During its visit to Washington D.C. the WOAgri delegation met many public figures from different sectors: agricultural unions, NGOs and Think Tanks, economists, members of staff from Congress and the Senate…
Below is a summary of the various meetings that took place, showing the interest our American colleagues have in our work, and our similarities of opinion on a subject as strategic as agriculture.
1. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is a leading American think tank, which is considered today as one of the major sources of influence in agriculture and development. In fact it was this think tank that last year presented to all the economic capitals in the world the Carnegie model, which was adopted by political leaders during the Doha negotiations in the spring of 2006.
The meeting was very productive: the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace shares our vision, and also believes it is urgent to create steering instruments, such as the NAR model and the rating agency, for international agricultural markets.
In fact it is at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace headquarters that we have decided to hold our conference in Washington D.C. on June 25th 2007, and this has also led to the possibility of setting up long-term working relations.
2. Le Sénat américain
Our meeting with Stephanie Mercier, chief economist for the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forests department of the Democrat party, was extremely interesting. As well as agreeing with WOAgri’s philosophy and with the principles of construction behind the NAR model, she emphasized several times the usefulness of a such a model for political negotiators.
She particularly applauded the fact that the NAR model would model price volatility, would have a dynamic approach, rather than static like most current models, and would segment consumers into rich and poor in order to study the impact of the liberalization of agricultural markets on poverty.
3. The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)
The IFPRI is one of the most competent and influential research centers in the world. Our meeting with the IFPRI was immensely fruitful. Our views were very similar on both the situation of world agriculture and on the necessity of having a more reliable economic forecast model. On this point the IFPRI, which works on several economic models, underlined the originality and the relevance of the approach we have chosen to construct the NAR model. A possible collaboration between our two organizations was discussed.
4. The Center for Global Development
The Center for Global Development is an American think tank, whose objective is to study the impact of rich countries’ policies on poor countries and to find suitable solutions to the challenges created by development. In five years, this center has become very influential in particular because of the creation of the “Commitment to Development Index”, which grades rich countries on the results of their actions in favor of the poorest countries.
The Center for Global Development acknowledged WOAgri’s work and approved its goals, particularly the two instruments that it is constructing: the NAR model and the NAR Agency. The Center also expressed its wish to work with us on the problem of the effects of trade liberalization and development.
5. The Cato Institute
The Cato Institute is one of the most liberal and influential think tanks in the world because it examines the liberal economic way of thinking of international institutions, in particular the WTO. Our views were very similar on many issues, particularly concerning the improvement of existing information on agricultural markets and their stakes, from both a quantitative and qualitative point of view.
The Cato Institute showed a marked interest in the NAR model and the rating agency that we are constructing, as in its opinion there is:
> a real lack of information on agricultural markets and the stakes associated with them, in terms of environment and development…. In fact, the Cato Institute was well aware of the fact that the WTO had not received any statistics from Member States for 5 years!
> an urgent need to evaluate the relevance of policies and strategies implemented particularly by major international organizations (FAO, World Bank).
6. The National Farmers Union
The National Farmers Union is the minority union of American farmers. Although it has fewer members (250,000 in 32 States) than the majority union the American Farm Bureau Federation, it has a significant network and close contact with major players such as congressmen in the United States.
This meeting was extremely fruitful because the NFU shared WOAgri’s views on the necessity for the regulation of international agricultural markets in order to achieve equitable free trade, as well as on the importance of having steering instruments such as the NAR model and the rating agency, in which they showed a marked interest.
7. The Bipartisan Policy Center
The BPC is an American think tank, created in March 2007 by four former Republican and Democrat senators, Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole and George Mitchell. Its objective is to further discussions on questions of American internal policies, such as energy, agriculture, problems of national security, economic competitiveness, education, environment….
The BPC fully supported WOAgri in the belief that the Farm Bill cannot continue as it is today, and it also agreed with the philosophy behind our actions. It therefore recognized that the majority of American farmers, like European farmers, have doubts about the advantages of the Doha Round agreement, and that it would be possible to set up cooperation, as WOAgri proposes, between the United States and Europe.
8. The International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy (IPC)
The IPC is an NGO whose mission is centered on agricultural trade negotiations, national policies (biofuels) and technological progress and standards (environmental, health…). The IPC showed interest in our work, particularly in the relevance of the instruments we are developing: the NAR model and the rating Agency. Similarly, although the IPC believes that free exchange is the best way to improve conditions in poor countries, it is aware of the limits of such a strategy and of the necessity to guide development policies.
|