The Future of Animal Agriculture in North America - Farm Foundation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and services. The success of the local business depends on its ability to change from products no longer needed to new technologies demanded by the production sector. Benefiting the most will be businesses providing products or services related to environmental protection, such as nutrient management consultants, engineers, manure haulers and nutrition experts. These impacts are likely to vary by animal sector and by the region’s economic structure, i.e., the degree to which inputs are purchased locally versus regionally. Agribusinesses. Agribusinesses that operate across state, provincial or national borders may benefit from more uniform and predictable regulatory programs. Agribusinesses in better financial standing may be better able to adapt or relocate as regions, technologies and sectors may be impacted differently. Some businesses would benefit as producers purchase new technologies to meet water or air quality standards. Similarly to what was discussed above for producers, if environmental regulation substantially raises costs, competitiveness of agribusinesses that support animal agricultural production may be challenged. Rural Residents. Improvements may result in water and/or air quality in areas where animal agriculture reduces density or implements more environmental friendly practices. Given the slow movement and/or buildup of nutrients in soils, water quality benefits in some areas may take months, years and possibly decades to be realized. Some surface water concerns, such as pathogens, would be reduced more quickly, as would air quality concerns. To the extent that environmental and nuisance impacts of animal agriculture reduce nearby residents’ property values, a reduction in these off-site impacts through stricter regulations, technology adoption or closing of animal production farms should lead to an increase in property values near animal facilities. On the other hand, many types of agriculture generate amenities that neighbors and rural residents enjoy (Batie, 2003). To the extent that these amenities are lost when farms go out of business and/or convert to other uses, rural residents may be less well off, and possibly see a decline in property values. Citizenry/Taxpayers. Animal agriculture is an important economic activity in North America, particularly rural areas. Increasing regulations, incentives for environmental performance, or research on new technologies or innovative institutional programs will require an investment from the public sector. Taxpayers will carry part of the cost. Some benefits would be obtained by reallocation of existing government funds to cost sharing, technical assistance and education to targeted areas and farms. But more government funds would be needed to accomplish other program aspects, thereby increasing taxes. The general citizenry’s welfare would be reduced as they would have less money to spend on other items. The public-sector costs differ with the options selected. Increased regulation places a burden on industry, but there is a Environmental Issues 109 cost of policing the regulated firms. Incentive-based programs to encourage implementation of BMPs involve a cost share from the government. Industry-led efforts to achieve more accurate pricing of products and byproducts and improved environmental performance will require public investment in research and development of technologies and institutions. Knowledge Gaps 1. Increased scientific understanding of agricultureenvironment interactions, and linkages between biophysical and economic models, are needed to better measure and monitor the environmental performance of agricultural practices at appropriate scales at regional, local or watershed level, with a focus on adoption by different sizes and types of farms. These models could then be used to evaluate policy options relative to the environment and economic competitiveness at the farm, regional and national levels. They would also help raise awareness of the environmental benefits provided ecosystems and inform private and public decision making about the environmental issues related to animal agriculture. 2. Information is needed on the potential implications to human health of pathogen activity and air emissions from livestock and poultry production and manure storage, handling, treatment, utilization and application. It should focus on innovative solutions to address emerging issues. This research could lead to on-farm BMPs to reduce environmental impact. 3. Better understanding is needed of North American environmental problems, boundary issues, physical interconnections (Gulf of Mexico, Great Lakes) and public policies related to animal agriculture. This includes issues of water quantity, as well as quality and knowledge on the effects of farm practices on GHG emissions from animal agriculture. What are the implications of environmental issues for small, mid-size and large animal operations and across Mexico, Canada and the United States? Are proposed solutions equitable, or should they be? How should the stringency of environmental laws or the effectiveness of public policies be measured? Better information is needed on implementation of policies and regulations.
110 References Environmental Issues Abdalla, C.W., L.E. Lanyon, and M. C. Hallberg. (1995, December). “What We Know about Historical Trends in Firm Location Decisions and Regional Shifts: Policy Issues for an Industrializing Animal Agriculture Sector.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77, 1229-1236. Abdalla, C.W. and T.W. Kelsey. (1996, November/December). “Breaking the Impasse: Helping Communities Cope with Change at the Rural-Urban Interface.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 51, 462-466. Abdalla, C.W. and J.D. Shaffer. (1997, July). “Politics and Markets in the Articulation of Preferences for Attributes of the Rapidly Changing Food and Agricultural Sectors: Framing the Issues.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 29(1), 57-71. Abdalla, C. and A. Dodd. (2002). “Nutrient Management Policy: Pennsylvania Stakeholder Views of Policy, Progress, and Future Directions.” Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Penn State Cooperative Extension, University Park, PA. Alexander, R. and R. Smith. (2005). “Moving from Monitoring to Prediction: The Quality of the Nation’s Streams.” USGS. Animal Confinement Policy National Task Force. (1998). “1998 National Survey of Animal Confinement Policies.” Available at http://cherokee.agecon.clemson.edu/confine.htm. Batie, S. (2003). “The Multifunctional Attributes of Northeastern Agriculture: A Research Agenda.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 32(1),1-8. Becker, J., C. Abdalla, and D. Beegle. (2005). “Questions and Answers about the ACRE Program.” Penn State Cooperative Extension circular. Available at Nutrient and Water Policy Update, http://agenvpolicy.aers.psu.edu/ACRErevised%20(2).pdf. Beegle, D.B. and L.E. Lanyon. (1994, March/April). “Nutrient Management Legislation in Pennsylvania.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 49, 84-86. Boggess, W.G., G. Johns, and C. Meline. (1997). “Economic Impacts of Water Quality Programs in the Lake Okeechobee Watershed of Florida.” Journal of Dairy Science, 80, 2682-2691. Brewin, D. (2004). “Three essays in regional economics that consider the importance of space, agglomeration, and income.” PhD Dissertation from the Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Pennsylvania State University. Available at http://www.etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/WorldWideIndex/ETD-628/index.html. Cloutier, L., P. Thomassin, F. Dagicour, and J. Rodriguez. (2003). “Local Environmental Protection and Trade: The Cases of Hog Production in Canada and Mexico.” Report prepared for The Second North American Symposium on Assessing the Environmental Effects of Trade, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, Mexico City, Mexico. Cushman, J.H. (1998). “Courts Expanding Effort to Battle Water Pollution: New Enforcement Tactic.” New York Times, February 28, pp1, 20. Ervin, D. and A. Schmitz. (1996). “A New Era of Environmental Management in Agriculture.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78 (December), 198-207. Feedstuffs. (2005, May). Available at http://www.feedstuffs.com/ME2/Default.asp. FDA/USDA/CDC National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System – Enteric Bacteria (NARMS-EB), Veterinary Isolates Final Report-1998. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Business/docs.htm?docid=6755. Gollehon, N. (2005). “Status and Trends in Small and Mid-sized Animal Operations in the U.S.” USDA, ERS Presentation at the Workshop on Small and Mid-Sized Animal Operations and Water Quality, Linthicum Heights, MD. Isik, M. (2004). “Environmental Regulation and the Spatial Structure of the U.S. Dairy Sector.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86(4), 949-962. Johnson, K.A. and D.E. Johnson. (1995). “Methane emissions from cattle.” J. Anim. Sci. 73(11), 2483-2492. Kellogg, R., C. Lander, D. Moffitt, and N. Gollehon. (2000). “Manure Nutrients Relative to the Capacity of Cropland and Pastureland to Assimilate Nutrients: Spatial and Temporal Trends for the United States.” USDA, NRCS, Washington, DC.
Page 2 and 3:
The Future of Animal Agriculture in
Page 4 and 5:
Consumer Demand Working Group Helen
Page 6 and 7:
Foreword Farm Foundation is a catal
Page 8 and 9:
Executive Summary The Future of Ani
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20:
Page 23 and 24:
16 growth in the number of Canadian
Page 25 and 26:
18 Consumer Demand The demand for m
Page 27 and 28:
20 Nutrient loading on farmland fro
Page 30 and 31:
Chapter 2 Economics of Production,
Page 32 and 33:
Economics of Production, Processing
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
The Future Economics of Production,
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
References Economics of Production,
Page 46 and 47:
Chapter 3 Consumer Demand Issues Co
Page 48 and 49:
The consumer food demand pyramid, i
Page 50 and 51:
devote less time and effort to food
Page 52 and 53:
dollar. Many of the retail environm
Page 54 and 55:
economies will increase demand for
Page 56 and 57:
Information Needs Long term, how wi
Page 58 and 59:
Table 1. 2005 Population and Recent
Page 60 and 61:
Figure 3. U.S. Meat Consumption Pou
Page 62 and 63:
Consumer Demand Issues 55 Figure 7.
Page 64 and 65:
Chapter 4 Global Competitiveness an
Page 66 and 67: tariff-rate quota (TRQ) in place on
Page 68 and 69: 2004 EU enlargement is expected to
Page 70 and 71: provide guidelines for animal healt
Page 72 and 73: affordable foods to many developing
Page 74 and 75: With NAFTA, and indeed before, seve
Page 76 and 77: competitors. Economic logic, howeve
Page 78 and 79: Global Competitiveness and Trade 71
Page 80 and 81: Figure 4. World Beef Consumption So
Page 82 and 83: Figure 8. World Poultry Meat Produc
Page 84 and 85: Figure 12. Major Dairy Exporters So
Page 86: Global Competitiveness and Trade 79
Page 89 and 90: 82 and medical professions. This in
Page 91 and 92: 84 produced under specific contract
Page 93 and 94: 86 establishing food safety system
Page 95 and 96: 88 In the United States, FDA, under
Page 97 and 98: 90 Policy Options and Implications
Page 99 and 100: 92 A national structure coordinated
Page 101 and 102: 94 Food Safety and Animal Health Pr
Page 104 and 105: Chapter 6 Environmental Issues The
Page 106 and 107: positive and negative externalities
Page 108 and 109: environmental damage. Climate, soil
Page 110 and 111: Managing or changing the components
Page 112 and 113: transportation access and costs; in
Page 114 and 115: could also be integrated air and wa
Page 118 and 119: Environmental Issues 111 Metcalfe,
Page 120 and 121: Figure 2. Environmental Issues 113
Page 122 and 123: Chapter 7 Community and Labor Anima
Page 124 and 125: Slow economic growth in recent year
Page 126 and 127: informational hearing, at which com
Page 128 and 129: An aspect that should not be overlo
Page 130 and 131: States, FSIR would consider the no-
Page 132 and 133: • compensate parties harmed by an
Page 134 and 135: Community and Labor 127 Flora, C.B.
Page 136 and 137: Community and Labor 129 Senthilselv
Page 138 and 139: Community and Labor 131 Table 3. Un
Page 140 and 141: Chapter 8 Animal Welfare Animal agr
Page 142 and 143: In 2005, the Canadian Pork Council
Page 144 and 145: voluntary codes of practice are bei
Page 146 and 147: eak the rules; discipline is far mo
Page 148 and 149: In the final analysis, economic for
Page 150 and 151: References Animal Welfare 143 Agra
Page 152 and 153: Box 1. Animal Welfare Legislation i
Page 154 and 155: Animal Welfare 147 Box 3. Animal We
Page 156 and 157: Source: Agra CEAS Consulting Ltd. (
Page 158 and 159: Chapter 9 A Look to the Future Ther
Page 160 and 161: safety, animal welfare, process ass
show all

The Future of Animal Agriculture in North America - Farm Foundation

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?