Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

A meta‐analysis of the differences in environmental impacts between organic and conventional farming

2009; Emerald Publishing Limited; Volume: 111; Issue: 10 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1108/00070700910992925

1758-4108

Koen Mondelaers, Joris Aertsens, Guido Van Huylenbroeck,

Economic and Environmental Valuation

Purpose This paper aims to perform a meta‐analysis of the literature comparing the environmental impacts of organic and conventional farming and linking these to differences in management practises. The studied environmental impacts are related to land use efficiency, organic matter content in the soil, nitrate and phosphate leaching to the water system, greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity. Design/methodology/approach The theoretic framework uses the driver‐state‐response framework and literature data were analysed using meta‐analysis methodology. Meta‐analysis is the statistical analysis of multiple study results. Data were obtained by screening peer reviewed literature. Findings From the paper's meta‐analysis it can conclude that soils in organic farming systems have on average a higher content of organic matter. It can also conclude that organic farming contributes positively to agro‐biodiversity (breeds used by the farmers) and natural biodiversity (wild life). Concerning the impact of the organic farming system on nitrate and phosphorous leaching and greenhouse gas emissions the result of the analysis is not that straightforward. When expressed per production area organic farming scores better than conventional farming for these items. However, given the lower land use efficiency of organic farming in developed countries, this positive effect expressed per unit product is less pronounced or not present at all. Original value Given the recent growth of organic farming and the general perception that organic farming is more environment friendly than its conventional counterpart, it is interesting to explore whether it meets the alleged benefits. By combining several studies in one analysis, the technique of meta‐analysis is powerful and may allow the generation of more nuanced findings and the generalisation of those findings.