Farms have always required large amounts of energy to run. The source of that energy, however, has changed over time. In the past, human labor supported the production of farm products. Improvements in technology, such as the invention of the engine, have allowed the labor to be transferred to mechanical energy. Many improvements in plows, reapers, and metal processing were achieved during the 1860’s and contributed to an increase in farm machinery use (Jarchow 140). In Minnesota, riding plows débuted in the 1870’s and combines in the 1880’s (Jarchow 156). Many of the new products were produced out of state. Because of this, the farm implement business was criticized because it drained money out of the state (Jarchow 158). Yet, in the 1930’s the farm and the family continued to provide most of the inputs employed on the farm, such as labor, feed and seed (Cochrane 129).

From 1933-1970, this situation changed. Farmers began to turn to the market for their inputs. During this time period, the volume of non-purchased inputs was cut in half, while the volume of purchased inputs from the non-farm sector (including machinery, chemicals, and purchased feed, seed and livestock) more than doubled (Cochrane 129). In addition, the gasoline engine (in the form of the tractor, motor truck, and harvesting machines) now does all the heavy work on American farms, including hauling non-farm-produced inputs to the farm, preparing the seedbed, planting crops, harvesting, and hauling crop to urban collection centers (Cochrane 197). Consequently, human labor inputs declined more than 70% between 1933 and 1970 (Cochrane 129).

In the end, farmers were transformed into consumers, and the true price of agricultural production was buried beneath layers of production and consumption.  

The Ecological Footprint

Wackernagel and Rees developed the concept of an ecological footprint in 1996. An ecological footprint analysis “is an accounting tool that enables us to estimate the resource consumption and waste assimilation requirements of a defined human population or economy in terms of a corresponding productive land area” (Wackernagel and Rees 9). The analysis takes into account all of the resources needed and wastes produced by a given lifestyle, and is able to estimate a land area needed to support such a society. The outcomes of such analyses are astounding and sometimes contrary to popular environmental assumptions. The calculations for American society indicate that, given our current rates of consumption, our world is beyond its carrying capacity. The United States has the world's largest footprint at 5.1 hectare / capita (Wackernagel and Rees 97). There is only 2.81 hactares / capita available. We therefore create what Wackernagel and Rees call an eco-deficiency.

Our footprint has outgrown the planet because our production and consumption system creates false perceptions about the impact that our life in the human world has on the environment. The ability to ship materials around the globe allows us to use and consume items in far away from where they were produced. Because of the secret lives of products, consumers are unaware of the global network that they are a part of. “The fact is, some areas constantly give up ecological productivity, while others continuously draw on it” (Wackernagel and Rees 21). The accounting of an ecological footprint can help conceptualize the impact that an entire society is having on the earth. 

John C. Ryan and Alan Thein Durning championed footprint analysis of an individual item, rather than a lifestyle, in Stuff: The Secret Lives of Every Day Things. The book traces every day items commonly encountered in American life—a cup of coffee, newspaper, t-shirt, shoes, bike, computer, hamburger, French fries, and cola—back to their origins. Most of us live in cities and consume these items on a daily basis. We see them in their final context, but what about their life up to that point? Where do the resources to produce these goods come from, how do they reach our hands, and where do they go when we are done with them?        

The purpose of this study is to use the ideas behind the ecological footprint and Stuff to do an analysis of the farmland in the Cannon River watershed. I intend to compile information from near and far about what it takes to conventionally produce and harvest one acre of Roundup Ready® corn. I realize that we cannot rely solely on local resources for farming. However, everyone must take the impact of their economic and trade decisions into consideration. Only educated choices can be made wisely.

(back to top)