You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Agriculture and China's Accession to the World Trade Organization
The prospect of future growth in demand for agricultural products makes China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) an important issue for the U.S. agricultural sector. Most agricultural interest groups strongly support China’s entry into the WTO, because they think it will increase U.S. agricultural exports and enhance farm income. In the 107th Congress, attention is focused on China’s final WTO accession negotiations where differences over agriculture have become an issue. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2020/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track” (or, trade promotion) authority (TPA) is at issue in the 107th Congress. Such authority could enable the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Efforts to renew this authority, which expired in 1994, have not succeeded since then. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-oriented enterprises that support TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some farm groups argue that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that could have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1468/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track,” or trade promotion, authority (TPA) cleared the 107th Congress, and was signed into law (P.L. 107-210) on August 6, 2002. Such authority enables the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests were among the export-oriented enterprises that supported TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners would not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacked it. However, some farm groups argued that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least of some commodities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10014/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track,” or trade promotion, authority (TPA), legislation to implement trade agreements is at issue in the 107th Congress. Such authority would enable the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-oriented enterprises that support TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some farm groups argue that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that could have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2262/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track” (or, trade promotion) authority (TPA) is at issue in the 107th Congress. Such authority could enable the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Efforts to renew this authority, which expired in 1994, have not succeeded since then. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-oriented enterprises that support TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some farm groups argue that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that could have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2261/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track” (or, trade promotion) authority (TPA) is at issue in the 107th Congress. Such authority could enable the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Efforts to renew this authority, which expired in 1994, have not succeeded since then. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-oriented enterprises that support TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some farm groups argue that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that could have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2260/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track,” or trade promotion, authority (TPA) cleared the 107th Congress, and was signed into law (P.L. 107-210) on August 6, 2002. Such authority enables the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests were among the export-oriented enterprises that supported TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners would not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacked it. However, some farm groups argued that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least of some commodities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2264/
Agriculture and Fast Track or Trade Promotion Authority
New “fast track,” or trade promotion, authority (TPA) cleared the 107th Congress for the President’s expected signature in August 2002. Such authority enables the Administration to submit negotiated foreign trade agreements to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests were among the export-oriented enterprises that supported TPA, arguing that foreign trading partners would not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacked it. However, some farm groups argued that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that have adverse effects on U.S. producers, at least of some commodities. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2263/
Agriculture and Fast Track Trade Legislation
The 107th Congress is expected to consider new "fast track" (or, Presidential trade promotion) authority, which could enable the Administration to submit trade agreements negotiated with foreign countries to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-oriented enterprises that support fast track authority, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some agricultural groups argue that fast track ultimately will lead to new agreements that deliver more benefits to foreign than to U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1469/
Agriculture and Fast Track Trade Legislation
Senate and House committees in October reported legislation for new fast track authority enabling the Administration to negotiate trade agreements with foreign countries and to submit them to Congress for consideration under expedited procedures. Many agricultural and food industry interests are among the export-dependent enterprises that support new fast track authority, arguing that foreign trading partners will not seriously negotiate with an Administration that lacks it. However, some agricultural groups argue that fast track provides them with inadequate opportunities for dealing with their issues, and that it ultimately will lead to new agreements that benefit foreign more than U.S. producers, at least in some commodity sectors. Neither bill was taken to the floor in 1997 because of insufficient votes for passage in the House. However, the President is expected to seek approval in 1998. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs407/
Agriculture and Forestry Provisions in Climate Change Legislation (S. 3036)
This report summarizes some of the domestic agriculture and forestry provisions in the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008 (S. 3036, formerly S. 2191), as ordered reported out of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in December 2007. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94232/
Agriculture and FY2006 Budget Reconciliation
The FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95, H.Rept. 109-62) contains reconciliation instructions that require authorizing committees to report legislation to reduce spending on mandatory programs within each committee’s jurisdiction. The resolution instructed the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to report legislation reducing spending on USDA mandatory programs by $173 million in FY2006 and $3.0 billion over five years (FY2006-FY2010). The House and Senate Agriculture Committees have completed action on their recommendations ($3.65 billion in the House and $3.0 billion in the Senate). The two measures would reduce spending on farm commodity and conservation programs in varying ways. The House measure also eliminates funding for various rural development programs and reduces food stamp spending. The Senate extends authority for a dairy income support program, which would require an offset of its projected cost. Reconciliation floor action is expected in November. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8075/
Agriculture and FY2006 Budget Reconciliation
During the week of December 18, 2005, both the House and Senate approved the conference agreement on the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (H.Rept. 109-362, S. 1932), which includes net reductions of $2.7 billion over five years for USDA mandatory programs. Included in the agreement is a $1.7 billion reduction in farm commodity support programs, a $934 million reduction in conservation spending, a $620 million reduction in a mandatory research program, and $419 million cut in rural development programs, as scored by CBO over a five-year period (FY2006-2010). The measure also includes a two-year extension of a dairy income support program, at an estimated cost of $998 million. No reductions to food stamp spending were included in the conference agreement. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8741/
Agriculture and FY2006 Budget Reconciliation
On April 29, 2005, Congress completed action on the FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95, H.Rept. 109-62). This measure contains reconciliation instructions that require authorizing committees to report legislation to reduce spending on mandatory programs within each committee’s jurisdiction. To reduce spending in mandatory U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs, conferees instructed the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to reduce mandatory spending by $173 million in FY2006 and $3.0 billion over five years (FY2006-FY2010). The Bush Administration earlier proposed changes to several mandatory USDA programs, which it said would save $5.7 billion over five years (and which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) subsequently scored at $9.4 billion in reductions). The agriculture committees must determine how to divide the cuts among the various programs under their jurisdiction by September 16, 2005. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7596/
Agriculture and FY2006 Budget Reconciliation
The FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95, H.Rept. 109-62) contains reconciliation instructions that require authorizing committees to report legislation to reduce spending on mandatory programs within each committee’s jurisdiction. The resolution instructed the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to report legislation reducing spending on USDA mandatory programs by $173 million in FY2006 and $3.0 billion over five years (FY2006-FY2010). The House and Senate Agriculture Committees have completed action on their recommendations ($3.7 billion in the House and $3.0 billion in the Senate). The two measures would reduce spending on farm commodity and conservation programs in varying ways. The House measure also eliminates funding for various rural development programs and reduces food stamp spending. The Senate extends authority for a dairy income support program, which would require an offset of its projected cost. Reconciliation floor action is expected in November. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7949/
Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2006 Appropriations
This report is a guide to one of the regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Agriculture. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8583/
Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2006 Appropriations
This report is a guide to one of the regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Agriculture. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8544/
Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2006 Appropriations
This report is a guide to one of the regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Agriculture. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7814/
Agriculture and the 106th Congress: A Summary of Major Issues
Most congressional interest in agriculture in the 106th Congress was focused on persistent low prices for major commodities and proposals to redress declining farm income. Six emergency farm aid bills were approved, increasing agricultural spending by nearly $27 billion for fiscal years 1999-2001. These bills provided disaster relief along with short term “market loss payments”to farmers to shore up farm income. Some longer term changes also were enacted as part of emergency farm legislation, which this report discusses in brief. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1064/
Agriculture as a Source of Barge Demand on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers: Background and Issues
This report provides background on the linkage between U.S. agriculture and the UMR-IWW navigation system. In addition, it explores several of the key issues and uncertainties behind evolving trade patterns and projections for future agricultural freight traffic on the UMR-IWW navigation system. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9084/
Agriculture-Based Biofuels: Overview and Emerging Issues
This report reviews the evolution of the U.S. biofuels sector and the role that federal policy has played in shaping its development. In addition, it highlights emerging issues that are critical to the biofuels sector and of relevance to Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc29593/
Agriculture-Based Renewable Energy Production
Since the late 1970s, U.S. policy makers at both the federal and state levels have enacted a variety of incentives, regulations, and programs to encourage the production and use of agriculture-based renewable energy. Motivations cited for these legislative initiatives include energy security concerns, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and raising domestic demand for U.S.-produced farm products. This report provides background information on farm-based energy production and how this fits into the national energy-use picture. It briefly reviews the primary agriculture-based renewable energy types and issues of concern associated with their production, particularly their economic and energy efficiencies and long-run supply. Finally, this report examines the major legislation related to farm-based energy production and use. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9132/
Agriculture-Based Renewable Energy Production
Since the late 1970s, U.S. policy makers at both the federal and state levels have enacted a variety of incentives, regulations, and programs to encourage the production and use of agriculture-based renewable energy. Motivations cited for these legislative initiatives include energy security concerns, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and raising domestic demand for U.S.-produced farm products. This report provides background information on farm-based energy production and how this fits into the national energy-use picture. It briefly reviews the primary agriculture-based renewable energy types and issues of concern associated with their production, particularly their economic and energy efficiencies and long-run supply. Finally, this report examines the major legislation related to farm-based energy production and use. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8685/
Agriculture-Based Renewable Energy Production
Since the late 1970s, U.S. policy makers at both the federal and state levels have enacted a variety of incentives, regulations, and programs to encourage the production and use of agriculture-based renewable energy. Motivations cited for these legislative initiatives include energy security concerns, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and raising domestic demand for U.S.-produced farm products. This report provides background information on farm-based energy production and how this fits into the national energy-use picture. It briefly reviews the primary agriculture-based renewable energy types and issues of concern associated with their production, particularly their economic and energy efficiencies and long-run supply. Finally, this report examines the major legislation related to farm-based energy production and use. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9101/
Agriculture Biotechnology: Background and Recent Issues
This report discusses issues regarding the impacts of GE crops on the environment and food safety, and whether GE foods should be specially labeled. Underlying these issues is the question of whether U.S. regulation and oversight of biotechnology—with responsibilities spread primarily among the U.S. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87293/
Agriculture Conservation Programs: A Scorecard
This report provides basic information on several agriculture conservation programs, primarily drawn from agency budget presentations and websites, about each program using a consistent format. This information should help respond to basic questions and resolve many common sources of confusion about the purposes of the program, program participation and policy topics. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc94006/
Agriculture Conservation Programs: A Scorecard
The Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Farm Service Agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture currently administer 20 programs and subprograms that are directly or indirectly available to assist producers and landowners who wish to practice conservation on agricultural lands. The number, scope, and overall funding of these programs have all grown with each recent farm bill. This growth can cause confusion over which problems and conditions each program addresses, and specific program characteristics and performance, especially for those who are less familiar with this conservation effort. This report lists these programs and basic information about each of them. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7686/
Agriculture in Afghanistan and Neighboring Asian Countries
Agriculture (as measured by share of gross domestic product and employment) is a significant economic sector in seven Central and South Asian countries: Afghanistan, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. All of these countries are net food importers. Some have experienced successive years of drought, which has contributed to noticeable declines in agricultural output and the need to increase commodity imports. The United Nations’ World Food Program reports that both Afghanistan and Tajikistan are currently in need of emergency food assistance to cover sizable food deficits. The food outlook in Afghanistan is made uncertain by ongoing military conflict. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8621/
Agriculture in Pending U.S. Free Trade Agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea
The 111th Congress in coming months might take up free trade agreements (FTAs) signed by the Bush Administration with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea under trade promotion authority, or fast-track rules, designed to expedite congressional consideration of these agreements. Accordingly, agriculture as covered in each pending trade agreement is examined in this report in the order that Congress likely will take up these agreements, based upon statements made to date by Obama Administration officials and Members of Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc26158/
Agriculture in Pending U.S. Free Trade Agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea
This report discusses pending U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. The bills to implement these agreements will now be debated under trade promotion authority, or fast-track rules, designed to expedite congressional consideration. The report includes an overview of agricultural issues regarding FTAs and pending FTA partners, as well as a closer breakdown of the specific issues for each of the countries. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc103059/
Agriculture in Pending U.S. Free Trade Agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama
This report discusses pending U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama. The bills to implement these agreements will now be debated under trade promotion authority, or fast-track rules, designed to expedite congressional consideration. The report includes an overview of agricultural issues regarding FTAs and pending FTA partners, as well as a closer breakdown of the specific issues for each of the countries. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc93818/
Agriculture in the U.S.-Dominican Republic Central American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA)
On August 2, 2005, President Bush signed into law the bill to implement the Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement, or DR-CAFTA (P.L. 109-53, H.R. 3045). In DR-CAFTA, the United States and six countries will completely phase out tariffs and quotas — the primary means of border protection — on all but four agricultural commodities traded between them in stages up to 20 years. The four exempted products are as follows: for the United States, sugar; for Costa Rica, fresh onions and fresh potatoes; and for the four other Central American countries, white corn. DR-CAFTA’s provisions, once fully implemented, are expected to result in trade gains, though small, for the U.S. agricultural sector. This report describes this agreement in detail, as well as the stances of both supporters and detractors. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8288/
Agriculture in the WTO Doha Round: The Framework Agreement and Next Steps
Member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) reached agreement on July 31, 2004 on a framework for negotiating agricultural trade liberalization in the multilateral trade round known as the Doha Development Agenda (DDA). The framework, part of a work program for all negotiating issues in the DDA (nonagricultural market access, services, trade facilitation, etc.), sets the stage for negotiations, now underway, to determine specific targets or formulas (“modalities”) for curbing trade-distorting domestic support, reducing trade barriers and eliminating export subsidies. If agreed to, the agriculture modalities report would be on the agenda of the WTO’s Sixth Ministerial Conference in December 2005, and negotiations could be completed during 2006. In the meantime, the President has requested a two-year extension of trade promotion authority procedures (TPA, also known as fast-track) for considering legislation to implement trade agreements. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9099/
Agriculture in the WTO: Limits on Domestic Support
Most provisions of the current “farm bill,” the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (FSRIA) of 2002 (P.L. 107-171), do not expire until 2007. However, hearings on a 2007 farm bill could begin in late 2005. At that time, Congress will begin to examine farm income and commodity price support proposals that might succeed the programs due to expire in 2007. A key question likely to be asked of virtually every new proposal is how it will affect U.S. commitments under the WTO’s Agreement on Agriculture (AA), which commits the United States to spend no more than $19.1 billion annually on domestic farm support programs most likely to distort trade. The AA spells out the rules for countries to determine whether their policies are potentially trade distorting, and to calculate the costs. This report describes the steps for making these determinations. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6947/
Agriculture in the WTO: Member Spending on Domestic Support
Under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Agreement on Agriculture (AA), member countries agreed to general rules regarding disciplines on domestic and export subsidies, and concessions on market access. This report focuses solely on the commitments made by WTO member countries concerning government outlays in support of domestic agricultural production. The three sections of the report provide a brief overview of WTO domestic policy commitments; background information on WTO member requirements for reporting on domestic subsidy outlays; WTO member outlays made to support agricultural production; and U.S. agricultural support outlays compared against spending limits. In addition, the report briefly discusses the implications for U.S. agricultural policy of continued adherence to existing WTO commitments. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8538/
Agriculture in the WTO: Policy Commitments Made Under the Agreement on Agriculture
This report provides a review of the major agricultural policy commitments made by members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) during the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations completed in 1994, and the legal text that underlies those commitments. Most agricultural support commitments are embodied in the Agreement on Agriculture and it is the essential focus of this review. However, references are made to additional supporting legal texts that emerged as part of the Uruguay Round Agreement, as well as to related studies and references produced by the WTO, its member countries, and international organizations interested in trade and development. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9100/
Agriculture in U.S. Free Trade Agreements: Trade with Current and Prospective Partners, Impact, and Issues
This report discusses the trade in agricultural products, which is one of the difficult issues negotiators face in concluding free trade agreements (FTAs). The report also deals with food safety and animal/plant health matters. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc96787/
Agriculture in WTO Negotiations
The World Trade Organization’s (WTO) fifth ministerial conference (held September 10-14, 2003 in Cancun, Mexico) ended without an agreement on a framework for continuing multilateral negotiations on agricultural trade liberalization. The inconclusive end of the Cancun ministerial places in doubt the ability of WTO member countries to complete the current round of negotiations by the scheduled January 1, 2005 deadline. This report discusses the various agricultural negotiations currently underway in the WTO. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9076/
Agriculture: Payment in Kind (PIK) Program
On January 11, 1983, President Reagan announced that the U.S. Department of Agriculture would implement a payment-in-kind (PIK) program to help reduce Government grain surpluses and to improve farm income. The materials included in this report were compiled by Congressional Research Staff for Member of Congress desirous of more information on the subject. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9038/
Agriculture: Previewing a Farm Bill
Most provisions of the current “farm bill,” the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (FSRIA) of 2002 (P.L. 107-171), do not expire until 2007. Nonetheless, various policy developments have brought farm bill programs into play during the 109th Congress. For example, the FY2006 budget resolution (H.Con.Res. 95) directs the House and Senate Agriculture Committees to find five-year savings of $3 billion from programs under their jurisdiction. Hearings on a 2007 farm bill itself could begin later in 2005. This report will be updated if events warrant; for a more extensive discussion of the issues, see CRS Report RL33037, Previewing a 2007 Farm Bill. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7730/
Agriculture: Prospective Issues for Congress
A number of issues affecting U.S. agriculture could receive attention during the 109th Congress. Some are related to new initiatives or to unfinished legislation from the 108th Congress; others have been the focus of ongoing congressional oversight. Although the current (2002) farm bill (P.L. 107-171) generally does not expire until 2007, the agriculture committees could begin hearings on a new measure as early as 2005. The farm bill spells out the types and levels of benefits provided to producers and landowners under commodity price support and conservation programs, both of which could receive close scrutiny in the coming year as lawmakers seek ways to control federal spending. Other concerns include agroterrorism, food safety, and animal and plant diseases (e.g., “mad cow” disease); interest in multilateral and bilateral trade negotiations; the rising cost of energy on farms; environmental issues; and a number of agricultural marketing matters. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6726/
Agriculture: Prospective Issues for the 107th Congress
Persistent low farm prices and 3 years of multi-billion dollar ad hoc additions to federal spending for farmers are expected to put pressure on the 107th Congress for an early review of federal farm policy. Farm policy is governed by a variety of laws, many of which are incorporated into an omnibus, multi-year farm bill. Most of the provisions of the current farm bill, the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996, expire after the 2002 crop year. Key issues are the responsiveness of current policy to low commodity prices and farm income, factors influencing low prices, and options for improving prices and/or providing automatic relief to farmers when prices fall. Increased concentration in the agriculture industry, trade, and environmental regulations affecting agriculture are likely to be part of the debate. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1388/
Agriculture Support Mechanisms in the European Union: A Comparison with the United States
The European Union (EU), comprised of 15 member states (countries), is one of the United States’ chief agricultural trading partners and also a major competitor in world markets. Both heavily support their agricultural sectors, with a large share of such support concentrated on wheat, feed grains, cotton, oilseeds, sugar, dairy, and tobacco. However, the EU provides more extensive support to a broader range of farm and food products. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the EU and United States in 2001 together accounted for nearly two-thirds of all government support to agriculture among the major developed economies. However, EU agricultural spending generally is much higher than in the United States. Information comparing how the U.S. and EU governments support their producers is expected to be of interest to policymakers while negotiations are underway among world trading partners to further reform agricultural trade. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8623/
Agriculture: U.S.-China Trade Issues
With China’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in December 2001, U.S. agricultural interests were hopeful that longstanding barriers to trade with that vast and growing market would begin to fall. However, critics charge that China is failing to honor commitments to open its markets, affecting U.S. exports of grains, oilseeds, meat and poultry, and other products. U.S. agriculture and trade officials have been working to resolve these differences. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8848/
Agroterrorism: Options in Congress
Although U.S. intelligence agencies have not identified any terrorist acts targeting agricultural production (i.e., agroterrorism) in the United States to date, the events of September 11, 2001 have awakened the nation to their possibility. Some experts estimate that a single agroterrorist attack using a highly contagious livestock disease could cost between $10 billion and $30 billion to the U.S. economy. This report examines the potential threats to America’s agriculture from a deliberate biological attack, describes the current defense structure and capabilities available to respond to agroterrorism, and analyzes current congressional proposals to address the threat of biological weapons to U.S. agriculture. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1384/
Agroterrorism: Options in Congress
Although U.S. intelligence agencies have not identified any terrorist acts targeting agricultural production (i.e., agroterrorism) in the United States to date, the events of September 11, 2001 have awakened the nation to their possibility. Some experts estimate that a single agroterrorist attack using a highly contagious livestock disease could cost between $10 billion and $30 billion to the U.S. economy. This report examines the potential threats to America’s agriculture from a deliberate biological attack, describes the current defense structure and capabilities available to respond to agroterrorism, and analyzes current congressional proposals to address the threat of biological weapons to U.S. agriculture. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2118/
Agroterrorism: Threats and Preparedness
The potential of terrorist attacks against agricultural targets (agroterrorism) is increasingly recognized as a national security threat, especially after the events of September 11, 2001. In this context, agroterrorism is defined as the deliberate introduction of an animal or plant disease with the goal of generating fear, causing economic losses, and/or undermining stability. This report addresses the use of biological weapons against agriculture, rather than the threat of terrorists using agricultural inputs for other purposes. It also focuses more on agricultural production than food processing and distribution. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6486/
Agroterrorism: Threats and Preparedness
The potential of terrorist attacks against agricultural targets (agroterrorism) is increasingly recognized as a national security threat, especially after the events of September 11, 2001. Agroterrorism is a subset of bioterrorism, and is defined as the deliberate introduction of an animal or plant disease with the goal of generating fear, causing economic losses, and/or undermining social stability. This report outlines the probable strategic reasoning behind agroterrorism, the vulnerabilities of the agriculture industry, and the funding and legislation behind several preventive Congressional measures. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10413/
Agroterrorism: Threats and Preparedness
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9882/
Agroterrorism: Threats and Preparedness
Although U.S. intelligence agencies have not identified any terrorist acts targeting agricultural production (i.e., agroterrorism) in the United States to date, the events of September 11, 2001 have awakened the nation to their possibility. Some experts estimate that a single agroterrorist attack using a highly contagious livestock disease could cost between $10 billion and $30 billion to the U.S. economy. This report addresses the use of biological weapons against agriculture, rather than the threat of terrorists using agricultural inputs for other purposes. It also focuses more on agricultural production than food processing and distribution. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5731/