FARM-LEVEL EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE POLICY APPROACHES TO REDUCE NITRATE LEACHING FROM MIDWEST AGRICULTURE

Policies to reduce nitrate leaching are evaluated using a mixed integer linear programming model of a representative Michigan cash grain farm. At spring 1993 prices, elimination of the current deficiency payment program is found to be more efficient at reducing leaching than a nitrogen input tax, a tax credit on biologically fixed nitrogen, a rotation payment, or obligatory use of the Integrated Farm Management Program Option (IFMPO). However, elimination of the deficiency payment program would significantly reduce farm income. Modeling risk management and nitrate leaching dynamics are useful extensions of this research, as is estimating the benefits from averting nitrate leaching.Agricultural and Food Policy,

INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE: VIEW FROM WITHIN THE LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITY

Sustainable agricultural research and education have gained acceptability within the land-grant system in less than a decade, an impressive change. Attitudes were changed by a set of forces which include lobbying by sustainable agriculture advocates, requests from farmers as a result of the cost-price squeeze of the early 1980's, changing demands for both environmental quality and less pesticide residues from food consumers, and the availability of new funding sources. Despite its hard-won acceptability, there are tensions with respect to sustainable agriculture within the land-grant system. Sustainable agricultural issues are not yet integrated into the fabric of the land-grant institution. In order to integrate it fully, challenges remain in three key areas: knowledge generation, research and education, and funding. The challenge to generate new knowledge embraces not only biological and ecological systems, but also the socioeconomic systems of the humans who manage agriculture. We must move beyond anecdotal evidence of biological integration efficiencies to scientific understanding of the underlying processes and opportunities for human intervention. The biological research agenda covers a plethora of plant-animal-environment interactions from the microbial level on upward. Socioeconomic research must grapple with human motivations to change farming methods, as well as the likely impacts of change on farmers, consumers, other species, and the quality of the environment in which we live. One important area for such knowledge-generation is the relative merits of government policy tools, which have been and will continue to be central to environmental quality assurance. Attempts to generate new sustainable agriculture knowledge have already begun to raise new challenges for the integration of research and education. Research trials conducted off the research station pose new quandaries for scientific analysis and validation. Having farmers set the research and outreach agenda can be threatening to land-grant personnel as the old distinction between research and extension begins to dissolve. This situation is complicated by the budgetary stress on land-grant institutions and uncertainty about the dividing line between public and private responsibilities in a rapidly changing agricultural business environment. Funding is the third area where more integration into the land-grant university is needed. Earmarked funding for sustainable agriculture has helped to legitimize it in the land-grant university. But earmarked funding is a two-edged sword. If sustainable agriculture fails to become integrated into the routine land-grant agenda for research and education, it will lose its newly gained momentum if those funds disappear. It needs to gain full acceptance as legitimate science that will allow its researchers to compete for "mainline" funding sources such as the USDA National Research Initiative grants. Sustainable agriculture has made strong gains within the land-grant university system. But it can easily slip from the land-grant agenda or become co-opted if sustainable agriculture research and education are not integrated further into the system while retaining a clear focus on its original goals.Environmental Economics and Policy,

A RISK PROGRAMMING APPROACH TO DESIGNING CONTRACTS TO REDUCE NITRATE LEACHING

As contractual agriculture expands, contract design offers a non-regulatory opportunity to reduce non-point source pollution. A risk programming analysis of seed corn contract designs illustrates a tractable empirical principal-agent model, and shows that grower risk preferences affect contract acceptability and efficiency at reducing nitrate leaching.Environmental Economics and Policy, Risk and Uncertainty,

FQPA IMPLEMENTATION TO REDUCE PESTICIDE RESIDUE RISKS: PART I: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCER CONCERNS

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) transforms the regulation of pesticide residues on food in the United States. Three changes are prominent. First, under the FQPA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is authorized to develop uniform pesticide residue tolerances for both fresh and processed foods. These tolerances must be based on a conservative standard appropriate for infants and children, rather than the adult-based tolerances that prevailed previously for fresh-market produce. Second, under the FQPA, pesticide registration will be based upon aggregate risk to the most susceptible consumers from all pesticides sharing a common biochemical mode of action in humans. Third, the FQPA expands the scope of health effects included in risk assessment decisions to include potential endocrine and reproductive effects of pesticidal chemicals. As the EPA has moved to develop implementation guidelines for the FQPA, agricultural producers and input suppliers have become concerned about its impact on them. Even if the FQPA's implementation results only in a restriction of the pesticides used on some crops, producers still have four major concerns: (1) the potential loss of farm profitability, especially for farms specializing in fruit and vegetable production; (2) unfair competition if foreign competitors can use pesticides forbidden to domestic producers; (3) the impact of the FQPA on consumer purchases, (i.e., if reduced pesticide use results in more blemishes or lower quality product, will consumers refuse to purchase the product?); and (4) excessive reliance on a few remaining pest control weapons, possibly resulting in accelerated pest resistance. Because these uncertainties potentially impact producers' livelihoods, many argue for a go-slow, long transition for any major changes in the way they farm or the pest control products they use. Competing with these agricultural concerns, however, are a parallel set of concerns, expressed by consumer and environmental groups, that the FQPA's promise to protect infants and children from pesticide risks will be sabotaged by lax or ineffective implementation. There are many uncertainties with respect to the impacts related to alternative FQPA implementation strategies. Research to resolve these concerns is fragmentary and frequently inconclusive. The common element that emerges from this review of producer concerns is: Impacts on producers will depend on how the FQPA is implemented.Crop Production/Industries, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

FQPA IMPLEMENTATION TO REDUCE PESTICIDE RESIDUE RISKS: PART II: IMPLEMENTATION ALTERNATIVES AND STRATEGIES

Implementation of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) is fraught with difficulty due to the divergent perspectives and demands of stakeholders in the process. In "Part I: Agricultural Producer Concerns," the authors reviewed the concerns of food producers about potential FQPA threats to farm profitability, international competitiveness, consumer perceptions, and the development of pest resistance to remaining pesticides. Fortunately, lessons from past environmental policy and economic theory offer useful principles for how to implement the FQPA. This paper, "Part II: Implementation Alternatives and Strategies" addresses ways to accommodate producer concerns while meeting the policy mandate of reducing risk from pesticide exposure, especially for infants and children. In so doing, the authors are neither advocating nor criticizing this FQPA policy mandate; rather, they are providing policy analysis of alternative implementation strategies.Crop Production/Industries, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION CONTRACTS TO REDUCE NITRATE LEACHING: A WHOLE-FARM ANALYSIS

Ten alternative seed corn contract specifications are evaluated with respect to nitrate leaching and profitability for the processor firm (principal) and contracted grower (agent). A whole-farm optimization and feasibility analysis suggest that contract terms can be used to reduce non-point source pollution.Crop Production/Industries,

Theodicy and End-of-Life Care

Acknowledgments The section on Islamic perspective is contributed by information provided by Imranali Panjwani, Tutor in Theology & Religious Studies, King's College London.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Barriers and facilitators experienced in collaborative prospective research in orthopaedic oncology

Recerca col·laborativa; Grup focal; Oncologia ortopèdicaCollaborative research; Focus group; Orthopaedic oncologyInvestigación colaborativa; Grupo focal; Oncología ortopédicaObjectives As tumours of bone and soft tissue are rare, multicentre prospective collaboration is essential for meaningful research and evidence-based advances in patient care. The aim of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators encountered in large-scale collaborative research by orthopaedic oncological surgeons involved or interested in prospective multicentre collaboration. Methods All surgeons who were involved, or had expressed an interest, in the ongoing Prophylactic Antibiotic Regimens in Tumour Surgery (PARITY) trial were invited to participate in a focus group to discuss their experiences with collaborative research in this area. The discussion was digitally recorded, transcribed and anonymised. The transcript was analysed qualitatively, using an analytic approach which aims to organise the data in the language of the participants with little theoretical interpretation. Results The 13 surgeons who participated in the discussion represented orthopaedic oncology practices from seven countries (Argentina, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Denmark, United States and Canada). Four categories and associated themes emerged from the discussion: the need for collaboration in the field of orthopaedic oncology due to the rarity of the tumours and the need for high level evidence to guide treatment; motivational factors for participating in collaborative research including establishing proof of principle, learning opportunity, answering a relevant research question and being part of a collaborative research community; barriers to participation including funding, personal barriers, institutional barriers, trial barriers, and administrative barriers and facilitators for participation including institutional facilitators, leadership, authorship, trial set-up, and the support of centralised study coordination. Conclusions Orthopaedic surgeons involved in an ongoing international randomised controlled trial (RCT) were motivated by many factors to participate. There were a number of barriers to and facilitators for their participation. There was a collective sense of fatigue experienced in overcoming these barriers, which was mirrored by a strong collective sense of the importance of, and need for, collaborative research in this field. The experiences were described as essential educational first steps to advance collaborative studies in this area. Knowledge gained from this study will inform the development of future large-scale collaborative research projects in orthopaedic oncology

Assessing the impacts of natural resource management interventions in agriculture: concepts, issues and challenges

This chapter identifies key issues involved in assessing the impacts of natural resource management (NRM) interventions in agriculture. Such interventions include adoption of changed NRM practices arising from investments in research and outreach that are implemented through NRM projects, programmes, and policies. The purpose of impact assessment is discussed, as well as the underlying concepts and techniques for conducting impact assessment. This is followed by a discussion of the special challenges that complicate impact assessment of NRM intervention

Towards comprehensive approaches in assessing NRM impacts: what we know and what we need to know

This chapter synthesizes the conceptual, methodological and empirical issues for evaluating the impacts of natural resource management (NRM) technology and policy interventions. It offers insights on key lessons, policy conclusions, knowledge gaps, and areas that need further researc