The “S” word: Dare we say it?

Excerpt

It seems to be easy in the U.S. to spark a heated debate by introducing the word “sustainable” into a discussion. An SWCS position statement task force fretted for over a year on how to define it. The Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture confessed in a recent annual report that suscainability meant so many different things to so many people that it was an illusive concept. Indeed, “sustainable agriculture” has been saddled with a number of incomplete associated concepts and perhaps short sighted viewpoints, from “low input” to organic to a decent income for farm families. A definition agreed to in the U.S. by a Democratic Congress and a Republican President seemed to cover most of the bases as far as agriculture, by saying that sustainable agriculture is “…an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will, over the long-term (A) satisfy human food and fiber need; (B) enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends; (C) make the most efficient use of non-renewable resources and onfarm operations; and …