The emergence of the zoonotic disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Canada resulted in a severe agricultural crisis. However, little is known about the ways in which farmers and rural communities were affected. The overall objective of this study is to characterize and better understand the impacts on and responses of farmers and rural communities as they relate to this crisis. Research was undertaken in strata throughout the diverse three Canadian prairie provinces – Alberta, Saskatchewan and Alberta – by employing surveys and focus groups. Results indicated there were numerous direct and ‘spillover’ impacts on farmers and rural communities resulting from the BSE crisis. Declines in cattle prices, herd equity and cash flow, often resulting in the need for bank loans, farm credit or off farm employment, as well as emotional and psychological stress were all experienced by farmers as a result of BSE. Importantly, many additional factors such as adverse weather and market volatility compounded the impacts related to BSE, adding to what was already a crisis situation for many farmers. These impacts were not restricted to farms but, rather, extended into the surrounding community fabric in the form of financial and social stress. Results further indicated government policies contributed to the impacts and the effectiveness of farmer responses related to BSE. A longer-term policy shift that has embraced agro-industrialization and entrenchment into the global marketplace has resulted in clear disparities between the biggest and smallest players in the beef industry and agriculture as a whole. This was illustrated in the ways in which governments responded to the BSE crisis, favouring the needs of the largest farmers and agri-businesses over those of smaller-scale, cow-calf producers. This policy shift and response has left the Canadian beef industry, family farmers and rural communities more susceptible to the emergence of similar future risks. A more inclusive approach to risk research and policymaking that meaningfully involved farmers and their rich, longer-term local knowledge might help mitigate similar risks that will inevitably confront agriculture in the future.

No description available.

The emergence of the zoonotic disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in Canada resulted in a severe agricultural crisis. However, little is known about the ways in which farmers and rural communities were affected. The overall objective of this study is to characterize and better understand the impacts on and responses of farmers and rural communities as they relate to this crisis. Research was undertaken in strata throughout the diverse three Canadian prairie provinces – Alberta, Saskatchewan and Alberta – by employing surveys and focus groups. Results indicated there were numerous direct and ‘spillover’ impacts on farmers and rural communities resulting from the BSE crisis. Declines in cattle prices, herd equity and cash flow, often resulting in the need for bank loans, farm credit or off farm employment, as well as emotional and psychological stress were all experienced by farmers as a result of BSE. Importantly, many additional factors such as adverse weather and market volatility compounded the impacts related to BSE, adding to what was already a crisis situation for many farmers. These impacts were not restricted to farms but, rather, extended into the surrounding community fabric in the form of financial and social stress. Results further indicated government policies contributed to the impacts and the effectiveness of farmer responses related to BSE. A longer-term policy shift that has embraced agro-industrialization and entrenchment into the global marketplace has resulted in clear disparities between the biggest and smallest players in the beef industry and agriculture as a whole. This was illustrated in the ways in which governments responded to the BSE crisis, favouring the needs of the largest farmers and agri-businesses over those of smaller-scale, cow-calf producers. This policy shift and response has left the Canadian beef industry, family farmers and rural communities more susceptible to the emergence of similar future risks. A more inclusive approach to risk research and policymaking that meaningfully involved farmers and their rich, longer-term local knowledge might help mitigate similar risks that will inevitably confront agriculture in the future.

Zugl.: Berlin, Freie Univ., Diss., 2005 / Hergestellt on demand

Zugl.: Berlin, Freie Univ., Diss., 2006 / Dateiformat: zip, Dateien im PDF-Format

Freie Universiẗat, Diss., 2006--Berlin. / Dateiformat: zip, Dateien im PDF-Format.

Tématem této práce je komparativní analýza burz střední Evropy, tzn. Burzy cenných papírů Praha, a.s.; Burzy cenných papierov Bratislava; Gieldy papierów wartościowych ve Varšavě; Budapesti Értéktözsde v Budapešti a Wiener Börse ve Vídni. Záměrem bylo ucelené srovnání jednotlivých trhů zejména z pohledu realizace IPO a likvidity jednotlivých burz. Teoretická část popisuje obchodní systém a systém vypořádání obchodů. Při analýze trhu IPO ve střední Evropě jsem se zaměřil hlavně na faktory rozvinutosti jednotlivých trhů IPO a počtu realizovaných IPO na jednotlivých trzích. Analýza likvidity na středoevropských burzách je rozdělena na likviditu akciových částí burz a dluhopisových částí burz. Na jednotlivých trzích byl analyzován podíl pěti nejlikvidnějších emisí na celkovém objemu obchodů. Práce by měla poskytnout obraz konkurenční pozice českého burzovnictví v porovnání se středoevropskou konkurencí.

Global beef markets are highly influenced by sanitary issues, mainly related to animal health and food safety, which have been determining levels and trends in global beef trade. Food safety issues affecting human health such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) associated with Creutzfeldt-Jacob Disease (vCJD) in humans, and other diseases affecting production such as foot and mouth disease (FMD) has encouraged putting these issues to beef trade attention. A way to address these concerns and comply with international standards is the use of traceability systems in order to quickly identify hazard sources and assure beef quality and safety. The goal of this research was to assess the effect of exporting countries sanitary status of BSE and FMD, and traceability systems in beef export prices and to examine Paraguayan beef exports relative to other exporting countries. Data of the top beef exporters was collected from the United Nations Commodity Trade Database (UN Comtrade), including export operations volume and receipt with each of their trading partners, from 2000 to 2012. Four commodities were studied: Frozen and Fresh/Chilled bone-in and boneless beef cuts. The data was analyzed using ordinary least squares regression methods (a hedonic price equation). Five models were run, one for each commodity and lastly one with all four together. Results revealed that both FMD and BSE affect negatively to beef exports prices, as well as shipments from India, that has no official FMD status and any traceability system in place. Apart from sanitary status, epidemiological events also have a negative impact on beef prices. On the other hand, the implementation of traceability systems improves prices. In this scenario, Paraguay lags behind in the adoption of emerging markets standards for traceability systems, therefore does not access most competitive markets, which pay higher prices. As such, Paraguay faces challenges to maintain and expand beef exports, especially in regards to keeping the country’s FMD free status.

This ethnographic research examines how farmers survive agricultural crises by exploring reactions of Saskatchewan beef and dairy farmers to the Canadian BSE crisis. As this study unfolded it became clear that the BSE crisis is only one of many recent crises that have been changing the face of Saskatchewan rural communities and family farms. Producers see a crisis in their inability to achieve their own measures of success in both the life and business of farming. This includes a greater need for off-farm work, a decline in rural community life and values, and a shift away from farming as a desirable livelihood.<p> The BSE crisis has highlighted the risky nature of the contemporary agriculture industry, both for farmers' livelihoods and for food safety. Farmers' initial strategies to address the BSE crisis were precautionary and conservative in nature: minimal enterprise adaptation while waiting out markets. As the crisis continued, producers worked to bring their experience and understanding to bear on changing the structure of the agricultural system. Attempts at change were not often successful. This was attributed to a lack of initiative by government and powerful players, such as the multi-national packing industry that profited from the crisis situation and used the crisis to consolidate power within the value chain. Producers felt that they were paying too much for risks that were beyond their control. The government support they needed was not in line with their structural concerns; risky pre-BSE structures have not been appreciably changed. Uncertainty and risk remain high for the average farmer.<p> There appears to be a growing distrust in powerful institutions that farmers depend on, and a consequent disengagement from government surveillance and regulatory policies. This foreshadows possible serious repercussions in food security and food safety, issues that are still unsettled regarding BSE in Canada. This research indicates a need for greater transparency and public knowledge pathways to reduce uncertainty and allow individuals to better understand and manage emerging risk complexes. Increased democratic space within food and agricultural systems for participation by producer and rural publics would help to balance out government rationalities that may not fully account for culturally mediated understandings of risk and action at the farm level.

This ethnographic research examines how farmers survive agricultural crises by exploring reactions of Saskatchewan beef and dairy farmers to the Canadian BSE crisis. As this study unfolded it became clear that the BSE crisis is only one of many recent crises that have been changing the face of Saskatchewan rural communities and family farms. Producers see a crisis in their inability to achieve their own measures of success in both the life and business of farming. This includes a greater need for off-farm work, a decline in rural community life and values, and a shift away from farming as a desirable livelihood.<p> The BSE crisis has highlighted the risky nature of the contemporary agriculture industry, both for farmers' livelihoods and for food safety. Farmers' initial strategies to address the BSE crisis were precautionary and conservative in nature: minimal enterprise adaptation while waiting out markets. As the crisis continued, producers worked to bring their experience and understanding to bear on changing the structure of the agricultural system. Attempts at change were not often successful. This was attributed to a lack of initiative by government and powerful players, such as the multi-national packing industry that profited from the crisis situation and used the crisis to consolidate power within the value chain. Producers felt that they were paying too much for risks that were beyond their control. The government support they needed was not in line with their structural concerns; risky pre-BSE structures have not been appreciably changed. Uncertainty and risk remain high for the average farmer.<p> There appears to be a growing distrust in powerful institutions that farmers depend on, and a consequent disengagement from government surveillance and regulatory policies. This foreshadows possible serious repercussions in food security and food safety, issues that are still unsettled regarding BSE in Canada. This research indicates a need for greater transparency and public knowledge pathways to reduce uncertainty and allow individuals to better understand and manage emerging risk complexes. Increased democratic space within food and agricultural systems for participation by producer and rural publics would help to balance out government rationalities that may not fully account for culturally mediated understandings of risk and action at the farm level.