But in the eighties and nineties, often as part of structural-adjustment programs imposed by the I.M.F. or the World Bank, many marketing boards were eliminated or cut back, and grain reserves, deemed inefficient and unnecessary, were sold off. In the same way, structural-adjustment programs often did away with government investment in and subsidies to agriculture--most notably, subsidies for things like fertilizers and high-yield seeds.
Even if they were inefficient and unnecessary, which is debatable at best, isn't this one area where the "Better Safe Than Sorry" rule applies? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
The Perils of Efficiency: Financial Page: The New Yorker
But a few weeks ago Bill Clinton, no enemy of market reform, got it right when he said that we should help countries achieve "maximum agricultural self-sufficiency." Instead of a more efficient system, we should be trying to build a more reliable one
