Cálculo de la capacidad de carga turística

Organic farming, whose origins (along with biodynamic agriculture) date back to the early 20th century, is commonly perceived as being primarily focused on the non-use of synthetic chemicals in agriculture. While this is (up to a point) a characteristic of the approach, it does not address what organic management involves instead - not using synthetic inputs and doing nothing else (organic farming by default) is likely to lead to failure in productivity, financial and environmental sustainability terms.

Organic farming can be defined as an approach to agriculture where the aim is to create integrated, humane, environmentally and economically sustainable production systems

environmental protection, resource use sustainability, animal welfare, food security, safety and quality, social justice and financial viability. Maximum reliance is placed on locally or farm-derived, renewable resources (working as far as possible within closed cycles) and the management of self-regulating ecological and biological processes and interactions, in order to provide acceptable levels of crop, livestock and human nutrition, protection from pests and diseases, and an appropriate return to the human and other resources employed. Reliance on external inputs, whether chemical or organic, is reduced as far as possible in order to promote a self-reliant, self-sustaining system.

The term 'organic', first used in this context in the 1940s, refers less to the type of inputs used, and more to the concept of the farm as an organism (or system in modern terminology), in which all the component parts – the soil minerals, organic matter, micro- organisms, insects, plants, animals and humans – interact to create a coherent and stable whole. In many European countries, organic agriculture is known as biological or ecological agriculture, reflecting the emphasis on biology and ecosystem management. In other parts of the world, ecological or biological farming are sometimes used to refer to agroecological systems that are not certified organic.

The ideas and principles underpinning organic farming as a coherent concept go back almost 100 years (e.g. to King (1911); see also Lockeretz (2007)). Since then, different issues have come to the fore at different times, from soil conservation and the dustbowls in the 1930s (Howard, 1940; Balfour, 1943), to pesticides following the publication of Silent Spring (Carson, 1962), energy following the 1973 oil crisis (Lockeretz, 1977), and more recently to current concerns about animal welfare, biodiversity loss, climate change, resource depletion and food security. These ideas are reflected in the four fundamental principles of organic farming – health, ecology, fairness and care – defined by the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM, 2005).

The key elements of organic farming practice are described in Lampkin (2003); Lampkin et al. (2014) and in more detail in Lampkin (1990). Although the regulations focus on input restriction, particularly with respect to synthetic fertilisers, pesticides and genetically modified organisms (in part because inputs are easier to audit), organic farming practices include:

 Maintaining soil fertility using crops such as legumes and green manures;

 Conserving nutrients by aiming to close cycles, avoiding waste and unnecessary exports, and recycling nutrients where possible;

 Using relatively insoluble mineral nutrient sources, e.g. rock phosphate, in preference to high solubility or processed forms;

 Reducing energy use, and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources;

 Using shallow ploughing and reduced tillage techniques to protect the soil and its biological activity;

 Managing manures and slurries to conserve nutrients and avoid pollution, including through composting;

 Using crop rotations and polycultures to restore soil fertility, help control weed, pest and disease problems; provide sufficient livestock feed and maintain a profitable system;

 Replacing biocides for weed, pest and disease control with preventive cultural measures, supplemented by mechanical, thermal and biological controls if required;  Integrating livestock with cropping systems (except in the case of stockless

horticultural and arable farms), with both ruminants and non-ruminants ranging freely (i.e. no intensive, permanently-housed pig, poultry and feedlot cattle production);  Relying as far as possible on home-grown feeds for livestock, limiting stocking rates

to levels consistent with the EU nitrates directive, and thus reducing pollution risks;  Mixing livestock species, such as sheep and cattle or sheep and poultry, to help

 Maintaining animal health through preventive management (including breeding, rearing, feeding and housing) and health plans in preference to prophylactic medication (e.g. with antibiotics or anthelmintics);

 Promoting animal welfare including freedom to exhibit normal behavioural patterns through housing design, stocking rate, restrictions on mutilations, but also through the use of conventional treatments if needed to avoid suffering from disease or injury. The definition of organic farming, and the debate surrounding it, has been further influenced by the development of specialist markets for organic food since the 1970s, a relatively recent development in the history of organic farming (Lockeretz, 2007). In order to maintain the financial viability of organic systems, producers looked to consumers’ willingness to pay higher prices for the perceived benefits of organic food. In some cases, the consumer interest reflected more altruistic environmental, animal welfare and social concerns; in others more ‘self-interested’ concerns relating to food quality and safety, in particular issues relating to pesticide residues and health. To protect consumers and bona fide producers, the development of the organic market involved the development of production standards, both at national level and globally.

As the market for organic produce developed, many countries, including the USA and the EU, introduced legal regulations, which required organic products to be certified before they can be marketed as such. The original EU regulation (EC, 1991) was substantially revised in 2007 (EC, 2007), in particular to include a clearer statement of the underlying principles of organic farming that might be used in future as a basis for determining acceptability, or otherwise, of specific practices. For many, these regulations have become the standard definition of organic farming, even though they contain some black and white distinctions, when in practice shades of grey may be more appropriate. The EU Regulations are being revised in 2015.

Building on the market potential and the environmental and other societal benefits attributed to organic farming, some EU Member States introduced specific policy support for organic farming from the late 1980s. This was extended on an EU-wide basis to support conversion to, and maintenance of, organic farming as an agri-environmental measure from 1994 (under EU Regulation 2078/92 and subsequent Rural Development regulations). The financial support provided recognises both the financial barriers to conversion and the costs of delivering environmental benefits using organic methods on a long-term basis, acknowledging that a minority of consumers paying a premium might not be sufficient to compensate fully for the income foregone.

The specialist markets and regulatory context of organic farming, particularly in the northern hemisphere, have led to some debate about whether some organic farms that achieve organic certification by input substitution rather than redesign (see section 2.2) can really be considered agroecological, and whether the organic concept has become a victim of corporate and political institutionalisation (e.g. Guthman, 2004; Lynggaard, 2006). Given the common heritage of the concepts, this debate may reflect more the different cultural and socio-economic contexts of the respective movements, with agroecology as a movement currently more associated with southern hemisphere contexts such as Latin America. Even so, there is a not insignificant risk that the market and the regulations can be seen as an endpoint for organic producers, rather than a step in developing sustainable systems based on organic/ agroecological principles.