Abstract
In the decades following the Green Revolution, industrial monoculture has quickly become the dominant model of agriculture in the United States. Despite its economic benefits and high crop yield, monocultures have diminished biodiversity and operate on massive amounts of agrochemical inputs, which have caused extensive ecological and human damage. In hopes of shifting agriculture to a greater moral standing, agro-ecological models have been formulated that incorporate ecosystem processes into farming. Agro-ecology has culminated in the practice of permaculture, which enables ecological regeneration while growing crops in a sustainable manner. Permaculture is in its early stages of development, and agricultural engineers must shift their efforts to improving its design and feasibility for widespread use.
Introduction
The shift to industrial monoculture began when agronomist Norman Borlaug engineered a vastly improved set of plant strains. These included a “miracle wheat” which tripled normal yields, as well as new maize and rice strains that showed similar success [1]. Borlaug’s new plant varieties responded well to nitrogenous fertilizer and could survive extreme rainy seasons, especially when grown in monoculture plots [2]. Farms were improved in tandem with the new plant strains, where engineers focused on inputting fertilizer to new monocultures. These innovations led to the implementation of industrial monoculture around the world, creating secure agriculture industries in previously import-dependent countries like Pakistan and India [1]. Within this 40-year period of agricultural productivity, commonly known as the Green Revolution, global fertilizer usage increased tenfold [2]. Industrial monoculture has remained the global method of choice since the Green Revolution.
In recent decades, agriculture around the world has become dominated by a single form of efficient, all-out production: industrial monoculture. By planting only one species of crop in a massive plot, industrial monoculture optimizes the cultivation of dynamic cash crops like corn, soybeans, and wheat. This practice enables farmers to grow produce at the artificially high rates necessary to tap into an opportune and growing agricultural market. The practice of industrial monoculture emerged in the 1960s, where it ended a period of low farming production and underwhelming food output for the burgeoning world population.
However, the practice of industrial monoculture throughout the last decades has also yielded unexpected long-term environmental impacts. Industrial monocultures utilize harmful techniques and resources to produce their high crop yields. The root of the problem lies in a concerning loss of biodiversity, which stems from massive amounts of water used for irrigation and an increased reliance on fertilizer and pesticides [1]. The biodiversity loss in these one-plant systems leads to a greater dependence on artificial resources, unlike in natural ecosystems, where biodiversity is used to self-sustain. To address the ecological burden created by the industrial monoculture system, agricultural engineers and farmers must develop a new sustainable system of industrial scale agriculture: the ecologically integrated, multi-crop model of permaculture.
The Industrial Monoculture System and its Ecological Consequences
Monoculture plots cover 80% of arable land around the world, and account for 440 million acres of land in the United States [3]. The overwhelming use of monocultures in the agriculture industry lies in their economic benefits. The process of planting and maintaining a single crop in a monocultural plot is much more cost-effective than keeping up a variety of crops. Fertilization and tillage tend to vary from crop to crop, making a one-crop system preferable from a pure efficiency standpoint [4]. Additionally, the steady market for certain high-demand crops, such as corn, provides economic incentive to plant monocultures. For example, the U.S. produces, consumes, and exports the most corn in the world, with about 90 million acres planted each year [5]. This production, encouraged by the increasing price of corn, is supplemented by large-scale monocultures that increase corn yield per acre. Corn is used in a variety of food products, livestock feeds, and biofuels [5], which generate a stable demand that supports the continuation of monoculture.
U.S. agricultural policy has played a significant role in incentivizing corn production, and therefore growing industrial monoculture acreage. The Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 allowed farmers to make decisions on which crops to plant based on their economic returns, causing an increase from 60 million acres of corn in 1983 to 90 million in 2018 [5]. This acreage increase was needed to match a growing market for ethanol, which is a type of biofuel used in gasoline that uses 45% of U.S. corn [5]. In the United States, corn is currently an $86 billion industry–in no small part because of the rise of ethanol. This free policy and the growing market for corn encouraged the pure efficiency provided by industrial monocultures. This makes industrial monocultures the farm of choice from a utilitarian perspective, as the economic returns of industrial monoculture provide the most benefit to both the farmers and the agricultural industry.
However, the industrial monoculture results in dire ecological consequences which undermine the benefits of the system. When only one crop is planted on a plot with thousands of acres, the resulting anthropogenic “ecosystem” is missing the web of biodiversity typically found in nature. This web sustains nature by creating an equilibrium that prevents species extinction and ecological disasters. Without this biodiversity, industrial monocultures have less ecological resistance and are prone to being overtaken by pests and weeds. This unnaturally low ecological resistance creates a dependence on pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer to carry out the functions that biodiversity would otherwise fulfill [6]. Most inputs are synthetic, and therefore result in ecological health impacts. For example, a common herbicide for corn monocultures is atrazine, which is also an endocrine disruptor that leads to reproductive abnormalities in small animals [6]. Additionally, chemical nitrogenous fertilizers like nitrate have been found to infiltrate aquifers [6]. Nitrate levels are now exceeding healthy amounts in 25% of U.S. wells, with known links to hemoglobinemia (increased blood clot risk) in children and bladder cancers in adults [6]. These impacts on animal and human health are a direct result of these synthetic inputs, which are necessary to maintain industrial monocultures.
Dependence on chemical inputs goes hand in hand with genetically engineered crop strains, which further the ecological problems of monoculture. Transgenic (gene-altered) crops, like Norman Borlaug’s famous miracle wheat, add an artificial genetic element to the ecosystem. These genetically engineered crops commonly hybridize with wild weeds to form superweeds that are resistant to herbicides [7]. As a result of hybridization and superweeds, herbicide use must increase. For example, herbicide-resistant ‘Roundup Ready’ seeds were implemented across U.S. farms in 1996. These seeds were engineered to be resistant to herbicides, in hopes that if herbicide could be applied post-planting, it would decrease the amount used. However, after five years there was an infestation of superweeds in over 50% of those farms [7]. This resulted in the input of 404 million pounds of herbicide [8]. This highlights the fact that without biodiversity, monoculture fields are vulnerable to hybridization, which results in the rise of superweeds and herbicide use.
Additionally, the industrial-scale use of synthetic fertilizer within monocultures results in larger-scale ecological impacts. Nitrogenous fertilizers generate nitrogen-rich runoff that results in “dead zones” with low oxygen levels in water bodies [6]. This high nitrogen content in these dead zones causes algal blooms that harm marine ecosystems. Furthermore, monoculture nitrogen fertilizers contribute to the emission of nitrous oxide (N2O), an extremely potent greenhouse gas that accelerates ozone depletion and climate warming [6].
Perhaps the most disastrous environmental impact of industrial monoculture is soil erosion. For example, when corn monocultures were adopted in the Midwest, soil erosion in the area increased tenfold [6]. Monoculture plots typically have weaker soil structure due to the unnatural, simplified root system, which eventually decreases the natural productivity of the land. Erosion creates the need for more pesticide input to control a soil profile that lacks resistance, creating a cycle of harmful inputs and soil erosion that worsens in magnitude. This erosion also accelerates nutrient pollution by eroding organic material into waterways and groundwater, doubling the problem created by synthetic fertilizer use. Furthermore, reduced soil health necessitates the use of large amounts of water to provide more moisture. As corn monocultures expand into less climate-favorable locations to meet growing demand in the U.S., even more irrigation is needed. Corn agriculture in arid states like Arizona has resulted in groundwater pumping at ten times higher rates [6].
Environmental Ethics Applied to Industrial Monocultures
From the lens of environmental ethics, the practice of industrial monocultures is unethical as it undermines the natural ecological order. The early 20th-century ecologist and philosopher Aldo Leopold developed the theory of “land ethic[s],” which asserts that everything in the natural world possesses value and humans should extend their moral concern to nature [9]. It follows that in the view of land ethics, humans have no right to reduce natural richness and biodiversity of the land. This philosophy is related to deep ecology, or “biospherical egalitarianism,” which is the view that all living things possess equal intrinsic value because of their existence, regardless of their utility to humans [9]. The deep ecological perspective of the world is a total-field image, meaning that every living thing in the world must depend on one another, including humans. Agriculture pertains to the natural land, meaning that all nature involved in farming is included in this biospherical unity.
Industrial monoculture uses nature entirely for humanity’s benefit and fails to recognize the inherent value of the land it uses as a part of nature. It is one of the most outright forms of human dominance over nature, by completely neglecting the land’s intrinsic value to prioritize efficient agricultural output. Engineers and farmers in the agriculture industry must avoid blind adherence to a pure utilitarian framework, in which only human well-being is maximized by ensuring food security and economic development. An efficient, economically beneficial system must be developed to uphold food security and biodiversity in tandem. The pure “utility” that humans get from nature cannot be the only factor; the land must also be respected for its intrinsic value.
Additionally, given the range of negative environmental and health impacts resulting from industrial monocultures, consequentialist ethics also necessitate a shift in the agriculture industry. The abundant ecological problems of industrial monoculture also negatively impact human health. In addition to the illnesses and pollution brought by the runoff of nitrogenous fertilizers into the water supply, new research has shown that industrial use of pesticide has resulted in cases of both acute and chronic toxicity in humans [10]. High yields of monoculture crops, such as corn and soybeans, have resulted in a food industry dominated by processed foods containing these ingredients, which contributes to a rise in negative health impacts, such as obesity [10]. In the total-field image of land ethics, the way industrial monocultures abuse the land directly results in these negative health consequences. Industrial monoculture harms both the environment and humans, but in the views of environmental and consequentialist ethics, humans must take responsibility for these negative effects and work to develop a new means of farming that works in harmony with the Earth’s natural ecosystem.
Therefore, to shift the agriculture industry away from industrial monoculture, a “cultural ascension” must occur that moves the ethos of farming from ego-centric utilitarianism to eco-centric environmentalism rooted in respect for the intrinsic value of agricultural land [11]. By restoring the natural biodiversity back into farmland, humanity can cultivate a sustainable agricultural industry that is able to fill their needs while respecting nature’s innate value.
The development of natural agriculture is necessary to create a system that simultaneously meets the needs of society while ensuring the sustainability of natural systems. This is called agro-ecology, or the integration of farming with self-sustaining nature [12]. Therefore, the shift to an ethics-based agricultural system should culminate in an ecological system based on agro-ecology. Specifically, agricultural engineers and farmers should focus on developing one of these agro-ecological models: permaculture.
The Shift to a Sustainable System: Permacultures
Permaculture (permanent agriculture) is a farming system that uses natural ecosystem features for agricultural benefit, completely avoiding agrochemical inputs like synthetic fertilizers [13]. The “ecosystem” of permaculture works naturally. In a permaculture plot, a variety of cover crops are planted to provide a layer of security for both the soil and the production crops. These cover crops strengthen the root systems, increase soil porosity, and prevent weathering and erosion [14]. They also serve as feed for animals on the farm, which further cycles nutrients to the soil and creates a naturally fertilized system [14]. In turn, this fertilization supports the intercropped system of a variety of production crops grown alongside other species. Through intercropping, a large range of nutrients are supplied to the land, and pests that are key targets for monocultures are naturally controlled due to the species and animal variety [14.
At the heart of permaculture is biomimicry, which adopts natural processes for industrial farming [12]. Biomimicry draws methods from nature rather than using anthropogenic techniques to dominate it. Throughout a permaculture’s perennial (all season) polyculture, inputs like fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, water, and energy largely come from nature itself. This is done in part to store energy in organic forms and conserve water use. For example, applying organic mulch to fields allows soil to store more water and thus have higher yields [15]. This mulch increases organic matter and biomass content in soil, contributing to more efficient and healthy nitrogen cycling [15]. Organic mulch decomposes over time and effectively holds soil moisture, providing the biomimetic equivalent of a typical ecosystem’s falling leaves and organic topsoil.
Moreover, permaculture regenerates ecosystems by mimicking natural biological processes [16]. They introduce animals and other “wild” organisms to farms, use natural pest control, and set up plants in intercropping (polyculture) arrays, all while irrigating more efficiently [12]. As a result, biodiversity flourishes, making permaculture an agricultural model of land regeneration. Applying permaculture in naturally depleted regions and former monoculture plots will improve land health, allowing these abused plots to achieve the full potential of farmland. In this way, the value of the environment is acknowledged and the human role of respecting the ecosystem is fulfilled.
Application of Permaculture Fields
Permaculture is now the model for a few thousand small farms around the world [17]. Its lack of implementation in larger-scale farms makes it difficult to analyze its economic feasibility for widespread implementation. Therefore, the agriculture industry must conduct economic and ecological analysis of existing permaculture farms. Farmers and agricultural engineers have an ethical obligation to recognize the ecological benefits of permaculture, and, in doing so, enable permaculture to become economically viable for the farming industry and the public [18]. Agricultural engineers design the framework of farms and set the precedent for future farm operations. By researching the benefits of permaculture and agro-ecology, the system can be developed for large-scale implementation. Currently, the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers (ASABE) follows a code of ethics which makes no mention of the environment or nature [19]. It is time for sustainability and environmental ethics to become the industry standard. Recognizing permaculture’s benefits is the first step to creating a viable sustainable food production system and will eventually lead to its design and implementation.
A fundamental principle of the ASABE code is to increase the prestige of the agricultural engineering profession [19]. By designing and perfecting permaculture systems, engineers will achieve this prestige for the industry, both for the environment and for humans. Sustainability-related prestige for agricultural engineering will result from adopting the design principles of permaculture and creating a more fine-tuned permaculture guide. Permaculture originator David Holmgren created a guideline with twelve principles of permaculture which can be applied to agricultural engineering [20]. If ASABE implemented Holmgren’s ideas like “Care of the Earth” into its code of ethics, the profession would have the groundwork needed to advance permaculture into the mainstream.
Conclusion
The rise of industrial monoculture during the Green Revolution enabled economic growth for countries around the world. Despite the economic benefits of the practice, its reliance on high chemical inputs results in severe environmental impacts that harm ecosystems, human health, and the environment. The future of agriculture relies on the enhancement of its environmental ethics. Reducing the environmental impact of the agricultural systems is a must, especially with respect to upholding deep ecology and the land ethic. The current monocultural system will continue to impact the environment at faster rates, as demand for its products increases and methods become more artificial and harmful.
Permaculture has the ethical groundwork needed to enhance the status of the agricultural industry. A sustainable system must be researched and implemented using the agro-ecological concept of combining the farm and the ecosystem. Agricultural engineers and farmers must divert their efforts to increasing the feasibility of permaculture. As the world catches on to climate efforts, agriculture will come along for the ride. It’s time to bring a top-polluting industry into sustainable status.
By James Hiemstra, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California
About the Author
At the time of writing this paper, James was a second-year student at the University of Southern California pursuing a degree in environmental engineering. As he spends most of his time in the mountains, he has developed a passion for all things sustainability.
References
[1] B. Glaeser, The Green Revolution Revisited. London: Rutledge, 2010. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203840443
[2] G. S. Khush, “Green revolution: Preparing for the 21st century,” Genome, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 646-55, 1999. [Online]. Available: ProQuest, http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.pro quest.com/scholarl y-journals/green-revolution-preparing-21st-century/docview/220536452/se -2 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[3] M. A. Altieri and C. I. Nicholls, “Agroecology and the reconstruction of a post-COVID-19 agriculture,” The Journal of Peasant Studies, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 1-18, July 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/1 0.1080/03066150.2020.1782891 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[4] J. F. Power and R. F. Follett, “Monoculture,” Scientific American, vol. 256, no. 3, pp. 78-87, March 1987. [Online]. Available: JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24979342 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[5] Economic Research Service, “USDA ERS – Feed Grains Sector at a Glance,” US Department of Agriculture, January 27, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/corn-and-other-feed-grains/feed-grains-sector-at-a-glance/ [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[6] M. A. Altieri, “The Ecological Impacts of Large-Scale Agrofuel Monoculture Production Systems in the Americas,” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 236-244, April 2009. [Online]. Available: Sage Pub https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467609333728 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[7] M. Altieri, Red Sugar, Green Deserts . Stockholm: Fian International, 2009, pp. 67-75.
[8] ““Superweeds” Resulting from Monsanto’s Products Overrun U.S. Farm Landscape,” Union of Concerned Scientists, December 13, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.ucsusa.org/about /news/superweeds [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[9] A. Brennan and Y.S. Lo, “Environmental Ethics” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta, Ed. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/ [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[10] “The Hidden Costs of Industrial Agriculture,” Union of Concerned Scientists, August 24, 2008. [Online]. Available: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/hidden-costs-industrial-agriculture [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[11] F. Caporali, “Conclusions: A New Ecological Ethic for Grounding Sustainability in Agriculture and Society,” in Ethics and Sustainable Architecture. Springer, Cham, January 2021, pp 259-262. [Online]. Available: Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76683-2_7 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[12] M. Stojanovic, “Biomimicry in Agriculture: Is the Ecological System-Design Model the Future Agricultural Paradigm?,” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, vol. 32, no. 5-6, pp. 789-804, November 2017. [Online]. Available: Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-017-9702-7 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[13] S. M. Newman, “Agroforestry,” Elsevier, pp. 467-471, January 2019. [Online] Available: Elsevier, https://doi.org/10. 1016/b978-0-12-409548-9.11084-x [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[14] J. Chester and M. Chester, “The Biggest Little Farm,” Neon. November 12, 2019.
[15] J. Krebs and S. Bach, “Permaculture—Scientific Evidence of Principles for the Agroecological Design of Farming Systems,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 3218, September 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3218/pdf [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[16] C. J. Rhodes, “Permaculture: Regenerative – Not Merely Sustainable,” Science Progress, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 403-412, December 2015. [Online]. Available: Sage Journals, https://doi.org/ 10.3184/003685015×14467291596242 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[17] I. Fiebrig, S. Zikeli, S. Bach, and S. Gruber, “Perspectives on permaculture for commercial farming: aspirations and realities,” Organic Agriculture, vol. 10, pp. 379-394, January 2020. [Online]. Available: Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-020-00281-8 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[18] A. W. Sanford, “Ethics, Narrative, and Agriculture: Transforming Agricultural Practice through Ecological Imagination,” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 283-303, March 2010. [Online]. Available: Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-010-9246-6 [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[19] “Code of Ethics,” ASABE. [Online]. Available: https://www.asabe.org/Quick-Links/Code-of-Ethics [Accessed April 12, 2024].
[20] “What are the principles of permaculture,” medicinfo.netlify.app, October 5, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://medicinfo.netlify.app/post/what-are-the-principles-of-permaculture/ [Accessed April 12, 2024].
Links for Further Reading
Monoculture Could Worsen Vulnerability to Climate Change
Insight on how the homogeneity of monocultures could doom the future of our planet.
Experiences and Relationships with the Land
A collection of inspiring anthologies that explore holistic farming techniques.