And this is still the case in many countries even after a decade of reform effort. For reasons that relate to our history and our culture, to memories of war, famine and shortage and, for many of us, to our own roots in the countryside and on farms, agriculture has always been considered to be somehow different or special and has been treated accordingly. I myself was raised on a small Canadian farm and marvel at the evolution of the agricultural sector in the post war period. From my point of view at the head of OECD, our primary role is to help improve the quality of public policy, domestically and internationally, and thereby to contribute to economic growth, to prosperity and to sustainable development. Members learn from each other through sharing experiences, and a process of peer scrutiny.
Policy makers have a duty to be vigilant.
They must constantly ask whether the objectives set for policies are still valid and, if they are, whether the measures being taken are the most efficient, the most equitable and the most cost-effective. OECD has a comparative advantage in undertaking objective analysis that, by adopting horizontal approaches, allows all the different facets of a problem to be tackled. This allows, for example, to ask if agricultural policies are consistent with, and integrated into, the broader macroeconomic and social policies and whether they are compatible with international obligations. So, in this time of rapid change we should be putting not just the policies themselves, but the very premises on which they are based, under the microscope. Let me give you some examples.