Marketing organic/sustainable products

[AlbertaFarmer5]

From what I understand in the other thread, Klause is growing no-till, high quality, high yielding crops with minimal chemicals or fertilizer. Almost organic but not willing to give up all chemistries prohibited by organic certification. All of which sounds more sustainable and environmentally friendly than either conventional high input farming, or organic ( as typically practiced, there are many notable exceptions)

But, the market has no mechanism to reward Klause for doing the right thing, unless he goes full organic. It does however have a very strong incentive to go full organic and perform summerfallow in the desert, and other less than sustainable practices. While at the same time, ironically, putting green labels on all their products. Many of the organic producers also do the right thing and are improving their soils, using no-till when possible, livestock, cover crops etc, but, their products aren't worth any more than the least sustainable organic producer, since the teeth of the organic movement is primarily about prohibited substances rather than enforcing best practices(they certainly encourage sustainable practices, but as far as I know, no one has lost their organic status for causing topsoil or OM loss, but certainly would lose it for using glyphosate).

I don't want this to be an agronomic thread, or bashing any method of production. I want to ask if there is a way to create a market for sustainable/regenerative farm products, parallel to the current organic market? Much like what Gabe Brown has done except on a national/international and commercial scale.

The way I see it, the only ones who would have incentive to create such a market are progressive producers themselves. Existing organic producers, processors and retailers aren't likely to be on side after having established a successful and lucrative market, with large barriers to entry.

I don't think the typical consumer has enough understanding of either production method to make an informed judgement on what is the most "green" or healthy, and a lot of disinformation is spewed by both sides to truly confuse matters. Therefore I don't see the consumer suddenly demanding a sustainbly produced product. Although if asked, they certainly claim to want that. They are demanding a green and healthy product, and rightfully so, even if the two are often mutually exclusive. They believe conventional farmers are trying to kill them and are voting with their wallet in increasing numbers, yet most of us are unwilling to entertain the possibility that we are very efficient at producing something that our end customers are very vocally opposed to. Even many ofthose who can't afford or can't justify the cost of organic, are against our current practices. I was surprised to learn that most consumers don't believe that glyphosate is used as a pre harvest descicant, but are truly horrified when they are finally convinced that it is common place. Are we better off to wait until an ill informed urban majority enforces their will on us, or educate them and present them with a more palatable(both literally and figuratively) option?

I don't see a bright future for mass commodity production any time soon, prices will continue to gravitate to the COP of the lowest cost producer, and the lowest cost producers typically aren't up here in the frozen socialist utopia. Yet there is this vast and growing market which many of us are unwilling, or unable to tap due to the arbitrary and non-science based restrictions required to access the organic market. Myself, after my organic experiment this year, I can see that going back to tillage isn't a price I'm willing to pay for short term financial gain. I'm not aware of anyone, not even Rodale Institute, doing long term continuous no-till without chemicals.

What do my fellow Agriviller's think, is there a potential market for products using the best of both organic and conventional agriculture? And would you be more likely to pursue the premium market if the practices permitted/enforced were also better for your soil and the environment? Do you see any other group who might create this market, or would it have to be farmers? Or am I way off base, and the consumer really doesn't care about sustainability, and farmers are only in it for the short term monetary gain, and the status quo will continue ad infinitum?

[chuckChuck]

Several companies at different levels are incorporating sustainabilty or restrictions on input use into their product requirements. In some cases they pay a small premium but not sure how much.

Your example of Gabe Brown in North Dakota is a good one. He is not organic but has dramatically reduced his chemical and fertilizer use by careful management and rotating intensively grazed livestock production and crop production. His yields are very good if not higher than the county average. The primary economic benefit he receives is a lower cost of production which increases his net income.

Gabe Brown's farm is likely the way of the future for the majority of farms that can do this.

[farmaholic]

Two ways of being more profitable ....on the production side and on the marketing side. Combined, its even better!

VERY GOOD POST AF5

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Gabe Brown's farm is likely the way of the future for the majority of farms that can do this.

I actually hope you are right, at least on the production side. But not on the marketing side. The Browns had to develop their own market, their own brand and do all the footwork, travelling, delivery. As a producer, I'd rather concentrate on what I'm good at, growing things, than have to spend my time on direct marketing, not to mention the lack of efficiency of every producer reinventing the wheel and competing with each other for market.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Two ways of being more profitable ....on the production side and on the marketing side. Combined, its even better!

VERY GOOD POST AF5

Thanks farmaholic, so does this model work in the slum of the ghetto? Would you adopt sustainable practices if the market existed?

[farmaholic]

Nothing works in the Slum of the Ghetto AF5....I'll respond with more detail later.

[tweety]

high yielding crops with minimal chemicals or fertilizer.

The fertilizer part is not sustainable. No matter what cropping system you use, if you take off 30 lbs of phosphate, you need to replace it with 30 lbs of phosphate. Same thing with all the other nutrients

[farmaholic]

Braveheart, wasn't there a "Pesticide Free Production" model running at one time?

I already do things to reduce pesticides. Not every acre gets a preharvest app. Not one drop of fungicide was applied on this farm this year....some people in the area did...how they justified it is beyond me. No insecticdes this year either and just expanded a midge tolerant wheat for seed purposes for the next three or so years if it fits the agronomic bill after another year or two look at it. I'm a cheap bastard so don't like applying pesticides if unwarranted or for nothing or because I like sitting in a sprayer all spring, summer and fall!!! I don't believe in mining the soil either, what's taken needs.to be replaced...somehow. if that means synthetic fert....so be it. Zero till has done more good for this farm in the last two and a half decades than all the ****ing tillage the previous decades since the sod was turned.

There needs to be a balance found and same new ideas adopted....the uptake is always slow when something new and unusual comes available.

[pgluca]

About 10 or 15 years ago I was approached by a person wondering if I was interested in "Pesticide Free Production" which I understood to mean fertilizer okay, but nothing sprayed on the crop. I considered it for some quite clean land I had, figured I could swath if it got weedy and l could rotate to different parcels and clean up the dirty ones with subsequent conventional production. How ever I never did find out what premium there would be and dropped the idea.

[farmaholic]

Does the public have an appetite (pardon the pun) for all GE(genetic engineered) crops that would supply/fix their own nitrogen, resist insects and diseases in lieu of lower pesticide and fertilizer use?

How much more do they want to pay for what they want?

Has there ever been a time in human history when the bulk of the world population has depended so greatly on so few to supply them with their food? And the dependency continues to grow at an alarming rate. Could you imagine the chaos if real hunger became a world-wide problem....then would it matter how the food is grown/produced.

(Demoted to trucking....the circle of life continues)

[grassfarmer]

I actually hope you are right, at least on the production side. But not on the marketing side. The Browns had to develop their own market, their own brand and do all the footwork, travelling, delivery. As a producer, I'd rather concentrate on what I'm good at, growing things, than have to spend my time on direct marketing, not to mention the lack of efficiency of every producer reinventing the wheel and competing with each other for market.

Not too familiar with what Browns do on the grain side by way of direct marketing but I know they do it on the livestock/poultry side. I think it's going to be more difficult to direct market grains or legumes - unless of course you are prepared to take it right to retail ready bags of flour etc.
Here is a story of one family in our area who just that.

[URL="http://www.producer.com/2014/02/on-farm-millers-prefer-safe-steady-growth/"]http://http://www.producer.com/2014/02/on-farm-millers-prefer-safe-steady-growth/[/URL]

It's the nature of direct marketing that if you want the increased margins you've got to be prepared to do the extra work. Maybe klause has a market lined up for filling tote bags into containers and exporting product? Most farmers want to concentrate on production so the trade off is you get commodity price. Personally I don't see a large market for "not organic-not conventional" crop products - it would be hard to explain to consumers.
It is just what we have done with our grass-fed beef of course - developed a market for non-organic but also non-conventional product. Grass-fed has become a category of it's own recognized by consumers but it didn't happen over night. So in short I think heading the direction Gabe Brown has gone is a good thing and will help farm profitability but I think the benefit on the crop side will come from reduced production costs (less purchased inputs) rather than getting a premium for the crops per se. I also think it is critical that some livestock are on the land and the way Gabe combines that with his cropping and collects the premiums on the livestock direct marketing side is a very strong business model.

[farmaholic]

.....then my "laziness" will keep me poor.

[jamesb]

The "Pesticide Free Production" or PFP system was used by a few guys in my area years ago. http://umanitoba.ca/outreach/naturalagriculture/articles/pfpguide.html
Guys were picking clean fields and going a year with no incrop chemicals. There was a ready market but the thing that killed PFP was the full organic guys themselves. They saw the PFP guys as stealing or undercutting their market (rightly or wrongly). I would have thought that the organic guys would welcome more convention farmers reducing chemical use but because it wasn't full organic or transition cropping it was rejected. Sad really

[AlbertaFarmer5]

90 replies to the bash organics thread, constant threads about the evil input suppliers and their grand conspiracy to keep us buying more and more, even more posts about low commodity prices, yet only 12 replies to a thread offering a potential solution. So evidently, no on is interested. Does that mean that we only want to vent our frustrations and blame someone else, not look for solutions?

From the agronomics perspective. I can see growing a crop with no in crop chemicals being viable here at least. I can also see not allowing chemicals past a certain stage, such that there could never be residues. Or take it further, and keep the organic rules, but allow exceptions to encourage no-till. Namely, the ability to kill a cover crop with chemicals, with a long list of criteria which must be met first.

[pourfarmer]

I started to read the post, but then came this part:

"But, the market has no mechanism to reward Klause for doing the right thing, unless he goes full organic. It does however have a very strong incentive to go full organic and perform summerfallow in the desert, and other less than sustainable practices."

Talk about ignorant, since when has COR ever preached summerfallow, especially in the desert? Or any other "less than sustainable" practices. Fertility/Weed management is left up the operator, he/she may decide to summerfallow, or decide to do a green manure plowdown. He/she may decide to do neither, and continuous crop until the thistles take over and they are forced to sell to FJLIP

If you want to harp on the down falls of organic production at least learn about it first.