Contract farming—defined in general terms as agricultural production in which there is a pre-harvest agreement between a producer and buyer—provides an alternative to post-harvest transactions on an open-market. As supply chains become increasingly complex and differentiated, the use of agricultural production contracts can assist in the timing of delivery along with assurances regarding production processes related to quality and safety. In more developed economies, adoption of agricultural production contracts can be seen as an outgrowth of agricultural industrialization and concentration. In many developing economies, often characterized by a large number of smallholder producers, contract farming is viewed as a means to facilitate engagement in otherwise inaccessible or inequitable markets and support rural development. Although there are clear benefits to agricultural production contracts, they may involve risks to the contracting parties and other adverse social effects. In an effort to capture the economic and structural transformation potential of these contractual arrangements, some governments have developed regulatory schemes to promote their use and mitigate potential adverse impacts. But this is far from universal, and parties generally remain free to structure their contracts to maximize their self-interests. Production contracts are an established mechanism for vertical coordination in the agricultural sector. The increasing globalization and rapid modernization of the agricultural supply chain, however, has heightened interest in this topic. Unidroit, in partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), recognized the need to identify emerging legal issues in this area and provide objective guidance, where appropriate, based on internationally accepted standards of practice in contracts. The objective was to encourage stable and balance contractual relationships in order to promote sustainable contract farming models. After providing additional background details regarding the implementation and economic impacts of agricultural production contracts, this chapter attempts to highlight key aspects of the Unidroit, FAO, IFA Legal Guide on Contract Farming, identify areas of continuing concern and suggest opportunities for future Unidroit, efforts in this critical area.

This letter aims to illuminate the legal issues and challenges surrounding agritourism liability and agritourism legal definitions, which are overlooked in the tourism literature. By demonstrating a lack of a clear and consistent agritourism definition and its impacts on liability exemption laws in the US, we discuss the legal and industry-wide complications surrounding an ambiguous definition and argue that this ambiguity may discourage agritourism expansion and operation sustainability, lead to inequity among various forms of agritourism businesses, and undermine agritourism visitors' right.

Private-sector dominance of plant breeding consti­tutes the present norm of organic seed genetics research, which has generated concerns in the organic farming community in this era of robust intellectual property protections. Intellectual prop­erty restrictions primarily in the form of certifi­cates, patents, and contractual arrangements are blamed for stifling the innovation of organic seed varieties. To better understand the challenges small-scale and university-based breeders and researchers face in organic corn seed genetic devel­opment, this article provides an overview of intel­lectual property structures surrounding seed inno­vation and sharing. After describing the legal landscape in which organic corn seed research and development occurs, the article details research efforts exploring the veracity of claims that con­tractual arrangements (in the form of seed-sharing agreements between breeders and universities) sti­fle the innovation of organic varieties. In doing so, the article describes the search methodology uti­lized and highlights a critical barrier to research: the closely guarded nature of private contracts that parties are reluctant to reveal. While we were able to identify several data points that highlighted the importance of seed-sharing agreements as a part of the intellectual property regime controlling organ­ics research and breeding, we were unable to obtain contracts or identify disputes over contractual lan­guage to further analyze. Such contractual language only becomes available upon consent and release by individual parties to the contract or by litigation that exposes the contractual language, both of which we attempted to explore and utilize. The article concludes with a discussion of why contrac­tual arrangements in the context of organic corn seed development are an informative piece of the intellectual property puzzle worth exploring, as well as future points of research necessary to yield data substantiating the concerns of stakeholders in the organic seed industry.

A case study in the U.S. Midwest explored factors likely to be limiting organic maize, aka corn seed quality and quantity. We sought to learn about the influence of the regulatory loophole which allows use of conventionally produced, untreated, non-GMO seed for organic production when an organic equivalent is unavailable and, the organic sectors' concerns about access to quality seed, and seed price. Two farmer focus groups, a workshop with seed producers, a survey of merchants of organic maize seed, and a research project advisory board suggested that the degree of concern about the loophole and seed quality varied according to participants' priorities. Farmers equate seed quality with agronomic traits impacting grain yield and crop establishment (vigor, emergence and tolerance to cultivation). Traits influencing grain quality or composition for specific uses, and the ability to satisfy consumer wants were more important to buyers. Seed price was of greater concern to farmers and buyers catering to commodity markets than to producers and buyers serving de-commodified markets. Producers that prized yield most highly were less concerned about the loophole or interested in participatory on-farm breeding and testing networks than farmers catering to specialty markets. Despite interest, little information about nutritional quality, rhizosphere function, and ecosystem service provision is circulated outside of academic groups. A workshop with leaders in the organic seed improvement industry and advisory board input identified the inability of inbred lines to withstand weed, pest, and disease pressure as the main bottleneck increasing costs and limiting investment in organic seed improvement. The cost differential between organic-and conventional non-treated seed, and competition from organic grain imports, were believed to be limiting the price of certified seed, thus making it difficult to garner investment and innovation needed to develop desired agronomic, environmental, or grain-quality traits. An audit of seed sales reported by >90% of U.S. vendors of certified seed found that the volume of organic seed being sold may account for as much as 75% of organic maize acreage planted in the U.S. Costs of non-treated seed sourced through the loophole are 40-100% less than certified seed. With 75% of U.S. organic corn being produced using certified organic seed, we conclude that the loophole is not altering seed quality by undercutting organic seed sales. Substantially higher costs of organic seed production and challenges associated with organic seed production appear to be the most likely barriers to maize seed improvement for the organic sector.

新冠肺炎疫情扰乱了人们的日常生活,给美国的食品供应造成严重影响.食品杂货店的货架空空如也,农产品滞留农田任其腐烂,牛奶被倾倒浪费而不是用于销售,这些都是美国食品体系脆弱性的体现.将地方和区域食品作为现有生产和分销渠道的补充来源,可纠正食品体系的韧性问题,这或许可以抵抗新冠肺炎疫情对食品体系造成的严重冲击.本文指出了美国工业食品供应链的弱点,即过度重视开发和经济增益,忽视对食品供应链韧性的关注,并进一步描述了新冠肺炎疫情大流行加速这些弱点暴露的途径.首先,本文描述了新冠肺炎疫情的暴发对食品供应链造成的一系列破坏,如供需失衡、食物浪费、粮食安全系统性风险加剧等;其次,本文全面概述了当前美国政府所面临的危机和灾难响应规划,并指出了这些规划和政策是如何落实到地方和区域食物来保障食品供应,又或者无视该内容及其问题.最后,本文提出将地方和区域食品资源纳入政府规划,将地方和区域私营实体的参与视为最有希望的变革路径,如食品政策委员会、农贸市场和食品银行等.

Research suggests that between 20–30% of consumers self-identify as having some form of food allergy or sensitivity and demand for allergy-safe foods is growing. European Union regulations require restaurants to inform diners of the presence of 14 primary food allergens. The method of disclosure, however, is left to the discretion of the restaurant and may include verbal communication, menu labels, or separate informational pamphlets. Despite these requirements, 74% of allergen related food incidents arise from the non-prepackaged (restaurant) environment. Individuals with allergens, therefore, may avoid restaurants or intentionally seek out, especially in the tourism context, venues with publicly disclosed allergen prevention protocols. Due to group effects and social media's ability to channel consumers, implementing allergy-friendly practices could substantially increase restaurant profits. This research examines the performance of the restaurant industry in leading tourist destinations in Croatia with respect to self-disclosure of potential food allergens. Menus, accompanying websites and social media reviews of 973 restaurants across 43 locations were analyzed. Results indicate that very few restaurants have taken affirmative steps to disclose food allergens on their websites (1.3% of English and 0.8% of Croatian websites). Of the subset of restaurants with on-line menus, 6.5% disclosed specific food allergens. In contrast, third-party social media reviews of 24.6% of the restaurants included some statement relating to food allergens. Based on the results, this paper suggests strategies for improved food allergen communication. Specifically, restaurants should make greater efforts to affirmatively disclose allergen information on their websites and monitor social media reviews. Very few restaurants responded to consumer comments, thereby allowing others to dictate the narrative. In light of the strong consumer interest and relatively weak self-disclosure efforts, the hospitality industry has a ready opportunity to attract new consumers by moving beyond regulatory minimums through enhanced allergen communication efforts and social media engagement.

Porez na dodanu vrijednost u turizmu ima ključnu ulogu u poticanju razvoja turizma, ostvarivanju konkurentne pozicije turističke destinacije te prikupljanju prihoda ostvarenih od turizma. Dosadašnjom izmjenom visine stopa poreza na dodanu vrijednost u turizmu hrvatska vlada nastojala je ostvariti konkurentnost hrvatske turističke destinacije, uz maksimiziranje iznosa prihoda prikupljenih od turizma. U radu se upotrebljavaju sekundarni podaci za razdoblje od 1998. do 2020., a cilj je rada analizirati alternativan pristup oporezivanju smještaja i ugostiteljstva, sličan onome koji primjenjuje SAD, da bi se ostvarili bolji fiskalni i ekonomski učinci. U rezultatima analize prikazuju se prednosti i nedostaci povišene i snižene stope poreza na dodanu vrijednost u turizmu Hrvatske, odnosno turističkih poreza SAD-a.

As cities continue to expand, the issues of flood control and urban water quality have become major modern sustainability challenges. Green infrastructure—the use of nature-based solutions to target, treat, and store stormwater at its source—has emerged as a possible solution. While green infrastructure does offer multiple benefits for urban users, its performance is also highly variable. This Article addresses a key gap in existing literature by explicitly addressing how uncertainty in environmental and anthropogenic factors affects green infrastructure performance and integration within the Clean Water Act's municipal separate storm sewer (MS4) regulatory program.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted much of daily life, not the least of which was the nation’s food supply. Empty grocery store shelves, rotting produce in the fields, and gallons of milk dumped rather than sold manifested as symptoms of the fragile nature of the U.S. food system. Rectifying issues of resilience through the incorporation of local and regional food sources as supplementary to the existing channels of production and distribution may have prevented such a harsh shock to the system. This article identifies the weaknesses of the U.S.’s industrial and consolidated food supply chain that prioritizes extraction and economic gain over resiliency, and further describes the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated these points of failure. The article first depicts some of the disruptions to the food supply chain stemming from consequences of the pandemic such as issues with matching supply to demand, wasting large quantities of food, and exacerbating systemic food insecurity. The article then provides a comprehensive overview of existing government crisis and disaster planning with an eye toward how these plans and policies incorporate or ignore implementing local and regional food into the greater food supply. The article concludes with recommendations for how to integrate local and regional food sources into government planning, identifying local and regional private entities such as food policy councils, farmers markets, and food banks as the most promising vehicles of change.

Most courses on food law, whether taught in the United States or Europe begin, rightly so, with a discussion of the bureaucratic agencies and the statutes and regulations providing for their jurisdiction. Historical context is critical as the courses move through discussions identifying the accretion of various forms of public law. Based on this foundation, courses generally transition to exploring more contemporary and nuanced topics within the broader concept of food and regulatory structures. Over the years, an increasing amount of class discussion and associated readings are devoted to how private law is advancing the regulation of the food supply chain, from safety in the production fields and factories to marketing efforts directed to final consumers. Prof. van der Meulen was one of the original scholars in this field of private food law and this article hopes to add to the discussion. After providing some background context with respect to the administrative state, this article proceeds to explore some of the latest private law developments in the United States' food supply chain.

Member States of the European Union have strong historical ties to agriculture in tropical regions based on colonial history and accompanying trade flows. Attempts to reverse the extractive nature of these relationships through public finance investments in sustainable intensification and the linking of smallholders to new markets could enhance food security and rural development. Public sector financing of public–private partnerships to support these efforts, however, may create dominant positions for large agricultural companies. Moreover, the expanded use of agricultural production contracts by these firms may give rise to a variety of legal and social issues, especially when one party to the agreement lacks economic bargaining power. On the other hand, production contracts can enable small-scale farmers to mitigate risk, establish more predictable income streams, and access new market opportunities. Public development funds promoting reformation of smallholder farming operations need to consider the consequences of the expanded use of production contracts.

Cottage food laws are state-by-state regulations intended to facilitate the development of local food and economies by reducing the obstacles small food producers face in market entry. 1 The laws are designed to exempt the sale of certain non-hazardous foods by small scale-producers from food safety regulations so that these individuals are able to market food directly to consumers.2 For example, many of the food safety laws that regulate food production were designed for large processors, whereby food is prepared in a certified commercial kitchen that has met certain requirements to ensure food safety.3 However, these requirements also serve as significant economic hurdles for small food producers seeking to make low risk (non-potentially hazardous) foods—products which do not present the same safety risks as other processed items.4

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not.The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire

In response to agricultural concerns, US legislatures in the late 19th and early 20th centuries enacted laws to regulate invasive plant species whose presence negatively affected crop yields. More recently, these laws regulating noxious weeds have expanded their focus to protect the environment and ecosystem functions. Concurrently, federal mandates have incentivized the commercialization of high-yielding and, in some cases, potentially invasive bioenergy feedstocks. This chapter considers the invasion potential of novel bioenergy crops within the context of conflicting regulatory provisions designed to prevent invasion and promote development of novel feedstocks. The fragmented nature of environmental regulations across multiple jurisdictions (local, state, national) necessitates increased attention by stakeholders to ensure cultivation of bioenergy crops do not result in a largescale invasion. To mitigate such an eventuality, it is recommended that pre-market invasion risk assessments and post-introduction negligence liability actions be codified into new and revised bioenergy laws at all levels of government.

Large scale management of weed populations is vital to decreasing propagule pressure and reducing weed seedbanks, two of the principle process targets in integrated weed management strategies.1 Unfortunately, demands for improved management techniques will escalate in many areas as herbicide resistance (HR) expands. One strategy—cooperative weed management areas (CWMAs)—have been a fixture in western rangeland systems, and are increasingly being adopted to manage invasive plant populations in the eastern U.S. CWMAs are defined loosely as coalitions of neighboring landowners, natural resource agencies, and conservation organizations that pool and distribute public and private resources to optimize regional weed control.2 As plant dispersal is not restricted by land ownership boundaries, and both the direct and indirect movement of weed seeds is facilitated by the agricultural infrastructure, whether through contaminated feeds or manure, use of non-certified seed, or weed seeds carried on farm equipment transported or used across broad areas, a more regional or landscape approach to weed management may be an important innovation in traditional Midwestern row cropping environments.3