42 pages, The 2006 United Nations report “Livestock’s Long Shadow” provided the first global estimate of the livestock sector’s contribution to anthropogenic climate change and warned of dire environmental consequences if business as usual continued. In the subsequent 17 years, numerous studies have attributed significant climate change impacts to livestock. In the USA, one of the largest consumers and producers of meat and dairy products, livestock greenhouse gas emissions remain effectively unregulated. What might explain this? Similar to fossil fuel companies, US animal agriculture companies responded to evidence that their products cause climate change by minimizing their role in the climate crisis and shaping policymaking in their favor. Here, we show that the industry has done so with the help of university experts. The beef industry awarded funding to Dr. Frank Mitloehner from the University of California, Davis, to assess “Livestock’s Long Shadow,” and his work was used to claim that cows should not be blamed for climate change. The animal agriculture industry is now involved in multiple multi-million-dollar efforts with universities to obstruct unfavorable policies as well as influence climate change policy and discourse. Here, we traced how these efforts have downplayed the livestock sector’s contributions to the climate crisis, minimized the need for emission regulations and other policies aimed at internalizing the costs of the industry’s emissions, and promoted industry-led climate “solutions” that maintain production. We studied this phenomenon by examining the origins, funding sources, activities, and political significance of two prominent academic centers, the CLEAR Center at UC Davis, established in 2018, and AgNext at Colorado State University, established in 2020, as well as the influence and industry ties of the programs’ directors, Dr. Mitloehner and Dr. Kimberly Stackhouse-Lawson. We developed 20 questions to evaluate the nature, extent, and societal impacts of the relationship between individual researchers and industry groups. Using publicly available evidence, we documented how the ties between these professors, centers, and the animal agriculture industry have helped maintain the livestock industry’s social license to operate not only by generating industry-supported research, but also by supporting public relations and policy advocacy.
Ben-Othmen, Marie Asma (author) and Ostapchuk, Mariia (author)
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2019-05
Published:
France
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 32 Document Number: D10583
Notes:
16 pages., Paper presented at the 172nd European Association of Agricultural Economists Seminar,"Agricultural policy for the environment or environmental policy for agriculture?" Brussels, Belgium, May 28-29, 2019., via database., Results of this study indicate that environmental consideration is not the key factor behind farmers' preference involving land restoration programs. The financial component remains the main incentive.
Toepfer, Stefan (author), Kuhlmann, Ulrich (author), Kansiime, Monica (author), Onyango Owino, David (author), Tamsin, Davis (author), Cameron, Katherine (author), and Day, Roger (author)
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2019-04
Published:
Germany: Springer
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 12 Document Number: D10360
4 pages., Via online journal., This is an opinion paper to the perspective paper “The spread of the Fall Army Worm Spodoptera frugiperda in Africa—what should be done next?” from the “Section Plant Protection in the Tropics and Subtropics” at the 61st German Congress of Plant Protection, held at the University of Hohenheim, Germany, on 11 September 2018. It highlights the best approaches in communication, information sharing, and advisory services to raise awareness for fall armyworm detection and area-wide management by farmers.
11 pages., Via online article, A “digital revolution” in agriculture is underway. Advanced technologies like sensors, artificial intelligence, and robotics are increasingly being promoted as a means to increase food production efficiency while minimizing resource use. In the process, agricultural digitalization raises critical social questions about the implications for diverse agricultural labourers and rural spaces as digitalization evolves. In this paper, we use literature and field data to outline some key trends being observed at the nexus of agricultural production, technology, and labour in North America, with a particular focus on the Canadian context. Using the data, we highlight three key tensions observed: rising land costs and automation; the development of a high-skill/low-skilled bifurcated labour market; and issues around the control of digital data. With these tensions in mind, we use a social justice lens to consider the potential implications of digital agricultural technologies for farm labour and rural communities, which directs our attention to racial exploitation in agricultural labour specifically. In exploring these tensions, we argue that policy and research must further examine how to shift the trajectory of digitalization in ways that support food production as well as marginalized agricultural labourers, while pointing to key areas for future research—which is lacking to date. We emphasize that the current enthusiasm for digital agriculture should not blind us to the specific ways that new technologies intensify exploitation and deepen both labour and spatial marginalization.
17 pages., via online journal article, The Sustainable Forestry and African American Land Retention
Program (SFLR) was launched in 2012 to increase adoption of sustainable forestry practices among African American landowners in
the southeastern United States to prevent land loss, increase forest
health, and build economic assets. One of its main goals was to
build communication networks through which African American
landowners could obtain and share information about forestry practices and landowner assistance programs independent of public agencies. To measure and examine the growth of these communication
networks over a three-year period (2014-2017), we conducted 87
interviews with landowners (24 of whom were interviewed multiple
times), SFLR personnel, and Federal and State staff members in
North Carolina. We used complementary methods of data gathering
and analysis, including social network analysis and qualitative analysis. Our results showed expanding communication networks will be
sustained independently of the program over time, although there is
still a heavy reliance on program personnel.
23 pages., via database., Results of this study indicate that the consumption of handmade and locally made agrifood products increases for consumers who read nutrition labels and health claim information and for those with higher income and are younger. Authors offer suggestions for improving communications.
