Example collocations logo

Farmers in sentence

1667 examples of Farmers in a sentence

As a result, farmers’ incomes suffer while food prices soar.
Pastoralists, small producers, and independent farmers simply cannot compete with low retail prices that fail to account for the industry’s true environmental and health costs.
The first change would be to prohibit imports of genetically modified feed, and require that farmers produce at least half of their animal feed on their own farms.
Moreover, slurry and manure would no longer be transported long distances, and could be used to fertilize farmers’ own land to produce feed.
This would force farmers to treat animals individually for illnesses, based on veterinary diagnosis.
In Darfur, recurrent drought has poisoned relations between farmers and nomadic herdsmen, and the war we are helplessly witnessing today follows years of escalating conflict.
They preferred less competition in credit markets not out of concern for the unwitting farmers, but in order to defend powerful lenders’ profits.
Nor was this the first time: in 2000, when South Korea increased tariffs on garlic to protect its farmers from a flood of imports, China responded by banning imports of South Korean cellphones and polyethylene.
Hu’s Politburo has consistently refused to let peasants set up non-official farmers’ associations or trade unions.
At the same time, it has allowed farmers across China to fall victim to an epidemic of illegal land grabs by local governments and developers.
But it also includes choices made on a much smaller scale: farmers pondering which crops to plant, how much fertilizer to apply, and when and where to sell their produce.
For example, experts might estimate with 90% confidence, based on available data and their own experience, that farmers’ average maize yields in a given region are 0.5-2 tons per hectare.
Python skins are commonly used as raw material in the luxury fashion industry, and ITC surveys of python-skin harvesters, farmers, processors, and exporters in Vietnam and Malaysia found that the trade reinforces livelihood resilience by providing an additional source of income.
Of course, the billions of farmers and villagers worldwide should not be forgotten.
Farmers are a different story.
Forced eradication risks pushing farmers into the hands of extremists, and thus will not lead to the sustainable reduction of opium fields.
Farmers will be weaned off opium over the long term only if they have sustainable livelihoods.
We must punish the traffickers and reward the farmers.
These developments do not constitute more protectionism in the usual meaning of the term, where private interests subvert the public good, as when farmers charge higher prices because competitive imports are restricted.
Africa is endowed with 60% of the world’s unused arable land and millions of dedicated farmers.
And some are implementing risk-management and hedging tools to shield farmers from drought and flood, and poor consumers from the food-price volatility that such disasters cause.
For example, the Global Index Insurance Facility insures Kenyan farmers against drought or excessive rainfall.
Under the Global Warehouse Receipt Program, for example, farmers may use produce stored in depositories as collateral for loans.
Farmers could be grouped together to pool their production and negotiate a favorable offtake agreement to monetize future sales, then use the receipts to lease equipment, such as tractors.
When it comes to agriculture, developed countries, such as the US and European Union members, insulate both consumers and farmers from these risks.
In addition, some of the billions spent to subsidize Western farmers should now be spent to help poorer developing countries meet their basic food and energy needs.
Opening up trade in agriculture and textiles – and even providing preferences of the kind that are offered to other poor countries – would likely benefit directly the poor farmers who make up 70% of the population, as well as create new jobs.
Gene flow is an age-old process that is well understood by farmers, who grow hundreds of crops, virtually all of which have been genetically improved in some way with a variety of techniques.
But, with a combination of factors – including natural selection, farmers’ pursuit of their commercial self-interest, and liability concerns – militating against such a possibility, the odds are very long, and the impact would almost certainly be very low.
Donors are rallying for food aid, but they are resisting the obvious need to help the poorest million farmers (and their four million dependents) get soil nutrients and improved seeds in time for the planting season this autumn.
BackNext