals were also studied in depth. At the time of study, organic beef and sheep meat production was particularly profitable. It was found that, in these product sectors, a large improvement in Family Farm Income would result if organic production was introduced on the case study farms. With few exceptions, a fall in Family Farm Income during the conversion period would not be an obstacle to farmers changing to organic methods. Fixed cost changes would also not deter conversion but expensive investment in new livestock and appropriate buildings would be required by some of those businesses studied. These findings are, however, dependent upon the price premia assumptions used and, whilst these premia have dropped slightly since the time of study, this would lessen the financial shortfall during the conversion period. There is also the possibility that reversion to conventional agricultural production might occur, perhaps at a faster rate than the original conversion process that was taking place around the turn of the century.