Logo

Agricultural Sustainability and Food Production October 07, 2022

Project Advisor: William Masters (Tufts University) Raw data: .xlsx Full questionnaire: .pdf

Agricultural Sustainability and Food Production

In collaboration with William Masters at Tufts University, we asked leaders, fellows, and awardees of the American Society of Agronomy, the American Society of Animal Science, and the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association about their views on agriculture. A total of 111 experts participated in the survey. More details and criteria for inclusion can be found here.

The questions and responses are summarized below. All information on this page is in the public domain and can be cited as:

Chris Said and William A. Masters (2022), Apollo Academic Survey on Agricultural Sustainability and Food Production. Released 7 October 2022 at www.apollosurveys.org.

Primary results

  1. Threats to food production sustainability and the role of climate change: Climate change was ranked the biggest threat to sustainability of food production in the U.S., with 51% of researchers ranking it as the top threat. Lower ranked threats included resource depletion, economic viability, government regulation, and biodiversity loss, which were ranked as the top threat by 21%, 19%, 10% and 2% of respondents respectively.
  2. Actions to improve sustainability and use of more traditional techniques: We asked respondents what changes in agricultural production methods could improve the sustainability of food production. Respondents favored farm diversification, defined as producing more than 3 different crop and livestock species, which 69% said would improve sustainably. Fewer respondents thought that producing closer to consumers (45%), more organic certification (27%), or using older more traditional production techniques (11%) would improve sustainability.
  3. Threats to well-being from how food is produced: When we asked respondents to rank threats to the overall well-being of Americans from the way food is produced, the top threat cited by researchers is how food manufacturing transforms whole foods into processed and packaged items with added salt, sugar and other potentially harmful chemicals, which 32% of researchers ranked as the top threat. Lower ranked threats included greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, risks from bacteria and antibiotic resistance, and risks from crop chemical residues and runoff.
  4. Actions to improve the well-being of Americans: The highest priority was more restrictive standards on the use of antibiotics in livestock and food animals, which 58% of respondents thought would improve the well-being of Americans. Fewer respondents thought that more restrictive standards on use of crop chemicals (44%) or more restrictive standards on the use of GMOs (11%) would improve the well-being of Americans.
  1. Question 1

    What do you believe are the greatest threats to the continued ability of U.S. farmers to produce food for Americans and the world, over the next 20-30 years?
    1. • Climate change (e.g. heat waves, drought and floods, storm intensity)
    2. • Resource depletion (e.g. soil degradation, loss of access to irrigation water)
    3. • Biodiversity loss (e.g. too few crop varieties, loss of pollinators or other ecosystem function)
    4. • Economic viability (e.g. labor scarcity, high input costs, low output prices)
    5. • Government regulation (e.g. on land use, crop inputs, & livestock practices)

    Results

    survey 1 responses

    survey 1 responses
    Participant Response Confidence
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 6
    Jikun Huang
    Peking University
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 1 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 8
    International trade liberalization and governance are also important
    David Zilberman
    Univerisity of California, Berkeley
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 2 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 5 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 3 7
    We are also dependent on trade. The conflict in Ukraine raises questions about future trade flows.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 2 2
    Barry Goodwin
    North Carolina State University
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 1 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: Government regulation: 1
    Market will adjust for resource and economic constraints, so they won't be a concern. only climate change and biodiversity loss are concerns..
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 1
    Allen Featherstone
    Kansas State University
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 1 9
    Daniel A. Sumner
    University of California, Davis
    Climate change: Resource depletion: Biodiversity loss: Economic viability: Government regulation: 1 8
    It is impossible to separate the issues of regulation and economic viability, since regulation affects viability. But the main issue is that if input suppliers, producers and marketers are allowed to respond then climate and resource issues raise prices not "ability." Odd that reduced public R&D and regulation of private R&D are not listed.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    In my view, economic viability is ensured since prices will adjust in the face of scarcity.
    Alfonso Morales
    University of Wisconsin
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    Will human responses scale sufficiently?
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 8
    While most challenges listed can potentially be mitigated with investments in research and development, and adoption of new technologies, Climate change presents a novel threat whose impacts are arguably beyond the control of farmers.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 8
    James Sterns
    Oregon State University
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    The drivers of change (climate change, resource depletion, biodiversity loss) will happen at a pace exceeding agribusinesses' ability to modify/shift their business models to maintain viability; regulations will be even slower to change - obsolescence of business models and regulations will be our primary scholarly and policy challenges.
    Gary Schnitkey
    University of Illinois
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 1 9
    Resource issues related to climate change can be dealt with in a straight-forward manner if the tools are available.
    Matthew S. Clancy
    Institute for Progress
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 6
    I am confident US farmers will continue to be produce food for Americans and the world over the timeframe.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 5
    I would rank climate change far, far above the other threats on this list.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 3 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 3
    Matin Qaim
    University of Bonn
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 2 5
    Biodiversity loss is serious from environmental perspective, but may not necessarily jeopardize food production
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 9
    I am confident in the ability of farmers and associated industries to find solutions to economic problems, but I am far less confident in market or government responses to the huge externalities that we face in the form of climate change, excessive water use, and so on.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 4 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 4
    so many of those elements are interrelated and in the same systems
    Ken Meter
    Crossroads Resource Center
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 5
    Agriculture has not been financially viable since 1973, except during global crises.
    David Hennessy
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 1 4
    I don't think there is great threat. Reduced rate of technical innovation is the biggest threat, hence 1 for regulation. Some of these headings are not separable; regulation, climate change, depletion, biodiversity.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 5
    James MacDonald
    University of Maryland
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 5
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 10
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 4 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 5
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 7
    Geoffery E. Dahl
    University of Florida
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 2 7
    Many of these are interdependent; e.g. drought will affect economic viability, regulation may affect resource depletion etc.
    Michael Dikeman
    Kansas State University Professor Emeritus
    Climate change: Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 1 Economic viability: Government regulation: 4 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 5
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 7
    The U.S is already experiencing ongoing drought conditions, water scarcity, and adverse weather events that will only get worse without significant behavioral changes in agriculture and society.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 9
    These answers are based on mainly the midwest and availability of water. California and south might be different.
    Jean-Francois Hocquette
    INRAE
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 8
    Cassandra Jones
    Kansas State University
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 4 4
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 6
    Filippo Miglior
    University of Guelph
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 1
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 1 9
    Animal feeding and government regulation
    Anna Kate Shoveller
    University of Guelph
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 6
    Each threat is real and depending on context, I may change my priority listing. The strongest approach would be consideration of all.
    Gerald Huntington
    North Carolina State University
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 10
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 3 8
    Climate change is real, the solutions are a hoax to get more government money.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 8
    Alison Van Eenennaam
    University of California, Davis
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 5
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 8
    Tim McAllister
    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 3 8
    All of the above are important indicators
    Michael Azain
    University of Georgia
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 4 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: Economic viability: Government regulation: 8
    The survey allowed me to score only one issue. Each of these issues can be important. Drought and soil degradation fundamental to all of agriculture. Govt Regulations can be burdensome. Economic viability, ie, labor availability is an issue.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 7
    Increased labor constraints and government regulations are the two that are most difficult to overcome.
    Alison Crane
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 1 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 6
    James Reecy
    Iowa State University
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 4 7
    John P. McNamara
    Washington State University
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 10
    the short term headline grabbing nonsense of regulations and labor issues are minor compared to serious environment changing problems like soil health, temperature ,weather patterns (climate change) and biodiversity management.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 2 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 1 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 3
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 3 7
    Labor shortage and access to supplies.
    Randall Nelson
    University of Illinois
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 1 9
    my personal thought
    Nat B. Dellavalle
    Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc.
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 4
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    This survey is very problematic in that these are all interconnected: for example climate change is a huge controller of resource depletion, and regulations, biodiversity and economics all play a role as well. You are really looking at a web of interconnectivity not individual controls that are separate from one another. A change in one can produce feedback loops in others.
    Michelle Wander
    University of Illinois
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 4 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 3 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 9
    These factors are, of course, all intertwined.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 5
    Harry Vereecken
    Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Juelich, Germany
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 5
    Each of the issues is so key that ranking them is fruitless.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 7
    Mark Anthony Brick
    Colorado State University
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 8
    I would rank Resource depletion the same as Biodiversity loss
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    Recent reports show that the impacts of soil degradation have been masked by fertilizer and irrigation , while the availability of both declines.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 9
    The 5 categories are not independent. Climate change affects resource depletion and biodiversity
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 1 9
    David Bruce Weaver
    Auburn University
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 2 6
    We are doing a fair job of combating loss of biodiversity. Resource depletion can be a function of Climate change.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 6
    I assume government regulation includes govmt supports programs
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 7
    climate change is going to alter how we grow food, through production ag systems. water shortages will precede land availability, but not by much
    Warren Dick
    The Ohio State University
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 3 9
    Climate change is an issue but the more important part of this is how to adapt to climate change followed by reducing the development of climate change. Worldwide, resource depletion is, to me, by far the #1 issue.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 5 5
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 7
    Climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource depletion are interrelated. Drivers will vary by location.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 4 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 2 Government regulation: 3 7
    Water shortages in the western U.S.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 10
    Climate change is by far the biggest sustainability challenge for agriculture in the coming years
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 8
    climate change and resource depletion are intimately related - either one could be the "greatest threat" to food security.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 9
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 5 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 1 9
    David Allen Lobb
    University of Manitoba
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 4 9
    Soil degradation and the changing climate interact to enhance the impacts caused by either in isolation.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 2 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 2 Resource depletion: 1 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 5 7
    These rankings may reflect regional/crop bias though the survey if US-wide. One shoe does not fit all.
    Paul Gepts
    University of California, Davis
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 3 Biodiversity loss: 2 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 5 10
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 5 Government regulation: 4 3
    Political instability (in the U.S. or globally) would the the greatest threat to food production.
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 3 Resource depletion: 4 Biodiversity loss: 5 Economic viability: 1 Government regulation: 2 6
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 5 Biodiversity loss: 4 Economic viability: 3 Government regulation: 2 10
    Anonymous
    Climate change: 1 Resource depletion: 2 Biodiversity loss: 3 Economic viability: 4 Government regulation: 5 7
  2. Question 2

    What do you believe are the greatest threats to the overall wellbeing of Americans caused by how the U.S. food supply is produced, over the next 20-30 years?
    1. • Harms from greenhouse gas emissions (especially CO2 and methane), loss of carbon sinks
    2. • Harms from crop chemicals (especially fertilizer runoff, pesticides and herbicides poisoning or residues)
    3. • Harms from bacteria and antibiotic resistance (including bacteria affecting food safety)
    4. • Harms from food manufacturing (including added salt & sugar or chemicals in packaging)
    5. • Harms from animal welfare (considering Americans’ interest in both people and animals)

    Results

    survey 2 responses

    survey 2 responses
    Participant Response Confidence
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Jikun Huang
    Peking University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 6
    David Zilberman
    Univerisity of California, Berkeley
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 5
    Barry Goodwin
    North Carolina State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 1
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Allen Featherstone
    Kansas State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 3 6
    I do not think that any of these are highly significant.
    Daniel A. Sumner
    University of California, Davis
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare: 9
    Odd you do not mention higher prices relative to incomes, caused by lack of R&D and other regulations.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 8
    Alfonso Morales
    University of Wisconsin
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 8
    The market will respond to the last, the downstream consequences of the first three are the biggest concern.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 6
    The threat of food insecurity has been surmounted by a food production system heavily reliant on intermediate materials—fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides. Food manufacturing and processing in order to extend shelf-life, and cater to changing consumer tastes and preferences have had a direct impact on consumer health and well-being, as well as the eco-system.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 7
    James Sterns
    Oregon State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 6
    Gary Schnitkey
    University of Illinois
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 4 8
    Matthew S. Clancy
    Institute for Progress
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 2 6
    If we're talking about how the animals feel, rather than how the humans feel about the animals, I might rank things differently!
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Matin Qaim
    University of Bonn
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 9
    I am not the least concerned about animal welfare or food manufacturing. I am concerned about consumer's lack of good sense in making food choices that are consistent with their short and long term well-being, an item not listed above.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Ken Meter
    Crossroads Resource Center
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 7
    David Hennessy
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 4
    Misinformed regulations might be the biggest threat.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 5
    James MacDonald
    University of Maryland
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 4
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 5 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 4 5
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 3 8
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Geoffery E. Dahl
    University of Florida
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 5 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 3 5
    Michael Dikeman
    Kansas State University Professor Emeritus
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 2 4
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 6
    All of these are significant issues for American consumers but poor dietary choices leading to obesity, cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure is perhaps the most concerning.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 8
    Have a better handle on crop chemical and food manufacturing problems...those are easily controllable, consumer response to use of cars and animal welfare less predictable
    Jean-Francois Hocquette
    INRAE
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Cassandra Jones
    Kansas State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 4
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 4 8
    Filippo Miglior
    University of Guelph
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 4 1
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 1 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Poor knowledge of the public about human nutrition
    Anna Kate Shoveller
    University of Guelph
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 5 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 4 6
    I listed the above as the risks that I believe to be of greatest threat; however, animal rights seem to have steered itself into #1 in MHO.
    Gerald Huntington
    North Carolina State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 3 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 5 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 1 8
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 4 8
    The list does not include any real threats to the wellbeing of Americans. None of them are significant.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Alison Van Eenennaam
    University of California, Davis
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 6
    Putting bacteria and antibiotic resistance together is really combining two different concerns - one to do with foodborne illness and one to do with medically-important antibiotics
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 4 7
    Tim McAllister
    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 8
    NC
    Michael Azain
    University of Georgia
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare:
    I do not think these are really issues that affect our wellbeing.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare: 9
    I don't see any of these issues as critical for causing harm to Americans. The biggest harm to Americans comes from False Information concerning these issues scaring Americans leading to bad decisions.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 8
    What is consumed will be the first factor, which is a healthful product.
    Alison Crane
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 5
    James Reecy
    Iowa State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 7
    John P. McNamara
    Washington State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 10
    again, climate change swamps any of the others. we can manage crop chemical use well if incentives are in place. we can manage bacterial resistance, but there will be outbreaks. the addition of sodium chloride and sugar will change as consumers change their eatiing habits, and this might be the hardest problem to fix.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare:
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 3 4
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 6
    I do not solely link greenhouse gas issues with ag.
    Randall Nelson
    University of Illinois
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 9
    personal thought
    Nat B. Dellavalle
    Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc.
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 4
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 6
    All of these topics cannot be adequate addressed when short-term profit for corporations is put before human or environmental health. The health burden is pushed off onto individuals to pay, instead of being put into the up-front costs of products, which would decrease short-term profits for corporations.
    Michelle Wander
    University of Illinois
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 4 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 8
    Lack of food / access to food will become a larger problem
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 5 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 4 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Greenhouse gas emissions means climate change is a major factor.
    Harry Vereecken
    Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Juelich, Germany
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Mark Anthony Brick
    Colorado State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 5 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 2 7
    This is a difficult set of options to choose from. Clearly, all five concerns are valid.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 8
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 3 9
    David Bruce Weaver
    Auburn University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 3 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 4 1
    I believe the magnetude of these threats tend to be exaggerated
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 5
    Warren Dick
    The Ohio State University
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare:
    I didn't rank any of the response in question 7 as it ignores so many other more important issues like food deserts, narrowing of food choices, too many regulations on what government deems should be accessible to people, etc.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 4 5
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 5 Animal welfare: 3 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 4 Food manufacturing: Animal welfare: 9
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 1 8
    David Allen Lobb
    University of Manitoba
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 3 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 5 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 2 Animal welfare: 4 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 3 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 2 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 4
    Paul Gepts
    University of California, Davis
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 1 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 6
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 4 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 1 Animal welfare: 5 7
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 4 Crop chemicals: 2 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 1 Food manufacturing: 3 Animal welfare: 5 3
    The greatest threat to wellbeing of Americans is their choice of consumption habits. The industry produces what people want to consume, but does not dictate the amount or form of food they choose to consume.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: Crop chemicals: Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: Food manufacturing: Animal welfare: 8
    I did not to rank these, as none are major threats. Science has given us the safest and most regulated food production system in the world. The greatest threat will be regulation that will try to limit some of these practices which will force producers into practices that are truly harmful to wellbeing.
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 5 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 3 10
    Anonymous
    Greenhouse gas emissions: 2 Crop chemicals: 1 Bacteria and antibiotic resistance: 3 Food manufacturing: 4 Animal welfare: 5 6
  3. Question 3

    On balance, for the sustainability of agricultural production over the coming 20-30 years, what do you expect would be the effect of:
    1. • A larger fraction of farmland managed with older methods, instead of the latest techniques.
    2. • A larger fraction of farms being more diversified, defined here as producing more than 3 different crop and livestock species.
    3. • A larger fraction of food was produced closer to consumers, for example within the same region or state of the U.S.
    4. • A larger fraction of food was produced in ways that would meet the requirements of USDA organic certification.

    Results

    survey 3 responses

    survey 3 responses
    Participant Response Confidence
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Much improve 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 2
    Jikun Huang
    Peking University
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    David Zilberman
    Univerisity of California, Berkeley
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 2
    Barry Goodwin
    North Carolina State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Greatly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly improve 10
    Don't quite understand the questions, poorly framed. Are you asking what they should be "for the...", or what I think they would be?
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    Allen Featherstone
    Kansas State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 8
    Daniel A. Sumner
    University of California, Davis
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly improve 5
    Alfonso Morales
    University of Wisconsin
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    The science is incomplete, however the behavioral change from proximity is important.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Much improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 8
    James Sterns
    Oregon State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Much improve Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    Gary Schnitkey
    University of Illinois
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 3
    Matthew S. Clancy
    Institute for Progress
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly improve 1
    These questions are vague. e.g., older methods v. latest techniques is too wide a set of possible comparisons.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    Matin Qaim
    University of Bonn
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    is there any evidence to suggest that 1950s or 19th Century agriculture was more sustainable? We have learned much in the last 50 years. Improvements have occurred using new methods and technologies, not by abjuring them.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Much improve Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    wide range of practices in each of the category so hard to rank
    Ken Meter
    Crossroads Resource Center
    Older farmland management techniques: Much improve Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 9
    David Hennessy
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 4
    I am not sure what is meant by the "latest techniques." Some will help, some worsen, some have unclear likely impact.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 5
    James MacDonald
    University of Maryland
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly improve 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    Geoffery E. Dahl
    University of Florida
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    Michael Dikeman
    Kansas State University Professor Emeritus
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    While having food sourced closer to consumers would be great there would need to be a lot of money put into doing that in urban areas that would decrease the efficiency of production and make them more expensive
    Jean-Francois Hocquette
    INRAE
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Much improve 9
    Cassandra Jones
    Kansas State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 3
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 8
    Filippo Miglior
    University of Guelph
    Older farmland management techniques: Farm diversification: Food produced close to consumers: Food produced organically:
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Greatly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 9
    Animal producers are reluctant to adapt to new ideas and new knowledge.
    Anna Kate Shoveller
    University of Guelph
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 8
    Gerald Huntington
    North Carolina State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    I dont feel that organic production practices can meet the demands of the population for econimic food production in a way comparable to convential ag practices.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Get rid of PC based solutions to non existent problems.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    Alison Van Eenennaam
    University of California, Davis
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    The definition of "diversified" as "producing > 3 different crop and livestock species" likely includes most farms – even a large corn/soy rotation probably also have some cattle so that would be three right there but likely not what is envisioned by diversified
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 10
    Tim McAllister
    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Reliance on organic production will result in food insecurity
    Michael Azain
    University of Georgia
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    The problem with many of these suggested practices is higher cost food which would harm a majority of Americans
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 6
    These are implying that older methods were better.
    Alison Crane
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
    James Reecy
    Iowa State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
    If you compare where agriculture was 50 years ago to today, incredible improvement have been made. I think the future will be even more positively impactful.
    John P. McNamara
    Washington State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 9
    these are pretty broad categories but crop rotation for example will help with some crops in some locations, but is not feasible nor needed in others. Organic ag is a myth, the only difference being antibiotics and nutrient source (manure versus manufactured) and those are non issues (antibiotics are not bad and are manageable and chemical fertilizer production is an energy and distribution issue.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 8
    Question 10 is very ambiguous. How 'old' is older? Practices of 30 years ago or 100+ years ago?
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Much improve Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 4
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 10
    Old ways and heavy organic will have a heavily negative impact upon the environment. I do not know of any production system without 3crops/livestock. Even the basic corn/bean/Beef. True diversified would be many more than 3.
    Randall Nelson
    University of Illinois
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly improve 7
    Nat B. Dellavalle
    Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc.
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 3
    There are multiple claims for organic, regenerative and what ever is next farming. With out empirical evidence the claims are faith not evidence based claims.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 3
    Most of these changes cannot be enacted due to the controlling forces of capitalism. Unless capitalism is regulated, these suggestions are not realistic and increased regulation does not seem plausible or likely in today's political environment.
    Michelle Wander
    University of Illinois
    Older farmland management techniques: Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Much improve 9
    Devil is in the details- I am assuming organic practiced would embrace appropriate new methods, is not ‘old fashioned’
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 9
    Organic production has major environmental problems
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Not alter 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly worsen Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 5
    Harry Vereecken
    Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Juelich, Germany
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Farm diversification: Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    I did not answer # 10 because the timescale for older methods was not provided; hence, the question is too vague. Q #11 assumes the only options are mono-culture or diversified farming on land, which I believe is too limited.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 6
    Mark Anthony Brick
    Colorado State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Much improve 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 6
    Unless diets change, just growing organic would require more land. Therefore it is probabaly a wash in terms of sustainability
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 9
    Crop/livestock rotation is by far the best approach in conjunction with local/regional climate
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Organic food is ok BUT the changes to tillage (increased tillage for weed management) would greatly harm the environment + can't use chemicals for disease control
    David Bruce Weaver
    Auburn University
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 9
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly improve Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    Warren Dick
    The Ohio State University
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
    WE are becoming too vertically stacked in our production systems and with a narrowing of diversity of crops and animals.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 6
    ‘Older methods’ is vague.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 6
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 9
    Organic does not always equal sustainable, especially if a lot of tillage is done.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Not alter 5
    I think the way these questions are written indicates the survey is tainted and you are looking for a specific outcome.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Not alter Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Much improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
    David Allen Lobb
    University of Manitoba
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 8
    Organic farming is not necessarily an environmentally or economically friendly form of production -- there are problems.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Slightly worsen Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Not alter 3
    'Sustainability' of some modern methods will factor into these answers; as current GE traits, for example, continue to fail (resistance issues) and are not replaced with either genetic or chemical solutions, then re-learning older techniques but with modern technology (GPS, image analysis, equipment) will be necessary but take a long transition. It takes skill and time to be successful with NOSP approved methods, but may become necessary, and eventually more sustainable, depending on the product pipeline. So far, the future GE treadmill looks bleak.
    Paul Gepts
    University of California, Davis
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly improve 5
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Slightly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 10
    Organic production is a marketing sham. Someone studying economics, true production needed to feed the world, etc. cannot support organic systems as they do not make sense and cater to the rich. We need to focus on vegetables and fruits for the middle class and poor, using safe conventional practices.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Farm diversification: Much improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 7
    Terms "older methods" and "latest techniques" are too vague, or subject to too much personal interpretation, so I did not answer question 10.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Not alter Food produced organically: Greatly worsen 9
    Such practices are fine and noble, but will not be able to maintain the demand. Just look what impact a war or weather event can have on supply now.
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Much improve Farm diversification: Not alter Food produced close to consumers: Greatly worsen Food produced organically: Much improve 10
    Anonymous
    Older farmland management techniques: Greatly worsen Farm diversification: Slightly improve Food produced close to consumers: Slightly improve Food produced organically: Slightly worsen 7
  4. Question 4

    On balance, for the wellbeing of Americans, taking account of how changes would affect all of our concerns, what do you expect would be the effect of:
    1. • Using more restrictive standards than we now have to limit subtherapeutic antibiotic use.
    2. • Using more restrictive standards than we now have to limit use of genetically modified organisms
    3. • Using more restrictive standards than we now have to limit use of crop chemicals, including fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides.

    Results

    survey 4 responses

    survey 4 responses
    Participant Response Confidence
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 2
    Jikun Huang
    Peking University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    David Zilberman
    Univerisity of California, Berkeley
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 3
    Barry Goodwin
    North Carolina State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 10
    same as above
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 5
    Allen Featherstone
    Kansas State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 10
    Changes need to be market driven and not regulatory driven. Regulation tends to not be flexible enough to consider individual conditions.
    Daniel A. Sumner
    University of California, Davis
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 6
    Alfonso Morales
    University of Wisconsin
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 4
    I have the least knowledge and experience on this.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 9
    James Sterns
    Oregon State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 6
    Gary Schnitkey
    University of Illinois
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 2
    Matthew S. Clancy
    Institute for Progress
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 4
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 6
    Matin Qaim
    University of Bonn
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Ken Meter
    Crossroads Resource Center
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Much improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 10
    David Hennessy
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 4
    Not sure what is meant magnitude-wise by 'more restrictive' so category choice is hard.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 5
    James MacDonald
    University of Maryland
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 5
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Geoffery E. Dahl
    University of Florida
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 8
    Michael Dikeman
    Kansas State University Professor Emeritus
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Foreign ownership of land is an increasing concern.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 3
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Jean-Francois Hocquette
    INRAE
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 9
    Cassandra Jones
    Kansas State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 3
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 7
    Filippo Miglior
    University of Guelph
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 1
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 9
    The FDA should review new science about animal nutrition and approve the use of amino acids as alternatives to in-feed
    Anna Kate Shoveller
    University of Guelph
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Gerald Huntington
    North Carolina State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    This survey obviously has a built in bias, based on the possible answers and questions.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 9
    Alison Van Eenennaam
    University of California, Davis
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    What is meant by "subtherapeutic" antibiotic use? It is illegal to use medically important antibiotics for production purposes – is that was is meant by subtherapeutic? For the therapeutic treatment, prevention, and control of a specifically identified disease, animal producers need to obtain authorization from a licensed veterinarian
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 10
    Tim McAllister
    Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8
    Need regulatory oversight but needs to be driven by science not fear
    Michael Azain
    University of Georgia
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 10
    Use of antibiotics has already been reduced and this contribution to human health is negligible. GMO have increased productivity. We should not be doing things that produce less food (local, organic, etc)
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 9
    These suggestions would reduce productivity, and increase the need to utilize marginal land for production
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 9
    Alison Crane
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    James Reecy
    Iowa State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    I believe that agricultures brightest days are to come. The upside potential to positively impact society is incredible, from carbon sequestration to improved nutritional quality of the food produced.
    John P. McNamara
    Washington State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 10
    the same basic comments. more regulations are not needed. education and incentives to use best practices is needed. we have the technical expertise for about anything. the will to use it, the willingness to adapt and change are the issues. The irrational behavior in response to the pandemic is an example of a more acute symptom compared to the slower less intense problem we have had with agriculture. Well meaning people suggest regulations or actions which deny or defy existing knowledge, farmers and others overreact with 'government is killing us' while the education, rational few make the needed evidence based changes and lead the way. we need to make more of the third group, people who are able to look at evidence and change as needed.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 4
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 10
    Randall Nelson
    University of Illinois
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 5
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Much improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 8
    Nat B. Dellavalle
    Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc.
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 3
    Choices should be based on empirical evidence not superstition such as old vs new, organic vs conventional or natural vs artificial.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 6
    Michelle Wander
    University of Illinois
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 4
    Outcomes are context dependent and indirect effects, for example weed resistance resulting from overuse of chemicals enabled by use of GMOs….
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    These questions require a lot of context.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 7
    Harry Vereecken
    Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Juelich, Germany
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    Mark Anthony Brick
    Colorado State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    The Gobal public is not well informed about the use, effects and impacts of chemicals, genetic modifications and modern technologies on food production. Without these modern technologies, more people will be affected by food insecurity. We need to better inform the public about these issues and reduce some very ridiculous ideas about many modern technologies. Issues related to biodiversity, sustainability, and the real cost of food production are important to a better-informed global consumer.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Much improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 2
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 9
    antibiotics are so over prescribed as are crop chemicals that it will take decades for much improvement
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 9
    There are already herbicide resistant weeds, taking one out of the tool-box will put more pressure on what is left. This will heighten problems. Until crops are developed that are 'weed resistant' (can grow through weed pressure) we will continue to lose yield potential and food security
    David Bruce Weaver
    Auburn University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 3
    Warren Dick
    The Ohio State University
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 8
    The anti technology approach will lead to more harm than good. The better alternative is to develop responsible use of technology.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 5
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 8
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: More restrictive standards on crop chemicals:
    I have no experience or academic knowledge relating to questions 16-19.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 9
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Much improve 8
    David Allen Lobb
    University of Manitoba
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 6
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Not alter 8
    History tells us the development and use of these products is market- and profit- driven and if the product value is worth it, restrictions matter little.
    Paul Gepts
    University of California, Davis
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Not alter More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 7
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Not alter More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly worsen 7
    The option "not alter" was taken to include the potential outcome where improvements in one area would be offset by worsening circumstances in other areas.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly worsen More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Greatly worsen 9
    As noted above, the type of restrictions mentioned here are potenially much more harmful than the practices themselves which are already adequately scientifically sound and well regulated.
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Much improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 10
    Anonymous
    More restrictive standards on antibiotics: Slightly improve More restrictive standards on the use of genetically modified organisms: Greatly worsen More restrictive standards on crop chemicals: Slightly improve 8