Human Dimensions That Drive Soil Degradation - Principles of Sustainable Soil Management in Agroecosystems - page 177

access to inputs among the rural poor and weak regulations in the forest industry,
can drive increased clearing and cultivation of nutrient-rich forested land in pursuit
of increased economic returns (Barbier 2000).
Agricultural corporations can take advantage of competitive markets and lower
their production costs, so that consumers also pay less. However, to keep up, small
farmers carry out agricultural intensification and extensification contributing to
additional land degradation and deforestation (Hazell and Wood 2007).
On the other hand, globalization may lead to improved agricultural practices
for niche markets. The rise of certified products, such as organic and shade-grown
coffee for export, takes advantage of the possibility that consumers overseas may
place a high value, and willingness to pay, for products produced more sustainably
(Perfecto et al. 1996).
7.4.4 g overnment P oLIcIes
Macroeconomic policies affecting soil productivity include expansive fiscal and
monetary policies, high interest rates, high inflation, overvalued exchange rates, high
debt service ratios, and protectionism (Knowler 2004). The first three of these reduce
economic stability and encourage maximizing present output rather than investing
for the future. Overvalued exchange rates make inputs cheaper and thus more widely
used, while high debt service ratios encourage production of exportable crops rather
than more sustainable crops. Protectionism can induce greater cultivation of irri-
gated crops, which can cause salinization and waterlogging of soils.
Government policies are often technology- and physical development-centered,
without consideration of political and economic forces (Grossman 1997; Urama
2005) or local institutions (Ostrom 1990). For example, many governments fund
interventions to persuade farmers to adopt chemical fertilizers by subsidizing their
prices (Andersen and Lorch 1994). While fertilizer is a profitable investment on aver-
age, as soil becomes degraded, fertilizer inputs lose their effectiveness on crop yield,
which makes the marginal costs too high for many farmers to afford (Lipper and
Osgood 2004; Marenya and Barrett 2009).
Government policies may directly promote activities that degrade soil. One such
example is the European Union's subsidizing of the cost of soil movement and land
leveling up to 50% (Marti'nez-Casasnovas and Ramos 2009), when the detrimental
effects of land leveling and deep plowing are well documented.
Policies that promote irrigation are common, despite evidence of the environmen-
tal consequences (Urama 2005; Howes 2008). From the late nineteenth to the late
twentieth century, Australian farmers in state of Victoria noticed, and were alarmed
by, the salinization of their soil through irrigation. Policy-makers paid little atten-
tion to landowners' and scientists' concerns. Their resistance made sense in terms of
the substantial investments made in the irrigation system, but their response was to
blame individual farmers for the degradation of the soil (Howes 2008).
At a broader scale, policy and government structures have influenced land man-
agement practices. Traditional and indigenous arrangements of common property
regimes and usufruct arrangements have been replaced by Northern institutions
and organizations. These institutions in developing countries are often modeled to