WEBVTT

NOTE The Role of Policy Academics in Guarding Failing Food Safety Regulation: The Anti-Aphid Hypothesis

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.000
My name is Hamide Yasudan and the title of my focus is the role of policy academics in guarding pay-in-to-safety regulation.

2
00:00:09.000 --> 00:00:15.000
First, the content of my text. Why do I study ideology? Why is it important?

3
00:00:15.000 --> 00:00:20.000
Second, I apply evolutionary science to ideology of change. Why is it justified?

4
00:00:20.000 --> 00:00:25.000
The application of evolutionary science produces two hypotheses.

5
00:00:25.000 --> 00:00:31.000
I will explain them, and then I will test them later, and finally the conclusions.

6
00:00:31.000 --> 00:00:35.000
This is a question about the recent peanut butter scheme.

7
00:00:35.000 --> 00:00:38.000
This reads, business can regulate itself.

8
00:00:38.000 --> 00:00:44.000
Well, why do people always blame business?

9
00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:50.000
The top graph shows a federal food safety budget in the last decade.

10
00:00:50.000 --> 00:00:56.000
The bottom part shows, I reported the two positive cases during the same period.

11
00:00:56.000 --> 00:01:02.000
I've already presented it and the positive cases didn't really change.

12
00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:04.000
It means regulation is not working.

13
00:01:04.000 --> 00:01:10.000
Why don't people blame government? Why do they always blame business or the free market?

14
00:01:10.000 --> 00:01:22.000
This is my question. Why, how this pro-government regulation came into being?

15
00:01:22.000 --> 00:01:30.000
I said I applied evolutionary thinking to ideological change. Why is it justified?

16
00:01:30.000 --> 00:01:36.000
150 years ago Charles Darwin published the original speeches.

17
00:01:36.000 --> 00:01:45.000
In one paragraph, in introduction to that book, he summarized his theory of evolution by natural selection.

18
00:01:45.000 --> 00:01:56.000
What he said is, well, there's variation among biological traits, and some of the biological traits are passed on to the next generation, they are predatory.

19
00:01:56.000 --> 00:02:03.000
And there's selection among them. Some biological traits have better chances for survival.

20
00:02:03.000 --> 00:02:16.000
As a logical conclusion, evolution must occur. Organisms with biological traits with better chances of survival will increase in number.

21
00:02:16.000 --> 00:02:25.000
But then how about ideology? Ideologies are composed of ideas, behaviors and institutions.

22
00:02:25.000 --> 00:02:31.000
There is a variation among them. These components are copied and learned and spread.

23
00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:36.000
And there is a lecture among them. Some ideas and behaviors are copied more than others.

24
00:02:36.000 --> 00:02:42.000
Therefore, as a logical conclusion, ideologies must evolve.

25
00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:46.000
Then what is expected of evolution? What will happen?

26
00:02:46.000 --> 00:02:55.000
Well, these pre-floating ideas and institutional behaviors will aggregate into co-adapted ideological complexes.

27
00:02:55.000 --> 00:03:01.000
Look at the colors, and then there's some color consistency.

28
00:03:01.000 --> 00:03:05.000
Well, similar things have happened in the biological world.

29
00:03:05.000 --> 00:03:09.000
All organisms are co-adapted gene complexes.

30
00:03:09.000 --> 00:03:15.000
All genes in my body help one another to increase their survival rates.

31
00:03:15.000 --> 00:03:25.640
Likewise, a policy proposal for wealth redistribution can be easily picked up by people who already

32
00:03:25.640 --> 00:03:35.500
believe in social equality. These ideas help each other. Also, that policy proposal can

33
00:03:35.500 --> 00:03:43.500
spread itself better if it is institutionalized into a regulation and a government agency.

34
00:03:43.500 --> 00:04:00.500
So they have a similar color, so ideology is a hotly contested concept. There are many definitions, but based on its genesis and evolution, we can redefine ideology simply.

35
00:04:00.500 --> 00:04:10.500
Ideology is a naturally evolved complex consisting of mutually assisting ideas, collective behaviors and social-political institutions.

36
00:04:10.500 --> 00:04:22.500
When we study evolution, we look at selective factors or selective environment, because selective factors decide the direction of evolution.

37
00:04:22.500 --> 00:04:28.500
There are two kinds of selective environment, psychological and socio-economic.

38
00:04:28.500 --> 00:04:34.500
I will focus on the socio-economic environment, let me explain the psychological environment first.

39
00:04:34.500 --> 00:04:42.180
Please imagine, numerous brains are forming a network. That's the psychological environment.

40
00:04:42.180 --> 00:04:51.300
And it is these human brains which pick up and store and spread ideological components.

41
00:04:51.300 --> 00:04:57.460
Ideological components such as ideas and behaviors with strong psychological appeal

42
00:04:57.460 --> 00:05:00.740
will be picked up and copied more than others.

43
00:05:00.740 --> 00:05:08.740
For example, an economic policy which exploits human insecurity about the future will be copied and spread.

44
00:05:08.740 --> 00:05:14.740
But the psychological environment doesn't function in a social vacuum.

45
00:05:14.740 --> 00:05:20.740
Social factors influence human brain initial exposure to ideas.

46
00:05:20.740 --> 00:05:23.740
Then the main part of my topic.

47
00:05:23.740 --> 00:05:27.260
I focus on government information supply

48
00:05:27.260 --> 00:05:29.660
as a dominant selective factor

49
00:05:29.660 --> 00:05:31.980
in the socioeconomic environment

50
00:05:31.980 --> 00:05:33.960
because there are three reasons.

51
00:05:33.960 --> 00:05:37.540
Well, first, pro-regulatory ideologies are so dominant now,

52
00:05:37.540 --> 00:05:41.060
so therefore we cannot ignore government agencies

53
00:05:41.060 --> 00:05:43.520
as the target of my study.

54
00:05:43.520 --> 00:05:47.840
Second, for government engaged in PR activities,

55
00:05:47.840 --> 00:05:49.820
they issue consumer warnings,

56
00:05:49.820 --> 00:05:56.820
Therefore, government interferes with the information we are exposed to.

57
00:05:56.820 --> 00:06:07.820
Third, the tax-funded nature of government activities makes them different from private sector players in society.

58
00:06:07.820 --> 00:06:09.820
Let me explain that further.

59
00:06:09.820 --> 00:06:20.820
Evolutionist thinking produces two hypotheses, and let me explain these hypotheses first and I will test them later.

60
00:06:20.820 --> 00:06:26.820
As I said, government agencies are funded with tax. It means they have secure resources.

61
00:06:26.820 --> 00:06:42.820
That makes them as a kind of nucleus, nucleus component in the ideological complex around which other ideas or institutional behaviors gather and grow.

62
00:06:42.820 --> 00:06:46.820
and pro-regulatory ideas are one of them.

63
00:06:46.820 --> 00:06:58.820
And then, because government doesn't have to adjust its information commodities according to ever-changing consumer preferences,

64
00:06:58.820 --> 00:07:09.820
so therefore, government can supply the same pro-government ideas consistently and persistently.

65
00:07:09.820 --> 00:07:19.820
In addition to that, we human beings, unfortunately, tend to believe what people around us are always saying.

66
00:07:19.820 --> 00:07:29.820
It's called human conformity bias. As a result, we will have a little bit of increased support for government agencies.

67
00:07:29.820 --> 00:07:37.820
That goes back to times. This is a cycle, and this is how government information supply grows over time.

68
00:07:37.820 --> 00:07:49.820
The second hypothesis and the title of my talk, a mutualism between bureaucrats and academics emerges, a mutualism is a mutually beneficial relationship.

69
00:07:49.820 --> 00:08:00.820
There are many examples in the biological world. People who are interested in insects or gardening might know the relationship between aphids and ants.

70
00:08:00.820 --> 00:08:12.500
Aphids are tiny insects which give honeydew a kind of sweet substance to ants, but they

71
00:08:12.500 --> 00:08:17.940
are defenseless and they are attacked by predators and eaten.

72
00:08:17.940 --> 00:08:24.180
Ants in return for honeydew protect aphids against their predators.

73
00:08:24.180 --> 00:08:44.180
These are things that will happen between bureaucrats and academics because bureaucrats give funding to academics and academics in return for the funding provide theoretical justification for agencies, mandates and budgets.

74
00:08:44.180 --> 00:09:00.180
This is the kind of cycle. In the process, new institutional ideological components such as academic societies, academic journals and research institutions, graduate schools are created and then they strengthen the ideological complex.

75
00:09:00.180 --> 00:09:05.180
These are two hypotheses. Let me test these two hypotheses.

76
00:09:05.180 --> 00:09:12.180
First hypothesis and the question is, how dominant government is over the information supply?

77
00:09:12.180 --> 00:09:20.500
Well, I chose Google News as our representative information tool, and I did a survey using

78
00:09:20.500 --> 00:09:29.900
food safety and policy, and total I get about 567 accessible articles, 180 articles actually

79
00:09:29.900 --> 00:09:39.220
relevant to the keywords were 59.9, and I read all of them and I assessed every institution's

80
00:09:39.220 --> 00:09:43.860
Contribution as news sources to the information pool.

81
00:09:43.860 --> 00:09:48.340
News sources are interviews and citations.

82
00:09:48.340 --> 00:09:49.780
This is the result.

83
00:09:49.780 --> 00:09:50.880
Big surprise.

84
00:09:50.880 --> 00:09:55.580
Government agencies dominate as information sources.

85
00:09:55.580 --> 00:10:02.300
They are provided more than 30% of the information.

86
00:10:02.300 --> 00:10:05.260
They're followed by food industry, journalists

87
00:10:05.260 --> 00:10:08.660
and authors, and consumer advocacy groups,

88
00:10:08.660 --> 00:10:15.660
and University Academics. If we add university academics who are funded by government agencies,

89
00:10:15.660 --> 00:10:23.660
then government agencies as a whole account for more than 36% of the information.

90
00:10:23.660 --> 00:10:27.660
This is the same data about different organizations.

91
00:10:27.660 --> 00:10:34.660
The USDA, the US Department of Agriculture, provided more than 12% of the information,

92
00:10:34.660 --> 00:10:41.660
followed by the FDA and Food and Drug Administration provided 9.5% of the information.

93
00:10:41.660 --> 00:10:50.660
The USDA, by the way, is the top spender of federal food safety money and the FDA is the second spender of federal food safety budget.

94
00:10:50.660 --> 00:10:59.660
They were followed by Monsanto, a biotech company, and the Center for Food Safety,

95
00:10:59.660 --> 00:11:08.780
A Consumer Advocacy Group, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association, a trade association.

96
00:11:08.780 --> 00:11:15.460
The results clearly showed government dominance of the information supply.

97
00:11:15.460 --> 00:11:16.620
What does this mean?

98
00:11:16.620 --> 00:11:23.860
This means that since 1862, when President Lincoln set up a federal office that would

99
00:11:23.860 --> 00:11:37.860
and how to develop into safety and the USDA. These two federal agencies have grown to become the two most dominant information suppliers in the field.

100
00:11:37.860 --> 00:11:44.860
I don't know the exact shape of this curve, but the growth is undeniable.

101
00:11:44.860 --> 00:11:55.860
The testing of the hypothesis too. The question is how dominant government is in research funding.

102
00:11:55.860 --> 00:12:04.860
I looked at the university economists because I couldn't find a category like food safety policy analysts.

103
00:12:04.860 --> 00:12:12.860
And I chose university economists because food safety policymaking involves a lot of cost-benefit analysis.

104
00:12:12.860 --> 00:12:36.860
So in 2007, 190 million dollars were provided by federal agencies and that amount accounted for 35% of their total funding and again within the federal funding, the USDA, the top spender of federal food safety money, contributed 20% of the federal.

105
00:12:36.860 --> 00:12:41.860
The results show government dominance in research funding.

106
00:12:42.460 --> 00:12:45.580
Well, the next question was,

107
00:12:45.580 --> 00:12:50.060
how is dominance governed in academic publishing?

108
00:12:50.060 --> 00:12:53.460
Well, I chose a journal, academic journal, Food Safety Policy

109
00:12:53.460 --> 00:12:57.380
because of its emphasis on food policy issues.

110
00:12:57.380 --> 00:13:00.860
I did a survey using food safety as a keyword

111
00:13:00.860 --> 00:13:03.420
and the total hit 46 articles, I read them,

112
00:13:03.420 --> 00:13:18.420
And the result is government-affiliated authors, basically bureaucrats, authored 26% of these articles and then government agencies funded 29% of these articles.

113
00:13:18.420 --> 00:13:32.420
Some of these lines didn't overlap so we can add them and as a result we can say that, well, government agencies as authors or fund providers contribute 55% of these articles.

114
00:13:32.420 --> 00:13:38.420
Again, the results showed government dominance of academic publishing. There is no question about that.

115
00:13:38.420 --> 00:13:40.420
Conclusion

116
00:13:40.420 --> 00:13:50.420
Government information supply has grown. It means government keeps spreading pro-regulatory ideas.

117
00:13:50.420 --> 00:13:55.420
Second, a mutualism between bureaucrats and academics exists.

118
00:13:55.420 --> 00:14:03.420
and economic theories which support more government interventions are produced and spread.

119
00:14:03.420 --> 00:14:14.420
I hope my presentation has shown that evolutionary thinking is useful to understand how ideologies are changing currently.

120
00:14:14.420 --> 00:14:15.420
Thank you very much.