As you may know, U.S. policies encouraging meat production are old and, forgive the pun, deeply engrained. The most important are those that have seen livestock as a way of providing expanded markets for grains in a context of nearly constant overproduction in grains. (Something that is for the moment at least changing rapidly as a result of ethanol production--think of SUV's replacing cows and pigs as premier consumers of grain.) It is these policies, coming out of the overproduction crisis of the 1930's and then out of high yield seeds coming in the market as a result of plant breeding (at this stage associated with the term Green Revolution) in the early 1950's that led to massive government support for meat production and, more specifically, policies that encouraged feedlot and confined facility production. This was also tied into Public Law 480, providing food aid for the poor and hungry abroad as a huge sink for surplus production, very much a part of Cold War politics! in which the U.S. could be pictured (erroneously) as feeding the starving millions. Public Law 480 not only shipped surplus grain abroad at government expense, but also provided financing directly and indirectly (through such agencies as AID, the Export-Import Bank and OPIC) for expansion of feed lots and grain intensive methods of livestock production around the world. World Bank policies were tied into the same effort.
At home, this was linked into marketing efforts, partly supported by an array of government programs, convincing people that highly-marbled, fatty beef was greatly to be preferred over anything else. (I eat very little red meat in the U.S. but love the grass-fed beef that predominates in Brazil, where I live a lot, and all you have to do to see how much healthier and tasty grass-fed beef is is to sample a little Brazilian steak, capable of creating conversion experiences for the more sensually inclined vegetarians) A lot of this health-related aspect has been superbly covered by Marion Nestle in her Politics of Food and earlier books. In addition, federal land policies providing cheap grazing leases in the West are an aspect of the story. A large critical literature on this developed in the 1960's and was rather neatly summarized by the famous Diet For a Small Planet by the freelancer Frances Moore Lappe (who used her proceeds to found the organization Food First!) She later moved away from the vegetarianism of the first book with other publications, including World Hunger: Twelve Myths. Food First! continues to put out popularly written, as well as some more scholarly literature that serves as an entry point even for those with a more scholarly purpose in mind. World Hunger: Twelve Myths came out in an updated edition (2000?--go to foodfirst.org) that has an entry level bibliography on all of this. (Disclosure statement: I was a Board member of Food First and President for a time). The literature is obviously vast. Marty Strange, Fred Buttel, Patricia Allen and others are among excellent policy analysts who have treated this. In a much larger framework, I think that my The Death of Ramon Gonzalez: the Modern Agricultural Dilemma is useful in framing the issue, even though its field study and much of the rest focuses on pesticides.Cynthia Hewitt-Alcantara and Keith Griffin have also provided large frame works that have become the foundation for the larger literature produced since they were active. That's a start. Good luck to your student. Even starting with these minimal suggestions, she will find the field of policy analysis in this area quickly expanding beyond manageability and will want surely to narrow down. Angus Wright Professor Emeritus of Environmental Studies California State University Sacramento ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sonja Walti [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 9:50 AM To: [email protected] Cc: ctspink Subject: Meat, policies, and climate change Dear GEP-ED colleagues, I'm teaching a graduate course on the policy process and have students write papers on particular issues in select countries including the US, one of which is climate change. After reading Mark Bittman's NYT article on "Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler" this weekend, a student is interested in writing on meat consumption and climate change, a topic with which I'm not very familiar. I took a look at the GEP archives and came across a recent related thread about the link between food, namely eating vegan, and climate change. However, the references mainly pertain to the 'consumption-->climate change' link. As this is a policy process course, I would like the students to focus on the policy side of things. So my student's question will be something like "What are the policies encouraging meat consumption? And why are those in place?" or "Why does climate change policy in the US (and elsewhere) focus more on energy and transportation than on food? I.e. why is there no policy to curb GHG in the food sector?" It might also be interesting for her to take a look at a country that does have such a policy. I would appreciate hints (substantive ideas or references) to send her off in a productive direction. Many thanks! Sonja Walti Assistant Professor Department of Public Administration and Policy School of Public Affairs American University, Washington DC
