Agricultural subsidy

Last updated

Agribusiness: a display of a John Deere 7800 tractor with Houle slurry trailer, Case IH combine harvester, New Holland FX 25 forage harvester with corn head Agricultural machinery.jpg
Agribusiness: a display of a John Deere 7800 tractor with Houle slurry trailer, Case IH combine harvester, New Holland FX 25 forage harvester with corn head

An agricultural subsidy (also called an agricultural incentive) is a government incentive paid to agribusinesses, agricultural organizations and farms to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such commodities.

Contents

Examples of such commodities include: wheat, feed grains (grain used as fodder, such as maize or corn, sorghum, barley and oats), cotton, milk, rice, peanuts, sugar, tobacco, oilseeds such as soybeans and meat products such as beef, pork, and lamb and mutton. [1]

A 2021 study by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization found $540 billion was given to farmers every year between 2013 and 2018 in global subsidies. The study found these subsidies are harmful in numerous ways. In wealthy countries, they damage health by promoting the overconsumption of meat.

In under-developed countries they encourage overconsumption of low-nutrition staples, such as rice. Subsidies also contribute to the climate crisis, by encouraging deforestation; and they also drive inequality because smallholder farmers, many of whom are women, are excluded. According to UNDP head, Achim Steiner, redirecting subsidies would boost the livelihoods of 500 million smallholder farmers worldwide by creating a more level playing field with large-scale agricultural enterprises. [2] A separate report, by the World Resources Institute in August 2021, said without reform, farm subsidies "will render vast expanses of healthy land useless". [3]

History

On the earliest known interventions in farming markets was the English Corn Laws, which regulated the import and export of grain in Great Britain and Ireland for centuries. The laws were repealed in 1846. [4] Agricultural subsidies in the twentieth century were originally designed to stabilize markets, help low-income farmers, and aid rural development. [5] [ unreliable source ] In the United States, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as part of the New Deal in 1933. At the time the economy was in a severe depression and farmers were experiencing the lowest agricultural prices since the 1890s. [6] The plan was to increase prices for a range of agricultural products by paying farmers to destroy some of their livestock or not use some of their land - known as land idling. [4] This led to a reduction in supply and smaller agricultural surpluses. Initially seven products were controlled: (corn, wheat, cotton, rice, peanuts, tobacco and milk). [7] Unlike traditional subsidies that promote the growth of products, this process boosted agricultural prices by limiting the growth of these crops.

In Europe, Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was launched in 1962 to improve agricultural productivity. According to the European Commission, the act aims to

OECD countries support their livestock and dairy industries with subsidies worth billions of dollars. Meat Atlas 2014 subsidies animal products.png
OECD countries support their livestock and dairy industries with subsidies worth billions of dollars.

By region

Canada

Canadian agricultural subsidies are currently controlled by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Financial subsidies are offered through the Canadian Agricultural Partnership Programs. [11] The Canadian Agricultural Partnership began in April 2018 and is planned to take place over five years with a combined federal, provincial and territorial investment of three billion dollars. [12] Some programs offered surround issues including AgriAssurance, agricultural leveraging programs, promoting diversity in agriculture, crop and livestock insurance, marketing activities, risk mitigation, and more. [13] Before the Canadian Agricultural Partnership, agricultural subsidies were organized under the Growing Forward 2 partnership from 2013 to 2018. [12]

European Union

In 2010, the EU spent €57 billion on agricultural development, of which €39 billion was spent on direct subsidies. [14] Agricultural and fisheries subsidies form over 40% of the EU budget. [15] Since 1992 (and especially since 2005), the EU's Common Agricultural Policy has undergone significant change as subsidies have mostly been decoupled from production. The largest subsidy is the Single Farm Payment .

Malawi

Increases in food and fertilizer prices have underlined the vulnerability of poor urban and rural households in many developing countries, especially in Africa, renewing policymakers' focus on the need to increase staple food crop productivity.

A study by the Overseas Development Institute evaluates the benefits of the Malawi Government Agricultural Inputs Subsidy Programme, which was implemented in 2006–2007 to promote access to and use of fertilizers in both maize and tobacco production to increase agricultural productivity and food security. The subsidy was implemented by means of a coupon system which could be redeemed by the recipients for fertilizer types at approximately one-third of the normal cash price. [16] According to policy conclusions of the Overseas Development Institute the voucher for coupon system can be an effective way of rationing and targeting subsidy access to maximize production and economic and social gains. Many practical and political challenges remain in the program design and implementation required to increase efficiency, control costs, and limit patronage and fraud. [16]

New Zealand

New Zealand is reputed to have the most open agricultural markets in the world [17] [18] [19] after radical reforms started in 1984 by the Fourth Labour Government stopped all subsidies.

In 1984 New Zealand's Labor government took the dramatic step of ending all farm subsidies, which then consisted of 30 separate production payments and export incentives. This was a truly striking policy action, because New Zealand's economy is roughly five times more dependent on farming than is the U.S. economy, measured by either output or employment. Subsidies in New Zealand accounted for more than 30 percent of the value of production before reform, somewhat higher than U.S. subsidies today. And New Zealand farming was marred by the same problems caused by U.S. subsidies, including overproduction, environmental degradation and inflated land prices.

As the country is a large agricultural exporter, continued subsidies by other countries are a long-standing bone of contention, [20] [21] with New Zealand being a founding member of the 20-member Cairns Group fighting to improve market access for exported agricultural goods.

Turkey

This section is an excerpt from Agriculture in Turkey § Quotas and subsidies.[ edit ]

The 2024 agricultural support budget was €2.7 billion. [22] In 2019–21 about 20% of gross farm income was government support, mostly market price support, particularly for potatoes, wheat, sunflower seed and beef. [23] Diesel and fertilizer payments were made, which may make the goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2053 more difficult. [23] According to environmental group Doğa the subsidies for water intensive crops such as corn and sugar beet endanger wetlands in Turkey. [24] [25]

Farmers are not allowed to export wheat. [26] Despite subsidies farmers' fuel and fertilizer costs increased a lot in 21/22 due to international price rises and the fall in the lira. [27] The state's Grain Board (TMO)(Turkish) sometimes pays more for foreign than Turkish wheat, and farmers complain that foreign wheat is sold at a discount: [26] this is done so bread is cheaper, as Turks eat so much bread. [27] A TMO objective is to stabilize grain prices. [27] Cotton growing [28] and oilseeds [29] are subsidized. There is some support for organic farming. [30] Some farmers say their debt is due to not enough state support. [22]

Although a healthy amount of sugar is less than 50g a day for an adult [31] the sugar production quota for market year 23/24 was 3 million tonnes, [32] thus for the population of 85 million about twice as much sugar is produced than is healthy.

United States

USDA fiscal year 2020 budget summary U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Fy2020-budget-summary (1).pdf
USDA fiscal year 2020 budget summary

The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, also known as the 2002 Farm Bill, addressed a great variety of issues related to agriculture, ecology, energy, trade, and nutrition. Signed after the September 11th attacks of 2001, the act directs approximately $16.5 billion of government funding toward agricultural subsidies each year. This funding has had a great effect on the production of grains, oilseeds, and upland cotton. The United States paid allegedly around $20 billion in 2005 to farmers in direct subsidies as "farm income stabilization" [34] [35] [36] via farm bills. Overall agricultural subsidies in 2010 were estimated at $172 billion by a European agricultural industry association; however, the majority of this estimate consists of food stamps and other consumer subsidies, so it is not comparable to the 2005 estimate. [37]

Agricultural policies of the United States are changed, incrementally or more radically, by Farm Bills that are passed every five years or so. Statements about how the program works might be right at one point in time, at best, but are probably not sufficient for assessing agricultural policies at other points in time. For example, a large part of the support to program crops has not been linked directly to current output since the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (P.L. 104–127). Instead, these payments were tied to historical entitlement, not current planting. For example, it is incorrect to attribute a payment associated with the wheat base area to wheat production now because that land might be allocated to any of a number of permitted uses, including held idle. Over time, successive Farm Bills have linked these direct payments to market prices or revenue, but not to production. In contrast, some programs, like the Marketing Loan Program that can create something of a floor price that producers receive per unit sold, are tied to production. [38] That is, if the price of wheat in 2002 was $3.80, farmers would get an extra 58¢ per bushel (52¢ plus the 6¢ price difference). Fruit and vegetable crops are not eligible for subsidies. [39]

Corn was the top crop for subsidy payments prior to 2011. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandated that billions of gallons of ethanol be blended into vehicle fuel each year, guaranteeing demand, but US corn ethanol subsidies were between $5.5 billion and $7.3 billion per year. Producers also benefited from a federal subsidy of 51 cents per gallon, additional state subsidies, and federal crop subsidies that had brought the total to 85 cents per gallon or more. However, the federal ethanol subsidy expired 31 December 2011. [40]

2018 U.S. Loan Rates [41]
CommodityLoan Rates per Unit
Corn$1.95/bushel
Upland cotton$0.52/pound
Wheat$2.94/bushel
Rice$6.50/hundredweight
Peanuts$355.00/ton
Soybeans$5.00/bushel
Grain Sorghum$1.95/bushel
Barley$1.95/bushel
Oats$1.39/bushel
Oilseed (sunflower, flaxseed, canola, rapeseed, safflower, mustard, crambe, sesame seed)$0.1009/pound

Asia

Farm subsidies in Asia remain a point of contention in global trade talks. [42] [43]

China

In 2016, China provided $212 billion in agricultural subsidies. [44] In 2018, China increased their subsidies for soybean farmers in their northeastern provinces. Corn farmers, however, received reduced subsidies due to Beijing's 2017 policy that set out to reduce its huge stockpile. Soybean farmers in Liaoning, Jilin, Heilongjiang, and Inner Mongolia provinces will receive more subsidies from Beijing than corn farmers. The cutting of corn acreage and the lifting of soybean acreage came in 2016 as a push from China to re-balance grain stocks. Subsidies for agriculture machinery and equipment will also be provided by Beijing to farmers. [45]

Indonesia

In 1971, as a method of expanding the rice supply in Indonesia, the government began subsidizing fertilizer to farmers after the discovery and introduction of new, high-yielding rice varieties. [46] In 2012, Indonesia provided $28 billion in agricultural subsidies. [47]

Japan

Over the 2000s, Japan has been reforming its generous agricultural subsidy regime to support more business-oriented farmers. [48] Yet, subsidies remain high in international comparison. In 2009, Japan paid US$46.5 billion in subsidies to its farmers, [49] and continued state support of farmers in Japan remains a controversial topic. [50] In 2012, Japan provided $65 billion in agricultural subsidies. [47]

South Korea

South Korea has made attempts to reform its agricultural sector, despite resistance from vested interests. [51] In 2012, South Korea provided approximately $20 billion in agricultural subsidies. [47]

India

Agricultural subsidy in India primarily consists of subsidies like, fertilizer, irrigation, equipment, credit subsidy, seed subsidy, export subsidy etc. Subsidy on fertilizers is provided by the Central government whereas subsidy on water and irrigation is provided by the local State governments. [52] Drawing on the most recent estimates, annual central government subsidies to farmers would be of the order of ₹120,500 crore (equivalent to ₹1.4 trillionorUS$17 billion in 2023) as the sum of fertilizer subsidies (₹70,000 crore (equivalent to ₹820 billionorUS$9.9 billion in 2023), 2017/18), credit subsidies (₹20,000 crore (equivalent to ₹240 billionorUS$2.8 billion in 2023), 2017/18), crop insurance subsidies (₹6,500 crore (equivalent to ₹77 billionorUS$920 million in 2023), 2018/19) and expenditures towards price support (₹24,000 crore (equivalent to ₹280 billionorUS$3.4 billion in 2023) estimated for 2016/17). [53] Total subsidies to farmers in India is in the range of $45 billion to 50 billion, to the tune of 2%-2.5% of GDP. But per farmer the subsidy just about touches $48 in India, compared to over $7,000 in the U.S. [54]

Armenia

Direct subsidies, of the Ministry of Agriculture, include subsidies for fertilizers, improved seed, agricultural chemicals, and fuel. The purpose of subsidies is to aid the smallest farmers in the sector. In particular, the maximum loan size for interest subsidies is minimal, and only farms with less than 3 ha are eligible for fuel, fertilizer, chemical, and seed subsidies. For loans of up to 3 million drams (about US$6,185 at current exchange rates), subsidies decrease interest rates from 10%–12% to 4%–6% in an effort to support Armenia's smaller farms. [55]

Impact of subsidies

Global food prices and international trade

Although some critics and proponents of the World Trade Organization have noted that export subsidies, by driving down the price of commodities, can provide cheap food for consumers in developing countries, [56] [57] low prices are harmful to farmers not receiving the subsidy. Because it is usually wealthy countries that can afford domestic subsidies, critics argue that they promote poverty in developing countries by artificially driving down world crop prices. [58]

Generally, developing countries have a comparative advantage in producing agricultural goods,[ citation needed ] but low crop prices encourage developing countries to be dependent buyers of food from wealthy countries. So local farmers, instead of improving the agricultural and economic self-sufficiency of their home country, are forced out of the market and perhaps even off their land. This occurs as a result of a process known as "international dumping" in which subsidized farmers are able to "dump" low-cost agricultural goods on foreign markets at costs that un-subsidized farmers cannot compete with. Agricultural subsidies often are a common stumbling block in trade negotiations. In 2006, talks at the Doha round of WTO trade negotiations stalled because the US refused to cut subsidies to a level where other countries' non-subsidized exports would have been competitive. [59]

Others argue that a world market with farm subsidies and other market distortions (as happens today) results in higher food prices, rather than lower food prices, as compared to a free market. [60]

In 2002 Mark Malloch Brown, former head of the United Nations Development Programme, estimated that farm subsidies cost poor countries about US$50 billion a year in lost agricultural exports:

It is the extraordinary distortion of global trade, where the West spends $360 billion a year on protecting its agriculture with a network of subsidies and tariffs that costs developing countries about US$50 billion in potential lost agricultural exports. Fifty billion dollars is the equivalent of today's level of development assistance. [61] [62]

Poverty in developing countries

The impact of agricultural subsidies in developed countries upon developing-country farmers and international development is well documented. Agricultural subsidies can help drive prices down to benefit consumers, but also mean that unsubsidised developing-country farmers have a more difficult time competing in the world market; [63] and the effects on poverty are particularly negative when subsidies are provided for crops that are also grown in developing countries since developing-country farmers must then compete directly with subsidised developed-country farmers, for example in cotton and sugar. [64] [65] The IFPRI has estimated in 2003 that the impact of subsidies costs developing countries $24 billion in lost incomes going to agricultural and agro-industrial production; and more than $40 billion is displaced from net agricultural exports. [66] Moreover, the same study found that the least developed countries have a higher proportion of GDP dependent upon agriculture, at around 36.7%, thus may be even more vulnerable to the effects of subsidies. It has been argued that subsidised agriculture in the developed world is one of the greatest obstacles to economic growth in the developing world; which has an indirect impact on reducing the income available to invest in rural infrastructure such as health, safe water supplies and electricity for the rural poor. [67] The total amount of subsidies that go towards agriculture in OECD countries far exceeds the amount that countries provide in development aid. In the case of Africa, it is estimated that a 1% increase in its total agricultural exports could lift its GDP by $70 billion, nearly five times what the region is provided in total foreign aid. [68]

Haiti and US rice imports

Haiti is an excellent example of a developing country negatively affected by agricultural subsidies in the developed world. Haiti is a nation with the capacity to produce rice and was at one time self-sufficient in meeting its own needs. [69] [70] At present, Haiti does not produce enough to feed its people; 60 percent of the food consumed in the country is imported. [71] Following advice to liberalize its economy by lowering tariffs, domestically produced rice was displaced by cheaper subsidized rice from the United States. The Food and Agriculture Organization describes this liberalization process as being the removal of barriers to trade and a simplification of tariffs, which lowers costs to consumers and promotes efficiency among producers. [72]

Opening up Haiti's economy granted consumers access to food at a lower cost; allowing foreign producers to compete for the Haitian market drove down the price of rice. However, for Haitian rice farmers without access to subsidies, the downward pressure on prices led to a decline in profits. Subsidies received by American rice farmers, plus increased efficiencies, made it impossible for their Haitian counterparts to compete. [73] [74] According to Oxfam and the International Monetary Fund, tariffs on imports fell from 50 percent to three percent in 1995 and the nation is currently importing 80 percent of the rice it consumes. [75] [76]

The United States Department of Agriculture notes that since 1980, rice production in Haiti has been largely unchanged, while consumption on the other hand, is roughly eight times what it was in that same year. [77] Haiti is among the top three consumers of long grain milled rice produced in the United States. [78]

As rice farmers struggled to compete, many migrated from rural to urban areas in search of alternative economic opportunities. [79]

Impact on nutrition

One peer-reviewed research suggests that any effects of US farm policies on US obesity patterns must have been negligible. [80] However, some critics argue that the artificially low prices resulting from subsidies create unhealthy incentives for consumers. For example, in the US, cane sugar was replaced with cheap corn syrup, making high-sugar food cheaper; [81] beet and cane sugar are subject to subsidies, price controls, and import tariffs that distort the prices of these products as well.

The lower price of energy-dense foods such as grains and sugars could be one reason why low-income people and food insecure people in industrialized countries are more vulnerable to being overweight and obese. [82] According to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, meat and dairy production receive 63% of subsidies in the United States, [83] as well as sugar subsidies for unhealthy foods, which contribute to heart disease, obesity and diabetes, with enormous costs for the health sector. [83]

Market distortions due to subsidies have led to an increase in corn fed cattle rather than grass fed. Corn fed cattle require more antibiotics and their beef has a higher fat content. [84]

Cross-border movement of businesses

Tariffs on sugar have also caused large candy makers in the US to relocate to Canada and Mexico, where sugar is often half to a third the price. [85] The Dominican Republic Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), though, has had little impact in this area. The sugar issue causing alarm had reasoning due to what plausible effects could come through the tariffs as well as the undetermined future of these types of negotiations considering sugar importation in the United States. Due to various continuing disputes in trade, Mexico began to have fewer exports of sugar into the United States, where the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allowed. Those who left and sought out other companies for sugar have leaned marginally more towards Canada than Mexico. The tariffs are what keeps the large pressure from competition from south of the Rio Grande at bay. [85]

Non-farming companies

Subsidies are also given to companies and individuals with little connection to traditional farming. It has been reported that the largest part of the sum given to these companies flow to multinational companies like food conglomerates, sugar manufacturers and liquor distillers. For example, in France, the single largest beneficiary was the chicken processor Groupe Doux, at €62.8m, and was followed by about a dozen sugar manufacturers which together reaped more than €103m. [86] [87] [88] [89]

Public economics implications

Government intervention, through agricultural subsidies, interferes with the price mechanism which would normally determine commodity prices, often creating crop overproduction and market discrimination.

Journalist Michael Pollan argues that corn became a prime crop for over-production (and thus subsidies) due to it having a wide genetic variability and flexibility; historical uses of corn as food and as a commodity fueled its growth with capitalism. [90] As a result of overproduction and falling prices, farmers were subsidized with direct payments from the government. The pressure to produce massive swaths of corn, however, resulted in farmers tending to monocrop agriculture. As Pollan argues, this not only pushed many small farms out of business, but also resulted in paradoxical "food deserts". [90]

Subsidies are also an inefficient use of taxpayer's money. For instance, in 2006, the Department of Agriculture estimated that the average farm household income was $77,654 or about 17% higher than the average US household income. [91] From a public economics perspective, subsidies of any kind work to create a socially and politically acceptable equilibrium that is not necessarily Pareto efficient. [92]

Environmental implications

A study by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization found 87% of the $540bn farmers given every year between 2013 and 2018 in global subsidies are harmful to both people and environment. [2] The monoculture system associated with subsidized large-scale production has been implicated as a contributory factor in Colony Collapse Disorder which has affected bee populations. Bee pollination is an essential ecosystem service essential for the production of many varieties of fruits and vegetables. Subsidies often go towards subsidising meat production which has other nutritional and environmental implications; and it has been found that out of the $200Bn subsidies to subsidise crops from 1995 to 2010 around two-thirds of this went to animal feed, tobacco and cotton production. [93] On the other hand, farmers producing fruits and vegetables received no direct subsidies. The environmental impact of meat production is high due to the resource and energy requirements that go into production of feed for livestock throughout their lifespan, for example, a kilogram of beef uses about 60 times as much water as an equivalent amount of potato. [94] The subsidies contribute to meat consumption by allowing for an artificially low cost of meat products. [95]

Alternatives

Liberals argue that subsidies distort incentives for the global trade of agricultural commodities in which other countries may have a comparative advantage. Allowing countries to specialize in commodities in which they have a comparative advantage in and then freely trade across borders would therefore increase global welfare and reduce food prices. [96] Ending direct payments to farmers and deregulating the farm industry would eliminate inefficiencies and deadweight loss created by government intervention.

However, others disagree, arguing that a more radical transformation of agriculture is needed, one guided by the notion that ecological change in agriculture cannot be promoted without comparable changes in the social, political, cultural and economic arenas that conform and determine agriculture. The organized peasant and indigenous based agrarian movements, e.g. Via Campesina, take action by arguing that only by changing the export-led, free-trade based, industrial agriculture model of large farms can halt what they call the downward spiral of poverty, low wages, rural-urban migration, hunger and environmental degradation. [97]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Common Agricultural Policy</span> Agricultural policy of the European Union

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is the agricultural policy of the European Commission. It implements a system of agricultural subsidies and other programmes. It was introduced in 1962 and has since then undergone several changes to reduce the EEC budget cost and consider rural development in its aims. It has however, been criticised on the grounds of its cost, its environmental, and humanitarian effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agricultural policy</span> Laws relating to domestic agriculture and foreign-imported agricultural products

Agricultural policy describes a set of laws relating to domestic agriculture and imports of foreign agricultural products. Governments usually implement agricultural policies with the goal of achieving a specific outcome in the domestic agricultural product markets. Well designed agricultural policies use predetermined goals, objectives and pathways set by an individual or government for the purpose of achieving a specified outcome, for the benefit of the individual(s), society and the nations' economy at large. The goals could include issues such as biosecurity, food security, rural poverty reduction or increasing economic value through cash crop or improved food distribution or food processing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cash crop</span> Agricultural crop grown to sell for profit

A cash crop, also called profit crop, is an agricultural crop which is grown to sell for profit. It is typically purchased by parties separate from a farm. The term is used to differentiate a marketed crop from a staple crop in subsistence agriculture, which is one fed to the producer's own livestock or grown as food for the producer's family.

Trade can be a key factor in economic development. The prudent use of trade can boost a country's development and create absolute gains for the trading partners involved. Trade has been touted as an important tool in the path to development by prominent economists. However trade may not be a panacea for development as important questions surrounding how free trade really is and the harm trade can cause domestic infant industries to come into play.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in India</span>

The history of agriculture in India dates back to the Neolithic period. India ranks second worldwide in farm outputs. As per the Indian economic survey 2020 -21, agriculture employed more than 50% of the Indian workforce and contributed 20.2% to the country's GDP.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Iran</span>

Roughly one-third of Iran's total surface area is suitable for farmland, but because of poor soil and a lack of adequate water distribution in many areas, most of it is not under cultivation. Only 12% of the total land area is under cultivation but less than one-third of the cultivated area is irrigated; the rest is devoted to dryland farming. Some 92 percent of agricultural products depend on water. The western and northwestern portions of the country have the most fertile soils. Iran's food security index stands at around 96 percent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Senegal</span> Economic sector in Senegal

Agriculture is one of the dominant parts of Senegal's economy, even though Senegal lies within the drought-prone Sahel region. As only about 5% of the land is irrigated, Senegal continues to rely on rain-fed agriculture. Agriculture occupies about 75% of the workforce. Despite a relatively wide variety of agricultural production, the majority of farmers produce for subsistence needs. Millet, rice, corn, and sorghum are the primary food crops grown in Senegal. Production is subject to drought and threats of pests such as locusts, birds, fruit flies, and white flies. Moreover, the effects of climate change in Senegal are expected to severely harm the agricultural economy due to extreme weather such as drought, as well as increased temperatures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States farm bill</span> Primary agricultural and food policy instrument of the federal government

In the United States, the farm bill is comprehensive omnibus bill that is the primary agricultural and food policy instrument of the federal government. Congress typically passes a new farm bill every five to six years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of agriculture in China</span>

For millennia, agriculture has played an important role in the Chinese economy and society. By the time the People's Republic of China was established in 1949, virtually all arable land was under cultivation; irrigation and drainage systems constructed centuries earlier and intensive farming practices already produced relatively high yields. But little prime virgin land was available to support population growth and economic development. However, after a decline in production as a result of the Great Leap Forward (1958–60), agricultural reforms implemented in the 1980s increased yields and promised even greater future production from existing cultivated land.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in the Philippines</span>

Agriculture in the Philippines is a major sector of the economy, ranking third among the sectors in 2022 behind only Services and Industry. Its outputs include staples like rice and corn, but also export crops such as coffee, cavendish banana, pineapple and pineapple products, coconut, sugar, and mango. The sector continues to face challenges, however, due to the pressures of a growing population. As of 2022, the sector employs 24% of the Filipino workforce and it accounted for 8.9% of the total GDP.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Food vs. fuel</span> Debate concerning diversion of food supply for biofuels production

Food versus fuel is the dilemma regarding the risk of diverting farmland or crops for biofuels production to the detriment of the food supply. The biofuel and food price debate involves wide-ranging views and is a long-standing, controversial one in the literature. There is disagreement about the significance of the issue, what is causing it, and what can or should be done to remedy the situation. This complexity and uncertainty are due to the large number of impacts and feedback loops that can positively or negatively affect the price system. Moreover, the relative strengths of these positive and negative impacts vary in the short and long terms, and involve delayed effects. The academic side of the debate is also blurred by the use of different economic models and competing forms of statistical analysis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Haiti</span>

Agriculture in Haiti describes the tortured agricultural history of an island nation once described as the "Pearl of the Antilles". The Taíno people were the farming inhabitants of the island when the Spanish first visited in the late 15th century. The Taino died out from European diseases and exploitation and were replaced with imported African slaves. In the 18th century, Haiti became a country of large plantations, especially of sugar cane, owned by Europeans and worked by hundreds of thousands of slaves. The slaves revolted in 1791 and gained independence from France. The plantations were broken up and the land was distributed to former slaves who primarily engaged in subsistence agriculture with coffee as their most important cash crop and as Haiti's most important export.

The agricultural policy of the United States is composed primarily of the periodically renewed federal U.S. farm bills. The Farm Bills have a rich history which initially sought to provide income and price support to US farmers and prevent them from adverse global as well as local supply and demand shocks. This implied an elaborate subsidy program which supports domestic production by either direct payments or through price support measures. The former incentivizes farmers to grow certain crops which are eligible for such payments through environmentally conscientious practices of farming. The latter protects farmers from vagaries of price fluctuations by ensuring a minimum price and fulfilling their shortfalls in revenue upon a fall in price. Lately, there are other measures through which the government encourages crop insurance and pays part of the premium for such insurance against various unanticipated outcomes in agriculture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2007–2008 world food price crisis</span> World food prices increased dramatically in 2007 and the 1st and 2nd quarter of 2008

World food prices increased dramatically in 2007 and the first and second quarter of 2008, creating a global crisis and causing political and economic instability and social unrest in both poor and developed nations. Although the media spotlight focused on the riots that ensued in the face of high prices, the ongoing crisis of food insecurity had been years in the making. Systemic causes for the worldwide increases in food prices continue to be the subject of debate. After peaking in the second quarter of 2008, prices fell dramatically during the late-2000s recession but increased during late 2009 and 2010, reaching new heights in 2011 and 2012 at a level slightly higher than the level reached in 2008. Over the next years, prices fell, reaching a low in March 2016 with the deflated Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) food price index close to pre-crisis level of 2006.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Benin</span>

Benin is predominantly a rural society, and agriculture in Benin supports more than 70% of the population. Agriculture contributes around 35% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) and 80% of export income. While the Government of Benin (GOB) aims to diversify its agricultural production, Benin remains underdeveloped, and its economy is underpinned by subsistence agriculture. Approximately 93% of total agricultural production goes into food production. The proportion of the population living in poverty is about 35.2%, with more rural households in poverty (38.4%) than urban households (29.8%). 36% of households depend solely upon agricultural (crop) production for income, and another 30% depend on crop production, livestock, or fishing for income.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Bolivia</span>

The role of agriculture in the Bolivian economy in the late 1980s expanded as the collapse of the tin industry forced the country to diversify its productive and export base. Agricultural production as a share of GDP was approximately 23 percent in 1987, compared with 30 percent in 1960 and a low of just under 17 percent in 1979. The recession of the 1980s, along with unfavorable weather conditions, particularly droughts and floods, hampered output. Agriculture employed about 46 percent of the country's labor force in 1987. Most production, with the exception of coca, focused on the domestic market and self-sufficiency in food. However, with increased industrial agriculture starting in the early 2000s, exportation of commodities such as quinoa has grown substantially and local consumption has declined. Foreign industries' introduction of new machinery, monoculture, and chemicals to Bolivian agriculture has shifted production further away from Indigenous farmers and created a larger dependence on foreign markets. Agricultural exports accounted for only about 15 percent of total exports in the late 1980s, depending on weather conditions and commodity prices for agricultural goods, hydrocarbons, and minerals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rice production in Thailand</span>

Rice production in Thailand represents a significant portion of the Thai economy and labor force. In 2017, the value of all Thai rice traded was 174.5 billion baht, about 12.9% of all farm production. Of the 40% of Thais who work in agriculture, 16 million of them are rice farmers by one estimate.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Agriculture in Panama</span> Economic sector in Panama

Agriculture in Panama is an important sector of the Panamanian economy. Major agricultural products include bananas, cocoa beans, coffee, coconuts, timber, beef, chicken, shrimp, corn, potatoes, rice, soybeans, and sugar cane.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corn production in the United States</span> Production of maize crop in the United States

The production of corn plays a major role in the economy of the United States. The US is the largest corn producer in the world, with 96,000,000 acres (39,000,000 ha) of land reserved for corn production. Corn growth is dominated by west/north central Iowa and east central Illinois. Approximately 13% of its annual yield is exported.

Rice production was an integral part of the Haitian economy, as it has been farmed in Haiti for over two hundred years. The origin of this rice has been traced back to West African agriculture. Rice is a staple food for most Haitians but it has become a commodity in the sense that Haiti is no longer self-sufficient in producing rice for the country. Haiti maintained dependency on their own agriculture of rice until the 1980s. In the mid-1980s trade liberalization policies imposed by international financial institutions resulted in reduced production of rice in Haiti and by the 1990s imported rice far exceeded domestic production. The decline in rice production caused by policies under the Caribbean Basin Initiative had devastating consequences for Haiti's rural population. Many Haitian farmers, traders, and millers faced unemployment and relocation. Because farming was their livelihood, many could not find adequate work with their skill set. The adoption of trade liberalization policies and environmental degradation are said to be the two factors that have caused Haiti's decline in rice production. These policies have lowered the rice import tariff so that it is now less than any other Caribbean nation. The tariff is at three percent, causing a dumping ground of rice in Haiti. Many accuse the United States of purposefully depositing all of their rice into Haiti; in 1985 the local rice production was at 163,296 metric tons while the United States imports were only at 7,337 metric tons counting for a total of 170,663 metric tons. By 2000, local production had decreased to 130,000 metric tons while United States imports ascended to 219,590 metric tons; in addition, since 1995 over $13 billion in subsidies have gone to rice exports. The result made Haiti inundated with subsidized rice imports while undercutting domestic production.

References

  1. ↑ Karnik, Ajit; Lalvani, Mala (1996). "Interest Groups, Subsidies and Public Goods: Farm Lobby in Indian Agriculture" . Economic and Political Weekly. 31 (13): 818–820. JSTOR   4403965.
  2. 1 2 "90% of global farm subsidies damage people and planet, says UN". The Guardian. 14 September 2021. Retrieved 14 September 2021.
  3. ↑ Repurposing Agricultural Subsidies to Restore Degraded Farmland and Grow Rural Prosperity, World Resources Institute
  4. 1 2 Daniel A. Sumner, Agricultural Subsidy Programs
  5. ↑ "History of Agricultural Subsidies in the US and EU". food-studies.net. Archived from the original on 10 September 2018. Retrieved 27 November 2018.
  6. ↑ Hurt, R. Douglas, Problems of Plenty: The American Farmer in the Twentieth Century, (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2002), 67.
  7. ↑ Rasmussen, Wayne D., Gladys L. Baker, and James p. Ward, "A Short History of Agricultural Adjustment, 1933-75." Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 391 (March 1976), pg. 2.
  8. ↑ "The common agricultural policy at a glance". European Commission - European Commission. Retrieved 27 November 2018.
  9. ↑ Meat Atlas 2014 – Facts and figures about the animals we eat, page 20, download Meat Atlas Archived 29 July 2016 at the Wayback Machine as pdf
  10. ↑ OECD, Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2013, 2013, p. 317, table: "OECD: Producer Single Commodity Transfers (USD)" Archived 12 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  11. ↑ Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food (11 July 2013). "Programs and services". www.agr.gc.ca. Retrieved 26 November 2019.
  12. 1 2 "Canadian Agricultural Partnership - Home". cap.alberta.ca. Retrieved 26 November 2019.
  13. ↑ Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food (6 May 2016). "Canadian Agricultural Partnership". www.agr.gc.ca. Retrieved 26 November 2019.
  14. ↑ "Title 05 – Agriculture and rural development". Archived from the original on 19 July 2011. Retrieved 1 January 2011.
  15. ↑ EU Budget 2010 (PDF). Publications Office of the European Union. 15 March 2024. ISBN   978-92-79-13391-6.
  16. 1 2 "Towards 'smart' subsidies in agriculture? Lessons from recent experience in Malawi". Overseas Development Institute. September 2008.
  17. ↑ "Save the Farms – End the Subsidies". Cato Institute. Archived from the original on 25 October 2008. Retrieved 22 October 2008.
  18. ↑ "Surviving without subsidies", NYT Archived 22 July 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  19. ↑ Pickford, John (16 October 2004). "New Zealand's hardy farm spirit". BBC News. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  20. ↑ "Return of US dairy subsidies sours Kiwis". Television New Zealand . 25 May 2009. Archived from the original on 21 September 2011. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  21. ↑ "Why bother with a US FTA?". The New Zealand Herald . 23 March 2010. Retrieved 15 September 2011.
  22. 1 2 "Turkish farmers worse off than EU counterparts". dw.com. Retrieved 27 March 2024.
  23. 1 2 Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2022. OECD. 2022. doi:10.1787/7f4542bf-en. ISBN   9789264998681. S2CID   264550308 . Retrieved 12 April 2023.
  24. ↑ "Bakan Yumaklı, şeker pancarı alım fiyatını açıkladı" [Minister Yumaklı announced the purchase price of sugar beet]. www.trthaber.com (in Turkish). 5 October 2023. Retrieved 19 November 2023. Tarım ve Orman Bakarı İbrahim Yumaklı ….. şeker pancarı alım fiyatının ton başına …. bin 855 lira olduğunu bildirdi.[Minister of Agriculture and Forestry İbrahim Yumaklı stated that the purchase price of sugar beet ….. is 1,855 lira,]
  25. ↑ Tridimas, Beatrice (25 September 2023). "Turkey's fishermen fight to save wetlands as water scarcity bites". Reuters . Retrieved 24 November 2023.[ permanent dead link ]
  26. 1 2 Bland, William; Bobylov, Alexandre (25 May 2022). "Turkey's wheat farmers await state price amid criticism of higher-priced imports". www.spglobal.com. Retrieved 16 April 2023.
  27. 1 2 3 "Grain and Feed Annual" (PDF).
  28. ↑ Çullu, Mehmet Ali; Teke, Mustafa; Aydoğdu, Mustafa Hakkı; Günal, Hikmet (1 September 2022). "Effects of subsidy and regulation policy on soil and water resources of cotton planted lands in Harran Plain, Turkey" . Land Use Policy. 120: 106288. Bibcode:2022LUPol.12006288C. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106288. ISSN   0264-8377. S2CID   251031944.
  29. ↑ "Oilseeds and Products Annual" (PDF). 9 March 2023.
  30. ↑ "Organic Farming Projects". www.tarimorman.gov.tr. Retrieved 28 April 2023.
  31. ↑ "Turkiye_Seker_Tuketimini_Kullanimini_Azaltma_Rehber" (PDF). hsgm.saglik.gov.tr. 10 April 2021. Retrieved 5 October 2024.
  32. ↑ "Turkiye: Sugar Annual | USDA Foreign Agricultural Service". 23 April 2024.
  33. ↑ "Budget Summary". www.usda.gov. Retrieved 8 May 2021.
  34. ↑ Archived 28 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine
  35. ↑ "Farm Subsidies Over Time". The Washington Post. 2 July 2006. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  36. ↑ Stephen Vogel. "Farm Income and Costs: Farms Receiving Government Payments". Ers.usda.gov. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  37. ↑ "The per-capita farm support is close to three times higher in the United States than in the European Union". Momagri. Archived from the original on 9 June 2019. Retrieved 2 December 2018.
  38. ↑ "The 2002 Farm Bill: Title 1 Commodity Programs". USDA. 22 May 2002. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 December 2006. Retrieved 6 December 2006.
  39. ↑ Chrisman, Siena (14 September 2018). "American Farmers Are in Crisis". Reports Policy. Retrieved 17 September 2018.
  40. ↑ Sweet, William (January 2007). "Corn-O-Copia". IEEE Spectrum. 44 (1): 26–28. doi:10.1109/MSPEC.2007.273036. S2CID   208802093.
  41. ↑ "2018 National Average Loan Rates" (PDF). USDA. 7 April 2018.
  42. ↑ "US, India, Japan Farm Subsidies Face WTO Ag Committee Scrutiny". ICTSD. Archived from the original on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 13 June 2012.
  43. ↑ Ashok B Sharma (28 March 2012). "BRICS for end to rich nations' farm subsidies". The Indian Awaaz.
  44. ↑ "Agricultural Subsidies Remain a Staple in the Industrial World | Worldwatch Institute". www.worldwatch.org. Archived from the original on 14 December 2018. Retrieved 1 November 2018.
  45. ↑ "China grants more subsidies to soy farmers as it cuts corn stocks". Reuters. Retrieved 1 November 2018.
  46. ↑ Hedley, D (March 1989). "Fertilizer in Indonesian agriculture: the subsidy issue" (PDF). Agricultural Economics. 3 (1): 49–68. doi:10.1016/0169-5150(89)90038-8 (inactive 9 December 2024). S2CID   154965004.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of December 2024 (link)
  47. 1 2 3 "Agricultural Subsidies Remain a Staple in the Industrial World | Worldwatch Institute". www.worldwatch.org. Archived from the original on 14 December 2018. Retrieved 2 May 2018.
  48. ↑ Jentzsch, Hanno (1 August 2017). "Tracing the Local Origins of Farmland Policies in Japan—Local-National Policy Transfers and Endogenous Institutional Change". Social Science Japan Journal. 20 (2): 243–260. doi:10.1093/ssjj/jyx026. hdl: 10.1093/ssjj/jyx026 .
  49. ↑ "EU farm subsidies fall, bucking global trend". Agrimoney.com. 1 July 2010. Archived from the original on 22 May 2013. Retrieved 13 June 2012.
  50. ↑ Yutaka Harada (17 January 2012). "Can Japanese Farming Survive Liberalization?". The Tokyo Foundation.
  51. ↑ "Coffee shop farmers". The Dong-A Ilbo. 17 March 2012.
  52. ↑ Singh, Hemant (20 October 2015). "Different Types of Agricultural Subsidies Given to Farmers in India". Jagran Josh.
  53. ↑ Ramaswami, Bharat (March 2019). "Agricultural Subsidies" (PDF). Study Prepared for XV Finance Commission.
  54. ↑ Gupta, Dipankar (25 December 2020). "The farmers' protest, truths and half-truths". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 26 December 2020.
  55. ↑ Garry, Christensen (May 2017). "Sustainable, Inclusive Agriculture Sector Growth in Armenia". doi:10.1596/29699.
  56. ↑ Panagariya, Arvind (2005). "Liberalizing Agriculture". Foreign Affairs. Archived from the original on 18 February 2007. Retrieved 26 December 2006.
  57. ↑ "World Bank's Claims on WTO Doha Round Clarified" (Press release). Center for Economic and policy research. 22 November 2005. Archived from the original on 22 March 2007.
  58. ↑ Andrew Cassel (6 May 2002). "Why U.S. Farm Subsidies Are Bad for the World". The Philadelphia Inquirer. Archived from the original on 9 June 2007. Retrieved 20 July 2007.
  59. ↑ Alan Beattie; Frances Williams (24 July 2006). "US blamed as Trade Talks end in acrimony". Financial Times. Retrieved 18 May 2008.
  60. ↑ "Farm Subsidies Are Making Your Food More Expensive". John Locke Foundation. 20 April 2023. Retrieved 17 June 2023.
  61. ↑ "The Millennium Development Goals and Africa: A new framework for a new future". Archived from the original on 27 July 2009. Retrieved 10 June 2009. Address by Mark Malloch Brown, UNDP Administrator, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda, 12 November 2002
  62. ↑ Kristof, Nicholas D. (5 July 2002). "Farm Subsidies That Kill". The New York Times.
  63. ↑ Patel, Raj (2007). Stuffed and Starved. UK: Portobello Books. p. 57.
  64. ↑ Agricultural Subsidies in the WTO Green Box Archived 12 November 2011 at the Wayback Machine , ICTSD, September 2009.
  65. ↑ "Agricultural Subsidies, Poverty and the Environment" (PDF). World Resources Institute. January 2007. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
  66. ↑ "How much does it hurt? The Impact of Agricultural Trade Policies on Developing Countries" (PDF). IFPRI. 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 July 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
  67. ↑ "Farm subsidies: devastating the world's poor and the environment". Archived from the original on 9 January 2018. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
  68. ↑ Adams, Brock (2005). The Structure of American Industry. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson. p. 21. ISBN   978-0-13-143273-4.
  69. ↑ "Trade and the Disappearance of Haitian Rice". .american.edu. Archived from the original on 29 March 2012. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  70. ↑ Altidor, Paul (2004). Impacts of trade liberalization policies on rice production in Haiti (Thesis). hdl: 1721.1/28350 .
  71. ↑ http://www.ifad.org/operations/projects/regions/pl/factsheet/haiti_e.pdf%5B%5D
  72. ↑ "Chapter 4. Trade liberalization and food security in developing countries[45]". Fao.org. 12 July 2002. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  73. ↑ Germain, J. Claude (2009). Trade liberalization and globalization: The experience of Haiti (Thesis). ProQuest   305170611.
  74. ↑ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 May 2017. Retrieved 6 February 2012.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  75. ↑ "Haiti No Longer Grows Much of Its Own Rice and Families Now Go Hungry | Oxfam International". Oxfam.org. Archived from the original on 28 November 2012. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  76. ↑ "Haiti: Selected Issues" (PDF). IMF. January 2001. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 November 2023.
  77. ↑ "Rice Production and Trade Update" (PDF). Global Agricultural Information Network - USDA. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 October 2011. Retrieved 6 February 2012.
  78. ↑ Childs, Nathan; Burdett, Alexander (2000). "The U.S. rice export market". Rice Situation and Outlook. USDA Economic Research Service. pp. 48–54. ISBN   978-1-4289-0898-7. S2CID   166235903 .
  79. ↑ Doyle, Mark (4 October 2010). "US urged to stop Haiti rice subsidies". BBC News. Retrieved 12 April 2012.
  80. ↑ Alston, Julian M.; Sumner, Daniel A.; Vosti, Stephen A. (December 2008). "Farm subsidies and obesity in the United States: National evidence and international comparisons". Food Policy. 33 (6): 470–479. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.05.008. S2CID   53641508.
  81. ↑ Pollan, Michael (12 October 2003). "THE WAY WE LIVE NOW: 10-12-03; The (Agri)Cultural Contradictions Of Obesity". The New York Times.
  82. ↑ "FRAC Food Research and Action Center". frac.org. Archived from the original on 14 September 2012. Retrieved 7 April 2018.
  83. 1 2 "PCRM - Taxing America's Health: Subsidies for Meat and Dairy Products". archive.is. 15 April 2013. Archived from the original on 15 April 2013. Retrieved 7 April 2018.
  84. ↑ Kummer, Corby (May 2003). "Back To Grass". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 16 May 2008. Retrieved 29 April 2008.
  85. 1 2 "The Sugar Industry and Corporate Welfare". Archived from the original on 20 July 2012. Retrieved 6 February 2011.
  86. ↑ "French farmers survive but multinationals cash in on EU subsidies". The Daily Telegraph . 30 August 2009. Archived from the original on 3 June 2023.
  87. ↑ "EU Farm Subsidies More Skewed than Ever: Report". Archived from the original on 2 January 2020. Retrieved 23 April 2018.
  88. ↑ http://farmsubsidy.openspending.org/ Europe’s Vast Farm Subsidies Face Challenges
  89. ↑ "Farmsubsidy.org". Archived from the original on 29 June 2015. Retrieved 23 April 2018.
  90. 1 2 Pollan, Michael (2007). The Omnivore's Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. Penguin Publishing. ISBN   978-0143038580.
  91. ↑ Thompson, Wyatt; Mishra, Ashok K.; Dewbre, Joe (December 2009). "Farm Household Income and Transfer Efficiency: An Evaluation of United States Farm Program Payments". American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 91 (5): 1296–1301. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01300.x. hdl: 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01300.x .
  92. ↑ Rosen, Harvey (2008). Public Finance . New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. pp.  83–84.
  93. ↑ Allen, Arthur (3 October 2011). "U.S. touts fruit and vegetables while subsidizing animals that become meat". The Washington Post. Retrieved 7 April 2018.
  94. ↑ Hoekstra, Arjen Y. (1 April 2012). "The hidden water resource use behind meat and dairy". Animal Frontiers. 2 (2): 3–8. doi: 10.2527/af.2012-0038 .
  95. ↑ "What We Do". UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity. 20 April 2020.
  96. ↑ Anderson, Kym; Martin, Will (September 2005). "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda". The World Economy. 28 (9): 1301–1327. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00735.x. hdl: 10986/6889 . S2CID   154986778.
  97. ↑ Altieri, Miguel A. (8 July 2009). "Agroecology, Small Farms, and Food Sovereignty". Monthly Review. 61 (3): 102. doi:10.14452/mr-061-03-2009-07_8.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.