The squabble over supply
management is ongoing and poorly understood.
The real problem has been the role of capital in agriculture itself
which has transitioned from peonising huge populations to the present practice
of controlling market access through size alone. Neither solution was ever satisfactory and
the Canadian supply management approach appears a good compromise that is
actually worth thinking through and actually improving.
In milk production there are huge
advantages accruing to quality and secondary processing if herd size is
restricted to a creditable level within the capacity of individual
operators. That is what has happened in Canada although
the use of secondary processing has been retarded by a lack of innovative
thinking in terms of regulations.
Pressure is building to overcome this limitation.
The real advantage however is
that all agriculture needs to have management input on its natural local market
and the heavy hand of tariffs is a blunt instrument. A better system may well be operating a
farmer owned coop that becomes the effective manager of a determined market
district. Such a Coop is able to handle imports as needed and profit
accordingly, yet unable to prevent its own members form selling into this local
market. That would at least keep them
honest and face to face with their own members.
The conflict between capital and
best practice has gone on for a long time and it is long time that agriculture
globally gets a grip on this problem.
After all if I had my druthers, I would acquire all the lands in the Midwest , eliminate everything except easily grown cash
crops to sell globally and staff the place with illegal aliens to optimize my
margins. The problem of course, is that
my imagination is far too limited to do much more. It is the much more that we need to promote
and yes properly protect. We do not need
to drive our farmers into bankruptcy because the farmers a hundred miles away
had a bumper crop and just dumped the surplus into our market on a one time hit
never to be seen again.
My point is that these profoundly
local markets need an organized approach to managing demand and supply that
allows true optimization rather than capital optimization.
Canadian farmers trust regulated dairy industry
by Staff Writers
"There was some concern from dairy farmers that the government
wouldn't continue to protect them, but once the World Trade Organization was
formed in 1995 and the level of protection didn't change, we learned that
farmers are not too concerned, even with the new round of negotiations,"
said University of Illinois agricultural economist Lia Nogueira.
Nogueira explained that under the protection of the supply system,
the government estimates what the demand of milk will be based on the
population and past trends and allocates quotas to producers accordingly.
"Because farmers need to buy that quota, it's a really big
investment in their dairy operation," she said. "And just as the
subsidies are viewed in the United
States , they aren't conducive to a
free-trade world. In order to maintain higher milk prices in
Canada , the government
restricts imports of milk and dairy products into Canada .
"We weren't trying to analyze the pros and cons of the quota
system, but rather what it has meant for farmers. Farmers have a lot of capital
invested in those quota, and if the system goes away, those quotas will be
worth nothing. From one day to the next, they would lose a lot of their capital
investment," she said.
Nogueira looked at data from the 1980s to 2006 that includes trade
negotiations and the Uruguay Round in 1986, the precursor to the World Trade
Organization of 1995.
The study calculated how secure farmers feel under government
protection based on the price of the quota and other economic variables such as
the interest rate and appreciation rate. She suspected that farmers would fear
that the government would eliminate the supply management system because it
goes against free trade.
"When Canada
became a part of the World Trade Organization, farmers could have felt that the
government might stop protecting them, but that wasn't the case," she
said.
"The government made some drastic changes in the way prices were
set for the milk that goes into cheese and other industrial uses because
processors were complaining that the price of milk was
too expensive and they were not competitive. We found that farmers were
concerned around the WTO time, but later on they were secure that the
government would continue to support them."
Although the system was implemented to protect farmers and stabilize
their income and farmers appear to feel secure, Nogueira said there are
drawbacks.
"Farmers may change their management practices because quotas are
now the single largest capital investment, which restricts herd size," she
said.
"They don't have an incentive to export their milk because the
price that they would get in the world market is
much lower than the domestic market. It shows that government intervention and
controlling an industry can change the way farmers do things. Once you
establish a system and people are so invested in that system, it's going to be
very hard to make any substantial changes even if it's clear that the program
is inefficient."
"Policy Risk in the Canadian Dairy Industry"
was published in Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy. Co-authors are Richard
R. Barichello, Kathy Baylis, and Hayley H. Chouinard.
No comments:
Post a Comment