Struggle for coexistence: paper identifies factors crucial to sustaining differentiated agricultural systems

The coexistence of genetically-engineered (GE), organic, and conventional crops is both a distinguishing characteristic of US agriculture and a tremendous challenge – with implications for everyone from seed producers to farmers and consumers, at home as well as abroad.

A recent report produced for the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) by the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Agriculture in the 21st Century (AC21) brings clarity to this sometimes contentious topic. The report, submitted in February, succinctly identifies factors that enable coexistence in the US, as well as those factors that may inhibit it in the future.

The report notes, for example, that the US legal and regulatory framework “has enabled different markets to develop without … setting specific mandatory adventitious presence (AP) thresholds[,] and having process-based rather than product-based organic standards.” But AC21 found that AP remains a major challenge, and even “an occasional problem can have huge ramifications for coexistence.” These ramifications are magnified in the global market. A decision by a provider “to produce or commercialize GE products in the USmarket before regulatory clearances have been obtained in key US export markets could place exports of an entire crop (GE, organic, and non-GE) at risk.”

“Understanding what we’re doing right is just as important as understanding where there are issues that need to be addressed,” says AC21 Chair Patricia Layton, who also chairs the Department of Forestry and Natural Resources at Clemson University. “This report will help not only in terms of domestic policy making, but also when the US goes out to negotiate with its international trading partners.”

Michael Schechtman (USDA Agriculture Research Service) has served as Executive Secretary to AC21 since its inception six years ago. “The issues around coexistence and low-level presence are ones many countries have to grapple with. We share papers such as this one with some of our closest trading partners (Canada and Mexico). Our own agencies – such as Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, which is reviewing regulations related to transgenic plants – may find it useful as well.”

Layton credits Schechtman’s role, along with effective facilitation from the RESOLVE-HWW team, for AC21’s productivity. “Michael… is the conduit for communication between AC21 and the Administration. His breadth of knowledge – of the subject, of how USDA works, and of the world (trade perspective) – is enormously helpful.”

Schechtman says the key is for participants to “coalesce around a common vision” of a final product that will “meet the capacities and individual requirements of the committee members” as well as the USDA Secretary’s objectives.

Stakeholders say their participation in AC21 supports and informs their work on behalf of their individual organizations. “It’s a wonderful opportunity to move beyond posturing and get a deeper understanding of the positions of diverse stakeholders on the committee,” says Margaret (Mardi) Mellon, Director of Union of Concerned Scientists’ Food and Environment Program.

Randy Giroux, Scientific Lead, Corporate Agricultural Biotechnology, Cargill, Inc., agrees. “Cargill is only one stakeholder in a complex food and feed supply chain, from seed manufacturers all the way to consumers. Participating in these discussions helps us understand and make sure that our decisions and policies are informed by the needs of other stakeholders in our supply chain – both upstream and downstream from us.”

Contact: Abby Dilley

Creating “A Blueprint for a Healthier America”

“America should strive to be the healthiest nation in the world. Every American should have the opportunity to be as healthy as he or she can be. Every community should be safe from threats to its health. And all individuals and families should have a high level of health, health care, and public health services, regardless of whom they are or where they live.”

Over 140 organizations have signed on to this “Vision for a Healthier America,” formulated by the Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), a nonpartisan non-profit organization that has been convening leading health experts and organizations to discuss how to effectively modernize the public health system. 
 
“A change in administration presents an opportunity,” says TFAH Executive Director Jeff Levi. “Public health tends to be neglected during these transitions. We saw the need for a clearly articulated blueprint for how public health should be funded, how it should be structured, what kind of work force is needed. We wanted to develop this blueprint in a systematic way, using creative thinking from some of the best minds from all the [public health] constituencies.”

To ensure that every stakeholder could participate as equal players at the table, TFAH worked with facilitators from RESOLVE to convene a preliminary discussion in January, followed by a substantive work session in March with former federal health officials, current state and county health officials, and public health professional and constituency groups. (The March meeting was also informed by a discussion of social determinants of public health that TFAH had convened in February with the Prevention Institute.)

The desire for facilitation arose from the need to make every stakeholder feel that they are equal players at the table, says Levi. “A lot of the folks who participated in these discussions have been very active in federal policy for a long time. What was refreshing was that we seem to have created a safe enough space that people were willing to be critical of initiatives that they had created when they were in office – to say that some policies, programs, or structures needed to be undone or rethought.”

Written reports are now being circulated for comment by participants and others, and are the basis for conversations TFAH is having with both presidential campaigns. The final “Blueprint” of policy options for revitalizing the public health system will be presented in December to the transition team for the incoming Administration along with the next Congress.

This project is supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The California Endowment, and other philanthropies.

Contact: Abby Dilley

Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making.
Since 2003, a National Academies panel has been studying public participation processes in environmental assessment and policy making. The panel conducted an extensive review of the literature and reported on indicators of success and variables that may influence these indicators. RESOLVE President Gail Bingham is serving on the panel for this study, which will be released in the fall of 2008.

Policy Consensus Initiative’s “Getting the Most from a Collaborative Process.”
This trainer’s manual provides information for training agency and other leaders who would like to learn about and use collaborative processes to address public issues. Materials are presented in eight “best practices” modules for sponsoring, organizing, and conducting a collaborative governance process. These materials are a follow-up to and were designed to be used with PCI’s Practical Guide to Collaborative Governance. For more information, see http://www.policyconsensus.org/.

Responding to Streams of Land Use Disputes: A Systems Approach.
This report by the Public Policy Research Institute at the University of Montana and the Consensus Building Institute surveys practices in nearly 30 North American communities and states. It offers a framework for planners, planning board members, civic officials, developers, citizens and others who wish to avoid unproductive and costly disputes and explores how municipalities are learning to manage streams of disputes in a systematic, measured way. To download the report, see http://www.umtpri.org/publications/policy_reports.html.

Global Climate Change Collaborative (G3C).
The MIT-USGS Science Impact Collaborative (MUSIC) has initiated the Global Climate Change Collaborative (G3C), a network of institutions conducting research projects to help communities, planners, and policy makers develop adaptive management and governance processes to prepare for climate change impacts. The coordinating committee is tri-chaired by MUSIC’s Herman Karl, Michael Davidson of the University of Pretoria, South Africa, and Rosemary Sandford of the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystem Cooperative Research Centre, Tasmania. Initial projects focus on coastal and marine ecosystems and fresh water resources and management. For more information, see http://scienceimpact.mit.edu.

Gregory Sobel Diversity in Mediation Scholarship.
This scholarship was established as a tribute to the late Gregory Sobel, who was an accomplished mediator and advocate for increasing diversity in the field of alternative dispute resolution. The scholarship is managed by The Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution, who will award a limited number of scholarships to their Certificate Program in Dispute Resolution, ADR Training Program, and Annual Conference each year. For more information, please see http://www.natlctr4adr.org/index.html.

U.S. Institute’s Environmental Conflict Resolution (ECR) Internship Program.
This internship offers an opportunity for Udall Scholars who have completed college or are in graduate school to spend three to six months in Tucson, AZ and gain exposure to the practice of environmental conflict resolution. Interns will contribute to an array of projects related to ECR cases, outreach and/or evaluation. All interested former Udall Scholars are encouraged to apply. Applications are requested three months before the desired start date. For more information, visit ecr.gov or email gillette@ecr.gov.

Maryland Storm Water General Permit
Earlier this year, Maryland’s Department of the Environment (MDE) announced that it would revise the General Discharge Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, a permit required for all construction projects in Maryland disturbing one acre or more. The General Permit establishes effluent limitations protecting water quality, erosion and sediment control, and storm water management. MDE invited public involvement through a series of monthly public meetings to seek input and build agreement on the revisions, and asked RESOLVE to facilitate the public meetings, which began in April, with technical partner LimnoTech.

Contact: Jennifer Peyser

Green Seal Industrial and Institutional Cleaners Standard Revision Process
Green Seal has worked with manufacturers, purchasers, and end users to create more than 40 environmental certification standards. RESOLVE is now facilitating the revisions process for Green Seal’s “Environmental Standard for General-Purpose Bathroom, Glass, and Carpet Cleaners Used for Industrial and Institutional Purposes” (GS-37). The process involves nearly 400 registered stakeholders, a technical team, and an Executive Committee representing industry, health experts, children’s advocates, and the State of New York, which has adopted the current GS-37 standard for use in all public and private elementary and secondary schools.

Contact: Jennifer Peyser

Environmental Justice and Green Business
Private sector interest in green business opportunities is growing rapidly, with an increasing number of businesses improving the energy efficiency of their operations, finding market opportunities in products that will enhance the sustainability of US communities, and collaborating with others in their supply chain or communities to achieve environmental goals. EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice has asked RESOLVE to assess the potential for a national dialogue on the opportunities for low income and minority communities to participate economically and to benefit environmentally from these trends.

Contact: Gail Bingham

International Association of Facilitators
July 23-24, 2008 (Africa Conference, Pilanesburg, South Africa)
August 27-28, 2008 (Asia Conference, Sarawak, Malaysia)
October 2-5, 2008 (Europe Conference, Groningen, The Netherlands)
November 26-28, 2008 (Australia/New Zealand Conference, Bathurst, New South Wales)
For more information: www.iaf-world.org

International Association for Public Participation International Conference
“Public Participation and Corporate Social Responsibility: from Why to How”
August 27-29, 2008
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland
For more information: www.iap2.org 

8th Annual Association for Conflict Resolution Conference
“Aspirations, Possibilities, and Realities: Expanding Principles, Practice, and Research in a Changing World”
September 24-27, 2008
Austin, Texas. For more information: www.acrnet.org/conferences

4th National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation Conference
October 3-5, 2008
Austin, Texas
For more information: www.thataway.org

Association for Conflict Resolution - Conflict Resolution Day
October 16, 2008
For more information: www.acrnet.org/crday

We welcome your feedback. Email us: resolvereporter@resolv.org

We’re on the Web! www.resolv.org

RESOLVE
1255 23rd Street , NW
Suite 875
Washington, DC 20037
(202) 944-2300