Invisible hazards and imperfect information held by producers, consumers, and regulators continue to make food a volatile issue that can disrupt markets and cause substantial losses to suppliers of agricultural inputs, farmers, marketers, and consumers. New and improved data are needed to assess risks, consumer demand, and costs of alternative private and public control strategies. Food data were identified as a high priority by several groups. The 1989 Survey of Agricultural and Rural Social Scientists ranked very important data collection and dissemination efforts and gave develop measures of food safety a rank of seventh and inventory of pesticide and herbicide applications a rank of ninth (Hushak, Chern, and Tweeten). A report of the planning and budget subcommittee of the Experiment Station Committee on Organization and Policy (ESCOP), Research Agenda for the 1990s: A Strategic Plan for the State Agricultural Experiment Stations, rated ensuring the and stability of consumer foods as its first priority. The National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) added food to its list of program areas for funding in 1990, largely because of ESCOP's rating. President Bush proposed a major food initiative in 1989 with a large data collection component, and Congress appropriated funds in 1990. Better data are needed on the incidence, severity, and economic dimensions of foodborne disease from microbial (bacteria, parasites, fungi, and viruses), chemical (insecticides, herbicides, fertilizers, animal drugs, environmental contaminants, food additives), and natural constituents (including biotechnology) in food.' No data source exists with definitive estimates of the number of illnesses caused by foodborne sources or the distribution of disease severities (OMB). The estimates in the literature suggest that microbial sources are causing from 6.5 to 33 million cases of foodborne disease annually and 9,000 deaths (Bennett et al., Garthright, Archer, and Kvenberg). Chemical sources of foodborne disease risk are less well characterized. A worst case EPA estimate suggests 6,000 cases of cancer annually (EPA 1987), while others have reckoned the risk to be much smaller (EPA 1990, Ames and Gold, Archibald and Winter). Economists can contribute to the food discussion by identifying data needed for economic analysis, estimating the social welfare costs of foodborne illness, and estimating benefits and costs of alternative control programs.
Read full abstract