You are here: / / Wheat Letter Blog
thumbnail
,

Global and Domestic Perspectives on How Best to Meet the Growing Demand for Food

“As a neutral forum, FAO has been promoting debates, dialogues and exchanges of information in order to enhance our knowledge of a broad portfolio of tools and approaches to eradicate hunger, fight every form of malnutrition and achieve sustainable agriculture.” That is how Jose Graziano da Silva, Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, opened the recent FAO-hosted international symposium, “The Role of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Sustainable Food Systems and Nutrition.”

The symposium focused mainly on the broad range of biotechnologies that could result in yield increases, better nutritional qualities, and improved productivity of crops, livestock, fish and trees benefitting family farms. These include many applications such as fermentation processes, bio-fertilizers, artificial insemination, the production of vaccines, disease diagnostics, the development of bio-pesticides and the use of molecular markers in developing new plant varieties.

UN statistics indicate that one out of every nine people in the world is currently unable to eat enough nutrient energy to conduct an active and healthy life. In this context, Graziano da Silva said biotechnologies, knowledge and innovation must be available, accessible and applicable to family farmers and small holders.

Such issues are getting a wide hearing these days, including by the Philippine government Departments of Agriculture, Science and Technology, Environment and Natural Resources, Health, and Interior and Local Government. These agencies this week issued a joint ruling expected to lift a temporary ban on research, field-testing, commercialization and importation of genetically modified crops and biotech products in the country imposed by the country’s Supreme Court last December.

The scientific and academic community, farmer groups, traders, food and feed processors, and livestock producers had all criticized the ban. Dr. Emil Q. Javier, a noted Filipino scientist, academician and chair of the Coalition for Agriculture Modernization in the Philippines, said the temporary ban helped change public opinion about the science and benefits of genetically modified organisms by drawing attention to the issue and encouraging researchers to raise their voices about such advances in science and technology.

More specific to wheat, leaders from the National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) are raising concerns about the economic viability of wheat production in the United States, and promoting the potential role of all new technologies to help.

For example, NAWG is developing a National Wheat Action Plan and a yield contest. In addition, at the recent Commodity Classic event, NAWG’s past president Brett Blankenship said the industry also wants to focus on such improvements in seed technologies as biotechnology and other “new breeding techniques shy of GMO.”

The Washington farmer spoke in favor of advancements in wheat genetics. When asked if he would grow biotech wheat on his own property, Blankenship said that “would be a marketing decision more than an agronomic one.” He pointed to the high volume of Washington wheat exported to markets that are “sensitive” to biotechnology.

For more information about the joint positions of USW and NAWG on agricultural biotechnology, visit here.

/by
thumbnail
,

U.S. Wheat Sustainability is In the Details

By Elizabeth Westendorf, USW Policy Specialist

When it comes to analyzing the sustainability of agricultural crops there is a tendency to apply generalized metrics or standards to a wide swath of scenarios. While there is value in using generalized metrics, broad stroke approaches can miss the small details that often make a big difference in regional situations. Seeing the whole forest is important, but sometimes you learn more by focusing a little more on individual trees.

Let us discuss wheat, for example. This is a crop with many specific advantages often not considered in a sustainability analysis. Farmers tend to grow wheat on marginal land areas that do not receive enough water for other agricultural production or in areas too cold or too dry for other crops. In some regions and systems, it plays a vital role in rotations with other row crops by providing residue in a soybean rotation and a water-saving role in irrigated corn or sorghum. In assessing wheat’s sustainability, generalized base metrics of water usage do not take in the whole picture. Wheat’s true sustainability should also include what it adds to the entire agricultural system, and how it complements other crops while providing an essential food grain for literally billions of people.

One area of wheat production that has been criticized for its sustainability in the past is Desert Durum® in the desert southwest United States. Unlike most other wheat production, Desert Durum receives almost all of its water from irrigation. However, it uses less irrigation water than many of the other crops grown in that region, and farmers are constantly working to increase irrigation efficiency.

A recent study by Dr. George Frisvold of the University of Arizona analyzed sustainability metrics for water use in Arizona small grain production and found that most generalized metrics of sustainability do not adequately reflect the true nature of this system. Wheat, and specifically Desert Durum, plays an important role in sustainable agriculture in the Southwest. Using wheat in a rotation with vegetables in this area increases farmer profit significantly and maximizes economic productivity of water use. In addition, the study showed that the amount of water necessary to produce one bushel of Desert Durum in Arizona has declined by 18 percent over the last 30 years.

In the case in desert wheat and durum production, as in other U.S. wheat producing regions, different systems and environments face different challenges and producers adapt with different sustainable solutions. A general measure can never fully capture all of those nuanced solutions comprehensively.

For more information, visit https://bit.ly/1LROd1O, or https://www.thesustainabilityalliance.us/.

/by
thumbnail
, ,

U.S. Wheat Industry Encourages Discussion on Border Issues with Canada

By Elizabeth Westendorf, USW Policy Specialist

Two weeks ago, government officials from Canada and the United States met for the biannual Consultative Committee on Agriculture — a committee designed to facilitate cross border trade flows and cooperation. In preparation for this meeting, USW sent a letter to the USDA highlighting the need for Canada to correct its discriminatory treatment of foreign grain. Both countries have a strong commitment to cross-border collaboration and open trade, but Canada’s protectionist measures go against these principles and deny U.S. wheat farmers access to a market that is right next door.

While Canada is one of the United States’ largest trading partners, USW continues to have concerns about the closed nature of its bulk grain handling system, which will not allow U.S. wheat to receive an official grade commensurate with its quality. Though Canada privatized the Canadian Wheat Board in 2012, it has not completely liberalized its wheat industry. Instead of letting U.S. wheat into its bulk grain handling system, Canada downgrades all foreign wheat to the lowest grade, feed wheat. U.S. wheat is of comparable quality to Canadian wheat, so this downgrading of all foreign wheat is a blatantly protectionist action. It denies U.S. farmers access to the market across the border, access that Canadian farmers have if they choose to bring their wheat to U.S. elevators during harvest. This lack of access means that when there is a price premium at Canadian elevators near the border, as we saw in the late summer and fall of 2015, U.S. farmers cannot take advantage of those higher prices.

USW hopes that Canada’s new government will commit to reform its Grains Act and allow foreign grain to receive the same treatment as domestic. The United States repealed Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) for meat in December 2015 as Canada requested, but Canada’s discriminatory wheat treatment does much of the same thing as COOL. Now that the United States has domestically addressed its treatment of Canadian livestock, it seems only fair that Canada fix its treatment of U.S. wheat. This will ensure a healthy continuation of the long-term partnership between the two countries. Governments should never be responsible for segregation that market forces could manage more efficiently. USW is happy to see our Canadian industry counterparts calling for reform alongside us, and we look forward to Canada continuing to break down barriers to the free trade of wheat.

/by
thumbnail
, , , , ,

USW Lays Down Policy Priorities for Year Ahead

By Ben Conner, USW Deputy Director of Policy

A professor once told me this about achieving goals: “If you don’t write it down, it will never happen.” On behalf of the farmers we represent, USW takes a similar approach to our policy priorities: we write them down for the board to review every year. That happened again last week at the USW Board of Directors meeting in Washington, DC.

USW divides policy goals into three general categories: the World Trade Organization (WTO), free trade agreements (FTAs) and U.S. government policies. USW priorities in all three categories reflect our mission, which is ultimately to enhance the profitability of U.S. wheat producers and their customers.

The WTO category includes both trade enforcement and negotiations. A major policy priority is to ensure that wheat-producing countries follow WTO rules. Right now, a number of major developing countries are blatantly ignoring those rules, costing U.S. farmers in the form of lower exports and prices, and hurting their overseas customers in the form of more expensive domestic supplies. Studies conducted for USW estimated U.S. wheat farmers are losing more than $1 billion in revenue from domestic support policies in just four countries: China, Turkey, Brazil and India. Some of those countries have blatantly ignored WTO import rules in order to protect domestic wheat sectors. That is unacceptable and underscores the need to enforce past trade commitments. Similarly, our board supports negotiations through the WTO that create a more level playing field, but opposes rules that weaken current disciplines in the WTO Agreement on Agriculture or in continued negotiations under the failed Doha framework.

Free Trade Agreements are another priority. If the WTO negotiations remain at an impasse, aggressive market access gains will only come through bilateral regional sectoral trade agreements. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is now signed and, hopefully, will soon be ratified by legislatures including the U.S. Congress. Beyond that, the wheat industry is hoping for rapid TPP expansion to other countries in the Asia-Pacific region as well as to new FTA opportunities.

Finally, U.S. government policies also affect U.S. wheat export potential. One of our priorities is on-going funding for the beneficial federal market promotion programs that — along with investment from state wheat commissions — help organizations like USW provide valuable services and information to customers around the world. USW also supports an end to the U.S. embargo of Cuba.

Now that we have written our 2016 Policy Priorities, it is time to make it happen. We are passionate about the profitability of farmers and their overseas customers, so we will be working hard to remove the policy obstacles in the way.

 

/by
thumbnail
, , ,

Taking a Vote on TPP is Critical to Its Ultimate Success

Representatives from the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiating countries are set to sign the agreement in New Zealand next week. Though signing the pact is primarily ceremonial, it marks another step forward in the long process of putting the world’s largest free trade agreement into action.

In the months since the final agreement announcement, the TPP collected many new endorsements, particularly among business groups. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced its endorsement Jan. 6, while encouraging the Obama Administration to work with Congress and industry members on unresolved concerns.

After the Feb. 4 signing attention will largely shift to the U.S. Congress, where leaders have so far hesitated to commit to any timing for a potential vote in part because much work is needed before a vote can even be considered. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which held a hearing on the agricultural portions of the agreement earlier this month, is accepting formal testimony on the merits of the agreement until Feb. 15. Their final report due May 18 will incorporate those comments, required by this past summer’s Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) bill.

With that ITC report as an official “scorecard” of the TPP, the administration will work with Congressional leaders to find time for a vote. That is a critical point because according to the regulations set down by the TPA, after introducing the implementing legislation the appropriate committees must complete their reviews and hold a final up-or-down vote within 90 days.

Many congressional watchers speculate that this final vote will not take place until after the U.S. elections in November. Some legislators fear trade agreements are too political to address prior to the election, while others may hope a new administration will place different priorities on the agreement’s portions that are more contentious. Unfortunately, any delays will mean U.S. wheat producers and their customers overseas must continue managing through inconsistencies in sanitary and phytosanitary standards and paying higher tariffs until the agreement is implemented.

Conceived as much more than just another free trade agreement, TPP was to be the platform for expanded trade in an entire region. In fact, within a few weeks after negotiators struck an agreement, as many as 12 additional countries contacted U.S. Trade Representative officials to test the membership water. However, no other country may apply for membership until after the U.S. Congress and the governments of the 11 other countries ratify the agreement. For this positive momentum to continue and ultimately help reach that goal of lifting economic opportunity in the region, moving as quickly as possible toward the Congressional vote on TPP is critical.

By Dalton Henry, USW Director of Policy

/by
thumbnail
, ,

WTO Takes a Few Steps Forward in Agricultural Trade Negotiations

While achieving progress in multilateral trade negotiations among World Trade Organization (WTO) members is often frustrating, USW sees some steps in the right direction in the recent agreement at the WTO Nairobi Ministerial meeting held in mid-December — despite some setbacks.

USW is particularly pleased to see the elimination of export subsidies, which rank high among the most trade-distorting forms of support. The agreement immediately eliminates such subsidies for developed countries and calls for a phase-out for developing countries. Though the world’s largest traditional user of agricultural export subsidies – the European Union – has moved away from the subsidies, agreeing to eliminate them is no small matter.

USW welcomes the recognition in Nairobi that the United States can keep offering food aid and development programs without change, which underpins this country’s leadership in the world. Wheat produced by U.S. farmers is a cornerstone grain for food aid that is affordable, nutritious and fits monetization projects that encourage in-country development.

The Nairobi agreement also addressed export credit and financing rules that reflect reforms the United States has already made. USW believes there should be no further restrictions on the GSM-102 program, which is a reliable, practical financial tool used by several U.S. wheat importing countries.

Despite these gains, USW is disappointed that the Ministerial reauthorized the use of transportation, marketing and processing subsidies for agricultural products for developing countries. This exception could provide cover to bad actors who have violated past agreements to the detriment of producers around the world. USW will continue working with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) to ensure developing country members do not abuse this exception.

The Ministerial reflected differing views on future WTO negotiation priorities. At least the agreement recognizes that work would continue on Doha’s remaining issues in agricultural trade. This includes public stockholding programs, which India uses to subsidize its farmers, and a “special safeguard mechanism,” which would allow countries to “snap-back” tariffs on products in the face of rising imports. The continuation of these negotiations is especially concerning given some countries’ insistence on using these negotiations to roll back progress at the WTO.

USW congratulates and thanks our negotiators at USTR for their hard work. We look forward to sharing the U.S. wheat farmer’s voice in future negotiations. We must also ensure that WTO members hold firm on past agreements, allow no more backpedaling on domestic subsidies and return their focus to the original goal: liberalizing trade policies to promote economic growth for all participants.

By Dalton Henry, USW Director of Policy

/by
thumbnail
, ,

Wheat Breeders Traveling to Asia to Listen and Share with Milling and Baking Customers

Each year the United States exports, on average, 25 to 35 million metric tons (MMT) of wheat, which accounts for roughly 50 percent of the annual crop. This makes the voice of overseas customers important to wheat research. To demonstrate that importance, four wheat breeders will travel with U.S. Wheat Associates (USW) to Asia, April 18 to 26, 2015, on a Wheat Quality Improvement Team (WQIT).

The team will visit with buyers and end-users in Japan, Korea and Thailand to listen and exchange ideas. Their primary goal will be to gather input on wheat quality from key customers to inform their own research and to share what they learn with other U.S. wheat breeders upon their return. They will also share the successful efforts of the U.S. wheat industry to improve the quality of newly released varieties.

“It is vital that we actively listen to and respect the needs of our overseas customers,” said USW Vice President and West Coast Office Director Steve Wirsching, who will lead the team. “The impact breeders have on the industry and the livelihood of farmers is huge. Ultimately, if a variety offers higher yield potential but does not have strong milling or baking qualities that domestic and overseas customers need, farmers will feel that impact.”

This is the fourth WQIT led by USW. In 2004, a similar trip was made to Asia, followed by Latin America in 2009, and Europe and North Africa in 2010. State commissions in Oregon, Washington, North Dakota and Minnesota identified and sponsored top wheat breeders from their land grant universities to join this team.

Dr. Arron H. Carter leads the winter wheat breeding and genetics program at Washington State University where his research focuses on breeding improved wheat varieties for cropping systems in Washington state that incorporate diverse rotations and environments.

Dr. Michael Flowers is an assistant professor and extension cereals specialist at Oregon State University where his research areas include variety trials, nitrogen management in hard wheat and management practices for new Oregon winter wheat varieties.

Dr. Mohamed Mergoum represents North Dakota State University as the Richard C. Frohberg Spring Wheat Breeding/Genetics Endowed Professor. His program’s main objectives are to develop modern and improved cultivars adapted to the spring wheat region and generate wheat germplasm with valuable economic traits required in cultivar development.

Dr. James Anderson is a professor in wheat breeding and genetics at the University of Minnesota where the program he leads researches genetic investigations of complexly inherited traits, including disease resistance and grain quality, and incorporating disease and pest resistance into new cultivars using marker-assisted selection.

The WQIT is a part of a larger USW effort to address the quality of exported wheat and the needs of importing countries. It is a logical next step to a 17-year-old program called the “Overseas Variety Analysis” or OVA program. Through OVA, USW cooperates with millers and bakers to compare the performance of flour from newly or soon-to-be released U.S. wheat varieties to the local country’s standards. Results — both good and not-so-good — are shared with breeders and with state wheat commissions who develop recommended variety lists for wheat farmers. USW currently works with 22 OVA cooperators around the world. During the upcoming trip, the team will participate in an OVA workshop at the UFM Baking School in Bangkok, Thailand, to hear directly from several Asian cooperators.

USW will post photos and other information from the 2015 WQIT on its Facebook page at www.facebook.com/uswheat.

USW is the industry’s market development organization working in more than 100 countries. Its mission is to “develop, maintain, and expand international markets to enhance the profitability of U.S. wheat producers and their customers.” USW activities are made possible through producer checkoff dollars managed by 19 state wheat commissions and cost-share funding provided by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service. USW maintains 17 offices strategically located around the world to help wheat buyers, millers, bakers, wheat food processors and government officials understand the quality, value and reliability of all six classes of U.S. wheat.

/by

Think Farm Export Programs Don’t Matter? Think Again.

GET THE REST OF THE STORY

DTN Wheat Detail
DTN Corn Detail

2008-2013 U.S. Wheat Associates. All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy | Non-Discrimination Statement