It is appropriate as we enter a new century that we reflect on the past one since our profession is nearly 100 years old: the American Association of Farm Economics was formally created in 1910. “Savvy through one hundred years of progress and experience” is one description that comes to mind. “Geriatric” is another word that might fit. I intend to highlight some broad topics that have occupied agricultural economists' teaching and research over the past 100 years, to reflect in a little more detail about our thoughts over the past 12 years as revealed in the presidential addresses at AAEA and SAEA annual meetings, to make some rather terse comments about current important issues as they relate to the issues of the past, and to conclude with some advice for the younger members of our profession and our association that may be of value in the new century. I emphasize the word may, because I am much less certain about the wisdom of my beliefs today than if I had been given the opportunity to give this talk 18 or even 11 years ago.

The failure of the Seattle Ministerial to launch a new Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations raised a series of essential questions concerning the future of the World Trade Organization (WTO). This is only natural, considering the expectations that were raised before the Ministerial, the unprecedented extent of public discontent (albeit of various, often opposing tendencies), and the at-this-stage uncertain follow-up.

V.I. Lenin, in defense of communism, often defended governmental control over the “commanding heights” of the means of production. Upon consolidation of the revolution in the 1920s, Mexican leaders wholeheartedly adopted Lenin's approach to government intervention in the economy. The revolution was driven, in part, by a widely accepted need for land reform. The revolutionaries proceeded to restructure Mexican agriculture and adopt socialistic policies which promoted centralized planning. Also, state-owned enterprises (SOE's) began to participate in everything from the production, processing, distribution and commercialization of agricultural products. In recent years, policies have changed and Mexican agriculture is currently going through a dramatic process of reformation.

Soon after the implementation of the Uruguay Round, U.S. agricultural exports reached their highest level. Now many things, including exchange rates, factor into any rise in exports, but almost all economists agree that lowering trade barriers through trade agreements has been a critical factor. The vast majority— 96 percent—of potential customers for U.S. products, including agricultural products, live outside the United States. We must work to increase our opportunities to sell into these global markets.

The 1999 round of trade talks in Seattle, Washington got off to a rather shaky start; in fact, it may be several years before new trade talks will be held. Many special-interest groups, including environmentalists and labor unions, were successful in scuttling these trade talks. In addition, agriculture's role and position were not clearly stated. This paper deals specifically with key agricultural issues surrounding future progress in trade talks. These comments integrate the central themes covered by the several authors who participated in the session entitled “The Millenium Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations.” My discussion illustrates some of the outstanding issues which must be dealt with before significant progress will be made towards freer trade in agriculture.

Theory predicts that incentive-based regulatory instruments reduce compliance costs by encouraging efficient resource allocation and innovation in environmental technology. Cost reductions from pollution permit trading often have exceeded expectations, but the devil is in the details: the rules matter. In recent years, IB instruments of many kinds, from permit trading to various informal voluntary agreements, have been introduced in many countries. Point-nonpoint trading programs have been established in the U.S., but recorded trades have been rare. We speculate about prospects for performance-based monitoring of agricultural nonpoint pollution which, we believe, would encourage trading to the benefit of farmers and society.

While a carbon market offers substantial opportunities for US agriculture, regional differences in such a market are often ignored. This paper focuses on the advantages and challenges for agriculture in the South. The potential of two promising options are analyzed: conversion from cropland to forests and greater use of conservation tillage. It is argued that the right institutional arrangements can overcome three fundamental challenges to an efficient carbon market: transaction costs, risk, and perverse incentives. Some examples are given, such as the use of a farmer-owned organization and the provision of land use and carbon information by the government.

Nitrate contamination of municipal and domestic well water supplies is becoming an increasing problem in many rural and urban areas, raising the cost of providing safe drinking water. The objective of this paper is to describe a marketable permit scheme that can effectively manage nitrate pollution of groundwater supplies for communities in rural areas without hindering agricultural production in watersheds. The key to implementing this scheme is being able to link nitrate leaching from nitrogen fertilizer applied to crops at a farm to nitrate levels measured at a drinking water well.

There is rapidly growing interest in the use of market-based (MB) instruments in environmental policy. The papers in this session discuss three relatively new areas for such policies: groundwater contamination, nonpoint source surface-water pollution and carbon sequestration. The papers point out the potential for MB policies in these areas, but significant challenges remain. This comment highlights challenges related to five issues: monitoring and enforcement, trading ratios, baselines, transaction costs, and risk and uncertainty. All these issues must be addressed before MB policies can take the full step from economic theory to regulatory reality.

Parametric, non-parametric, and semi-parametric approaches are commonly used for modeling correlated distributions. Semi-parametric and non-parametric approaches are used to examine the risk situation for Kansas agriculture. Results from the model indicate that 2000 will be another difficult year for Kansas farmers, although crop income will increase slightly from 1999. However, unless another supplemental infusion of government payments occurs, crop income is expected to be the lowest since 1992.

This study presents a way to parametrically model and simulate multivariate distributions under potential non-normality, autocorrelation and heteroscedasticity and illustrates its application to agricultural risk analysis. Specifically, the joint probability distribution (pdf) for West Texas irrigated cotton, corn, sorghum, and wheat production and prices is estimated and applied to evaluate the changes in the risk and returns of agricultural production in the region resulting from observed and predicted price and production trends. The estimated pdf allows for time trends on the mean and the variance and varying degrees of autocorrelation and non-normality (kurtosis and right- or left-skewness) in each of the price and production variables. It also allows for any possible price-price, production-production, or price-production correlation.

Simulation as an analytical tool continues to gain popularity in industry, government, and academics. For agricultural economists, the popularity is driven by an increased interest in risk management tools and decision aids on the part of farmers, agribusinesses, and policy makers. Much of the recent interest in risk analysis in agriculture comes from changes in the farm program that ushered in an era of increased uncertainty. With increased planting flexibility and an abundance of insurance and marketing alternatives farmers face the daunting task of sorting out many options in managing the increased risk they face. Like farmers, decision makers throughout the food and fiber industry are seeking ways to understand and manage the increasingly uncertain environment in which they operate. The unique abilities of simulation as a tool in evaluating and presenting risky alternatives together with an expected increase in commodity price risk, as projected by Ray, et al., will likely accelerate the interest in simulation for years to come.

The purpose of this session is to discuss various procedures for modeling agricultural price and yield distributions. The model results are then used to provide improved analyses for agricultural risk management with the focus primarily upon the agricultural production sector. Each of the papers presented here contributes to that end. The discussion of these papers will be organized as follows: First, comments on each paper beginning with Richardson, Klose and Gray (RKG), then some general observations and concerns, along with a suggestion of issues for further discussion.

This study focuses on the longstanding impoverishment of the rural South and three of its subregions-Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, and the Black Belt. The poor quality of life in rural Appalachia and along the Mississippi Delta has been publically acknowledged by programs and commissions for improving conditions. However, the more comprehensive Black Belt subregion that links parts of Southern Appalachia and the Southern Delta has not received such regional policy attention. While the South as a whole is more rural and impoverished than other U.S. regions, this is largely due to the poor conditions in the Black Belt. In addition to region and rurality, a third feature of the pattern is race. It is in the Black Belt that the South's poor socioeconomic conditions are most concentrated. Policy and program attention are needed for regional solutions that take rurality and race into account along with demographic and other subregional characteristics.

Microenterprise programs (MEPs) have become an important research concern and rural development strategy in international development circles. The basic premise of this approach is that microenterprises , that is firms with fewer than 10 employees, can be provided with a series of small loans that allow them to start or expand productive activities and thereby increase incomes and escape poverty. Governments and donor agencies have expanded funding for microfinance programs in low-income countries and more articles appear in the Western media about the success of this new approach in assisting the poor.