the Myths of “Competition” and “Efficiency” in farming [General]
2009 Jun 7
Wow. The graphs on page 5 certainly tell a huge story in and of themself. It lists the commodity price of 4 major commodities : corn, wheat, barley, pork - and shows that the price paid to the farmer has remained flat for some 30 years, while the retails prices have doubled, tripled and in one case increased 5-fold!
2009 Jun 7
I glanced the article.
Conclusion: It sucks to be a (Canadian) farmer. Big time.
It also sucks to be a GM 'Nut Turner'.
Hello globalization ... the ultimate leveling of the playing field.
And I'm so glad my kids did not choose agricultural college, even after attending the Experimental Farm Summer Day Camp.
Conclusion: It sucks to be a (Canadian) farmer. Big time.
It also sucks to be a GM 'Nut Turner'.
Hello globalization ... the ultimate leveling of the playing field.
And I'm so glad my kids did not choose agricultural college, even after attending the Experimental Farm Summer Day Camp.
2009 Jun 8
Factory farms are one of the primary reasons I stopped eating meat back when I was a teenager. The recent focus on lifecycle awareness (in consumer products and foods) has been an incredibly good thing - and more small, independent farmers are now able to make a decent living, doing things the right way. I really hope it's not a fad.
2009 Jun 9
An interesting article, but not entirely surprising. I think the cause and effect might be a little muddled with respect to big business etc. In one chart they show how much more 'efficient' ( crop per acreage etc) farms are today than 30 years ago, and in another they lament how the average farm size has grown, and then they try to ignore the fact that they just pointed out that at the same time as farms were getting vastly more efficient, they were also growing in size. Of course, that doesn't mean that the larger size made them more efficient, but it does't mean it didn't either. From the price perspective, although it may be a big conspiracy on the part of big A agribusiness, the real reason that prices have stayed low for 20 years is a combination of world-wide government subsidy distorting markets, and the fact there has been an oversupply of food (to the countries with markets that is.. I don't mean to make that comment sound bad for starving 3rd world people). Of course, it has been in the interests of big A agribusiness to keep supply high, and prices low, and I'm sure they um.. encouraged it, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say they actually controlled it (although.. who knows, maybe they did). With the world grain inventories at the lowest point in 40 years, and countries like Russia capping exports, I think the recent gains in some grain prices might be here to stay (yay for farmers?). As Zym has pointed out before, this will not be good news for meat producers who only use grain, and not forage. Care to invest in grain futures Capt'n?
2009 Jun 9
I'm enjoying reading this, I'm about 2/3 of the way through and trying to read for retention so I haven't really digested the whole document for substantive commentary at the moment.
The more I read on the topic, the more it suggests to me that we have perhaps passed the top of the curve between efficiency v. quality output. In other words, although there are certain economic and practical advantages in mechanizing and centralizing the farm industry, there is a point where the laws of diminishing returns are invoked, and the if the system is consolidated too much many of these original efficiencies are lost. That definitely seems to be one recurring theme in the paper.
On a completely positive note, anecdotal evidence such as that provided by Irishgal is the type of feedback that suggests although the system may have a lot of challenges and issues, hopefully increased demand for artisan or smaller scale meat and produce will be able to keep smaller farmers in business. That is the idea behind consumer choice; if enough people stop drinking soda pop, eating twinkies and frozen chicken fingers, the demand for massive amounts of commodity corn just won't be there. I guess it remains to be seen if NAmericans are going to make those dietary changes en masse. It is going to take serious cultural and educational reform from my view.
The more I read on the topic, the more it suggests to me that we have perhaps passed the top of the curve between efficiency v. quality output. In other words, although there are certain economic and practical advantages in mechanizing and centralizing the farm industry, there is a point where the laws of diminishing returns are invoked, and the if the system is consolidated too much many of these original efficiencies are lost. That definitely seems to be one recurring theme in the paper.
On a completely positive note, anecdotal evidence such as that provided by Irishgal is the type of feedback that suggests although the system may have a lot of challenges and issues, hopefully increased demand for artisan or smaller scale meat and produce will be able to keep smaller farmers in business. That is the idea behind consumer choice; if enough people stop drinking soda pop, eating twinkies and frozen chicken fingers, the demand for massive amounts of commodity corn just won't be there. I guess it remains to be seen if NAmericans are going to make those dietary changes en masse. It is going to take serious cultural and educational reform from my view.
2009 Jun 12
I recently researched a brief talk on the benefits of organics (when I say brief I mean under 5 minutes). I want to share what stood out for me--if 10 families bought locally from one farmer, that farmer could sustain the family farm. Let's do it! BTW-this is in Ontario, vegetarian. It does cost more to sustain meat production. (I can't help you with the stats here.)
zymurgist
www.nfu.ca