The demand for organic foods is increasing worldwide due to health and environmental benefits. However, there are several unanswered questions, such as: Do organic farmers generate higher profits? Will the cost of cultivation reduce to compensate for low yields? Can farmers practice as per the organic agriculture protocols and obtain certification? The literature on organic agriculture varies widely in terms of profitability, yields and costs of organic products. A few studies have researched site-specific organic agriculture, but none have compared organic with conventional agriculture at larger scale in India. The Indian government has promoted organic agriculture since 2015 through its pan-India scheme—Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY). Under this program, there were 13.9 million certified organic farmers in 29,859 organic clusters, covering 0.59 million hectares (about 0.4% of the cropped area in India). This study assessed the implementation process of PKVY and the impact at the farmer level using the Difference-in-Difference approach. An economic surplus model was employed to observe the macro scale using data from an all-India representative sample from 576 clusters for the crop year 2017. The results identified that organic farmers experienced 14–19 percent less costs and 12–18 percent lower yields than conventional farmers. The net result is a marginal increase in profitability compared to traditional agriculture. The economy-wide economic surplus model indicates that there will be a reduction in producer and consumer surplus due to reduced crop yields. However, if the shift from conventional to organic is confined to rainfed, hilly and tribal areas, there will be an increase in both consumer and producer surplus.

Some short‐term experiments in applied ecology and agricultural research have demonstrated that nutrient applications in semi‐natural grasslands can maintain productivity and will not result in the decrease of plant species richness. Such findings may have an impact on management choices and quality of valuable plant communities, and therefore, further discussion of this topic is necessary. We highlight three aspects regarding the management suggestions in grassland communities with high biodiversity: (1) short‐term study results may not reflect potential long‐term changes; (2) broad range of grasslands may respond to disturbance in site specific ways; and (3) practical advices should contain careful consideration of existing ecological literature regarding grassland management and sustainable biodiversity. Synthesis and applications. Considering effects of fertilisation on biodiversity, we argue against nutrient application to semi‐natural grasslands. Biodiversity supports the resilience of grassland ecosystems and maintains a stable biomass yield. Current short‐term experiments are good indicators about the need for a long‐term experiments and meta‐analysis for detailed understanding of ecosystem functions in different types and areas during global change.