I wonder what proportion of this is caused by the speed of change vs the changes them selves.
I assume everyone would expect lower yields from more primitive growing and processing technologies.
I assume everyone would expect lower yields from more primitive growing and processing technologies.
To call it more primitive doesn't seem honest. Modern farming practices destroy the soil quality while using shortcuts to get higher yield in spite of that. From what I've read I think the jury is still out on which is better. Obviously organic farming is bad for the fertilizer and pesticide business.
One of the things I wanted to chime in with, somewhere in the discussion, was that this is the sort of policy which pushes people to develop technologies and that perhaps if deployed more slowly it might have driven innovation in organic farming.
Something like a pilot scheme + opt in + subsidies.