The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides access to information on a variety of topics related to the environment and strives to inform citizens of health risks. The EPA also has an extensive library network that consists of 26 libraries throughout the United States, which provide access to a plethora of information to EPA employees, scientists, and researchers. The EPA implemented a reorganization project to digitize their materials so they would be more accessible to a wider range of users, but this plan was drastically accelerated when the EPA was threatened with a budget cut. It chose to close and reduce the hours and services of some of their libraries. As a result, the agency was accused of denying users the “right to know” by making information unavailable, not providing an adequate strategic plan, and discarding vital materials. This case study explores the background of the digitization project, the practices implemented, and the critiques of the project.

/pdf/the-environmental-protection-agency-3gx4opzrjm.pdf

The Environmental Protection Agency

Framework Convention on Climate Change

Many of the key problems in food systems are linked specifically to industrial agriculture: uniform crop monocultures relying on chemical fertilizers and pesticides, industrial feedlots (the infamous "CAFOs") using preventive antibiotics. This form of agriculture is generating negative outcomes on multiple fronts: widespread degradation of land, water and ecosystems; high GHG emissions; biodiversity losses; persistent hunger and micro-nutrient deficiencies alongside the rapid rise of obesity and diet-related diseases; and livelihood stresses for farmers around the world.

From uniformity to diversity: a paradigm shift from industrial agriculture to diversified agroecological systems

Food Consumption and its Impact on Cardiovascular Disease: Importance of Solutions Focused on the Globalized Food System: A Report From the Workshop Convened by the World Heart Federation.

The structure of farms, farm households, and the rural communities in which they exist has evolved markedly over the last century. Historical data on a range of farm structure variables—including the value of agricultural production, commodity specialization, farming-dependent counties, and off-farm work—offer a perspective on the long-term forces that have helped shape the structure of agriculture and rural life over the past century. These forces include productivity growth, the increasing importance of national and global markets, and the rising influence of consumers on agricultural production. Within this long-term context of structural change, a review of some key developments in farm policy considers the extent to which farm policy design has or has not kept pace with the continuing transformation of American agriculture.

The 20th Century Transformation of U.S. Agriculture and Farm Policy

The world is now nearly five years into what has come to be known as the “food crisis”, sparked in 2007 by rapid spikes in international prices for basic commodities. Commodity prices doubled, the estimated number of hungry people topped one billion, and food riots erupted in more than 30 countries. A second price spike in 2010-11 drove home that this was not a one-off event, that the policies and principles guiding agricultural development and food security are deeply flawed. The glo bal food import bill for 2011 soared to an astonishing $1.3 trillion. There is now widespread agreement that international agricultural prices will remain signifi cantly higher than pre-crisis levels for at least the next decade.

The continuing food crisis global policy reforms lag.

Hunger continues to be one of humanity's greatest challenges despite the existence of a more-than-adequate global food supply equal to 2,800 kilocalories for every person every day. In measuring progress, policy-makers and concerned citizens across the globe rely on information supplied by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), an agency of the United Nations. In 2010 the FAO reported that in the wake of the 2007–2008 food-price spikes and global economic crisis, the number of people experiencing hunger worldwide since 2005–2007 had increased by 150 million, rising above 1 billion in 2009. However, in its State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012 (SOFI 12) the FAO presented new estimates, having revamped its methods and reinterpreted its hunger data back to 1990. The revised numbers for the period 1990–1992 to 2010–2012 reverse the trend to a steadily falling one. Based on the FAO's new calculations, extreme undernourishment peaked in 1990 at a record-breaking one billion, followed by a significant decline through 2006, when progress stalled but did not reverse (see chart below).

How We Count Hunger Matters

World trade talks have foundered recently, in part due to developing country demands that industrialized countries reduce their large farm support programs to allow poor farmers in the global South to compete more fairly. Claiming that Northern farm subsidies amount to over $1 billion a day, and that the average European cow receives more in subsidies than the nearly three billion people who live on less than two dollars a day, Southern governments, farmer groups, and international aid groups have demanded steep cuts in Northern agricultural subsidies. This paper examines the economic and policy aspects of the subsidy debate. We begin with an examination of the most widely used measure of agricultural support, the OECD's Producer Support Estimate. We identify several important flaws in its application and interpretation as a reliable subsidy measure, highlighting the particular problems this can cause in measuring the levels of farm support in developing countries whose economies may not be fully integrated with the world economy. We then review the results of economic modeling of trade liberalization and subsidy reduction, finding that overall such measures are unlikely to raise producer prices to a sufficient degree to bring relief from alleged agricultural dumping to Southern farmers by bringing export prices above production costs. We briefly examine one alternative explanation for low commodity prices, the oligopolistic nature of agricultural trade. We conclude with an outline for policy reforms at the global and national levels to address measurement flaws, raise commodity prices, and reduce the undercutting of developing country farmers by below-cost agricultural exports from the North. Throughout, we draw on US-Mexico trade in maize as an illustrative case study. We conclude that subsidy reduction is unlikely to reduce economic pressures on Mexican maize producers from below-cost US exports, nor are such measures likely to improve the economic prospects for similar small-scale farmers growing food primarily for subsistence and the internal market. Instead, policy reforms should focus on ending agricultural dumping, reducing global commodity overproduction in key crops, and reducing the market power of agribusiness conglomerates.

The Paradox of Agricultural Subsidies: Measurement Issues, Agricultural Dumping, and Policy Reform

With the opening of the Mexican economy under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Mexican agriculture came under new competitive pressures from U.S. exports. It was widely recognized at the beginning of NAFTA that Mexico had geographically-based comparative advantages in supplying off-season fruits and vegetables to a hungry U.S. market. NAFTA’s liberalization of agricultural trade produced the expected results, with more staple crops and meats flowing south and more seasonal fruits and vegetables flowing north. In agriculture, tariffs and quotas have now mostly been eliminated. Not so agricultural subsidies, which were left largely undisciplined by NAFTA. High U.S. farm subsidies for exported crops, which compete with Mexican products, have prompted charges that the level playing field NAFTA was supposed to create is in fact tilted heavily in favor of the United States. This paper assesses the costs of U.S. agricultural policies to Mexican producers by examining the extent to which the United States exported agricultural products to Mexico at prices below their costs of production, one of the definitions of “dumping” in the WTO. We study eight agricultural goods ‐ corn, soybeans, wheat, rice, cotton, beef, pork, and poultry ‐ all of which are heavily supported by the U.S. government, were produced in Mexico in significant volumes before NAFTA, and experienced dramatic increases in U.S. exports to Mexico after the agreement. We look at the years 1997-2005 because the beginning year follows both the implementation of NAFTA and the enactment of the 1996 U.S. Farm Bill, which significantly changed the nature of U.S. farm support. We estimate “dumping margins” and the costs to Mexican producers of prices driven below production costs by U.S. policies. We estimate Mexican losses for the eight products at $12.8 billion over the nine-year period, more than the value of Mexican tomato exports to the United States. Corn farmers experienced the greatest losses: $6.5 billion, an average of $99 per hectare per year.

Agricultural Dumping Under NAFTA: Estimating the Costs of U.S. Agricultural Policies to Mexican Producers

Since the introduction of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, traditional maize farmers in Mexico have faced difficult economic conditions. In barely more than a decade, as many as one million farmers may have abandoned their land under economic pressure from rising imports, low prices for maize and other traditional crops, weak local and regional demand, and large reductions in public sector support for agriculture. The losses are environmental as well as economic. With the loss of traditional maize, there has been a documented loss of the agricultural biodiversity of which these farmers and their ancestors have been stewards for centuries. With maize trade scheduled to be fully liberalized under NAFTA in 2008, many farm groups are calling for a renegotiation of the treaty’s agricultural provisions to prevent further damage. This policy analysis examines the room for alternative policies in Mexico under existing economic and environmental agreements, including NAFTA. It concludes that the Mexican government retains access to many useful policy instruments that could promote rural livelihoods while arresting the losses of important maize diversity. What is lacking is the political will to make use of them.

Timothy A. Wise

Papers

The continuing food crisis global policy reforms lag.

How We Count Hunger Matters

The Paradox of Agricultural Subsidies: Measurement Issues, Agricultural Dumping, and Policy Reform

Agricultural Dumping Under NAFTA: Estimating the Costs of U.S. Agricultural Policies to Mexican Producers

Policy Space for Mexican Maize: Protecting Agro-biodiversity by Promoting Rural Livelihoods