I would would choose to do both. First, having small-scale intensive agriculture with high yields would be the most productive. The problem with this is that it is very labor intensive, which means you need more people to do the work. You can’t use the big machines to do everything. I have read studies of agricultural output comparing different nations. Japan had the highest output per acre, but their man-hours to output ratio was also higher. In the US, output per acre is lower, but each man-hour produces much more output.
Wide-scale sustainable agriculture that incorporates nature is not possible in many areas of the country, especially the areas that have already been developed or historically were grasslands. It would also require a lot of labor, and knowledge of the land.
I don’t think your two choices are mutually exclusive. Both strategies should be implemented because neither alone will be able to produce enough food and still protect the environment.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC