The phrase,”industrial farming” is something I see on lots of web posts and comment strings.  I’m guessing that this intentionally derisive terminology conjures up some pretty negative imagery for most people not directly involved with farming.  The use of this emotive term raises two questions for me:

• Is modern, “industrial” farming actually what people imagine it to be?
• Is there actually a viable alternative?

Well, let’s consider some of the features of modern farming

“Industrial Farming Is Highly Mechanized” (True but Necessary)

It might not fit your view of a romantic, rural life-style, but if you are actually the farmer, the comfortable, efficient, sophisticated farm equipment available today sounds pretty good.  As in all “industrialized” segments of our economy, machines and computers make farmers more productive and eliminate the most laborious (and often dangerous) parts of the job.  There is a detailed history of farm equipment on the John Deere website that is worth a read.  Mechanization of farming has enabled the workforce directly involved in farming to drop from ~40% in 1900 to less than 1% today.  Over this time period, people have chosen other careers intentionally.  There are not a lot of people who want to work on farms in the old, labor-intensive way.

Actually, hand-labor-intensive crops (e.g. coffee, strawberries…), or high labor cropping systems (e.g. Organic) are on a collision course with demographic trends.  The pool of unskilled farm laborers upon which rich Americans have (unethically) depended is only going to decline over time and make rejection of “mechanization” an increasingly non-viable option.  Unless you are the one doing the work, it isn’t really reasonable to insist that mechanization be avoided because it’s too “industrial.”

Read more of this story »