Seminar on Low Impact Fisheries – considerations for the new CFP

In 2009, Seas at Risk (SAR) compiled a comprehensive document on how to move to Low Impact Fisheries (LIF) in Europe, defined as more selective fishing techniques which are less damaging to habitats and have lower carbon footprints.  Also, existing hurdles preventing such developments were discussed.

As a continuation SAR is soon launching a report on how to include LIF in the new Common Fishery Policy (CFP) and how policy measures could support developments towards more sustainable fishing techniques.

To highlight the coming report and to discuss the most important conclusions of their study, SAR organised a seminar at the European Parliament in Brussels on November 22. The meeting was well attended, and there was broad support from MEPs, Permanent Representatives, NGOs and industry, and also from Commissioner Maria Damanaki to include policy measures encouraging LIF in the new CFP. The seminar was attended by MEPs Anna Rosbach, Isabella Lovin and Christofer Fjellner.

Crick Carleton, from Nautilus Consultants, presented the most important messages of the soon to be published report: In the current proposal for the new CFP, there is much focus on matching fleets to fishing opportunities, in the management of stocks to reach MSY, but the question of how to minimise fishing-induced negative impacts on the environment and to protect biodiversity are neglected.

Carleton’s main message was that only small changes of the current wording are needed to induce large changes to include LIF in the revised CFP. For example, there should be explicit reference to LIF as an objective in the CFP and it is important to link this objective to existing Directives, especially to the Marie Strategy Framework Directive. Fishing regulations could thereby become flexible, so that for instance in threatened marine areas only LIF vessels could be permitted to fish. Furthermore, Carleton pointed out that a failing within the Commission’s CFP proposals is that high and low impact fisheries are not distinguished.

For Carleton, the introduction of Transferable Fishing Concessions (TFCs) should not be mandatory as suggested by the Commission for the CFP. Since fishing-induced environmental impact is often correlated with vessel size (small scale fisheries in general have less negative impact) there is a risk that TFCs will cause increased marine degradation by larger vessels, as quota is likely to concentrate in their hands. However, if implemented, Member States (MS) should make use of a range of management tools to restrict or counter the negative consequences through low impact fisheries. Clear guidance on appropriate tools were recommended to be included in the Basic Regulation and preference in the allocation of TFCs to those vessels deploying low impact fishing gear and practices should be one of those tools.

Regarding discarding, there is also a need to broaden the focus from “landing what you catch” to “not catching what you do not want”, which implies improved selectivity in of gears and fishing techniques.

It was also proposed that the possibility for Member States to reserve up to 5% of national fishing opportunities for allocation according to eligibility criteria, as proposed in the new CFP, should be expanded gradually to a mandatory reserve of at least 25% of national fishing opportunities. Guidance on allocation criteria should be agreed at EU level to ensure this 25% reserve serves to promote low impact fisheries.

At the meeting, Commissioner Damanaki stressed that we have already reached the “red line area” and that fishing cannot continue in the current way. She stated that funds available for the development of European fisheries should remain at the current level and assured that these funds would be used more progressively in the future, as part of the shift to more sustainable fisheries. “We will generously finance the selectivity of the gears”, she stated. She also stressed that the same rules should apply in European waters as well as for EU vessels fishing in foreign waters.

MEP Isabella Lovin summed up the meeting and in her closing remarks she expressed the need for not only rewarding Low Impact Fisheries but actively prohibiting fisheries that have significant negative impacts on the environment. She also advocated that Environmental Impact Assessments of all fisheries should be mandatory. Moreover, she concluded that socio-economic considerations must be included to safeguard especially small-scale, and often coastal, fisheries.

View the original article here

Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Commission files a case against Poland

Yesterday, the European Commission filed a case against Poland for failure to introduce a strategy for the protection of the Baltic Sea, as part of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The complaint case was filed to the court of Justice of the European Union, and the Commission requested an imposition of a daily fine of nearly EUR 60 000, counted from the court sentencing date, unless legislation strategy is presented before that time.

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) came into force on 15 July 2008, and is a legislative instrument, which aims to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) in the European seas by 2020.

The strategy for Baltic Sea protection was supposed to be available from July 15, 2010, which means Poland missed the deadline by more than one year.  Also at this time, the criteria and methodological standards for the interpretation of each descriptor of Good Environmental Status (GES) must have been agreed to, according to information from Seas at Risk, an organization involved in negotiating the MSFD legislation, and now working with its implementation.

Good Environmental Status is the basis of MSFD and contains eleven descriptors with which Member States need to comply. Some of the criteria for GES of marine waters in the EU focus on a myriad of aspects within the marine ecosystems framework, and include aspects such as fish stocks, biological diversity, eutrophication, contaminants, and more.

Lack of action by the Polish government on this issue puts the protection of fish stocks in the Baltic Sea at risk as well, which does not work in symbiosis with the push towards sustainable fisheries under the future Common Fisheries Policy, which is currently being reformed.

In addition to the above, Poland will also receive a so called ‘reasoned opinion’ from the European Commission regarding inappropriate action on programs concerning areas vulnerable to nitrate pollution, specifically nitrites found in agricultural fertilizers. According to Gospodarka Morska, a Polish Maritime & Fisheries news portal, the Commission believes that “Poland has not yet identified all the areas vulnerable to nitrate pollution. If Poland fails to do so within two months, the Commission may refer the matter to the EU Court of Justice”.

For more information on this issue see the links below.

View the original article here

EU-Morocco Agreement gets a ‘go ahead’ from the Fisheries Committee

Despite earlier recommendations by the Budget and Development Committees in the European Parliament to reject the extension of the EU- Morocco Fisheries Partnership Agreement, the vote in the Fisheries Committee (PECH) today approved the extension.

As reported on CFP Reform Watch, the result of the vote in PECH was not as close as initially expected: 12 members voted in favour of the agreement, 8 voted against, and 1 member abstained.

The decisive vote in the European Parliament (EP) plenary will take place in December, 2011. The EP, however,  has a limited ability to affect the deal as there will be less than three months remaining on the partnership after their final vote. The Council renewed the agreement on 28 February 2011, and it will run until 27 February 2012.  The EP vote should not be underestimated however, as it may have a bearing on subsequent renewals.

The Agreement has previously been criticised in an external consultant review for providing the lowest cost-benefit financial returns to the EU of all ongoing bilateral agreements, in addition to documented human rights violations relating to fishing activities in the waters of Western Sahara.

Carl Haglund, the rapporteur in the Fisheries Committee, was very critical about the extension in his report as well, stating that the European Parliament (EP) should reject an extension on the basis that it is ecologically and environmentally unsustainable and that it has no significant macro-economic effect on either the EU or Morocco. However, an amendment was introduced, which effectively reversed the conclusions of his report and led to PECH’s approval of the EU- Morocco agreement, according to CFP Reform Watch.

View the original article here

Fraud by Galician shipowner amplifies the need to clean-up subsidies

Shipowner, Manuel Antonio Vidal Pego of Ribeira, Spain, was condemned by the Provincial Court of Las Palmas in Gran Canaria for fraud as a result of illegal fisheries within the convention area for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, and concealing this fact—for economic benefit—during a significant  trade transaction with a representative of Coast Line Marine Services LTD. The illegal fishing activity has been spotted by the Australian authorities.

Vidal Pego already has a history of illegal fisheries dating back to 2003, a time during which he was internationally condemned for IUU (Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated) fishing activities onboard ship ‘Viarsa’.  The company he’s affiliated with has also been linked to receiving substantial EU- based public aid funding.

It has been reported that Spanish fishermen involved in illegal catches are receiving multi-million euro payouts from the EU fisheries subsidy system within the European Fisheries Fund (EFF). It is alleged that the Galician government specifically, provides subsidies to companies ‘closely linked’ to IUU fishing which further confounds the problem.

It is now widely known that the lack of transparency in the EU fisheries subsidy allocation in the European Union means that guesswork is required to know how much money has been spent and who has received funds. Spain is a huge benefactor of the EU subsidies, pocketing about 40% of all the payments. This situation is unacceptable and the Commission needs to reform the system under the proposed new European Maritime and Fisheries Fund—which will replace the current EFF—so that public funds are given out with accountability.

For the transgression, the sentence legislated by the Provincial court of Las Palmas required the incarceration of Vidal Pego for one year and eight months; in addition, for eight months of that sentence, the shipowner is required to pay a daily fine of 15 EUR (which totals about 3800 EUR).  Coast Line Marine LTD, shall be compensated for loss and damages in the amount of USD 2.74 million, and 10% of that amount in lost profits.

For more information please see the links below.

View the original article here

Agriculture Industry Amidst Stiff Competition for Self-Promotion

MSC certified fisheries show positive environmental impacts

Published yesterday, the report carried out by three expert marine science consultancies, Researching the Environmental Impacts of the MSC Certification Programme, concludes that those fisheries which are engaged in Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification process show progress in minimizing negative environmental impacts.

The analysis focused on eight key outcome performance indicators, which MSC utilises in their process of assessments: stock status, population reference points, stock recovery, retained species, bycatch species, endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species, habitats and ecosystems.

For more information please download the report Executive Summary, or the full Report.

View the original article here

We want green fish, EU consumers say

An overwhelming majority of European consumers – in southern Europe more than 90 percent – want to see more sustainably caught products in the fish counters, a recent WWF poll shows.

Still, the survey in 14 countries performed by an independent research institute showed that few consumers felt they were provided sufficient information about where and how the fish on sale were caught – so they had a chance to make sure that the product did not come from overfished stocks or was fished with unsustainable methods.

Eighty-eight percent of the respondents said that they think it is indeed important that fish products on sale within the European Union come from non-overfished stocks. Perhaps most surprising was the overwhelming support in southern European countries with dominating fishing sectors in the Union:

In Portugal (92 percent), France (93 percent), Spain (91 percent), Italy (95 percent) and Belgium (91 percent) more than nine out of ten consumers asked said it is important that fish on sale comes from non-overfished sustainable stocks.

“Europeans are clearly fed up with the disastrous management of our fisheries. They want the EU to turn the trend of overfishing around and the reform of the CFP offers exactly that opportunity to Members of the European Parliament and to EU Governments.” said Louize Hill, Head of Fisheries and Marine at WWF’s European Policy Office.

“We cannot afford to continue wasting our precious marine resources in times of economic crisis. The 2012 CFP reform has to be the one that delivers change.”

Asked whether they though they had adequate information on to which extent the fish on sale comes from well-managed, sustainable sources, 72 percent of those polled said no.

The survey included 14,635 adults in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK.

In other reports this spring, consumers in both Spain and the UK have expressed doubts about the labelling of seafood in their stores.

View the original article here

The new economics foundation (nef) report on “Value slipping through the net: managing fish stocks in the public interest” has been published

Home » Article » The new economics foundation (nef) report on “Value slipping through the net: managing fish stocks in the public interest” has been published

The report reveals the inefficiency of a European fisheries management system which rewards those who underperform in social, economic and environmental terms and punishes those that generate more societal benefits.

Over the period 2006-2008, the report compared two types of fishing – gillnets and trawlers – by the value created for society in terms of net revenues, employment, subsidies, discards, and greenhouse gas emissions. The results found that gillnets produced far higher value within the cod fishery and that trawlers were much more heavily subsidised through public funds.

Criticisms were also made of the way in which quota distribution methods in the EU have failed to provide societal benefits. Currently, the EU allocates fish resources on the basis of relative stability, and then each member state allocates their share of TACs to different sectors of the fleet based on histrorical records. However, this fails to prioritise fishing activities which deliver the most benefit to the public. The report recommends that as fish are a public resource, the implementation of access criteria as a means to provide priority access to those fishing in the most environmentally and socially sustainable way would provide greater benefits to the public while also being conducive to rebuilding the perilous state of fish resources.

View the original article here

Desert caviar a pricey first

Very far from its classic haunts in the Caspian Sea, sturgeon for exclusive caviar productions is now bred in – the Abu Dhabi desert.

The project – the world’s largest recirculating aquaculture system for sturgeons, and the first in the Middle East – is being run by the German firm United Food Technologies AG. The farm spans some 61,000 square metres, and at full capacity the plant will yield 32 yearly tonnes of caviar and 490 yearly tonnes of sturgeon, unprecedented quantities in the business.

To shorten the production process of 4-4.5 years and allow the company to put forth its first caviar by the end of this year, mature fish are initially shipped in for farming. Thus, 140 tonnes of live sturgeon, or 22 fish, were imported from Frankfurt by sea and air in early April to start the process.

Due to overfishing, water pollution and the increasing demand for oil in the Caspian Sea, where many of the fish roam, 85 per cent of sturgeon species are classified at risk of extinction. Farming them thus appears to be the best way to satisfy the world’s demand for the fish’s caviar, the German company believes.

View the original article here

Damanaki to address UK Parliament committee on CFP reform

On Thursday 27th October, Commissioner Damanaki will be exchanging views with the Members of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee of the UK Parliament on the Commission proposals for a reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy. The session will be webstreamed live.

This follows on from today’s committee hearing at which representatives from the fishing industry gave evidence, and last week’s hearing which featured scientists and NGOs. All of these proceedings can be viewed from the link below.

View the original article here

A Revolution Down on the Farm: The Transformation of American Agriculture since 1929

At a time when food is becoming increasingly scarce in many parts of the world and food prices are skyrocketing, no industry is more important than agriculture. Humans have been farming for thousands of years, and yet agriculture has undergone more fundamental changes in the past 80 years than in the previous several centuries. In 1900, 30 million American farmers tilled the soil or tended livestock; today there are fewer than 4.5 million farmers who feed a population four times larger than it was at the beginning of the century. Fifty years ago, the planet could not have sustained a population of 6.5 billion; now, commercial and industrial agriculture ensure that millions will not die from starvation. Farmers are able to feed an exponentially growing planet because the greatest industrial revolution in history has occurred in agriculture since 1929, with U.S. farmers leading the way. Productivity on American farms has increased tenfold, even as most small farmers and tenants have been forced to find other work. Today, only 300,000 farms produce approximately ninety percent of the total output, and overproduction, largely subsidized by government programs and policies, has become the hallmark of modern agriculture. A Revolution Down on the Farm: The Transformation of American Agriculture since 1929 charts the profound changes in farming that have occurred during author Paul K. Conkin's lifetime. His personal experiences growing up on a small Tennessee farm complement compelling statistical data as he explores America's vast agricultural transformation and considers its social, political, and economic consequences. He examines the history of American agriculture, showing how New Deal innovations evolved into convoluted commodity programs following World War II. Conkin assesses the skills, new technologies, and government policies that helped transform farming in America and suggests how new legislation might affect farming in decades to come. Although the increased production and mechanization of farming has been an economic success story for Americans, the costs are becoming increasingly apparent. Small farmers are put out of business when they cannot compete with giant, non-diversified corporate farms. Caged chickens and hogs in factory-like facilities or confined dairy cattle require massive amounts of chemicals and hormones ultimately ingested by consumers. Fertilizers, new organic chemicals, manure disposal, and genetically modified seeds have introduced environmental problems that are still being discovered. A Revolution Down on the Farm concludes with an evaluation of farming in the twenty-first century and a distinctive meditation on alternatives to our present large scale, mechanized, subsidized, and fossil fuel and chemically dependent system.

Price: $22.50

Click here to buy from Amazon

CFP reform discussed during hearing in UK parliamentary committee

Today, the UK Environment, Food and Rural Affairs committee sat to discuss the CFP reform. Professor Alex Rogers from the University of Oxford and the new economics foundation (nef) a founding member of OCEAN2012 were invited to give evidence.

A wide ranging discussion took place on the Commission’s proposals for the CFP reform, including TFCs, discards and regionalisation.

A webcast of the hearing can be found at the link below.

View the original article here

Agriculture Investment - A Must Read Article

Finding the best agriculture investment can be tricky for the inexperienced investor with little or no knowledge of the sector, but there are of course many different options available including agriculture investment funds, direct agricultural land investment, and purchasing equities in agricultural companies. In this article I will go some way to explaining the different options, the risks they present to investors, the mechanics of how each type of agriculture investment works, and the returns that are currently being achieved. You can also download?a complete agriculture investment guide at the link at the bottom of this article.

Firstly we will look at the relevance of agriculture investment for the current economic climate, and whether this particular sector shows us the signs of being able to generate growth and income.

The Current Economic Climate

The global economy is still in a state of turmoil, and the UK in particular is cutting back public spending to reduce an unmanageable national debt, the population is growing, and quantitative easing is likely to lead us into a period of extended inflation. Also, the lack of economic visibility means that it is very hard to value assets such as stocks, and interest rates being so low means that our cash deposits are not generating any tangible income to speak of.

So what does this mean for investors? It means that we need to buy assets that have a positive correlation with inflation i.e. they go up in value quicker than the rate of inflation, these assets must also generate an income to replace the income we have lost from cash, and finally any asset that we purchase must also have a strong and measurable track record.

It is very clear that agriculture investment, especially investing in agricultural land, displays the characteristics of growth, income, a positive correlation with inflation, is easy to value, and has a clear and evident track record to analyse, and as such agriculture investment ticks all of the relevant boxes to potentially become the ideal asset class for investors today.

Agriculture Investment Fundamentals

The fundamentals supporting agriculture investment are pretty easy to measure; as the global population grows we need more food, to produce more food we need more agricultural land as this is the resource that provides all of the grain and cereals that we eat, and all of the space to graze the livestock that end up on our plate. So we are dealing with a very basic question of supply and demand, if demand increases and supply can't keep up, the value of the underlying asset increases, so let's look at some of the key indicators of supply and demand for agriculture investment.

For seven of the last eight years we have consumed more grain than we have produced, bringing the global store down to critical levels.

Since 1961 the amount of agricultural land per person has dropped by 50% (0.42 hectares per person down to 0.21 hectares per person in 2007).

The global population is expected to grow by 9 billion by 2050.

Most think tanks and experts believe that we will need to increase the amount of agricultural land by 50% to support that growth, essentially a productive field the size of greater London need to be found every week.

In the last ten years virtually no more land has been bought into production as climate change, degradation and development and a host of other factors mean that there is little or no more new land we could use to farm.

The underlying asset that produces our food, the land, will become more valuable as more people demand food.

Agricultural land value rise when the food it produces can be sold for a higher price, making owning farmland more profitable, and food prices are at a 40 year low, leaving room for around 400% price inflation. In fact a bushel of wheat cost around $27 in the early seventies and now costs just $3.

Farmland in the UK has risen in value by 20% from June 2009 to June 2010, and 13% in 2010 alone according to the Knight Frank Farmland Index.

So the fundamentals supporting agriculture investment are sound and very clearly demonstrate a good picture for potential investment. But can we absorb price inflation? Well there are a myriad of studies that tell us very clearly that as a population, we absorb increases in food prices almost 100%, and sacrifice spending in other areas, so yes, we can.

Methods of Agriculture Investment

Agriculture Investment Funds

There are many types of agriculture investment funds to choose from, most invest in farming businesses, other purely in arable land, and others by stock in agricultural services companies. Most agriculture investment funds are showing excellent growth, and the fact that they are buying has increased the level of demand in the market therefore their mere presence is contributing to capital growth. Rural agent Savills recently commented on the fact that they have access to ?7 billion in capital from fund to purchase farms, that is enough capital to purchase six times the amount of farmland that will be advertised in the UK this year, in fact, according to Knight Frank there has been 30% less farmland advertised this year from last, and buyer enquiries have increased by 9%.

To talk about risk for a moment, the risk involved with this fund based investment strategy is that you give over control to a fund manager who will spend your money for you and acquire assets that he or she believes are relevant. Also, if one fund performs badly, that usually has a knock on effect for other agriculture investment funds as confidence in this particular strategy takes a hot, you can therefore lose value through no fault of your own. You also have to pay a fund management fee, eating into your profits.

In terms of the returns one can expect from a fund, this varies wildly but most project annual returns of around 10%, although this will vary depending on a whole host of factors including the fund management, investment strategy, and general market conditions.

Buying Shares in Agricultural Companies?as an Agriculture Investment

Another option for chose considering cashing in on agriculture investment is to purchase shares in an agricultural business, be that a farming business, or a services business, the options to consider vary wildly and careful thought must be undertaken to pick a suitable market (LSE, NASDAQ etc), and then a suitable company in which to invest. The business of picking shares remains, in my opinion, a job best left to those with the time, experience and resources to carefully research the company, its management, and it product line, and only those company displaying sound fundamentals should be added to a portfolio.

The risk here is as with any equity based investment, a down-swing in the market can cause a good company to lose value and thus affect the wealth of the investor in a negative way. We have all seen recently how a bear market can bring down profitable companies and the whole premise of agriculture investment is to avoid financial markets and add an element of non-correlation to a portfolio, ensuring the investor owns an asset that is unaffected by volatile stock markets.

So does an agriculture investment in the form of shares fit the bill? Well not really, as we were looking for stability, non-correlation, a positive correlation with inflation and income, and this mode of agriculture investment ticks none of those boxes other than a nominal dividend.

Buying Farmland as an Agriculture Investment

In my opinion the most sensible strategy for investors is to acquire profitable farmland that has a track record of producing an income yield, and rent that land to a commercial farmer. This mode of agriculture investment allows the buyer to access an asset that displays all of the characteristics that we are looking for, non-correlation with stock markets, positive correlation with inflation, income and growth, as UK farmland continues to increase in value yet is still only half the price of agricultural land in Ireland, Denmark and the Netherlands, leaving a huge margin for future growth.

There are of course a number of risks to consider here as well, sourcing good land for example, and of course sourcing and managing a farming tenant, these risks can all be managed effectively by partnering with a specialist agriculture investment consultancy that will handle the sourcing of both land and tenant and also handle all ongoing management too.

So to summarise, if one is to make an agriculture investment, the best option right at this moment is to buy agricultural land, giving the investor growth and income in a volatile market.

To download the complete Agriculture Investment Guide click here.

Download the Agriculture investment Guide at http://www.dgc-ai.com

David Garner in Managing Partner at DGC Business Consulting Ltd, a boutique advisory working with high net worth investors to provide access to managed agroculture investment, property investment, and distressed asset purchase strategies.

David has over a decade of experience in providing high end clients with solutions to meet their needs with real assets and is responsible for developing proprietary investment methods to allows investors to gain exposure to growth and income generating assets oin a low risk environment.

DGC Business Consulting Ltd source and manage farmland, residential property, and commercial property for investors, as well as provide research and due diligence for asset acquisitions across Europe.

Stalemate on subsidies in WTO talks

With only a few weeks remaining until a draft agreement is expected, the chair of the WTO negotiating group dealing with subsidies said he needed a period for “reflections”, while nations describing themselves as “friends of the fish” called for ambitious rules limiting fisheries subsidy payments.

The chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules, which covers anti-dumping, subsidies and countervailing measures – including fisheries subsidies – as well as regional trade agreements, said progress the latest weeks had been “incremental”.

The Doha Development Round, aiming for a new WTO agreement on rules for global trade, commenced in 2001, but is presently stalled after the latest round of negotiations broke down in 2008.

The process is till proceeding in working committees, however, and the groups have been asked to submit drafts by Easter this year.

The chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules, Ambassador Dennis Francis of Trinidad and Tobago, now said that the ability to move forward on fisheries subsidies restraints depended greatly on progress in the overall Doha Round negotiations. Those talks have slowed down notably the closer to Easter they have been getting.

He added that he may still be asked to present a text by that deadline, and that he now needed time for reflection on possible ways to bridge the differences, meaning that there would be no new meetings in April.

Meanwhile, speaking on behalf of Argentina, Australia, Chile, Iceland, New Zealand, Norway and the US, Ambassador David Walker of New Zealand said that the “friends of fish” nations expect ambitious rules limiting fisheries subsidy payments to be a key result of the rules negotiations.

“The WTO’s credibility on trade and environment issues is at stake here,” Walker said. “A weak outcome calls into question the future ability of the WTO to tackle other trade and environment issues of global importance.”

Pointing to the recently released “The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2010” FAO report, which states that 85 percent of global fish stocks are either fully or overexploited, he stressed that members should not let lack of progress in other parts of the Round deter them from pushing ahead on this issue.

The group’s statement called for a strong prohibition and strong disciplines on fisheries subsidies, after weeks of attempts by countries such as China, Brazil, Korea, and Japan to introduce various exceptions.

The “Friends of fish” initiative was praised by environmental NGOs.

“Today’s call clearly demonstrates that there is strong commitment for fisheries subsidies rules that serve global interests and not only protect narrow self concerns,” said Courtney Sakai, senior campaign director for the Washington-based green group Oceana.

“The WTO has a real and tangible opportunity to reduce global overfishing. The question is if it will seize this chance.”

View the original article here

The Economic Role Of Agriculture In China

Crisis and Opportunity: Sustainability in American Agriculture (Our Sustainable Future)

With the decline of family farms and rural communities and the rise of corporate farming and the resulting environmental degradation, American agriculture is in crisis. But this crisis offers the opportunity to rethink agriculture in sustainable terms. Here one of the most eloquent and influential proponents of sustainable agriculture explains what this means. These engaging essays describe what sustainable agriculture is, why it began, and how it can succeed. Together they constitute a clear and compelling vision for rebalancing the ecological, economic, and social dimensions of agriculture to meet the needs of the present without compromising the future.

 

In Crisis and Opportunity, John E. Ikerd outlines the consequences of agricultural industrialization, then details the methods that can restore economic viability, ecological soundness, and social responsibility to our agricultural system and thus ensure sustainable agriculture as the foundation of a sustainable food system and a sustainable society.

(20081101)

Price: $18.95

Click here to buy from Amazon