Hennessy, David A. (author), Lindsey, Alexander J. (author), Che, Yuyuan (author), Lindsey, Laura E. (author), Pal Singh, Maninder (author), Feng, Hongli (author), Hawkins, Elizabeth M. (author), Subburayalu, Sakthi (author), Black, Roy (author), Richer, Eric A. (author), and Ochs, Daniel S. (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2022-01-24
Published:
United States: Clemson University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 203 Document Number: D12260
4 pages, Selecting optimal corn and soybean seeding rates are difficult decisions to make. A survey of Ohio and Michigan farm operators finds that, although generally keen to learn from others, they tend to emphasize their own experience over outside information sources. Soybean growers declare university and extension recommendations as more important than do corn growers. In response to direct queries and in free comments, growers place more emphasis on understanding the agronomic and technological problems at hand than on adjusting to the market environment. Given the decision environment, we argue that these responses are reasonable.
25pgs, Plant-based eggs have been recently developed by food practitioners as an alternative to conventional eggs. However, there is uncertainty on how the current egg market will react to plant-based eggs, as well as lack of knowledge about product development and regulations. In this manuscript, we explored this issue by conducting in-depth interviews with egg industries and retailers, as well as with plant-based egg manufacturers. Results show that despite egg manufacturers are struggling to provide an alternative to people who do not consume eggs, they are skeptical that plant-based eggs can replicate all eggs’ nutrients and functionalities. Furthermore, egg industries do not see plant-based eggs as potential competitors to their products, while plant-based egg manufactures argue that they will directly compete with eggs. Also, there is uncertainty on how to label and name plant-based eggs, which has important implications in terms of marketing and policy labeling of these new products.
22 pages, The UK exited the EU on 31 January 2020, with a transition period agreed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement. During this transition period the UK and the EU will decide on their future trading relationship. No matter what form this relationship takes, there will be disturbances to agri-food markets. This study analyses four different scenarios with increasing barriers to trade, ranging from a very close relationship similar to the European Economic Area to a distant relationship in which the UK and EU trade on Most Favoured Nation terms, using the EU focused global agricultural sector model CAPRI. In the UK, food prices will increase in all scenarios, making consumers in the UK the biggest losers. Only in a free trade agreement scenario does the UK show an unambiguous positive net welfare gain in just the agri-food sector. In the case of the European Economic Area scenario, which assumes continued access to the single market, the net welfare impact would depend on the size of the UK’s continued contribution to the EU. In the EU, declining food prices would benefit consumers but the sum of the loss in farmers’ incomes and the UK’s EU CAP contribution would be much greater than the consumer’s gain. These impacts in agricultural markets under different future trade arrangements will also be influenced by the UK’s agricultural policy changes in direct payments as well as by possible further UK trade liberalisation after the end of the transition period.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 102 Document Number: D10892
Notes:
Online from the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues, Lexington, Kentucky, Rural Blog. 3 pages., Describes the editorial approach of two award-winning local newspapers in focusing on the human toll of changing market forces in the dairy industry.
20 Pages, Springer Online, Aspirations to farm ‘better’ may fall short in practice due to constraints outside of farmers’ control. Yet farmers face proliferating pressures to adopt practices that align with various societal visions of better agriculture. What happens when the accumulation of external pressures overwhelms farm management capacity? Or, worse, when different visions of better agriculture pull farmers toward conflicting management paradigms? This article addresses these questions by comparing the institutional manifestations of two distinct societal obligations placed on California fruit and vegetable farmers: to practice sustainable agriculture and to ensure food safety. Drawing on the concept of constrained choice, I define and utilize a framework for comparison comprising five types of institutions that shape farm management decisions: rules and standards, market and supply chain forces, legal liability, social networks and norms, and scientific knowledge and available technologies. Several insights emerge. One, farmers are expected to meet multiple societal obligations concurrently; when facing a “right-versus-right” choice, farmers are likely to favor the more feasible course within structural constraints. Second, many institutions are designed to pursue narrow or siloed objectives; policy interventions that aim to shift farming practice should thus anticipate and address potential conflicts among institutions with diverging aspirations. Third, farms operating at different scales may face distinct institutional drivers in some cases, but not others, due to differential preferences for universal versus place-specific policies. These insights suggest that policy interventions should engage not just farmers, but also the intersecting institutions that drive or constrain their farm management choices. As my framework demonstrates, complementing the concept of constrained choice with insights from institutional theory can more precisely reveal the dimensions and mechanisms that bound farmer agency and shape farm management paradigms. Improved understanding of these structures, I suggest, may lead to novel opportunities to transform agriculture through institutional designs that empower, rather than constrain, farmer choice.
