Maple Leaf Angus
Well-known member
The following column deserves careful consideration. Unfortunately, I missed the meeting where Ikerd spoke.
The CFFO Commentary
Title: A Change of Heart, a Change in Advice
By John Clement
November 17, 2006
Back in the 1980s, John Ikerd began to change his mind about farming and its future. A former head of the Department of Extension Agricultural Economics at the University of Georgia, Ikerd was a traditional, free-market agricultural economist. He believed that competitive markets are the most capable means of meeting the needs of people, for producers as well as consumers. He advised family farmers to manage their businesses for the economic “bottom line” and to not let family business interfere with farm business.
The U.S. farm financial crisis of the 1980s shook his beliefs in those assumptions. A domestic recession and the loss of export markets had left farmers with large debts, high interest rates, rising input costs, and plunging commodity prices. Ikerd particularly began to see that the farmers with the biggest financial problems were those who had been doing the things economic experts had been telling them to do. And he began to believe that he and his fellow agricultural experts were an important part of the cause for the crisis confronting American agriculture.
Ikerd brought the story of his changed outlook on farming --- and its lessons for the future --- to this year’s annual convention of the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario. The prime conclusion he left the audience with is that industrial agriculture is simply not sustainable. Ikerd said that industrial agriculture consumes more physical and social energy than it returns and has about a 50-year window of opportunity to change its ways. Instead, he believes that we must move towards a sustainable agriculture that is patterned more on living systems than on an industrialized, factory approach.
Ikerd’s prescription for the future advocates broad, sweeping changes in government policies. He told the CFFO audience that “our agriculture of today is not the natural consequence of the workings of free markets in a competitive global market economy, as economists would lead us to believe. Our agriculture is largely a reflection of our past agricultural policies. The farm policies of all so-called industrial nations have been shaped by the misperception that national food security could best be insured through greater productivity and that industrialization was the best means of achieving greater productivity.”
According to Ikerd, there are now many reasons to question the wisdom of continuing public policies that subsidize large-scale, industrial production agriculture. His prescription for future government policies includes public support only to sustainable farmers and mutually beneficial trade arrangements that do no disrupt social or environmental stewardship. He also wants to see a bedrock commitment to sustaining land and the natural environment, plus incentives for stewardship over incentives for productivity gains. Finally, he wants to see consumers being widely educated and informed about the need for local food. Ikerd counseled those at the CFFO Convention that “sustainability is ultimately an ethical and moral choice.”
An unlikely prophet, Ikerd’s call to change our ways was taken seriously by many of those attending the CFFO Convention. Like Ikerd himself, they believe that the business of farming should always be kept in balance with the need to be stewards of the resources entrusted to our care. Regardless of whether you agree with his prescriptions, Ikerd’s perspective has enduring value.
The CFFO Commentary
Title: A Change of Heart, a Change in Advice
By John Clement
November 17, 2006
Back in the 1980s, John Ikerd began to change his mind about farming and its future. A former head of the Department of Extension Agricultural Economics at the University of Georgia, Ikerd was a traditional, free-market agricultural economist. He believed that competitive markets are the most capable means of meeting the needs of people, for producers as well as consumers. He advised family farmers to manage their businesses for the economic “bottom line” and to not let family business interfere with farm business.
The U.S. farm financial crisis of the 1980s shook his beliefs in those assumptions. A domestic recession and the loss of export markets had left farmers with large debts, high interest rates, rising input costs, and plunging commodity prices. Ikerd particularly began to see that the farmers with the biggest financial problems were those who had been doing the things economic experts had been telling them to do. And he began to believe that he and his fellow agricultural experts were an important part of the cause for the crisis confronting American agriculture.
Ikerd brought the story of his changed outlook on farming --- and its lessons for the future --- to this year’s annual convention of the Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario. The prime conclusion he left the audience with is that industrial agriculture is simply not sustainable. Ikerd said that industrial agriculture consumes more physical and social energy than it returns and has about a 50-year window of opportunity to change its ways. Instead, he believes that we must move towards a sustainable agriculture that is patterned more on living systems than on an industrialized, factory approach.
Ikerd’s prescription for the future advocates broad, sweeping changes in government policies. He told the CFFO audience that “our agriculture of today is not the natural consequence of the workings of free markets in a competitive global market economy, as economists would lead us to believe. Our agriculture is largely a reflection of our past agricultural policies. The farm policies of all so-called industrial nations have been shaped by the misperception that national food security could best be insured through greater productivity and that industrialization was the best means of achieving greater productivity.”
According to Ikerd, there are now many reasons to question the wisdom of continuing public policies that subsidize large-scale, industrial production agriculture. His prescription for future government policies includes public support only to sustainable farmers and mutually beneficial trade arrangements that do no disrupt social or environmental stewardship. He also wants to see a bedrock commitment to sustaining land and the natural environment, plus incentives for stewardship over incentives for productivity gains. Finally, he wants to see consumers being widely educated and informed about the need for local food. Ikerd counseled those at the CFFO Convention that “sustainability is ultimately an ethical and moral choice.”
An unlikely prophet, Ikerd’s call to change our ways was taken seriously by many of those attending the CFFO Convention. Like Ikerd himself, they believe that the business of farming should always be kept in balance with the need to be stewards of the resources entrusted to our care. Regardless of whether you agree with his prescriptions, Ikerd’s perspective has enduring value.