Increasing U.S. competitiveness will require long-term, strategic 

 planning and a more effective Grovemment/industry partnership. 

 Competing in the international marketplace will be the primary 

 challenge of the remainder of this decade and beyond. The impor- 

 tance of exports to the U.S. red meat industry cannot be over- 

 stated. 



Faced with the year-on-year declines in consumption of U.S. beef, 

 pork, and lamb, producers are viewing the foreign markets as the 

 primary growth sector of total red meat demand. The implication 

 of this export growth on our economy are enormous. For example, 

 thfi U.S. pork industry employs about 765,000 people. This is more 

 than the total payroll of Northwest Airlines, Ford, and IBM com- 

 bined. 



Regrettably, the bond between the U.S. Government and indus- 

 try and exporters seems to be weakening. Ever fearful of GAO criti- 

 cism, FAS seems to be paralyzed into action at just the time a more 

 aggressive and flexible international approach is most warranted. 



Meeting the competitive challenge of the future will require fun- 

 damental reorientation of current FAS policies, programs, and or- 

 ganization. Our observations about current FAS shortcomings and 

 recommendations for action are as follows. 



First of all, we think long-range planning is lacking. To our 

 knowledge, the U.S. livestock industry, representing over one-half 

 of total farm receipts in U.S. agriculture, was not even consulted 

 once on the long-term agricultural trade strategy — called LATS. 

 This is also the case with FAS reorganization. 



In the meantime, agricultural industries independently develop 

 their own long-range plans. The U.S. Meat Export Federation pro- 

 gram has quantified and qualified opportunities in the export mar- 

 kets through the year 2001. However, because the Grovemment 

 commitment to agricultural exports is uncertain, the industry long- 

 range plans of which we are aware strikingly omit any mention of 

 a Government/industry partnership or joint action agenda in the 

 export marketplace. 



So our recommendation would be: One, allow industries to de- 

 velop the strategy and tactics for their respective industries while 

 USDA/FAS establishes strategic direction across all commodity 

 groups. In this regard, establish a joint long-range planning process 

 between industry and the Government. Set quantifiable export tar- 

 gets and periodically evaluate progress to date and/or reasons for 

 failure to meet these targets. Review long-range plans annually to 

 ensure flexibility and sensitivity to changing market conditions. 



Two, FAS focuses on process rather than results. USMEF's budg- 

 et submission for the fiscal year 1993 MPP program was in excess 

 of 650 pages. USMEF's overseas marketing directors are forced 

 every year to spend months away from their market development 

 work supplying minute details and excessive paperwork for MPP. 

 Meanwhile, our competition is out pounding the foreign pavement 

 in search of new customers and sales. 



The annual process of preparing and reviewing MPP plans lasts 

 an astounding 6 months. Plans are rarely approved by the begin- 

 ning of the marketing year, creating marketing paralysis overseas. 

 This may be the worst year since USDA has yet to announce even 

 the application date for next year's program. 



