Enhances biodiversity (↑34% species richness, ↑50% abundance) (Bengtsson et al., 2005)

Improves soil fertility and structure (Niggli, 2015)

Reduces water pollution and GHG emissions per land unit (Chiriacò et al., 2022; Seufert et al., 2012)

20-30% lower yields → more land required (Seufert et al., 2012)

GHG¹⁾ emissions per product unit may be similar or higher (Chiriacò et al., 2022)

Impact of transport and packaging varies widely (Giampieri et al., 2022)

Lower pesticide exposure and potential health benefits (Mie et al., 2017)

Ethical consumer appeal (animal welfare, fair trade) (Vega-Zamora et al., 2020)

Supports rural jobs (Crowder and Reganold, 2015)

10-40% higher prices → reduced access for low-income groups (Rahman et al., 2024)

Misinformation about pesticide use (Koch et al., 2017)

Scalability may introduce social justice concerns (Tscharntke et al., 2021)

Higher farmer profitability due to premiums and subsidies (Crowder and Reganold, 2015)

Growing global market (FiBL and IFOAM, 2025)

Greater resilience to market shocks (Organic Trade Association, 2009; Reganold and Wachter, 2016)

Higher production and certification costs (Crowder and Reganold, 2015)

Limited affordability for consumers (Gamage et al., 2023)

Yield gaps reduce cost-efficiency and land-use sustainability (Ponisio et al., 2015)