Wallach, Lori (author), Maybardukl, Peter (author), Hansen-Kuhn, Karen (author), and Jackson, Janine (author)
Format:
Interview
Publication Date:
2016-07-30
Published:
USA: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, New York City, New York
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10567
Notes:
13 pages., via website, FAIR., CounterSpin interviews with Lori Wallach, Peter Maybarduk and Karen Hansen-Kuhn on trade pacts and corporate globalization
International: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10565
Notes:
4 pages., via website, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy., As Congress and the public debate the pros and cons of the United States-Mexico-Canada
Agreement (USMCA), or New NAFTA, behind the scenes and in the shadows transnational
corporations are doubling down on their plans to weaken and eliminate public protections
through a related entity, the secretive Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). This littleknown council has the mission of promoting trade by “reducing, eliminating or preventing
unnecessary regulatory differences” between Canada and the United States. Since the RCC’s
inception, agribusiness—including factory-farmed livestock producers, the feed industry, and
chemical and pesticide manufacturers and linked transportation businesses—has had a seat at
the regulatory cooperation table. Their focus, without exception, has been advocating the
scaling back and even elimination of important safety protections in both countries. In the U.S.,
recommendations made by the RCC feed directly into regulations enacted (or eliminated) by
the Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration and Environmental Protection
Agency, among others
Harsh, Jessica (author), Lamm, Alexa (author), Telg, Ricky (author), and Meyers, Courtney (author)
Format:
Paper abstract
Publication Date:
2018-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 199 Document Number: D10019
Notes:
Abstract of paper presented at the National Agricultural Communications Symposium, Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists (SAAS) Agricultural Communications Section, Jacksonville, Florida, February 4-5, 2018.
Online via Drovers News Source. 3 pages., Announces a petition from the United States Cattlemen's Association to the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service to address "Product of the U.S.A. and "Made in the U.S.A. claims on U.S beef. Includes a link to full petition (199 pages). The petition ends: "To eliminate the likelihood of confusion and to better inform consumers, USDA contends that voluntary labels indication 'Made in USA' and 'Product of USA' or similar content should be limited to beef from cattle born, raise, and harvested in the United States."
Barkley, Andrew (author) and Barkkley, Paul W. (author)
Format:
Book
Publication Date:
2015
Published:
USA: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 154 Document Number: D07071
Notes:
196 pages., "In an information-based economy...the only source of prosperity is providing consumers with what they desire." Authors conclude that the flow of information from consumers to producers may be more important than providing consumers with knowledge about agriculture.
International: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 30 Document Number: D10564
Notes:
2 pages., via website, The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy., Regulation gets a bad name in much of the world today. Business lobbies have successfully equated it in many people’s minds with just so much “red tape”. Government-imposed rules on how things are made, how services are delivered and what products have no place on the market at all are said to hamper business competitiveness. Precautionary measures aimed at safeguarding people’s health, or the health of fragile water bodies and ecosystems, are labelled unfair barriers to trade and investment — a claim made increasingly over the past quarter-century of corporate globalization.
