More handpicked essays just for you.
Opinion on technology in agriculture
How has technology changed agriculture
How has agriculture changed over time
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Industrialization and Farming Farmers possess a broader expanse of farming knowledge in the present day due to technology. Industrialization revolutionized the idea of farming, bringing about many efficient shortcuts for the farmers to use. In “Renewing Husbandry” author Wendell Berry, a farmer who experiences firsthand the revolution of farming, discusses farming before the effects of technology and how technology has since affected it. In the process of witnessing the revolution of farming, he comes to the conclusion that technology means the end of husbandry, destroying the true meaning of farming. However, Berry fails to recognize that the world is constantly changes; in order to succeed in the world, farmers must keep up with these changes. …show more content…
Years ago, farmers and the community had a limited knowledge of natural resources. Most people assumed that it was limitless, as if it simply regenerated itself. Berry recognizes this by stating, “But in 1950, like most people at that time, I was years away from the first inkling of the limits of the supply of cheap fuel” (Berry, 2005, Para. 8). However, traditional farmers’ understanding of the world’s natural resources contradicts reality. In reality, the natural resources continue to run out if people do not take preventive measures. Berry writes, “Our recent focus upon productivity, genetic, and and technological uniformity, and global trade– all supported by supposedly limitless supplies of fuel, water, and soil–has obscured the necessity for local adaptation” (Berry, 2005, Para. 21). The farmers of that time did not realize the necessity for adaptation because they did not recognize the growing issues that threatened their farms. Farmers failed to realize that the natural resources do not last forever and run out. Husbandry focuses on the preservation of the soil and the proper care of it. At that time in history, farmers did not understand or have the resources to preserve the limited natural resources. Furthermore, their lack of resources and knowledge threatened the continuation of husbandry; however, because of industrialization, farmers possess the knowledge and equipment to preserve these resources. As a result, adaptation by industrialization is crucial to the continuation of farming and the preservation of
Even with these faults, this society appreciates the hard work of farming compared to the easy way of living today. One point of Berry’s argument is that he believes that the land is falling more and more into the hands of speculators and professional people from the cities, who, in spite of all the scientific agricultural miracles, still have more money than farmers. Big technology and large economies have caused more abandonment of land in the country than ever before. Many of the great farmers are clearly becoming different because they lack manpower and money to maintain properly. The number of part-time farmers and ex-farmers increases every year due to the problems with money and resources.
Jared Diamond Argues that the worst mistake in Human History is the invention and widespread introduction of agriculture, because it has created a plethora of social, economic, and health problems for the word. One example of this is when the article states, “Hunter-Gatherers enjoyed a varied diet, while early farmers obtained most of their food from one or a few starchy crops. The farmers gained cheap calories at the cost of poor nutrition.” This illustrates that the author's main argument is that agriculture was the worst mistake in human history because it shows how agriculture has negatively impacted health of both early farmers and people today by creating mass produced bulk crops that are low in nutrition. Furthermore, another example
After reading McKibben and Hurst’s articles in the book Food Matters, both authors present arguments on “industrial farming”, and although Hurst provides a realistic sense on farming, McKibben’s suggestions should be what we think about.
The farmers were accustomed to a daily routine. Their activities revolved around farming. The farmers used traditional methods that were created by their ancestors. Many of the traditions of small villages were abandoned and they were introduced to new things. This helped the villages to become more advanced. Abandoning traditions allowed the small villages also become familiar to new technology. New features were introduced to Britain, such as the cultivation of turnips and potatoes. Two of the contributors to agriculture were Jethro Tull and Lord Towenshend. Those men made the importance of root crops important to agriculture. In addition to the innovations helping villages, they could also hurt them. These changes were very complex for the farmers. Learning new techniques could be confusing and could also destroy their crops, which would definitely hurt the farmers.
One point Berry makes about people’s ignorance is that they do not recognize their connection to the agricultural cycle. He appeals to the reader’s sense of logic when he describes the process food goes through to reach the consumer, and how eating ends it (3). He uses their sense of reason to persuade them as he continues to point out how oblivious eaters are by saying that “food is pretty much an abstract idea” to them even though they should realize it does not magically appear in the local store (4). Berry mentions that not only do they ignore how it gets to the store, but also the location and type of farms their food comes from (4). He says ...
The lifeblood of a successful society is the ability to feed its families. The greatest civilizations were those who were able to harness the power of agriculture and promote it for the expanding power of their region. From ancient Mesopotamia to Jeffersonian America the government advocates and supporters of agriculture had positively benefitted those civilizations and helped them reach greater heights. Thomas Jefferson’s America was an overall pro-agrarian state; however, it was not until the 1890’s in which the United States began the modern era ideals of government justly assisting the agricultural forces in America. The American farmer during the late 1800’s was one who was struggling severely to make ends meet due to massive overproduction,
64-66), author Jared Diamond claims that agriculture as opposed to popular belief, didn’t help civilization bloom, but instead proved detrimental to human lives ever since its introduction. He states that the progressives believe agriculture was adopted due to its efficiency and how it complimented our race. He contradicts this view with multiple studies and expert sources. According to his research, modern day humans are much worse off than their hunter gatherer counterparts due to a variety of lifestyle changes ranging from greatly deteriorated nutritional quality to increased sexual discrimination. He gathers the support from various archaeological research conducted on various remains found in Chile, Greece, Turkey, etc. Archaeologists can further point out the date at which this switch (from Gathering to agriculture) took place. He further establishes that Hunter gatherers may have chosen to change ways with the preconceived idea that the capability to feed more people and reducing the burden on mothers (hence allowing them to bear a child every 2 years instead of 4) would in turn drastically improve quality of life. He concludes the article by emphasizing on how it created disparities between the elite and the commoners and by defending his own kind for having discovered mankind’s biggest mistake and the motive behind
In today’s culture, society puts a lot of emphasis on utilizing technology. Technology’s influence has spread into the farming industry. In Wendell Berry’s article, “Renewing Husbandry,” he addresses the mechanical changes in the farming process. He stresses the idea of husbandry, taking care of the land and conserving the life the land offers. Berry describes the benefits and downfalls of technology. But the problems of technology exceed the benefits. Although technology aids in the farming process, the advancement in farming technology distorts the importance of cultivating the natural land.
Berry describes the flaws of industrial products, the awful conditions in which domestic animals are kept, and the money-oriented attitude of patrons of the food industry. These facts, however, are not confirmed by any specific facts. The only concrete reference he mentioned was “bechemicled factory-fields that I have seen, for example, in the Central Valley of California”(Berry 14). There are no trustworthy documents, or photos, or convincing evidence to support his words, so we just have to trust him. Although Wendell Berry is a well-known writer, paying close attention to farming and agriculture themes in his works, he was more of an amateur in agronomy than a professional. Therefore, we should not consider his arguments as a reality of the
...o. “The Great Agricultural Transition: Crisis, Change, and Social Consequence of the Twentieth Century US Farming”. Annual Review of Sociology 27 (2001): 103-124.
In recent history, farming in America has changed dramatically, and Naylor’s farm is representative of many in the American Corn Belt. Though it began growing a variety of crops and keeping livestock too, Naylor now only plants corn and soybeans. In Naylor’s grandfather’s days, the farm fed the whole family with just enough left over for twelve others. Now, Naylor indirectly feeds an estimated 129 people, but this does not mean his farm is any more successful. In fact, Naylor’s farm cannot financially support his family.
The idea of the family farm has been destroyed by large food corporations. As discussed in class, industrial farming typically leads to the mass produ...
It is a known fact that the world population is increasing without bound; however, there is a debate if this increase is a good thing or if it will prove catastrophic. The article “The Tragedy of the Commons” by Garrett Hardin discusses how the ever-increasing world population will exhaust the world of its natural resources, and eliminate human’s capability of survival. On the other side of the argument is Julian L. Simon who wrote “More People, Greater Wealth, More Resources, Healthier Environment.” This article proposes the theory that with an increase in population, human’s quality of life is amplified. One particular issue that they both mention and have drastically different views on is the future of agriculture and human’s ability to sustain it.
It is estimated that 37 farmers leave the land every day to pursuit in different field (Herro 2006). The decline in rural farmers is from the consequences of industrialization of agriculture. Only 1 percent of the UK workforce is now employed on farm, compared to 35 percent in the last century (Herro 2006). Many of these workers are being weaved out by better technologies that can do the same work at a faster and more efficient rate. On the contrary, organic farming relies more on people for knowledge, daily monitoring, and production. A study by the Soil Association shows organic farming can potentially provide 32 percent more jobs per farm than conventional farming in the United Kingdom (Herro 2006). However, critics have argued that human labors will lead to higher food prices, which makes the shift infeasible. But while this may be true in developed country, a full scale shift to organic farming in developing countries, where labors are much cheaper than pesticides, can lead to a much higher profit for the farmers. Organic farming attracts younger employees than any other work industry. Currently, the average age for conventional farmer is 56 (Herro 2006). If a full scale shift to organic farming were to happen, it would draw a more vibrant and enthusiastic workforce who are food conscious than that older generations, setting up a platform
As agriculture has become more intensive, farmers have become capable of producing higher yields using less labour and less land. Growth of the agriculture has not, however, been an unmixed blessing. It, like every other thing, has its pros and cons. Topsoil depletion, groundwater contamination, the decline of family farms, continued neglect of the living and working conditions for farm labourers, increasing costs of production, and the disintegration of economic and social conditions in rural communities. These are the cons of the new improved agriculture.