| Land privatization has resulted throughout history in: a variety of governance types; wealth imbalances; fluctuating degrees of food production; industrialization; and the privatization of intellectual ideas/property. USA government strategies to combat soil degradation have in large been reactive and driven by land privatization and the entrepreneurial nature of the US economy, especially agriculture. This has led to boom and bust cycles of agriculture and soil resilience. Further straining the capability to combat soil degradation are weaknesses in land management legislation due to separation of federal and state law and unfunded mandates. Last, the sheer size of the United States may be its greatest weakness in effectively developing a coherent national soil degradation policy. The recent failure of the European Soil Directive emphasizes the continual struggle between land privatization, food production, and the generation of wealth. We suggest several new strategies to combat USA soil degradation based on existing and new land management schemes, which have the potential to more effectively buffer the unpredictable future of increasing population and climate change. |