The same is true for wheat, rice, and virtually every other staple crop.
Not to mention that going back to the "traditional" methods would require that 90% of the population be dedicated to performing manual agricultural labor, the bulk of which has historically been performed by unfree people (i.e., slaves and serfs).
Why does everyone assume when you say "traditional" you mean go back to the horse and cart. Is this an American thing? I...
Progress has been made on improving the efficiency of small farms of diversified crop types. It's what most of farming in Europe was until the 90s and we didn't have "slaves". I get it your past is coloured by greed and hubris but please don't let it be clouding common sense.
Unfortunately the larger EU nations started to adopt more mega farming practices which just led to problems, food reserve mountains and now they're reaping the bad decisions.
It's hilarious how actual research in the area keeps saying smaller fields, let ground go back to wild every few years as part of a rotation and growing rapeseed is probably better than directly dumping chemicals into the soil for altering the soil content.
> Why does everyone assume when you say "traditional" you mean go back to the horse and cart.
Because that's basically what "traditional" means? If "progress has been made on improving the efficiency", then it's not "traditional". By definition.
sorry, I seem to forget, when you have 200 years of history, of course you keep going back to the beginning.
`existing in or as part of a tradition; long-established.`
Long-estabished by 1980 is still long established, the rest of the world is traditionally not under the influence of the US economic super-power, I feel I needn't go on...
Traditionally farmers have been breeding cattle, traditionally we like to eat. You're being deliberately argumentative in assuming that traditional means luddite vs something that has been tried and tested and known not to be destructive. Progress needn't mean obliteration of resources, but then given the "traditional" view from the US of demanding growth and domination to sustain high pricing against the all-mighty petro-dollar, you clearly don't have a better system.
Did you read the rest of my comments. Producing copious amounts of excess corn is _not_ a good thing. Especially when it's produced in a long-term damaging way. Good progress is not the complete obliteration of tradition, those who say it is are fools.
Not to mention that going back to the "traditional" methods would require that 90% of the population be dedicated to performing manual agricultural labor, the bulk of which has historically been performed by unfree people (i.e., slaves and serfs).