The 2002 US Farm Bill: what's in it for CAP reform?

The 2002 U.S. Farm Bill (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act or FSRIA) provides considerably more government subsidies for U.S. agriculture than Congress envisaged when it passed the preceding 1996–2002 FAIR Act. We review the FAIR record, showing how government subsidies increased greatly beyond those originally scheduled. For FSRIA, we outline key commodity, trade, and conservation and environmental provisions. We expect that the commodity programmes will: (a) encourage production when the market calls for less; (b) significantly increase subsidies over FAIR baseline subsidies; (c) press against current WTO and possible Doha Round support limits; and (d) aggravate trading partners. Finally, we suggest two lessons from the U.S. policy experience that might benefit those working on CAP and WTO reform. First, past research shows that farm programmes have little to do with the economic health of rural communities. Second, programme transparency, and especially public disclosure of the level of payments going to individual farmers, by name, influences the farm policy debate. Personalized data show what economists have long maintained—that the bulk of programme benefits go to a relatively few, large, producers—but do so in a way that captures the public and policy-makers' attention

An exploration of the drivers to bio-security collective action among a sample of UK cattle and sheep farmers

At present, collective action regarding bio-security among UK cattle and sheep farmers is rare. Despite the occurrence of catastrophic livestock diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and foot and mouth disease (FMD), within recent decades, there are few national or local farmer-led animal health schemes. To explore the reasons for this apparent lack of interest, we utilised a socio-psychological approach to disaggregate the cognitive, emotive and contextual factors driving bio-security behaviour among cattle and sheep farmers in the United Kingdom (UK). In total, we interviewed 121 farmers in South-West England and Wales. The main analytical tools included a content, cluster and logistic regression analysis. The results of the content analysis illustrated apparent 'dissonance' between bio-security attitudes and behaviour.(1) Despite the heavy toll animal disease has taken on the agricultural economy, most study participants were dismissive of the many measures associated with bio-security. Justification for this lack of interest was largely framed in relation to the collective attribution or blame for the disease threats themselves. Indeed, epidemic diseases were largely related to external actors and agents. Reasons for outbreaks included inadequate border control, in tandem with ineffective policies and regulations. Conversely, endemic livestock disease was viewed as a problem for 'bad' farmers and not an issue for those individuals who managed their stock well. As such, there was little utility in forming groups to address what was largely perceived as an individual problem. Further, we found that attitudes toward bio-security did not appear to be influenced by any particular source of information per se. While strong negative attitudes were found toward specific sources of bio-security information, e.g. government leaflets, these appear to simply reflect widely held beliefs. In relation to actual bio-security behaviours, the logistic regression analysis revealed no significant difference between in-scheme and out of scheme farmers. We concluded that in order to support collective action with regard to bio-security, messages need to be reframed and delivered from a neutral source. Efforts to support group formation must also recognise and address the issues relating to perceptions of social connectedness among the communities involved. (c) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The value of sown grass margins for enhancing soil macrofaunal biodiversity in arable systems

The presence of a grass strip was found to be beneficial to soil macrofauna, increasing the species densities and abundances of earthworms, woodlice and staphylinid beetles. The biodiversity of the three main feeding groups - predators, soil ingesters and litter consumers - was also significantly higher in the grass strips than in the field edges without strips, indicating that establishment of grassy margins in arable fields may enhance ecosystem services such as soil fertility and pest control. The grass strip habitat contained a large number of species of soil macrofauna, being second only to hedgerow habitat, with 10% of the total species list for the farm found only within the margins. Of the rare species recorded on the farm, five of the nine were from the grass strips, four of which were found only there. This study shows that establishing grassy strips in the margins of arable fields increases the biodiversity of the soil macrofauna, both within fields (alpha diversity) and across the farm (beta diversity). (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The value of arable field margins for enhancing soil macrofaunal biodiversity in agroecosystems

The presence of a grass strip was found to be beneficial to soil macrofauna, increasing the species densities and abundances of earthworms, woodlice and staphylinid beetles. The biodiversity of the three main feeding groups – predators, soil ingesters and litter consumers – was also significantly higher in the grass strips than in the field edges without strips, indicating that establishment of grassy margins in arable fields may enhance ecosystem services such as soil fertility and pest control. The grass strip habitat contained a large number of species of soil macrofauna, being second only to hedgerow habitat, with 10% of the total species list for the farm found only within the margins. Of the rare species recorded on the farm, five of the nine were from the grass strips, four of which were found only there. This study shows that establishing grassy strips in the margins of arable fields increases the biodiversity of the soil macrofauna, both within fields (alpha diversity) and across the farm (beta diversity).

Can arable field margins be managed to enhance their biodiversity, conservation and functional value for soil macrofauna?

1. The establishment of grassy strips at the margins of arable fields is an agri-environment scheme that aims to provide resources for native flora and fauna and thus increase farmland biodiversity. These margins can be managed to target certain groups, such as farmland birds and pollinators, but the impact of such management on the soil fauna has been poorly studied. This study assessed the effect of seed mix and management on the biodiversity, conservation and functional value of field margins for soil macrofauna. 2. Experimental margin plots were established in 2001 in a winter wheat field in Cambridgeshire, UK, using a factorial design of three seed mixes and three management practices [spring cut, herbicide application and soil disturbance (scarification)]. In spring and autumn 2005, soil cores taken from the margin plots and the crop were hand-sorted for soil macrofauna. The Lumbricidae, Isopoda, Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Carabidae and Staphylinidae were identified to species and classified according to feeding type. 3. Diversity in the field margins was generally higher than in the crop, with the Lumbricidae, Isopoda and Coleoptera having significantly more species and/or higher abundances in the margins. Within the margins, management had a significant effect on the soil macrofauna, with scarified plots containing lower abundances and fewer species of Isopods. The species composition of the scarified plots was similar to that of the crop. 4. Scarification also reduced soil- and litter-feeder abundances and predator species densities, although populations appeared to recover by the autumn, probably as a result of dispersal from neighbouring plots and boundary features. The implications of the responses of these feeding groups for ecosystem services are discussed. 5. Synthesis and applications. This study shows that the management of agri-environment schemes can significantly influence their value for soil macrofauna. In order to encourage the litter-dwelling invertebrates that tend to be missing from arable systems, agri-environment schemes should aim to minimize soil cultivation and develop a substantial surface litter layer. However, this may conflict with other aims of these schemes, such as enhancing floristic and pollinator diversity.

A framework for revitalisation of rural education and training systems in sub-Saharan Africa: Strengthening the human resource base for food security and sustainable livelihoods

Recent studies of the current state of rural education and training (RET) systems in sub-Saharan Africa have assessed their ability to provide for the learning needs essential for more knowledgeable and productive small-scale rural households. These are most necessary if the endemic causes of rural poverty (poor nutrition, lack of sustainable livelihoods, etc.) are to be overcome. A brief historical background and analysis of the major current constraints to improvement in the sector are discussed. Paramount among those factors leading to its present 'malaise' is the lack of a whole-systems perspective and the absence of any coherent policy framework in most countries. There is evidence of some recent innovations, both in the public sector and through the work of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), civil society organisations (CSOs) and other private bodies. These provide hope of a new sense of direction that could lead towards meaningful 'revitalisation' of the sector. A suggested framework offers 10 key steps which, it is argued, could largely be achieved with modest internal resources and very little external support, provided that the necessary leadership and managerial capacities are in place. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.