Next Article in Journal
Application of Geospatial Techniques in Evaluating Spatial Variability of Commercially Harvested Mangoes in Bangladesh
Previous Article in Journal
Characterizing the Long-Term Landscape Dynamics of a Typical Cloudy Mountainous Area in Northwest Yunnan, China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 14
Issue 20
10.3390/su142013489
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Prospects for Organic Farming in Coping with Climate Change and Enhancing Food Security in Southern Africa: A Systematic Literature Review

by
Siphelele Vincent Wekeza
1,
Melusi Sibanda
1,* and
Kenneth Nhundu
2
1
Department of Agriculture, Faculty of Science & Agriculture, University of Zululand, KwaDlangezwa 3886, South Africa
2
Economic Analysis Unit, Agricultural Research Council (ARC), P.O. Box 8783, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(20), 13489; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013489
Submission received: 22 September 2022 / Revised: 14 October 2022 / Accepted: 17 October 2022 / Published: 19 October 2022
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The potential for organic farming (OF) as a system that enhances climate change (CC) adaptation and improves food security in Africa has been a provocative topic in global discussions. Although OF is promptly increasing globally, the pertinent question is to figure out how OF can result in sustainable food production systems. This systematic literature review was undertaken through two database searches to maximize available data and relevant literature (Scopus and Wiley Online Library), resulting in 2069 documents published between 2007 and 2022. After excluding documents that were duplicates, not presented in English and irrelevant, 538 documents remained. From the remaining documents, 406 were excluded after careful review (not meeting at least one of the inclusion criteria), and 132 documents remained. Finally, 95 documents were excluded after assessing and reviewing full-text articles for eligibility. As a result, 37 documents were included (eligible) in the systematic review. The inclusion criteria followed in this study considered language, thematic focus and document type. The reviewed articles suggest that OF can be one of the climate change adaptation options, preserve environmental impact and improve food security. However, the relative performance in OF differs from region to region. Correspondingly, the organic–conventional yield gap mostly depends on crops and cropping practices. This review concludes the prospects of organic agriculture in Southern Africa are still largely untapped, particularly by smallholder farmers who remain uncertified. Therefore, the review recommends organised interventions on various fronts, starting with organic certification and regulation. Accordingly, sustainability (economic, environmental and social) and investments in OF need to be reinforced and promoted by stakeholders, as it has the potential to alleviate the swarming farming challenges posed by climate change and to address food insecurity.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, agriculture is one of the major contributors to environmental destruction, resulting from the impact on the soil to increase global food production [1]. However, despite major efforts to increase global food production, more than a billion people experience insufficient food and undernourishment [2,3]. Organic farming (OF) is frequently indicated to improve food insufficiency and undernourishment and help achieve sustainable food security (FS). Food security is having ready access to adequate, affordable and nutritious food at all times. However, OF constitutes about 1 percent of global agricultural land and supplies from about 1 to 8 percent of total food sales in the European and North American nations [4]. The global organic market is valued at around USD 37 billion. Out of the USD 37 billion, the market for herbal and medicinal plants alone is worth USD 14 billion, which is anticipated to reach USD 5 trillion by 2050. The ‘organic’ brand is known and bought by several consumers and is the fastest emerging sector in the world [5,6]. Organic farming is a modern extensive farming method that is acceptably regulated in agriculture. Therefore, it is critical to assess its benefits and show how its profitability and sustainability could be improved.
Contrariwise, the advantages and benefits associated with OF are generally contested, even though certain researchers postulate that it reduces poverty among rural households. Moreover, portrayed as one of the remedies for achieving food security, OF research has shown less evidence that it will improve food shortages and reduce ecological destruction. On the other side, food production has declined due to unsustainable farming methods [7]. For instance, over the past 20 years, data shows that the per-capita food output in Southern Africa has decreased by about twenty percent due to a decline in soil fertility [4]. Nonetheless, some scholars believe that OF offers a chance to enhance soil fertility, thereby sequentially improving food production [3,4,7,8]. A similar emphasis was made by Rahmaiah et al. [9] that OF can offer a lot, such as soil fertility improvement, environmental protection and safety, increasing farmers’ income and premium prices for organic products sold in the market.
Generally, OF is regarded as a good production system for sustainable agriculture. It could help in the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 2, to end hunger (zero hunger goal) [10,11]. Organic farming is also considered a proper production method for commercial and smallholder farmers [11,12]. Generally, OF can play a vital role in achieving the United Nations (UN) SDGs [11]. Consequently, a swift move towards sustainable agricultural practices such as OF is needed for global sustainable food systems. If the global community desires to maintain sustainable food systems for future generations, OF should be at the forefront of achieving the SDGs [13]. Additionally, the achievement of, for example, SDG #2 has the potential to assist in tackling many challenges facing the globe, including climate change (CC) [14]. Climate change and food insecurity are primarily felt in Africa, including Southern Africa [15]. Food insecurity refers to a situation in which the population or individuals have limited access to the availability of adequate nutritious, safe food that is socially acceptable.
In addition, CC is commonly known as a threat to agriculture and FS across Southern Africa and around the world [16]. The global mean temperature is increasing, which results in frequent droughts, heatwaves and storms and is changing life cycles and geographical status, making crop and livestock production more difficult. Organic farming can help reduce carbon emissions, enhance soil fertility and improve climate resilience [17]. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions for crop production and enhanced carbon sequestration makes organic agriculture a farming system with many advantages and vast potential for mitigating and adapting to CC. Organic farming enhances soil organic matter content, which helps prevent nutrient and water loss and helps farmers adapt to CC. This CC adaptation strategy makes soils more resilient to floods, droughts and land degradation [18].
The discussions on the OF system’s reliability include various issues: complying with standards, processes and the challenges involved in the certification. Additionally, coping with the effects of CC and improving FS, economic, environmental and social aspects come into play, further defining the compatibility of this farming method. It is known that economic benefits from OF are a top priority for most farmers; however, in the long run, environmental and social aspects and sustainability have an equally important role. With this vision, studies need to deeply analyse how OF best suits the local communities in developing countries. If OF is to be endorsed, theoretically, it is necessary to understand which steps should be followed to grow and sustain it in the long run. For developing countries like South Africa, mainly confronted by a prevalence of CC, food (in)security and rising costs of farming inputs, it is more than necessary to understand how OF materialises to deal with these issues. This review will inform policymakers, relevant agricultural stakeholders, researchers and smallholder farmers about the importance of improving CC adaptation and mitigation strategies and FS and sustainable agricultural development policies.
Several scholars have focused on the advantages regarding OF practices. However, this review addresses the question(s) regarding the OF benefits in the context of its sustainability and reliability and CC adaptability, FS and environmental friendliness. Moreover, this review is conducted to assess organic farming as a tool for climate change adaptation and food security in the Sub-Saharan region. This review looks at whether farmers use OF as one of the CC adaptation tools and whether OF could significantly improve farmers’ FS status and better their livelihoods.
This review analyses various scholars’ positions regarding OF, CC and FS. The level of analysis is theoretically informative and reviews the literature systematically on OF, CC and FS between 2007 and 2022. This review paper is split into four sections: the introduction, a description of the systematic process used (methodology), the review results and discussion on OF benefits associated with aspects of CC and FS and the conclusion.

2. Materials and Methods

The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic literature review centred around the perspective that OF is a tool for CC adaptation and FS in the context of sustainable farming systems. Relevant research articles were studied, and after collecting, considering, assessing and assimilating data from two database sources, relevant articles were used for this review. The review was conducted systematically through books (chapters), peer-reviewed articles, reports and accredited journals. The keywords used to search the information were organic farming (OF), climate change (CC), and food security (FS). These terms were often filtered with specific search criteria. The search terminologies mentioned were generally used to find correlated studies in developing countries. Articles not in English print were excluded together with those from grey literature sources. The PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) [19] were followed. Articles and documents that met the criteria were carefully reviewed to exclude those not within the scope of the study.

Search Strategy and Inclusion Criteria

The assessment reported below draws upon a systematic review of all documents searched through Scopus and Wiley Online Library. A search through the Scopus database resulted in 47 documents fitting the search criteria. The Scopus search filter that was followed is: (TITLE-ABS-KEY (“organic farming” AND “climate change” AND “food security”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (“organic farming” AND “climate change” AND “food security” AND “Southern Africa”)) AND PUBYEAR > 2006 AND PUBYEAR < 2023. A search through Wiley Online Library resulted in 2022 journal articles and book chapters. This search was done using the following ‘Title-Abs-key’ search query: “organic farming”, “food security”, AND “climate change”. The above search was narrowed down through the following criteria (applied filter): “Agriculture” AND “Journal” AND “Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture”, and “Pub Year (2007–2022)”. The Scopus and Wiley Online Library searches resulted in 2069 articles, reports and chapters. The inclusion criteria followed in this review considered: language (documents reported in English considered only), the thematic focus (the main topic of organic farming or organic agriculture concerning climate change and food security) and document type (journals, reports, peer-reviewed articles, and book chapters).
Only documents that met all three criteria were deemed eligible and included in this review. The initial database search (initial search was on the 24th of April 2022) resulted in 2069 documents published between 2007 and 2022. The search period (2007–2022) was chosen because it was when OF was starting to gain more attention. After excluding documents that were duplicates, not presented in English and irrelevant, 538 documents remained. Out of 538 documents that remained, 406 of them were excluded after careful review (not meeting at least one of the inclusion criteria), and 132 remained. Finally, 95 documents were excluded after assessing and reviewing full-text articles for eligibility. As a result, 37 documents were included in the systematic review. The remaining 37 documents (see Table 1) were eligible for this review’s analysis. Figure 1 and Table 1 summarise the review selection process and the type of documents included in the systematic review, respectively.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Organic Farming Contribution to Food Security

Food security is defined as the ability of all individuals at all times to have access to sufficient, healthy and nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active lifestyle [20,21]. The four pillars of FS should be part of the conversation for everyone to be food secure. These four pillars of food security are summarised into scopes: food accessibility, affordability, availability and stability [22]. Table 2 shows the results of OF’s contribution to achieving FS.
The study of Bisht [33] emphasised that food accessibility in OF is achieved when households and individuals have sufficient food to consume and a proper diet. Numerous studies have shown that OF could significantly improve farmers’ FS status and livelihoods [34,35,36]. On the other hand, if OF has a significant role in providing sustainable FS and incomes, it has to be accessible to poor-resourced farmers. In its approach, OF has the potential to achieve at least three of the seventeen SDGs, such as no poverty, zero hunger and good health and well-being (Table 3).
It is commonly assumed that the productivity and yield in OF are lower than in conventional farming, which might have negative implications in FS [37]. The production gap between organic and conventional agriculture increases as OF develops globally. However, with OF producing 36 percent less food for human consumption than conventional farming, the world is not yet ready to move on to a fully organic world [38]. For instance, the study by Islam et al. [39] reported that cabbage and tomato yields are lower on organic farms compared to conventional farms. Similarly, the survey carried out by El Bilali [24] indicated that, for sub-Saharan Africa, the yields for OF are about 41 percent lesser compared to conventional farming. However, Avadi et al. [40] and Ferdous et al. [41] reported that organic cotton, soybean and wheat production systems provided significantly higher gross margins and resulted in about 25 percent growth compared to conventional farming. In addition, Le Campion et al. [42] and Singh [43] suggest that OF is likely to get higher yields and be sustainable compared to conventional systems.
Generally, OF is analysed through three aspects: social, economic and environmental, and these three aspects can improve food security [29]. Organic farming can reduce crop failure and solve food security and economic problems [27,31]. Organic farming (OF) is generally a sustainable and environmentally friendly method that provides developing countries with various economic, environmental and social gains [28]. Even though organic farming provides lesser yields than conventional farming, they are more cost-effective for farmers since consumers are willing to pay more for their products [26].
Organic farming requires more solid work and can positively contribute to long-lasting job opportunities, especially in rural areas [10,29]. It plays a significant role in employment opportunities in rural areas, providing more hiring chances for seasonal workers [27,31]. Moreover, given the increase in organic product sales, prospects are more likely to continue to grow in jobs related to organic products [10]. The beauty of OF is that it stimulates entrepreneurship. It contributes to reducing immigration in rural areas, enabling new and diverse members of society to engage in agricultural practices and helping improve employment and boost household income [27]. Although the above is true for OF, it is also true for other farming methods. In addition, OF acknowledges the importance of indigenous knowledge. It combines it with production techniques that enhance social ability while, on the other hand empowering farmers and local communities, which is in line with achieving food security [26].

3.2. Organic Farming as a Climate Change Adaptation Strategy

The reviewed literature suggests that OF can be one of the strategies to adapt to the effects of climate change in Africa. For instance, the study by Avadi et al. [40] argued that organic cotton grown in Mali could withstand harsh environmental conditions and produce low greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This observation is also in line with the study conducted by Smith et al. [44], which indicated that a switch to full organic production could result in an 8 percent decrease in GHG emissions compared to conventional production. Similarly, the study by Yodkhum et al. [45] states that a fair comparison between OF and conventional farming of paddy rice clearly shows that the GHG emissions of organic paddy rice were substantially lower than conventional production. In the same way, Skinner et al. [46] show that GHG emissions are much lower (about 40%) in organic farms than in conventional ones (Table 4). Therefore, this suggests that the increase in OF can be considered a GHG mitigation measure worldwide.
Generally, OF is also well-thought-out to support adaptation to CC. For example, El Bilali [24] found that OF is responsible for decreasing the risks of extreme climatic events, which could have resulted in a major decrease in economic growth globally. Similarly, OF is believed to have the potential to help reduce carbon emissions, enhance soil fertility and improve climate resilience [17]. The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions for crop production and enhanced carbon sequestration makes OF a system with many advantages and vast potential for mitigating and adapting to CC. Additionally, OF helps farmers adapt to climate change since high soil organic matter content and cover helps to prevent nutrient and water loss. This aspect makes soils more resilient to floods, droughts and land degradation [18]. As a CC adaptation approach, OF will help farmers adjust to CC and improve FS through access to healthy and nutritious food. Changes in climatic conditions negatively influence numerous livelihood factors of many farmers in OF.
Numerous studies have identified the contextual factors driving GHG emissions in both organic and conventional systems. Roos et al. [37] discovered that the benefit of OF is that it consumes lower energy levels for vegetables and fruits than conventional farming. Even if that is the case, several farmers are still sceptical about fully shifting towards OF because of its vulnerability to lower yields compared to conventional agriculture.

3.3. Organic Farming and its Impact on the Environment

In the coming years, the demand for food has been predicted to increase due to population growth [29]. A 60 percent increase in global agricultural production is expected to match the growing food demand [49]. The global food demand is a major challenge since land, water and many other natural resources are becoming scarce [50,51]. Furthermore, the synthetic agricultural systems practised worldwide are causing environmental problems [52,53]. Environmental issues include land degradation, biodiversity loss, water pollution and climate change [29]. Regardless of the reduced workable (arable) environment, the increase in global agricultural production will require intense changes in the farm sector and the technologies employed. However, many researchers have asked this pertinent question: What is the impact of organic farming on the environment (Table 5)?
The primary goal for OF is to increase agricultural production, successfully improve household FS and conserve and protect the environment [31,32,54]. Organic farming enhances soil quality, ensures the farm’s future and offers environmental healthiness [31]. Therefore, productive soil is reliable and most useful in the production cycle [31,32]. Through OF, more nutrients are given to the soil, resulting in less soil destruction and increasing soil biodiversity, thereby improving FS [10,55].
Likewise, soil fertility increases through minimum tillage, organic fertilizers, crop rotation and green manure [55]. Moreover, OF boosts FS by improving resistance to diseases and pests while combating desertification by reducing soil erosion, protecting water sources and preserving and enhancing environmental services [10]. One thing that OF strives for is avoiding chemical residues and pesticides. It also advocates for consuming fresh products, securing healthy diets, taking advantage of the nutritional benefits of organic products and improving FS [28,56]. Organic farming is also thought to complement carbon sequestration, as it offers sustainable alternatives that eliminate synthetic fertilizers. However, the effect of OF on carbon sequestration needs further understanding and research.
Food insecurity is one of the world’s most important issues in the current century [57,58]. Providing food for the ever-growing population requires a considerable increase in agricultural production [25,59]. Moreover, given the importance of FS and environmental degradation due to extreme agricultural chemicals usage, attention has shifted towards organic farming [41,60]. Organic farming is a farming system that aligns with sustainable development and agricultural farming [61]. Sustainable agricultural development is a progression that creates potential agricultural achievement environments [62,63,64]. Those environments try to incorporate knowledge growth, technology accessibility and apportionment of inputs and outputs [64]. Therefore, it is difficult to prevent environmental degradation when agricultural production solely depends on conventional agriculture. Additionally, given the issues associated with conventional agriculture, it is now a chance to earnestly consider the proposals and implementation of new sustainable agricultural traditions on environmental and socioeconomic grounds. It is necessary to grow and feed people properly but in a way that restores the soil and preserves healthy ecosystems [61].
Several studies have analysed the relationship between organic production and the preservation of the environment. El Bilali [24] shows in his systematic review that organic cocoa farms tend to conserve more natural biodiversity when compared with conventional farms. In line with the above statement, the studies of Singh [43] and Brust [65] believe that OF builds and improves soil structure and fertility and significantly increases its biological activity. The reasons for improved soil structure and texture are linked to lower input intensity and the use of natural resources. The key drivers of environmental friendliness for OF are using organic fertilizers and natural pesticides [30].
Moreover, Goel et al. [47] and Gaudare et al. [48] show that, although OF production contributes less to GHG emissions, it is also environmentally friendly compared to conventional production. Repairing the environmental loss in agricultural production techniques necessitates practices such as OF method for food production. Therefore, this finding demonstrates that the relative performance of OF is mostly site-specific and depends on the methods used in organic and conventional farms in each environment.

3.4. Potential Economic Benefits of Organic Farming

From the perspective of environmental and socioeconomic concerns, the acceptance and implementation of the proposal for new sustainable agricultural systems can increase the global organic market [61]. The global organic market is valued at around USD 37 billion. Out of the USD 37 billion, the demand for herbal and medicinal plants alone is worth USD 14 billion, which is anticipated to reach USD 5 trillion by 2050 [66]. There has been remarkable growth within the global organic markets, which has motivated numerous developing countries to focus more and grow their organic agricultural sectors [66,67]. Over the years, it has been evident that the total land reserved for organic intentions has increased significantly [61].
The total land area that is under organic cultivation worldwide is about 57.8 million hectares, where Australia has the most extensive organic agricultural land (27.1 million hectares), followed by Argentina (3 million hectares) and China (2.4 million hectares) [66]. On the other hand, India has the largest number of organic agricultural producers globally, with 835,000 certified organic producers [66,68]. India is home to over 30 percent of organic producers (2.7 million) worldwide, contributing only about 2.59 percent [68]. Developing countries such as Uganda and Mexico are the second (210,352) and third (210,000) largest certified organic producers, respectively [66,68]. These developing countries have significantly improved their organic sectors over the years.

Yield from Organic Farming

In developing countries, yields are often too low in organic farms compared to conventional farms, which is one of the drawbacks for some farmers within the production chain [27,44]. Smith [69] argues that OF is more advantageous to under-resourced farmers in enhancing their FS status and growing income. The potential benefits of OF mostly depend upon many factors such as economic, environmental, social aspects, health and dietary gains from organic foods. Generally, yields form an integral part of farmers’ success; for this reason, they are directly linked to their economic returns. The ultimate aim of the farming process is to improve income together with the livelihood of families and societies involved [4]. Therefore, it is important to look at the cost-effectiveness of organic methods to predict their feasibility compared to conventional systems. Additionally, if the cost-effectiveness of OF is similar to conventional farming, farmers will consider shifting from conventional to OF.
Numerous studies have compared OF and conventional farming [4,25,70,71,72,73]. In their studies, they concentrated on the economic competitiveness of both farming methods. Their finding was that the labour expenditure in OF was higher (about 7%) than in conventional farming. The high labour cost for OF was somewhat compensated by the costs of fertilisers and pesticides used in conventional farming. Correspondingly, Eyinade [4] recommends that an increased labour force is needed for organic production as a means to enhance rural stability in most developing countries. This increased labour requirement, in turn, is an opportunity to create employment and may result in economic enhancement for many rural communities. For this reason, the role played by OF should not be underestimated since it has been shown by Eyinade [4] and El Bilali [24] to have a positive effect on the economy of developing nations and through its provision of an increased labour force, thus leading to rural stability (Table 6).

3.5. Sustainability Driven by Organic Farming

Researchers often use the term sustainability to contextualise how the earth’s natural resources are utilised in agricultural methods, and whether these methods are within sustainable agrarian systems [74,75]. Looking from the farm production context, Khan et al. [76] define sustainable agriculture as economically viable, environmentally friendly, providing efficiency and functionality to society over the long run and socially beneficial. Sustainable agriculture and different food systems are responsible for providing adequate and healthy food for all while conserving the environment and supporting producers to earn a decent living [77,78]. Many scholars agree that agricultural production systems need to change to advance towards and achieve several SDGs while staying within environmental boundaries [79,80,81,82]. However, ways to accomplish this are hugely argued, with the two most narratives leading the debate: (1) finding different steps to improve the proficiency of conventional farming while reducing negative externalities, contrasted with (2) redesigning farming systems centred on agroecological ideologies.
The capacity of any sector to sustain a defined level of development is precisely interconnected with the achievement of sustainability principles [83]. It is generally known that sustainability consists of three-dimensional concepts that include economic, environmental and social aspects [84]. From this perspective, a shift from conventional farming to OF can contribute to the sustainability of the places at risk of being abandoned. Consequently, OF is believed to be a suitable and sustainable alternative for increasing FS, improving farmers’ income and reducing input costs [9,53]. In addition, OF is perceived to produce healthy food for household consumption and preserve an ecofriendly environment [85] (Table 7).
Several factors should be considered when looking at the sustainability of crop production, including economic performance and health aspects, which make OF sustainable [83]. It is equally important to consider that OF provides several environmental benefits, including biodiversity preservation, better soil structure, adaptation approaches, conserving energy and reducing GHG [86]. Now, looking at the continued debate around OF and conventional farming: the discussion provides differing views for a good reason. As mentioned earlier, the transformative practices around OF have shown many sustainability benefits. Still, it has produced lower yields in many respects, which casts doubts on its sustainability per unit product [83]. On the other hand, conventional methods are highly productive (in terms of yield/s and economic sense). Still, they have been proven to harm the environment, such as biodiversity loss, soil destruction and increased GHG emissions [23,30,87].

4. Conclusions

Agricultural production based on organic principles is fast-growing and well-known as a contributor toward poverty alleviation, achieving FS and preserving the environment. This view is irrespective of the fact that some researchers have criticized OF as a drawback to agriculture, as it produces relatively lower yields. However, OF has some clear advantages and favourable prospects. As a case in point, the positive impact on the environment, good performance in relatively adverse conditions and a better livelihood for under-resourced farmers in many instances cannot be understated. Moreover, it is significant to highlight that the comparative achievements between OF and conventional farming differ considerably. This relative achievement is context-specific, and projections of the average performance for OF have limited practical use.
Compared to other continents, Southern Africa is way behind in adopting OF. This situation is clearly shown by a relatively small quantity of retrievable sources regarding OF. Notwithstanding the above, this review provides evidence of a huge difference in yield and GHG emissions between organic and conventional systems. On the other hand, the key factor faced by the production of organic food is the proficiency of the system to increase its yields compared to the conventional system. The organic production method indicates some valuable system-driven skills, crucial for improving protracted sustainability and enhancing biological diversity and is beneficial to poor-resourced farmers. The basic goals for OF are to achieve ideal agroecological systems that are socially, environmentally and economically viable. Although it is nearly impossible to suddenly shift from a conventional to OF system, particularly by smallholder farmers, there is a need for a schematic and systemic shift that will balance the shortfalls of traditional and OF. A gradual worldwide transition to OF may not only have the potential to support and enhance food production objectives but also help to conserve and recover soil fertility and health. Consequently, sustainability and investments in OF should be supported and advocated by multiple stakeholders since it has the prospects to alleviate the swarming farming challenges posed by climate change and to address food insecurity.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization; writing—original draft preparation, S.V.W.; writing—review, editing; supervision and validation, M.S. and K.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Research Foundation (NRF) grant number: SFH180603339360.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge UNIZULU Research and Innovation Office.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pawlak, K.; Kołodziejczak, M. The role of agriculture in ensuring food security in developing countries: Considerations in the context of the problem of sustainable food production. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Hannah, L.; Roehrdanz, P.R.; Bahadur, K.C.K.; Fraser, E.D.; Donatti, C.I.; Saenz, L.; van Soesbergen, A. The environmental consequences of climate-driven agricultural frontiers. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0228305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Nicholls, E.; Ely, A.; Birkin, L.; Basu, P.; Goulson, D. The contribution of small-scale food production in urban areas to the sustainable development goals: A review and case study. Sustain. Sci. 2020, 15, 1585–1599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Eyinade, G.A.; Mushunje, A.; Yusuf, S.F.G. A systematic synthesis on the context reliant performance of organic farming. AIMS Agric. Food 2021, 6, 142–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gundala, R.R.; Singh, A. What motivates consumers to buy organic foods? Results of an empirical study in the United States. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0257288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Murphy, B.; Martini, M.; Fedi, A.; Loera, B.L.; Elliott, C.T.; Dean, M. Consumer trust in organic food and organic certifications in four European countries. Food Control 2022, 133, 108484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tongwane, M.I.; Moeletsi, M.E.; Tsubo, M. Trends of carbon emissions from applications of nitrogen fertiliser and crop residues to agricultural soils in South Africa. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 272, 111056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Abdelrahman, H.; Cocozza, C.; Olk, D.C.; Ventrella, D.; Montemurro, F.; Miano, T. Changes in labile fractions of soil organic matter during the conversion to organic farming. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2020, 20, 1019–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rahmaniah, H.; Darma, R.; Asrul, L.; Taufik, D.K. The potential of organic agriculture, soil structure and ‘farmers’ income for inclusive agriculture sustainability: A review. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2020; Volume 575, p. 012099. [Google Scholar]
  10. Rodriguez, A.O.V. Global Value Chains (GVC) and Social Learning. Developing Producer Capabilities in Smallholder Farmers: The Case of San Francisco Produce/Peninsula Organics (SFP/PO). Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  11. Williams, J.; Alter, T.; Shrivastava, P. Systemic governance of sustainable agriculture: Implementing sustainable development goals and climate-friendly farming. Outlook Agric. 2018, 47, 192–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Adeniyi, D.A.S. Sustainable Irrigation Agriculture for Food Security and Poverty Reduction among Smallholder Farmers in Northern Nigeria. Ph.D. Thesis, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  13. Boyd, C.E.; D’Abramo, L.R.; Glencross, B.D.; Huyben, D.C.; Juarez, L.M.; Lockwood, G.S.; Tucker, C.S. Achieving sustainable aquaculture: Historical and current perspectives and future needs and challenges. J. World Aquac. Soc. 2020, 51, 578–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Raszkowski, A.; Bartniczak, B. On the road to sustainability: Implementation of the 2030 agenda sustainable development goals (SDG) in Poland. Sustainability 2019, 11, 366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Dube, K.; Nhamo, G.; Chikodzi, D. Climate change-induced droughts and tourism: Impacts and responses of Western Cape province, South Africa. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. 2020, 39, 100–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Scherer, L.; Svenning, J.C.; Huang, J.; Seymour, C.; Sandel, B.; Mueller, N.; Siebert, S. Global priorities of environmental issues to combat food insecurity and biodiversity loss. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 730, 139096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yanakittkul, P.; Aungvaravong, C. A model of ‘farmers’ intentions towards organic farming: A case study on rice farming in Thailand. Heliyon 2020, 6, e3039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Aryal, J.P.; Sapkota, T.B.; Khurana, R.; Khatri-Chhetri, A.; Jat, M.L. Climate change and agriculture in South Asia: Adaptation options in smallholder production systems. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2019, 22, 5045–5075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Prisma Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6, e1000097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Nikolaus, C.J.; Ellison, B.; Nickols-Richardson, S.M. College ‘students’ interpretations of food security questions: Results from cognitive interviews. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. World Health Organization (WHO). Regional Overview of Food Security in Latin America and the Caribbean: Towards Healthier Food Environments that Address All Forms of Malnutrition; Food & Agriculture Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 12. [Google Scholar]
  22. Campi, M.; Duenas, M.; Fagiolo, G. Specialization in food production affects global food security and food systems sustainability. World Dev. 2021, 141, 105411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. El Chami, D.; Daccache, A.; El Moujabber, M. How can sustainable agriculture increase climate resilience? A systematic review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. El Bilali, H. Organic food and farming in West Africa: A systematic review. J. Sustain. Org. Agric. Syst. 2021, 70, 94–102. [Google Scholar]
  25. Jouzi, Z.; Azadi, H.; Taheri, F.; Zarafshani, K.; Gebrehiwot, K.; Van Passel, S.; Lebailly, P. Organic farming and small-scale farmers: Main opportunities and challenges. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 132, 144–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Singh, M. Sustainability of Organic Farming Compared to Conventional Farming in Chitwan District of ‘Nepal’. Ph.D. Thesis, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Japan, Hiroshima, Japan, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mhlophe, J.B. Antecedents of Consumer Purchase Intentions towards Organic Food Produces: A Case Study of the Johannesburg Municipality. Master’s Thesis, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  28. Morshedi, L.; Lashgarara, F.; Hosseini, S.J.F.; Najafabadi, M.O. The role of organic farming for improving food security from the perspective of farmers. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Bliss, K.; Padel, S.; Cullen, B.; Ducottet, C.; Mullender, S.; Rasmussen, I.A.; Moeskops, B. Exchanging knowledge to improve organic arable farming: An evaluation of knowledge exchange tools with farmer groups across Europe. Org. Agric. 2018, 9, 383–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lee, H.J.; Yun, Y.L. Consumers’ perceptions of organic food attributes and cognitive and affective attitudes as determinants of their purchase intentions toward organic food. Food Qual. Prefer. 2015, 39, 259–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Badgley, C. Biodiversity and Sustainable Agriculture. In Promoting Biodiversity in Food Systems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 165–182. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sivathanu, B. Factors affecting consumer preference towards the organic food purchases. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2015, 8, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bisht, I.S. Agri-food system dynamics of smallholder hill farming communities of Uttarakhand in north-western India: Socio-economic and policy considerations for sustainable development. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 45, 417–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Meemken, E.M.; Qaim, M. Organic agriculture, food security, and the environment. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2018, 10, 39–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Schreer, V.; Padmanabhan, M. The many meanings of organic farming: Framing food security and food sovereignty in Indonesia. Org. Agric. 2020, 10, 327–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Khadda, B.S. Prospects of organic farming in India. A Voice Agric. 2021, 2, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  37. Roos, E.; Bajzelj, B.; Weil, C.; Andersson, E.; Bossio, D.; Gordon, L.J. Moving beyond organic–A food system approach to assessing sustainable and resilient farming. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 28, 100487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Barbieri, P.; Pellerin, S.; Seufert, V.; Smith, L.; Ramankutty, N.; Nesme, T. Global option space for organic agriculture is delimited by nitrogen availability. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Islam, M.A.; Ferdous, G.; Akter, A.; Hossain, M.M.; Nandwani, D. Effect of organic, inorganic fertilizers and plant spacing on the growth and yield of cabbage. Agriculture 2017, 7, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Avadi, A.; Marcin, M.; Biard, Y.; Renou, A.; Gourlot, J.P.; Basset-Mens, C. Life cycle assessment of organic and conventional non-Bt cotton products from Mali. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2020, 25, 678–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ferdous, Z.; Zulfiqar, F.; Datta, A.; Hasan, A.K.; Sarker, A. Potential and challenges of organic agriculture in Bangladesh: A review. J. Crop Improv. 2021, 35, 403–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Le Campion, A.; Oury, F.X.; Heumez, E.; Rolland, B. Conventional versus organic farming systems: Dissecting comparisons to improve cereal organic breeding strategies. Org. Agric. 2020, 10, 63–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Singh, M. Organic farming for sustainable agriculture. Indian J. Org. Farming 2021, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  44. Smith, O.M.; Cohen, A.L.; Rieser, C.J.; Davis, A.G.; Taylor, J.M.; Adesanya, A.W.; Crowder, D.W. Organic farming provides reliable environmental benefits but increases variability in crop yields: A global meta-analysis. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2019, 3, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Yodkhum, S.; Gheewala, S.H.; Sampattagul, S. Life cycle GHG evaluation of organic rice production in northern Thailand. J. Environ. Manag. 2017, 196, 217–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Skinner, C.; Gattinger, A.; Krauss, M.; Krause, H.M.; Mayer, J.; Van Der Heijden, M.G.; Mader, P. The impact of long-term organic farming on soil-derived greenhouse gas emissions. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Goel, R.; Debbarma, P.; Kumari, P.; Suyal, D.C.; Kumar, S.; Mahapatra, B.S. Assessment of soil chemical quality, soil microbial population and plant growth parameters under organic and conventional rice–wheat cropping system. Agric. Res. 2021, 10, 193–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Gaudare, U.; Pellerin, S.; Benoit, M.; Durand, G.; Dumont, B.; Barbieri, P.; Nesme, T. Comparing productivity and feed-use efficiency between organic and conventional livestock animals. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 024012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Renner, A.; Cadillo-Benalcazar, J.J.; Benini, L.; Giampietro, M. Environmental pressure of the European agricultural system: Anticipating the biophysical consequences of internalization. Ecosyst. Serv. 2020, 46, 101195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hasegawa, T.; Fujimori, S.; Havlik, P.; Valin, H.; Bodirsky, B.L.; Doelman, J.C.; Fellmann, T.; Kyle, P.; Koopman, J.F.; Lotze-campen, H.; et al. Risk of increased food insecurity under stringent global climate change mitigation policy. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018, 8, 699–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Akinmoladun, O.F.; Muchenje, V.; Fon, F.N.; Mpendulo, C.T. Small ruminants: Farmers’ hope in a world threatened by water scarcity. Animals 2019, 9, 456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Meybeck, A.; Laval, E.; Levesque, R.; Parent, G. Food Security and Nutrition in the Age of Climate Change; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  53. Tripathy, S.; Khan, A. Efficiency of organic farming to maintain the food security and doubling farmer’s income in India. Int. J. Sci. Adv. Res. Technol. 2020, 6, 324–327. [Google Scholar]
  54. Robinson, L.; Segal, J.; Segal, R. Organic Foods: What You Need to Know. Available online: https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm (accessed on 13 January 2022).
  55. Khapayi, M.; Celliers, P.R. Factors limiting and preventing emerging farmers to progress to commercial agricultural farming in the King William’s Town area of the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. S. Afr. J. Agric. Ext. 2016, 44, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Hasimu, H.; Marchesini, S.; Canavari, M. A concept mapping study on organic food consumers in Shanghai, China. Appetite 2017, 108, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ahlem, Z.; Hammas, M.A. Organic farming. A path of sustainable development. Int. J. Econ. Manag. Sci. 2017, 6, 456. [Google Scholar]
  58. Pollard, C.M.; Booth, S. Food insecurity and hunger in rich countries—It is time for action against inequality. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Qiu, Z.; Egidi, E.; Liu, H.; Kaur, S.; Singh, B.K. New frontiers in agriculture productivity: Optimised microbial inoculants and in situ microbiome engineering. Biotechnol. Adv. 2019, 37, 107371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Djokoto, J.G.; Owusu, V.; Awunyo-Vitor, D. Adoption of organic agriculture: Evidence from cocoa farming in Ghana. Cogent Food Agric. 2016, 2, 1242181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Dessart, F.J.; Barreiro-Hurlé, J.; van Bavel, R. Behavioural factors affecting the adoption of sustainable farming practices: A policy-oriented review. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2019, 46, 417–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Nwankpa, N. Sustainable agricultural development in Nigeria: A way out of hunger and poverty. Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 6, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Trukhachev, V.I.; Sklyarov, I.Y.; Sklyarova, Y.M.; Gorlov, S.M.; Volkogonova, A.V. Monitoring of efficiency of Russian agricultural enterprises functioning and reserves for their sustainable development. Montenegrin J. Econ. 2018, 14, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Streimikis, J.; Balezentis, T. Agricultural sustainability assessment framework integrating sustainable development goals and interlinked priorities of environmental, climate and agriculture policies. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1702–1712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Brust, G.E. Management strategies for organic vegetable fertility. Saf. Pract. Org. Food 2019, 218, 193–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Asokan, R.; Murugan, D. Sustainable agriculture through organic farming in India. Multidiscip. Glob. J. Acad. Res. 2018, 5, 27–34. [Google Scholar]
  67. Hans, V. An Analysis of Sustainable Agricultural Development in India. In An Analysis of Sustainable Agricultural Development in India; SSRN: Rochester, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mendon, S.; Salins, M.; Aithal, P.S. Organic Agricultural Products: A Comparative Study of India with Other Economies. Int. J. Case Stud. Bus. IT Educ. 2018, 2, 86–97. [Google Scholar]
  69. Smith, L.G.; Kirk, G.J.; Jones, P.J.; Williams, A.G. The greenhouse gas impacts of converting food production in England and Wales to organic methods. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 4641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Crowder, D.W.; Reganold, J.P. Financial competitiveness of organic agriculture on a global scale. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 7611–7616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Reganold, J.P.; Wachter, J.M. Organic agriculture in the twenty-first century. Nat. Plants 2016, 2, 15221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Schrama, M.; De Haan, J.J.; Kroonen, M.; Verstegen, H.; Van der Putten, W.H. Crop yield gap and stability in organic and conventional farming systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2018, 256, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Muneret, L.; Mitchell, M.; Seufert, V.; Aviron, S.; Djoudi, E.A.; Pétillon, J.; Rusch, A. Evidence that organic farming promotes pest control. Nat. Sustain. 2018, 1, 361–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Luna, J.M.; House, G.J. Pest management in sustainable agricultural systems. In Sustainable Agricultural Systems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; pp. 157–173. [Google Scholar]
  75. Okigbo, B.N. Sustainable agricultural systems in tropical Africa. In Sustainable Agricultural Systems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; pp. 323–352. [Google Scholar]
  76. Khan, N.; Jhariya, M.K.; Raj, A.; Banerjee, A.; Meena, R.S. Eco-designing for sustainability. In Ecological Intensification of Natural Resources for Sustainable Agriculture; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 565–595. [Google Scholar]
  77. Plumecocq, G.; Debril, T.; Duru, M.; Magrini, M.B.; Sarthou, J.P.; Therond, O. The plurality of values in sustainable agriculture models. Ecol. Soc. 2018, 23, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Adenle, A.A.; Wedig, K.; Azadi, H. Sustainable agriculture and food security in Africa: The role of innovative technologies and international organizations. Technol. Soc. 2019, 58, 101143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Breuer, A.; Janetschek, H.; Malerba, D. Translating sustainable development goal (SDG) interdependencies into policy advice. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Visser, S.; Keesstra, S.; Maas, G.; De Cleen, M. Soil as a basis to create enabling conditions for transitions towards sustainable land management as a key to achieve the SDGs by 2030. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Leal Filho, W.; Tripathi, S.K.; Andrade Guerra, J.B.S.O.D.; Gine-Garriga, R.; Orlovic Lovren, V.; Willats, J. Using the sustainable development goals towards a better understanding of sustainability challenges. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2019, 26, 179–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Herrero, M.; Thornton, P.K.; Mason-D’Croz, D.; Palmer, J.; Bodirsky, B.L.; Pradhan, P.; Rockström, J. Articulating the effect of food systems innovation on the Sustainable Development Goals. Lancet Planet. Health 2021, 5, 50–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Eyhorn, F.; Muller, A.; Reganold, J.P.; Frison, E.; Herren, H.R.; Luttikholt, L.; Smith, P. Sustainability in global agriculture driven by organic farming. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 253–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Nasir, A.; Rao, K.S. The pathway of organizational sustainability through segregation of dimensional indicators for manufacturing enterprises. South Asian J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2020, 1, 25–33. [Google Scholar]
  85. Chand, G.; Niwas, R.; Azad, C.S. Eco-friendly and sustainable plant disease management through organic cultivation. In Precision Agriculture and Sustainable Crop Production; Chourasia, H.K., Acharya, K., Singh, V.K., Eds.; Todya & Tomorrow’s Printers and Publishers: New Delhi, India, 2020; pp. 213–218. [Google Scholar]
  86. Miftari, A. Sustainable agriculture and farmers choices among short term efficiency and preserving the future. Acad. Int. Sci. J. 2020, 11, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Wittwer, R.A.; Bender, S.F.; Hartman, K.; Hydbom, S.; Lima, R.A.; Loaiza, V.; Van Der Heijden, M.G. Organic and conservation agriculture promote ecosystem multifunctionality. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7, eabg6995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sustainability 14 13489 g001 550
Figure 1. The systematic literature review selection process guided by the PRISMA methodology. Source: Authors (2022).
Figure 1. The systematic literature review selection process guided by the PRISMA methodology. Source: Authors (2022).
Sustainability 14 13489 g001
Table
Table 1. The types of literature sources used in the review analysis.
Table 1. The types of literature sources used in the review analysis.
Literature Sources RetrievedNumber of Sources
Journal articles19
Book chapters3
Reputable reports and documents15
Total37
Source: Authors’ systematic search following the PRISMA methodology.
Table
Table 2. The results of organic farming’s contribution to achieving food security.
Table 2. The results of organic farming’s contribution to achieving food security.
Organic Farming’s Role in Improving Food SecuritySupporting Source/sSummary of the Findings/Conclusions
Improved yields from OFEyinade et al. [4]
Chami et al. [23]
El Bilali [24]
Jouzi et al. [25]		Crop yields in OF are lower compared to the conventional method. However, the organic matter from OF improves soil quality and crop yields by boosting carbon content in the soil.
Income from OFSignh [26]
Mhlophe [27]
Morshedi et al. [28]		Generally, OF earns high incomes due to premiums paid for certified organic production. Organic farming increase farm productivity and income, thereby improving food security.
Jobs creation from OFVilla Rodriguez [10]
Singh [26]
Bliss et al. [29]
Lee & Yun [30]
Badgley [31]		It plays a significant role in employment opportunities in rural areas, providing more hiring chances for seasonal workers. Moreover, prospects are more likely to continue to grow in jobs related to organic products
Improved environmental sustainabilityVilla Rodriguez [10]
Singh [26]
Morshedi et al. [28]
Bliss et al. [29]
Sivathanu [32]		It enhances soil quality, ensures the farm’s future and offers environmental healthiness. Through OF, more nutrients are given to the soil, resulting in less soil destruction and increasing soil biodiversity, improving food security
Table
Table 3. Achieving Sustainable Development Goals through organic farming reduces poverty and improves food security.
Table 3. Achieving Sustainable Development Goals through organic farming reduces poverty and improves food security.
Sustainable Development Goal(s)Potential Impact
No povertyFarmers in OF receive income from premiums of organic produce.
OF promotes sustainable production.
Zero hungerOF achieves food security and improved nutrition and promotes sustainable agriculture.
OF enhances productivity and sustainability of productive bases.
Good health and well-beingOF ensures healthy lives and promotes the well-being of all ages.
OF promotes minimal usage of chemicals and improves health and healthy lifestyles for all.
Source: Adapted from Eyinade et al. [4].
Table
Table 4. Organic farming as a climate change adaptation tool.
Table 4. Organic farming as a climate change adaptation tool.
Organic Farming’s Role as a Climate Adaptation ToolSupporting Source/sSummary of the Findings/Conclusions
Reduces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissionsJouzi et al. [25]
Morshedi et al. [28]
Roos et al. [37]
Goel et al. [47]
Gaudare et al. [48]		In terms of environmental and climate change, OF causes less pollution than conventional farming, mostly measured per unit of land. OF reduces greenhouse gas emissions for crop production and enhances carbon sequestration.
Enhances soil fertilityAbdelrahman et al. [8]
Villa Rodriguez [10]
Singh [26]
Bliss et al. [29]
Badgley [31]
Sivathanu [32]		OF has the potential to help reduce carbon emissions, enhance soil fertility and improve climate resilience. Soil fertility increases through minimum tillage, organic fertilizers, crop rotation and green manure.
Enhances soil coverRahmaniah et al. [9]
Arya et al. [18]
Roos et al. [37]		OF helps farmers adapt to climate change since high soil organic matter content and cover helps prevent nutrient and water loss. OF makes soils more resilient to floods, droughts and land degradation processes
Table
Table 5. Organic farming and its impact on the environment.
Table 5. Organic farming and its impact on the environment.
Organic Farming’s Role in the EnvironmentSupporting Source/sSummary of the Findings/Conclusions
Soil organic matterEyinade et al. [4]
Abdelrahman et al. [8]
Rahmaniah et al. [9]
Villa Rodriguez [10]
Arya et al. [18]
Roos et al. [37]		Organic matter plays a central role in maintaining soil fertility. Improvements in soil organic matter initiated by OF practices show up in the long-run and enhance environmental rehabilitation.
Soil quality and fertilityRahmaniah et al. [9]
Arya et al. [18]
Roos et al. [37]		Organic farming aims to maintain the soil’s natural fertility and improve its quality.
Soil structureYanakittkul and Aungvaravong [17]
Arya et al. [18]
Morshedi et al. [28]		Organic farming systems improve and encourage good soil structure. OF provides well-structured soil, which is important for sustaining high crop yields and controlling erosion and is crucial for the ecosystem.
Table
Table 6. Potential economic benefits from organic farming.
Table 6. Potential economic benefits from organic farming.
Potential Benefits from OFSupporting Source/sSummary of the Findings/Conclusions
Organic cost moreSingh [43]The cost of organic products is higher than that of conventional products, as the organic price tag closely reflects the true cost of growing the food, thus earning farmers/producers more money.
Farm incomeSingh [26]
Bliss et al. [29]		The economic viability in OF ensures that the producers receive higher incomes.
Reduced input costsSingh [43]Organic farming systems improve and increase the soil’s organic matter content, reducing input costs since the soil is deemed rich in nutrient content.
Table
Table 7. Sustainability is driven by Organic farming.
Table 7. Sustainability is driven by Organic farming.
Organic Farming’s Role in the EnvironmentSupporting Source/sSummary of the Findings/Conclusions
Environmental sustainabilityEyinade [4]
Singh [26]
Bliss et al. [29]
Badgley [31]		Organic farming advocates for the sustainability of the environment through composting and organic pest management while talking against the use of artificial chemicals, antibiotics and hormones in the production of crops
Social sustainabilityMhlophe [27]
Lee and Yun [30]		Organic farming stimulates entrepreneurship enabling new and various members of society to be involved in agricultural practices and thus help to improve employment and boost household income.
Economic sustainabilityMorshedi et al. [28]
Badgley [31] 		The economic aspect of OF is that it uses available local assets instead of capital-intensive resources, allowing poor farmers to improve their farm productivity and fertility without depending on costly external inputs.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wekeza, S.V.; Sibanda, M.; Nhundu, K. Prospects for Organic Farming in Coping with Climate Change and Enhancing Food Security in Southern Africa: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13489. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013489

AMA Style

Wekeza SV, Sibanda M, Nhundu K. Prospects for Organic Farming in Coping with Climate Change and Enhancing Food Security in Southern Africa: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability. 2022; 14(20):13489. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013489

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wekeza, Siphelele Vincent, Melusi Sibanda, and Kenneth Nhundu. 2022. "Prospects for Organic Farming in Coping with Climate Change and Enhancing Food Security in Southern Africa: A Systematic Literature Review" Sustainability 14, no. 20: 13489. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013489

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop