Cuba, an island in 80% in organic fruit and vegetable production.

[izentrop]

They are masters in the practices of "intensive organic market gardening".

Cuba transformed large plots into small areas carried out in polyculture because of an embargo since the 70s.

In order to feed the population, a major land reform was imposed, an urban subsistence agriculture was born.
This involuntary change, however, allowed Cuba to turn to new natural production techniques as oil, fertilizers and pesticides became scarce.

Organic micro-gardens were born by maximizing yields and minimizing energy and financial expenses.

There are examples to take, even for the individual http://jackyquetzalyne-monespacevert.ek ... iointensif

A very interesting document describing the techniques to be used http://www.aveyron-bio.fr/fr/produisez- ... e-plus.pdf

[Did67]

The advantage of being embargoed, sheltered from multinationals ...

[Janic]

The use of the term intensive in view of its use in current intensive agriculture is particularly inappropriate. At most we could say: high yielding crop (always had regard to the idea that the AB is not high yielding)

[izentrop]

Janic, for what reason can we not make a high yield, from the moment when the organic matter reported is sufficient to allow it in a sustainable way?

[Janic]

izentrop hello

Janic, for what reason can we not make a high yield, from the moment when the organic matter reported is sufficient to allow it in a sustainable way?

It is not a question of yield in the formula used, but of intensive in the current sense of the term in the mind of the average of the population. It is therefore more a question of language than of productive possibility.
"Which is brought to a very high degree, to a high yield by intense efforts or considerable means: Intensive training.
Refers to a culture, a system of agricultural production for which large amounts of labor and capital are applied per unit area, and from which, as a result, large quantities of products are obtained per unit area. "
However, the agricultural world is gradually becoming aware that intensive cultivation has exhausted the soil by wanting to give back to the earth, more, much more than it has given for millennia without exhaustion.
Agriculture, supposedly organic, falling back into this same trap will eventually have the same result in the long term.
Now between chemical agriculture and that cited, it goes without saying that the second is to be preferred even if it is only viable in the short term (in the sense of historical time)

[izentrop]

the agricultural world is gradually becoming aware that intensive cultivation has exhausted the soil by wanting to give back to the earth, more, much more than it has given for millennia without exhaustion.

The problem is not the intensive one, but the fact of nourishing the plant with great reinforcement of fossil fertilizers which replaced and partially destroyed the humus. Deep plowing and land left bare in winter have contributed to leaching, erosion and eutrophication of watercourses and to nitrates in groundwater. Without forgetting pesticides.

To solve all these problems, we must recycle all organic matter, even dry toilets, find alternatives to pesticides, land always covered with vegetation, even in winter, work the soil thoroughly without turning it over, exceptionally to always preserve a thick unpacked layer.

Nothing prevents the well-managed bio-intensive from producing a lot while keeping the soil fertile. The proof, the examples given above.

[Christophe]

The advantage of being embargoed, sheltered from multinationals ...

There is more than to explain your method to them and they will be 150% !!

[Janic]

isentrop hello

Nothing prevents organic-intensive well managed to produce a lot while keeping the soil fertile. The proof, the examples given above.

There is incompatibility between intensive and well conducted and even a lot (implying to ensure a sufficient income to the producer, but this is only valid on small farms) to feed the population of a country and a lot to make a profit " industrial "and there organic farming does not come within this framework. However, the world economy (that of business) cannot and does not want to turn back the clock by methods of cultivation with high use of labor (even cheap) and without chemical inputs.
So yes, on a small scale and in opposition to the current productivist cultural mode, the proposed solution is better, but not viable over time because even if (organic) blows of the stick make Father Martin's donkey advance, the charge will end up exhaust it, which is already the case with current intensive agriculture. But let's avoid comparing two different cultures like that of the West and South America, Africa or Asia.

[izentrop]

It is the pessimistic answer.
It is on this that the world market does not encourage these good practices.
More staff will be needed to achieve the same result, but Father Martin, as you say, and small Cuban producers are setting an example.
Well if we compare and follow the good examples ... the Americans have gone largely without plowing for a long time, because of land at greater risk of desertification and with great reinforcement of herbicides, but still.

It is time for politicians to start doing their job of regulating the markets, before it is the depletion of fossil stocks that do it.

[Janic]

It is the pessimistic answer.

There is an important difference between being pessimistic
"Pessimism (from the Latin word pessimus superlative of malus meaning "bad") indicates a state of mind in which an individual perceives life negatively.. "and be realistic. Warnings about intensive agriculture or global warming were seen as pessimistic, but reality shows that was even underestimated.

It is on this that the world market does not encourage these good practices.

Obviously! economic business and humanism do not mix well.

but Father Martin, as you say,

Reread! Father Martin pushes the donkey beyond its natural limits by forcing it. It is therefore an example not to follow precisely!

and small Cuban producers set an example to follow.

Of course it's better than other agriculture intense, but ultimately it is not more viable.