Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-64p75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-07T16:47:13.629Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soil quality and profitability of biodynamic and conventional farming systems: A review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

John P. Reganold
John P. Reganold
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-6420.
Get access

Abstract

Biodynamic and organic farming are similar in that both are ecologically oriented and do not use chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The main difference is that biodynamic farmers add eight specific amendments, called preparations, to their soils, crops, and composts. Recently, there has been an increasing interest in biodynamic farming practices and systems because they show potential for mitigating some detrimental effects of chemical-dependent conventional agriculture. Only a few studies examining biodynamic methods or comparing biodynamic farming with other farming systems have been published in the refereed scientific literature, especially in English. This paper summarizes data from previous studies, both published and unpublished (theses), that have compared biodynamic and conventional farming systems with respect to soil quality or profitability. These studies have shown that the biodynamic farming systems generally have better soil quality, lower crop yields, and equal or higher net returns per hectare than their conventional counterparts. Two studies that included organic management treatments with and without the preparations showed that the preparations improved biological soil properties and increased crop root growth. However, more research is needed to determine whether the preparations affect soil physical, chemical, and biological properties and crop growth and, if so, their mode of action.

Keywords

biodynamic farmingbiodynamic preparationssoil qualityfarm profitabilitycropping systemson-farm researchsustainable agriculture

Information

Type
Other Feature Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 36 - 45
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Abele, U. 1987. Produktqualität und Düngung—mineralisch, organisch, biologisch-dynamisch. (Product quality and fertilization: Mineral, organic, biodynamic.) Schriftenreihe des Bundesministers für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Forsten, Reihe A, Heft 345, Landwirtschaftsverlag, Münster-Hiltrup, Germany.Google Scholar
2.Bio-Dynamic Farming and Gardening Association in New Zealand. 1993. Bio-Dynamic Newsletter 46(3):50–51.Google Scholar
3.Foissner, W. 1987. The microedaphon in ecofarmed and conventionally farmed dryland cornfields near Vienna (Austria). Biology and Fertility of Soils 3:45–49.Google Scholar
4.Forman, T. 1981. An introductory study of the bio-dynamic method of agriculture. Diploma Thesis. Univ. of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.Google Scholar
5.Garcia, C., Alvarez, C.E., Carracedo, A., and Iglesias, E.. 1989. Soil fertility and mineral nutrition of a biodynamic avocado plantation in Tenerife. Biological Agric. and Horticulture 6:1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Goldstein, W.A. 1986. Alternative crops, rotations and management systems for the Palouse. Ph.D. dissertation. Dept. of Agronomy and Soils, Washington State Univ., Pullman.Google Scholar
7.Goldstein, W. 1990. Experimental proof for the effects of biodynamic preparations. Internal manuscript. Michael Fields Agric. Institute, East Troy, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
8.Granstedt, A. 1991. The potential for Swedish farms to eliminate the use of artificial fertilizers. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 6:122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Holmes, B. 1993. Can sustainable farming win the battle of the bottom line? Science 260:1893–1895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Hurlbert, S.H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological Monographs 54:187–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Koepf, H.H. 1986. Organisation, economic performance and labour requirements on bio-dynamic farms. Star and Furrow 66:25–37.Google Scholar
12.Koepf, H.H. 1989. The Biodynamic Farm. Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, New York.Google Scholar
13.Koepf, H.H. 1993. Research in Biodynamic Agriculture: Methods and Results. Bio-Dynamic Farming and Gardening Association, Inc., Kimberton, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
14.Koepf, H.H., Pettersson, B.D., and Schaumann, W.. 1976. Bio-Dynamic Agriculture. Anthroposophic Press, Hudson, New York.Google Scholar
15.Lampkin, N. 1990. Organic Farming. Farming Press Books, Ipswich, Great Britain.Google Scholar
16.Levick, M. 1992. A comparison of some aspects of two orchard floor management systems. B. Hort. (Tech) thesis. Dept. of Soil Science, Massey Univ., Palmerston North, New Zealand.Google Scholar
17.McLaren, R.G., and Cameron, K.C.. 1990. Soil Science: An Introduction to the Properties and Management of New Zealand Soils. Oxford Univ. Press, Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 132–139.Google Scholar
18.MELU. 1977. Auswertung dreijähriger Erhebungen in neun biologisch-dynamisch bewirtschafteten Betrieben. (Evaluation of a three-year survey of nine biodynamically managed farms.) Baden-Württemberg Ministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Umwelt, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
19.National Research Council. 1993. Soil and Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture. Board on Agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
20.Oelhaf, R.C. 1978. Organic Agriculture. Allanheld, Osmun and Co., Montclair, New Jersey.Google Scholar
21.Peerlkamp, P.K., 1967. Visual estimation of soil structure. In West European Methods for Soil Structure Determination. International Soil Science Society, Ghent, Belgium, pp. 11–13.Google Scholar
22.Penfold, C. 1993. Biological farming systems comparative trial—5 years on. Biological Farmers of Australia Quarterly Newsletter (Dec): 11–13.Google Scholar
23.Penfold, C. 1994. Broadacre organic farming. Internal report. Univ. of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, Roseworthy, South Australia.Google Scholar
24.Pettersson, B.D., and von Wistinghausen, E.. 1979. Effects of organic and inorganic fertilizers on soils and crops. Misc. Pub. No. 1. Woods End Agricultural Institute, Temple, Maine.Google Scholar
25.Pettersson, B.D., Reents, H.J., and von Wistinghausen, E.. 1992. Dungung und Bodeneigenschaften: Ergebnisse eines 32-jährigen Feldversuches in Järna, Schweden. (Fertilization and soil properties: Results of a 32-year field experiment in Jarna, Sweden.) Institut für Biologisch-dynamische Forschung, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
26.Proctor, P. 1989. The biodynamic preparations. In New Zealand Biodynamic Association (ed). Biodynamics: New Directions for Farming and Gardening in New Zealand. Random House, Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 106–129.Google Scholar
27.Reganold, J.P. 1988. Comparison of soil properties as influenced by organic and conventional farming systems. Amer. J. Alternative Agric. 3:144–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Reganold, J.P. 1994. Statistical analyses of soil quality—response. Science 264:282–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Reganold, J.P., Papendick, R.I., and Parr, J.F.. 1990. Sustainable agriculture. Scientific American 262:112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Reganold, J.P., Palmer, A.S., Lockhart, J.C., and Macgregor, A.N.. 1993. Soil quality and financial performance on biodynamic and conventional farms in New Zealand. Science 260:344–349.Google ScholarPubMed
31.Reinken, G. 1986. Six years of biodynamic growing of vegetables and apples in comparison with the conventional farm management. In Vogtmann, H., Boehncke, E. and Fricke, I. (eds). The Importance of Biological Agriculture in a World of Diminishing Resources. Verlagsgruppe Witzenhausen, Witzenhausen, Germany, pp. 161–174.Google Scholar
32.Schlüter, C. 1985. Arbeits- und betriebswirtschaftliche Verhältnisse in Betrieben des alternativen Landbaus (Labor and economic relations on alternative farms.) Verlag E. Ulmer, Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
33.Spiess, H. 1990. Chronobiological investigations of crops grown under biodynamic management. I. Experiments with seeding dates to ascertain the effects of lunar rhythms on the growth of winter rye (Secale cereale, cv. Nomaro). Biological Agric. and Horticulture 7:165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Vereijken, P. 1986. From conventional to integrated agriculture. Netherlands J. Agric. Sci. 34:387–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Vereijken, P. 1990. Research on integrated arable farming and organic mixed farming in the Netherlands. Schweizerische Landwirtschaftliche Forschung 29:249–256.Google Scholar
36.Wardle, D. A. 1994. Statistical analyses of soil quality. Science 264:281–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed