Organic and conventional wheat production: Examination of energy and economics

Berardi, Gigi

doi:10.1016/0304-3746(78)90002-1

Cited by 53 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results presented in this paper underline the recorded yield reduction in ecologically managed farms (Lockeretz et al, 1977;Berardi, 1978;Lünzer, 1979;Haas et al, 1995). Due to the relatively high energy input in the two ecofarms compared with other test results, energy intensity in 01 and 02 is notably higher than in the reference farms K2 and K5.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

“…It seems to be justified to conclude that ecologically run farms are not principally superior to conventional farms in energy consumption. An essential cause might be the mostly older and smaller machines (Berardi, 1978) and the broader diversity of the machine fleet due to given cropping and livestock structures. The absolute level of energy consumption in the tested ecofarms exceeds the average energy input of 6.8 GJ/ha as calculated by Haas et al (1995) for organic farms in the former West Germany.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Management‐related material and energy balances for the rating of production intensity and environmental acceptability of land use

Kalk

Hülsbergen²,

Biermann³

1998

Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A complex rating of the environmental acceptability, sustainability and consumption of resources by farms is possible when indicators characterizing the material and energy regime are used. Reference values for ecologically tolerable nutrient and humus levels as well as energy consumption and energy efficiency are used for assessing the results of nutrient, humus and energy balancing. Five conventionally and two ecologically run farms were analysed. They revealed explicitly large differences in their nutrient regimes, in the humus supply level, the consumption of fossil energy and energy intensity.Evaluations and analyses of the tested farms and of farms under other local conditions led to the conclusion that along with rising shares of cash crop products, mineral nitrogen input and energy consumption go up, whereas feed nitrogen supply, humus supply level and energy intensity go down. Ecological farms have advantages in nutrient regime and humus supply, however, they involve disadvantages in energy intensity.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management‐related material and energy balances for the rating of production intensity and environmental acceptability of land use

Kalk

Hülsbergen²,

Biermann³

1998

Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Green (1976) claimed "Low agricultural productivity is energy efficient, high agricultural productivity is energy demanding" (642). Many studies have found reduced energy inputs result in reduced EI for low-input systems (Berardi 1978;Pimentel et al 1983;Dalgaard et al 2001;Hoeppner et al 2006;Alonso and Guzmán 2008;Cruse et al 2010;Gündogmus 2010;MacRae et al 2010;Aluvione et al 2011;Zentner et al 2011). Reduced NEY for low-input systems is also a common finding, as indicated by the review of 78 different crops by Alonso and Guzmán (2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Pulse Crops Improve Energy Intensity and Productivity of Cereal Production in Montana, USA

Burgess¹,

Miller²,

Jones³

2012

Journal of Sustainable Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Proponents of alternative or reducedinput agricultural systems have typically used farm-level comparisons of these two systems as a major research tool (e.g., Berardi, 1978 . But as will be stressed later, critics of alternative agriculture have not used actual farm data in their research.…”

Section: Comparisons Of Organic and Conventional Agriculture: A Methomentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced-input agricultural systems: Rationale and prospects

Buttel¹,

Gillespie

Janke

et al. 1986

Am J Alt Ag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In many respects the long standing and vigorous debates over alternative agriculture and organic farming are becoming less strident and less polarized. However, despite the mounting evidence that key elements of both the conventional and alternative agricultural communities are beginning to "build bridges" to each other, and to establish formal institutional programs and arrangements for improved communication and program development, important differences continue to separate the proponents and opponents of alternative agriculture. In part, these lingering differences result from the lack of adequate and reliable data, misinformation, and faulty data analyses. In order to clarify those issues which continue to divide the critics and advocates of alternative agriculture, this reappraisal of the debate begins with a methodological critique of comparison studies of conventional and organic farms. Also included is an assessment of fertilizer and pesticide use in American agriculture, the environmental impacts of conventional and reduced-input systems, the relationship between alternative agriculture and efforts to save the family farmer, and the prospects for increased public sector research on reduced-input farming systems.

show abstract

Organic and conventional wheat production: Examination of energy and economics

Cited by 53 publications

References 3 publications

Management‐related material and energy balances for the rating of production intensity and environmental acceptability of land use

Management‐related material and energy balances for the rating of production intensity and environmental acceptability of land use

Pulse Crops Improve Energy Intensity and Productivity of Cereal Production in Montana, USA

Reduced-input agricultural systems: Rationale and prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About