Economic Benefits

Cost-savings in annual crops

Crop establishment with direct drilling/no-tillage requires as little as one pass for planting compared to two or more tillage operations, as well as seeding, in conventional tillage farming. Fewer passes save an estimated 97 €/ha on machinery depreciation and maintenance costs. That is about 1,950 € savings on a 200 hectare farm. Direct sowing/no-tillage also permits a fuel saving of some 30-40 litres per hectare annually compared to conventional tillage systems. These savings normally compensate for or exceed the extra costs of Conservation Agriculture (direct sowing machinery and application of herbicides). The annual cost reduction in direct sowing of annual crops compared to conventional tillage ranges between 40 and 60 € per hectare in Southern Europe conditions. Greater savings have been reported in the UK. Therefore, in some areas farmers who adopt Conservation Agriculture are strongly motivated by cost-savings. This is clearly the case of geographical regions where crop land is not highly erodible and/or of countries where agriculture is not subsidised by the government, such as Argentina and Brazil. In other situations, the direct benefit from the adoption of Conservation Agriculture in the form of machinery, fuel and labour costs are intertwined with conservation ethics and the concept of land stewardship.

Labour and fuel savings in perennial crops

In conventional agriculture, tillage operations require considerably higher inputs in machinery investment and maintenance, fossil combustibles and labour inputs as compared to Conservation Agriculture, especially direct sowing/ no-tillage. For example, in no-till olive orchards a saving of about 60 to 80 litres of fuel and 3 to 5 hours of labour per hectare annually is estimated as compared to conventional tillage. Generally, Conservation Agriculture reduces the energy consumption of farming operations and increases energy productivity – this is the yield output per energy input – in the range of 15%-50% and 25%-100%, respectively.

Increase of yields

Crop yields in eroded soils are lower than those in protected soils because erosion reduces soil fertility and water availability. For example, in some locations crop yield on severely eroded soils were 9% to 34% lower than those on slightly eroded soil. Water resources also decrease due to erosion. Conservation Agriculture over time improves soil health and functions, and offers improved factor productivities of labour, nutrients, water and energy. Once the soil health has recovered sufficiently, crop yields tend to increase towards the full agro-ecological land potential. These productivity and yield benefits translate directly into greater financial benefits to the farmer.

Reduction of off-site problems

The use of large or excessive amounts of fertilisers, pesticides and irrigation can help to offset the deleterious effects of erosion and soil degradation but only up to a point. For example, cereal yields have stagnated in Europe for the past two decades to a sub-optimal level despite the fact that large quantities of agrochemical are used to sustain yields. Thus, once soil health and functions are degraded and erosion cannot be controlled, applications of fertilizers and pesticides lead to environmental pollution and human and animal health problems, to destruction of natural habitats, to higher energy consumption, and eventually to unsustainable agricultural systems. In fact, the effect of erosion is equivalent to an increase in recurrent agricultural production costs by about 25% each year. Important off-site problems are caused by soil sediments transported in the surface water from eroded agricultural land. These include damage to roadways and sewers, siltation of waterways and rivers, drainage disruption, undermining of foundations and pavements, gullying of roads, earth dam failures, siltation of harbours and channels, loss of reservoir storage, disruption of stream ecology and damage to public health, plus increased water treatment costs. In addition, by raising stream beds and burying streamside wetlands, sediment can increase the probability and severity of floods. Indeed, economic damage from off-site soil erosion is nearly 40% of the total cost of the erosion. Thus, by implementing Conservation Agriculture the rest of society would also benefit when the off-site effects of erosion are avoided, up to some 32 €/ha of agricultural land. If off-site and on-site erosion costs are combined, the total cost of erosion from agriculture in USA were estimated at about 85.5 €/ha of crop land annually.