32 



cline is explicit in the Uruguay Round text and is often read to 

 mean that the GATT agreement legalizes export subsidies. 



That is a relatively narrow reading of a very large agreement. 

 The Uruguay Round is also explicit in granting to those who signed 

 it the right to seek redress from unfair trade practices. Today, 

 roughly 40 nations have implemented the countervailing duty and 

 antidumping laws. Those laws give individuals the right to file 

 cases against their governments. That list was considerably shorter 

 in 1985 when many of our export programs were designed, but the 

 list is growing. 



Domestic producers in any nation do not want, nor do they have 

 to accept, unfair competition. The Uruguay Round recognizes that 

 right, and it may lead to a more rapid decline in export subsidies 

 than envisioned in the Dunkel text. 



It may also reign in less visible but unfair practices to which the 

 United States has objected. We have also seen a more privatized 

 global economy developing. Private importers buy differently than 

 monolithic buying boards. Their focus often includes quality and 

 other terms of sale, as well as price. 



Asia and Latin America are the high growth areas. They are the 

 likely sources of new demand for American products. 



As trade barriers are capped and progressively reduced, future 

 expansion in production and trade increasingly is going to reflect 

 cost and comparative advantage. This should be particularly posi- 

 tive for resource-rich, technologically productive U.S. agriculture. 



These structural changes suggest that global grains, oilseeds, 

 and livestock trade should expand, especially to the West and 

 South. The United States is uniquely positioned to capture the 

 lion's share of this new trade. That is not true for any of our com- 

 petitors. 



Macroeconomic considerations. A foundation for growth in ex- 

 ports is solidifying. 



Environmental considerations. The choices between demand ap- 

 proaches which put agriculture in a straitjacket, or more flexible 

 market-oriented approaches. We believe producers have a better 

 opportunity to enhance competitiveness. 



The market also is being shaped or, excuse me, reshaped by com- 

 puters, software, and communication features. The result can be in- 

 creased efficiency, lower cost, better product, less resource stress. 

 The technological leadership of U.S. producers and agribusiness 

 should give us a competitive edge. 



American agriculture will need policy shifts to respond to the 

 changing marketplace. As an exporter and major investor in rural 

 America, with employees and customers throughout the Nation, we 

 believe the policy should focus on three major objectives: Economic 

 opportunity, environmental responsibility, and technology leader- 

 ship. 



In the area of economic opportunity, we think that full-time com- 

 mercial farmers need tools to cope with the business risks they 

 face, without distorting their production or marketing practices. 

 Another idea is to build opportunities for those who live on farms 

 or in rural areas whose incomes predominantly come from off-farm 

 sources. In the area of environmental responsibility, there should 



