Urbana, Illinois
May 13, 2009
Source:
ACES News
Robert G.F. Spitze (217) 367-2919
Writer: Bob Sampson
Globalization of agriculture production and food will likely
mean more regulations on producers and suppliers, said Robert
G.F. Spitze, professor emeritus of agricultural and consumer
economics at the University of Illinois.
"Where national boundaries and oceans once separated us, we are
now in a world-wide market," said Spitze as he discussed
significant changes in public agricultural policy over the last
three-quarters of a century and then glanced at the potential
future. "This means our food supply can originate from any field
or processor on our planet.
"Carelessness at one peanut manufacturer, as we've seen, began
affecting the whole world almost immediately. A problem in one
location can have immediate impacts world-wide."
These interconnections focus attention on quality and safety
assurance.
"We may well see increasing public control by human
decision-makers over almost every detail of food production,
marketing and distribution," he said. "Why? Because mistakes in
any of these systems can have a devastating impact on health and
safety.
"Some farmers and distributors are resisting this, but what
happens when a whole crop of apples is wiped out or a herd of
prize livestock is wiped out because they didn't have these
protections?"
Born and raised in rural Arkansas, Spitze has a unique
perspective on agricultural policy with on-farm experience
combined with a multi-decade career as a distinguished
agricultural economist.
"I can remember as a child looking out the window one morning
and seeing a neighbor driving his herd of dairy cows down the
road to town," he said. "They were collected in town,
slaughtered, burned, and buried because they couldn't afford to
feed them and there was no one to buy them."
Spitze remembers the day in 1939 when, for the first time,
electricity came to his family's farm and being able to study by
adequate lights.
"What an experience that was, and it was made possible by public
agricultural policy," he said, referring to the New Deal Rural
Electrification Act.
Broadly defined by Spitze, public agricultural policy can be
traced back to the creation of public schools in frontier
communities, setting aside public lands in every township to the
mid-nineteenth century landmarks that created land-grant
universities, agricultural research, and the experiment station
system.
"In our public policy history today, I'd say there are five
broad areas of vivid change," he noted. "The first involves the
gradual broadening of what was once 'farm' policy to a diverse
array of activities that treat problems of rural
America—the environment, conservation, trade, education,
and rural health and development.
"Because of this, the term 'farm bill' is a misnomer today."
Secondly, as the scope of agricultural policy has expanded, so
has the seating at the table around which it is made.
"Today, there are all types of participants because nearly every
group has an interest in the results of agricultural policy," he
explained. "From the Farm Bureau to the League of Women Voters,
many groups have a stake in the outcome.'
Third among the sweeping changes is the sophistication of the
information available to decision-makers. And that is welcome,
he added, if wise policy is to be made.
"Today's USDA budget, for example, covers so much more than
simply farming," he said. "In fact, those segments probably
account for less than one-third of the budget. The other things
deal with total land use, food, and the system for feeding
Americans."
Americans, who once either lived on farms or were only a
generation removed, today have no contact with farming. This
contributes to the suffering of the current recession, he noted.
A fourth area of change is the globalization of the food system,
which he described earlier.
"Finally, there continues to be a reduction in the number of
farms in the United States but an increasing size of the
remaining farms," he noted. "That is a tremendous change over
the past century."
On the other hand, some things have not changed.
"First and foremost, agricultural and food policy is still
important," he said. "People are more concerned about it today
than they have ever been. The importance of the food supply
translates into the importance of public policy, no matter how
urbanized we get."
The basic process for making that policy is basically unchanged
from the early days of the republic.
"It begins when someone says this or that is a problem and
decides to do something about it. They begin talking to people,
then interest groups, and soon it evolves into the policy-making
process, complete with hearings, research, disagreements, and
compromise. Public agricultural policy will always be the result
of compromise," he said.
"That's how our democratic system works. People resolve their
differences by give-and-take. Some dismiss this as 'trading'
promises. But what else is there to resolve real
differences—a dictatorship? Democracy is always about the
process of reconciling differences."
Research, extension and communications continue to be constants
in agricultural policy as both the process and the delivery of
policy rely upon these supporting factors.
"Finally, at the end of the day, agricultural policy must deal
with problems about production, prices, and income," he said.
"Regardless of new concerns like the environment or climate,
policy will always end up with compromises about these three
economic issues."
The future may well see an increasing importance for food and
agricultural policy.
"We will see increasing human control over the food system," he
said. "The changes will occur because what happens on the farm
or in the food distribution system eventually affects many
others. Individual freedom will yield to the right of fellow
consumers because whatever we put on the land or in our
livestock eventually end up on the plate of another person."
The quality of the end product will emerge as a major concern,
as will the impact of production on the environment.
"We'll have a change of public policy relating to the actions of
individuals through the entire system to a level we've never
seen before," he said. "The public interest is larger than that
of any individual if it is determined through democratic
decisions."
If that seems far-fetched, Spitze responds with recent history.
"Five years ago, who would have predicted democratic governments
around the world would be taking over the major banks?" he said.
Globalization, the potential for impact on people thousands of
miles away from a single decision in a farmer's field or
processing plant, will lead to a willingness to involve
government "to do the things we can't do for ourselves," he
said.
As the world comes closer together through a globalized food
system, Spitze believes there will be a similar rise in what
might be termed global consciousness and international types of
controls.
"We are so interwoven, so interdependent, that we need
democratic government-type policies at the international level,"
he said. "The days of unfettered kingdoms and nationalism are
passing and yielding to broader public interests arising from
democratic processes. Agricultural and food policy will be one
of the driving factors in this change.
"Food and health are too important to be left to the unregulated
private indulgences of men and nations. It is up to interested,
informed citizens to help decide the desired combination of
public and private policies."
In essence, Spitze is describing a world with freedom from want
for basic human needs, freedom from fear.
"That's what I fought for in World War II," he said. |
|
