U.S. farm law stints on research, public goods-Critique

The money earmarked for farm subsidies by the 2014 farm law represent a “lost opportunity to use the funds for programs that unequivocally have the potential to increase social welfare,” writes Bruce Babcock of Iowa State University in Choices, the journal of agricultural economics. “Examples include agricultural research, agricultural pollution prevention, invasive species control, transportation infrastructure investments, increased food quality and food safety inspections, and nutrition programs.”

Babcock says justification of farm subsidies as a way to assure U.S. food supply is undermined by record farm income of recent years and the large amount of U.S. crops that are exported – half of wheat and 28 percent of soybeans – or devoted to industrial use; as much as 40 percent of corn is used in making biofuels.

“But transferring funds from farm subsidies to these types of public goods will not happen without a dramatic increase in the political power of groups advocating for the public good, which is a daunting challenge, given the diffuse nature of public good benefits and the highly targeted nature of the current subsidy programs to a relatively small number of farm households,” writes Babcock.

Exit mobile version