Securing solidarity between generations: inter-generational cohesion in the face of demographic change, with particular focus on individual and familial factors and their relation to societal development ; preparatory expertise for the International Plan of Action on Ageing 2002
Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Tesch-Römer, C., Motel-Klingebiel, A., & Kondratowitz, H.-J. v. (2000). Securing solidarity between generations: intergenerational cohesion in the face of demographic change, with particular focus on individual and familial factors and their relation to societal development ; preparatory expertise for the International Plan of Action on Ageing 2002. (DZA Diskussionspapiere, 34). Berlin: Deutsches Zentrum für Altersfragen. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168ssoar-370082
Cross-Cultural Understandings of Festival Food-Related Activities for Older Women in Chiang Mai, Thailand, Eastern Kentucky, USA and Auckland, New Zealand
This cross-country, cross-cultural study explored the meaning of older women’s food-related activities for the annual festivals of Songkran (Thai New Year) in Chiang Mai, Thailand; and Christmas in Richmond, Kentucky, USA; and Auckland, New Zealand. A derived etic method was used. The community-dwelling participants were 33 Thai women, aged 60 and older, and 16 New Zealand and 23 eastern Kentucky women, aged 65 and older. This article focuses on the final cross-cultural analysis of the data. Emic, or within-country, findings are presented, followed by the derived etic, or cross-cultural, interpretations for two themes of meaning; older women’s ‘protecting what matters’ and ‘leading the way’. Applying derived etic methods helped reveal how, despite the highly different food-related practices, preparing and sharing celebratory foods at Songkran or Christmas held related meanings for older women in Thailand, Kentucky USA, and New Zealand.
Livestock Aspects of Feed Grain Policy
It is a signal event that our topic should be included on this program. In recent years, the livestock and poultry economy has scarcely been considered in the making of price and income policy for feed grains. It has been disregarded by pragmatic policy makers. It has been almost equally bypassed by theoretical economists, who usually kibitz freely. Policy for support and target prices for corn, grain sorghums, and other feed grains has been made with an eye almost exclusively fixed on the producers of those crops. The target price has been set relatively high in order to protect crop farmers' income. The latest (and current) loan rate policy has been to hold the rate low. Although a low rate facilitates moving grain into livestock and poultry consumption when crops are abundant, it does nothing to provide buffer stocks for years when crops are short. In addition, a couple of years ago it became administrative policy to dispose of the stocks inherited from an earlier period, even subsidizing their sale abroad. But the foremost example of one-sidedness is the attitude toward release prices. In all the rhetoric heard recently about the peril of holding corn or sorghums in reserve, the scold has been that release prices would not be set high enough. What group can the spokesmen have had in mind? Feed producers, of course! Not feed consumers, that is, livestock and poultry men. It has been a one-sided consideration of a two-sided issue. If all groups are to have equal voice in policy making, how can livestock and poultry interests be so ostracized? The one-sidedness has more impact now that so much livestock and poultry production has become detached from feed supply on individual farms. The livestock-poultry economy is therefore more sensitive to the availability and price of feed. It is in fact a contradiction that historically, livestock and poultry got more attention when they were still closely connected with feed production on the farm. In the early years of farm programs, the "ever-normal granary" was consciously designed to level out the supply and price of feed for livestock and poultry. Now that livestock and poultry have become more commercial and more vulnerable to a volatile feed situation, feed price stabilization has been progressively removed from the councils of farm policy. And the ultimate contradiction is that the alleged price-depressing perils of a feed reserve have been proclaimed in disregard of the fact that the main defense of feed grain producers' incomes is the target price-direct payment mechanism, not support prices. If grains on reserve should cause market prices to be reduced below target level, producers would get bigger direct payments, that is, producers with a base on their farm are protected in that way. Admittedly, production outside such a base would not be eligible for payment.