Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Policy barriers to sustainable agriculture

  • Douglas L. Young (a1)
Abstract

U.S. agriculture, which has developed in a mixed environment of private initiative and government support, is very successful by many measures. American farmers produce record levels of food and fiber per farm worker at very low budgetary cost to consumers. Recently, however, concern about resource depletion and agrichemical pollution has caused critics to question the environmental sustainability of the agricultural production system. Furthermore, pressures to trim the growing contribution of agricultural subsidies to the national budget deficit have led legislators and others to question the sustainability of the federal farm programs. Low agrichemical input or sustainable agricultural practices, such as nitrogen-fixing legumes in rotation with cereals, could reduce environmental damage. The selectivity and structure of historical farm programs, however, have economically favored conventional systems. Farm programs subsidize only about half the total value of agricultural products. Feed and food grains, cotton, and dairy products receive the lion's share of payments. Soil-building crops like forage legumes, most edible legumes, hay, and pasture are excluded. Secondly, the structure of commodity programs favors intensive production of program crops supported by high fertilizer and pesticide applications. This incentive emanates from the policy of computing the farm-wide deficiency payment for a program crop proportionately to the farm's historical “base” acreage and “established” yield for the crop. The leading farm program crops of corn, wheat, cotton, and soybeans occupied slightly over 60 percent of cropped acres and received at least 65 percent of all U.S. agricultural pesticides and fertilizer in the mid 19809s. Despite budget pressures and environmental concerns, near term termination of farm programs or decoupling them from production of particular commodities is unlikely. Fears about aggravating financial stress, reducing land values, and harming agrichemical supply businesses in program crop-growing regions will promote cautious incremental change. Recent promising signs of “creeping decoupling” include the 1986 freeze on established yields, the gradual reduction in target prices, the permitting of multi-year grass or legume plantings as set aside acreage, and the loosening of base acreage restrictions within the 1988 Drought Relief Bill.

Copyright
References
Hide All
1.Benbrook, Charles. 1988a. Sustainable agriculture and agricultural policy. Paper presented as USDA Conference on Low-Input/Sustainable Agriculture, September 7–8, Washington, DC.
2.Benbrook, Charles. 1988b. The environment and the 1990 Farm Bill. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 43(6):440443.
3.Blakeslee, Leroy. 1980. Post World War II government policy impacts on the U.S. wheat sector. College of Agriculture Research Center, Washington State University Technical Bulletin No. 0093.
4.Cacek, T., and Langner, Linda L.. 1986. The economic implications of organic farming. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1(1):2529.
5.Cochrane, Willard W. 1986. A new sheet of music: how Kennedy's farm advisor has changed his tune about commodity policy and why. Choices 1(1):1115.
6.Cochrane, Willard W., and Ryan, Mary E.. 1976. American farm policy, 1948–1973. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
7.Cook, R. James. 1986. Interrelationships of plant health and the sustainability of agriculture, with special reference to plant diseases. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 1(1):1924.
8.Daberkow, Stan G., and Reichelderfer, Katherine H.. 1988. Low-input agriculture: trends, goals, and prospects for input use. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70(5): 11591166.
9.de la Garza, E. (Kika). 1988. A Democratic view: making agricultural policy work - advice to the next President. Choices 3(4):1619.
10.Dixon, O., Dixon, P., and Miranowski, J.. 1973. Insecticide requirement in an efficient agricultural sector. The Review of Economics and Statistics 55:423432.
11. Doane's. 1986. Doane's agricultural report: farm exports. Vol. 49, No. 46–5, 14 November.
12.Dobbs, Thomas L., Leddy, Mark G., and Smolik, James D.. 1988. Factors influencing the economic potential for alternative farming systems: Case analyses in South Dakota. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 3(1):2634.
13.Fleming, Malcolm H. 1987. Agricultural chemicals in ground water: Preventing contamination by removing barriers against lowinput farm management. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 2(3): 124131.
14.Goldstein, Walter G., and Young, Douglas L.. 1987. An agronomic and economic comparison of a conventional and a low-input cropping system in the Palouse. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 2(2):5156.
15.Hallberg, George R. 1986. From hoes to herbicides: agriculture and groundwater quality. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 41(6):357364.
16.Hammer, Thomas A. 1988. U.S. sugar policy: it should be changed. Choices 3(4):89.
17.Hertel, Thomas W. 1988. Gainers and losers with supply control: an economy-wide perspective. Choices 3(4):1013.
18.Hodges, R. D. 1978. The case for biological agriculture. Ecologist Quarterly (Summer Summer): 122143.
19.House of Representatives. 1988. Low-input farming systems: benefits and barriers. 74th Report by the Committee on Government Operations. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. pp. 12.
20.Johnston, Warren E., and Sandrey, Ron A.. 1989. Emergence of structural adjustments in response to economic policy reforms: New Zealand agriculture in 1989. Paper presented at Western Agricultural Economics Association annual meeting, Coeur d'Alene, Idaho.
21.Miranowski, J. A. 1975. The demand for agricultural crop chemicals under alternative farm program and pollution control solutions. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
22. Newsweek. 1987. The heretics of the heartland. March 30 issue, pp. 4647.
23.Ortmann, G. F., Stulp, Valter J., and Rask, Norman. 1986. Comparative costs in agricultural commodities among major exporting countries. Paper presented at the 1986 annual meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, August, Reno, Nevada.
24.Reichelderfer, Katherine H. 1985. Do USDA farm program participants contribute to soil erosion? USDA, Economics Research Service. Agricultural Economics Report No. 532.
25.Schuh, G. E. 1986. Impact of national and international economic policies on U.S. agriculture. Paper presented at annual meeting of Agriculture Research Institute, October 8–10, Washington, DC.
26.USDA. 1987. Agricultural statistics 1987. Washington, DC.
27.USDA. 1988. 1988 agricultural chartbook. Agricultural Handbook No. 673. U.S. Government, Washington, DC. p. 72.
28.USDA. 1989. 1989 agricultural chartbook. Agricultural Handbook No. 684. U.S. Government, Washington, DC.
29.Vogtmann, H. 1984. Organic farming practices and research in Europe. In Bezdicek, D. F. and Power, J. F. (eds.). Organic Farming and its Role in Sustainable Agriculture. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 2738.
30.Vrooman, Harry. 1987. Fertilizer use and price statistics, 1960–1985. USDA, Economic Resources Service. Statistics Bulletin No. 750.
31.Wallace, L. T. 1987. Agriculture's futures: America's food system. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.
32.Womach, Jasper. 1988. The 1990 Farm Bill: issues likely to shape the policy debate. CRS Report for Congress, 88-700ENR. Food and Agriculture Section, Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division, Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress, Washington, DC.
33.Young, Douglas L. 1988. Economic adjustment to sustainable agriculture: discussion. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 70(5):11731174.
34.Young, Douglas L., and Goldstein, Walter A.. 1988. How government farm programs discourage sustainable cropping systems: a U.S. case study. In How systems work: proceedings of farming systems research symposium. University of Arkansas/Winrock Institute, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Journal of Alternative Agriculture
  • ISSN: 0889-1893
  • EISSN: 1478-5498
  • URL: /core/journals/american-journal-of-alternative-agriculture
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 13 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 83 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 12th June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.