>
It would be wonderful if someone could write a serious defense of the small
farm from a systems perspective. The Food First white paper certainly falls far
short. One of the major issues is its attempt to globalize when the size of the
farming operations are often dependent of highly local bio/physical
restrainsts, first and socio/economic factors second. In developing countries
where starving/landless peasants are given an opportunity to produce, there are
real opportunities. There the productivity is directed to immediate need and
not necssarily off-farm export to generate capital to participate in the
Nintendo world of global commerce. On the other hand, the small farm in the
wheat belt of the US has always had its problems ever since the US government
convinced immigrants that they should fund the railroads by buying small plots
on which to start a farming operation.
External issues also enter into the equation when farmers start wanting
manufactured goods. Raw material production has always had trouble generating
capital to purchase value added commodities. As the demand for the latter rises
in the farmers, either they get bigger or they generate more profits from their
holdings. Of course, when food goes up, so does manufactured goods and we are
back to square one. This, of course, has been the rationale for value added
processes in farming- not always possible.
The Food First paper, in staying at the macro level and meshing third and first
world looks good on the surface. But the devil is in the details
thoughts?
tom abeles
--------------B38EF74EC43C01F1D9F09391
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
It would be wonderful if someone could write a serious defense of the small farm from a systems perspective. The Food First white paper certainly falls far short. One of the major issues is its attempt to globalize when the size of the farming operations are often dependent of highly local bio/physical restrainsts, first and socio/economic factors second. In developing countries where starving/landless peasants are given an opportunity to produce, there are real opportunities. There the productivity is directed to immediate need and not necssarily off-farm export to generate capital to participate in the Nintendo world of global commerce. On the other hand, the small farm in the wheat belt of the US has always had its problems ever since the US government convinced immigrants that they should fund the railroads by buying small plots on which to start a farming operation.
External issues also enter into the equation when farmers start wanting manufactured goods. Raw material production has always had trouble generating capital to purchase value added commodities. As the demand for the latter rises in the farmers, either they get bigger or they generate more profits from their holdings. Of course, when food goes up, so does manufactured goods and we are back to square one. This, of course, has been the rationale for value added processes in farming- not always possible.
The Food First paper, in staying at the macro level and meshing third and first world looks good on the surface. But the devil is in the details
thoughts?
tom abeles
--------------B38EF74EC43C01F1D9F09391--
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail