...there remains much confusion amongst some commentators and analysts about what is `organic’ agriculture, and this has led to many outspoken attacks (cf Borlaug, 1992, 1999; Avery, 1995, 1999; Stott, 1999; Hillman, 2000). Many of these are misguided, in that they see organic methods of farming as a threat to world food security, mainly due to certified organic systems in industrialised countries appearing always to yield less than high-input modernised systems.

The prevailing assumption is that any system founded on organic or agroecological principles will fail. But these attacks on organic systems are misguided for several reasons:

i) these commentators commonly fail to account for the real costs of producing food (including the externalities);

ii) few analysts argue that industrialised country organic systems should be directly transferred to developing countries;

iii) most food-poor in developing countries are in regions where yields are already low, and where modern agriculture has already failed them;

iv) most sustainable agriculture analysts believe that an agriculture built on agroecological principles and accumulating natural, social and human assets can be highly productive, but that if this is not enough, then external inputs should be used.