Main

October 17, 2006

Organic Agriculture in China -- Article in Businessweek

My dad knows more about what’s going on in Yunnan province than I do, and he lives in Wisconsin. He forwarded me a link to this article in Businessweek this morning, which is ridiculous because I was interviewed for it, and quoted in it, but he still scooped me.

The article discusses entry of Chinese organic products into the US market from a fairly skeptical perspective. I can understand the sentiment, but I tend to have a more positive outlook — and I’d like to think, fairly well-reasoned. Of course, I went on at length about this in the email interview… to draw a line from the article,

Barbara Robinson, who oversees the USDA’s National Organic Program, says that her department has received no complaints about Chinese organic products entering the U.S. “I don’t know why everybody picks on China,” she says.

Indeed.

What do I really think about China’s organic agriculture? Glad you asked. My organization just held a seminar on this issue a few weeks ago, which solidified a lot of the perspective I gained in the last year over here, so the questions from Businessweek were very well-timed. Here is the verbatim of my original responses:

Q: How much pesticides (and fertilizer, if you have that) does China use each year? Is it going up, or down?

The data vary widely depending on who you believe. For example, data reported by the Chemical Industry Almanac in 2001 was 300,000 tons lower than that reported by the China Agricultural Development Report. China Customs’ data for pesticide production was 1.04 million tons in 2005. It is important to note that about 430,000 tons (nearing half of all production) was exported in 2005.

The trend, however, is very consistent no matter whose data you look at. There was a brief decrease in use between 1983-1985, as a result of new policies banning a big group of persistent organic pollutants and highly toxic chemicals (DDT, lindane, monocrophos) but since the late ’80s, there has been a continual increasing trend in pesticide production and domestic use.

Q: Does the country use chemicals that are banned in the U.S.?

There are a large number of agrochemicals that are heavily restricted in the US that are still sold without legal restriction in China. For example, in the US, only licensed pesticide applicators can purchase the herbicide Paraquat, while in China, it is widely available over the counter (and often used for suicides).

Another example is Methamidophos, a highly toxic organophosphate that is only available to licensed pesticide applicators under very special and restricted circumstances in the US, and may only be applied to certain crops. In China, it is technically banned for use on all fruit and vegetable crops, but still easily available to most farmers without oversight.

A third problem in China is that many chemicals which have technically been banned for more than two decades (DDT, for example) are still manufactured in China for export — a practice I consider ethically questionable — and since there is a supply manufactured in China, it is still available from many pesticide retailers in rural areas. The ban is enforced in high-population areas, urban areas, and places producing crops for export, but in some small villages, DDT is still sold and used. In casual conversations, just about any pesticide retailer will openly admit this, and with a rural population of 700 million, the ban is difficult to fully enforce.

Q: What effect are these chemicals having on farmers and food? Are there any statistics on deaths, etc?

Pesticide is the primary means of suicide in China, since guns are illegal/almost completely inaccessible here. Suicide rates are highest among women in rural areas.

Acute poisonings on a large scale happen on a semi-regular basis, but the Chinese government doesn’t often pinpoint pesticides, instead citing deaths or hospitalizations from the very non-specific “food poisoning.”

Pesticide residue data is collected on a semi-regular basis, but these results may only be published annually in a national-level academic report. Some of the best case reports of pesticide residue on Chinese produce are those found in the Hong Kong media, since there is some residue testing at the border, and regular reports of poisoning due to black-market produce coming across from Guangdong province.

There has been some concern over the import of organic food because of fears that the regulations aren’t strict enough. Do you think those concerns are valid?

Organic farming means something very different in China than it does in the US. In the US, “organic” brings to mind small-structure, possibly family owned and managed farms that go organic due to a set of personal, ethical or health reasons. In China, organic products destined for export are usually grown on large-scale farms where farmers are organized and managed by either local governments or private companies. Plots of land are too small for one “family farm” to bring products to export, and in these places, the decision to go organic rarely lies with the farmer. This means they may not be invested in the idea of organic products, and therefore more likely to bend the rules.

The problem isn’t with the regulations per se, as with possible corruption during enforcement/certification. What I have seen of SMALL SCALE organic farming in China has been very positive and in compliance with regulations — but companies and governments still have the capacity to get away with a lot.

That being said, I don’t really see much of a health risk posed by eating China’s organic foods. They may not be as pristine an “organic” as US products, but they are still likely to be far “greener” than non-organic produce from the US. These food products are randomly tested for pesticide residue before exporting anyway, as both the US and the EU demand it.

Q: How should American consumers view organic food from China?

Organic food from China is a greener choice than off-the-shelf produce from the US. Pound for pound, even non-organic Chinese farmers are using only a fraction of the insecticides and herbicides used by US farmers. On the other hand, if a consumer’s goal is low environmental impact, they might want to consider the effects of shipping organics across the Pacific.

My personal opinion is that anything that can help to make organic farming in China a profitable choice will do the world an immense service. Production and use of pesticides is very much on the rise here. Local governments are actively promoting pesticide use in rural areas, using funds targeted for “scientific development” to host “experts” from pesticide companies that basically show farmers how to use more pesticides. Many consumers still have no idea what “organic” means. Profitable, export-oriented organic food products that are popularized by American consumers will give consumers a choice, and show farmers an alternative to dumping more toxins on their (and our) food.


September 7, 2006

Whose land is it anyway?

Normally when I want to bore my friends to sleep, I talk to them about rural land rights and agricultural development. The topic is a fascinating one in China, but it requires a background in agriculture and legal theory that most people don’t really have the patience to acquire. Luckily, I had a little help in the form of my senior thesis, and as a result, get really excited every time the central government tweaks the system.

I can’t promise to keep you awake here, but I’ll try at least…

Yesterday brought a fairly significant announcement from the State Council, reported by China Daily here — think of it as an executive order, because it hasn’t really been codified or vetted through a legislative process yet. Some of the more interesting requirements include:

To stop local governments from giving land to investors free or at throwaway prices, the central government will set a minimum price, which will vary according to what it is used for. Officials who sell land at prices lower than the minimum will be prosecuted.

What incentives do local governments have to take land from farmers and give it away for a pittance? Many are involved as management or investors in the development schemes that receive the land. Even if they’re not directly/legally involved, officials will often receive substantial under-the-table payments in exchange for such land transfers. At minimum, officials believe that having major developments in their (previously rural) jurisdiction will bring them prestige.

There will be a ban of leasing land from farmers for construction purposes, a back-door tactic increasingly used by some local governments and investors to dodge taxes on land sales and approvals by higher authorities.

This one really caught my eye. A BAN on LEASING? I understand that it is intended to prevent permanent structures from being built on the leased land (amounting to a de facto permanent transfer out of agricultural use, regardless of the official designation of the land) but this seems like a notable subtraction from a portion of the property right previously allocated to farmers. In an article in Land Economics from May 2000, Yang Yao describes farmers’ difficulty gaining permission to lease to their neighbors before migration/relocation. I can’t imagine this added layer of suspicion will improve things much.

I also liked this one:

Land sale revenues must be incorporated into local budgets so that they can be scrutinized by higher authorities a major departure from the current practice where local governments have total freedom to spend the money as extra-budget revenue.

Didn’t the idea of preventing local officials from directly pocketing land-sales revenue without any legal ramifications occur to someone before? We political economists like to call this a “perverse incentive.” I know, it sounds dirty, doesn’t it. The change is a good one, but you’ve gotta wonder why it took this long (household responsibility system since 1978, major problems with arable land loss to development since the early 1990s at least) to come up with an innovative idea like this.

The article concludes with this gem:

A survey of 16 cities by the Ministry of Land and Resources last year showed that nearly 50 per cent of new land under development was acquired illegally. The figure was as high as 90 per cent in some cities.

Check out the extended entry for some fun facts about China’s land and property rights! If I haven’t bored you so far, fear not, for I will bore you shortly.

Continue reading "Whose land is it anyway?" »

August 22, 2006

Snails gone wild in Guangxi

Every morning when I get to work, I glance through two online publications: the New York Times, and, for “interesting” China news, Shanghiist. Today, a story about snails caught my eye — apparently people in Beijing are eating these things and getting meningitis. Good to know, since I eat everything I find for sale on the street.

Anyway, the article made brief mention of a related snail outbreak in rice paddies in Guangxi, which is both closer to my neighborhood and in my field (molluscicides are pretty toxic, yo.) The first thing I discovered is these little guys have lots of names. In addition to Amazonian Snail, they are also called “Apple Snail,” and in Chinese, they are “daping snail” (大瓶螺) or “fushou snail” (ç¦?寿螺). And it turns out they have been causing problems for a while:

(from a 2002 article on invasive species in the People’s Daily, see it here)

The species of snail Liu mentioned, Amazonian snail which is dubbed “Fushou snail” in China, was introduced to the southern county in the 1980s as a food delicacy. However, the snails bred very rapidly to infiltrate all lakes, brooks and ponds in the whole county - a disaster for local farmers as they tended to eat every seedling in the rice fields and seize bait from carp in fishponds.

From the perspective of my organization (see our awful website here), this next bit was even more interesting:

Making matters worse, the Amazonian snail is strongly resistant to highly toxic pesticides. Farmers have to pick them up by hand and take them far from water so they shrivel to death or directly bury them. But such labor-intensive methods have proved ineffectual against the powerful potency of the river snails. Having run out of options, the farmers are appealing to scientists to find or breed a natural enemy of the river snail.

Yeah, it is so awful that the snail is resistant to “highly toxic pesticides” — the farmers pick them off by hand instead of dumping tons of chemicals into the rice paddies. Boo hoo.

The article I found on Guangxi Agricultural Information Network (in Chinese, here) was far more informative, but, again, is in Chinese. Apparently they have found some chemical solutions since 2002. Some bits translated here —

自家田里施了激螺迯忎,螺虽然死了,忯丿到两三天,忈从水沟和别人家的田里爬过濥。(After a family applies molluscicide, the snails will die, however, within two or three days, they come back from neighboring fields and irrigation channels.)
(…)有计划组织农民养鸭,在螺念孵化时,放鸭孿到田里〿沟里心掉幼螺;在禿寿螺釿忑区,农民覿在规定时间内,在田地〿水沟〿池塘内统一投放激螺迯,开展全鿢性迯激。 (There is a plan to organize farmers to raise ducks, and at the time when the snales reproduce, put the ducks in the fields and irrigation channels to eat snail eggs and young snails. In areas where outbreaks of Fushou snails are serious, farmers should establish a time during which fileds, channels, and reservoirs will all be treated with molluscicide to kill snails simultaneously).

Gotta wonder what is going to happen to those ducks after they wander around in the poisonous fields eating toxic dead snails.

Kunming - Ducks

The Hao Hao Report

Planet Carleton

Chinalyst...
Powered by
Movable Type 1.56