XI World Congress of Rural Sociological Association
Trondheim, Norway - July 26, 2004
Rural futures in an International World
Welcome address
Minister of Agriculture and Food in Norway, Lars Sponheim
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure to open the eleventh World Congress of the International Rural
Sociological Association (IRSA). It is also a pleasure to see that more than 570
delegates from 56 countries have found the opportunity to visit Norway to attend this
congress. I would like to welcome you all to Norway, and I hope you will have a nice
stay as well as interesting discussions during your five days here in Trondheim.
Rural Norway lengthwise
I will start this talk by telling you about my journey to Trondheim together with my
wife. Over the last two days we have been driving by car along the fjords of Western
Norway. We started our journey from my home place in the fjord community of
Ulvik in Hardanger, not far from Bergen, where I run a small sheep farm together
with my family. We drove up through rich valleys and along fjords with a narrow
strip of arable land. We crossed mountain passes close to glaciers and have walked
around inland lakes where farmers have been cutting grass, close to the eternal snow.
We have been able to see part of Norwegian wildlife from the road, reindeers and
mosques oxes, cranes and grouses.
Waking up in the morning, we have heard the birds singing close to the cabin where
we stayed over night. The landscape has been shifting all the time, from my fjord
country where apples and cherries now are ripening, over the mountain passes where
farmers are taking their animals for a few weeks, to summer pastures just turned
green, to the broad valleys around the Trondheim fjord, where grain fields soon are
getting yellow.
It is this diversity that makes up rural Norway, and without a flourishing agriculture
we would have no cultural landscape to show you. My only worry is that we will not
be able to keep up active farming all over our country. We already see that brushes
and trees are creeping into the open landscape because farms are abandoned and
farmers don’t keep grazing animals any more.
Maybe most of you came to Trondheim by air, and you might have had the chance to
view some of our landscape from above. Trondheim is a nice town. In addition, I
also urge you to explore some of our countryside. According to the programme, it
seems that you will be able to do that on Wednesday.
Norwegian agriculture
This account of my journey (travelogue) through the Norwegian scenery, presents
you to a landscape in which Norwegian agriculture and agricultural policies must be
interpreted and understood. In my talk, I will present some facts about Norwegian
agriculture, and the main objectives of Norwegian Agricultural policy. Due to the
importance of the WTO process for future agriculture in Norway, I will briefly
present the Norwegian arguments and positions in the ongoing negotiations.
Norway is the northernmost country in Europe and its mainland extends from 58 to
71 degrees north. This is a total distance of about 1 750 km, which is more than the
distance between Oslo and Rome. The population density is only 13 inhabitants per
square km, the second lowest in Europe.
Arable land represents only 3% of total land area, and only 1% of total land area is
suitable for production of cereals. Norway is a net importer of food, and we produce
only 50% of the calories we consume. The average farm size is about 16 ha of arable
land, and nearly 20 per cent of the agricultural area has a gradient exceeding 1:5.
Dairy farms have an average herd of 15 cows. The number of farms in Norway has
decreased from 155 000 in 1969 to less than 65 000 today.
Norwegian agricultural policy of promoting livestock production in less favoured
areas has been an important instrument for food security and regional development.
This policy has resulted in a concentration of cereal production in the best
agricultural areas, which also are the most populated areas, such as in the Central
Eastern Provinces and here around the Trondheim fjord. A relatively large extent of
the agricultural output, mainly from livestock production, is produced in areas where
there are few alternative means of livelihood. To be quite frank with you, there
would be no farming in the upper valleys of Norway, in the narrow fjords and in
Northern Norway without a rather expensive farm policy. A majority of Norwegians
supports a farm policy safeguarding agriculture all over Norway. But not at any cost.
The main produce is dairy and meat products, cereals and temperate fruits and
vegetables. Approximately three quarters of farm income is derived from livestock
2
production and one quarter from crop production. The produce is almost entirely
destined for the national market and plays an important role in ensuring national food
security, sustaining the viability of rural areas and safeguarding certain
environmental qualities.
Although Norwegian agriculture contributes to less than 3 % of total employment, it
is the main source of employment in many rural communities. Taking into account
its links with other sectors and industries, agriculture contributes to substantial
employment. Moreover, agricultural employment is decreasing, and substantial
efforts have been made to develop agricultural production and generate alternative
employment opportunities in rural areas.
Rural development programmes were started in Norway as early as in 1984. These
had a special emphasis on creating jobs for womensince several rural communities
have low population levels and net emigration of young women. Most of these
regions are not able to compete in world-wide food markets in terms of production
costs. Disadvantages stemming from a harsh climate, a short growing season, long
distances, difficult topography, low population density and small-scale agricultural
structure, combined with a high level of costs, make Norwegian agriculture less
competitive at the world market.
Arable land has increased by 10% since 1969, (from 950 000 hectares to 1 050 000
hectares). The production of the major products like meat, milk and grains has been
stable or increased, even though labour input has decreased by almost 300%, (down
from 192 000 man-years in 1969 to less than 70 000 man-years today). This immense
increase in agricultural productivity is partly due to technological developments, as is
the case for other industrialised countries and is well known to rural sociologist like
you.
Agricultural policy - history and challenges in the future
The Ministry of Agriculture and Food has played an important role to include issues
of regional developmentand environmental protection into national politics. Food
quality, research and public health have gradually become just as important items as
development and administration of our agriculture.
Hence, measures in the agricultural sector are not only directed at subsidising the
income level of farmers. Support schemes also aim at ensuring a sufficient level of
public goods as requested by society. These are things like food security, high
standards of plant, animal and public health, viabile rural areas, sustainable growth,
environmental protection, agro-biological diversity, cultural heritage and land
conservation. These additional functions often cannot be disassociated from
agricultural production. Hence, we are talking about a multifunctional agriculture.
3
The effect of agriculture’s various functions represents its total contribution to
society. Moreover, our Government believes that a competitive agricultural industry
and active food production in all districts contributes to important social goals.
The international framework for agriculture is of major importance to the future of
Norwegian agriculture. Within the international context, my Government will seek to
ensure sufficient flexibility for an active national agricultural policy, which can
provide for farming all over this country, safe high-quality food of various kinds and
wholesome plant and animal health.
The role of research and development in Norwegian agriculture
In my talk at this scientific congress I cannot avoid mentioning the essential role of
research and development for the modernisation of Norwegian agriculture. Education
of farmers and applied research with a strong connection between researchers and
farmers have been a central part of the success of Norwegian agriculture. We have
had experiment station farms and agricultural agents giving advice, and an open
exchange of research and researchers from other countries.
Also in future, we need to mobilise research and development in order to reduce
production costs and to ensure good performance within environmental protection.
For these purposes, it is obvious that we need to co-operate internationally. About 99
percent of the world's research and technology development takes place outside
Norway. We have a high degree of co-operation within EU's research programmes. It
is, however, necessary to strengthen our connections with researchers from other
parts of the world. In the near future research funding will be established to finance
international collaborative research with countries outside the European Union. It is
my hope that this congress will make a basis for further co-operation between
research communities in Norway and the rest of the world.
In order to ensure food safety for consumers we need extensive expertise on these
issues. Several areas related to this receives research support, such as plant- and
animal breeding, and microbial food science. In order to understand how producers
and consumers think and act, social science research on food safety and animal
welfare is also very important. For example, trust to food security among consumers
is a social as well as a techno-medical construction, and social scientists like you can
help experts and politicians understand which priorities need to be taken.. Food
safety research is a global concern, and international scientific collaboration between
all continents is a necessity. Often we do not know the consequences from actions
taken to day. The precautionary principle should be given priority and society must
have confidence in technology development.
4
‘Agriculture plus’
So far, agricultural modernisation has been a success in Norway. Although it has
created some problems, like pollution of waterways and threatening the biodiversity,
measures have been taken to correct the course at an early stage. Now, farmers as
well as agricultural politicians face the challenge of finding new ways of making
quality food products more according to consumers’ expectations. As consumers
increase their standard of living, travel more and taste foreign food, their demand for
quality food increases along with their willingness to pay. Hence, in addition to
standard bulk production, there is a need for a larger variety of products and products
with extra taste and flavour. I think that food wrapped in culture and storytelling will
be in demand in the future. For example, consumers can be invitedto farms with
niche production, as tourists as well as customers, and learn the story behind the
food.
Another opportunity for farmers is to produce services which there is need for in
modern society. One example is services for the sector of education and health care,
we call it ‘green care’ in Norway. I am told that some of you will meet some ‘green
care’ farmers on your excursion on Wednesday.
A third area of opportunity for agricultural districts is agricultural and rural tourism.
Offering experiences, local food and local story telling is an opprtunity to sell
products from our countryside without degrading its landscape and biodiversity. We
have used quite a lot from public budgets to stimulate rural and green tourism. We
have seen some remarkable successes, as well as some failures, which might be
expected. However, there is a lack of good research reports, analysing why some
initiatives are working, while others are not. I want to challenge the many Norwegian
rural researchers present to investigate more into resource based tourism in Norway,
to advice future private investments and future policies within this field. My Ministry
has taken responsibility for tourism based on landscape and agricultural resources,
since it can be a basis of income trade to many rural communities in the future.
Bio-energy also provides a promising opportunity as a marketable product from
forestry and agriculture. Bio-energy will be especially important to meet the
increased demand for energy. I would emphasise the need to develop new
technologies in order to make the production of bio-energy more cost effective.
Current consumption of biomass for energy purposes equals 16 Twh (terawatt-hour)
per year in Norway. Recent estimates indicate that it is possible to more than double
the supply of biomass for energy purposes within the technical and ecological
conditions required. Bio-energy is important for economic development within
forestry, for rural development, for the diversification of energy supply and our effort
to increase the supply of energy from renewable sources.
5
CO2-neutral hydroelectric power provides most of Norway’s stationary energy
supply. Many farmers have streams and small rivers running through their hillside
farms. Steps have been taken to increase the production of electricity from micro
hydroelectric power stations owned by farmers. In general, it will be quite central to
strengthen the utilisation of raw materials from agriculture and forestry which are not
used for food.
International issues and WTO negotiations
I have had a look at the programme, and it seem that the organisers have put together
five days of interesting and relevant discussions regarding the future of agriculture
and rural societies within an international context. Personally, I would be very
interested in the panel discussion on multifunctional agriculture on Friday. Three
weeks ago, I attended a meeting in the G10 group in Geneva1. From this meeting I
want to tell you that it is our firm conviction to make the present Doha round into a
development round. On behalf of Norway, I have declared that we offer to abandon
all export subsidies on milk products. Both the Parliament majority and the dairy
farmers support me on this position, even though our cheese export - which will
become generally unprofitable without export subsidies - represents 2000 milk
farmers' jobs.
As I have pointed out, Norwegian agriculture is facing various challenges which my
Government is prepared to meet with domestic reforms. For instance, we are trying
to arrange for niche production and alternative economic activities, such as rural
tourism. Furthermore, we are working on cost-savings in order to promote a more
robust and competitive agriculture. Structural changes are underway, and fewer and
bigger farms will ensure future agricultural production in Norway. Having said this,
agricultural production in Norway will always be small-scale, compared with the
most competitive world producers, and we have permanent handicaps relating to our
climate, topography, structure, as well as general cost levels. Norwegian agriculture
will therefore, as far into the future as we can see now, be dependent on support and
protection.
Bearing this in mind, the ongoing agricultural negotiations in the World Trade
Organisation (WTO) is of outmost importance to Norway, and we give top priority to
these negotiations. Throughout the negotiations, Norway together with amongst
others the G10 group and the EU, has emphasised that agriculture is not merely an
economic sector. Agriculture also contributes to safeguarding a number of noneconomic or non-trade concerns, such as food security, the viability of rural areas,
cultural heritage and identity and environmental benefits, including bio-diversity and
agricultural landscapes. Moreover, agriculture is multifunctional and should be
1
The G10 in WTO consists of Bulgaria, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Korea, Liechtenstein, Mauritius, Norway, Switzerland,
and Chinese Taipei
6
treated separately within the multilateral trading system. It is therefore essential to
acknowledge the right of every country, according to mutually agreed rules, to secure
the viability of its agriculture.
After all, it has become clear to everybody that non-trade concerns are of vital
importance to a number of WTO Members, developing as well as developed
countries. Pursuing non-trade concerns requires a certain degree of domestic
agricultural production. A country can import food from another country, but the
safeguarding of non-trade concerns such as food security, rural development and
cultural landscape maintainance depends largely on domestic agriculture.
Because of its unique characteristics, agriculture cannot be left to market forces
alone. I believe completely free trade in agriculture would only benefit a small
number of very competitive traders, while the agricultural sector of a large number of
low-potential developing and developed countries with disadvantaged and
unfavourable production conditions would face serious difficulties and in some
countries even collapse.
Our agricultural production systems are characterised by an amazing diversity. Even
within one country, there is a huge diversity, as I tried to illustrate with my
travelogue. Therefore, the WTO reform process cannot be based on a one-size-fits-all
approach. A joint effort will be needed to ensure that appropriate flexibility is built
into the future multilateral trading system. Only then can we secure the coexistence
of various types of agriculture, across countries and regions.
The outcome of the Doha round will be of vital importance for Norwegian farmers
and food industry. We will, together with like-minded countries, do our outmost to
get a result from the Doha round that gives us the necessary flexibility in policy
design to foster domestic agricultural production necessary to address domestic nontrade concerns. Norway will not accept a WTO solution without a safeguard on our
sensitive products: meat, milk and grains.
The biggest challenges are to be found in Africa.
Saying so much about the Norwegian interests, my Government is concerned that the
Doha round of WTO is made into a development round. International treaties are
necessary, but not sufficient steps towards development. Food and agriculture on a
global basis are undergoing certain negative trends. There is a slow-down in
agricultural production growth in many developing countries. A large number of
countries and large population groups are suffering from food shortages. Conflicts in
a number of countries are affecting the global food security situation, and so is the
HIV/AIDS epidemic, especially in Africa.
7
Recent studies show that a majority of the world's poor still live in rural areas.
National governments and the multilateral system are jointly responsible for reaching
out to the marginalized rural poor. There is a need to increase the supply of resources
to sustainable agriculture and rural development in order to achieve food security. In
Norway, an advisory group has been set up to advise the Government on how to
integrate agriculture more strongly into Norway's development strategies.
Over the last five years, Norway and other partners have supported an initiative
among agricultural universities in developing countries to radically change their
approach to agricultural training. The participating universities have developed, on a
regional basis, a new vision with a focus on contributing to the fight against poverty.
Students are to be trained to become rural entrepreneurs and to create opportunities
locally.
Norway stands committed to the Millennium Development Goals. We stand
committed to increasing our development aid to one per cent of Gross National
Income by 2005, and we stand committed to increasing our efforts in the area of rural
development.
I will urge you to take part in institution building in the Africa, in order to establish
viable rural research and development institutions in that part of the world. In order
to be of any help in the developing process, those institutions should be focusing on
the basic needs of rural areas, like increasing the agricultural production, basic
nutrition, health care, and basic education. I am sure that agricultural and rural
research institutions in Norway could be of good help for this development. I would
look favourably upon a project request to look into the possibility of institution
building in Africa.
We live in a time of accelerating urbanisation. However, the rural poor which
constitute the majority, are highly dependent on a farm economy for their livelihood.
Far too little is invested in rural development.
Analyses from the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO)
indicate that we may see a greater shortage of food and other commodities ten to
fifteen years from now. The Norwegian government believes that a broad approach
to food security is needed - an approach that takes social, cultural and political
aspects into account. This means that we need to work from a number of angles to
achieve food security and improve the livelihoods of the rural poor.
Once again: welcome to Norway and good luck with your congress!
8