Example collocations logo

Agricultural in sentence

1280 examples of Agricultural in a sentence

The concessions it contains on manufactured products like automobiles are much smaller than those on, say, agricultural products, which will involve profound sacrifices from other TPP countries, such as Japan.
Shareholders know of hundreds of agricultural enterprises, hotels, luxury villas, banks, investment companies and corporate jets owned by Gazprom.
The tragic result is that some of the world’s poorest countries cannot export their agricultural goods, one of the few areas where they might realistically compete with the likes of China and India.
In practice, this has meant large flows of money either to big agricultural producers, like France, or to poorer member states, like Greece and Portugal.
Australia, too, is grappling with serious droughts in the agricultural heartland of the Murray-Darling River basin.
Can Africa position itself in the global economy to produce and sell finished goods, especially processed foods and agricultural products?
It calls for enhancing agricultural productivity; upgrading value chains; exploiting local, regional, and international demand; strengthening technological effort and innovation capabilities; promoting effective and innovative financing; stimulating private participation; and improving infrastructure and energy access.
In fact, such templates now extend beyond conventional trade issues (for example, agricultural protection) to vast numbers of areas unrelated to trade, including labor standards, environmental rules, policies on expropriation, and the ability to impose capital-account controls in financial crises.
Unilever has committed to the sustainable sourcing of agricultural and forest products.
When an agricultural research unit called the World Agroforestry Center discovered that a certain tree could help African farmers grow more food, they introduced a new and valuable approach to overcoming Africa's chronic food crisis.
The reality is that the global impact of agricultural liberalization in rich countries would be relatively small and highly uneven.
These policies may hurt agricultural producers elsewhere, but they also benefit poor urban consumers.
Of course, there would be some big gainers from agricultural reform, but they are chiefly consumers and taxpayers in rich countries.
Most industry was located in the North, whereas the South was mainly agricultural.
All too often, notions such as “reserve agricultural land,” or “idle land,” are manipulated out of existence, sometimes being used to designate land on which many livelihoods depend, and that is subject to long-standing customary rights.
In the past, agricultural development has prioritized large-scale, capitalized forms of agriculture, neglecting smallholders who feed local communities.
And governments have failed to protect agricultural workers from exploitation in an increasingly competitive environment.
It should come as no wonder that smallholders and agricultural laborers represent a combined 70% of those who are unable to feed themselves today.
Certainly, agricultural investment should develop responsibly.
Low world commodities prices and protectionism against Argentina’s agricultural exports are additional factors.
Argentina is vulnerable to external shocks such as declining agricultural commodity prices because Argentina failed to develop a diversified export sector, one in which a broad range of industrial and service sectors are internationally competitive.
Argentina’s trade is overwhelmingly concentrated in a small number of commodities, including cereals, meats, processed foods, and other agricultural products.
Argentina has much going for it: widespread literacy, a healthy population, a highly productive agricultural economy, and a strong natural resource base.
From the very beginning, these countries have represented the different aspects of Europe’s identity: Belgium, as an industrial country, continentally oriented, bilingual, and an intermediary with southern Europe, and the Netherlands with its strong agricultural and trading tradition and its Anglo-Saxon and Atlantic orientation.
And it collects extremely high import duties for agricultural products.
The system of agricultural protectionism that this compromise produced survives to this day, exemplified in import duties of 69% on beef and 26% for pork.
Because of these high import tariffs, European agricultural prices are, on average, around 20% above world market levels.
Europe’s agricultural protectionism also harms developing countries, which are unable to sell their agricultural products – in many cases, the only goods they can export – in European markets.
According to an older studyby the Canadian economist John Whalley, the disadvantages of agricultural protectionism for developing countries outweigh the benefits of development aid.
That means that it must not sacrifice its citizens’ interests to those of the French agricultural lobbies or to the Commission’s financing needs.
BackNext