Karen Kl kKl onsky - aic.ucdavis.edu · The Profitability of Organic Agriculture: Lessons from the Sustainable Agriculture Farming Systems Project (SAFS) Dr. Karen Kl kKlonsky

The Profitability of OrganicThe Profitability of Organic Agriculture: Lessons from the

Sustainable Agriculture Farming Systems Project (SAFS)Systems Project (SAFS)

D K Kl kDr. Karen KlonskyDept. of Agricultural & Resource Economics

University of California, Davis

Variety of research areas at Russell Ranch

Riparian Reser e Runoff plots

Main plots

Small plotsHabitat Restoration area

Riparian Reserve Runoff plots

Main plots

Organic plotsFarm buildings

Conventional commercial farmFarm buildings

•Small plots for shorter term investigations: e.g., comparison of cover crop mixes, biofuels crops, impact of continuous cover on soil biology, comparison of drip vs furrow irrigation

•Runoff plots: impact of management on runoff of nutrients and pesticides

•Large plots under organic management, currently unassigned

•Conventional commercial farm: surrounding land leased by neighboring grower, managed conventionally

•Habitat restoration area (as mitigation for UC Davis development)

•Putah Creek Riparian Reserve adjacent to Russell Ranch

Russell Ranch / SAFS HistoryRussell Ranch / SAFS History

Years Events

1992 – 1993Russell Ranch purchased by UC DavisIrrigated, unfertilized Sudan grass planted to create uniform soil fertility conditionssoil fertility conditions

1994 ‐ 2007

Two‐year rotations of processing tomato and corn & othersOrganic, low input, and conventionalEach system/crop combination each year

2003 SAFS relocates to Russell Ranch from Vegetable Crops facility

2003 2007 Each system split into conservation tillage and standard tillage2003 ‐ 2007 Each system split into conservation tillage and standard tillage

2008 ‐ present

Two‐year rotations of processing tomato and wheatOrganic, low input, and conventionalAll t ti tillAll systems are conservation tillage

SAFS Systems and RotationsSAFS Systems and Rotations

Cover crop Tomato Corn

Organic

p

Low input

Conventional

Fall/Winter Spring/Summer Fall/Winter Spring/Summer

YEAR 1 YEAR 2

PRODUCTION PRACTICES AT SAFSPRODUCTION PRACTICES AT SAFS

Tomato Preplant OperationsTomato Preplant Operations

Organic Conventionalg

October/November

Mow residuePlant cover crop

Mow residueSubsoil, disc, roll, triplanePrepare beds

December

January Spray weeds

FebruaryFebruary

March Spray weeds

April Mow cover cropApply compost

Smooth bedsStarter fertilizerApply compost

Ground prepMake beds

Starter fertilizer

May Transplant TransplantMay Transplant TransplantSidedress fertilizer

Tomato bed managementTomato bed management

1 Strip till1. Strip till

2. Full bed mulch

3 S i ill d il3. Strip till detail

1

2 3

FertilityFertility

OrganicTOMATOLow Input Conventional

Cover crop 1994 ‐ 2006 2004 – 2006 only

Chicken manureRates reduced after 1997after 1997

Synthetic N None1994 – 2003 = conv2004 – 2006 reduced

15‐15‐15, ammonium sulfate

Organic CORN

Low Input Conventional

Cover crop 1994 ‐ 2006 1994 ‐ 2006Cover crop 1994 2006 1994 2006

Chicken manure Same as tomato

Synthetic N None None Urea

Fertility ‐ 2007Fertility 2007


Cover crop Bell beans/vetch Bell beans/vetch

Poultry compost 4 tons

Synthetic N

Preplant15 – 15 ‐15 @ 45 lbs.

Preplant15‐15‐15 @ 45 lbs.

Sidedress21 0 0 24 @100 lbs21‐0‐0‐24 @100 lbs.

Organic CORN


Cover crop Bell beans/vetch Bell beans/vetch

Poultry compost 4 tons

Synthetic NPost plant 46‐0‐0 @ 165 lbs.Sidedress 15‐15‐15 @ 45 lbs.

Oats/vetch/bell bean mixOats/vetch/bell bean mix

Reel chopping cover crop to initiate d ddry down prior to incorporation

Cover crop and incorporationp p

2 Bell bean/wheat cover crop2. Bell bean/wheat cover crop

3. Bed disc for full incorporation

l il i4. Flail mowing cover crop

Weed control ‐ 2007Weed control 2007


TillageStrip till 5XCultivate 4X

Strip till 5XCultivate 3X

Strip till 2XCultivate 2X

Hand hoeing 35 hours 11 hours 6 hoursg

HerbicideMay July

February May JulyJuly

Organic CORN


Tillage Cultivate 3X Cultivate 2X Cultivate 2X

bi idFebruary

ilHerbicideMay

AprilMay

Pest control ‐ 2007Pest control 2007


Insecticide/Miticide Oberon 8.5 oz. Oberon 8.5 oz.

Worms Sulfur 20 lbs. Sulfur 20 lbs.

COST OF PRODUCTOINCultural Costs

COST OF PRODUCTOIN

Costs of Production by Management CategoryCosts of Production by Management Category

Fertility Weed control Pest control

Tomato conventional

y

Tomato ‐ organic

Field corn ‐ conventional

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Field corn ‐ organic

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

$ per Acre

Cost of Production ‐ CornCost of Production Corn

Organic ‐ $465/A Conventional ‐ $390/AOrganic ‐ $465/AGround prep$34 7% Cover crop

Manage residue$17 4%

Conventional ‐ $390/A

Ground prep$23

Manage residue$17 Cover crop

$75 16%Compost

$171 37%

$23 6%

Weed controlFertilize

$4%

Weed control$29 6%

control$85 22%

Fertilize$99 25%

Plant$56 12%Irrigate

$83

Plant$86 22%

Irrigate$80 21%

18%

Comparison of Cultural Costs – CornOrganic $465/A ~ Conventional $390/A

$23G d

$75

$34

$85

$23

W d t l

Cover crop

Ground prep

$56

$29

$80

$86

$85

I i

Plant

Weed control

Conventional

$171

$83

$17

$99

$80

Fertilizer/Compost

Irrigate Organic

$17 $17

0 50 100 150 200

Manage residue

$$ per Acre

Cost of Production ‐ TomatoCost of Production Tomato

Organic ‐ $1 432/A Conventional ‐ $1 012/AOrganic ‐ $1,432/AGround prep$45 3%

Cover crop$72Pest

Compost$184 13%

Manage residue

$7 1%

Conventional ‐ $1,012/A

Ground prep$13 Fertilize

Manage residue$393% $72

5%

Weed control

Irrigate

Pest control$65 5%

13% 1% $13 1%

Weed control$205

Pest control

Fertilize$96 10%

$39 4%

$379 26%

Irrigate$105 7%

$205 20%

Irrigate$90

$73 7%

Plant$575

Plant$496

9%

40% 49%

Comparison of Cultural Costs – TomatoOrganic $1,432/A ~ Conventional $1,012/A

13Ground prep

379

72

45

0

13

Weed control

Cover crop

Ground prep

105

575

379

90

496

Irrigate

Plant

Conventional

65

184

73

96

Insect control

Fertilizer/Compost Organic

739

0 200 400 600 800

Manage residue

$$ per Acre

REVENUEYield and Price

REVENUE

Processing Tomato HarvesterProcessing Tomato Harvester

P i T HProcessing Tomato Harvester

Processing Tomato HarvestProcessing Tomato Harvest

Average Tomato Yields2003 ‐ 2007

35

25

30

15

20

ns per acre

5

10

15

Ton

0

5

Conv CT Conv ST Low CT Low ST Org CT Org STConv CT Conv ST Low CT Low ST Org CT Org ST

2007 Tomato Yields2007 Tomato Yields

45

35

40

20

25

30

ns per acre

10

15

Ton

0

5


Average Corn Yields 2003 ‐ 2007

12000

8000

10000

6000

8000

ns per acre

2000

4000

Ton

0

2000


2007 Corn Yields2007 Corn Yields

45

35

40

20

25

30

10

15

20

0

5


Organic and Conventional PricesProcessing Tomatoes

120

100

60

80

per ton

Organic

20

40

$

Conventional

0

20

89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 0989 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09

Organic and Conventional PricesfCorn for Grain

300

250

150

200

per ton

Organic

50

100

$

Conventional

0

50

92 94 96 98 00 02 04 0692 94 96 98 00 02 04 06

NET RETURNS2007

NET RETURNS

Revenue, Operating Costs, and Net Returns

PROCESSING TOMATOES 2007PROCESSING TOMATOES 2007Organic Conventional Low Input

2,865 3,000

3,500

g p

1,644

2,190

1 487

2,000

2,500

1,221 1,038 1,152

1,487

1,061

426

1,000

1,500

426

‐

500

Revenue Cost Net returnsRevenue Cost Net returns

Runoff as a Percentage of Rainfall Events Cover crop – organic and low inputCover crop organic and low input

Manure – organic only

Organic Low Input Conventional

38%36%

g p

18%

8%

18%

10%

3% 4%2% 3% 2%3% 3% 2% 3% 4%

Feb. 7 Feb. 9 Feb. 18 Feb. 20 March 9

Revenue, Operating Costs, and Net Returns

CORN 2007CORN 2007Organic Conventional Low Input

1,075 1,074

1,000

1,200

g p

485590

756

600

800

485

318 312 265

200

400

600

47

‐

200

Revenue Cost Net returnsRevenue Cost Net returns

RESOURCE USERESOURCE USE

Labor Hours by Management Category Fi ld CField Crops

Machine Labor Hand Labor

Tomato conventional

Tomato ‐ organic

Field corn ‐ conventional

0 10 20 30 40 50

Field corn ‐ organic

0 10 20 30 40 50

Hours per Acre

Fuel Use for Cultural PracticesFuel Use for Cultural Practices

FuelFuel(Gallons/Acre)

Times over the Field

O C O CO C O C

Tomatoes 57 51

Corn 33 37

Average Water UseAverage Water Use

Corn Tomato49

37

44

40

50

Corn Tomato

37

2931

19

30

40

nches

19

10

20

Acre in

0

Organic Low Input ConventionalOrganic Low Input Conventional

Sources of NitrogenSources of NitrogenOrganicTomato

Low InputTomato

ConventionalTomato

Cover crop 1994 ‐ 2006 2004 – 2006 only

Chicken manureRates reduced after 1997after 1997

Synthetic N None1994 – 2003 = conv2004 – 2006 reduced

15‐15‐15, ammonium sulfate

OrganicCorn

Low InputCorn

ConventionalCorn

Cover crop 1994 ‐ 2006Cover crop 1994 2006

Chicken manureHigher than for

tomatoes

Synthetic N None None Urea

Corn Nitrogen Inputs 02 ‐ 06Corn Nitrogen Inputs 02 06

250

200

e

150

per hectare

Manure

Cover Crop

50

100

Kg N p Cover Crop

Fertilizer

0

Conventional Organic Low InputConventional Organic Low Input

Tomato Nitrogen Inputs 04 ‐ 06Tomato Nitrogen Inputs 04 06

250

200

e

150

per hectare

Manure

Fertilizer

50

100

Kg N p Fertilizer

Cover Crop

0


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTSENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Corn Nitrogen lInputs, Outputs, Balance

250

200

e

150

per hectare

Inputs

Output

50

100

Kg N p Output

Balance

0


Tomato Nitrogen lInputs, Outputs, Balance

250

200

e

150

per hectare

Inputs

Output

50

100

Kg N p Output

Balance

0


Nitrogen Balance (Corn and Tomato)Soil Storage and UnaccountedSoil Storage and Unaccounted

Accumulated 1994 ‐ 20064,000

3,000

3,500

e

2,000

2,500

per hectare

Unaccounted

1,000

1,500

Kg N p Soil Storage

0

500

Organic Low Input ConventionalOrganic Low Input Conventional

Nitrous Oxide EmissionsNitrous Oxide Emissions

450

350

400

r)

200

250

300

g/M

2/hour

No cover

100

150

200

N2O (m Cover Crop

0

50

C ti Till St d d TillConservation Tillage Standard Tillage

Nitrous Oxide EmissionsNitrous Oxide Emissions

• Emissions were higher with winter legumeEmissions were higher with winter legume cover crops for both tillage systems

• This may be the result of adding N to the soil• This may be the result of adding N to the soil in a form that can be transformed into N2O under ideal soil moisture and temperatureunder ideal soil moisture and temperature conditions

Soil organic carbon in the top 30 cmSoil organic carbon in the top 30 cm

55

50

e

Cover crop every yearHigh inputmanure

45

per hectare

Organic

Low Input

Cover cropevery year

manure

Cover crop every other year

35

40

Mg C Low Input

ConventionalConservation

Tillage

30

1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 20071993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007

Runoff as a Percentage of Rainfall EventsStandard Tillage ‐ 1999

4%

2%3%

35%

4%

F b 20

March 9

2%

8%

4%

10%Feb. 18

Feb. 20

Conventional

Low Input

4%

2%

4%

8%

38%Feb. 9

Feb. 18 Low Input

Organic

3%

4%

3%18%

7‐Feb

Conventional — Winter Fallowed

Organic and Low Input — Winter Cover Cropped

Runoff Water Quality ‐ 2007Runoff Water Quality 2007

Conventional Low Input Organic

Applied Detected Applied Detected Applied Detected

Tillam (herbicide) X x X x ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐Tillam (herbicide) X x X x ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

Trifluralin (pre‐emergent herbicide) X ‐‐‐‐‐ X ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

M l hl (h bi id ) X X X XMetolachlor (herbicide) X X X X ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

L‐cyhalothrin (pyrethroid insecticide) X ‐‐‐‐‐‐ X ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

Runoff Water Quality ‐ 2007Low Input and Conventional Systems

Standard Conservation Tillage Tillage

% of Samples % of Samples

Tillam (herbicide) .05% ‐‐‐‐‐‐

Trifluralin (pre‐emergent herbicide) ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

Metolachlor (herbicide) 63% 25%

L‐cyhalothrin (pyrethroid insecticide) ‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐

Runoff Water Quality ‐ 2007Pesticide Concentration


0 25

0.3

0.35

mg/m

l)p

0.15

0.2

0.25

on in

ppb (m

0

0.05

0.1

oncentratio

0

Conservation Tillage Standard Tillage

Co

Note: No pesticides were found in organic system runoff

Sweeping Generalizations About Organic AgricultureOrganic Agriculture(at least in California)

• Relies on cover crops, compost, and sometimes liquid p , p , qfertilizers

• Fertility costs more than for conventional

• Only crops that rely on hand hoeing for weed control use hand hoeing in organic

• When used labor costs for hand hoeing are higher• When used, labor costs for hand hoeing are higher

• Fewer pest and disease control tools are available

• Some crops are easier to grow organically than othersSome crops are easier to grow organically than others

• Organic price premiums vary from crop to crop but are not trending downward over time

Cover Crop Impacts Not Captured in d lCost and Return Analyses

• May delay planting in SpringMay delay planting in Spring

• May replace a cash crop in a rotation

• Reduces winter runoff• Reduces winter runoff

• Improves the quality of winter runoff

I b t ti• Increases carbon sequestration

• May increase greenhouse gas emissions

• Provides habitat

• Reduces erosion

Documents

Karen Kl kKl onsky - aic.ucdavis.edu · The Profitability of Organic Agriculture: Lessons from the Sustainable Agriculture Farming Systems Project (SAFS) Dr. Karen Kl kKlonsky