Editing Agricultural policy (section)

== Developed world cases ==

=== Agriculture policy design strategy and examples ===
The concerns of agricultural policies are extensive, and includes ensuring the hygiene of salads, globalization management, and other emerging issues. The majority of the concerns fall into three categories: food supply for a growing population, livelihood insurance for farmers, and environmental protection.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Three key challenges facing agriculture and how to start solving them - OECD |url=https://www.oecd.org/agriculture/key-challenges-agriculture-how-solve/ |access-date=2022-05-26 |website=www.oecd.org}}</ref> The theme of all approaches aiming to address these 3 types of concerns is to have a holistic view of their effects and externalities{{Citation needed|date=August 2022}} (a by-product of an action that affects others without their consent), because some policies intended to address one aspect of the concerns may have unintended harmful consequences that worsen other aspects while some have zero or negative beneficial effects. For example, subsidizing agricultural companies allows them to expand their industry and offer their products at lower prices to customers, but increases the firm's water and land usage which are at the cost of natural habitats. From an opposite perspective, if we protect the natural habitats and tax the agricultural firm for turning natural lands into factories, the prices of their products increase, making the firm's products too expensive for some customers.<ref name=":0" /> These externalities and trade-offs put the policymakers in a dilemma because our current global agriculture system is vulnerable to many disruptions such as weather changes, locality, manpower shifts, etc.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Leclère |first1=D |last2=Havlík |first2=P |last3=Fuss |first3=S |last4=Schmid |first4=E |last5=Mosnier |first5=A |last6=Walsh |first6=B |last7=Valin |first7=H |last8=Herrero |first8=M |last9=Khabarov |first9=N |last10=Obersteiner |first10=M |date=2014-12-01 |title=Climate change induced transformations of agricultural systems: insights from a global model |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=9 |issue=12 |pages=124018 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/9/12/124018 |bibcode=2014ERL.....9l4018L |s2cid=11583020 |issn=1748-9326|doi-access=free }}</ref> Consequently, before we resolve this primary fragility of our agriculture system. It's of high cruciality for policymakers to weigh the trade-offs and adopt the most appropriate policies.

There are examples of the agricultural policy design mentioned above that are made by worldwide unions, countries, and states. While every specific situation requires its own specific agricultural policy design, these examples can provide useful models, insights, and lessons for future policymakers' reference and inspiration. The [[Common Agricultural Policy]], published by E.U., uses government subsidies to encourage food production and farming industrialization in its early stage.{{citation needed|date=August 2022}} In some areas, food production boomed so much that enormous food waste became a new problem. With food waste, the market was thrown into imbalance. Consequently, the price drop cost the farmers' utility and has led to a future reform known as the Marsholt Plan. Marsholt Plan and following reforms generally adjusted the agriculture market back to balance. Later reforms managed to spread the fund to farmers and increase each individual farmers' welfare instead of merely expanding croplands and industries. Starting from 2003, the Common Agricultural Policy fund is further detailed into individuals and environmental protection is finally put into consideration.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Koester |first=Ulrich |date=May 2012 |title=The CAP in disarray: EU commission proposes basic direct payments to EU farmers |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10272-012-0417-8 |journal=Intereconomics |volume=47 |issue=3 |pages=170–174 |doi=10.1007/s10272-012-0417-8 |hdl=10419/98234 |s2cid=37832294 |issn=0020-5346|hdl-access=free }}</ref>

=== Overview: Europe and America ===
{{main|Agricultural policy of the United States|Common Agricultural Policy}}
The farmer population is approximately five percent of the total population in the E.U. and 1.7% in the U.S.{{Citation needed|date=August 2007}} The total value of agricultural production in the E.U. amounted to 128 billion euros (1998). About forty-nine percent of this amount was accounted for by political measures: 37 billion euros due to direct payments and 43 billion euros from consumers due to the artificially high price. Eighty percent of European farmers receive a direct payment of 5,000 euros or less, while 2.2% receive a direct payment above 50,000 euros, totaling forty percent of all direct subsidies.

The average U.S. farmer receives $16,000 in annual subsidies. Two-thirds of farmers receive no direct payments. Of those that do, the average amount amongst the lowest paid eighty percent was $7000 from 1995 to 2003. Subsidies are a mix of tax reductions, direct cash payments and below-market prices on water and other inputs. Some claim that these aggregate figures are misleading because large [[agribusiness]]es, rather than individual farmers, receive a significant share of total subsidy spending. The [[Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996]] reduced farm subsidies, providing fixed payments over a period and replacing price supports and subsidies. The [[Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002]] contains direct and [[countercyclical]] payments designed to limit the effects of low prices and yields.

In the EU, €54 billion of subsidies are paid every year. An increasing share of the subsidies is being decoupled from production and lumped into the Single Farm Payment. While this has diminished the distortions created by the Common Agricultural Policy, many critics argue that a greater focus on the provision of public goods, such as biodiversity and clean water, is needed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.reformthecap.eu|title=reformthecap.eu|website=www.reformthecap.eu}}</ref> The next major reform is expected for 2014 when a new long-term EU budget is coming into effect.

=== Environmental programs ===
The U.S. Conservation Reserve Program leases land from producers that take marginal land out of production and convert it back to a near-natural state by planting native grasses and other plants.<ref>{{Cite report |author=Patrick Sullivan |author2=Daniel Hellerstein |author3=Leroy Hansen |author4=Robert Johansson |author5=Steven Koenig |author6=Ruben Lubowski |author7=William McBride |author8=David McGranahan |author9=Michael Roberts |author10=Stephen Vogel |author11=Shawn Bucholtz |url=http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer834/ |title=The Conservation Reserve Program: Economic Implications for Rural America |website=Economic Research Service |publisher=US Department of Agriculture |access-date=2005-06-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050914011908/http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer834/ |archive-date=2005-09-14 |id=AER834}}</ref> The U.S. Environmental Quality Incentives Program subsidizes improvements which promote [[water conservation]] and other measures. This program is conducted under a bidding process using a formula where farmers request a certain percentage of cost share for improvement such as drip irrigation. Producers that offer the most environmental improvement based on a point system for the least cost are funded first. The process continues until that year's allocated funds are expended.<ref>[https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/eqip/ Financial Assistance], NRCS</ref>