Why home-grown food is up to ten times better than arable crops

Last Updated on June 8, 2019 by Afifah Hamilton
Read Time: 6 min
Just some of the homegrow produce from our garden here at Rosemary Cottage.

An article in the Telegraph [1] that recently came to my attention galvanised me to assemble some thoughts that had been gradually coalescing for several weeks around the environmental and nutrient impact of our food choices.

During the second world war the British were encouraged to ‘Dig for Victory’. Garden vegetable plots were at their height and allotment demand peaked. Homegrown produce allowed farmers to focus on grain and dairy production – activities ill suited to small scale urban plots.

So what was the contribution of homegrown efforts to the national diet? How effective could it actually have been? Here are the stats:

during the [second world war], allotments and gardens provided c. 10% of food consumed in the UK because of the ‘Dig for Victory’ campaign whilst comprising <1% of the area of arable cultivation [2]

Take a moment absorbing the significance of that statement. Home growing produced ten times the food per acre than arable farms! How can that be? Aren’t we told repeatedly, that we can only feed the world with grains? And that only intensive agriculture can deliver?

The Dig for Victory campaign helped home grown veg provide 10% of food during WW2
The Dig for Victory campaign helped homegrown veg provide 10% of food during WW2

Of course it could be argued that farming has become more efficient since WW2. Indeed, with the ‘green-revolution’ of the 50’s and 60’s intensive inputs, pesticides and high yield varieties increased the efficiency of arable farms, with the biggest impact seen on wheat yield which increased seven fold, however, recent studies show that intensive farming does not come close to the levels possible from allotment and vegetable gardens.

…more recent UK trials conducted by the Royal Horticultural  Society and ‘Which?’ Magazine showed fruit and vegetable yields of 31–40 tonnes per hectare per year (Tomkins 2006), 4–11 times the productivity of the major agricultural crops in the Leicestershire region (DEFRA 2013). [2]

That left me gob smacked!

So, how is it possible that low-tech veg plots out perform modern mechanised farms? Here are two parts of the answer:


The BBC Reith Lecture 2000 focused on sustainability, and was unusual in having a panel rather than a single lecturer. The fifth speaker, Vandana Shiva – an Indian environmental activist and anti-globalization author – spoke powerfully about and the dominance of international commercial agriculture in the global dialogue around food security. International statistics speak about ‘yeild’, which usually refers to the production per unit area of a sinlge crop. Such a measurement is inherently biased towards mono-culture production. ‘Output’, on the other hand, measures the total production of mixed crops per unit area. Allotments and vegetable gardens mix multiple crops in the same space, reducing yield of any one crop, but increasing total output,  Vardana says:

Who feeds the world? My answer is very different to that given by most people. It is women and small farmers working with biodiversity who are the primary food providers in the Third World, and contrary to the dominant assumption, their biodiversity based small farms are more productive than industrial monocultures. [my emphasis] [3]

Not only are such small holdings more productive, but they provide a greater diversity of food, with a better range of nutrients, vitamins and minerals than do most commercial farms.

Amongst scientists, policymakers, the media and public, there is increasing awareness of the multiple benefits of ‘own-growing’ including access to nutritious fresh produce, stress relief, improved psychological well-being and physical fitness. [2]

Living salads can be grown on the windowsill, allowing everyone to enjoy really fresh produce.

My own experience of homegrown vegetables is that their freshness – straight from the garden to the kitchen – gives them a palpable quality of ‘aliveness’ that is simply missing from even the freshest veg in a supermarket, that is at best hours old.

The exception to this are ‘live salads’ – punnets of cress, lettuce or herbs growing in a soil-free medium. I read a paper several years ago (which I can’t track down now), showing that these live salads had much higher nutrient levels than either organic or conventional ‘fresh veg’. They will stay fresh and grow happily on a windowsill, so at least some of the benefits of allotment gardening are accessible to everyone.

Soil fertility

The Telegraph article was based on a 2014 report in the Journal of Applied Ecology entitled “Urban cultivation in allotments maintains soil qualities adversely affected by conventional agriculture” which compared soil fertility in allotments, gardens, arable and pastoral farms in the Midlands. In short they found total nitrogen and carbon levels were higher and that soils were less compacted in allotments and gardens compared to arable farms. Here are graphs of their findings:

(a) Mean soil organic carbon density; (b) soil nitrogen density; (c) soil C : N ratio; (d) soil bulk density in urban allotment and agricultural soils. Error bars are ±1 standard error; letters show significant differences between land uses (Tukey’s test P < 0·05). – Edmondson et al. 2014

As you can see, the soil in the urban allotments was superior to the arable farms in  every category (note that graph (d) is effectively measuring soil compaction, so higher = more compacted = worse). The authors ascribe most of the benefits seen in the allotments to on-site composting and addition of manure.

Furthermore, ploughing – which is an essential practise only for arable crop production – gradually destroys soil carbon stores as it exposes them to oxygen which rapidly converts soil organic matter to carbon dioxide releasing it into the atmosphere.

…modern agricultural practices have degraded soil natural capital – which has profound implications for the loss of ecosystem service provision, including reduced structural stability, water and nutrient holding capacity and impaired regulation of nitrogen mineralization and supply to plants [2]


Gardeners and organic farmers have long claimed that natural organic fertilisers ‘build the soil’, in contrast to typical chemical fertilisers that provide soluble nitrogen which easily washes out of the soil, polluting water courses as a side effect.

…by applying artificial fertilisers soil carbon levels can fall further through lack of organic matter and reduced soil microbial activity [4]

UK farming is now engaged in trying to reduce its carbon footprint – a process that could make a huge impact on meeting national targets as soils are potentially a major carbon sink. For example, according to Farm Carbon Cutting Toolkit, just a 0.1% increase in farm soil carbon levels would increase annual carbon sequestration by 8.9 tonnes of CO2 per hectare (see infographic, right [5])

What about pasture?

The elephant in the room in this discussion is the pasture. It’s soil carbon in the graphs above lies midway between allotments and arable farmland, but this is only half the story. Typically, much of UK lowland pastures are rotated with arable crops (ie ploughed up regularly), so permanent pasture would be expected to have even higher levels of carbon than shown in the graph.

Arable landscapes provide less amenity and environmental services than pastoral landscapes.
Arable landscapes provide less amenity and environmental services than pastoral landscapes.

Furthermore, pasture had the least compacted soil (think: more perennial roots, worms and soil denizens) whilst having similar nitrogen levels to allotments. This places it distinctly ahead of arable farming in terms of soil quality and all the associated ‘environmental services’ (water retention, CO2 sequestration etc).

What elevates it’s status further, I contend, is that it provides these with very little input. Allotments need compost, manure and a lot of human intervention. The lower productivity of permanent pasture compared to allotments and gardens is made up for by these reduced material and labour inputs. We should not forget the amenity aspect of pasture either: Walking in a pastoral countryside is infinitely more pleasurable than navigating the soulless desert of a wheat field.

In the end a diet based around “meat and two veg” might well be the most environmentally ethical food production system, particularly if we grow more of our own veggies and rear our meat on permanent pasture. Throw in some seafood, and it’ll be the most nutritionally sound too.

To finish – a picture of our vegetable garden showing that gardens can be beautiful as well as productive! You can read more about the gardens at Rosemary Cottage on my gardening blog here.



  1. Soil report shows we should all grow more of our own, Ken Thompson, The Telegraph, (2014)
  2. Urban cultivation in allotments maintains soil qualities adversely affected by conventional agricultureJill L. Edmondson et al. Journal of applied ecology (2014)
  3. Poverty & Globalisation, Vandana Shiva, BBC Reith Lecture ‘Respect for the Earth’ (2000)
  4. Soil carbon and organic farming, Azeez, Soil Association (2009)
  5. Farm Carbon Cutting Toolkit: http://www.farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk/

Recommended external sites:

4 thoughts on “Why home-grown food is up to ten times better than arable crops”

  1. Please keep putting the word out Afifah and thankyou for doing so.
    Take a walk down the length of any allotment field and it will be obvious that the quantity, diversity and in most cases the health of the soil is way above that of any form of oil dependent monoculture.
    My own garden with hens to process the compost and rotationally feed and keep down the grass is tiny but supplies all our vegetables and eggs(4 hens who have kept laying all winter this year without lights – weird?).
    My utopia would grant those that yearned for it 1,5 or 10 acres at coming of age or in my case, maturity which came much later .

    • Thank you Fred, your comment drops on us like balm. Keir wrote and researched this particular article but it is very dear to both our hearts.After all, “I and the land are one” (said King Arthur).

  2. Such a surprising and inspiring post. Can someone please email me? I’d like to enquire about reposting this on a web magazine I edit for. Sincere thanks!


Leave a Reply