Francais | English | Espanõl

Industrial agriculture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Image:Herdim.JPG

Industrial agriculture, also known as factory farming, refers to the industrialized production of livestock, poultry, fish, and crops. The methods deployed are geared toward making use of economies of scale to produce the highest output at the lowest cost. The practice is widespread in developed nations, and most of the meat, dairy, eggs, and crops available in supermarkets are produced in this manner[citation needed].

Contents

[edit] History

The practice of industrial agricultureses is a relatively recent development in the history of agriculture, and the result of scientific discoveries and technological advances. Innovations in agriculture beginning in the late 1800s generally parallel developments in mass production in other industries that characterized the Industrial Revolution. The identification of nitrogen and phosphorus as critical factors in plant growth led to the manufacture of synthetic fertilizers, making possible more intensive types of agriculture. The discovery of vitamins and their role in animal nutrition, in the first two decades of the 20th century, led to vitamin supplements, which in the 1920s allowed certain livestock to be raised indoors, reducing their exposure to adverse natural elements. The discovery of antibiotics in the 1940s facilitated raising livestock in larger numbers by reducing disease. Chemicals developed for use in World War II gave rise to synthetic pesticides. Developments in shipping networks and technology have made long-distance distribution of agricultural produce feasible.

[edit] Animals

[edit] Arguments in favor

Proponents say that large-scale, intensive farming is a useful and proven agricultural advance.

  • Low cost — Intensive agriculture is necessary to meet demand for affordable food.[citation needed]
  • Efficient — Animals in confinement can be supervised more closely than free-ranging animals, and diseased animals can be treated faster. Further, more efficient production of meat, milk, or eggs results in a need for fewer animals to be raised, thereby limiting the impact of agriculture on the environment.
  • Safe — Properly run factory farms meet and exceed the government standards for safe and humane food production of the countries in which they are located. Sometimes, as with the case of regulated aquaculture, it can actually be more environment friendly since it reduces the dependence of deep sea fishing and trawling ships that cause damage to the ecosystem and the catch in the long run.[citation needed]
  • Economic contribution — The high input costs of agricultural operations result in a large influx and distribution of capital to a rural area from distant buyers rather than simply recirculating existing capital. A single dairy cow contributes over $1300 US to a local rural economy each year, each beef cow over $800, meat turkey $14, and so on. As Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Dennis Wolff states, “Research estimates that the annual economic impact per cow is $13,737. In addition, each $1 million increase in PA milk sales creates 23 new jobs. This tells us that dairy farms are good for Pennsylvania's economy.” <ref>Dairy in Pennsylvania: A VITAL ELEMENT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT[1]</ref>
  • Industry is responsible and self-regulating — Organizations representing factory farm operators claim to be proactive and self-policing when it comes to improving practices according to the latest food safety and environmental findings. A 2002 article by a representative of the U.S. Poultry & Egg Association, arguing against increased CAFO regulation, stated, "Poultry growers, largely free of regulatory controls, are managing their litter in an environmentally sound, agronomically beneficial manner."<ref>Starkey, John. CAFO Revisions: Regulation Without Purpose?, WATT PoultryUSA: January 2002.</ref>

Proponents also dispute the foodborne illness argument. They note the fact that E. coli grows naturally in most mammals, including humans, and that only a few strains of E. coli are potentially hazardous to humans. They also note that diseases naturally occur among chickens and other animals. Properly cooking food can effectively remove risk factors by killing bacteria. Proponents argue that there is widespread demand for a cheap, reliable source of meat.

[edit] Arguments against

Hardy Meyers chicken operation near Petal, Mississippi

Opponents say that what they refer to as factory farming is cruel,<ref>"Cruelty to Animals: Mechanized Madness", PETA</ref><ref>Comis, Don, USDA Agricultural Research Service. "Settling Doubts about Livestock Stress." in Agricultural Research. March 2005. p. 4-7.</ref><ref>Smith, Lewis W., USDA Agricultural Research Service. “Forum – Helping Industry Ensure Animal Well-Being.” in Agricultural Research. March 2005. p. 2.</ref>, poses health risks, and causes environmental damage.

In 2003, a Worldwatch Institute publication stated that "factory farming methods are creating a web of food safety, animal welfare, and environmental problems around the world, as large agribusinesses attempt to escape tighter environmental restrictions in the European Union and the U.S. by moving their animal production operations to less developed countries." <ref>Nierenberg, Danielle. Factory Farming in the Developing World World Watch Magazine: May/June 2003.</ref>

Arguments and claims include:

  • Air and water pollution — Large quantities and concentrations of waste are produced <ref>Facts about Pollution from Livestock Farms. National Resource Defense Council. Retrieved on 2006-05-30.</ref>. Lakes, rivers, and groundwater are at risk when animal waste is improperly recycled. Pollutant gases are also emitted. Dust, fly, and odor problems can be created for people living in the immediate region.
  • Cruel — Crowding, drugging, and performing surgery on animals. Chicks are debeaked hours after birth, commonly by slicing off the beak with a hot blade. Confining hens and pigs in barren environments leads to physical problems such as osteoporosis and joint pain, and also boredom and frustration, as shown by repetitive or self-destructive behaviour known as stereotypes.<ref>"The Welfare of Intensively Kept Pigs - Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee - Adopted 30 September 1997, European Commission, and "Opinion of the AHAW Panel related to the welfare aspects of various systems of keeping laying hens", European Food Safety Authority (7-Mar-2005)</ref>
  • Resource overuse — Large populations of animals require a commensurately large amount of water and are depleting water resources in some areas. [citation needed]
  • Tracking — With the intensive farming system it is difficult to track the source of food, let alone food borne disease, back to particular animals. Sometimes food purchased on one side of the country may have been produced on the other side. Hamburger meat may contain the meat of as many as 1000 cows.<ref> Scholosser, Eric, interview with Morgan Spurlock; This causes concern among consumers concerning the origin of foods and among government officials concerning the origin of disease. The National Animal Identification System is one proposed way the USDA is attempting to remedy this problem. With traditional farming techniques this problem is eliminated because the consumer can buy directly from the producer. <ref>Schlosser, Eric, Fast Food Nation; </ref><ref>Eisnitz, Gail, Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry</ref>

Opponents believe that intensive farming is responsible for many foodborne illnesses and many food safety risks. An estimated one out of every four cattle that enters a slaughterhouse may host toxic forms of the bacteria E. coli, [citation needed] and this is blamed on fecal contamination resulting from closely confined animals wallowing in their own manure. A Consumer Reports study[citation needed] of nearly 500 supermarket chickens found campylobacter in 42 percent and salmonella in 12 percent, with up to 90 percent of the bacteria resistant to antibiotics. Eggs pose a salmonella threat to one out of every 50 people each year.[citation needed] In total, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that there are 76 million instances of foodborne illness each year, and more than 5,000 deaths. [citation needed]

[edit] Crops

[edit] Features

  • large scale — hundreds or thousands of acres of a single crop (much more than can be absorbed into the local or regional market);
  • monoculture — large areas of a single crop, often raised from year to year on the same land, or with little crop rotation;
  • agrichemicals — reliance on imported, synthetic fertilizers and pesticides to provide nutrients and to mitigate pests and diseases, these applied on a regular schedule; the use of fertilizer recycled from toxic waste and other hazardous industrial byproducts is common in the US.<ref>Duff, Wilson. "Fear In The Fields -- How Hazardous Wastes Become Fertilizer ...", The Seattle Times: July 3, 1997.</ref>
  • hybrid seed — use of specialized hybrids designed to favor large scale distribution (e.g. ability to ripen off the vine, to withstand shipping and handling);
  • genetically engineered crops — use of GMOs varieties designed for large scale production (e.g. ability to withstand selected herbicides);
  • large scale irrigation — heavy water use, and in some cases, growing of crops in otherwise unsuitable regions by extreme use of water (e.g. rice paddies on arid land).
  • high mechanization

[edit] Criticism

Critics of intensively farmed crops cite a wide range of concerns. On the food quality front, it is held by critics that quality is reduced when crops are bred and grown primarily for cosmetic and shipping characteristics. Environmentally, factory farming of crops is claimed to be responsible for loss of biodiversity, degradation of soil quality, soil erosion, food toxicity (pesticide residues) and pollution (through agrichemical build-ups, and use of fossil fuels for agrichemical manufacture and for farm machinery and long-distance distribution).

Some opponents say that the large chemical and agricultural companies are attempting to gain control over agricultural methods through aggressive litigation and legislation, extending even to the third world to destroy bio-diversity in favor of their "products." In third world countries, governments are confiscating family farms which have fed indigenous peoples for hundreds of years and selling the land to corporate factory farms to sell food overseas[citation needed]. The solution to worldwide starvation, they say, is decentralization and bio-diversity not centralization and bio-centralization in the hands of a few international agricultural businesses. <ref>Garcia, Deborah Koons, The Future of Food</ref>

[edit] Origins of the term "factory farming"

The origin of the term factory farm is not clear, although the Oxford English Dictionary attributes the first recorded use to an American journal of economics in 1890, while it didn't enter pejorative use until the 1960s. <ref>Oxford English Dictionary, Second Ed. - factory</ref> A 1998 documentary film, A Cow at My Table, showed the term being used within the agricultural industry as descriptive of "factory-like" farming operations. In recent decades, the term has been widely used by environmental and animal rights movements, and thus has a negative connotation, at least in public forums. However, it has also been included in modern dictionaries as simply referring to "large-scale agriculture". The term is generally used in opposition to the term family farm.

[edit] Alternatives

The definition of industrial agriculture is somewhat variable, and therefore the proposed alternatives to industrial agriculture are not sharply defined. In general, critics of industrial agriculture advocate decentralized approaches to food production, such as smaller farms serving local farmer's markets or community supported agriculture, and the reduction or elimination of synthetic agents in agriculture.

Some have proposed genetically modified foods as a solution in alleviating some of the issues of industrial agriculture, particularly excess use of pesticides and fertilizers.

A number of countries, including the United States, the member states of the European Union, and Japan have legislated organic production standards. These detailed regulations cover all aspects of agricultural production, processing, storage and transportation. Requirements such as minimum open pasture area for livestock (e.g. cows may require two acres per animal to meet organic standards) effectively preclude factory farming practices. Organic regulations are, however, in the domain of consumer protection, not agricultural policy, and are entirely voluntary.

[edit] References

<references/>

[edit] See also

Image:Commons-logo.svg

[edit] External Links

To meet Wikipedia's content policies, the external links section for this article may require cleanup.
This article may contain excessive or inappropriate external links. See Wikipedia's external links guidelines for further information. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the talk page.
Please remove this tag after the section has been cleaned. This article has been tagged since November 2006.


Government regulation
Proponent, neutral, and industry-related
Criticism of factory farming

fr:Élevage intensif it:Allevamento intensivo he:חקלאות תעשייתית nl:Bio-industrie uk:Промислове сільське господарство

Retrieved from "http://en.wikivisual.com/index.php/Industrial_agriculture"
Personal tools