Agroecology versus Ecoagriculture: balancing food production and biodiversity conservation in the midst of social inequity

This paper critically reviews the concept and vision of ecoagriculture and the initiative of Ecoagriculture Partners . The paper points out that supporters of Ecoagriculture (ECOAG) adhere to two pervasive but flawed assumptions: (a) that alternatives to a chemically-based crop production system necessarily require more land to produce the same amount of output and (b) that the adverse ecological and health consequences of industrial farming are minor in comparison to those that would be wrought by expansion of land extensive production systems.

ECOAG, the study argues, has a profound negative ecological and health and social impacts:

• monoculture systems, lacking in functional biodiversity and self regulatory mechanisms, are genetically homogenous and species poor systems that are very vulnerable to diseases and pest outbreaks
• due to this increased vulnerability a large quantity of pesticides has to be applied bringing enourmous environmental and health costs
• ECOAG indirectly promotes the use of agrochemicals and GMOs
• the real causes of hunger are poverty, inequality and lack of access to food and land, and not necessarily the lack of production; and as most methods of production intensification (also those proposed by ECOAG) deepen inequalities, they will fail to reduce hunger.

The study concludes that without further endangering the natural environment depends upon public support for high-yield, sustainable agriculture research, education and extension. Alternatives to both chemical-intensive, high-yield agriculture and to land extensive sustainable agriculture can be expected to result from scientific endeavours dedicated to their discovery and development.