We cannot implement effective policies to reduce agricultural emissions without an accurate understanding of the primary constituencies.
While analysts often make broad statements about “farmers,” “ranchers,” and “rural communities,” careful analysis of who actually produces our food, where and how they live, and how they are doing is much more rare.
For example, while mainstream news reports suggested that 2019 was yet another crisis year for farmers, “when farm families wondered how they were going to keep the farm afloat,”1 farmers overall, in fact, saw their 11th highest per farm profits since 1929. Many of these commentators do not include in their assessment the profound impact on producer income of federal counter-cyclical subsidies, favorable tax treatment, and exports supported or even mandated by trade agreements. These programs can even make the costs of climate change harder to discern, as relief programs often ensure that the costs of increased weather variability or extreme weather events do not fall on farmers. And, over and above the established farm bill conservation, commodity, and crop insurance programs, the president can,12
and often does, provide significant additional assistance through the Commodity Credit Corporation—in 2019 the Trump Administration doubled government direct payments to farmers up to almost $24 billion.2 Without this full picture, policymaking is hobbled.
Unfortunately, very few journalists have the time or expertise to assess the actual contours of farm economics or to examine in detail who these producers are and what they are doing. The number of reporters in rural America has rapidly declined and fewer and fewer reporters live in farm regions or have a background in agriculture.3 Without experience, it is hard to disentangle the interplay of weather, markets, and government programs that affect farmers. And who does the work on farms? Again, writers will often make broad references to farmers and sometimes to farmworkers, but rarely do they distinguish among different farm actors or rigorously analyze the lives and work of people in the different groups. In fact, lawmakers have excluded the agricultural industry from many labor and environmental regulations,4 which makes the distinctions between employers and employees, producers and their neighbors, starker than in almost any other context in the United States.
Policymakers created the foundations of modern farm policy at a time when a substantial portion of the American population lived on farms and the average farm family was more likely to be poor than the average non-farm family. But that is not the case today, and modern agriculture policy should be revised to reflect our current reality. As it exists now, U.S. farm policy largely benefits a small number of almost entirely white producers who are substantially wealthier than the average American, and who are required
13
to do little to protect the health and environmental concerns of their workers and neighbors or to address climate change.
Sound, sustainable, and fair agriculture policy should be built on an accurate understanding of the affected constituencies, rather than on assumed and outdated images and narratives. Here, we try to provide this foundation, looking not only to the “farmer” and agribusiness, but also to other larger rural constituencies. These include farm laborers, who do most of the work on farms and outnumber farmers by a wide margin, and rural residents, who, according to numerous polls, support environmental reforms by substantial margins. These other constituencies, of course, should also include those who consume our food and all those affected by climate change.
To achieve climate-neutral agriculture in the United States, as well as to make it more just and sustainable, we must engage all these groups. They are the ones who will live with—and see through—these policies.
More on the topic We cannot implement effective policies to reduce agricultural emissions without an accurate understanding of the primary constituencies.:
- To implement sound policy and pursue effective legal strategies, decisionmakers and advocates must become familiar with the climate-friendly agricultural practices that constitute carbon farming.1
- There are a number of ways that the private and nonprofit sectors can boost carbon farming and help reduce net agricultural emissions.
- Methane and nitrous oxide are the two main greenhouse gases emitted by agricultural sources. EPA has several direct regulatory tools available to reduce emissions of these greenhouse gases, including recognizing the harm or “endangerment” caused by these pollutants and promulgating regulatory programs to require or support their reduction.
- We must understand the limitations of current research and data in order to craft effective policies.
- 2. U.S. Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- 3. State-Level Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- 1. Global Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- A. Agricultural Systems and Practices for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions
- At first glance, reducing net agricultural greenhouse gas emissions through public law poses a considerable challenge.
- 3. A More Accurate Assessment of Farm Income and Wealth
- Congress’ expressed purpose for supporting agricultural research and extension is not only to increase the productivity of agriculture,7 but also to “[maintain and enhance] the natural resource base on which rural America and the United States agricultural economy depend.”8
- 1. Emissions From Fertilizer Production
- 2. Landfill Waste Emissions
- Policies of the Roman Republic
- UNDERSTANDING THE CONSTITUTIO ANTONINIANA
- Ineffective Drug or Effective Food? The Social Life of Viartril-S and Regulatory Politics in Taiwan
- Postproduction greenhouse gas emissions, while significant, have not been comprehensively catalogued in the United States.20
- Understanding the so-called shift from government to governance
- New Food Labeling Policies Adopted in 2015
- Inspiring an effective Plant Treaty with the ‘theory of the commons’