[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Info Update: ECOTECH'94 / ECOTECH Network (Pls distribute)

Info Update: ECOTECH'94 / ECOTECH Network

Proceedings from ECOTECH'94:
---------------------------
The intention is to publish 2 proceedings -
(a) containing selected papers from the various activities of ECOTECH'94
(computer conference, IUFRO computer workshop and the Beijing Conf.) and
ECOCITY Network, and (b) containing other all papers. There is a good
possibility of making "a" a United Nations University (Tokyo)
publication, this is now being investigated by Prof. Li Wenhua from
Beijing while I am seeking help for funding, editing and publishing the
second proceedings. Friends in Nepal can print 200 copies of a 100 page
proceedings for USD 700 (suggested price), so I am working for a
collaboration with them. The quality of the paper is adequate (poor with
pictures) but this quality would be poor when compared to UNU's standard
publications. We hope that the proceedings will be available in 1995.


Future Announcements:
--------------------
All announcements will be made via the ET-ANN mailing list, to receive
these announcements, pls join ET-ANN; to join, address your e-mail to:
listserv@searn.sunet.se with the message:
SUB ET-ANN your name    (e.g. SUB ET-ANN FU Dianliang)

(ET-ANN is a read-only list distributing a few postings per month only.
So have no fear of message overload. To signoff from this list, send
listserv the message: SIGNOFF ET-ANN).


New Mailing Lists for ECOTECH Network:
-------------------------------------
A new set of mailing lists will be created for the ECOTECH Network. They
will also be announced via ET-ANN as soon as they become available.

ET-PLAN mailing list:
---------------------
This mailing list will be used to define and to discuss how the ECOTECH
Network could be developed into a Network to enable a global
participation and involvement to advocate research, education and use of
ecotechnologies for multipurpose objectives in sustainable development.
ET-PLAN will enable you to contribute and participate in this development
process as well as to be part of the "electronic" component of the
ECOTECH Network. To join this ET-PLAN mailing list - address your email
to: listserv@searn.sunet.se with the message:
SUB ET-PLAN your name

(Note: it was earlier announced that ET-PARTI would be used for the
planning of ECOTECH Network. Pls note the change now (from ET-PARTI to
ET-PLAN) so that ET-PARTI could remain for public info exchange on
ecotechnologies and general discussions.

To new subscribers of ET-PLAN:
You can retrieve earlier messages by sending this message to the
listserv@searn.sunet.se :
GET ET-PLAN LOG9411

From: (Mr) Eng-Leong Foo (ECOTECH Network Manager)


             CHALLENGES, REALITIES AND PERCEPTIONS:
   CHANGING PARADIGMS FOR THE U.S. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE SYSTEM

Kristen Allen                                       December 1993

                     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


A survey of leaders and experts in fields of relevance to the food and
agriculture system highlighted six emerging trends and forces, and
responses to them, that will be of major importance in determining the
shape of that system in the coming decades.

The six factors are as follows:

Agricultural production will increasingly be influenced by public
concern about environmental quality;

Biotechnology will become integral to agricultural production as a
means of reducing chemical input use;

Vertical coordination will be increasingly common in the food and
agriculture system;

Agriculture will face more costly water because more clean water will
be bid away by other uses;

The urban and suburban portions of the population will have increasing
political clout; and

Policies and regulations designed to address serious threats to
environmental quality will increasingly change the nature of the
agricultural production system.

In combination, these factors, among others, will present actors in the
food and agriculture system with new challenges and opportunities over
the next two decades.  They are, for example, at the root of the
challenge, the beginnings of which are apparent even now, to the idea
that natural resource "owners" have unlimited rights of control over
those resources.  In the coming years this idea will likely be
challenged even more, as urban and suburban residents demand larger
shares of clean water and as public concern about environmental damage
changes consumption, and possibly investment, patterns and gives rise
to stricter controls on resource using activities.

Another trend, the need add distinguishable value to agricultural
commodities, offers both challenges and opportunities.  The changing
demographics and economic position of the consumer base are key forces
driving the challenge; but we can also see potential opportunities in
greater coordination of activities throughout the food and agriculture
system and in the increasing application of biotechnologies in food and
agricultural production.  Such opportunities are not, however, without
some costs and possi ble dislocations.  The most immediate challenge
for the food and agriculture community is to acknowledge these emerging
trends and understand the forces driving them, then to begin to explore
how best they might be encountered.

             CHALLENGES, REALITIES, AND PERCEPTIONS:
  CHANGING PARADIGMS FOR THE U.S. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE SYSTEM

                          Kristen Allen



        Environmental quality, biotechnology, the increasing political
clout of the urban/suburban population, competing demands for water,
and the need to coordinate food system activities are, according to the
opinions of a group of experts and leaders from within the food and
agriculture system, key among the emerging forces, trends and responses
that will shape that system, and the challenges that it must face,
as we enter the twenty-first century. With a little generalization and
simplification, we can characterize the U.S. food and agriculture
system in recent decades in terms of challenges. In the 1970s, the
challenge facing the system was to expand output and productivity to
meet new sources of demand, especially that from other countries.
In the 1980s, the challenge was to meet the competition from other
countries (and to pay for the heady days of the preceding decade).
In the 1990s and 2000s, the food and agriculture system may also be
characterized by the challenges it faces.  One of the major challenges
will be to deal with the attack on the notion that natural resource
"owners" in the food and agriculture system have an unquestionable
right of control over those resources.  A second major challenge will
be to find ways in which to add distinguishable value to agricultural
commodities.  We can see the genesis of these new challenges in the
emerging forces mentioned previously.

A Survey of Opinions
        As an extension of a strategic planning exercise, we asked
ninety experts and leaders to give us their opinions on which emerging
trends and forces will likely have the greatest influence on the U.S.
food and agriculture system over the next two decades. "Emerging" was
defined to mean anything new to the system, but for which no
well-developed trend can yet be discerned.  (See Box 1 for a brief
description of the study).  These experts were selected to represent
arange of views and perspectives on issues of relevance to food,
agriculture, environmental quality, resource use and rural communities.
The diversity of opinion was evidenced by the answers to and comments
on the survey questions.  Yet the general thrust of their responses was
that the six em erging forces discussed in this report will contribute
largely to the new challenges and opportunities facing the U.S. food
and agriculture system over the next two decades.

BOX 1:THE STUDY METHODS: A GROUP PROCESS AND MODIFIED DELPHI TECHNIQUE
        The study used two levels of expert panels to identify the
important emerging forces that will likely affect the U.S. food and
agriculture system. The first panel was a workshop group, comprised
mainly of agricultural, environmental and resource economists and soil
scientists who were attending professional meetings in August 1992.
The workshop was held in conjunction with the annual meetings of the
American Agricultural Economics Association, the Association of
Environmental and Resource Economists, t he Northeastern Agricultural
and Resource Economics Association and the Soil and Water Conservation
Society, in Baltimore, Maryland.  They responded to the question: "What
will be the emerging forces, factors, and trends that will shape U.S.
agriculture in the next twenty years?"  The ideas generated by this
panel were used as the basis for the propositions contained in a
questionnaire that was sent to the second expert panel.  This second
panel included most of the workshop participants plus sixty-one ot her

 individuals, invited to participate on the basis of their recognized
expertise in and leadership on issues of relevance to the food and
agriculture system and their breadth of view of the system in general.
end Box 1

BOX 2: THREE WAYS TO LOOK AT SIGNIFICANCE
        Survey participants were asked to complete a questionnaire
containing a total of fifty-eight propositions.  For each proposition,
participants were asked to assign an impact score-- ie. how large an
effect the factor described by the proposition would ha ve on the food
and agriculture system, whenever it occurred--, and to place it in a
time-frame--ie. how soon the factor would become important for the food
and agriculture system.  The  participants were also asked to identify
the five propositions that t hey deemed would be most important, among
all these emerging factors, for the U.S. food and agriculture system
over the next two decades and to rank those five propositions, relative
to each other. A high impact ranking may or may not go together with a
high importance ranking.  For example, the impact on the U.S. food and
agriculture system of complete failure of all crops in Europe would be
very large, but as the probability of such an event occurring is
small, it might not be ranked as very important.  Timing may also
influence perceived importance.  Factors deemed to be more imminent may
be viewed as more important than others that are expected to have a
greater impact on the system but in the more distant future. While the
three aspects (impact, timing and overall importance) are related, each
tells a slightly different story. Taking all three aspects together
helps us to build a more multifaceted picture of how these emerging
trends, forces and responses might shape the food and agriculture
system.
end Box 2.

SIX EMERGING CHARACTERISTICS IN THE EVER-CHANGING PARADIGM...

        In the opinion of the survey group, four trends or forces and
two responses to trends will feature prominently in characterizing the
U.S. food and agriculture system of the early twenty-first century.
These six emerging characteristics can be summarized as follows:

Agricultural production will increasingly be influenced by public
concern about environmental quality;

Biotechnology will become integral to agricultural production as a
means for reducing chemical input use;

Vertical coordination will be increasingly common in the food and
agriculture system;

Agriculture will face more costly water because more clean water will
be bid away by other uses;

The urban and suburban portions of the population will have increasing
political clout; and

Policies and regulations designed to address serious threats to
environmental quality will increasingly change the nature of the
agricultural production system.

        All of these trends were ranked by the survey participants as
being in the top ten in terms of overall importance and expected impact
(see Box 2 for a discussion of the measures used) and were expected to
begin to have an effect on the U.S. food and agri culture system within
the next five to ten years (or sooner in some instances). These six
forces will not, of course, be the only factors important in shaping
the food and agriculture system.  Many of the forces that are important
now will continue to shape the system.  World trade in agricultural
products, federal deficits, macroeconomic policies, technological
developments and changing consumer preferences are among those
continuing forces.

...AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR THE U.S. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE SYSTEM

        Within these six emerging characteristics we can see the seeds
of the challenges referred to earlier: One is that, increasingly, the
notions of ownership, property, and use rights will be called into
question.  Players within the food and agriculture sys tem, whether
they are farmers, executives of agribusiness firms, food retailers,
legislators, land holders, or restauranteurs will witness challenges
to some of their control over their activities.  Another is that there
will be a strong drive to add valu e to and make distinguishable,
agricultural commodities.  Producers, processors and marketers will
increasingly see opportunities in the form of niche markets, where
products that are distinguishable from the basic commodities--for
example, brand name mea ts and produce, "small farmer" dairy products,
low cholesterol eggs--can be sold at premium prices.

The Rise of Affluent, Politically Correct, Urban/Suburban Income Earners

        One of the driving forces over the next twenty years will
certainly be demographics.  Since the 1920s the U.S. population has
been more urban and suburban than rural.  With the stabilization of
population distribution over the past two or three decades, the
urban/suburban segmant is beginning to realize its strength and will
gain political clout.  Their interests--as consumers, voters,
homeowners, taxpayers, urban workers, and rural leisure seekers--will
be increasingly attended by businesses and policy makers.  Their
concerns about environmental quality will influence the food and
agriculture system in various ways.  They will press for political and
legislative decisions aimed at allaying their fears about real and
perceived contamination of food and water from agricultural chemicals.
They will seek state and local ordinances to protect their families,
themselves, their property, and their playgrounds from some of the
externalities of agricultural production--waste products, by- products,
noise and visual pollution.  In the marketplace, we can already see sellers
of food and other agricultural goods catering to their increasingly specific
demands, borne of high incomes, health consciousness, and political
correctness. Another challenge for the food and agriculture system that
arises from this demographic shift is that much of the general
population will have little understanding of where food comes from and
the complexities of the food production system.  This lack of
understanding may result in unrealistic demands, such as for food with
certain quality, safety, nutritional and convenience attributes,
produced, processed and packaged in an environmentally benign manner,
and offerred for sale at low prices. Urban and suburban income earners
may also tend to romanticize farming and farm lifestyles.  Some will
seek rural living experiences, either as permanent or vacation options.
At the same time, as urban and suburban voters, they may have
diminishing symp athy for direct subsidies to agricultural
production--seeking instead to shift those subsidies to the income,
health, education and other needs of the larger population--, and for
the indirect subsidies that agriculture has enjoyed, especially those
for land and water.  To compound the challenge further, especially in
areas close to urban centers, urban income earners seeking rural
experiences, may compete directly with farmers for land, but also
vehemently oppose any efforts to subdivide current or forme r farmland
for housing developments. Competing demands for productive resources
will not be limited to agricultural land on urban fringes.  Already in
the western United States we see considerable competition for water,
and in other areas competition for clean, uncontaminated water.  Pressure
to reduce or remove subsidies for agricultural water, combined with
effective competing demands for that water may simply price much
agricultural water, especially that used to irrigate low-valued crops,
out of reach of many agricultural producers.

Rising Concern About Environmental Quality
        The changing demographic structure is among the factors
contributing to the emerging force ranked as most important by the
survey group: that agricultural production will increasingly be
influenced by public concern about environmental quality.  Food and
agricultural producers and processors have already egun to feel the
effects of this concern.  Producers are facing tighter environmental
regulations, including restrictions on some practices and uses of
specific inputs.  These constraints may signal the need for further
changes in management decisions and techniques in the future. And the
specter of potential liability may bring more parties into the decision
making process. Concern about environmental quality is not, however,
limited to individuals outside the agricultural system.  Many of the
changes in farming and processing practices may be self initiated.
Farmers, concerned about the effects of some practices on their own,
their families, and their farms' health may voluntarily change their
practices.  Food processors may see advantages in changing practices
in terms of insurance premiums and worker health.  Investors may
increasingly incorporate concerns about environ mental impacts into
their investment decisions.  Such shifts may signal changes in
attitudes, away from a focus solely on individual returns and more
toward an acceptance of responsibility for communities and future
generations, but they may also signal changes in the way benefits and
costs are assessed.  Individuals and groups making changes in their
practices may have decided that the long run benefits outweigh the
short run costs. One of the resulting challenges for the food and
agriculture system will be to continue to produce, process and market
its products within a potentially ever-expanding web of
market-expressed consumer concerns, environmentally-aimed federal
policies and regulations, and locally-imposed zoning ordinances.
At the same time, the costs of some inputs may increase--water, 
land and chemicals for example--and options for disposing of waste 
products may diminish or become considerably more expensive.  
High cost producers and processors may be squeezed out.  The cost 
of food and other agricultural products may more closely reflect all 
the costs of producing, processing and marketing them.  And the 
competitive position of U.S. agricultural products in world markets 
may change, at least in the short term, if food and agriculture 
systems in other countries do not undergo similar readjustments.

Responding to the Challenges
        Among the six emerging characteristics listed above, two are
more responses to, or means for dealing with, forces rather than forces
in and of themselves.  The emergence of commercially viable, publicly
acceptable biotechnologies may provide one means by which producers and
processors can make adjustments in their activities necessitated by
consumer demands, public pressures, policies and regulations. Another
means of responding to some of these pressures is vertical
coordination.  Such coordination can range from relatively informal
agreements or formal contracts among individuals and firms to a high
degree of integration and concentrated asset ownership.  And, as
discussed below, there may be a synergy in these responses.

        Biotechnology represents one possible means for addressing both
environmental quality concerns and the drive to add value to basically
similar commodities. The basic idea of bio-engineering is not new.
Plant and animal breeders and geneticists have practiced selection and
supression of certain traits for may years.  But recent advances in
genetic engineering have opened new frontiers that will potentially
allow producers to select specific genotypes, not just phenotypes.
Within the next twenty years, genetic engineering techniques may
enhance resistence to diseases and pests in plants and animals,
reducing the need for externally applied or administered d rugs or
pesticides.  With greater understanding of genetic make-up, and the
technical ability to alter it, we may see greater precision possible in
agricultural production that may, ultimately, reduce the amount of
other production inputs required for any given product. Genetic
engineering may open other doors also.  In the not too distant future,
specific desired traits--such as leaness in meat, firmness in vine-
ripened tomatoes, drought tolerance in plants--may be engineered
directly rather than selected, somewhat imp recisely, over several
generations. As consumers demand greater specificity in their
purchases, producers, processors and marketers are already responding,
but in order to do so they must know much more about their products and
the practices and processes used to produce them.  Only by knowing the
origins of the ingredients in their products can sellers be sure that
they can back up the claims on their packages.  And in this
increasingly litigious society, knowing the veracity of one's claims
will be important.  A greater degree of coordin ation than currently
exists may offer sellers a form of insurance. Coordination of
activities within the food and agriculture system is not a new concept.
Prices are a coordinating mechanism.  Contracts between producers and
certain buyers or sellers are common.  Even the federal price support
program is a type of contract bewteen farmers and the goverment.  
Some segments of the system have a greater degree of coordination than
others; a large portion of U.S. broiler chicken production, for
example, is highly integrated now.  Over the next two decades, vertical
coordin ation, to varying degrees, will likely become increasingly
common within the food and agriculture system as a means for spreading
and sharing risk, ensuring supplies of inputs and markets for outputs
and, in general, for coping with the myriad of changes that will be
occurring. That biotechnology and increasing vertical coordination
represent potential responses to some of the challenges facing the food
and agriculture system should not overshadow the fact that both
continue to attract considerable concern, in the agricultural community
and among the general public.  Greater reliance on genetically
engineered organisms and increasing vertical coordination would, almost
certainly, offer gains for some individuals and organizations and
losses for others.  Neither the gains nor the losses can be ignored.



THE GRADUAL FORMATION OF NEW PERCEPTIONS

        A society's self perception changes only slowly.  Today's new
trends will be, or will influence, tomorrow's characteristics, but
today's self image is often based on yesterday's characteristics.  We
can see many examples of this lag in perceptions in the U.S. food and
agriculture system.  Popular culture often romanticizes farming, as an
unhurried, independent, almost self-sufficient way of life.  Yet those
individuals closest to it realize full well that Old MacDonald is now
just as likely to have a com puter, a fax machine and a direct line to
a stock broker on that farm as a duck, a horse and a sheep.  Farming is
as much a business as is a die casting shop or a corner service station
and as such it depends heavily on being integrated with the rest of
the economy.  While much of the population still equates farming,
agriculture and rural areas, in reality agricultural activities are not
confined to farm boundaries, and rural areas increasingly depend on
activities other than farming for their vitality. Agricultural policies
are still viewed, and referred to, by many people as farm policies,
yet the most recent "farm bill" covered such issues as food stamps,
trade, conservation, forestry, research, marketing and improvement
of the agricultural economy, as well as the commodity programs.
Thus will our perception of the food and agriculture system
in the years to come be based on today's realities.  But the challenges
of tomorrow will arise from the trends and forces we just now see
emerging. This report synthesizes ideas and opinions from leading
agriculturalists, predominantly, but not exclusively, in the United
States, that were gathered during 1992 - 1993.  It seeks to stimulate
interest in and thinking about the food and agriculture syst em of
tomorrow.  It does not attempt to present projections, official or
unofficial, for the U.S. food and agriculture system.  Nor is it
intended to give a forecast of future agricultural sector performance
or predict specific events.  Rather, it seeks t o provide a context, by
identifying general trends and forces, within which future performance
will occur.  These general trends may spawn any number of individual
events in different locations or for different parts of the system.
Perhaps the broadest i nterpretation of the results is that, over the
next twenty years, there will be several major forces that will give a
general shape to the food and agriculture system and many other forces
that will influence the system differently over time, and across
regions and segments.
        Many of the ideas and issues presented herein will not be new
to practitioners in the food and agriculture system.  Many of them, and
their implications for the food and agriculture system, have been much
discussed and analyzed, and some are controversia l or contentious.
This report attempts to present these emerging factors objectively.
For better or worse, they will shape and influence the U.S. food and
agriculture system over the next twenty years.  What is needed now is
further investigation, particularly of the combined, synergistic
effects of the forces and trends.  They signal challenges to
production, processing, marketing, teaching, research, extension, and
policy and regulation setting in and for the food and agricultural
system.  Understanding the genesis of these challenges is a first step
toward encountering them successfully.


ABOUT THE PROJECT, ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, AND FURTHER INFORMATION

Kristen Allen is a Research Fellow in the Department of Agricultural
and Applied Economics at the University of Minnesota.  The work on this
project was done while she was an Associate at the Rural Development
Institute, University of Wisconsin--River Fal ls.  The work was
supported with funding from a cooperative agreement between the
Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
University of Wisconsin--River Falls, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and the Rural Developm ent Institute.  All funders are most
gratefully acknowledged.  While the contents of this brochure are based
on a workshop and survey and the input of all participants is also
gratefully acknowledged, the way in which the responses were
interpreted is the responsibility of the author.  Special thanks also
go to Kitty Reichelderfer- Smith, David Rejeski, and James Stewart, for
their faith in the project, to Courtney Harold, for many hours of
computer work, and to David Trechter, for many constructive comments.


Further information on the project may be obtained from Kristen Allen 
at 612-625-7019.  This report and others associated with the project 
are accessible via computer from U.S. EPA Gophernet/Gopherserver 
(futures.wic.epa.gov) or by contacting D. Rejeski, 202-260-6523. 


APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE PROPOSITIONS, LISTED IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE 
(numbers refer to question number)

27a. Agricultural production will increasingly be influenced by
     environmental quality concerns.

9b. Biotechnology will be integral to
    agricultural production by enhancing production efficiency.

29a.Biotechnology will be integral to agricultural production by enabling
    reduction in use of some chemicals.

1c. Farms will be more vertically coordinated.

21b. Water for agriculture will be more costly because it
     will increasingly be bid away for non-agricultural uses.

25. Diet/health links will change food demand, decreasing demand for
    staples, especially meat.

21a. Water for agriculture will be more costly beause of water shortages.

8. Urban/suburban consumers will have more political clout.

28c. Agricultural production will be influenced by environmental quality
     policies & regulations.

1b. Farms will be significantlyly more specialized.

27b. Agricultural production will increasingly be influenced by concern
     about special entities.

33. Public will demand assurance of some level of food quality & "safety."

21c. Water for agriculture will cost more because of successful
     challenges to agricultural water subsidies.

31. Policiess & regulations on agricultural practices will raise
    agricultural production costs & decrease supply.

15. Agricultural/economic policies will be more
    harmonized among nations.

28b. Agricultural production will be influenced by farmer interest
     in alternative farming methods.

28a. Agricultural production will be influenced by the rise of "green"
     consumers.

35. Public support for special treatment for agriculture
    will be difficult to sustain.

34. Agriculture will be viewed as just
    another sector of the economy.

1a. Farms will be significantly larger.

36. Farm programs will shift away from price intervention toward income
    maintenance.

27c. Agricultural production will increasingly be
     influenced by concern about loss of biological diversity.

9. Strength of traditional agricultural lobby groups will decline.

20. Colleges of agricultural & publicly funded research & extension
    will lack funding & support.

2. Farming will be seen as one of many stages in food/fiber industry.

5. Professional farm managers & managment techniques will be common.

39. Formation of trading blocs will stimulate protectionist action 
    among continents.

24b. Agriculture will be a source of energy products.

10. Congressional agricultural committees will lose control
    over agricultural & related policies.

40. Property rights issues will increasingly affect agriculture.

7a. Education & information sharing systems will be common in agriculture.

41a. The aging U.S. population will affect agricultural production.

41b. The aging U.S. population will influence agricultural product consumption.

22a. Supply of agricultural land & products will be constrained by
     environmental degradation.

19a. Input supply & food marketing firms will be more concentrated.

23. Climate change & environmental
    degradation will constrain agricultural production.

13. New, public & private entities will assume some U.S. Department of
    Agriculture functions.

24a. Need to reduce energy inputs will influence agricultural production 
     & processing.

19b. Input supply & food marketing firms will have a larger share of
     processing & trade.

7b. Education & information sharing systems will be common in rural areas.

18. Decisions on health, food safety, & environmental quality will be
    negotiated among multiple stake holders.

11. U.S. Department of Agriculture will decline in size & scope.

12. U.S. Department of Agriculture's emphasis will shift away from marketing
    & risk reduction, & more toward rural issues.

17. Scientific community will lose public
    credibility on health/environmental/ food safety issues.
 
6a. High performance computers will be common in the food & agricultural
    system.

4. "Corporate" control of agricultural resources will be common.

22c. Supply of agricultural land & products will be constrained as land
     prices are bid up.

16a. Multinational corporations will play a greater role in economic 
     coordination & policies.

26. Food demand changes--more variety will be sought.

3. Number of "small," owner-operated farms will decline.

37. Information technologies will be increasingly important in agriculture.

30. Consumer skepticism toward genetically engineered foods will decline.

22b. Supply of agricultural land, & products, will be constrained by 
     competition from urban & suburban spread.

16b. International organizationss will play a greater role in economic
     coordination & policies.

14. A "Competitive Council on Agriculture" will be established.

6b. High performance computers will be common in rural areas.

32. A national environmental strategy will require coordination across agencies.

38. New fertilizer technologies, using human & animal wastes, will be developed.