In recent years, organic farming has come to occupy a powerful moral position in public discourse. Farmers’ markets, government programmes and consumer movements increasingly portray organic agriculture as the inevitable path toward sustainable food production. More recently, the idea of natural farming – promising cultivation without external inputs – has added another dimension to this enthusiasm.

Yet beneath this growing popularity lies a question that farmers and consumers rarely ask: are we truly understanding the natural fertility of soil, or are we merely replacing chemical inputs with commercially promoted organic ones? My own experience with paddy cultivation compelled me to reflect deeply on this question. My understanding of organic and natural farming did not begin in books or policy debates but in my own field. Encouraged by the widespread enthusiasm surrounding organic agriculture, I decided to cultivate rice using vermi compost and cow dung – two inputs widely promoted as the foundation of sustainable farming.

With genuine optimism, I applied these materials carefully, believing they would restore soil fertility and enhance crop productivity in a natural way. The results, however, were not what I had anticipated. The growth of the paddy crop was not particularly impressive, and the final yield remained far from satisfactory.

This outcome was surprising because organic farming is frequently presented as a reliable path to improved soil health and better crop quality. Instead of witnessing dramatic improvement, I realised that the relationship between soil, nutrients and plant growth is far more complex than the simplified prescriptions often promoted.

The problem is compounded by the absence of scientific support at the local level. In many rural areas, including my village, farmers have no access to facilities for proper soil analysis. Without laboratory testing, it is almost impossible to understand the existing nutrient status of the soil, its microbial activity, or its organic matter content. As a result, recommendations such as “apply vermicompost” or “use cow dung manure” often become routine advice rather than scientifically guided agricultural practice. Equally concerning is the lack of facilities to analyse the harvested crop itself.

Soil is not merely an inert medium waiting to receive nutrients. It is a living ecosystem inhabited by billions of microorganisms, fungi, insects, and earthworms that continuously recycle organic matter.

Organic agriculture is frequently associated with claims of superior nutritional quality – higher antioxidant levels, better micronutrient balance and healthier grains. Global scientific research has undoubtedly contributed to the popularity of organic farming. Over the past three decades, numerous studies have reported improvements in soil health, biodiversity and ecological sustainability under organic management. For example, long-term agricultural experiments reported in journals such as Nature Communications and Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment have shown that organic farming systems often contain higher soil organic carbon and greater microbial activity than conventional systems.

These biological processes strengthen nutrient cycling and may enhance the long-term resilience of agricultural ecosystems. Organic farming also appears to support biodiversity. Several comparative studies have shown that organic farms tend to host more insects, birds, and soil organisms because they avoid synthetic pesticides and maintain more diverse cropping systems. Research published in PLOS ONE and related environmental journals has highlighted how such biodiversity contributes to ecological services such as pollination and natural pest control.

Yet scientific literature also presents an important caution. The success of organic farming is highly dependent on local conditions. Soil type, climate, crop variety, and existing nutrient levels all influence agricultural outcomes. Simply replacing chemical fertilisers with organic inputs does not automatically restore soil fertility. When compost or manure is applied without understanding the soil’s biological and chemical characteristics, the results may remain uncertain. Another concern frequently highlighted in international research relates to productivity. Several global analyses comparing organic and conventional farming have suggested that organic crop yields are often lower on average.

Some studies reported in Nature Communications estimate that organic yields may be roughly 15-20 per cent lower, although the difference varies widely depending on crop type and management practices. If productivity declines significantly, larger areas of land may be required to produce the same amount of food. This raises a difficult question for environmental policy: could large-scale adoption of organic farming unintentionally increase pressure on forests and natural ecosystems? Sustainable agriculture must therefore balance ecological benefits with the practical need to ensure food security. Yield stability is another issue.

Organic farming relies heavily on ecological processes such as natural pest control and biological nutrient cycling. While these processes are environmentally beneficial, they can also make crop production more sensitive to climatic fluctuations, pest outbreaks, and soil fertility variations. It is within this context that the growing interest in natural farming becomes particularly significant. Natural farming encourages farmers to minimise external inputs and instead rely on the inherent biological processes of soil ecosystems. The philosophy is attractive because it emphasises harmony with nature rather than intervention.

However, large-scale scientific evidence supporting the productivity of natural farming remains limited. Early experiences suggest that while input costs may decline, yields can remain uncertain, particularly during the transition period. For small farmers with limited land, such uncertainty may represent a serious economic risk. These debates ultimately point to a deeper truth: soil is not merely an inert medium waiting to receive nutrients. It is a living ecosystem inhabited by billions of microorganisms, fungi, insects, and earthworms that continuously recycle organic matter and release nutrients essential for plant growth. Nature itself offers a striking example.

Forest ecosystems maintain extraordinary fertility without fertilisers or compost applications. Through the continuous cycle of leaf fall, microbial decomposition and nutrient recycling, these systems sustain themselves for centuries. The future of sustainable agriculture may therefore depend less on replacing one set of inputs with another and more on rediscovering the biological intelligence of the soil. When farmers begin to understand soil as a living system rather than a passive container of nutrients, agriculture can move closer to genuine sustainability. In the end, the real challenge before agriculture is not choosing between organic or natural farming, but learning how to restore the living intelligence of the soil while still feeding a hungry world.

This article was first published in The Statesman, an ANN partner of The Daily Star, on April 5, 2026.

Debapriya Mukherjee is a former Senior Scientist, Central Pollution Control Board, India. 

Send your articles for Slow Reads to [email protected]. Check out our submission guidelines for details.