The agriculture sector should broaden its coalitions so it can land more research money, said Dan Glickman, former agriculture secretary, in a speech at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “We have to figure out how to collaborate with partners in other disciplines,” Glickman said. “Agriculture has to look at itself much more holistically” with roles in nutrition, natural resources, health and global security besides food production. Funding for research has been constrained for years.
Too often, agricultural research is pigeon-holed as solely higher yields, Glickman said, when the challenge is much larger – thriftier use of inputs to yield more nutritious food in larger quantities while assuring growers of a reasonable income. The National Institutes of Health has a research budget 10 times USDA’s, he said, in arguing for a panoramic view of research activities. Speaking of genetic engineering, he said, “I don’t think it’s been explained very well. We can’t expect people to believe (its value) just because we say so.”
Agricultural research “pays off handsomely” but it often takes decades, said Philip Pardey, University of Minnesota economist, during a panel discussion afterward. “You need a lot of foresight and patience.” Leon Bruner, chief science officer of the Grocery Manufacturers Association, said there was an anti-science trend, a “food elite actually longing to take us back to the past.”
Agriculture Undersecretary Catherine Woteki, in charge of USDA’s research arm, said public interest was rising in food issues. She said the sector lacked heavyweight backers in Congress – “We don’t have those recognized figures in important positions” – but was cultivating them. Purdue professor Gebisa Ejeta, who specializes in food security, said development of “human capacity” was key so developing nations would have their own researchers and networks.