Is the United States prepared to change corporate agribusiness to protect water resources, address the food crisis and climate change? Doubt it.

However, according an article in IPS News, a report by the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) at a world agriculture conference in Johannesburg concluded:

"Amongst the 22 findings of the study that chart a new direction for agriculture: a conclusion that the dominant practice of industrial, large-scale agriculture is unsustainable, mainly because of the dependence of such farming on cheap oil, its negative effects on ecosystems -- and growing water scarcity.

"Instead, monocultures must be reconsidered in favour of agro-ecosystems that marry food production with ensuring water supplies remain clean, preserving biodiversity, and improving the livelihoods of the poor.

"The notion that yield can no longer be the sole measure of agricultural success was also raised by Greenpeace International's Jan van Aken, who said that the extent to which agriculture promotes nutrition needs to be considered. A half-hectare plot in Thailand can grow 70 species of vegetables, fruits and herbs, providing far better nutrition and feeding more people than a half-hectare plot of high-yielding rice, he added.

"The IAASTD further notes that experts in agricultural science and technology must not only work with local farmers, but also economists, social and health scientists, governments and civil society.

"The plenary was marked by some disagreement over the ever-controversial matters of biotechnology and trade: indeed, during a long and fraught debate over biotechnology, the meeting very nearly fell apart. U.S. and Australian government representatives objected to wording in the synthesis report that highlighted concerns about whether the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in food is healthy and safe.

"This issue, along with challenges pertaining to trade, had been thoroughly debated over the three-year IAASTD process and the final wording reflected scientific evidence. The report says biotechnology has a role to play in the future but that it remains a contentious matter, the data on benefits of GM crops being mixed; it further notes that patenting of genes causes problems for farmers and researchers.

"We have a very strong anti-GMO (genetically-modified organism) stance but agreed to accept the synthesis report findings because it was neutral,' noted van Aken. 'We're not happy with everything, but we agree with the scientific consensus in the synthesis report.'

"The impasse at the plenary was broken when the two countries agreed to a footnote in the report indicating their reservations about the wording. They also agreed to accept the report as a whole, along with Canada and Swaziland: 'Our government will champion this even though we have reservations on some parts,' the Australian delegate told the meeting.

"The other 60 countries represented at the plenary took a stronger position, moving beyond acceptance to adopt the report.

" 'These documents are like a bible with which to negotiate with various institutions in my country and transform agriculture,' the Costa Rican delegate told the Johannesburg gathering, through a translator."

While developing countries must address the transformation of agriculture relatively quickly, industrial nations like the United States must begin planning for changes away from huge agribusiness which will not be sustainable in the long run because of its dependence on oil which is no longer economical, the problem of clean, but increasingly finite water resources, and protection of ecosystems and the environment.

Although corporate agribusiness and its lobbyists will fight tooth and nail to protect their huge interests, food, water, ecological and environmental crises be damned, maybe family farms will need to make a successful comeback in the new 21st century agricultural model for the U.S. to provide adequate food supplies for the nation.