Review of three articles

Chemicals and the Environment

This article is a study of the long term effects of chemicals in the environment.

Chemical substances enter the environment and into the bodies of humans and animals through complex and interrelated paths. Some enter through direct application (e g fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides), some through combustion processes, and some enter as waste flows from manufacture, transport and consumption of products.

The article points out that a relatively harmless chemical may be transformed into a toxic by-product in the environment, and may also enter the food chain and accumulate in living organisms. The rapidly increasing flow of toxic chemicals into the environment is becoming a major concern to governments, organisations, etc.

The article correctly points out that only the short term effects of chemicals are studied properly before their use, neglecting the long term effects which may prove to be more hazardous. The example given is that if a man is exposed to arsenic, immediately the effect is noticed as death or illness. But it is not known what will happen if man is exposed to chemicals at low concentrations for a long time. The possibilities are genetic mutations being induced, carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, etc.

This observation has been very much visible in the endosulfan tragedy in Kerala where the people suffered due to the negligence of the authorities. Endosulfan has left Kasargod injured with both short term as well as long term effects.

The article points out that chemicals are being used extensively for agriculture, livestock production, etc. I agree with the argument that even though use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides are vital to cope up with the growing demand under constraints of land use, etc , the current practices in this field are doing more harm than good and these have to be reformed in an environment friendly and sustainable way.

The article reveals some hazards caused by the release of certain toxic metals such as mercury into the environment. The example given is the outbreak of minamata disease in Japan in 1950s caused by consumption of fish in Minamata bay where an industry had been depositing waste products containing mercury.

The article says that the most effective way to minimise the release of such toxic substances into the environment is by minimising their production and use. I think that the technology today neglects the environmental impact of the method used for achieving something. An alternative technology has to be developed considering the broad picture.

How Green is the Green Revolution?

This article is a critique of the green revolution.

Many years ago, agricultural specialists warned of impending famine in underdeveloped countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America. These countries did not have the capacity to feed their growing population. But today, the problem has reversed. The world has an abundance of grain. Now the problem is oversupply and wastage.

This increase in agricultural production is credited to the green revolution, which is based on the use of the so-called miracle grains. These are high yielding varieties of wheat and rice developed by agricultural scientists.

According to this article, the green revolution has just given rise to an illusion that man has finally found out how to keep up food production with the increasing population.

The article points out that the increase is partly due to new technology but mainly because more and more land was put under agricultural production. Once new land became scarce, the increase decreased.

In India, the new varieties of grains were not requested by farmers but were rather imposed on them by the government. The government was doing this partly out of fright of earlier crop failures and partly from pressure by foreign scientists and aid givers.

Plant breeders say that it is dangerous to produce the same variety of grains over large areas. Such farming is in danger of a disastrous attack by pests or disease. This has happened in the case of oats in the US.

The green revolution requires large amounts of irrigation and fertilizers which cannot be afforded by many farmers. This has resulted in an increase in food prices. Even though the efficiency of production has increased, the cost of production has also increased along with it and the result is that people are becoming malnourished not because of shortage of food but simply because they cannot afford it.

Another criticism is that the use of fertilizers and pesticides in large scale has adverse effects on humans and the environment. The article sites several relevant examples where chemicals have polluted the environment.

I agree with the article’s opinion that green revolution is not green enough to be used so extensively that it can always be ahead of population growth. In my opinion, there will be adverse effects in the environment which will lead to agitations which will forcibly stop the practice of the so-called green revolution. Many such incidents have happened in several parts of the world.

I feel that besides thinking of sustainable methods of agriculture, we must also think about population control.

Developing Sustainable Agriculture

This article calls for sustainable agriculture, which has gained popularity in theory, but its practice has not been prevalant.

First the harmful effects of unsustainable agriculture (a farming development in the 20^th century) are examined. The three key processes of this form of agriculture are: the modernisation of farming practices, industrialisation of agriculture for use by mass markets, and state protection.
The article criticises that such methods have led to the loss of biodiversity, pollution of ground water, eutrofication of water sources, soil erosion and salinity, discharge of pesticides into rivers, overgrazing, etc.

While I agree with all of this, the article has remained silent on the advantages of these methods. These methods were essential considering the demand for food grains at that time. The methods of farming which were prevalant at that time could not have met with the demands of the the rapidly growing population and famine would have resulted causing death in large numbers. It is understandable that in the time when agriculture was just starting to develop scientifically, the prediction of its long term impacts might have been overshadowed by the short term benefits. But the time has come to shift to sustainable methods.

The article suggests integrated farming systems (IFS) as an alternative.IFS involves embedding sustainable farming practices within existing farming systems. These practices include: crop rotations for land use diversity, biological controls for crop pests and fungal diseases to reduce, but not replace, all agri- chemicals, the management of field margins to increase biodiversity and create habitats for predators of crop pests, the use of green and animal manures to reduce, but not eliminate, inputs of inorganic fertilisers; and practices to manage water and combat soil erosion (e.g. minimum cultivation, winter cover crops and contour ploughing).

These practices leave the final farm product largely unchanged and are less stringent in requiring alterations to existing farming systems. I think that this is an excellent way to get started with sustainability. This method can retain the large scale productions of conventional methods and yet decrease their environmental impact.

But IFS has not become widespread. Surveys with farmers reveal that IFS are still perceived as too risky in delivering required volumes of agricultural produce for economic viability. Compared with conventional agriculture, new types of information, knowledge and management skills are needed to implement the more complex and risky farming practices of IFS.

Many alternative methods of farming have been suggested in the article but these are not gaining enough popularity. The reason might be the indifference of farmers to the environment, considering only their personal gains. The farmers must be made aware of the need for sustainable methods of farming opposed to the productivistic approach. The government and NGO’s must intervene suitably otherwise sustainability will remain as a theory while the environment suffers.

by Sarath M, CE10B055

BOOK REVIEW

By: MOHAMED AMEEN VK 

CE10B037 

Silent Spring

Author                        Rachel Carson

Copy write                 1962

Country                      United States

Language                   English

Subject                       Environmentalism

Publisher                    Houghton Mifflin

Publication date         September 27, 1962

Media type                 Hardcover/paperback

            Silent Spring is the one of the famous outcome of the great writer Rachel Carson which points towards environmental impact of chemicals used in agriculture. It was the beginning of environmental movements in United States. Rachel Carson’s alarm touched off a national debate on use of chemical pesticides, responsibility of science and limitation of technology. It generated a storm of controversy over the use of chemical pesticides. Miss Carson's intent in writing Silent Spring was to warn the public of the dangers associated with pesticide use. Throughout her book are numerous case studies documenting the harmful effects that chemical pesticides have on the environment. Along with these facts, she explains how in many instances the pesticides have done more harm than good in eradicating the pests they were designed to destroy. In addition to her reports on pesticide use, Miss Carson points out that many of the long-term effects that these chemicals may have on the environment, as well as on humans, are still unknown. Her book as one critic wrote, "dealt pesticides a sharp blow" (Senior Scholastic 1962). The controversy sparked by Silent Spring led to the enactment of environmental legislation and the establishment of government agencies to better regulate the use of these chemicals.

 Cason begins the article in an imaginary story which drags the readers into the hazards of chemicals used in agriculture.Once there was a town in the United States of America where all living things existed in harmony. Thriving farms surrounded the town and every spring there were fruits and flowers in abundance. When people traveled to the area, they enjoyed the variety of plants. This was a land that was beautiful in spring and in winter. Suddenly, something happened to make everything start to die. No one could account for the strange kinds of symptoms people, birds, and animals started displaying. Many creatures died. People wondered what had happened to the birds. The birds that remained were often so sickly that they couldn’t fly. Chickens still laid eggs, but the eggs didn’t hatch. The apple trees put out blossoms, but no bees came to pollinate them. The countryside that once looked so pretty now looked dry and withered. People noticed a fine, white dust had settled all over the leaves and in the gutters of their houses. The problem with this land didn’t come from witchcraft, but from the people themselves.

Miss Carson first became aware of the effects of chemical pesticides on the natural environment while working for the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries. Of particular concern to her was the government’s use of chemical pesticides such as DDT. She was familiar with early studies of DDT and knew of its dangers and lasting effects on the environment. DDT is a very complex chemical very hard to break. Ones it reaches to an organism it transfers through the food chain and causes endless effects on many other organisms. That’s why Carson said they are not insecticides, but they are biocides.

According to Darwin’s principle of ‘survival of fittest’, Continues use of same pesticides leads to adaptations and pests gain immunity against that pesticide. So farmers will be compelled to use stronger insecticides and the same process continues. Thus use of chemicals is never a permanent solution but it will do temporarily. But if we look more deeply, the real interest in usage of excessive chemicals is over production and more economical benefits which essentially ruin all the concepts of sustainability. Here most remarkable thing is all these are not just saying there is no problem with insects and no need of control them, but it is saying, rather, control must be geared to realities and is not to wash us away gradually with insects. Here the important questions that Carson never tried to answer are whether use of chemicals and pesticides are just about economical interest or whether it is an outcome of overpopulation and exponentially increasing needs..? Controlling chemicals is critical for the future life, but what is an alternative way for the production of required crops and food materials for this huge population…??

Most of the chemical presently using are allowed to be used with little or no advance investigation of their effect on soil, water, wild life and man himself. The people who have control over these chemicals usually don’t know very much about them. They work zealously on stamping out unwanted plants and animals. Carson isn’t against the use of chemicals at all. The problem is that these chemicals have been controlled by people who don’t know what they’re doing and don’t know the harm they’re causing. The Bill of Rights doesn’t guarantee people in the United States to be secure against lethal poisons that are distributed by individuals or public officials, but that is only because the framers of the Constitution didn’t foresee the problem. These chemicals have been used without considering their effect on the soil, the water, the wildlife or on people. Most people don’t know how big this problem is. Specialists only know about their area. Corporations make sure that their chance for profits isn’t impeded. The U.S. public should be the ones to decide these matters. People are very worried about the threat of a nuclear war destroying the planet. They should think about the use of these chemicals that are being poured into the environment. These chemicals get into the tissues of plants and animals. They even get into the germ cells so that they will change the material of heredity. Some people are thinking about engineering people’s genes. They don’t seem to recognize the fact that another kind of engineering is happening inadvertently already.

            Today most common pesticides include DDT, Arsenic, chlorinated hydrocarbons and organic phosphorous compounds. The main difference of synthetic pesticides is their power not only to poison but to enter into the body and change its processes. They destroy enzymes of the body, enzymes that are supposed to protect the body. They also block oxidation, thus blocking the body’s ability to receive energy. They make organs malfunction. They cause cancer. Even so, more chemicals are added each year. In the United States from 1947 to 1960 the production of synthetic pesticides increased by five times. It is important to learn about these chemicals we live with. Most of these chemicals leads to many skin and hereditary problems and slowly kill lever and other tissues as they are excreted in negligible amounts. Another important issue is regarding spraying these chemicals from copters and planes which not only kill many useful organisms but also poisons air for large areas. Silent Spring not only attacked the integrity of the chemical industry, but also challenged the credibility of the government. The general public knew only of the benefits of using chemical pesticides and trusted the government that these chemicals were safe to use. However, the issues that Miss Carson raised made people more aware of the pesticide spraying that was going on in their neighborhoods.

            Threats of chemicals used in agriculture spread ultimately into water too. They finally reach to surrounding water resources and ground water through rain water. High chemical contents not only poison the resource but it reduces the oxygen content (nitrification) and make inhabitable for aquatic lives. Soil pollution is another important concern.  The soil constantly changes. New matter is added all the time to existing soil and other matter is taken away by living creatures like earthworm, bacteria, fungi etc. Insecticides upset the delicate balance of organisms in the soil. They last in the soil for hundreds of years. So even if we control them they build up in the soil year by year due to repeated application.

            Environment has its own ability maintain equilibrium and prevent any unbalances. But it is very slow process compared to rate of anthropogenic activities. Trees and plants have important role in carrying out natural processes. Thus de habitation, herbicides and seed killers’ biggest challenges for effective natural process and which enhances accumulation of chemicals further more. Now a day’s People were reporting the shocking drop in the number of bird sightings in places where they had previously been abundantly present. Many animals are under the risk of extinction. Abundance of fish in rivers also considerably reduced. The only question remains is how long humans going to exist!?

             A drastic change has occurred in the realm of public health problems. Whereas in past decades, people worried about smallpox, cholera, and such communicable diseases, now they have to worry about the hazards of chemical poisoning. Environmental health problems are many and various. People now live under the fear that their environment is being corrupted. They now fear environmental diseases caused by the pollution of the air they breathe and the food they eat. Living things have been fighting cancer from early times, but it become most common after industrial era. The rate of cancer has risen dramatically each year of the twentieth century. In 1900, only four percent of deaths were caused by cancer. In 1959, the figure had risen to fifteen percent of deaths.

            Carson ended her writing with few more words of ethical appeal of the book. Darwin would be impressed today by the fact that insect populations so clearly bear out his theories of the survival of the fittest. Insects have worked under the stress of repeated chemical sprayings to weed out the weaker members of species and reinforce the strongest.  Carson dwells on the positive answer to the problem of pest insects. She has spent the majority of the book showing the harmful effects of insecticides, pesticides, and fungicides; here she shows the promising research and its successful results in using biological methods to control insects. She provides a variety of examples from a variety of locations in order to demonstrate the extent of applicability of biological methods to prevent insects efficiently.

            Silent spring made many impacts on environmental thinkers as well as supporters of pesticide industry. Many arguments and criticisms are raised. Silent spring doesn’t give a clear picture of use of chemicals in agriculture as it is silent about it beneficial aspects especially in the present situation of huge population and higher need for food. Many industries published articles explaining why chemicals are in agriculture during while many articles came out supporting Carson’s ideas and explaining how chemical pesticides were largely responsible for the virtual eradication of diseases. Even though she is not supporting insecticides, she is not arguing that they must be banned. However silent spring resulted in banning DDT in United States and followed by many other countries. Carson was so effective in generating pubic opposition to pesticide use was her ability to incorporate into her book real-world examples of how pesticides were negatively impacting the environment. She explained how use of DDT kills other organisms which are not targeted using food chain and examples. It also helps to illustrate relation between different organisms and also reminds human is not separate, but is interconnected through web life.

Fertilizer use in African agriculture-Lessons learned and good practice guidelines BOOK REVIEW

Fertilizer use in African agriculture

Lessons learned and good practice guidelines

Authors: Michael Morris

Valerie A. Kelly

Ron J. Kopicki

Derek Byerlee

This book is written by a team of staff and consultant from the Africa region of World Bank with technical assists from U.K departmental for internal development

Africa is famous for its internal wars and poverty and many other things. One of the major problems in this area is the agricultural instability. Africa will start develop from one point in time when it has food sustainability. As we know the food sustainability is very tough to achieve by region. Now a day every field of human life is utilizing technological innovations to enhance its growth. Agricultural sector should utilize this aspect of technology and that by usage of fertilizers and pesticide. Here the authors deal with the fertilizers. They tried to conduct a deep study into the implementation of fertilizer in Africa.

I completely agree to the authors view of the inherent lack of fertility of many African soils as a major problem which has been and continues to be decreased by widespread nutrient mining, has led to expansion of the agricultural frontier and the opening up of less favourable soils for cultivation. This is a scenario for disaster over the long run, given the difficulty of restoring tropical soils to productive capacity. In many tropical soils, the restoration of organic matter—a key component in soil fertility—is a very long-term proposal, and in lateritic soils such as those found throughout large parts of Africa, restoration may even be impossible. Without nutrient replenishment, many African farmers risk taking their soil resource base beyond a point of no return. Mainly for this reason, there is widespread agreement that the improvements in soil fertility needed to boost agricultural productivity growth, improve food security, and raise rural incomes will require substantial increases in fertilizer use, in combination with accelerated adoption of improved land husbandry practices. As this problem exists there is only little doubt that we should try to use fertilizers in agricultural fields to meet it food sustainability, agricultural growth and poverty reduction.

The book is trying to help the people for better decision making in promoting fertilizers in Africa. Therefore policies and programmes that encourage fertilizer use in this region should be brought up. But these policies should make sure that it meets the concept of sustainability, technical efficiency and market friendly. But at the same time the use of fertilizer is not a kind of magic stick which gives you solutions for all of your problems and promoting fertilizers alone will have little effect on agricultural field. Many fertilizer promotion schemes implemented in Africa have succeeded in temporarily increasing use of fertilizer, but only in ways that have encouraged inefficient use of fertilizer, imposed heavy administrative and financial burdens on governments, and undermined the development of viable private sector–led fertilizer markets. Such policies and programs are undesirable because they cannot be sustained over the longer term without large inputs of financial support from the government that only few African countries can afford. The book supports the view of privatising and liberalizing of fertilizer sector markets in Africa. But in my point of view it is not desirable to completely privatise and liberalise the sector because it make the market unbalanced one and the cost control of fertilizer cannot be carried out and due to these reasons fertilizer industry may make a setback on whole of agriculture of the region. So a much detailed thinking and feasible solution should be brought up for the manufacturing and distribution of fertilizers.

One of the important lessons given from past experience in this region is there is a need of thinking how fertilizers policy will suit in to the development policies of each and every country in this region. Each and every country expects a certain percentage of its whole growth from agricultural sector. It is a clear idea that uses of fertilizer increase the growth rate. Once viewed mainly as a productivity-enhancing input for agriculture, today fertilizer is seen by many policy makers and politicians as a tool that can be used to achieve a range of broad development goals, including stimulating rapid economic growth, alleviating poverty, and erecting safety nets to protect the rural poor in times of crisis. Some of these expectations are frankly unrealistic. As part of these plays, many initiatives are taken to privatise and liberalise fertilizer production and distribution by the help of economical organisations around the world. But use of fertilizer continues to grow very slowly in most African countries. By the study of various organisations says that the reason is explained by two factors, supply side factors and demand side factors. Demand for fertilizer is often weak in Africa because incentives to use fertilizer are undermined by the low level and high variability of crop yields on the one hand and by the high level of fertilizer prices relative to crop prices on the other. The demand-depressing effects of unfavourable price incentives are aggravated by many other factors, including the general lack of market information about the availability and cost of fertilizer, the inability of many farmers to raise the resources needed to purchase fertilizer, and the lack of knowledge on the part of many farmers about how to use fertilizer efficiently. I feel the same way that authors do in n many African countries, private investment in fertilizer distribution is discouraged by an unfavourable business climate characterized by poorly defined rules of the game, weak regulatory enforcement, a proliferation of taxes and fees, cumbersome bureaucratic procedures, a general lack of security, and the widespread incidence of corruption. In the absence of an active private fertilizer industry, fertilizer marketing is left mainly in the hands of inefficient public agencies. More fundamentally—and regardless of whether it is being done by public agencies or private firms—fertilizer distribution is unprofitable in many parts of Africa because of the weak and dispersed nature of demand, the small market size, high transportation costs stemming from inadequate road and rail infrastructure, and the limited availability and high cost of financing.

To overcome the weak demand of fertilizers adoption of a long term perspective is required.

Public interventions can be used to help farmers, but they can also be used to help fertilizer importers and manufacturers, fertilizer distributors at the wholesale and retail levels, financial services providers, and other key actors on the supply side. More fundamentally, public interventions can involve not only direct budgetary payments designed to influence fertilizer prices in the short run but also a wide range of other measures that improve the profitability of fertilizer over the medium to long run by directly or indirectly influencing market prices, costs incurred, or benefits received by consumers and producers of fertilizer.

The major guidelines ideated by this group of authors are given here:

Policy reforms are needed to stimulate private investment in, and commercial financing of, the agricultural sector. Relevant options include trade policies that promote the free flow of goods, macroeconomic policies that facilitate access to foreign exchange, tax policies that do not place an undue tax burden on productive inputs, policies that promote competition by facilitating entry and exit of firms, and land tenure policies that increase farmers’ access to credit and encourage increased agricultural investment.

Institutional reforms are needed to ensure smoothly functioning commercial exchanges at all levels of the value chain. Areas needing particular attention often include development and implementation of quality controls, enactment and enforcement of contract law, prevention of excessive consolidation of market power, and creation of farmers’ cooperatives and professional organizations.

Investment in infrastructure is needed to reduce fertilizer costs, increase farmers’ share of output prices, and improve the reliability of service (both timeliness of delivery and maintenance of quality of the product).Improvement of the entire range of transportation infrastructure is fundamental to these objectives, including improvement of rural roads, major highways, railways, and ports.

Strengthening in agricultural research and extension services is needed to improve their responsiveness to the needs of farmers and to allow them to adapt with greater agility to the commercial realities of the fertilizer sector. Some rethinking about how these services are organized and funded may be necessary, including consideration of public-private partnerships. Also some realigning of the criteria used to develop fertilizer recommendations may be needed to arrive at a cost-effective balance between farmers’ need for location- and farm-specific recommendations and fertilizer suppliers’ need to limit product variety to realize economies of scale.

Capacity building is needed to improve the knowledge and skills of farmers and commercial actors. Training needs typically differ by cropping system, level of market development, and infrastructure. Key needs include basic literacy and numeracy, business management training, and knowledge of fertilizer products. The problem must be addressed by improved public education systems, as well as through training programs that target farmers’ and traders’ needs.

Improvements in the agricultural resource base are needed to help improve the quality of soil and water resources so as to increase crop responses to fertilizer and reduce the risk of crop loss. The potential public-good nature of some of these improvements suggests that governments, possibly in partnership with the private sector, might need to be involved in irrigation and water control and in soil conservation and erosion control.

This report does not present a detailed theoretical analysis of fertilizer supply-and-demand issues, nor does it provide guidance on the amounts of fertilizer that farmers in specific locations should apply to particular crops. Rather, it sketches out a conceptual framework to guide thinking about fertilizer policy and market development. The conceptual framework is

intended to be practical, empirical, and above all useful. In addition, the book tried to find out innovative strategic interventions to improve fertilizer market performance, and it summarizes lessons from past and current efforts to increase the efficiency and sustainability of fertilizer use.This book set his target on some specific readers. The authors think that their primary audience must be government policy analyst and decision makers who are responsible for designing and implementing policies to promote efficient and sustainable use of fertilizers. And the secondary readers government officials, development agency representatives and employees of development organizations, including nongovernmental organizations, involved in the designed implementation of projects to promote efficient and sustainable use of fertilizer. In addition, the report may be of interest to representatives from the agribusiness sector engaged in producing, importing, or distributing fertilizers.

USE OF CHEMICALS IN AGRICULTURE

CHEMICALS IN AGRICULTURE - WHAT ARE THEY?

In order to understand the effects of chemicals in agriculture we should know about the chemicals used. Chemicals used in agriculture are broadly divided into two categories namely Fertilizers and pesticides. As we are discussing about synthetic chemicals whenever I use the words fertilizers and pesticides it refers to artificially produced synthetic chemicals not other organic or natural minerals that are used as fertilizers and pesticides.

Fertilizers are used to provide necessary nutrients required by plants. Fertilizers mainly provide 6 macronutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and sulphur (S); & 7 micronutrients: boron (B), chlorine (Cl), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Mo), and zinc (Zn).Most widely used are is NPK fertilizers such as urea and ammonium nitrate. Most of them are prepared through Haber-Bosch process in which Ammonia is produced as starting reactant. They are used to enhance plant growth in order to increase the crop production.

A pesticide is a substance or combination of different substance whose sole purpose is to prevent, destroy or control the pests. The term pesticide, in broad terms, can also include herbicides (inhibits the growth and reproduction of some harmful plants), insecticides( prevent growth of insects) and fungicides (inhibits the growth of mildews, yeasts, and molds). Pests includes any weeds, insects, fish or any mammals that can destroy crop. The pesticides can protect a crop even if there occurs a 'sudden outburst of pests' and hence ensures increased production. Pesticides can be grouped into different chemical families. Important chemical families include organochlorines, organophosphates, and carbamates. Organochlorine hydrocarbons (e.g. DDT) could be separated into dichlorodiphenylethanes, cyclodiene compounds, and other related compounds. They pose a danger since they are non-bio-degradable and bio-accumulate i.e. get stored in bodies of human and other species.

HISTORY :- WHEN IT STARTED?

Practice of using chemicals in agriculture is directly linked to the method of industrial agriculture. It is the process of mass production of agricultural products and livestock. It includes innovation in agricultural machinery and farming methods, genetic technology, techniques for achieving economies of scale in production, the creation of new markets for consumption, the application of patent protection to genetic information, and global trade.It is the so called ‘modern farming’ we often here. These methods are widespread in developed nations and increasingly prevalent worldwide.

Industrial agriculture started in England during industrial revolution. Use of fertilizers especially NPK started with it. Chemist Justus von Liebig (1803–1883) & Sir John Bennet Lawes (1814–1900) from England, Jean Baptiste Boussingault from France where the first to study about fertilizers. The Englishmen James Fison, Edward Packard, Thomas Hadfield and the Prentice brothers each founded companies in the early 19th century to create fertilizers from bone meal. But there wasn’t much in the way of commercial fertilizers before 1900. Sodium Nitrate was the first popular fertilizer and used in the early 1900′s. In the early decades of the 20th Century, the Nobel prize-winning chemists Carl Bosch of IG Farben and Fritz Haber developed the process that enabled nitrogen to be synthesised cheaply into ammonia, for subsequent oxidation into nitrates and nitrites.So then Ammonium Nitrate came into vogue after World War I.

Use of pesticides started after world war II. Many of the chemicals prepared for war purposes were discovered to be toxic to insects but appeared to have low toxicity to animals and other species. The "first generation" pesticides were largely highly toxic compounds, such as arsenic and hydrogen cyanide. Their use was largely abandoned because they were either too ineffective or too toxic. The "second generation" pesticides largely included synthetic organic compounds. ('Synthetic' here means made by humans -- not naturally occurring, while 'organic' means carbon containing, not to be confused with the popular use of "organic" as in "organic farming".)The first important synthetic organic pesticide was a chlorinated hydrocarboon (or organochlorine): DDT or dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane . In 1939 Swiss chemist Paul Muller discovered its toxicity towards anthropods soon it was used as insecticide and to prevent malaria. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1948 for this discovery.

The use of chemicals in agriculture in directly linked with the practice of industrial agriculture. Since use of chemicals is integral part of industrial agriculture it is evident that any discussion on the merits and de-merits of using chemicals in agriculture must be done in the larger context of analysing industrial agriculture.