Much more complex from the point of view of policy:

1. Much more complex from the point of view of policy: “Changing Roles of Agriculture in Global Development Policy: Is anthropology (Out) Standing in Its Field?” by Timothy J. Finan Major critique of development anthropology—Arturo Escobar, Western-based development has hegemonic control of lesser developed countries.

2. Significant stakeholders in formulation of international Agricultural policy: United States Agency of International Development (USAID)—spear headed the green revolution…and embraced farming systems research. World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)—very power in formulating the current Structural Adjustment Policy (SAP) reform. International Rice Research Institute (Philippines)—independent of governments. International Center for Maize and Wheat improvement CIMMYT in Mexico—independent of governments. World Trade Organization---regulation of trades between states.

3. CGIAR (NGO) Mission: To achieve sustainable food security and reduce poverty in developing countries… The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is a strategic alliance of countries, international and regional organizations, and private foundations supporting 15 international agricultural Centers, including CYMMYT and the international Rice Research Institute (IRRI). Major funding? World Bank

4. Finan’s article can be better understood if we understand the so-called “green revolution.”

5. Green Revolution Prior to emphasis on agriculture in the late 1960s many developing nations focused as much as possible on industrial growth as the path to economic development. What changed this? Mass starvation in India in 1967, due to drought, was averted when the United States exported wheat to India, feeding over 60 million Indians in two years. This led to a change in emphasis, from industrialization (which encouraged rural to urban migration) to an emphasis on agricultural production in rural areas.

6. …the goal The idea behind the Green revolution was to assist developing nations in growing their own food, using modern and western technology, and thereby avert mass starvation. The United States increased its funding of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), especially in connection with funding shipments of fertilizer.

7. Emphasis was placed upon the use of fertilizers without sufficient appreciation for the other components of soils—the more fertilizer the better, even in situations where technological advice warned about excessive use of nitrogen.

8. Initial success… Use of fertilizer on tradition varieties wheat and rice yield greater biomass, but did not increase yield. An important part of the Green Revolution was the development of genetically engineered seeds that translated greater fertility into higher yields. This is the significance of the work done by agronomists at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), and the International Center for Maize and Wheat improvement (CIMMYT). Wheat production grew as much as 50% between 1967 and 1969, unbelievably “green” and successful.

9. What went wrong? Failure soon followed success…because success was built upon a combination of seed, fertilizer, and irrigation. Irrigation was critical due to the reduced biomass of genetically engineered seeds. In the Punjab area of India success was high, initially, because elaborate irrigation systems, involving dams and canals, were constructed. Punjab farmers could cultivate year round. In areas where farmers did not have a predictable water supply yields were greatly reduced compared to traditional plants.

10. soils…. Waterlogging of Punjab soils occurred because the naturally formed canals existed to drain the water during heavy rains, monsoons. The introduction of additional canals and two dams in the region, in order to store water, upset the balance of “traditional” drainage and irrigation. High applications of NKP fiterlizer (Nitrogen, phosphorous, potassium), on waterlogged soils, reduced minor but additional and required nutrients of soils, such as iron, copper, or magnesium.

11. Results…mixed Persons on marginal land, such as in the Punjab area, began experiencing decreased yields after an initial increase. Persons on less marginal lands, already better off economically, saw increases that didn’t so quickly destroy soils—greater inequality due also to the costs of genetically engineered seeds, fertilizer, and access to water. http://www.ifpri.org/pubs/ib/ib11.pdf Brief overview of the Green Revolution, by the International Food Policy and Research Institute.

12. Policy-related outcomes of the Green Revolution Sustainable development…based in part upon what happened to Punjab soils! Farming Systems Research…focus must be upon households so that the poorest among the poor receive development assistance. Both perspective above invite greater use of an anthropological perspective. ….sustainability invites a holistic perspective so that we look at the total environment in relationship to a give technology. …..farming systems research involves specific attention to households, production practices, and how these relate to the environment.

13. Structural Adjustment Policy… …Is based on classical economic theory and thus the domain of monetarist free-market economists. Under SAP agriculture becomes “outward-oriented, and its development role was to make agriculture generate export income and through this, contribute to the macro-level recuperation of the economy…” Finan, page 108.

14. Department of Interior and the National Parks Service Internal policy formulation: http://planning.nps.gov/policy.ctm National Park Service Act of 1916 Program Standards, Park Planning, 2002 (revised) External policy formulation: National Parks Conservation Association [an NGO] Mission of NPCA: To protect and enhance America’s National Park System for present and future generations.

15. Minerals management Service U.S. Geological Survey Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Reclamation Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Surface Mining National Park Service* U.S. Fish and Wild Life Service *Robert Stanton, Director of NPS

16. Federal law National Park Service Policy Park Planning Policy

17. Booker T. Washington National Monument Boston African American National Historic Site Brown v. Board of Education National Historic Site Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park Frederick Douglass National Historic Site Maggie L. Walker National Historic Site Martin Luther King, Jr., National Historic Site

18. Park Planning: General Management Plan Archeology and Historical Preservation: Secretary of the Interior’s standards for evaluation Evaluation is the process of determining whether identified properties meet defined criteria of significance [I.e., why Booker T. Washington, and why Franklin County and not Tuskegee, Alabama] and therefore should be included in an inventory of historic properties determined to meet the criteria. The criteria employed vary depending on the inventory's use in resource management. This basic standard has been a problem from the beginning of the establishment of Booker T. Washington National Monument.

19. Any general management plan must include as a matter of policy: data about the park’s fundamental resources (in this case, educational—this is where research come into our educational parks) 2. Consultations with federal, tribal, state, local government agencies to identify the range of potential planning issues and how to resolve them.

20. …leading to my work at Booker T. Washington National Monument As part of any general management plan the Superintendent of any Park must organize public meeting and make all findings public. A key “partner” of Booker T. Washington National Monument: The Franklin County Historical Society. Another key “partner,” University of North Carolina, Greensboro [and Dr. Willie L. Baber].

21. Stop

22. Green Revolution rationale 1. In 1967, after two consecutive monsoon failures, the United States shipped one fifth of its wheat crop to India in order to avert mass starvation. 2. There was an acute need to change American foreign aid policy. This resulted in increase funding of USAID, and the “Green Revolution.” .

23. 3. The Green Revolution hopes to avert global hunger crises by enabling developing nations to be self sufficient. The goal is to replace old agricultural traditions with newer Western practices. Developing nations can increase their total yields by using genetically engineered seeds, large irrigation projects, and prolific quantities of fertilizer.

24. Farming Systems Research [and sustainability] Green Revolution: mixed results in Africa (water) and India (soil/irrigation systems), success in Asia generally… Still, a need to look at particular households to address poverty—led to farming systems research [anthropological field methods became more important in this phase].