Steve,
A lot the paper discusses something known as the 'Dutch disease' which is
what happened for instance in Ecuador not long ago.
In Ecuador the country exploited it's oil and sold a lot of it. The country
had a lot of revenue and the money supply was very great. As a result of the
revenue people tended to purchase lots of imports. The currency was
overvalued as a result. This was not the problem but something else. The
country exploited it's oil and then when it started running out it no longer
had a large amount of foreign currencies to exchange for imports. So the
countries economy had to shift to the export of other items. But in the
meantime when the country had lots of oil revenue, it did not take some of
those earnings and create another more sustainable industry.
The country was not able to get much revenue from bananas and shrimp for
instance, so the country became poorer. What that country experienced was
not forecast because tradtional resource economics do not analyze
ecosystems, or finiteness.
The country should have worked in improving education and attracting
sustainable industries. So to do all that you don't need an army, you need
teachers, planners, and your need cooperation to embark on a plan that takes
years to complete. Right now most countries are incapable of planning for
anything. So decentralization is difficult to achieve when the only rational
organization is the military, or a few dominant industries.
>The combination of these two policy stances is to produce a gross
>inefficiency in the global use of agricultural resources. All too much of
>the world's agricultural output is produced in the high-cost developed
>countries, and all too little in the low-cost developing countries. This
>tendency is exacerbated by the export subsidies which further lowers the
>domestic prices in the developing countries. This dumping takes place
>both through food aid programs and through more direct export subsidies."
>(Page 9)
>
>What is the effect of all this? Well the authors go on to write the
>following.
>
>"In developed countries for example, shifting the domestic terms of trade
>in favor of agriculture leads to the excessive use of fertilizers,
>pesticides, and other modern inputs. This excessive use leads to the
>pollution of both underground and above ground water supplies, in the
>latter case including lakes, reservoirs, streams and rivers." (Page 10)
>
>In other words, what the authors are saying is that by returning the terms
>of trades to their "natural" levels would do much to move economic
>activity to becoming more sustainable.
Yes but I would add that it is 'self-sufficiency' that should result. Each
region growing what it most suited to grow. Low intensity farming, low
inputs, modess outputs. Most tree crops are labour extensive, that is they
do not require much work. Most agriculture is not labour intensive even if
one does not own a tractor.
john foster
>
>
>Steve
>
>=====
>"In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in
a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
>--Jamey Lee West
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
>http://invites.yahoo.com/
>
"When an idea is new, it is seen as crazy. This is followed by a period in
which it is viewed as dangerous. After this, there is a period of
uncertainty. In the end, you can't find anyone who disagreed with it in the
first place".
Stephen J. Gould
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|