Gaoming's points: Jiang Gaoming, a researcher at the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, said sustainable agriculture is an important long-term solution to boosting production while protecting the environment. As a first step, Jiang says China needs to reduce the amount of fertiliser used by 50% and pesticide by 80 to 90%. China is also struggling to find more land to support agricultural production as it continues to urbanise. Beijing said it would strictly guard the government’s so-called 'red line' of 120 million hectares of arable land. However, a national survey found that per capita farmland has fallen to 0.1 hectare, less than half the global average. A China Daily editorial wrote that the contradiction between urban construction and preservation of arable land was “increasingly prominent.” http://www.中外对话.net/article/show/single/en/6636-Polluted-farmland-leads-to-Chinese-food-security-fears Polluted farmland leads to Chinese food security fears Wang Yue 07.01.2014 comments 1 Agricultural pollution means that China’s food security will increasingly rely on food imports China is struggling to find more land to support agricultural production as it continues to urbanise (Image by Greenpeace ) Decades of intense agricultural production have left China's soil seriously polluted and its water depleted . Wang Shiyuan, the vice-minister of land and resources, recently told a news briefing that about 3.33 million hectares of China’s farmland is too polluted to grow crops. The contaminated area is roughly the size of Belgium. The deteriorating environment adds to the immense pressure to produce more food. Imports of corn, rice and wheat have more than doubled over the past three years. In October 2013, the US Department of Agriculture predicted that by the end of the year China would have imported 23 million tonnes of grain. The overall grain self-sufficiency rate is now less than 90%, well below the target of 95% “China has moved from being self-sufficient in grain a few years ago to being very close to the world’s leading grain importer,” said Lester Brown, founder of the Earth Policy Institute, an environmental think tank based in Washington, D.C. China is set to become more dependent on imported grains, oilseeds and meat, according to a recent report published by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the OECD. It described feeding China in the context of its resource constraints as a “daunting” task. Brown said the Chinese leadership is well aware of the political risks associated with increased food imports. Between 2007 and 2008 export restrictions in major producer countries drove up food prices, a situation that led to civil unrest in several nations. “China no longer considers food security as one secluded country,” said Li Guoxiang, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. “We must also utilise the international market for more food. The leadership views food security in a new light and this is a good change.” Sustainable solutions The overuse of fertilisers, together with dumping of industrial waste, is a major factor behind soil contamination. In May 2013, tests showed that rice produced in Hunan province, one of China’s most important agricultural regions, was tainted by cadmium, a heavy metal known to affect liver function and bone health. Hunan officials blamed the contamination on fertilisers. Jiang Gaoming, a researcher at the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, said sustainable agriculture is an important long-term solution to boosting production while protecting the environment. As a first step, Jiang says China needs to reduce the amount of fertiliser used by 50% and pesticide by 80 to 90%. China is also struggling to find more land to support agricultural production as it continues to urbanise. Beijing said it would strictly guard the government’s so-called 'red line' of 120 million hectares of arable land. However, a national survey found that per capita farmland has fallen to 0.1 hectare, less than half the global average. A China Daily editorial wrote that the contradiction between urban construction and preservation of arable land was “increasingly prominent.” Jiang said sustainable farming could further boost supply from limited land resources. “We have to adjust domestic production. Already many people have to eat imported food because of worsening environmental conditions. This is a forced choice and it is not sustainable,” he said. Local government and farming Zhang Zhongjun, the FAO's Beijing representative, said local governments play a key role in promoting sustainable farming, yet they lack incentives to do so as agriculture traditionally accounts for a very small part of local growth. “Quantity is still the top priority,” Zhang said. “They don’t care as much about the environment.” Jiang said party officials are also unsure if sustainable agriculture can really improve production as those farming methods require more investment. “They won’t support us,” he said. “The fertiliser and pesticide manufacturers tell them that our ways don’t work. We are showing them that they are wrong. Our production doubled in the fourth year.” Farmers are also unwilling to change their method of cultivation as the cost of doing so would cut into their small profit margin. A large number of people have abandoned their fields to work in cities because of the unacceptably low price of grain. “China has to subsidise the farmers in a better way, ” said Zhang. But it may not be enough to just subsidise farmers. Li Guoxiang said land reform is also the key to promoting such products on a bigger scale. Currently, farmers are not allowed to sell or lease the land they farm or live on. Giving them the right to transfer rural land would pave the way for larger and more profitable farms.
Jiang Gaoming July 06, 2012 A 1970s botanist and his theory of ecological balance are all but forgotten in China. But the country needs them today more than ever, writes Jiang Gaoming. “An overreliance on human interference has led to excessive use of chemical feeds, fertiliser, pesticides, plastic membranes, herbicides, additives and GM technology, gravely upsetting the ecological balance of our farms.” Related articles “We will only succeed if we are equal” June 15, 2012 Our bounded world June 15, 2012 We’re all farmers now May 29, 2012 In the late 1970s, China was swept by a wave of economic growth, and with it a wholesale attack on nature. Grain was planted on grasslands and profits extracted from rivers. Land was reclaimed from lakes and seas and forests were felled for arable land. Seeing those drastic and potentially disastrous steps, an ecologist named Hou Xueyu spoke out. Humanity needed to respect nature’s rules, he said, and safeguard its ecological balance. Today, Hou Xueyu, who was a member of the Academic Divisions of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and researcher at the academy’s Institute of Botany, is all but forgotten. But his theory of ecological balance remains as relevant as ever. It still has a role to play in guiding social and economic development. Put simply, ecological balance is a state of adaptation, harmony and unity between organisms and their environment. When an ecosystem is in balance, different parts of the system maintain certain ratios to each other and can maintain that balance even in the face of external interference. But if balance is lost, the system will head towards collapse. To allay worries that maintaining “balance” meant halting development, Hou used a vivid metaphor: ecological balance is like riding a bike, he said. A bike must be in motion to be stable; if it’s not moving, you fall off. If one component fails – if the handlebars fall off, the brakes fail or the tire springs a leak – the balance is lost and the rider won’t move forward. Three decades on, nobody talks of ecological balance. Instead, the buzzwords are “ecological construction” or “ecological development”. “Pollute and destroy first, clean up and develop later.” “Better to die of pollution than poverty.” These are the mottos by which China’s officials live. Development trumps all, nothing is more important than GDP, and Hou’s warnings – indeed Hou himself – have vanished into history. Virtually all of China’s ecosystems – both natural and artificial – are in various states of crisis. Grasslands are degraded by overgrazing and mining. Efforts to exterminate locusts on the grasslands have killed off birds, beneficial insects and other predators of locusts. The natural wetlands of the rural north have been drained and vast swaths of surface water turned filthy. Polluted coastal wetlands have been struck by red tides and natural woodlands swallowed up by development, while village trees are uprooted, trussed up and carted off to the cities for “urban greening” projects. Invasive species create constant crisis, and are found even in nature reserves. And look at our agricultural ecosystems. An overreliance on human interference has led to excessive use of chemical feeds, fertiliser, pesticides, plastic membranes, herbicides, additives and GM technology, gravely upsetting the ecological balance of our farms. Fertiliser use has increased 100-fold since the early 1950s, and has long focused on providing nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium – not on returning organic material to the soil. The carbon-nitrogen ratio is badly out of balance, resulting in hardpan soil , acidification, and less fertile land than ever before. Overreliance on pesticides has killed off the natural predators of pests, while the pests themselves continue to develop new resistance, driving use of ever more toxic chemicals. Herbicides temporarily controls weeds, but the weeds return the next year, and so does the herbicide – in greater quantities. Plastic agricultural membranes are everywhere; fields are full of this “white terror”. The old days of Chinese villages blessed with clean air, water and fresh food are gone. Pests and weeds are growing in number, while extended exposure to chemicals is causing illness – particularly cancer – among villagers. The levels of pesticides, herbicides and growth hormones in food are rising and affecting the health of urban consumers. These are the harsh lessons seen when human arrogance disrupts the ecological balance. More worryingly, humans are failing to look for the root of the problem. When we see more pests and weeds, we just step up the fight. The pest-killing Bt gene is transferred into crops, turning plant cells into “pesticide factories”, while complementary pesticides are used in a pincer attack. The more highly toxic glyphosate weed killers are used in tandem with crops genetically engineered to resist the chemical, while everything else green dies off. But the dangers of glyphosate when it enters the environment, our food and our bodies, have not been explained. GM technology adds insult to the injury of an already unbalanced ecosystem. After a decade of genetically modified crop cultivation, US fields are now plagued by “ superweeds ” and “ superpests ”. America is the largest planter of such crops, and the water and air of its agricultural areas are already widely polluted with genetically modified material. And American farmers are afflicted by higher planting and pesticide costs. Early this year, 300,000 organic farmers took GM giant Monsanto to federal court , claiming the company was infringing their rights to plant traditional crops and damaging the agricultural foundations of their industry. The problems are not going unrecognised. Last year, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation issued a call for agriculture to return to nature. With Save and Grow , a publication of the FAO’s plant production and protection division, the organisation launched an initiative “to produce food for a growing world population in an environmentally sustainable way.” “The present paradigm of intensive crop production cannot meet the challenges of the new millennium. In order to grow, agriculture must learn to save,” the FAO said. “The Save and Grow model incorporates an ecosystem approach that draws on nature's contribution to crop growth – soil organic matter, water flow regulation, pollination and natural predation of pests.” UN expert Oliver de Schutter has gone so far as to say that small-scale farmers could double food production in 10 years in critical regions by adopting eco-farming methods – plenty to meet the additional needs created through population growth. Meanwhile, Europe has remained wary of the GM project: in January, German chemical company BASF announced plans to stop producing genetically modified crops for the European market and move its plant-science headquarters to the United States due to “lack of acceptance for this technology in many parts of Europe from the majority of consumers, farmers and politicians.” And, in both Europe and America, public and private efforts are bolstering eco-agriculture and trade, a trend neatly symbolised by Michelle Obama, America’s first lady, when she planted organic vegetables in the White House garden. Unfortunately, however, what the developed nations increasingly see as trash technology is now moving to the developing world, and in particular to China. If humanity wants to survive, it must better manage its relationship with nature. We must recognise that the productive forces of science and technology can also destroy. If we do not protect ecosystems, human society is doomed. We must learn from the fall of Mayan civilisation and from the failings of the old development model. And we must listen to Hou Xueyu; it’s time to get back on our bikes and restore ecological balance. Jiang Gaoming is chief researcher at the Chinese Academy of Science’s Institute of Botany and deputy secretary of the Ecological Society of China. Homepage image by Greenpeace
Jiang Gaoming Water scarcity affects 184,000 square kilometres (276 million mu)of farmland in northern China, as the worst drought for half a century grips the region. It has put food security back on the agenda, and revealed a lack of investment in agricultural land. The drought has also triggered discussion about new crops that can cope with these conditions. Monsanto, the multinational agricultural biotechnology firm, recently announced plans to market a drought-tolerant strain of maize earlier than expected, after four years of development. Irrigation will provide inadequate water for Chinas fields, say some experts. The cultivation of drought-tolerant crops seems important. But are genetically-modified crops the best way to improve harvests? Aside from food safety issues, they may not be a good idea. The factors that affect Chinese food security are the area farmed, and the yield per unit of area. Yield is more affected by the quality of the land than the nature of the crop. Without a major increase in yield, decreases in the amount of land that is farmed or a shortening in the growing season result in decreased harvests. GM technology only has a role to play where fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides are used heavily. All of these technologies replace labour: people do less work, the soil becomes less fertile and pollution worsens. In the long term, the key factor in food production soil fertility is not improved but diminished. As the GM industry overwhelms agriculture, farmers will have less freedom over their work and will become less inclined to plant staple food crops. According to Li Zhensheng, an award-winning expert on the genetics of wheat, yields in the 1950s were very low: around 100 kilograms per mu. At that time, harvests were limited by the area of land planted. Investment in agriculture, including irrigation, the use of chemical fertilisers and mechanisation, increased from 1962 to 1995. This and the household-responsibility system which motivated farmers to increase harvests saw yields rocket to 283 kilograms per mu (667 square metres). Yield became the limiting factor. Since then, yield has remained around 300 kilograms per mu: 314.4 kilograms in 2006, 286 kilograms in 2008. As in the 1950s, the area of land farmed now determines the size of the harvest. In the latter half of the last century, there was progress in increasing soil fertility, which we can still learn from today. Mao Zedong said that increasing harvests required irrigation, soil improvement, extra fertiliser, improvement of crop strains, closer planting, the prevention of pests, the use of machinery and field management. All of these measures can provide crops with the conditions for growth, and all need investment in agricultural infrastructure. But today we concentrate on a few technological factors: different GM strains, fertilisers, and so on. Irrigation, pest control and field management infrastructure receive no investment and fall into decay. Labour is replaced by machinery; people become lazy. Vendors of machinery, fertilisers, pesticides and agricultural membrane take their cut; nobody worries about pollution or biodiversity loss. Is it any surprise the soil suffers? There have been huge advances in agricultural technology in recent decades in fertilisers, pesticides, membranes, breeding and genetic engineering. The use of fertiliser increases by two million tonnes every year. But despite this, Chinas harvests from 1999 to 2007 failed to reach the peak of 1998. The limiting factor is not technology; further investment in that direction only serves to increase costs. The problem is a human one. An elderly farmer from eastern China told me that he often heard people say: There is no money to be made growing crops. Fertilisers and the rest are so expensive: the more you plant, the more you lose. Just plant enough to eat. In economically developed regions, farmland goes to waste or is covered with buildings. Fertile soil is being lost. Just plant enough to eat, encapsulates the threat to Chinas food security. After the household-responsibility system was implemented, farmers took care of their own food security first. And when it became possible to earn an income from growing crops, productivity rose. Today, costs are high and grain prices are low, so farmers leave the land and head for the cities. From the rich eastern coast to the poor provinces of the west, it is mainly the old, sick or disabled that remain in the villages. Even the women have left to find work. With little available labour, only the minimum is ever planted. This is the root of Chinas food security problem, and it is not an issue that GM crops can solve. GM crops will only benefit the powerful and force more people off the land. GM crops, combined with the use of chemicals, will continue to harm soil fertility, decreasing food security. Chinese food security is limited by the fact that millions of rural residents simply will not plant food crops, due to falling fertility and yields. For the sake of our agriculture and that of future generations, we must use and maintain the land as we did in the past. We need to increase investment in agriculture; restore the irrigation infrastructure that dates back to the 1960s; encourage intensive cultivation; and ensure that working the land is profitable. We should not allow fields to lie empty and fertility to drop.
标签: eco-farming
