≡≡≡nma≡≡Mβ
JULY, 1984
DISCUSSION: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS OF EMERGING
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES
Joe T. Davis
The development and adoption of informa-
tion technologies to the marketing and pro-
duction of food and fiber has raised numerous
issues which our profession will have to address
in years to come. Professor Sporleder has pre-
sented an outline which can direct our thinking
concerning the policy issues arising from the
use of these new technologies in the agricultural
sector. I agree with his statement that society
has entered the “information age” and would
add that the agricultural sector is experiencing
this transformation along with other segments
of the economy. The decade of the 1980’s will
most likely be remembered as a period of rapid
technological development and adoption, es-
pecially in the area of computer use and in-
formation delivery.
This discussion will attempt to accomplish
three objectives: (1) to discuss the evolution
of the issues raised in the paper, (2) to refine
some of the issues, particularly those relating
directly to the land-grant system, and (3) to
offer differing viewpoints on some of the im-
plications presented.
Considerable time was taken to present what
was called “traditional farm structure and mar-
keting policy issues” which covered the areas
of control, market access, thin markets, and
public information availability. There is no par-
ticular argument concerning these issues relat-
ing to markets and production activities;
however, the linkage to the emerging technol-
ogies associated with information delivery was
somewhat unclear. The author indicated that
these issues were presented to enhance the
articulation of those issues created by emerging
information technologies. When the issues re-
lated to information were presented, the rela-
tionship of these traditional issues to the new
ones was not clear. There was an element of
control involved in the issue of access to in-
formation; however, I do not believe that this
is in the same vein as the traditional policy
issue of “Who Will Control Agriculture?” Also,
the traditional issues of control, market access,
and thin markets were said to be a subset of
the issue of market structure impacts emerging
from the adoption of this new technology. Does
this indicate that a new dimension of structural
issues has been created as a result of the new
technology and that the traditional ones are just
a part of this set or does this indicate that the
new technology may impact or change the na-
ture of the traditional issues?
Although the linkage between the traditional
issues and the emerging issues associated with
information technologies was not altogether
clear, the identification of some broad issues
associated with this new technology was well
presented. I have no particular arguments with
this list of issues and agree with Dr. Sporleder
that it would be impossible to enumerate all
the issues dealing with this subject. My com-
ments relative to the issues created by emerging
information technology will be to supplement
those presented and to specifically address those
issues which will face the administration and
faculties of our land-grant system.
The degree of involvement by land-grant uni-
versities and state extension services in the in-
formation field is not well defined. The degree
of involvement can range from operating and
maintaining a complete system to being a casual
observer of what is occurring in the private
sector. The issue is how much involvement
should these units have and will all states be
involved? The answer more than likely will not
be all or nothing but will lie somewhere be-
tween these extremes. The number of states
involved will vary depending on their particular
situation, funding, clientele needs, and other
external factors. Some universities may play an
important role in the development and testing
of new methods, systems, and techniques and
not provide the service or maintain the system
after development. The university system has
performed this role in numerous other areas
and would not be departing from their mission
or method of operation in accepting this role.
Other institutions may go beyond this devel-
opment role and maintain the system for their
clients.
Joe T. Davis is an Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky.
Invited discussion presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Agricultural Economics Association, Nashville, Tennessee,
February 5∙8, 1984. Invited papers are routinely published in the July SJAE without editorial council review but with review
of the copy editor (as per Executive Committee action June 25, 1982).
23