An historical perspective of organic farming. A Comparative Analysis of Organic and Industrial Agriculture: Foundations, Principles, and Practices

Prof.Marcel Robischon with Dr Vikash Tatayah of the Mauritus Wildlife Foundation 

Introduction: Defining Two Agricultural Paradigms

Modern food production has been profoundly shaped by two distinct and often competing paradigms: industrial agriculture and organic agriculture. The industrial model, born from scientific and technological revolutions, has achieved unprecedented scale and output. In contrast, the organic model has emerged as a holistic counter-movement, championing ecological harmony and long-term sustainability. 

The central theme of his presentation is to contrast the industrial model's focus on high-input, standardized production with the organic model's guiding principles of ecological integration and local adaptation. While one seeks to maximize efficiency through technological control over nature, the other strives to work within natural systems, viewing the farm as a component of a larger, interconnected ecosystem. To fully appreciate their current methodologies, it is essential to first understand the core philosophy that animates the organic movement.

The Philosophy and Principles of Organic Agriculture

To understand organic agriculture is to look beyond a simple list of prohibited inputs and farming techniques. It is a holistic system rooted in a distinct philosophy of sustainability, ecological integration, and social responsibility. This section defines the movement by exploring its core principles, which emphasize a collaborative rather than a purely extractive relationship with the natural world.

According to leading organizations, organic farming is a production system guided by a clear set of tenets. Synthesizing definitions from the German Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food and the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), the core principles can be summarized as follows:

• Resource Efficiency and Sustainability: To practice a form of agriculture that is resource-efficient, environmentally sound, and fundamentally based on the principles of sustainability, aiming to farm in harmony with nature.
• Ecological Preservation: To actively protect and preserve ecosystems, biodiversity, soil health, and water quality, while minimizing the overall climate impact of agricultural activities.
• Local Adaptation: To rely on ecological processes, biodiversity, and natural cycles that are adapted to specific local conditions, integrating tradition with innovation.
• Socio-Economic Dimensions: To promote fair relationships and a good quality of life for all individuals involved in the food system, a principle central to the broader agroecology movement.

It is critical to note, however, that while IFOAM’s definition includes social aims, organic farming as a production system can be separated from these goals. It is possible to have a perfectly organic product that ignores the broader social objectives of the agroecology movement. While related concepts such as biodynamic and regenerative farming exist, this report will focus on the term "organic farming" as the primary subject of comparison. These foundational principles stand in stark contrast to the framework that underpins the industrial model.

3.0 The Framework and Methodologies of Industrial Agriculture

Industrial agriculture emerged from the scientific and technological advancements of the modern era, fundamentally reshaping food production on a global scale. This approach prioritizes efficiency, output, and standardization to meet the demands of a growing world population. The defining characteristics of industrial agriculture are a direct reflection of its core philosophy of maximizing production through intensive methods. These methodologies include:

• Scale and Intensity: A focus on large-scale, intensive production, often described as factory farming.
• Technological Dependence: The extensive use of heavy machinery and a requirement for high levels of capital investment to support its operations.
• Chemical Inputs: A heavy and systematic reliance on externally produced inputs, including chemical mineral fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides.
• Specialization and Standardization: A preference for monocultures—growing a single crop like corn or sugar cane over vast areas—which contributes to a loss of diversity through processes of "biological globalization" and the "Columbian exchange." This results in highly standardized products that are uniform in appearance and taste.
• Economic Model: The operation is structured more as a high-tech business than a traditional farm, with producers often specializing in a single commodity.

This model, while highly productive, is associated with significant environmental consequences, including widespread soil erosion, a dramatic loss of biodiversity, the accumulation of toxins throughout the food chain, and significant alterations to the natural water balance. In fact, the destructive capacity of this model has led to the potent conclusion that "one may boldly say that industrial agriculture tends to actually destroy what is the basis of agriculture itself." 

The Scientific Revolution in Agriculture: The Rise of the Industrial Model

The industrial model was made possible by a series of key scientific innovations and the work of several architects who laid the foundation for modern agrochemistry. Their discoveries fundamentally changed the relationship between farming, chemistry, and large-scale production.

• Justus von Liebig: Considered a founder of agrochemistry, Liebig developed the theory of mineral nutrition for plants, arguing that growth is limited by the nutrient in shortest supply. This principle led to his development of superphosphate, a soluble phosphate fertilizer that became, and remains, the most widely used fertilizer in the world.
• Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch: These two figures developed the Haber-Bosch process for synthesizing ammonia directly from the air, a breakthrough that enabled the mass production of nitrogen fertilizers. This process is the basis for most chemical fertilizers available today. Critically, Fritz Haber is also noted as a controversial figure, known as the "father of gas warfare" for his work during World War I.
• Paul Hermann Müller: A Nobel laureate, Müller discovered the potent insecticide effects of Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). His discovery led to its rapid and widespread global adoption in the 1940s and 1950s. The subsequent environmental damage caused by DDT, particularly its impact on bird populations, was famously brought to public attention by Rachel Carson in her seminal 1962 book, Silent Spring.

Conclusion: Synthesizing Two Opposing Paradigms

Prof M. Robischon provided a historical and philosophical overview of organic agriculture, tracing its evolution from early "humus farming" concepts, which emphasize the soil food web and nutrient recycling, to a globally recognized and regulated commercial commodity. Key intellectual pioneers like Sir Albert Howard and J.I. Rodale are identified as foundational figures who reacted against the destructive practices of industrial, chemical-based agriculture and advocated for healthy soil leading to healthier food. The texts highlight the role of environmental crises and landmark publications, notably Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, in accelerating the environmental movement and increasing public demand for verified organic food, which led to standardization efforts like the National Organic Program (NOP) in the U.S. Furthermore, the documents examine related alternative systems like Integrated Production and discuss unique cases, such as Cuba's forced conversion to agroecological practices due to the collapse of its trade partners, illustrating the system's resilience when chemical inputs are unavailable.

He alslo highlighted numerous farming concepts related to organic agriculture. While these concepts are not always identical to organic farming, they share strong commonalities or represent specific varieties and versions of it. Related farming concepts mentioned in the sources include:

• Biodynamic farming: This is a distinct but related concept. The initial movement of biodynamic agriculture, started by Rudolf Steiner in 1924, had a zero scientific basis and relied on esoteric, anthroposophical concepts. However, it does share principles with organic farming, such as avoiding chemical pest control and mineral fertilizers. Early biodynamic practices included unusual and non-scientific concepts, such as using "horn manure" where horns are filled with dung, buried, and then diluted.
• Natural farming: This concept includes versions such as the Korean and Japanese natural farming styles. In Japan, the organic farming movement emerged, drawing inspiration from local philosophies, specifically Buddhism and Shinto principles.
• Regenerative farming: This is another term found among the related concepts.
• Agroecology: While distinct, agroecology is a closely related, overarching concept. It strives for transformation towards sustainable agriculture overall and is generally considered scientifically rooted. Organic farming is considered a more specific term within the broader context of agroecology. Agroecology is also described as a social movement.
• Bioland: This is a producer association that started in the 1950s. Bioland aims for similar outcomes as biodynamic farming, promoting circular economy and soil fertility, but it has a scientific basis. Bioland arose from observations that industrial agriculture was drastically changing home areas and farms

The Megaherbivore Theory: How Ancient Giants Shaped Our World and Why Their Absence Matters

 

Prof U.Zeller with Prof. M.F.Driver 

Professor Dr. Ulrich Zeller is a retired Professor at the Humboldt University (HU), Berlin, Germany. He holds degrees in Medical and Biological Sciences of The Universities of Goettingen and Berlin, and was a fellow of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Professor Zeller was Director of the Zoological Museum in Berlin and was the head of the Division of Systematic Zoology at HU. He is member of the editorial board of various scientific journals and has a record of more than 300 publications in well recognized scientific journals. His research interests are the organismic and evolutionary biology of vertebrates esp. mammals, biodiversity under changing environments and human use mainly in central Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa and Australia.

Professor U. Zeller gave a comprehensive overview of biodiversity, land use, and ecological conflicts across different global regions, particularly focusing on Africa and Europe. He defined biodiversity as the total variety of life on Earth, distinguishing between natural and artificial (man-made) forms resulting from domestication. A core theme is the growing human-wildlife conflict exacerbated by land use activities, which has led to the extinction of megafauna in Europe, contrasting with Africa where these large animals persist and compete with introduced domesticated species like cattle, often leading to overgrazing and desertification. The professor then presents potential solutions, such as game farming and the reintroduction of megafauna, and discusses the concept of rainforestation as a successful ecological recovery method in tropical areas like the Philippines, concluding that academic teaching is essential for implementing these biodiversity management solutions.

The core message of the megaherbivore theory is profound: the largest animals are not just inhabitants of an ecosystem, but are powerful architects of it. Their presence or absence can fundamentally change the land itself, turning forest into grassland, or grassland into desert. Understanding the functional roles of natural biodiversity and the disruptive impacts of artificial biodiversity is therefore essential for preserving the planet and ensuring a sustainable future. 

More information is available in this review paper. 

Biodiversity, land use and ecosystem services—An organismic and comparative approach to different geographical regions,\. Ulrich Zeller, Nicole Starik, Thomas Göttert *
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Faculty of Life Sciences, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences,  Germany

Biodiversity and Land Use in a Changing Environment and Human Care

 

The Erasmus+ Link Coordinator,  Assoc. Prof. Brinda Ramasawmy Molaye. (In front row, second from the right)

The Faculty of Agriculture organised a special series of seminars on Biodiversity and Land Use in a Changing Environment and Human Care, a theme of paramount global and local importance, particularly for the future of our island's food security and natural heritage.

This event is a part of the ERASMUS+ Programme—the European Union's leading initiative to foster international cooperation and knowledge exchange in higher education. It is an academic link between the University of Mauritius and Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany. Humboldt University is consistently ranked among Germany's most prestigious institutions.

The Faculty acknowledged the efforts of Associate Professor Brinda Ramasawmy Molaye, ERASMUS+ Coordinator with Humboldt University. She has been instrumental in organizing this visit and making today’s event a success. .

We were privileged to have insightful presentations from our visiting professors:

• Professor Dr. Marcel Robischon, Head of the Division of Agricultural Ecology (In front row, fourth from the right)
• Professor Dr. Ulrich Zeller, Professor Emeritus of Systematic Zoology (In front row, third from the right) .

They shared their knowledge spanning the history of organic farming, global floriculture trends, ecological comparisons between European and African megaherbivore systems, and cutting-edge organic culture techniques.

The Acting Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture, Associate Professor Daya Goburdhun (in the picture) extended a warm welcome to all attendees and to the distinguished professors from Humboldt University, Berlin. She gave a brief overview of the Faculty's vital role, highlighting its commitment to research, education, and extension services that are crucial for advancing sustainable agriculture, food security, and environmental stewardship in Mauritius and the region.

Click the links for the summary of the main discussion of the presentations of Prof U.Zeller and Prof M.Robischon

Alternative Foods and Food Circular Economy Prof. William Chen's Presentation at University of Mauritius

This presentation was delivered on September 25, 2025, at the launching of the Food Literacy & Sustainable Nutrition (FOLSUN) Initiative at the University of Mauritius. Prof. William Chen from Nanyang Technological University (NTU) addressed critical challenges and opportunities in transforming our food systems through alternative proteins and circular economy approaches.

 The Current Food System Crisis

The Fundamental Challenge

The global food system faces mounting pressure from multiple directions. With the world population projected to reach 10 billion by 2050, conventional meat production systems are increasingly unsustainable. The environmental and health issues associated with traditional animal agriculture—including greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water consumption, and public health concerns—necessitate a fundamental rethinking of how we produce protein.

Constraints and Needs

The presentation establishes that our current food system operates under significant constraints: limited agricultural land, water scarcity, climate change impacts, and the inefficiency of converting plant calories into animal protein. These constraints create an urgent need for innovative solutions that can deliver adequate nutrition while reducing environmental impact.

Alternative Protein Sources: A Detailed Analysis

1. Plant-Based Foods and Meat Alternatives

Plant-Based Foods: The Advantages

Prof. Chen distinguishes between whole plant-based foods and processed plant-based meat products. Traditional plant-based foods offer several compelling advantages:

• Nutrient density: Rich in vitamins, minerals, fiber, and phytonutrients
• Consumer familiarity: People already understand and consume vegetables, legumes, grains, and nuts
• Minimal processing: Can be consumed with fewer industrial processing steps
• Cost-effectiveness: Generally more affordable than both animal meat and processed alternatives
• True alternatives: Represent genuine dietary diversity rather than meat imitations

Plant-Based Meats: The Reality Check

However, highly processed plant-based meat alternatives face significant challenges:

• Hyper-processed nature: Require extensive industrial processing, multiple ingredients, and additives to achieve meat-like texture and flavor
• Identity crisis: Despite marketing, they are fundamentally not meat, which creates cognitive dissonance for consumers
• Premium pricing: Often more expensive than conventional animal meat, creating a barrier to widespread adoption
• Low consumer buy-in: Many consumers remain skeptical or uninterested, limiting market growth beyond early adopters

This dichotomy highlights a critical tension in the alternative protein space: the trade-off between creating familiar meat-like experiences and maintaining the inherent benefits of plant-based eating.

 

2. Cultivated Meat (Cell-Based/Lab-Grown Meat)

Regulatory Landscape

The cultivated meat sector presents a fascinating study in global regulatory divergence:

• Singapore and USA: Have granted regulatory approval, positioning themselves as innovation leaders
• Italy: Has banned cultivated meat by law, citing cultural and agricultural preservation concerns
• This regulatory patchwork creates uncertainty for investors and companies attempting to scale

The Urban Solution Proposition

Cultivated meat is often positioned as an urban solution because it could theoretically:

• Reduce the land footprint of protein production
• Be produced closer to consumption centers
• Minimize transportation and associated emissions
• Address sustainability concerns in land-scarce environments

Critical Barriers

Despite its promise, cultivated meat faces formidable obstacles:

• Scale-up bottleneck: Moving from laboratory production to industrial-scale manufacturing remains technically challenging and economically unproven
• Cost structure: Production costs remain prohibitively high, with questions about whether costs can ever reach parity with conventional meat
• Consumer acceptance: Many consumers express discomfort with "lab-grown" food, raising questions about willingness to pay premium prices

3. Biomass Fermentation and Precision Fermentation

Prof. Chen identifies fermentation technologies as emerging alternatives, though he poses the critical question: "High Cost?" This suggests that while these technologies show promise, their economic viability remains uncertain.

Biomass Fermentation: Uses microorganisms (like fungi or bacteria) grown on various feedstocks to produce protein-rich biomass.

Precision Fermentation: Engineers microorganisms to produce specific proteins, such as dairy proteins without cows, offering highly targeted nutrition solutions.

4. Alternative Food Sources from Nature

The "Real Solutions" Question

Prof. Chen provocatively asks whether these natural alternatives represent "Real Solutions?!" suggesting cautious optimism:

Microalgae

• High protein content and rapid growth rates
• Can be cultivated in non-arable land
• Rich in omega-3 fatty acids and other nutrients
• Challenges include taste, digestibility, and processing costs

Edible Insects

• Extremely efficient feed conversion ratios
• High protein and micronutrient content
• Low environmental footprint
• Major barrier: cultural acceptance in Western markets

Mushrooms

• Increasing consumption as meat alternatives
• Low in calories and cholesterol-free
• Provide umami flavor and meaty texture
• Offer documented health benefits
• Already culturally accepted in most markets

The mushroom sector appears particularly promising because it overcomes the acceptance barrier while delivering nutritional and sustainability benefits.

 

Food Circular Economy: Closing the Loop

The Waste Crisis in Food Manufacturing

The presentation reveals that significant food loss occurs at every stage of the food value chain:

1. Pre-harvest/slaughter: Agricultural waste, damaged crops
2. On-farm post-harvest/slaughter operations: Processing waste, unusable parts
3. Transport, storage, and distribution: Spoilage, damage
4. Processing and packaging: Manufacturing side-streams, off-cuts, by-products

The Circular Economy Vision

Prof. Chen presents a comprehensive framework for closed-loop upcycling, which he intriguingly labels as "too easy and too good?" This rhetorical question suggests that while the concept is compelling, implementation faces hidden complexities.

The Circular System Components:

Inputs: Agricultural and food manufacturing operations generate side-streams (a more positive term than "waste")

Food Manufacturing Side-Streams (FMSS): Materials that are currently discarded but contain valuable ingredients:

• Okara: The fibrous residue from soy milk and tofu production, rich in protein and fiber
• Brewer's spent grains: Barley remnants from beer brewing, high in protein and fiber

Transformation Process: These materials are processed to extract or utilize valuable components

Reintegration: Valuable ingredients are returned to the food chain for human consumption

Alternative Applications: Materials unsuitable for food can be used in other sectors (animal feed, biofuels, materials)

Residual Waste: Only true waste that cannot be utilized remains in the system

Food Manufacturing Side-Streams: A Balanced Perspective

The presentation acknowledges both advantages and challenges of utilizing FMSS through a "quad-modal hazard dynamics" approach, which considers:

1. Biological hazards: Microbial contamination risks
2. Chemical hazards: Pesticide residues, heavy metals, processing chemicals
3. Physical hazards: Foreign materials, contaminants
4. Nutritional/allergen concerns: Anti-nutritional factors, allergenic proteins

This nuanced approach recognizes that food waste valorization isn't automatically safe—it requires rigorous assessment and appropriate processing.

Food Safety Risk Assessment Framework

The Critical Importance of Safety

As alternative foods and circular economy approaches proliferate, Prof. Chen emphasizes that safety cannot be an afterthought. Novel foods require novel safety assessment approaches.

General Framework vs. Novel Foods Framework

The presentation contrasts:

Traditional Food Safety Risk Assessment:

• Hazard identification
• Hazard characterization
• Exposure assessment
• Risk characterization
• Well-established for conventional foods

Novel Foods Risk Assessment Framework:

• Must address unique challenges of foods with no history of safe use
• Requires evaluation of production processes (e.g., genetic modifications, cell culture conditions)
• Must consider novel compounds and interactions
• Needs to assess allergenicity and toxicology of unfamiliar proteins

New Approach Methodologies (NAMs)

Traditional food safety testing relies heavily on animal testing, which is:

• Time-consuming and expensive
• Raises ethical concerns
• May not accurately predict human responses

NAMs offer alternatives:

• In vitro (test tube) testing systems
• Computational modeling and simulation
• Human cell-based assays
• Organ-on-a-chip technologies
• Artificial intelligence for predictive toxicology

These approaches can accelerate safety assessment while reducing animal testing and potentially improving human relevance.

 The FRESH-WHO Initiative

A Global Collaboration for Food Safety

Prof. Chen concludes by presenting the FRESH (Food safety Risk assessment for Eating and living Safely and Healthily) initiative's collaboration with the World Health Organization.

Core Components

Global Perspectives: Bringing together international expertise and multilevel support to address food safety as a universal concern

Local Priorities: Ensuring that global frameworks can be adapted to regional needs and constraints

Working Areas

1. Novel Foods and Production Systems: Developing assessment frameworks for cultivated meat, precision fermentation products, insect proteins, and other emerging foods
2. Nutrition-Food Safety Integration: Recognizing that safety and nutrition cannot be separated—a food that is safe but nutritionally poor, or nutritious but unsafe, both fail to serve public health
3. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs): Implementing cutting-edge testing methods to accelerate and improve safety assessment
4. Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovations: Leveraging AI for predictive modeling, big data analysis, and rapid risk assessment

The Ultimate Goal

The initiative aims to create "a dynamic and comprehensive next-generation food risk assessment framework and related food control components that are effective and responsive to the evolving landscape of food systems, thereby ensuring continuous protection of global public health."

This vision recognizes that food systems are rapidly evolving, and safety frameworks must be equally dynamic—not static regulations that quickly become outdated.

Conclusion: Navigating Complexity

Prof. Chen's presentation reveals that the transition to sustainable food systems involves navigating complex trade-offs:

• Innovation vs. Acceptance: Cutting-edge technologies may struggle with consumer adoption
• Cost vs. Sustainability: More sustainable options often carry premium prices
• Processing vs. Naturalness: Creating meat alternatives requires processing that some consumers reject
• Speed vs. Safety: Rapid innovation must be balanced with thorough safety assessment

The path forward requires not just technological innovation, but also:

• Robust regulatory frameworks that enable innovation while ensuring safety
• Economic models that make sustainable options accessible
• Consumer education to build acceptance
• International cooperation to share knowledge and harmonize standards
• Integration of nutrition and safety considerations from the earliest stages of development

The presentation ultimately argues that alternative foods and circular economy approaches are essential tools for feeding 10 billion people sustainably, but their success depends on addressing economic, regulatory, safety, and consumer acceptance challenges with the same rigor applied to technological innovation.

 

Keynote Lecture: "Future-ready and Regenerative Agri-food Systems for Food Security (a Singapore Perspective)," by Prof. William Chen of Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore.

We were deeply honoured to have Professor William Chen Wei Ning, Michael Fam Endowed Chair Professor in Food Science & Technology, Nanyang Technological University Singapore at the launching of the FOLSUN initiative as our keynote speaker. He delivered a very insightful speech on “Future-ready and Regenerative Agri-food Systems for Global Food Security: A Singapore Perspective “ enriching the event with his expertise and perspective.

Professor William Chen Wei Ning, Michael Fam Endowed Chair Professor in Food Science & Technology, Nanyang Technological University Singapore

1. The Unsustainable Linear Food System and Global Pressures

The presentation begins by highlighting the critical pressures on the current Linear Food System (Resources → Production → Utilization → Waste) , arguing that this model is no longer viable due to immense global challenges.

• Growing Demand: The world population is projected to reach 9.7 billion by 2050 , requiring a 70% increase in food demand. The planet currently requires the resources of 1.7 Earths to support humanity's demand on its ecosystems.
• Supply Chain Disruptions: The system is vulnerable to external shocks, including climate change impacting farming yield , infectious diseases affecting the supply chain , and geopolitical tensions.
• The Food Waste Crisis: Globally, 1/3 of all food produced is wasted. This waste poses a severe environmental threat, as up to 1/2 of landfill volume is composed of food waste. The food waste generates methane, which is 25 times worse for the environment than CO2​. As a domestic example, Singapore alone generated 791 million kg of food waste in 2016 , equivalent to over 1,500 Olympic-size swimming pools.

2. The Evolution to a Regenerative Food System

 

 

The keynote speaker proposes a necessary evolution of the food system through two progressive stages:

1. Circular Food System: This phase focuses on Mitigating and Damage Control and is defined by a Circular Economy model. Key components include:
• Zero Waste.
• Processing and Valorisation (maximizing the value of resources).
• Technological innovations like Data-driven efficiency, Waste recycling/upcycling, and Alternative foods.
2. Regenerative Food System: This is the ultimate goal, which goes "Beyond sustainability" by creating Positive Changes. The regenerative model aims for broad, positive outcomes across the ecosystem:
 
• Rebuilds soil health.
• Restores the environment and draws down carbon.
• Improves human health and animal welfare.
• Promotes social justice and provides broad economic opportunity.

Singapore, a highly developed city-state with scarce arable land (approximately 1%), serves as a model for utilizing technology to build a resilient food supply.

• The "30 by 30" Goal: Singapore’s strategic commitment is centered on the "30 by 30" goal, which aims to produce 30% of the nation’s nutritional needs in Singapore by 2030.
• Strategic Framework: This goal is driven by a comprehensive framework based on technological innovation, regulatory agility, and collaborative partnerships.
• Alternative Foods: Investment in the alternative protein sector has surged, reaching a Total 2020 invested capital of $3.1 billion. NTU's research focuses on bringing diversity to food systems through:
• Plant-based proteins.
• Microbial protein.
• Cultivated meat.
• Insect proteins.
•  
•  
• Zero Waste Innovations: NTU research emphasizes the Valorisation of food processing waste-stream. Examples include using:
• Prawn Shells to create Chitosan Packaging Film.
• Durian Husk to create biodegradable packaging materials.
• Future-Ready Technologies: Other research capabilities include Precision Fermentation and Green Extraction.

The conclusion emphasizes that Singapore is positioning itself as a hub for cutting-edge food technologies and sustainable practices. Key factors for success include robust investments in research and development and strategic leadership, with the aim to set a benchmark for resilience in food systems globally.