U.S. Agricultural Policy

The feasibility of sustainable agriculture in the US is greatly hindered by current farming policies. The infamous “Farm Bill” is slightly renovated by congress every few years, however it remains a roadblock for any really change in the agricultural system (Eubanks, 958). Its offical purpose is to create "agriculture, nutruition, conservation, and forest policy" according to the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. This bill more specifially includes how arable lands are used and how susbsidies are distributed, which plays a large role in what crops farmers choose to grow (Batie, 380). There are numerous issues with this bill, but the ones that are most relevant to sustainable agriculture are the lack of incentives for sustainable farming techniques and the unbalanced subsidies given to certain popular crops.

Encouraging Sustainability

Large agribusinesses have taken control of agricultural production in the US. They cover thousands of miles, use copious amounts of resources, and harm local ecosystems to produce their crops. Clearly these large businesses don't concern themselves with the environmental impact they have, and the farm bill neither requires nor encourages them to change.

Essentially, current farm policy allows these destructive practices to occur with no consequences. Over time this can lead to dire environmental impacts that have serious repercussions in the future. California is a prime example; they have 81,500 farms and are currently struggling to support them (Eubanks, 960). Forty percent of the state’s water usage goes toward agriculture (Jeffery, Freeman, and Lund), a hard figure to maintain in the middle of roughly a decade of drought. If the agribusinesses of California sustainably handled their irrigation systems, these farm’s water usage would be less of a burden on the resources of the state.

For a more sustainable farm culture to exist, congress would first need to set up a system in the farm bill to incentivize more sustainable farming techniques (Eubanks, 960). These could include no-till farming, crop rotation, or a reduction in the use of chemical fertilizers (Eubanks,964). A monetary incentive or penalty would provide and immediate motivation for farmers to change and effectively enforce techniques that don't damage local and global environments on such a grand scale.

The Problem with Subsidies

Furthermore the policy surrounding agriculture has caused a warped distribution of subsidies. Subsidies are money granted by the government to farms in order to supplement farmer’s income. Corn, rice, cotton, wheat, and soybeans are the crops that receive the vast majority of subsidies from the government (Eubanks, 963). This uneven distribution of money caused a plethora of problems in the agricultural community.

The government ensures that the prices of these products are kept low, and encourage farmers to grow them through subsidies. This results in farmers growing them on large, monocultural farms. Single crop farms diminish the quality of the soil through over use, utilize large scale irrigation systems that waste water, and inefficiently consume energy and fuel. Additionally the high operating cost of these massive farms push smaller, local farmers out of business and has contributed to the shift in the US agricultural system to large agribusinesses.

The low prices of american agribusinesses not only hurt the local farmers of the US, but small farmers around the world (“Deal Making at the WTO, 339). The US is one of the leading exporters of corn, cotton, and other highly subsidized crops, which makes smaller farms in other countries unable to compete with the low prices. In this way the US agricultural system is eliminating small farms all around the globe (“Deal Making at the WTO, 339). Other countries in the World Trade Organization have requested that the US eliminate or better distribute their subsidies but no significant change has been made.

It is well known that healthier food tends to be pricer, but it is often overlooked that this is partially due to the farm bill. The lack of subsidies for crops like nuts and fruits lead to higher prices for healthier foods. In the farm bill these non subsidized products are labeled as “specialty crops” implying that they are unnecessary and rationalizing their high market prices (Eubanks, 960). Currently obesity rates are at alarmingly high levels in many states, making the push for policies encouraging the growth of nutritious foods all the more essential.

These problems have continued to accumulate over the years, and the lack of response from the federal government is highly irresponsible. In order to improve our country’s current agricultural situation these issues of the disparity between the subsidies distributed to large agribusinesses compared to those given to smaller farms, as well as the lack of initiatives to encourage the use of sustainable farming techniques must be addressed. Without a shift to more sustainable practices, local environments and the overall nutrition of food could be in jeopardy.

#policy