40 



So I believe we are both on the same wavelength in saying be 

 careful regarding our rules surrounding technology, not only as 

 they apply to us but as some would have them apply to the entire 

 world, of seeing that the world does not have access to the tech- 

 nology that has made us the greatest food country of the world. 



Ms. Patrick. Technology also has a great bearing on how you 

 end up measuring up environmentally. If you solely look at U.S. 

 agriculture as U.S. agriculture and you forget it is in a global con- 

 text, you may in fact be straining at gnats here and swallowing 

 camels elsewhere. 



The United States has the capability of using technology to 

 produce abundant quantities at far less degradation to the environ- 

 mental base than primitive agriculture can. And very often that 

 gets lost in the discussion. 



Mr. STENHOLM. We are really going to have to work on that one. 

 Any other suggestions of policy tools that this committee should be 

 looking at as we prepare the debate? 



Ms. BROOKINS. I agree with Stephanie totally. I think we do have 

 the lead in technology and we do certainly have a lead, we have 

 a higher productivity lead in our food processing industry over Ger- 

 many and Japan, for example, than any other manufacturing in- 

 dustry comparatively in the countries. And it is something we 

 haven't thought about, we haven't viewed our talents and our 

 strengths in terms of our food system. 



I think that we do need to change the way we operate our credit 

 programs; commercial credits are going to be negotiated over the 

 next few years, with a new consensus in the OECD, which is part 

 of the Uruguay Round and people haven't really focused on that. 

 But we have to be going to those negotiations with a very strong 

 export credit package that we have adopted. Because otherwise we 

 will be swamped by what other people might be doing in these ne- 

 gotiations and within the OECD for credit consensus there. 



I think, also, that we need to focus tremendously on leveraging 

 our private and public sector resources. The chairman had a meet- 

 ing a few weeks ago in Minneapolis, and was looking at the 

 globalization of business and the globalization of the economy and 

 what it meant. And I was privileged to address the meeting. 



And at that time, Senator Bradley was speaking about the fact 

 that the GATT or the Uruguay Round was going to produce 200 

 billion dollars' worth of economic activity, GDP, a year than would 

 otherwise be the case. And I thought about that, and I realized it 

 is not the Uruguay Round that is going to produce it. It is hard 

 working men and women out there producing goods and services 

 and trying to get around Government policy to trade or trying to 

 find ways to use Government policy to trade. 



And I think in this respect, we have to really truly work in pri- 

 vate-public cooperation more. And this has to do with research and 

 technology. In a way, it is good that budgets are being cut in the 

 Federal Government because it is going to force some technological 

 institutions and universities to become more commercially relevant 

 in terms of the technologies that they are studying and working on. 



I think it certainly is going to affect the way we structure our 

 cooperator program, and I very much believe we need to have a co- 

 operator program, a much bigger cooperator team and pool, to work 



