Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

A crisis in food policy rather than food capacity

By Mick Keogh - posted Monday, 16 June 2008


Continued restrictions on agricultural imports into Europe and the USA have also meant that developing nation farmers have been locked into poverty, and not able to afford the farm inputs or technologies that could rapidly improve agricultural productivity.

The imminent introduction of greenhouse emission mitigation policies in Australia and New Zealand also has the potential to adversely impact global agricultural capacity, and to simultaneously increase global greenhouse emission levels unless managed very carefully. Australian and New Zealand farmers will be uniquely impacted by these policies due to their high level of trade exposure, which means they have no capacity to demand higher prices in response to the higher farm input costs that greenhouse mitigation policies will create.

The result of such policies is very likely to be the “leakage” of both economic activity and greenhouse emissions to nations without greenhouse mitigation policies. This is particularly the case given the Kyoto Protocol emission accounting rules which both Australia and New Zealand have now agreed to observe, and which ignore the cyclical nature of greenhouse gases in agricultural systems, counting agricultural emissions but not sequestrations. Unless changed, they have the potential to divert agricultural land to permanent carbon sink forests (which operate under different greenhouse accounting rules) and reduce agricultural output by two of the world’s major agricultural exporting nations.

Advertisement

In conclusion, a re-examination of Malthus’s writings highlights that he actually identified humans and the decisions they make as the main issue in efforts to secure long-term food security, rather than natural resource constraints. It seems over the ensuing centuries, little has changed.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Mick Keogh is the Executive Director of the Australian Farm institute. The Australian Farm Institute is an independent policy research institute that carries out research into issues that impact on agriculture and regional Australia.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Mick Keogh

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Mick Keogh
Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy