Organic farming in Thailand: case studies on chemical-free vegetable production in Chiangmai, Thailand

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of organic farming, in particular chemical-free vegetable production, in Chiangmai, Thailand. The main objective of the study was to assess the outcomes in terms of the farmers' objectives, economic performance, and other effects from this method of production including social and environmental effects. Two appropriate methods: interviews and available data, were used to gather data. Three villages were selected as case studies. Forty-five farmers from three categories of agricultural methods: chemical-free vegetable farming (CFA), mixed agriculture (MA) and conventional agriculture (CA), were interviewed.

The study found that profit maximisation was the first priority in the farmers' goals in all production categories. Lower CFA production costs were also a reason for farmers to move away from CA into CFA. Few farmers seriously realised the social and environmental impacts caused by conventional farming. However, CFA farmers tended to be more concerned about their health and environment than CA farmers.

The economic comparisons indicated that, firstly, the running costs of CFA farming were less than the running costs of CA farming. However, since this study compared CFA farming (a labour intensive form of production) with the alternative crops raised in CA farming, the economic and the social cost comparison results varied among the research sites. It could not be concluded that the economic and the social costs of CFA farming were less than for CA farming.

Secondly, in general it could not be concluded that CFA farming gains a higher net farm income than CA farming. However, the study suggested that the net farm income of the CFA farms was greater when the CFA farmers could sell their produce at a reasonable price. In one research site, the negative social net farm income finding indicated that the government CFA promotion project had failed.

Social comparisons between CFA and CA methods showed CFA results in education and health benefits in comparison to conventional agriculture. Finally, the environmental comparisons found that CFA had beneficial impacts on the farm environment, and required the use of fewer types of artificial agricultural inputs. The farmers realised that the use of artificial agricultural chemicals resulted in decreases in local wildlife quantity and variety. Indeed they actually noted that CFA seemed to have positive effects on local wildlife in terms of quantity and variety.