Washington Insider--Thursday

By DTN's Washington Insider

Here's a quick monitor of Washington farm and trade policy issues from DTN's well-placed observer.

Froman Will Attempt to Sell TTIP to Skeptical Europeans

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman will be in Brussels on Friday to meet his new European Union counterpart, Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstroem, and attempt to move the proposed Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) free trade agreement a little further down the road.

EU officials, including Malmstroem and Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan, are beginning to question the level of the U.S. commitment to completing the agreement in a relatively short time. When TTIP was first proposed, optimists predicted it could be wrapped up by the end of this year. That clearly is not going to happen. In fact, Commissioner Hogan told reporters the negotiations should be shelved if the United States isn't committed to moving quickly on the talks in advance of the 2016 presidential election.

The main sticking points in the talks include Europe's insistence on maintaining geographical indications on food labels, its opposition to U.S. beef and to imports of most genetically engineered crops, and its worries about provisions that would allow investors to sue national governments. EU officials also see there has been little movement by the White House or Congress to grant the administration the trade promotion authority it needs to conduct serious negotiations.

***

Study Finds Divide on Climate Change Between Scientists, Farmers

A Purdue University study shows farmers have a significantly different view of climate change and its causes than do scientists and climatologists. That difference is hardly surprising, but the degree to which the two groups disagree is remarkable.

The study found more than 90% of the scientists and climatologists surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with more than 50% attributing climate change primarily to human activities. In contrast, 66% of the farmers surveyed said they believed climate change was occurring, with 8% pinpointing human activities as the main cause. A quarter of producers said they believed climate change was caused mostly by natural shifts in the environment, and 31% said there was not enough evidence to determine whether climate change was happening or not.

The study's authors say the gulf between the two groups shows the need for better communication and better information about climate change. They also say climate change presents both potential gains and threats to U.S. agriculture. Warmer temperatures could extend the growing season in northern latitudes, and an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide could improve the water use efficiency of some crops. But increases in weather variability and extreme weather events could lower crop yields.

"Farmers are by necessity very focused on short-term weather, in-season decisions and managing immediate risks," said the lead researcher. "They're thinking about when they can get in their field to do what they need to do, rather than looking 20 to 30 years down the road." But farmers are not alone among business owners who resist planning for situations that might occur in 30 years. It is against this backdrop the Obama administration will try next year to convince a sometimes skeptical public of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

***

Washington Insider: New GMO Evaluation

There's nothing new about scientific studies that conclude that genetically engineered (GE) crops, also known as GMO crops, are no more of a health hazard than those produced with earlier technology. There are, in fact, dozens of such studies including those by the world's most prestigious institutions. Even voters appear to believe the technology is no threat, since ballot initiatives that would have mandated the labeling of GMOs on store shelves lost in both in Colorado (overwhelmingly) and Oregon (narrowly).

At the same time, reports by general interest press outlets have become increasingly cynical about the issue. A recent Bloomberg-Businessweek report said while "nobody knows exactly how the passage of those measures [the defeated labeling proposals] would have affected the sales of GMO products over the long run, consumers have shown a tendency to ignore the calorie counts on food labels." The story goes on to suggest it is possible that over the short term labeling laws would make foods containing GEs less popular and therefore decrease the amount of farmland in the United States and abroad given over to modified crops.

That was the goal of many labeling proponents, the report suggested, and then noted a "new study suggests it would have been a bad result."

The report didn't look at the health effects of GMOs since "thousands of independent studies have already done so and found that GMOs are perfectly safe to eat." Instead, it focused on the costs and benefits for agriculture and the environment, a question upon which there is less agreement.

Again, there is a lot of research on the topic including a large study from the National Academy of Sciences that found GMOs have significantly increased farm yields while decreasing pesticide use and soil erosion. It turns out, Bloomberg said, GE traits that produce insecticides in the plant's tissues and make the plant immune to particular herbicides, "reduce the man-hours, fuel, and chemical inputs in farming, even while reducing losses to pests and weather."

A new study in the journal PLOS One comes down strongly on the pro-GE side. It aggregates and examines the results of 147 existing research studies looking at GE soybeans, corn and cotton, the world's biggest GE commodity crops. The authors, a pair of agricultural economists at Germany's University of Gottingen, found GM technology increased crop yields by 22%, reduced pesticide use by 37%, and increased farmer profits by 68%.

A few of the study results are especially striking, Bloomberg said. For example, the benefits were greater in those GM crops that produced their own pesticides than those engineered for herbicide resistance. That trait was used early to tempt producers to try the technology, but it also has shown a greater rebound effect as weed species evolved resistance to the chosen herbicides.

The report also said yield and profit gains were greater in developing countries than in developed countries. In addition, the studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals showed more dramatic effects, both in yield and profit gains, than those published elsewhere. Bloomberg said that means the more rigorously vetted a study is, the more likely it has been to have found benefits from GEs.

It seems that since the November votes, more and more information is coming out that bolsters the market foundation of GEs. For example, health products could lead the way to GE acceptance, since here is "widespread support of transgenic healthcare therapies but far less so for genetic engineering in agriculture," according to Dr. Ben Locwin, a biopharmaceutical expert and adviser for the American Association for Pharmaceutical Scientists. That's despite the fact that, "There is little difference in the technologies or principles between GM foods and GM drugs."

So, while the scientific basis for GE products and their use seems to be strengthening, there is little likelihood of a fundamental change in the marketing war over food products, which seems to be far more about lifestyle than it ever was about health or safety. This is a shame since non-rational food choices tend to increase food costs -- an effective reduction in consumers' incomes, and a resulting dip in their standards of living.

Thus, this is still an important debate for producers to watch carefully, Washington Insider believes.

---

Want to keep up with events in Washington and elsewhere throughout the day? See DTN Top Stories, our frequently updated summary of news developments of interest to producers. You can find DTN Top Stories in DTN Ag News, which is on the Main Menu on classic DTN products and on the News and Analysis Menu of DTN's Professional and Producer products. DTN Top Stories is also on the home page and news home page of online.dtn.com. Subscribers of MyDTN.com should check out the U.S. Ag Policy, U.S. Farm Bill and DTN Ag News sections on their News Homepage.

If you have questions for DTN Washington Insider, please email edit@telventdtn.com

(GH/CZ)

Copyright 2014 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.