An easier to read version of this document may be found by clicking –>here 

(http://writer.zoho.com/public/jmflahiff/Fair-Trade-Overview1/script)

Fair Trade Overview

Free Trade recap

As pointed out in earlier talks, Free Trade is based on premise that once barriers totrade are lifted, everyone will benefit.

Historically a country’s import quotas and tariffs were tools to ensure fair pricesfor a country’s products (agriculture and industry), limiting cheaper imports fromother countries.  (Think Mexico and corn, Mali and cotton).  

Free trade is a removal of the import quotas and tariffs. It occurs between countries,and in regions (as NAFTA and the European Union).  Free trade principles are alsoused by global institutions as the International Monetary Fund, as conditions for countries when they accept loans. (Details will differ on individual loans). 

Is Free Trade viable? Can it or will it work?

Some say we can’t tell because the effects of Free Trade cannot be separatedfrom other factors (climate changes, regional and international economic fluctuations(recession, depression, increases in agricultural/industrial production, corrupt govts in the South)

Some may say it is too soon to tell, or it’s not universal (many separate agreements between/among countries may be impeding “progress)

Free trade does not exist (subsidies in countries with higher GDPs, still some tariffs in place)

This is not the right time for free trade, only the multinationals are profiting..

  Free trade is about free flow of goods/services, not free flow of people (immigration/emigration)..beyond that…is it disrupting community? Exasperating materialism? bringing out the worstin capitalism?? Treating people as little more than the commodities they produce??

One answer to that is….if trade is going to be based on justice…ultimately the producers must be empowered and seen as partners, not suppliers 

Fair Trade  (alternative to Free Trade focused on stabilizing markets at community level in developing counntries    

 Definition

                Relationship between developing country producers and their buyers in which payment  is based not only a fair price but social and environmental standards.  It is not only market-based but is also a social movement. It goal is to work with marginalized producers and workers so that they can be self sufficient and ultimately be on equal footing with all involved in international trade. 

Another way to think about this…

Fair trade is a production chain created by importers, distributors, and retailers of food and handmade products. This chain not only includes prevailing market costs, but “hidden costs” that affect producer. 

These “hidden” costs are costs to environment, costs to producer that has no reserves or access to reserves (i.e. multinational corporations). Fair and just cost of products need to be  more centered on poor farmers in global product markets. They go beyond exchange of money…true cost of products. 

How does it do this?

Poor farmers can be empowered or included (not patronized or given handouts) through a package of benefits.

These benefits usually include one or more of the following

•  anti-cyclical mark-ups on prices (means to pay producer fair cost, regardless of what current market price is)
•  long-term relationships between producers and buyers
• credit facilities
•  consultancy to build producers’ capacity (think agricultural extension)

In summary, fair trade is basically about skill advancement and progressive independence of the producer from the fair trader. It’s about working with people so they are increasingly on the same economic footing as corporations.  

Short History

Basically started in the 1940’s and 1950’s with religious groups and non-governmental organizations.One example- Ten thousandvillages (affiliated with Mennonites) that sold handicrafts mostly in churches or fairs.

Current fair trade began in Europe in the 60’s  as gesture against neo-imperialism  (radical student movements against multinational corporations and business models that were unfair to developing world).  Began with handicrafts sold outside of mainstream business (homes, churches, etc)

Evolved  to include agricultural products…which are presently about 70% of fair trade products)

Presently products are largely handicrafts,coffee, cocoa, sugar, tea, bananas, honey, cotton, wine, fresh fruit, and flowers

supporters include  Oxfam, Amnesty International, Catholic Relief Services, and Caritas International(coalition of Catholic org working to eradicate poverty and social injustice —> as(Catholic Charities USA (CCUSA), Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD), Catholic Relief Services (CRS))

 Principles

• Market Access for Marginalized Producers 
  Fair trade enables buyers to trade with producers that may otherwise be excluded from the market (physically [maybe roads] or small volume/producer). It also shortens the trade chain (producer to consumer), so producers get more of the final selling price
  
• Sustainable and equitable trading relationships
   Fair price is based on all costs of production, both direct costs and indirect (as safeguarding natural resources and improved conditions for the future). It is a commitment to not only present, but future.  Prices and payment terms (including prepayment where required) are not only based on day-to-day needs, but also improved conditions for the future

• Capacity building and empowerment
  To improve conditions for future, fair trade may involve: upgrading technical skills, education about market conditions/trends, financial stability (for example credit unions whch act as a local “buffer”…), finance services to stabilize prices (as crop insurance) 

   [Note, fair trade does not necessarily mean organic]

• Consumer awareness raising and advocacy 
  Fair trade not only increases awareness of consumer with working/living conditions of producers in developing world, but also informs consumers of the need for social justice and opportunities for change…Fair trade organizations, thru consumersupport are able to advocate for reforming international trade for a more just and equitable global trading system
  

             (Where is input of producers???

Fair Trade Label requirements

To obtain the ‘‘fair trade’’ label, these prod-ucts need to comply with the following requirements, defined by the Fairtrade LabellingOrganization (FLO) (Fair Trade Advocacy, 2005a) and hence must: 

(i) pay a fair wage(price) in the local context;

 (ii) stabilize price fluctuations; 

(iii) offer employees opportuni-ties for advancement (including investment in local public goods);

 (iv) provide equal employ-ment opportunities for all, particularly the most disadvantaged; 

(v) engage in environmentallysustainable practices; 

(vi) be open to public accountability;

 (vii) build long-term trade relationships; 

(viii) provide healthy and safe working conditions within the local context;

 (ix)provide technical and financial assistance (price stabilization insurance services and anticipatedfinancing arrangements which reduce financial 

constraints) to producers whenever possible.            

How/where to buy

 Direct— The chain from producer to consumer is entirely by organizations having Fair Trade as part of their mission, as…

Indirect – “product certification route”   products complying with international standards are certified, they have met requirements in the following areas: production, trading, processing, and packaging  (Increasingly products are not in stores not soley fair trade based)

  Certificaition may be made by one or several national or international federations

      Currently four federations are the largest and most influential (2 are European based, 2 are international). These four have joined together to create  an informal association to harmonize fair trade standard & guidelines, increase quality and efficiency of fair trade monitoringsystems, and advocate fair trade politically.

       Currently, fair trade agricultural products are best identified by the Fair Trade Certified Label. It identifies products inspected and certified byan international certification body (part of one of the largest international free trade federations – FLO (Fair Trade Labelling Organization)

Fair trade agricultural products may be found in stores as: Kroger’s, Meijer’s, Golden Eagle, Claudia’s, Phoenix Cop-op, Fresh Foods

Fair trade “handicrafts” may be found at the Happy Badger in B

Pros/cons of each,comparison

–Opponents of fair trade argue that the ‘‘fair price’’ is a distortion of market prices and provides mistaken incentives to affiliated farmers, 

increasing their dependence on products which are overproduced in the market. 

    Fair trade advocates counter this argument by pointing out that the fair price should not be considered as a price distortion since transactions between first-level producers and intermediaries often do not occur in a competitive framework but rather in a monopsonistic (oligopsonistic) one where producer prices fall below the marginal value of the product.

     A second criticism of the above argument is that the food industry has historically produced highly differentiated products with continuous waves of innovation, creating new varieties. Fair trade continues this tradition; there is not one coffee but many different varieties of coffee products, each differentiated by varying combinations of quality, blends, packaging, and now also ‘‘social responsibility’’ features.Each of these products has a specific and different market price that is influenced by consumer tastes according to the particular coffee variety. In creating a new range of products, fair trade is an innovation in the food industry. 

The literature on FT impact analyses is surprisingly scarce, given the importance of evaluating claims that participation in the FT chain brings advantages to producers.  (the two that use statistics are coffee related – Costa rica & Guatamala)At least 4 others have very good descriptive studies,  but no quantitative (statistical) components)(oxfam, cocoa in ecuador)

   However one study..on FT impact on Kenyan farmers…Our descriptive and econometric findings document significant differences in terms of varieties of products sold, price satisfaction, monthly household food consumption, (self declared) satisfaction with living conditions, dietary quality, and child mortality for affiliates of fair trade and Meru Herbs (first-level local producer organization) with respect to a control sample….In Section 4 our econometric analysis highlights the following main results: Meru Herbs members with access to the FT channel have a more diversified product portfolio, relatively higher price and living condition satisfaction, spend significantly more on food consumption, higher nutritional standards and have relatively fewer episodes of infant mortality in their households. 

Fair trade and Meru Herbs affiliates also have higher price satisfaction, food consumption expenditure, and dietary quality. Another nteresting result is the remarkable difference between fair trade affiliated and control farmers in terms of income satisfaction. Such difference is not only due to the higher earned income, but also to a relatively lower desired income which is likely to be determined by a higher supply of complimentary (or cheaper) goods, services, lower trade risk, and technical assistance. 

Next time?

–More info on fair trade organizations (their reports, how they are meeting their goals)

–How it is really affecting producers

–Dangers of romanticizing fair trade and the producer

Thought…

Is fair trade and agribusiness subsidies more closely related than first appearance…both are driven by consumers wanting a product…at a cost that free trade or free market cannot sustain

1.Becchetti, L., &  Costantino, M. (2008). The Effects of Fair Trade on Affiliated Producers: An Impact Analysis on Kenyan Farmers. World Development, 36(5), 823-842.

2. Fair trade (Wikipedia article) http://en.wikipediaorg/wiki/Fair_Trade

3. Weyer, MV. (2005). Can Free Trade Be Fair Trade? New Statesman, 28 February 2005, 22-25.  (Full text is found in archive section at http://www.newstatesman.com)

4. Jaffee, Daniel (2007). Brewing Justice: Fair Trade Coffee, Sustainability, and Survival. Univ. of California Press. 

A “Word” like version of this document can be found here

(just click on the word “here” above…it should take you to the link below..)

( http://writer.zoho.com/public/jmflahiff/Mexico-after-NAFTA/script  )
   This version should be easier to read 

NAFTA and US-Mexico agricultural trade, emphasis on corn trade :  provision overview and reflections

Last month I gave a short provision on the pros and cons of NAFTA.

In the next 10 minutes (or less) I will focus on one provision…our corn trade with

Mexico and offer some reflections.

As I said last week…

Goal

NAFTA aims to be a continent wide custom free zone with a common approach to trade, energy, immigration, law enforcement, security.  It also envisions the opening upof most borders to the relatively free passage of goods and services.

NAFTA Short Definition

NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is a comprehensive trade agreement limited to Canada, US, and Mexico in a free trade sphere (since ‘94).

It immediately ended tariffs on some goods, on other goods tariffs were scheduled to be eliminated over a period of years.

(tariff…duties on exported goods…..a country is basically protecting its industries)

No supranational government bodies are involved (as the European Union) or any body superior to any national law.  It is similar to a treaty.  Under US law it is acongressional-executive agreement.

(Congress OK’s our entry into it…and the executive department sends representatives to NAFTA meetings to iron out details….(as Depts of labor, agriculture, commerce))

NAFTA is a900 page document, basically phasing out tariffs, quotas, and replacing country, state/provincial, city laws
     Beyond trade….NAFTA…

                   puts limits on safety/inspection of meat sold in grocery stores

                     elimination of preferences for spending your tax dollars on US made products or locally grown                    food 

NAFTA is not really a trade agreement, it is really an investment agreement

   Core provisions grant foreign investors a remarkable set of new rights and privileges that promote relocation of factories and jobs and the privatization and deregulationof essential services, as water, energy and health care..

NAFTA and US/Mexican agriculture

Ultimate goal of corn trade is same as agricultural trade..ultimately elimate import quotas and tariffs with no exceptions

However, the phasing out period was extended to 15 years (2003 bumper year..Mexican tariffs eliminated on US wheat, dairy, hots, pork) phase out period supposedly ended in January with Mexican tariffs on corn/dry beans

Mexican agriculture going thru phase in industrialization, as US, agriculture is playing a smaller role, fewer employees

 As income rises 1%,the GDP of agriculture rises o.6 % (how much of this goes to workers wasn’t stated)

      Follows that Mexico will see more large scale farms, factory type livestock lots, food processing (as canned/frozen meats) at expense of subsistence farmers (these food processing plants by US investors have more than doubled with NAFTA)

Our exports to Mexico have have more than doubled (3.6 billion to 7.9 billion), grains/feeds up 149%, vegetables up 267%

Mexico’s have also increased..sugars (595 percent), beverages (584 %),grains/feeds (328 % about 1/2 as much as US)

At some level there may be some truth that US agribusiness has greatly benefited from both NAFTA provisions (doing away with tariffs/quotas)

AND many of our policies that conflict with NAFTA

….We still have corn and wheat subsidies

…Relief to farmers (as floods)

…$ support for exports to developing countries

Mexico before NAFTA (in spirit of NAFTA)

…Import quotas…these have been converted to tariffs…tariffs have been slowly phased out

…Mexico has revised its land tenure laws…greater flexibility in owning/selling/renting land

      (peasant farmers permanently deed small plots of land, 1917 Constitution), so they

     wouldn’t be seized by creditors for example

Mexico after NAFTA (subsidies/transitional support..depending on viewpoint)

….subsidize/support sugar industry thru loans)

…income support to agricultural producers

…infrastructure, extension type assistance

Sources

US, Mexican and Canadian Farmers and Agriculture. Public Citizen (NAFTA at Ten Series). 2003.  http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_ag.pdf

The Mexican Economy, Agriculture and Environment. Public Citizen (NAFTA at Ten Series). 2003. http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_mexico.pdf

NAFTA overview for Pax Christi (September 14, 2008)

Short Definition

NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is a comprehensive trade agreement limited to Canada, US, and Mexico in a free trade sphere (since ‘94).

It immediately ended tariffs on some goods, on other goods tariffs were scheduled to be eliminated over a period of years.

No supranational government bodies are involved (as the European Union) or any body superior to any national law.  It is similar to a treaty.  Under US law it is a congressional-executive agreement.

Goal

NAFTA aims to be a continent wide custom free zone with a common approach to trade, energy, immigration, law enforcement, security.  It also envisions the opening up

of most borders to the relatively free passage of goods and services.

NAFTA’s effect on politics & economies (broadly speaking)

NAFTA is only one entity that is responsible for recent economic and political changes in the US, Mexico, and Canada. Other factors include individual country economic policies

worldwide, actions and policies of the World Bank and World Trade Organization, and global and local economic indicators (as recessions). No country or group of countries is an island!

It is unfair at times to blame NAFTA for every economic disappointment in the last 10 years. It is always challenging, if not impossible to “tease out” any one variable in any social study.

Everything is interrelated. (Related examples might be the state of our local education and health care).

Pro NAFTA points

• For the US, NAFTA has always been more about foreign policy than domestic economy.

                 Mexico has changed from a centralized protective economy to decentralized democratic capitalism. For example, Vincente Fox became president, endin 75 years of dominance by the PRI political party.Mexico no longer is a boom/bust economy with high inflation and debt. Mexico and Chile are the two most stable major economies in Latin America.

• In the US, NAFTA has allowed jobs to be shifted to those with better efficiency.  Manufacturing output has risen 30% since 1994.

• In the US, unemployment fell between 1993 and 2000 (6,9% to 4%)   Real wages have risen.

• NAFTA is not responsible for lost jobs. Unemployment increases are a result of the East Asia economy, recession, and increases in manufacturing productivity.

Con NAFTA points

• In Mexico, hog farming and other farming is disappearing. Farmers cannot compete with the dumping of our grains and corns.    NAFTA has ended tariffs on these products that Mexico had imposed. However, These farm products are subsidized by our government.While relatively cheap for US farmers to grow and for Mexicans to buy, Mexicans cannot afford to buy these        same products grown in Mexico. So, many farmers are crossing into our country (short and long term) to gain employment.

• NAFTA has a “hands off” policy to intellectual copyright (including patents). For example genetically engineered corn is patented. This means that when a farmer grows genetically grown corn, he or she is not allowed to use the seed to grow next year’s crop. To do so is stealing in the eyes of the law, and the farmer can be prosecuted. Furthermore, if such seed blows in from a neighboring farm and grows,  the “receiving” farmer can be prosecuted even though some would call this an act of nature or act of God (think insurance and lightening).

• NAFTA lacks common policy. Each country is still free to negotiate independently with countries inside and outside of NAFTA.

• NAFTA has only 5 members on its dispute resolution panel for arbitration purposes.  Proceedings are not public.

• NAFTA does address the free flow of products and capital (money). However, it does not address the “free flow” of people. Each country has its own immigration laws.

• NAFTA does not seem to address humane/spiritual values (see especially the first two points above).

Christian responses (to ponder)

Rethink personal lives

             Think about material goods, what is actually needed, what to buy, where made.  Think about life beyond cars, housing, owning land.  Think about good stewardship.

Consider actions

           Ask stores where they get their products, either in person or through letter writing. Express concern for the working conditions of those who grew, manufactured, or shipped the product.

            Consider buying more Fair Trade products (in which the farmer gets a larger share of the profits).  Although the annual global volume of Fair Trade products would only fill one very large supermarket, it is a start However, consider that not buying from companies or stores with goods from “sweat shops” may be hurting the workers. Due to conditions where they live, it may be the only work possible without emigrating. (Think those who work in the flower industry under poor conditions in countries as Colombia).

Consider prayer

         Perhaps incorporating actions and rethinking personal lives into a vow of nonviolence

         Pray to make wise purchasing decisions

         Pray that for better listening skills, especially to those living under different economic, social, and political situations.

Closing thought

God gives us all we need (materially, spiritually, etc).  However, these gifts very often are through others (God’s instruments). So, for lack of a better word, it behooves us to listen and be grateful for the words, works, and deeds of others. I am thinking of a student from my Peace Corps days in Liberia, West Africa. He asked me if Americans would be interested if he came to the US and taught Mano. Maybe he was voicing something larger, Americans came over to teach, they also had much to offer us.

Sources

The North American Free Trade Agreement. (Headline Series- Foreign Policy Association) George Grayson. 1993

Free Trade (The Reference Shelf). Lynn Messina. 1995

US, Mexican and Canadian Farmers and Agriculture. Public Citizen (NAFTA at Ten Series). 2003.   http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_ag.pdf

The Mexican Economy, Agriculture and Environment. Public Citizen (NAFTA at Ten Series). 2003.  http://www.citizen.org/documents/NAFTA_10_mexico.pdf

Hello all,

Below is a copy of my presentation “outline”.

If you would like to see this as a “Word – like” document, 
    go to

      http://writer.zoho.com/public/jmflahiff/Pax-Christi—Hunger-(10-12-09) 

Any questions (including any challenges accessing the above), just let me know.

Peace Be With Us!

Janice 

jmflahiff@yahoo.com

Relationship between Free Trade, Current Food Policy and World Hunger (along with a few talking points for our representatives)

This presentation will focus on

(1) Current hunger crisis overview

(2) Factors affecting this crisis, as demand, fuel costs, biofuels, govt agricultural policies, free trade, IMF policies, agribusiness

(3) Talking points for our representatives

(4) Personal level options

(1) Current hunger crisis affects more than 900 million (of 6.5 billion) people (about 1 of 7). This is happening despite (in at least

recent years) that food production is believed to be adequate for the world’s people.  It is not only straining budgets of families

worldwide, but of the assistance programs.  The average family meal in El Salvador has 40 percent fewer calories now than

in May 2006. The cost of providing a meal to a child in Kenya has almost doubled (9 cents to 16 cents).

Many hungry people live in countries that cannot produce enough food, must import it (lack of arable land in their country, drought, do not own enough land.

(2) Prices have gone up due to many factors (am going to focus those under human control)

Fuel costs/biofuels
         Oil prices have risen rapidly in recent years, driving up agriculture prices, esp those dependent on petroleum (everything from                                        fertilizers, pesticides, gasoline for transportation, )
         Biofuels ..food products (for humans/livestock) are increasingly being used for fuel

        ”The price of grain is now directly tied to the price of oil” …Lester Brown, pres of Earth Policy Institute

          for example this year, 1/4 of US corn crop will e sent to ethanol plants…so chickens eat corn…price of eggs go up

          More corn planted, less soybeans planted, fewer acres left fallow

          Biofuels are renewable,and may be affordable in future, presently this is affecting choices in what to plant, food prices, and                                   world hunger

         Rising demand for nonlocal & “grain dense” food

 Growing demand for food in developing world (as China, India), with their higher incomes they are for the first time enjoying more                      diverse diets

 This includes rising demand for meat (and grain to feed livestock…ties in with biofuels)

        Government agricultural policy (individual countries)

 Subsidies (US Japan, EU) applied to one crop directly affect that crop’s production in another country that doesn’t have                                          subsidies…and can affect hunger

       Example….because of govt subsidies, AZ grows cotton where water is scarce (cotton requires a lot of water), this is at                                           expense of farmers in countries as Mali, who then can’t sell their product at a price to feed their family

Prohibition or restrictions on exports

          Presently applies to wheat (Russia, Ukraine, Argentina)…and rice (China, Indonesia, India)

              Keep in mind that about 70% of so called developing countries are net importers of food…

                  Upshot is a country as Bangladesh cannot buy rice because prices are so high 

        Free trade

     Under agreements as NAFTA, import quotas have been reduced or abolished, and tariffs increasingly dismantled

      (Keep in mind import quotas/tariffs meant to protect local production (as food) from cheaper imports)

      (Case in point, Mexico and corn..at the surface…seems helpful if their is a shortage, but it is at expense of local production

      jobs, improving local production in long run)

     Introduction of global agribusiness – Free trade agreements open up lands and markets to outside corporations which

        can…for example…plant high value crops for Western supermarkets (think ..perhaps Chilean grapes, gourmet foods)

       at expense of foods part of native’s diet, what they can afford

World Bank and IMF Monetary Fund (since 70’s, increasingly since 80’s)

Structural adjustment policies , set of policies imposed on national governments as condition for receiving loans…

basically these are long term policy changes so a country can resume growth…as market liberalization (esp opening

up to international trade), privatization of state run enterprises…end aid, credits, and advice to small farmers…reduce/

eliminate government market intervention (price fixing)….

Belief is if these countries are more like those of the North, economy will improve ( not the same conditions!)

Instead…argued…made it easier for multinational corporations to go in, easier for richer countries and multinationals

to extract goods at cheap prices and export cheap foodstuffs and other products…

Agribusiness 

(Corporations outside the so called developing countries..as ADM [anyone watch NewsHour?), Cargill, Nestle)

A few large companies dominate world's food system, large share of international markets for grains,

fertilizers, pesticides, and seeds

Agricultural commodities  are pretty much a monopoly,they are making record profits

    Cargill's went up 86% in quarter ending Feb 2008  (it controls 25% of US wheat exports, operates in 66 countries)

                      2004, settled suit of price fixing in corn sweetener market, 

     ADM- also operates in corn sweetener market, owns shipping/trucking subsidiaries as well as mills/storage facilities

                          worldwide 1993 found guilty of price fixing , fined $100 million by US govt, 2002 & '03 find for massively violating                                 environmental  air quality laws   (just cost of business???, )

       Remember, the very poor peform most farm work, whether on their own plots or in agro-industrial farms...their low labor cost

                     making it possible for us to eat well, (too well), while their educational, social, and political opportunities are minimal

                     Not only is modern agribusines dependent on cheap labor, but also cheap energy, water, soil overuse (fertilizer                                                     dependence)

     Food processing is also in hands of fewer and fewer large corporations (as Nestle), 

(3) Talking points/policy rethink

Energy conservation

Lately there is much private sector research and products to alternative sources of energy (solar, wind energy production,                                                        smaller cars,hybrid/electric cars).

However, not much government policy to overall energy reduction (energy use by new buildings/houses, computers [gaming                                                    takes a lot of energy], label info (how many energy units went into processing something) )

What role should the govt have in overall energy reduction? How much should be voluntary private sector driven? How much by

standards organizations?

Population….

  What should our govt policy be to aiding other countries in stabilizing populations

     (family planning, “spacing children”, birth control,etc)

Biofuels

What should be our govt policy in regards to biofuels?  Should they be encouraged?

Food Aid

Some say that aid for the hungry is often the dumping of surpluses by rich counries, undercutting local producers and even                                                  driving them out of business…Credits offtered to poor countries for agricultural imports can boost indebtedness and can create                                       import dependency..

How would your government policies address this?

 What do you think about offering agricultural extension services (both in our country and in other countries)  that are based on                                            listening to the farmer and what works best…

before offering ideas on based on our “best practices” and current research? 

Agribusiness

What responsibility do US based agriculture corporations have towards the farmers and others they employ directly or                                                           indirectly?

What responsibility to they have to the land and natural resources they directly or indirectly use?

Should these companies be regulated, and if so, to what degree in our countries policies, laws, as well as free trade                                                                   agreements we sign with other countries.

Lastly…

Should food be considered just another commodity (to be stocked privately, to be accepted as a product for speculation,                                                        hedging, etc) or is it a basic human right that should be treated differently.

If yes to the latter, how?

(4) Personal level options

    Think about consumption levels, how often do I need to eat meat? how much? how often?

    Think about how often I need to eat out of season food, gourmet food,processed food

    Think about if and how to incorporate more organic and/or locally grown food into my diet

    Think about buying more quality goods in which worker gets fair wage/price

    Think about “chatting people up” about these things without being preachy

        (St. Francis said, preach…use words if you must)

References

Here’s the link to the somewhat detailed outline of my talk

(Click on the link below, it should bring up the document)

http://writer.zoho.com/public/jmflahiff/Pax-Christi–Hunger-(10-12-09)

Any difficulties or challenges, please contact me!
I can send a copy of the document (don’t have Word at home, it’s something similar, and
hopefully compatible with your computer)

article here

Council on Library and Information Resources May/June 2008

Excerpts

HOW SHOULD WE be rethinking the research library in a swiftly changing information landscape?

In February, CLIR convened 25 leading librarians, publishers, faculty members, and information technology specialists to consider this question. Participants discussed the challenges and opportunities that libraries are likely to face in the next five to ten years, and how changes in scholarly communication will affect the future library. Essays by eight of the participants—Paul Courant, Andrew Dillon, Rick Luce, Stephen Nichols, Daphnee Rentfrow, Abby Smith, Kate Wittenberg, and Lee Zia—were circulated to participants in advance and provided background for the conversation.¹ CLIR will issue a full report of the meeting, including the background essays, later this summer.

A Vision for the 21st-Century Library

The breadth of the discussion underscored a critical point: the future of the research library cannot be considered apart from the future of the academy as a whole. Researchers are asking new questions and are developing new methodological approaches and intellectual strategies. These methods may entail new models of scholarly communication—for example, a greater reliance on data sets and multimedia presentations. This has profound consequences for academic publications because traditional printed books and journals cannot adequately capture these novel approaches. With the predicted rise in new forms of scholarship, the promotion-and-tenure process, which favors print publications (especially in the humanities), will need to be rethought. As these methods of communication change, the procedures, skills, and expertise that libraries need to manage them will change as well. With growing cross-disciplinary emphasis, it will also be necessary to reassess the organization of higher education—its departments, schools, and centers.

The research library in the 21st century will thus be profoundly influenced by the transformation of scholarship and research and by changes in the traditional organizational structures of a university.

Begin forwarded message:

From: Tim Reynolds <graypennell@GMAIL.COM>
Date: June 24, 2008 9:20:54 AM EDT
To: “DIG_REF@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU” <DIG_REF@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
Subject: Re: [DIG_REF] Zoomi and your library OPAC
Reply-To: Discussion of digital reference services
<DIG_REF@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>

Hi
I got this from another listserv but thought I would share it with
you all.
Pardon the cross posting.

http://zoomii.com/

Now imagine linking this system with your webcat instead of with Amazon.
People will now be able to virtual browse your shelves.

Thinkering Spaces in Libraries

(also search..thinkering..at least 2 more posts)

By jenny

Today I saw one possible future for libraries, and it has me pretty excited. I can look back on my professional career and see a progression of advocating for shifting services to where our users are, making our spaces more collaborative, and reinvigorating libraries as the community center (regardless of type of library). It’s why [...]

Today, many of those pieces came together for me in a pretty amazing package that has the power to reimagine the library as third place, cross some digital divides, and integrate participatory culture into our service model. Even better, it involves people and books, not just technology. So what did I see today? A project called Thinkering Spaces, conceived of by some very smart people at the Illinois Institute of Technology’s Institute of Design and funded by the MacArthur Foundation. After quite a bit of initial visioning and research, this group has built a prototype for a relatively cheap, portable, collaborative space that can be put up and taken down in libraries of any size on the fly.

The point is to bring spaces into libraries that let people collaborate around the content that already exists in in our buildings, add new content to the mix, mash it all up to create something new, and share it with the community. Rinse. Repeat. It’s a way to connect people with the physical world and help them make sense of it by interacting with and changing it. It’s another instance where the library adds value to the equation (the same way it does with books and now games), offering an experience you can’t replicate at home, borne of the community.

article

atricia Anderson was never big on computer games.

But walking a group through a demonstration on the virtual 3-D world called Second Life last week, Anderson told a small crowd she’s found a world of possibilities that virtual reality could have on health care.

“I see so much potential in Second Life,” the University of Michigan Emerging Technologies Librarian told the group. in the future. Almost exactly five years after the creation of Second Life, the development of Wolverine Island — U-M’s presence on the site – is nearly complete.

Applications: virtual medical situations/disaster preparedness