tunity for improvement in marketing efficiency. Numerous conversions from one unit of measure to another are a matter of everyday practice. Agricultural products leaving the farm are sold by pound, gallon, bushel, or containers of innumerable shapes and sizes. Even a given measurement unit, bushel for example, has manifold meaning within a commodity as well as among commodities. Thus the numerous types of measurement encompassed in agriculture leave much to be desired.

The USDA believes much improvement in efficiency through simplification of relationships among units is potentially possible within the customary system. But, the disruption among those involved would be of such magnitude as to suggest direct conversion to the metric system rather than making major improvements within the customary system and later converting to metric, assuming that adoption of the metric system is in the offing. Moreover, perhaps much of the needed reform to achieve improved efficiency, understanding, and communication in marketing could be more readily accomplished in the process of converting to the metric system than in a major overhaul of the customary system.

As agriculture has much to gain, USDA support can be counted on if “going metric" becomes a national goal. In that event the Department recommends that the conversion be made as quickly as possible after thorough planning and preparation has taken place. The USDA is in accord with the distinction being made between measurement units and engineering standards. Any concerted action to convert should focus on getting the metric language and instruments into use within as short a transition period as possible - hopefully 2 or 3 years after plans and provisions for the change have been fully developed. Adoption of uniform or new standards (sizes) could be governed by obsolescence and other economic factors and follow without the necessity of a totally coordinated effort with an imposed time schedule.

Impacts on Consumer Affairs

Present Metric Usage. The metric system is used in less than onequarter of all activities in consumer affairs. The Department of Agriculture respondents do not feel that there is any significant trend toward metric usage in consumer affairs.

The impact of the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the metric system to the present time has been trivial. Imported packaged products, for example, are generally labelled in familiar units of weight or volume. Many show dual measurements.

Future Impacts of Metrication. Assuming no concerted national action toward increasing metric usage, the Department of Agriculture believes that there would be little effect on people as consumers of food and fiber products from domestic and foreign origins. There would also be negligible impact on the ability of the Department of Agriculture to perform its mission with respect to consumer affairs due to the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the metric system.

* See "Classification of Intensities of Impact" scale on p. 79.

The respondents believe that the question is either continued use of the customary system or complete conversion to the metric system. They see no advantage to a national program to increase metric usage in the consumer area, assuming increased use means selective use rather than complete conversion.

If the U.S. makes a decision to convert, the USDA respondents believe that much time and effort should be spent on the development of plans that would enable conversion to metric usage in units and standards in as short a period as possible. Hopefully such conversion should take place in less than 5 years after full preparation has taken place. Adoption of metric engineering standards need not occur for all items in a specified period of time. Rather, the rate of progress toward use of metric standards would be governed by obsolescence and other economic factors and demand for change as, and after, metric language comes into general use.

The problem of being an intelligent consumer is becoming increasingly difficult with the proliferation of goods and services. After transition, communication and calculation would be more efficient and less costly and there would be less opportunity for deception regarding pricing and container sizes. Mental calculation needed to compare prices of products in different package sizes (e.g., weights in pounds and ounces) is a frustrating exercise. Persons of low intellectual ability might have the most difficulty of transition to the metric system, but in the long run, benefits to them might be relatively greater because the arithmetic is simpler. Any plans for conversion should include special provisions during the transition period for protecting the equity of parties involved in transactions and for handling a larger than average number of court cases.

The Department of Agriculture respondents say "perhaps there is more to gain from standardization of sizes of units than from adoption of metric measurement units."

The price of food to consumers and marketing costs would be two numerical indicators which could be used as measures of the impact of metrication on the consumer affairs area.

The Department of Agriculture respondents say that the adoption of metric measurement units (and/or standards) would improve the Department's effectiveness within consumer affairs, but the amount is not clearly discernible. The respondents believe, however, that in the long run, consumers would benefit considerably.

What Action Should Be Taken? The Department of Agriculture respondents suggest that the Government should help facilitate people's understanding of the metric system and its various applications. The Government should conduct formal studies of the costs and benefits of a complete changeover to the metric system.

Impacts of Metrication on Food and Fiber
Production

The Department regards the impact of metrication on the small farms with little mechanization and some small agri-businesses as about the same as for

consumers, the difference being primarily a matter of degree rather than kind. Hence, the impact of metrication on food and fiber production is considered primarily with reference to heavily mechanized farms, agricultural service establishments, handlers and processors of food and fiber, together with designers and manufacturers of agricultural and forestry inputs - farm equipment, processing equipment, agricultural chemicals, etc.

Present Metric Usage. The metric system is used in less than onequarter of all activities within the food and fiber area as defined above. There is a progressively greater use, especially in foreign trade matters. Up to the present time, the impact of the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the metric system has had trivial impact on the food and fiber industry. In some areas, however, the impact might be classified as negligible or moderate.

Future Impacts of Metrication. The USDA respondents believe that there would be very little, if any, change during the next decade or two if no concerted national action concerning metrication is undertaken. Also, there would be very little, if any, impact on the ability of the Department of Agriculture to perform its mission with respect to the food and fiber industry. The impacts on its ability to perform its mission according to the intensity scale would be trivial.

The Department of Agriculture provides little response concerning the effects on the food and fiber industry of a nationally planned program to increase the use of the metric system. Costs of metrication would be reflected in prices of farm supplies, in the cost of performing custom services for farmers and, more generally, in the costs of farm production. However, the cost or savings from metrication would not be separable from the effects of other factors. The Department believes, in the long run, that adoption of the metric system would improve its effectiveness in performing its mission but the degree of improvement is not clear.

What Action Should Be Taken? The Department of Agriculture says that it does not have a sufficient information base to make a sound recommendation on what action, if any, the United States should take with respect to the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the metric system. While universal adoption of the metric system would bring long-range benefits, it is not clear that in the farm and related segments of the food and fiber industry, the net benefit would be sufficient to push for metrication limited to this sector.

Impacts on Environmental Pollution Control

Present Metric Usage. At the present time the metric system is used in less than one-fourth of all activities within the environmental pollution control field in the United States. The use varies with disciplines. In some areas, the use may be greater than 25 percent, according to the Environmental Quality Executive Committee of the Department of Agriculture. The Committee says that there is a trend toward increasing metric usage in environmental pollution control. In nearly all technical papers, the metric system is used. Professional journals have become more insistent that data

be reported in metric units. Improved international cooperation and understanding among engineers and scientists has been evolving. Water quality is increasingly being measured in terms of the metric system.

Up to the present time, the impact on the environmental pollution control field of the increasing worldwide and domestic use of the metric system has been trivial on the intensity scale. Some impacts have been in the moderate category, however. There have been some changes in measuring devices. The professional staffs have had to become more adept at making conversions between customary and metric units. Soil surveys are now published in dual languages.

Future Impacts of Metrication. If there is no concerted national action to increase metric usage, the Committee says that there will be added costs and difficulties resulting from being increasingly involved in having to work in terms of both systems. There will be a general delay in making full use of the metric system.

The impact of the increasing use of metric outside of USDA, assuming that there will be no concerted national action, will be increasing difficulties for the Department in performing its mission. There will be increasing difficulty in communication and increased costs of having two systems until a total changeover is accomplished. These impacts will be trivial on the classification scale.

If there is a nationally planned program to increase the use of the metric system, the Committee says that increased use would mean greater involvement with two systems, and as a result, added cost and communications difficulties. Apparently, these difficulties can be avoided only by complete conversion.

If there is a changeover, it should be made as quickly as possible, after a thorough development of plans and provisions. Except for some equipment replacement, the actual transition period should be less than 5 years, the Committee believes. The continuing cost of a dual system would overshadow the costs of quick training and change.

The Committee does not know of any numerical indicators which could be used as measures of impact of metrication on the environmental pollution control field. However, the Committee says that use of the metric system would result in greater international use of American standards for soil and water conservation practices and greater American use of other countries' technology.

Adoption of metric measurement units (and/or standards) would improve the Department's effectiveness in performing its mission with respect to the environmental pollution control field. There would be greater uniformity of construction materials. In areas of chemical usage, errors in preparation of dilutions would be minimized. Automatic data processing would be facilitated. Communications between scientists and engineers would be enhanced. International cooperation would be strengthened. Costs and errors would be less as there would be only one measurement system to deal with. If complete conversion is made, domestic operations under the metric system would be more efficient.

What Action Should Be Taken? The Committee thinks that the metric system should be adopted. The United States should establish specific target dates, develop training programs and conversion schedules, and provide technical assistance to industry and specialized groups. In cases where costs are exceedingly high due to unique technical complexities, perhaps tax adjustments could be used to expedite change.

Impacts of Metrication on International Affairs

Present Metric Usage. The Department of Agriculture's responsibility in international affairs includes: collection, compilation, analysis, and publication of statistics on world production, imports, exports, and consumption of agricultural products by countries; maintaining and expanding agricultural exports; and provision of technical assistance in agricultural development.

The USDA respondents say that in the international affairs areas, a dual system is used, so that between one-quarter and three-quarters of all activities are in metric. There is a trend toward increasing use of the metric system. As international metric usage trends upward and international trade grows, there is more U.S. usage of metric units, thereby increasing involvement in dual dimensioning. More and more statistics showing international comparisons and world or regional totals are being published using metric units. Foreign markets and consumers are important to U.S. agriculture.

Up to the present time, the impact on USDA's international affairs responsibilities of the increasing worldwide and domestic metric usage has been trivial on the classification scale. U.S. exporters need to convert quotations and to keep figures on a dual basis. There is more relabeling or dual labeling of exported and imported products. There has been little change in trading practices.

Future Impacts of Metrication. If there is no planned national action, the USDA respondents believe that there will be a slow rate of increase in metric usage in the United States. Greater volumes of international trade and increasing worldwide use of the metric system will simplify the problems of conversion, negotiation, recordkeeping, and meeting standards. This suggests a gradual intensification of difficulties for the Department in performing its mission. However, the intensity of impact is mostly classed in the trivial category.

The respondents were asked what would be the effects on the USDA's international affairs responsibilities of a nationally planned program to increase the use of the metric system. The Department feels that a 10-year period would be much too long, with regard to international affairs, because it would prolong the agony of a dual system with all of its problems. The optimum period would be 1 or 2 years since this period would lead to a cheaper, more effective changeover with fewer problems and more benefits than the 10-year transition period would.

The respondents are not aware of any good numerical indicators which could be used as measures of the impact of metrication on their international affairs responsibilities. In some cases, changes in export statistics on specified commodities and packaging might be partial indicators. There have