World Agriculture

Developments, trade, data, and topics in world agriculture

All713 Developments611 Trade46 Data12 Topics3 Readings41

2013-07-25
Nature MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus): Trouble on the farmMicrobiologists are investigating whether the use of antibiotics on farms has triggered an epidemic of drug-resistant strains in the population. Nature| News Feature http://www.nature.com/news/mrsa-farming-up-trouble-1.13427 MRSA: Farming up trouble Microbiologists are trying to work out whether use of antibiotics on farms is fuelling the human epidemic of drug-resistant bacteria. Beth Mole1 24 July 2013 Pigs carrying methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus were found on US farms for the first time in 2007. DANIEL ACKER/BLOOMBERG/GETTY The sight of just one boot coming through the doorway cues the clatter of tiny hoofs as 500 piglets scramble away from Mike Male. “That's the sound of healthy pigs," shouts Male, a veterinarian who has been working on pig farms for more than 30 years. On a hot June afternoon, he walks down the central aisle of a nursery in eastern Iowa, scoops up a piglet and dangles her by her hind legs. A newborn piglet's navel is an easy entry point for bacterial infections, he explains. If this pig were infected, she would have an abscess, a lump of inflamed tissue, just below the navel. “In human terms, she'd be an outie instead of an innie," he says, rubbing the pig's healthy, pink belly button. Nearly six years ago, an outbreak of 'outies' at this nursery marked the first known infection with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus(MRSA) in pigs in the United States. MRSA has troubled hospitals around the world for more than four decades and has been infecting people outside of health-care settings since at least 1995 (see Nature 48223-25; 2012). It causes around 94,000 infections and 18,000 deaths annually in the United States. In the European Union, more than 150,000 people are estimated to contract MRSA each year. Its first appearance on a US farm signalled the expansion of what many believe is a dangerous source of human infection. More on antibiotics: The last resort Male investigated the infections with Tara Smith, an epidemiologist at the University of Iowa in Iowa City, who has since launched one of the most comprehensive investigations yet of where MRSA lives and how it spreads into and out of agricultural settings. She has surveyed farms and grocery stores as well as people's homes, noses and pets. Her findings could help to end a raging debate about whether farms' use of antibiotics is contributing to the rise of drug-resistant bacterial infections in humans. Scientists and health experts fear that it is, and that drug-resistant bacteria from farms are escaping via farmworkers or meat. Last year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended more restraint in the use of antibiotics in livestock, following the lead of regulatory authorities in other countries (see Nature 481, 125; 2012). But the meat and agricultural industries are fighting those restrictions. They claim that MRSA and other drug-resistant bacteria that cause human infections arise in hospitals, and that meat production includes safety measures, such as sanitation rules in slaughterhouses, that prevent resistant bacteria from spreading to and infecting people. “There's a long way between the farm and the table," says Ron Phillips, a representative for the Animal Health Institute, a trade organization based in Washington DC that represents veterinary-medicine companies. The major problem has been lack of data. Many farmers are reluctant to allow scientists access to their facilities, and farmworkers - many of whom, in the United States, are undocumented immigrants - are wary of anyone who might want to sample them. But Smith and a small group of researchers are starting to fill the void. They have “really shaped the state of knowledge in the United States”, says Christopher Heaney, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. Smith's current research, says Heaney, could allow officials to “truly say where these bacteria in people's noses are coming from ”. Profit and loss At a concentrated animal-feeding operation (CAFO) about an hour's drive west from Ames, Iowa, the usual din of the nursery is punctuated by the sound of piglets sneezing, thanks to an outbreak of H1N2 influenza. Craig Rowles, a veterinarian and the farm's manager, surveys his charges, some of which have mucus dripping from their snouts. “It's just like when you bring kids to a day-care centre," he says. “After a while, they're going to come home with a snotty nose ." Rowles is using a vaccine to fight the outbreak, but he is also dosing the pigs with two antibiotics - chlorotetracycline and Denagard - to prevent secondary bacterial infections. The combination is also routinely used to prevent bacterial diarrhoea and other common ailments in piglets. Expand NIK SPENCER/NATURE Such practices have been common for decades. But few CAFOs have veterinarians on staff to advise on antibiotic use. They are not required to: veterinary antibiotics are generally available over the counter. And some CAFO operators use antibiotics much more liberally than Rowles does. Small doses of antibiotics in feed curb low-grade infections that might otherwise stymie livestock growth. Studies have found that certain antibiotics can increase pigs' growth rate by 2.5%, enough to make the difference for farmers between profit and loss. In the current US market, a farmer might get around US$1 per pound for a pig that costs about $0.94 per pound to produce. Although farm owners do not always reveal the quantities or types of antibiotics they use, an analysis of FDA data by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future in Baltimore found that in 2009, some 13.1 million kilograms - 80% of the antibiotics sold in the United States that year - were used on farms. Antibiotic use on such a broad scale leads to resistant microbes. In a 1976 study, Stuart Levy, a microbiologist at Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston, Massachusetts, found that when farmers started using tetracycline, the numbers of tetracycline-resistant bacteria on the farms spiked 1. Within months, resistance had spread to microbes in farmworkers' intestinal tracts. “You don't have to look that far to see resistant bacteria moving to the environment," Levy says. In humans, S. aureus generally lives peacefully on the skin and in the nose. But if the bacterium enters the body through a wound, for example, it can become an aggressive pathogen and eventually make its way into the bloodstream to cause deadly infections. Most infections succumb to antibiotics, but resistant varieties, including MRSA, can be difficult if not impossible to cure. There are 270,000 strains, each potentially harmful. Smith and her colleagues are distinguishing the strains of S. aureus around Iowa City in part by sequence type (ST), a categorization based on DNA sequences from several places in the genome. The sequence type that Male and Smith found in the Iowa nursery in 2007 was ST398 (ref. 2 ). Before then, researchers had seen ST398 mostly in Europe, where it was found in livestock and farmworkers but usually did not cause infection. But two years earlier, ST398 had been reported in a hospital in Hong Kong 3, from patient samples dating back to the early 2000s. For Smith and her collaborator Lance Price, an epidemiologist at George Washington University in Washington DC, it was a sign that the boundaries between animal and human infections were blurring. In February 2012, Price, Smith and their colleagues published a genetic analysis of strains related to ST398 isolated from animals and humans around the world 4. They found that the lineage that gave rise to ST398 originated in humans. At some point, it crossed into livestock, where it acquired genes conferring drug resistance and a preference for pigs before jumping back to humans. As of 2012, ST398 was the cause of up to 20% of human cases of MRSA in the Netherlands, although the infections are generally mild. “No one has even looked at these strains in the United States," says Smith. Doctors, she says, often don't determine what strain of MRSA is causing an infection, so it is possible that the bug has been stealthily migrating between farms and hospitals for years. “In 2009, 80% of the antibiotics sold in the United States were used on farms ." Smith's next step was to see if there were other ways MRSA might make it off the farm. At a grocery store on the outskirts of Iowa City, Smith pulls a shopping cart from a metal corral, takes a sterile swab from her purse, wipes the cart's handle and deposits the swab in a plastic sheath. Then she heads to the meat case. “I think the average consumer doesn't think of this as a risk," Smith says, picking up a shrink-wrapped tray of bright red steaks. Her swabs have told a different story. Beginning in January 2012, Smith and her research assistant, Dipendra Thapaliya, spent a year collecting weekly swabs and meat samples from local grocery stores, including this one. They found S. aureus on nearly every type of surface. Five per cent of grocery carts carried MRSA. Of meat samples, 30% harboured S. aureus, 11% had S. aureus resistant to multiple antibiotics and 3% carried MRSA. The data, which have not been published, also showed that pork products had some of the highest levels of MRSA, whereas meat labelled 'antibiotic free' had little or none. This mirrors what Smith and her colleagues found in samples from farms across the state. On the menu Now Smith is conducting detailed genetic analyses of the samples to identify MRSA subtypes and where they might have originated. She and her colleagues have found ST398 in the grocery-store samples. But to their surprise, they also found ST5, which is generally found in hospitals and in 'community' infections with no obvious link to farms or hospitals. Last year, Smith and Timothy Frana, a microbiologist and veterinarian at Iowa State University in Ames, found that veterinary students who carried MRSA in their noses after visiting pig farms picked up mainly ST5, most of which was resistant to tetracycline 5. The presence of ST5 among livestock suggests that S. aureus strains may move easily between pigs and people, and may become resistant on farms. “It's the most interesting finding from our study," says Frana. In lab tests, Smith and her colleagues have found that 30% of the S. aureus harboured in meat is resistant to tetracycline. Given Levy's data from the 1970s, this is not surprising, says Smith. But researchers, including Heaney and his group at Johns Hopkins, are finding that a bacterium's drug-resistance profile can give information about where the bug came from that sequence type and other gene-based categorizations may not. In a study comparing workers from different farms, tetracycline-resistant MRSA showed up only in workers from farms where antibiotics were used 6. In the last phase of their research, Smith and her colleagues will try to determine whether MRSA is trafficking between farms, households and clinics (see 'From the farm and back again'). They are taking nasal samples from 1,300 people and swabbing doorknobs, kitchen sinks and even family pets in 96 households around Iowa City. The researchers are comparing S. aureus strains they find in these samples with the MRSA strains they have found in grocery stores and farms and with strains local doctors find in infected patients. If a strain shows up in all the locations, the researchers will sequence the whole genomes of individual isolates to retrace their movement and evolution. The results have the potential to create the first complete link between farms and clinical cases of MRSA. Ban versus beast CAFO supporters acknowledge that farm strains of drug-resistant bacteria could theoretically spread to people. But “I don't see this equating to human health risk”, says Scott Hurd, a veterinarian and epidemiologist at Iowa State University who has conducted multiple studies to assess the risk of drug-resistant bacteria spreading through meat production. He says that the average person has a greater chance of dying from a bee sting than of contracting MRSA from pork. Hurd argues that limiting the use of antibiotics on farms could be harmful to human health. Even Smith's grocery-store study found that meat sold as 'antibiotic free' had the highest levels of garden-variety S. aureus, suggesting that untreated animals harbour more pathogens. “Animals really do need to be treated," Hurd says. Nevertheless, regulatory authorities have clamped down on antibiotic use on farms. The European Union began phasing out antibiotics for growth promotion in the late 1990s. Denmark led the charge with a full ban in 2000. (China, however, which claims half the world's pig population, has yet to rein in antibiotic use.) The bans' effects on drug resistance and human and animal health have been murky. Levy and other supporters of the bans say that the result in Denmark has been positive, pointing to data showing a drop in the use of antibiotics on farms and an increase in meat production. But opponents, including the Animal Health Institute, point out that the use of antibiotics to treat acute illness in Denmark has increased, as have animal deaths. Last year, amid mounting pressure from several groups, including the National Resources Defense Council, based in New York, the FDA released new guidance calling for the “judicious use” of antibiotics on farms. The agency discouraged the use of antibiotics for growth promotion and urged label changes to the drugs and more veterinary oversight for their application. Not all the guidelines are yet approved, and compliance is voluntary. Nevertheless, the agency has suggested that it will enforce tougher rules if farmers and drug-makers do not adopt the guidelines within about three years. Few are satisfied with the FDA's policy. Pig farmers and meat-industry representatives consider the move a blow to farmers and animal welfare, and supporters of antibiotic restriction say that the voluntary guidelines do not go far enough. Scientists, meanwhile, have pressed the FDA to reveal more data on how farmers are using antibiotics, so far without success. Smith, who is concerned that farmers are still overusing antibiotics, hopes that the results of her current research will sway their opinions. Antibiotics on farms can trigger the emergence of resistant strains, she says, and those strains turn up on meat, in grocery stores and in homes, and they can infect people. “For me, that's enough," she says. At the same time, Smith says that she sympathizes with CAFO operators who are trying to produce meat as safely and efficiently as possible. And although human health should take priority over farm animals, she says, farmers will be reluctant to change until researchers can come up with safe and cost-effective practices to replace the use of antibiotics. For now, Smith says, “we're kind of stumped ”. Journal name: Nature Volume: 499, Pages: 398-400 Date published: (25 July 2013) DOI: doi:10.1038/499398a See Editorial page 379
2013-07-22
77 Years of American Agriculture (1936-2012)Digitizing Our Agricultural History; 77 Years of Annual Statistics Now Online- Files Available 2012 Agricultural Statistics 2011 Agricultural Statistics 2010 Agricultural Statistics 2009 Agricultural Statistics 2008 Agricultural Statistics 2007 Agricultural Statistics 2006 Agricultural Statistics 2005 Agricultural Statistics 2004 Agricultural Statistics 2003 Agricultural Statistics 2002 Agricultural Statistics 2001 Agricultural Statistics 2000 Agricultural Statistics 1999 Agricultural Statistics 1998 Agricultural Statistics 1997 Agricultural Statistics 1995-96 Agricultural Statistics The 1995-96 edition is also available in one large PDF file. 1994 Agricultural Statistics The 1994 edition is only available in one large file. (This file is 5 mb.) 1936 to 1993 Agricultural Statistics These editions are only available as one large file. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Ag_Statistics/index.asp
2013-07-22
Common Agricultural Policy 2014-2020: EU will allow more agricultural subsidies to be linked to agricultural productionCAP 2014-2020: EU allows more payments to be linked to production The EU is asking farmers to justify subsidies by linking part of their payments to the adoption of measures designed to improve the environment, such as ecological focus areas where wildlife can thrive 21.07.2013|Comments 0|156 viewsRecommend (0)CAP 2014-2020: EU allows more payments to be linked to productionAuthor:Agri.EU©picture 2013 : Agri.EU Reforms agreed by EU negotiators on CAP 2014-2020 reform offer subsidies to keep farms producing in regions where conditions are hard, going against the bloc's shift towards relying on market forces in agriculture. Since 1992, the European Union has been altering its common agricultural policy (CAP) to encourage farmers to grow crops in response to market prices, not subsidies. The aim was to avoid the butter mountains and wine lakes seen in the 1980s, when farmers were paid to produce even when markets were satiated. "The current reform is quite a break from that," said Alan Matthews, Professor Emeritus of European Agricultural Policy at Trinity College, Dublin, noting a shift towards linking payments more closely to production, a practice known as coupling. EU negotiators said they agreed sweeping changes to the bloc's farm policy fixing the rules governing 50 billion euros ($65 billion) in annual farm subsidies for 2014-2020. The package includes liberalising sugar production from 2017 and cutting subsidies to the largest farms in the bloc. But it also lets some countries link direct subsidies to output levels in certain regions, to help maintain output where farmers face natural or other constraints, such as dairy farms in mountainous central France. Analysts said the latest reforms link a limited share of payments more closely with production in part to maintain agriculture in more areas. Under the complex new rules, for some member states up to 15 percent of payments may be coupled but for others it may be only 8 percent. "This is not something that's going to increase production. This is something designed to maintain existing production in areas where it would otherwise disappear," said European Commission agriculture spokesman Roger Waite. Some were critical of EU moves to protect small, struggling producers. Independent consultant Sean Rickard said there was a need to invest heavily in new technologies to drive the growth in production needed as global demand expands. "You can't do that with farmers hanging on by their fingertips," said Rickard, a former chief economist for Britain's National Farmers Union and a UK government advisor. "The future lies with large-scale efficient farms." Others, however, stressed the value of farming in preserving the beauty of the countryside. "Imagine the countryside without farmers, it's something else entirely. The diversity of landscapes is precisely part of Europe's charm," said Philippe Chalmin, economist at Paris Dauphine university and a commodities specialist. The EU is asking farmers to justify subsidies by linking part of their payments to the adoption of measures designed to improve the environment, such as ecological focus areas where wildlife can thrive. "Moving from payouts based on production to flat payments turns farmers into welfare recipients with tractors," said Simon Evenett, Professor of International Trade and Economic Development at the University of St Gallen. "At a time when budgets are tight no special interest group wants to be seen getting something for nothing," he added. Britain, a strong proponent of liberalising EU farm policy, had reservations about some of the latest reform proposals, while France has sought more protection for farmers and saw it as a victory. Noting that global talks meant to liberalise trade have been an important driver for market forces, Britain's agriculture minister Owen Paterson regretted that none were now under way. "It was unfortunate there were no (global) trade talks to keep the pressure on," Paterson said. The World Trade Organization's Doha round ground to a halt in 2008 amid disagreements over farm subsidies, tariffs and market access. An impasse was formally declared in 2011. "The logic of liberalism did not win, on the contrary we managed to turn the situation around...we didn't let things slide, we changed what has been the prevailing trend in agriculture," French farm minister Stephane Le Foll said. The current reform package does contain elements which point to more open markets such as the abolition of sugar quotas in 2017. The basic principle had, however, been agreed years ago and the latest reform delays implementation by two years. ©2013 Agri.EU http://agri.eu/cap-2014-2020-eu-allows-more-payments-to-be-linked-to-production-news4844.html
2013-07-18
US-EU FTA: A Challenge to AgricultureU.S., Europe Trade Deal A Challenge for Agriculture Farm Foundation forum participants outline hurdles for TTIP, remain positive it can provide freer trade between U.S. and EU Janell Baum Published: Jul 18, 2013 As the first round of talks on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership kicked off Friday, agricultural trade experts say it marks the beginning of a challenging but hopefully rewarding process that could result in the largest trade deal in the world. At present, the United States and the EU have about $2.7 billion of trade daily, and nearly $4 trillion is invested each other's economies, said J. B. Penn of Deere and Co., moderator of a Wednesday Farm Foundation discussion panel comprised of agricultural trade experts. Penn noted that the already significant trade relationship between the U.S. and the EU represents an opportunity for the U.S. to expand trade for many products, but a special opportunity for agricultural products, which account for the largest sector exported. Farm Foundation forum participants outline hurdles for TTIP, remain positive it can provide freer trade between U.S. and EU But as panelist said, there are hurdles to expanding trade and negotiating a trade deal. Specifically, regulations for biotech crops and food safety expectations, along with differences in production and processing methods will require participation from the ag community and special consideration from negotiators. Read more: U.S., EU Begin Trade Negotiations Many have noted the non-tariff trade barriers represent one of the biggest concerns for the agriculture and food industries. "We believe TTIP offers a genuine opportunity to expand dairy exports," said Sue Taylor, Leprino Foods Company. She noted that elimination of tariffs and regulatory barriers are the top priority for the dairy industry. We want to "ensure that our products have access to the EU market without unwanted burdens. Unfortunately, this is currently not the case," Taylor said. Among the trade issues, Taylor said, are somatic cell count limits and bans on the use of generic food names. Along with issues on the food safety and dairy front, biotechnology has gotten a good look from both sides of the negotiation as an expected sticking point. But Matt O'Mara, Director of International Affairs for Food and Ag at the Biotechnology Industry Organization, said the biotech industry largely sees a potential FTA as a positive way forward for biotech. He said biotech is growing in the U.S., but there's rapid adoption of technology is outside of the U.S., too. He estimated that more than 17 million farmers are using biotechnology, and 90% are resource-poor. That figure, he noted, shows the need for across-the-board adoption of technology in trade. If the technology is employed in the exporting country but not in importing there's a disruption in trade, he said, speculating that it will take management of the global regulatory process and major import markets coming to a decision on the product all around the same time. "It's critical that we get these timelines to be as synchronous as possible - when this doesn't happen there's trade disruption," O'Mara said. http://farmfutures.com/story-europe-trade-deal-challenge-agriculture-0-100457
2013-07-18
Brazil's conundrum: food and storageThe tropical climate allows year-round agricultural cultivation, which seems to be a great economic advantage, but it is also a problem for corn and bean farmers in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, with up to 10% of post-harvest storage consumption. Brazilian dilemma: Grain and storage Debra Levey Larson07/09/2013 @ 1:21pm Tropical climates that allow for year-round farming would seem to be a tremendous economic advantage, but for corn and soybean farmers in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, it also poses a problem -- an abundance of grain followed by about a 10% postharvest loss, partially due to a lack of storage. “There is a 34% undercapacity of soybean storage, and the situation is aggravated by the rapidly increasing production of second-crop maize," said University of Illinois agricultural economist Peter Goldsmith. “The worst situation occurs in northern Mato Grosso with a simulation of a full-maize second crop. The potential to succession crop is great and current levels of storage are low. There is clear evidence of a shortage of storage, particularly private and cooperative, as grain production rises in the state," he said. Goldsmith conducted the research project, which was the first to employ geographic information system (GIS) software to map the coordinates of commercial, cooperative, and private grain storage facilities in Mato Grosso. “We created GIS coordinates for every facility, mapped them, and then overlaid how much the production there currently is and how much production there would be if farmers were to produce and store a second corn crop on 100% of the bean crop, in order to find the areas that had the most congestion and the least congestion," Goldsmith said. The study focused on commercial warehouses with capacity greater than 50,000 metric tons, mapping the state's 2,143 registered warehouses. “One region in the northern part of the state is about 6.9 million metric tons under capacity," Goldsmith said. “That's 270 million bushels. If a typical grain bin holds about 50,000 bushels, that's equivalent to 5,420 50,000-bushel grain bins. The area south of that in Lucas is 5 million metric tons under capacity. Of course, the actual undercapacity situation may be less because it assumes double-crop production on every acre. It would be highly unlikely that every acre would be farmed for soybean, maize, and a safrinha, or 'little crop.' Alternatively, though, maize yields are less than half that commonly found in the midwestern U.S., so there is a significant upside to the size of the maize crop .'" Goldsmith said that the information will help determine the best, most convenient locations for additional storage. “The state of Mato Grosso, where I 've been working for the past dozen years, is the largest state producing soybeans in the world," Goldsmith said. “It produces 38% of Brazil's soybeans and an increasingly greater percentage of corn. It's also the number one state in Brazil for rice, cattle, and cotton. Over my years of involvement, I have seen it change from being an emergent agro-industrial complex state to a state that is now a global leader ." Goldsmith said that the project was funded by the Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) Institute for the Prevention of Postharvest Loss at the University of Illinois, which researches many different aspects of postharvest loss in developing countries, in addition to storage. “Losses occur in three areas -- grain that's left standing in the field after a harvest, during the shorthaul when grain falls off of the truck in transportation from the field to either storage or commercial sale, and loss of private storage," he said. “Short-haul loss is fairly trivial in the U.S., but it is significant in developing countries where there is no infrastructure, no paved roads. And the roads that are paved are full of potholes and in very poor condition. Commercial trucks used for hauling grain are not in the best shape, so there's a 3% loss of grain that falls off the truck ." The nature of nonstop, year-round farming in the tropics contributes to the loss. “Farmers have to harvest soybeans during the rainy season because if they wait until the end of the rainy season to plant corn, the corn won't get pollinated due to the onset of the dry season," he said. “There are also significant quality and direct-gain/loss issues due to harvesting at very high-moisture levels. And the urgency brought on by the seasonal timing makes harvesting go very fast. Speed is important because you've got to get the beans out to get the corn in. A farmer might sacrifice soybeans to get the corn planted. And the equipment is in constant demand and kept far from the farmstead so the combines and trucks don't get maintained properly ." Goldsmith said that tropical regions of the globe will be producing more and more of the world's food, so helping farmers in developing countries such as Brazil to create more efficient harvesting, transporting, and storage is a step toward ensuring that there will be enough grain to feed and fuel the world. “This is where the available ground is located," Goldsmith said. “It's been difficult to know how to farm it in the past. The low organic matter and highly acidic soils that are under significant pest pressure make it a difficult area to produce crops, but the Brazilians figured out how to do it and do it very well. “They are part of the global market at the frontier of agricultural production systems," he said. “Places like Mato Grosso are at the margin where the food gap can be closed. In most temperate regions of the world, grain productivity is already high, so increasing output to meet rising demand is more incremental. The big changes are happening in the low-latitude regions of South America and Africa. As a scientifically relevant university, we need to understand the tremendous changes under way in the global agribusiness scene, which currently happens to be in western Brazil. “Mapping Private, Commercial, and Cooperative Storage in Mato Grosso” was co-authored by João Antonio Vilela Medeiros and published in Portuguese in a 2013 issue of the Soybean Research Journal. Editor's note: Debra Levey Larson is a media communications specialist with University of Illinois Extension information technology and communications services. http://www.agriculture.com/news/crops/brazili-dilemma-grain-stage_2-ar32420
2013-07-16
Science magazine published article "Sustainable intensification of agriculture: Premise and policy"Sustainable and intensive development of agriculture may solve the problem of food shortage source: China Social Science Journal, No. 473 oxford University's official website reported on July 5, the school's future food plan project director. Charles Gaudfrey and his team published an article in the Policy Forum of Science magazine, "Sustainable Intensive Development in Agriculture: Premises and Policies" it is pointed out that increasing the yield of existing arable land and realizing sustainable and intensive use of land are the best way to solve the global food supply shortage. In this paper, the author makes a detailed analysis of the sustainable and intensive development of agriculture. The article believes that as the world's population grows, many regions of the world need to produce more food, which requires policymakers to strengthen the management of food supply chains, national diets, and food waste. At present, human beings need to produce more food on the existing land resources, rather than cultivate more arable land. Gaudfrey said that sustainable intensive development is a necessary choice for people, but in addition, to establish a sustainable food supply chain requires not only adjustments in agricultural production models, but also changes in human diet. Structure, eat less meat, and to minimize waste, the key is to improve the efficiency and stability of the food supply chain. Tara Garnett, the main researcher of the project, said that increasing food production does not mean using chemical fertilizers and pesticides, because these will bring higher environmental costs. Human beings need to develop more advanced farming methods to minimize the impact on the environment. At the same time, promoting sustainable and intensive agricultural development will involve a series of related policies, including protecting biodiversity, maintaining animal living space, ensuring the nutritional structure of human diet, and maintaining rural economy and sustainable development. Decision makers need to consider various factors and seek reasonable solutions to coordinate various contradictions and meet multiple interests. (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-15
The United Nations Environment Programme and the International Fund for Agricultural Development jointly released a study on small farmers, food security and the environment.The United Nations Environment Programme and the International Fund for Agricultural Development jointly issued a report entitled "Small Farmers, Food Security and Environmental Issues ( Smallholders, food security, and the environment), calling on countries to support the development of small farmers, so that they can take more important responsibilities in food production and natural resource management, and help the world's 1 billion poor out of poverty. The report pointed out that small-scale farmers supply more than 80% of the food in developing countries and make a huge contribution to ensuring food security and poverty reduction. The development of small-scale agricultural economies has been hampered by increasing land fragmentation, reduced investment and the neglect of small-scale agricultural economies in economic development policies. The overuse of natural resources and pollution from agricultural production undermine the ecological basis of the global food system, exacerbate land degradation and reduce the capacity of ecosystems for sustainable production, which not only threatens food security, but also adversely affects poverty reduction. In this regard, the report emphasizes that the development of small farmers depends on well-functioning ecosystems, and sustainable agricultural intensification is the right way to improve food security, protect the environment and reduce poverty. This approach protects the natural resources and ecosystems on which small-scale farmers depend, and ensures food security and rural development. The report recommends that countries promote the development of sustainable agriculture and reduce the impact of agriculture on the environment; encourage countries to eliminate policy barriers and rely on market mechanisms to ensure that small farmers continue to invest in production, eliminate fertilizer subsidies, and instead subsidize projects related to soil and water conservation and green certification, etc.; Broaden the access to information for small farmers, such as the establishment of farmers' field schools, and the popularization of rural broadcasting and mobile communication equipment. Small farmers are an important feature of China's rural areas. In order to maintain the sustainable development of agriculture and rural areas, the government should formulate sustainable agricultural intensive management development planning and support policies to create a good environment for small farmers' production and operation. Introduce, demonstrate, promote and apply practical technologies for sustainable agricultural production, strengthen technical training for small farmers, and enhance the capacity building of small farmers. http://www.ifad.org/climate/resources/smallholders_report.pdf (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-12
Global Food Safety Index 2013 ReleasedA report on the Global Food Safety Index, sponsored by DuPont and published by UK economists, is available http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/. Related reports and data can be downloaded. (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-12
UK publishes annual report on food safety incidentsOn June 28, the British Food Standards Agency released the latest annual report on food incidents, which counted all food safety incidents investigated or notified by the Food Standards Agency in 2012. The report reported a total of 1604 food and environmental pollution incidents, down from 2011, but still higher than in previous years. The highest proportion of microbial pollution, environmental pollution and natural chemical pollution. In addition, it also announced the reasons that may lead to the increase in the proportion of food safety incidents. For example, the increase in the detection rate of a certain Salmonella in recent years is due to betel leaves imported from Bangladesh. At the same time, the significant increase in the proportion of food allergy incidents may be related to the revision of gluten-related regulations. Has a lot to do. Source: National Food Safety Information Center (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-06
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon encourages governments to adopt policies to support and strengthen cooperativesUN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon encourages governments to adopt policies to support and strengthen cooperatives july 5, 2013 July 6 of this year is "International Day of Cooperatives". Its publicity theme is: enterprise cooperation, maintaining vigorous development in the financial crisis (Cooperative enterprise remains strong in time of crisis). UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon issued a statement in this regard, calling on governments to encourage policies to support and strengthen cooperatives. In his statement on the International Day of Cooperatives, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted that humanity is living in a time of global uncertainty, with multiple crises and natural disasters testing even the strongest economies and communities. The annual International Day of Cooperatives is an opportunity to highlight how cooperatives can contribute to building resilience in all regions and all economic sectors. In the midst of the current global financial and economic crisis, financial cooperatives have proven their strength and resilience, benefiting their members, employees and customers. They have maintained high credit ratings, increased assets and turnover, and expanded their membership and customer base. Ban Ki-moon said that after the earthquake, tsunami, flood and other disasters, the cooperative has shown its ability to mobilize unity and reconstruction. Agricultural cooperatives increase farmers' productivity by helping to provide markets, credit, insurance and technology. Social cooperatives can provide an important safety net in the face of diminishing or already minimal public benefits. They also show considerable potential for empowering youth and alleviating the growing global youth employment crisis. In this regard, he called on Governments to encourage policies to support and strengthen cooperatives so that they can contribute fully to inclusive and sustainable development. In 1844, Rochdale Fair Pioneer Society was born in England, which opened the prelude of the modern cooperative movement. The International Cooperative Union was founded in London in 1895. In 1922, the International Cooperative Alliance decided to designate the first Saturday of July as "International Day of Cooperatives". In 1992, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution proclaiming the first Saturday of July 1995 as the "United Nations International Day of Cooperatives" to commemorate the 100 anniversary of the establishment of the International Cooperative Alliance, and subsequently decided to celebrate this day every year to increase people's awareness of cooperatives, emphasize the goal of complementarity between the United Nations and the international cooperative movement, and emphasize the great contribution of the movement to solving the main problems raised by the United Nations. Full text of Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's message:6 July 2013 we live in a time of global uncertainty. Multiple crises and natural disasters are testing even the strongest economies and communities. The annual International Day of Cooperatives is an opportunity to highlight how cooperatives can contribute to building resilience in all regions and all economic sectors. In the midst of the current global financial and economic crisis, financial cooperatives have proven their strength and resilience, benefiting their members, employees and customers. They have maintained high credit ratings, increased assets and turnover, and expanded their membership and customer base. In the aftermath of disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis and floods, cooperatives have demonstrated their ability to mobilize solidarity for reconstruction. Agricultural cooperatives increase farmers' productivity by helping to provide markets, credit, insurance and technology. Social cooperatives can provide an important safety net in the face of diminishing or already minimal public benefits. They also show considerable potential for empowering youth and alleviating the growing global youth employment crisis. On this International Day of Cooperatives, I call on governments to encourage policies to support and strengthen cooperatives so that they can contribute fully to inclusive and sustainable development. (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-04
New changes in organic standard inputs in the United States2013-07-02 from Wugu Network ( http://news.wugu.com.cn/article/20130702/56366.html) introduction: The Agricultural Market Service (AMS) of the United States Department of Agriculture recently released updated organic standards covering changes in the allowable use of peracetic acid, potassium hydroxide, silicon dioxide, beta-carotene and non-organic rouge oranges in organic production and processing, and this article interprets the new regulations. On May 28, 2013, the Federal Register published an update to the National List of Licensed and Prohibited Substances in the Organic Standards issued by the Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Market Service (AMS). The revision involves new changes in the requirements for the use of peracetic acid, potassium hydroxide, silicon dioxide, beta-carotene and non-organic annatto in organic production processes. The National List of Licensed and Prohibited Substances specifies synthetic substances and prohibited natural substances that are permitted to be used in organic production, as well as synthetic substances and natural substances of non-agricultural origin that are permitted to be used in organic processing, and agricultural substances that are not organically produced that are permitted to be used in organic processing. This amendment prohibits the use of non-organic annatto oranges for organic processing. Anatto oranges will be removed from the list on November 3, 2013. After that, there will be a 12-month transition period. During this period, processing plants should change the formula and label. This means that after November 3, 2014, only annatto oranges that have passed organic certification can be used for organic processing. The reason for the National Organic Standards Committee is that organic annatto is already available on the market and in sufficient quantities. Silica, as a permitted composition, is used as a processing aid in food processing. This revision limits the scope of use and allows it to be used as a defoamer. When organic rice husk is not available on the market, it can also be used for other purposes. In the definition of organic terms in the US standard, the market can be defined as: organic production inputs can be produced in large quantities in the appropriate form, quantity and quality to achieve the basic functions of organic production and processing. This means that although organic rice husk can be obtained in the market, when the organic rice husk cannot completely replace the function of silica, it can still be understood that the market cannot be obtained, and silica can be used as an auxiliary. The amendment will enter into force on November 3, 2013. Peracetic acid, used as a disinfectant and cleaning agent for the disinfection of instruments, seeds and plant materials for sexual reproduction, and for the control of fire blight bacteria in pest control. At the same time, hydrogen peroxide products that have been approved for use are allowed to contain peracetic acid at a concentration not exceeding 6%, which should be marked on the product label. Compared with the original standard: increased hydrogen peroxide products can contain no more than 6% concentration of peracetic acid provisions. This amendment came into force on 29 May 2013. Potassium hydroxide, prohibited for lye peeling of fruits and vegetables, except peach peeling. Compared with the original standard, the restrictions on the peeling of peaches in the rapid freezing (IQF) process have been removed, meaning that potassium hydroxide can be used in any process of peach peeling. During the consultation, it was suggested that potassium hydroxide should be completely banned in machining, because EU standards and the International Federation of Organic Movement standards stipulate that potassium hydroxide is not allowed in organic processing. However, the Agricultural Market Service (AMS) of the United States Department of Agriculture believes that according to the regulations of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), potassium hydroxide is safe to be used as a processing aid in peach peeling process, and its substitute is not available on the market, therefore, this opinion was not adopted. This amendment came into force on 29 May 2013. β-carotene, extracted from carrots or algae (pigment CAS#7235-40-7), compared with the original standard: β-carotene source increases algae, and at the same time, the pigment number changes from CAS#1393-63-1 to CAS#7235-40-7. The amendment came into force on 29 May 2013. Extended reading: the National List of Permitted and Prohibited Substances of the United States Organic Standard can be amended as needed. The specific procedures are as follows: (a) Under the Act, any person may request the National Organic Standards Committee to add or remove a substance from the National Material List. (B) Requests for amendments to the National Bill of Material require an application process form from the USDA (address see (c)). (c) Requests for revision of the national inventory must be submitted to: Program Manager,USDA/AMS/TMP/NOP,1400 Independence Ave., SW., Room 4008-So., Ag Stop 0268,Washington,DC 20250 (text/Lulu) reference materials: National Organic Program (NOP); Amendments to the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances (Crops and Processing) Federal Register A Rule by the Agricultural Marketing Service Organic changes involve annatto extract, silicon dioxide Food Bussiness News (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-07-02
FAO's latest edition of the Statistical Yearbook publishedFAO has released the 2013 edition of the Statistical Yearbook, which once again sheds light on the impact of agriculture on global warming, trends in hunger and malnutrition, and the state of the natural resource base on which world food production depends. The latest data available in the Statistical Yearbook show that agricultural greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1.6 per cent per year in the decade after 2000, reaching 5 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2010, which is equivalent to 10 per cent of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Among the different sectors of agriculture, livestock activities and the use of fertilizers are the largest sources of emissions. In 2010-2012, nearly 0.87 billion of the undernourished population, 12.5 per cent of the world's population, lived overwhelmingly (0.852 billion) in developing countries. Global crop production has expanded threefold in the past 50 years, mainly through increased yields per unit area and crop intensification. The global per capita food supply increased from about 2200 kcal/day in the early 1960 s to 2800 kcal/day in 2009. Europe's current food supply per capita is 3370 kcal/day, the highest in the world. Cereals are the most important source of food for human consumption, with 1 billion tons for human consumption and 0.75 billion tons for animal feed out of the 2.3 billion tons produced annually. After a decade of slowing growth in the 1990 s, global public spending on agricultural research and development rose steadily, from $26.1 billion in 2000 to $31.7 billion in 2008. Most of the growth came from developing countries, with China and India accounting for nearly half of it. Other countries, notably Argentina, Brazil, Iran, Nigeria and Russia, also saw significant increases in public spending on agricultural R & D. However, there are many negative developments in many of the smaller and more technologically backward poor countries. In addition, the agricultural sector has shown remarkable resilience in the global economic turmoil as a result of high agricultural commodity prices. In 2010, the value added of agriculture worldwide increased by 4%, while the overall GDP increased by 1%. http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3107e/i3107e.PDF (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-06-27
China's bulk agricultural products are entering the "era of net imports"From 2013-06-27 《 economic reference newspaper the tariff threshold is too low the summer grain harvest is coming to an end and another bumper harvest is expected. However, bulk agricultural products, including grain, have maintained a net import trend since the beginning of this year, and domestic agricultural production and food security are facing challenges. A reporter from the Economic Information Daily learned from the Agricultural Trade Promotion Center of the Ministry of Agriculture that in recent years, while imports of soybeans, cotton, and vegetable oil have continued to remain high, and net imports of sugar and dairy products have increased significantly, all three major food crops have been net. import. Although the net import of grain, especially rice and wheat, is very limited, the trend of China's bulk agricultural products entering the net import stage is very obvious from the development and changes of more than 10 years. Data show that in 2012, the net import of grain was 13.169 million tons, the net import of wheat, corn and rice reached 3.415 million tons, 5.153 million tons and 2.088 million tons respectively, and the import volume of sugar and cotton reached 3.747 million tons and 5.413 million tons respectively, reaching a new high. According to data released by the Ministry of Commerce this week, imported soybeans are forecast to arrive at 8.3228 million tons in June, the highest level in the month. In addition, imports of meat products grew equally rapidly. Among them, pork changed from net export to net import in 2008, and the import volume increased rapidly; the trend of net import of mutton continued to strengthen, with the net import volume increasing from 24000 tons in 2007 to 119000 tons in 2012. It is worth noting that rice imports continued to be at a high level this year. From January to April, rice and rice imports were 1 million tons, an increase of 83.6 percent over the same period last year. Ma Wenfeng, an analyst at Oriental Aige Agricultural Consulting Company, said that China is now the largest rice importer, with natural annual imports reaching 4 million to 5 million tons. The absolute amount of rice imports is not large, but it has a great impact on the local market in the south. Rice enterprises in Hunan and Jiangxi have suffered a serious impact. "In the case of widening domestic and foreign price differentials and lack of tariff protection, it is impossible to import." Ni Hongxing, director of the Agricultural Trade Promotion Center of the Ministry of Agriculture, said that the fundamental reason for the increase in net imports of bulk agricultural products is driven by demand growth, and the widening price gap at home and abroad is the direct driving force for the increase in agricultural imports. At present, many agricultural imports are not due to domestic shortages, but to internal and external price differences, resulting in the coexistence of domestic backlogs and increased imports. In an interview with a reporter from the Economic Information Daily in Changde, Hunan not long ago, a rice factory owner said that the price of imported rice from Vietnam, Pakistan, and Myanmar is 172 yuan per 100 catties, while the local price of rice in Changde is 180 per 100 catties. To 190 yuan, many companies even mix 20% of imported rice with local rice. For the "high price difference" of cotton at home and abroad, many cotton textile enterprises also feel difficult to operate. Zhu Beina, president of the China Cotton Textile Industry Association, said that the current domestic cotton price exceeds 19000 yuan per ton, which is 4000 to 5000 yuan higher than imported cotton. Last year, the price difference reached 6000 yuan per ton. In this case, cotton textile enterprises are not competitive and the finished products cannot be digested. In the face of the continuous impact of low-cost imported agricultural products, the tariff level implemented by China is difficult to play the role of "threshold" protection, and the policy space for tariff protection is already very limited. It is understood that at present, the average tariff level of agricultural products in the world is 62 per cent, and the highest tariff level can even reach more than 1000 per cent, while the average tariff level of agricultural products in China is 15.2 per cent, less than a quarter of the world average. Although China implements tariff quota management on important agricultural products such as wheat, corn, rice, sugar, cotton, wool, etc., the highest non-quota tariff is only 65%. "The strong growth of my country's agricultural imports is not a problem in itself. The problem is the lack of sufficient tariffs and other policy measures to carry out effective regulation." Ni Hongxing believes that China's agricultural production is small in scale and high in cost, and it is an inevitable trend to widen the price gap at home and abroad, but the more open it is, the more tariff protection is needed. Taking soybeans as an example, the current dilemma facing the domestic soybean industry is not caused by the import itself in a strict sense, but by the lack of necessary tariff protection and import control policies. The tariff level on soybeans is only 3%, and the special safeguard mechanism cannot be used, which makes soybean imports almost unregulated. The next concern will be corn. Ni Hongxing predicted that driven by labor costs and material costs, if the minimum purchase price of domestic corn rises by 10% every year, while the extra-quota tariff of corn is only 65%, it will be difficult to block the extra-quota import of corn in another five or six years. Industry insiders are worried that the increase in net imports of bulk agricultural products, on the one hand, has formed a restraint on the domestic industry, resulting in the lack of necessary incentives and motivation for industrial development, on the other hand, it has brought potential risks to the long-term supply security of agricultural products. Although the country continues to raise the minimum purchase price of grain and other agricultural products, the effect of policy support is largely eliminated by low-cost imported agricultural products. Ni Hongxing believes that from the perspective of resource allocation, the impact of individual products such as soybeans can be reduced by adjusting the structure and freeing up more resources for food production. However, in the context of the expansion of the scope of net imports of bulk agricultural products and the increase in net imports, there is limited room for agricultural structural adjustment, and imports have a wide range of suppression and suppression of agricultural prices, which will bring unprecedented challenges to the development of my country's agricultural industry. (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-06-27
Ministry of Agriculture: China's aquatic products account for more than 60% of the world's total2013-06-27 09:21:44 from People's Daily article label: Ministry of Agriculture aquatic products farming the reporter learned from the Ministry of Agriculture: my country's modern fishery construction has achieved remarkable results. At present, my country's total aquatic product farming accounts for more than 60% of the world's total. Aquatic products have ranked first in domestic bulk agricultural exports for 13 consecutive years, and aquatic product exports have accounted for my country's agricultural exports. The proportion of total reached 30%. In 2012, the export volume of aquatic products was 3.8012 million tons, with an export value of 18.983 billion billion US dollars, an increase of 6.69 per cent over the same period last year. The foreign trade surplus of aquatic products was 10.985 billion US dollars, breaking through the 10 billion mark for the first time. The relevant person in charge of the Ministry of Agriculture said that in 2012, the total output of aquatic products nationwide was 59.0768 million tons, an increase of 5.43 percent over the previous year; of which, the output of aquatic products was 42.8836 million tons, an increase of 6.59 percent over the same period last year. The national aquaculture area was 8.0884 million hectares, an increase of 3.23 percent over the previous year. The output of pelagic fishery was 1.2234 million tons, up 6.59 percent year on year. After breaking through the 10,000 yuan mark in 2011, the per capita net income of fishermen continued to maintain rapid growth in 2012, reaching 11256 yuan, an increase of 12.43 percent over the same period last year. The total output value of the fishery economy of the whole society was 1732.188 billion billion yuan, and the added value was 791.522 billion billion yuan, an increase of 15.44 per cent and 15.02 per cent respectively over the same period last year. Among them, the output value of fishery accounts for 9.73 per cent of the total output value of agriculture, and the added value of fishery accounts for 10.06 per cent of the added value of agriculture.
2013-06-25
Some Thoughts on Supporting the Development of New Agricultural Business EntitiesJune 25, 2013 | Author: Zhang Hongyu, Zhang Haiyang, Li Na source: Farmers Daily-China Agriculture News Network this year's Central Document No. 1 clearly stated that we should innovate the agricultural management system and mechanism, and build a new agricultural management system that is intensive, specialized, organized, and socialized. Cultivating new agricultural management entities is the key to building a new agricultural management system. Recently, the Department of Industrial Policy and regulations of the Ministry of Agriculture went to Qihe County, Wucheng County, Shandong Province, and Songjiang District, Shanghai to conduct special research, and visited large grain growers, farmers' cooperatives, family farms and agricultural enterprises to understand the main difficulties and policy needs facing their development. In the investigation, we found that the local awareness of cultivating new business entities and the enthusiasm for the development of various new business entities are very high, and it also reflects many difficulties and problems, and we are full of expectations for the state to provide policy support. Through research, we believe that on the basis of the clear policy orientation of supporting new agricultural business entities, it is necessary for the state to refine policy measures and implement policies to create a good external environment for the development of new agricultural business entities. Clearly define the connotation of the concept of family farm the concept of family farm can be roughly expressed as: family management, moderate scale, one industry as the main body, intensive production, that is, farmers as the main body of management, mainly using family labor, moderate production and operation scale, specialization, standardization, intensification, and commercialization An agricultural production and operation unit with a high level and agricultural income as the main source of income. After several years of exploration and development, people's understanding of farmers' cooperatives and leading agricultural enterprises has gradually become clear. What is relatively vague is how to distinguish the concept of professional large households and family farms. The formulation of family farms has been reflected in the "Decision" of the Third Plenary Session of the Seventeenth Central Committee. After the release of the No. 1 Central Document this year, family farms have attracted more attention. At present, local enthusiasm for exploring the development of family farms is high, requiring a clear definition of the concept of family farms in order to facilitate the formulation of more targeted policies. In order to avoid the extensive management of agricultural land in the process of rapid industrialization and urbanization, Songjiang District has explored the development of grain-based family farms since the second half of 2007. Combined with Songjiang's successful practice, we summarized the concept of family farm, which can be roughly expressed as: family management, moderate scale, one industry as the main body, intensive production, that is, farmers as the main body of management, mainly using family labor, moderate production and operation scale, specialization, Agricultural production and operation units with high level of standardization, intensification and commercialization, and agricultural income as the main source of income. Family farms should have four basic characteristics: one is family operation. One of the principles clearly put forward by Songjiang is "self-cultivation by operators", that is, in principle, family farm operators must be peasant households in the village, and must mainly rely on family personnel to engage in agricultural production and operation activities, and must not subcontract or sublease the land they operate to a third party; except for seasonal and temporary employment of short-term labor, migrant labor shall not be employed all the year round to engage in the production and operation of family farms. Li Chunfeng, a 34-year-old family farmer in Yaojing Village, Linggang Town, Songjiang District, resigned from the enterprise in 2009 and went home to run his father's family farm (the farmer will retire in principle when he is over 60 years old). Now the farm is run by himself and his parents (his wife works in the enterprise and does not participate in farm management). He only needs to employ 1-2 people during busy farming, and the time is usually less than a week. From this perspective, farms established by foreign urban residents or other investors, or farms that employ labor for a long time, cannot be counted as family farms. The second is moderate scale. In order to give full play to the advantages of family management, the scale of family farms must be moderate and not too large. Director of the Songjiang District Agricultural Committee believes that "degree" is the vitality of family farms. The scale of cultivated land operated by family farms in Songjiang District is generally 100-150 mu, with a minimum of more than 80 mu and a maximum of about 200 mu. At present, 1206 family farms in the region operate a total of 137000 mu of arable land, with an average of 113 mu per farm. Songjiang mainly considers four aspects when determining the principle of moderate scale: first, according to the level of local agricultural mechanization, the maximum scale on which a labor force can operate cultivated land; second, how much land a family can manage at least in order to get rich through its own labor; third, how much land can be transferred out of the local rural labor force; fourth, the income level of family farms should be appropriately higher than that of migrant workers, at present, the annual income level of Songjiang family farms generally exceeds about 15% of the annual income of migrant families. After calculation, the scale of a family farm with an annual income of about 100000 yuan in Songjiang District needs to be more than 100 mu. In addition, the scale of family farms should not be too large, and the income from employment should not exceed the income of migrant families too much, otherwise it will lead to comparison, resulting in farmers returning to their own land, and the scale of family farms will not be stable. If the family farm is too large and needs to employ a large number of workers, there will be labor supervision problems, resulting in increased costs and loss of family business advantages. Therefore, it is necessary to comprehensively consider factors such as the level of economic and social development stages in different regions, the degree of rural labor transfer, the endowment of agricultural land resources, industrial differences, and the income balance of various industries, and determine the reasonable scale of family farm management land according to local conditions. Three is a business-oriented. For a long time, my country's agriculture has become synonymous with hard-working and low-income industries. Young people are not proud of farming, which has led to increasingly prominent structural contradictions in the agricultural labor force. The emergence of family farms has gradually changed people's understanding. The biggest attraction of family farms is that professional production and operation based on agriculture can also increase income and become rich. The results of an annual sample survey of 100 family farms in Songjiang District in recent years show that the agricultural income level of family farms is considerable. From 2008 to 2012, the average net income per mu of family farms increased from 552 yuan to 847 yuan, and the average annual net income increased from 81000 yuan to 95000 yuan. In 2012, family farms with an average net income of more than 800 yuan per mu accounted for 65%. The income level of family farms combined with planting and breeding is higher, and the average annual net income can reach about 150000 yuan (100000 yuan from growing grain and 50000 yuan from raising 1000 pigs on behalf of others). In Songjiang District, agriculture has become a "decent occupation", and engaging in agriculture can also obtain "decent income" and live a "decent life". Four is intensive production. Compared with small-scale farmers, the scale of family farms is moderate and not very large. Specialized production and intensive management can effectively exert the advantages of scale effect and family management. Among the 1206 family farms in Songjiang District, 1013 are specialized in growing grain, 53 are combined with planting and breeding (both growing grain and raising pigs), and 140 are integrated with machinery and agriculture (both growing grain and engaged in agricultural machinery services). In order to ensure that the cultivated land is managed by excellent farmers, Songjiang has established the access and exit mechanism of family farmers through the principle of "selecting the best operators", and strengthened training and assessment. Family farmers also generally have a strong sense of crisis and competition. In order to manage the family farm, farm operators actively participate in various training courses to master the latest agricultural science and technology knowledge. After six years of practice, the group of professional farmers in Songjiang has gradually grown, and the quality of agricultural operators has improved significantly. More importantly, family farms, as the main body of agricultural operations, on the basis of not violating the current agricultural land system and respecting the wishes of farmers, through the circulation of cultivated land, the production factors such as land, labor, and agricultural machinery are appropriately concentrated to achieve intensive management and specialized production. Effectively improve labor productivity, land output rate and economic benefits. At present, 99% of the land in Songjiang District has been transferred to village collectives. The operating area of family farms accounts for 80% of the grain field area in the whole district. The rice yield per mu has increased by 6.1 in five years, which greatly improves the level of specialization, standardization and intensification of grain production. The main difference between family farms and large professional households is that although large professional households also carry out specialized production, their scale of operation is more flexible, and the standards of large professional households may vary greatly in different places. the scale of land management ranges from dozens of mu to hundreds of mu, thousands of mu and even tens of thousands of mu, and the larger the scale, the more long-term employment is needed. There are 48 large grain growers with more than 100 mu in Qihe County, of which 11 are more than 1000 mu. Wang Chengliang, a major grain grower in the county, transferred 13200 mu of arable land in 3 townships and 11 villages, becoming the first major grain grower in Shandong Province. In a general sense, large professional households with an operating scale of less than 200 acres are most likely to become family farms, and if they are larger than this scale, they may exceed the management capabilities of husband and wife or 2 to 3 laborers in a family, and they often have to be long-term. Employment of agricultural workers has also lost the connotation concept of family farms. Although the family farm itself has many advantages and has attracted much attention, the family farm model is not the only choice. The choice of an appropriate scale business model should be determined from the actual situation of each region and in accordance with the principle of farmers' voluntariness and local conditions. For example, Shanghai is preparing to guide farmers to develop family farms in Jinshan District and Fengxian District where conditions are suitable, Baoshan District will mainly develop collective farms, Chongming District will mainly develop cooperatives, Taicang in Jiangsu will mainly develop cooperative farms, and Shandong will mainly develop large farmers, cooperatives and various leading agricultural enterprises. Different new business entities have their own characteristics and strengths, and policy support must be targeted. It is not appropriate to favor one over the other, let alone give administrative promotion regardless of reality. It should be noted that following the surging of cooperatives, many places have begun to be enthusiastic about the development of family farms. It is more necessary to avoid blind promotion, administrative intervention, violation or even infringement of farmers' interests, and to strengthen the guidance and regulation of policies and laws. More subsidies (assistance) for new agricultural business entities to support the healthy development of new agricultural business entities and ensure the supply of commercial agricultural products, it is necessary to gradually adjust the investment direction and structure of agricultural subsidies, and effectively strengthen the guiding role of subsidy policies. The agricultural "four subsidies" policy has played an important role in mobilizing farmers' enthusiasm for growing grain, but in terms of stimulating grain production, the current policy-oriented function has gradually weakened in many places. According to the investigation, there are certain differences in the distribution mechanism of agricultural subsidies between Shandong and Shanghai. Except for the subsidy for the purchase of agricultural machinery and tools linked to the purchase of agricultural machinery, the other three subsidies are basically owned by the original contractor in Shandong and by the operator in Shanghai. In Wucheng County, direct subsidies for wheat and comprehensive subsidies for agricultural materials are combined according to the planting area. The subsidy for improved wheat varieties per mu of 10 yuan is reflected in the unified supply of seeds at a low price. The subsidy for improved cotton varieties 15 yuan and the subsidy for improved corn varieties 10 yuan are sent to Cary in cash. The direct subsidy for wheat, agricultural materials and improved varieties are negotiated by both parties and are generally given to large growers. Due to the implied agricultural subsidies, large grain farmers in Shandong bear high land rents. Wang Chengliang's land lease period is 20 years. The rent per mu in the first three years is 1000 yuan. After three years, the rent per mu is 500.00kg wheat according to the market price at that time. The land rent of Tan Yingwei, a large grain grower of 800 mu in Wucheng County, is also 1000 yuan/mu. In Songjiang District, the direct subsidy for growing grain is directly distributed to the one-card system of family farms and other operators in cash. The subsidy for improved varieties is directly distributed to the operators in kind. Most of the comprehensive subsidies for agricultural materials are also distributed to the operators in kind. These three subsidies are calculated and distributed according to the actual operating area of the operators. The district agricultural committee has reasonable control over the land transfer fee of the family farm, and the rent per mu of land is 250.00kg rice, which is paid in kind or in cash. According to the market price, the average land transfer rent of 100 farms in 2012 was 724 yuan/mu. Like many other places, the agricultural subsidies paid by the central government have also become GSP income subsidies for everyone in Shandong, which cannot effectively stimulate food production. Support for large-scale grain production is mainly reflected in local finance. In order to support the development of large grain growers, Shandong Province, in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Finance to carry out the pilot work of subsidies for large grain growers, refined the implementation plan, and included large grain planting areas of 300 mu and above (including wheat or rice areas of 150 mu and above) into the scope of subsidies. Large households below 4000 mu will be subsidized by 230 yuan per mu, and each household above 4000 mu will be given a fixed subsidy of 1 million yuan, the subsidy funds are linked to the construction and transformation of farmland water conservancy, drying and storage facilities, the purchase of agricultural machinery and equipment, and agricultural materials, and the accounting system is implemented. Although the central government provides less agricultural subsidies to Shanghai, Shanghai has increased its subsidy support for family farms by strengthening supporting measures. The Songjiang District Government provides a monthly pension subsidy of 150 yuan per person to elderly farmers (male 60 years old and female 55 years old) who transfer their land to the village collective, encouraging farmers to voluntarily transfer their land, and stabilizing the relationship between family farm land transfer. Before March 2013, the district finance will give 200 yuan per mu of land transfer fee subsidy to family farms growing rice every year. Starting from March, it will be changed into an incentive subsidy. The scope of incentives includes high-yield grain competition on family farms, straw returning to the field, direct broadcast of agricultural machinery, promotion of new agronomy and new technologies, production assessment, etc., which are linked to the assessment results. In addition, the municipal and district finance subsidizes family farms by 50% ~ 70% of the total price of agricultural machinery. The rice insurance premium for family farms is all borne by the district finance. To support the healthy development of new agricultural business entities and ensure the supply of commercial agricultural products, it is necessary to gradually adjust the investment direction and structure of agricultural subsidies, and effectively strengthen the guiding role of subsidy policies. First, the annual increase in subsidies for improved varieties, comprehensive subsidies for agricultural materials and subsidies for the purchase of agricultural machinery and tools is mainly used for new business entities that grow grain on a large scale. We will encourage subsidies for improved varieties and comprehensive subsidies for agricultural materials in kind, explore the free supply of improved varieties and direct agricultural materials at preferential prices to large professional grain growers and family farms, and give priority to subsidies for the purchase of agricultural machinery and tools. Strengthen the connection of agricultural machinery subsidy lists between regions, so that farmers can obtain subsidies in their hometown when purchasing agricultural machinery in the list in other places. Second, while expanding the scope of subsidies for large grain growers, we should improve the mechanism and methods for implementing policies. In view of the fact that it is difficult for large grain growers to obtain invoices in the purchase of agricultural materials and the construction of agricultural production facilities, while strengthening tax supervision, it is encouraged to explore the possibility of giving corresponding fixed subsidies according to the scale of land operation. The third is to increase subsidies for large-scale business entities other than grain. Policies such as subsidies for improved livestock and poultry breeds, subsidies for breeding sows, subsidies for animal epidemic prevention, and subsidies for soil testing and formula fertilization should be tilted to large professional households, farms, cooperatives, small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises and other moderately large-scale business entities, and subsidies should be increased. Effectively improve rural financial insurance services to solve the problem of matching supply and demand of rural finance and agricultural insurance, and to promote the better and faster development of new business entities, it is necessary to further deepen reforms and continuously innovate systems and policies. The difficulty of rural loans and the small coverage of insurance for agricultural characteristic industries are problems that are reflected more at the grass-roots level. From the perspective of large-scale business entities and grassroots financial institutions, the contradiction between supply and demand of rural financial insurance may exist for a long time. There are two main aspects: first, scale operators have a stronger demand for loans and agricultural insurance. There are two main reasons: one is the large scale and high investment. Songjiang family farm due to the moderate scale, the required production input is not large, family cash flow can meet the production capital needs, loan demand pressure is not big. This in itself is a factor in our promotion of family farms. In Shandong, large grain growers and other large-scale business entities tend to operate on a large scale, with a serious shortage of their own funds and a strong demand for loans. In the early stage, Wang Chengliang has already invested more than 600 million yuan in land transfer rent, more than 280 yuan in agricultural machinery, and more than 300 million yuan in agricultural materials such as chemical fertilizers. In the later stage, the investment in water conservancy facilities for 10,000 mu of dry land still needs more than 2000 million yuan. He is very looking forward to receiving discount loan support. Qihe County Zhenghe Organic Farm rents more than 2000 mu of land for 40 years. The rent for the first ten years is 400 yuan (one-time payment). After that, it will be gradually increased to 500.00kg wheat. At present, more than 800 million yuan has been paid for the land rent, and 7.6 million yuan has been invested in the construction of 20 greenhouses. In the later period, a large amount of investment will be needed for soil improvement and water conservancy facilities construction of 1700 mu of sandy land. The second is the high natural risk and potential loss. Even if small-scale farmers lose all their harvests, the losses are not very large, while large-scale operators are completely different. They put almost all their wealth on agricultural operations. In the event of a catastrophe, the blow may be devastating. Therefore, the large-scale operators especially Need the support of agricultural insurance. At present, the main field crops and some aquaculture industries already have policy insurance, but some regional characteristic industry insurance or no or just started. As an important agricultural industry in the county, there is no insurance for peppers, vegetables and edible fungi in Qihe and Wucheng. Qihe County Meidong Modern Agriculture Company spent 36 million to build 600 greenhouses. When the pilot project of facility agricultural insurance was launched in Dezhou City in 2012, the company took out 50000 yuan to insure the greenhouses. Later, a strong wind set off some greenhouses and received compensation of more than 200,000 yuan. The company deeply felt the importance of facility agricultural insurance. Second, financial and insurance institutions are worried about product and service innovation. The reasons are also broadly twofold: one is the lack of effective mortgages and guarantees for rural loans. Each of the greenhouses of Meidong Company invested 60000 yuan, but it cannot be used as a mortgage, and the transferred land use rights cannot be mortgaged. The agricultural development funds mainly rely on the annual profit of its own sweater factory of more than 1000 yuan, or use the sweater factory to mortgage the loan. Yang Xiaoli, president of the Agricultural Bank of Qihe County, said that the mortgage rate of machinery and equipment for large grain growers is only 20%, that is, machinery and equipment worth 1 million yuan can be loaned up to 200000 yuan. As for pigs, cows, etc., it can not be used as collateral. If large households jointly guarantee loans, the maximum loan can only be 200000 yuan, there is still a big gap. Second, the development of agricultural insurance is facing many constraints. In addition to the natural risk, high operating costs, cumbersome procedures are also quite a headache for insurance institutions. According to Manager Wang of China Property Insurance Dezhou Branch, the current agricultural insurance rate is low and the operating risk is high. Moreover, due to the involvement of thousands of small farmers, the insured area, premium, insured amount, number of households, policyholders, all-in-one card number and other data All need to be verified one by one, and the workload is too heavy. The company and government departments have to invest a lot of manpower and material resources, and the pressure on the compensation. The financial premium subsidy cycle is long and is generally paid before the end of the year. However, the company has to withdraw the risk reserve according to the regulations, which may cause the company's cash flow to be interrupted. To solve the problem of matching supply and demand of rural finance and agricultural insurance, and to promote the better and faster development of new business entities, it is necessary to further deepen reforms and continuously innovate systems and policies. First, innovative rural loan guarantee mortgage methods. Encourage financial institutions to carry out mortgage loans for large-scale business entities such as large grain growers, such as large-scale agricultural machinery and equipment, and land management rights with clear ownership and controllable risks, and appropriately increase the mortgage rate. Encourage agricultural enterprises to provide guarantees for the production of loans to order farmers, or by enterprises to undertake loans, farmers to use. Establish a financially funded agricultural guarantee company to provide guarantees for new agricultural business entities, especially large grain growers. Guide farmers' professional cooperatives with good industrial foundation, large scale of operation, strong driving ability and good credit record to carry out credit cooperation. The second is to further straighten out the institutional mechanism for the development of agricultural insurance. Implement differentiated agricultural insurance support policies, include large-scale facility agriculture and large-scale agricultural machinery and tools into the coverage of central financial insurance subsidies, and increase subsidies. Increase the proportion of agricultural insurance premium subsidies from the central government to large agricultural counties. Explore the establishment of a government-supported agricultural catastrophe risk compensation fund, improve the relevant rights and interests mechanism, and gradually establish an agricultural catastrophe risk dispersion mechanism. Seriously study and solve the problem of facility agricultural land to solve the problem of facility agricultural land, we must develop ideas and think of more ways under the premise of strictly implementing the spirit of relevant documents. The use of land for agricultural production facilities and ancillary facilities is difficult to solve, and it has become a problem that was reflected more during the investigation in Shandong. Large grain farmers and grain production cooperatives responded strongly. Zhiyuan Grain and Cotton Planting Professional Cooperative in Wucheng County has built a grain and cotton planting demonstration base of more than 6000 mu, driving the development of 30000 mu of corn under orders. It is urgent to solve the problem of land use for facilities. Wucheng mainly grows wheat and corn all the year round, and there is no dryer in the county to operate grain drying business. The main method for farmers to dry grain is to sun the site. With the expansion of cooperative order planting scale, the disadvantages of traditional methods are increasingly apparent. For this reason, the cooperative invested more than 300,000 yuan to purchase a grain drying tower from Shenyang in 2012, and built a drying site, warehouse and hardening drying field behind the office building, covering a total area of 5 mu. The drying tower and site have been built, but the warehouse has not yet been capped and has been stopped by the county land and resources bureau, because this land is basic farmland in the planning of the land and resources bureau. At present, the township government is coordinating the matter with the Land Bureau, hoping to solve it by linking it with the reclamation of an abandoned local primary school. According to local officials, in the past, in order to strive for a balance between construction land indicators and arable land occupation and compensation, the county often revised its land use plan. "As soon as the land is repaired, the basic farmland will go up the mountain." Adjusted to basic farmland, as long as agricultural production facilities are built, basic farmland will inevitably be occupied, which is a big problem. The problem of grain drying in Songjiang family farm is solved by the government. The drying equipment is all invested by the district finance. The grain department is equipped with drying equipment (located in the grain depot) on a town-by-town basis. The grain planting family farm can make an appointment for drying time and then determine the harvest time. The agricultural machinery cooperative is responsible for the harvest. The grain purchasing and marketing department or the grain processing enterprise directly pulls it for drying after purchase. The family farm does not need to deal with matters after harvest. For family farms combining planting and breeding, the district government issued a document allowing a certain amount of land to be used for the construction of work houses and pig houses, and standardized construction was implemented, all of which were invested by the district finance and used for agricultural facilities. We saw on Li Chunfeng's family farm that the working rooms and pig houses covering an area of 3 acres were clean and tidy. According to reports, the government invested 800000 yuan. The family farm integrating machine and agriculture generally has 4 sets of agricultural machinery. These farms form agricultural machinery cooperatives. The district government specially plans the land for the construction of hangar sheds to realize the centralized storage of agricultural machinery in cooperatives. At present, the region has set up 30 agricultural machinery cooperatives, agricultural machinery services to achieve full coverage of family farms. The problem of facility agricultural land is not without solution. The Ministry of Land and Resources and the Ministry of Agriculture document "on improving the facilities of agricultural land management related issues notice" (land and resources development [2010] No. 155) clearly, production facilities and ancillary facilities land directly used for or services in agricultural production, according to agricultural land management. To solve the problem of facility agricultural land, it is necessary to develop ideas and think of more ways under the premise of strictly implementing the spirit of relevant documents: first, the effective use of general arable land and non-arable land; the second is to improve the efficiency of the use of rural construction land, through village planning and renovation, adhere to the principle of "farmers' land, farmers' use", and use idle land, economical construction land or reclaimed land in the village to build agricultural machinery warehouses, storage facilities, etc; third, when the local government revises the overall land use plan, it fully takes into account the demand for agricultural land for facilities brought about by the long-term development of agriculture; fourthly, it is encouraged to explore models such as warehouse leasing or food banks to solve the problem of grain storage for large-scale grain growers. Increase support for agricultural infrastructure projects most agricultural infrastructure has strong positive externalities, and as public goods or quasi-public goods, the government needs to increase investment to improve it. The weak agricultural infrastructure in our country is an old problem. In the case of small-scale decentralized operation, farmers often have no enthusiasm and ability to strengthen agricultural infrastructure construction. With the increase of the proportion of moderate scale operation in agriculture, if the land circulation relationship is stable, the new business entities have the enthusiasm to improve the agricultural infrastructure, but the government needs to help solve the input problem. Of the 11 villages transferred by Wang Chengliang, only 3000 mu of land in 3 villages can be irrigated with water from the Yellow River, and the other 10000 mu of land do not have irrigation conditions. If all water conservancy facilities are constructed, more than 2000 million yuan will need to be invested. For large-scale operators with very short land transfer contracts, there is generally no enthusiasm to improve agricultural infrastructure, which in turn directly affects their output efficiency and operating efficiency. Most agricultural infrastructure has strong externality, as public goods or quasi-public goods, the government needs to increase investment to improve. In Songjiang District, the government has invested more than 0.2 billion yuan in agricultural infrastructure in recent years. In terms of water conservancy facilities, tractor roads, and cultivated land renovation, the agricultural production conditions of the whole region have been greatly improved. Family farms have obtained a good development environment. Family farms only need to compete for the right to operate cultivated land, and there is no need to worry about agricultural infrastructure, or even invest a penny for the construction of pig houses. With the financial investment at all levels, the agricultural infrastructure is basically perfect. The production conditions of the 20 mu high-yield demonstration base in Qihe County are far better than those of other places in the county. However, as a poor county, Wucheng County is unable to increase investment, and its agricultural infrastructure is quite different from Qihe County. To promote the development of new agricultural business entities, the state needs to increase investment and support in agricultural infrastructure projects. First, in terms of project arrangements such as comprehensive agricultural development, land consolidation, high-standard farmland construction, medium-and low-yield farmland transformation, and farmland water conservancy facilities construction, it is necessary to tilt toward the main body of scale management, especially the implementation of irrigation and drainage, soil improvement, and roads on basic farmland. Renovation, mechanical farming roads, power matching and other engineering construction make it have the conditions for large-scale production. The second is to encourage the development of land joint-stock cooperatives on the basis of farmers' voluntariness, and fully guarantee the property income of farmers' land contract rights through the method of "fixed power and uncertain land, quantitative and non-positioning", which is not only convenient for large-scale agricultural infrastructure construction, but also convenient Large-scale mechanized operations are also conducive to eliminating ridges and increasing land output. Accelerate the training and introduction of new business entities career prospects and social evaluation are very important to practitioners. To attract young people and high-quality talents to join agriculture, it is necessary to accelerate the innovation of the agricultural management system, fundamentally transform the agricultural production and management methods, and make agriculture a profitable, status, promising, and dignified profession. Compared with the traditional small farmers, the main body of new agricultural management is mainly reflected in the integration of new knowledge, new technology, new ideas, new equipment and so on. With the expansion of the scale of operation, the new subjects generally feel the lack of knowledge and technology and the shortage of talent reserves. Large grain growers, cooperatives, and agricultural enterprises, especially business entities engaged in efficient agricultural production, on the one hand, strongly feel the need to improve their own quality, on the other hand, they are also thirsty for talents. In Qihe and Wucheng, edible fungus production is a big industry, but there is a shortage of talents. Gao Min of Fengyu Edible Fungus Co., Ltd. said that at present, the edible mushroom industry lacks practical technical talents, and there are too few edible mushroom talents in agricultural colleges and universities. At present, many employees are studying microorganisms. Although Li Chunfeng, a family farmer in Songjiang, only grows grain and raises pigs, and has participated in many trainings organized by government departments, such as wheat planting, pig raising, and soil fertilization, and obtained several certificates, he still feels that he still needs to improve his agricultural technology in order to meet the needs of farm management and development. In recent years, my country has achieved certain results in the training of new farmers and the introduction of high-quality agricultural talents, but there is still a big gap compared with the needs of modern agricultural development. The problem of lack of agricultural successors is highlighted, and it is urgent to cultivate new agricultural business entities. To this end, we should focus on two major aspects: first, vigorously strengthen the cultivation of new farmers. Formulate a medium-and long-term training plan for new farmers at the national level, vigorously develop agricultural vocational education, organize various forms of agricultural technology training, and train a large number of rural applicable professionals for returning migrant workers, rural capable people, and Senior high school graduates who have failed to continue their studies. Explore the establishment of professional farmers qualification, agricultural industry access system, and constantly improve the new agricultural management system. The second is to increase the introduction of external talent. Innovate systems and policies in terms of government subsidies, social security, project support, financial services, land transfer, title evaluation, rising channels, social evaluation, etc., to attract innovative college graduates and professional and technical personnel with strong professional knowledge Devotion to agriculture. Career prospects and social evaluation are very important to practitioners. To attract young people and high-quality talents to join agriculture, it is necessary to accelerate the innovation of the agricultural management system, fundamentally transform the agricultural production and management methods, and make agriculture a profitable, status, promising, and dignified profession. Effectively play the active role of the government there are many things that new business entities need government support, but the most important thing is to protect land management rights to stabilize the production foundation, and improve agricultural socialized services to strengthen production capacity. The government plays an irreplaceable role in the development of new business entities. In the survey, all kinds of new business entities are full of expectations for government support and positive evaluation of the government's role. There are many things that new business entities need government support, but the most important thing is to protect land management rights to stabilize the production foundation, and improve agricultural socialized services to strengthen production capacity. Specifically, the role of government should highlight the following three points: the first is to innovate the rural land system, stabilize farmers' land expectations, and promote the stability of land transfer relations. This is an issue of common concern to large grain growers, family farms, farmers' cooperatives, agricultural enterprises and other subjects. Songjiang District has explored to determine the land contract period of family farms to at least three years, and to extend the land operation period of family farms with the combination of planting and breeding and the integration of machine farming to more than 5 years. This still cannot eliminate the concerns of family farmers and has a long-term investment for operators. Have an impact. The land transfer contracts of some large grain growers in Shandong are as short as one sign a year, and the transfer relationship is very unstable, which is not conducive to the stable investment and sustainable development of large grain growers. Therefore, it is necessary to pass the confirmation and issuance of land rights, improve laws and regulations, implement property rights protection for farmers' land contract rights, and completely eliminate farmers' worries and concerns about the transfer of land management rights, supplemented by social security, non-agricultural employment, and transfer income Support measures in other aspects allow farmers who are unwilling to farm land to transfer out of land management rights for a long time. The second is to appropriately strengthen guidance and support, improve the development environment of new business entities, and enhance the quality and speed of development of new business entities. New business entities often encounter many difficulties in the early stage of development, lack of guidance in information acquisition and development planning, and need support in financing, personnel training, and material equipment. Governments at all levels should give more care and help to small and medium-sized business entities and moderate-scale business entities. In terms of agricultural land planning control and use control, agricultural infrastructure construction, and maintenance of market order, the government must truly be not absent or offside, and effectively make up for market failures. The third is to strengthen agricultural productive services in key links, solve the problems that new business entities cannot solve or cannot solve well, and continuously enhance the development capabilities of new business entities. A developed socialized division of labor is an important condition for improving the efficiency of economic operation. The biggest advantage of large grain growers and family farms is to do a good job in production management, and productive services in other key links can be undertaken by cooperatives, professional companies, public service institutions, and so on. such as technology promotion, agricultural material distribution, mechanical operation, unified prevention and control, drought and drainage, information services, product sales, and so on. The government needs to make overall plans, improve policies, increase investment, strengthen support, and promote the establishment of a new type of agricultural socialized service system in which public welfare institutions and business institutions cooperate with each other, guarantee strong, and operate efficiently. (Author Unit: Department of Industrial Policy and Regulations, Ministry of Agriculture)
2013-06-24
Changes in supply and demand of major agricultural products in international marketsSource: Department of Market and Economic Information, Ministry of Agriculture according to the monitoring of the Ministry of Agriculture, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Grain Council (IGC), the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other agencies have made the latest forecast of global agricultural supply and demand in 2012/13 (Table 3). The main changes are as follows: grain: FAO forecasts global production of 2.306 billion tons in 2012/13 and is expected to reduce production by 46 million tons. Consumption was 2.33 billion tons, with an ending stock of 0.499 billion tons, with a stock consumption ratio of 21.4 per cent. USDA forecasts global output of 2.247 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected reduction of 70 million tons. Consumption is 2.286 billion tons, ending inventory is 0.427 billion tons, and inventory consumption ratio is 18.7. Wheat: FAO, the International Grains Council and the United States Department of Agriculture forecast global production of 0.655 billion -0.662 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected reduction of 38 million -42 million tons. Consumption 0.674 billion -0.683 billion tons, ending stock 0.163 billion -0.178 billion tons. Coarse grain: FAO, the International Grains Council and the United States Department of Agriculture forecast global production of 1.123 billion -1.156 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected reduction of 12 million -31 million tons. Consumption 1.142 billion -1.17 billion tons, ending stock 0.146 billion -0.165 billion tons. For corn, the International Grain Council predicts a global output of 0.85 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected reduction of 27 million tons. Consumption 0.867 billion tons, ending stock 0.114 billion tons. USDA forecast output of 0.854 billion tons, is expected to reduce production of 29 million tons; consumption of 0.868 billion tons, the final inventory of 0.117 billion tons. Rice: FAO, International Grains Council and USDA forecast global output of 0.466 billion -0.489 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected increase of 2 million -5 million tons. Consumption is 0.468 billion -0.477 billion tons, and final inventory is 0.102 billion -0.172 billion tons. Soybean: USDA forecasts output of 0.268 billion tons in 2012/13, with an expected increase of 29 million tons. Consumption 0.261 billion tons, ending stock 60.21 million tons. Cotton: The International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) forecasts a production of 26.256 million tons in 2012/13, with an expected production reduction of 1.188 million tons. Consumption was 23.31 million tons and final inventory was 16.999 million tons. USDA forecasts 26.1 million tons of output in 2012/13, with an expected reduction of 930000 tons. Consumption is 23.32 million tons and final inventory is 17.8 million tons.
2013-06-24
Major Changes and Features of the 2012 Farm BillSource: World Agriculture 2013.2 the United States is one of the world's largest producers, consumers and traders of agricultural products, and its agricultural policy changes will have an important impact on the international agricultural market and trade. This article compares the Agricultural Reform, Food and Jobs Act of 2012 passed by the U.S. Senate with the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008. The reform direction and main contents of the new farm bill are analyzed, and the characteristics of the new farm bill in the United States are summarized on this basis. Every five years or so, Congress will revise the farm bill so that it can adapt to the new economic and social environment. Most of the agricultural programs in the Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 will expire in 2012, and Congress is preparing a new farm bill. On April 26, 2012, the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee passed the Agriculture Reform,Food and Jobs Act of 2012 (AgricultureReform, andJobsAct0f2012). The bill will be submitted to the House of Representatives, where it will be amended and formally signed by the President after it is passed by Congress. The 2012 farm bill will form the basic framework for U.S. agricultural policy for 2013-2017. The United States is one of the largest producers, consumers and traders of agricultural products in the world. Tracking the process of agricultural legislation in the United States will help China to grasp the changing trend of American agricultural policy and its important impact on the international agricultural market and trade in a timely and accurate manner. Key Changes to 1.'s New Farm Bill the 2012 Agriculture Bill passed by the Senate has 12 chapters, namely, commodity plan, crop insurance, environmental protection, nutrition assistance, trade, credit, horticulture, energy, scientific research, rural development, forestry and others. Compared with the 2008 Agriculture Bill, it has reduced by 3 chapters, namely, Chapter 1l Animal Husbandry, Chapter 13 Agricultural Products Futures and Chapter 15 Trade and Taxation in the 2008 Agriculture Bill, the contents of these three chapters are either canceled or integrated into other chapters. The changes in the specific contents are mainly reflected in the following aspects. First, the establishment of an agricultural income risk guarantee (ARC) scheme to replace support policies such as direct payments (DP) and counter-cyclical payments (CCPS). Direct payments and counter-cyclical payments are the main policy instruments in the 2008 Farm Bill commodity program to ensure that farmers achieve certain income targets. Direct payment is a kind of "unlinked" subsidy, similar to China's direct subsidy for growing grain. As long as farmers grow the specified agricultural products, they can receive subsidies according to the planting area registered in 1998-2001. Products that can receive direct payment include wheat, corn, Sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, peanuts, soybeans and other oilseeds. Counter-cyclical payment means that when the effective price (the sum of the average market price and the direct payment rate) received by the farmer is lower than the target price (a reasonable price determined by the act to guarantee the farmer's income level), the farmer can receive a subsidy in the amount of the difference between the target price and the effective price. Both direct payments and countercyclical payments were eliminated in the 2012 farm bill, along with the elimination of the average crop choice program and the Supplemental Income Assistance payment program. These canceled projects will be replaced by a new commodity program, the Agricultural Income Risk Protection Program. When the income from crops grown by farmers is less than 89% of the average level in the last five years, the agricultural income risk guarantee scheme will start to provide subsidies to farmers, but the total amount of subsidies should not exceed 10% of the average level in the last five years. The plan also stipulates that farms earning more than $750000 a year after adjustment will not be allowed to apply for the Agricultural Risk Guarantee Program and reduces the maximum amount of subsidies that farms can receive to $50000. The range of products covered by the plan is basically the same as the original direct payment plan. Cotton was not included in the case of Brazil's lawsuit against the United States cotton subsidy. Second, the range of products covered by crop insurance has been expanded, with the addition of the income insurance scheme for cotton (STAX) and the supplementary insurance option for other crops (SC0). The new farm bill expands the range of products covered by crop insurance programs, mainly by adding horticultural crops such as fruits and vegetables. Budget funding has also increased, mainly through the addition of the cumulative income insurance scheme for cotton and the Supplementary Insurance Option (SCO) for other crops, which provide greater income security for cotton and other crop producers who purchase insurance, respectively. The cumulative income insurance plan is that when the cotton planting income within a county is less than 10% of the expected income, the plan will be triggered, and the loss of more than 10% of the expected income will be compensated by the plan, but the compensation is capped at 30% of the expected income. The supplementary insurance option provides protection for the income from planting crops other than cotton. Farmers can choose 85% of their personal output or 90% of the county average output as the upper limit for insurance. When the loss of output or income exceeds 10% of the normal level (21% for producers participating in the agricultural income risk protection plan), the plan will compensate according to the insured amount. The government will provide 80%(STAX) and 70%(SC0) premium subsidies to purchasers of the two insurance schemes, respectively. Third, the Dairy Price Support Program, the Milk Revenue Loss Payment and the Dairy Export Stimulus Program were abolished, and the Dairy Profit Protection Program and the Market Stabilization Program were added. Dairy is one of the key agricultural products supported by the United States, and the Dairy Profit Protection Program (DPMPP) and the Market Stabilization Program (DMSP) have been added to the new Farm Bill to replace the original dairy price support program (equivalent to the minimum purchase price policy for dairy products, the product range includes cheese, skimmed milk powder or milk, butter), milk revenue loss payments (equivalent to counter-cyclical payments for dairy products) and dairy export stimulus programs (export subsidies for dairy exporters). The dairy profit protection plan ensures that the production profit of milk (the difference between the average national milk price and the national feed cost) is not less than US $4/cwt (1 cwt is about 50.8kg). When the profit of dairy production is less than US $4/load for two consecutive months, the producer is subsidized according to the profit difference. The purpose of the dairy market stabilization plan is to maintain a balance between supply and demand by encouraging milk producers to scale back production when there is an oversupply of milk. The USDA has been given more authority and resources to develop measures to ensure that dairy prices and feed costs are accurately calculated. Fourth, the new farm bill consolidates environmental protection projects from the original 23 to 10, and the funding budget for major projects has been cut. Compared with the 2008 Agriculture Act, the 2012 Agriculture Act retains several larger environmental protection plans, such as the Fallow Plan (CRP) implemented to protect soil water resources, the Environmental Quality Stimulation Plan (EQIP) aimed at promoting the development of agricultural production while protecting and improving environmental quality, and the Environmental Protection Management Plan (CSP) that encourages the use of new technologies and new products to implement high-level environmental protection, some smaller and similar environmental protection projects were canceled or merged. Among them, the fallow area ceiling of the fallow plan will be gradually reduced from the current 1.296 million hm2 to 1.0125 million hm2 in 2017, and the environmental quality stimulus plan and environmental protection management plan will also reduce the scope of protection and funding budget. The new farm bill establishes two new environmental protection programs-the Agricultural Land Titled Protection Program (ACEP) and the Regional Cooperative Protection Program (RCPP). Agricultural land tenure protection plan is mainly the government through the purchase of agricultural land development rights to protect wetlands, grasslands and some arable land. The regional cooperative protection plan mainly encourages the government, Indian tribes, farmers' cooperatives and other organizations in a certain area to work with farmers to improve soil quality, water quality and wildlife habitat. Fifth, bioenergy projects have been strengthened, and the budget for scientific research and horticulture projects has increased. The U.S. Farm Bill is valid for five years, but the government generally makes a 10-year budget baseline. In the 2008 Farm Bill, the budget baseline for material energy is only retained until 2012, without further extension. This means that these bioenergy projects will be canceled after they expire in 2012, because no funds are set aside for bioenergy in the big plate of the government budget. But the new farm bill still continues the vast majority of bioenergy projects and provides them with a five-year budget of $0.8 billion, which must save money for bioenergy projects from other projects. In addition, the government has set aside $1.125 billion for the development of bioenergy projects over the next five years. In terms of scientific research, the 2012 Farm Bill not only retains the scientific research projects and funding budget in the original bill, but also increases the budget by $0.1 billion to establish a food and agricultural research fund to strengthen the basic and applied research of the USDA. The U.S. government continues to pay attention to the importance of horticultural crops and organic agriculture, and the new farm bill adds about $0.212 billion over five years to the development of horticultural crops and organic agriculture. In addition, special mention needs to be made of nutrition programs, which are the largest item of expenditure in the United States farm bill. The 2012 Farm Bill basically maintains the basic policies and funding budget in the 2008 Farm Bill. The most important change is to modify the project rules to regulate the behavior of beneficiaries and food retailers in the implementation of the project, and encourage beneficiaries to purchase fruits and Healthy foods such as vegetables. Key Features of the New 2. Farm Bill through the analysis of the above-mentioned main changes, it is not difficult to find that the new farm bill passed by the U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee has the following characteristics in terms of content adjustment. First, high agricultural prices make it possible for the new farm bill to shrink its budget. Since 2006, the rapid development of biomass energy and the rapid growth of agricultural exports have led to a rapid increase in the demand for agricultural products in the United States. The inventory of major grain and oil crops has dropped to a historical low, coupled with the depreciation of the US dollar, making the prices of agricultural products run at a high level most of the time, and the operation of farms has been greatly improved. The U.S. Congress expects that agricultural product prices will continue to be generally higher than the target price in the next five years. The original policy measures such as direct payment, counter-cyclical payment, average crop income selection plan and supplementary income assistance payment plan have weakened their role in protecting farmers' income. Therefore, they were canceled in the new agricultural bill and replaced by a new agricultural income risk protection project. This change saves about 1.5 billion US dollars in fiscal expenditure every year. Together with about $0.8 billion in fiscal spending saved by the combined restructuring of environmental and nutrition programs, the entire farm bill is expected to save about $2.36 billion a year in already large deficit spending. Second, ensuring that farmers achieve their income targets remains a central element. In the context of the government's tight budget, although the new farm bill has streamlined and optimized agricultural income support programs and eliminated the original complex price and income support measures such as direct payments and counter-cyclical payments, the establishment of an agricultural income risk protection plan and a huge insurance plan can more effectively ensure that farmers achieve their income goals and ensure a stronger agricultural safety net in the United States. First, when farmers lose more than 11% of their income due to natural or market factors, the Agricultural Income Risk Guarantee Program can provide a 10% income subsidy in a timely manner. Second, if the loss of income exceeds 21% or more, the new cotton income insurance plan and supplementary insurance options for other crops can provide farmers with more compensation for loss of income. It should be pointed out that although the new farm bill names new projects as risk management or crop insurance, its essential attributes need to be seen. The agricultural income risk protection plan is actually an income subsidy for farmers when they lose their income. The cotton income insurance plan and supplementary insurance options for other crops not only subsidize farmers by 70% to 80%, more importantly, the standard of its guarantee is still the loss of farmers' income, and the compensation is very large, not simply commercial insurance for general natural disasters. Third, biomass energy has been strengthened as an important means to support the high prices of agricultural products. In recent years, the rapid development of global biomass energy has formed a huge demand for agricultural products, and has become an important factor to promote the price of agricultural products. Especially in the United States, with the rapid growth of fuel ethanol production, the demand for corn is growing rapidly. In 2011, the amount of corn used to produce fuel ethanol reached 1.3 billion t, an increase of 0.11 billion t over 2000, accounting for 40% of the corn production in the United States. Affected by this, corn prices also showed an obvious upward trend. The rapid rise in corn prices through the mutual transmission between agricultural products, led to the continuous rise in the prices of wheat, soybeans, meat, eggs and other products, from this point of view, vigorously developing biomass energy has become an effective means to support the high prices of agricultural products in the United States, and may even become an important strategic means to effectively regulate the prices of energy and agricultural products. As a result, the new farm bill increased support for biomass energy projects despite overall budget cuts. Fourth, the new farm bill adjusts the means of support to better adapt to WTO rules. The export of agricultural products is one of the important driving forces for the development of the US agricultural economy, and it also makes an important contribution to balancing the trade deficit of other industries. The United States has implemented a plan to double its agricultural exports and will continue to vigorously explore overseas markets and expand agricultural exports in the future. However, the original U.S. policy system based on price support and high subsidies for some agricultural products have caused dissatisfaction in many countries, and even encountered countervailing lawsuits. The most typical case is Brazil's lawsuit against the U.S. cotton subsidy case. In order to avoid more subsidy litigation disputes while strengthening support for domestic agriculture, the new farm bill has made major adjustments to subsidy instruments and programs such as price support. Reduced direct support for prices and income, but more indirect support for farm income through agricultural income risk protection programs and crop insurance, with greater concealment. For example, in response to the lawsuit filed by Brazil in wT0, the new farm bill no longer provides price and income support for cotton, but establishes an income insurance scheme specifically for cotton to provide income security for cotton producers; the dairy price support scheme and export stimulus scheme are canceled, but the dairy profit protection scheme and market stabilization scheme are added. Fifth, the new farm bill pays more attention to the pertinence of policies. The original intention of many agricultural subsidy policies is to help small and medium-sized farms, but due to unreasonable policy design, large farms often receive higher subsidies, making small and medium-sized farms unable to compete fairly with large farms. The new farm bill restricts the farm's application conditions and the maximum subsidy that can be obtained. For example, in the commodity plan, farms with adjusted annual income of more than $750000 are not allowed to apply for the Agricultural Risk Guarantee Program and reduce the maximum amount of subsidies that farms can receive to $50000. In general, the 2012 Agricultural Reform, Food and Employment Act passed by the Senate and the 2012 Federal Agricultural Reform and Risk Management Act passed by the House of Representatives in July are consistent in the direction of reform, that is, on the one hand, through streamlining and optimizing agricultural projects Reduce government fiscal expenditures, on the other hand, focus on risk prevention to build a more effective agricultural safety net. However, in terms of specific content, there are still some differences between the two. For example, in terms of building an agricultural safety net, the Senate bill pays more attention to the protection of producers' income rather than price support, while the House bill allows producers to choose between price subsidies and income subsidies.
2013-06-23
Thirty-eight countries meet global hunger targets ahead of scheduleThe Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations ( FAO) issued a circular at its headquarters in Rome on June 12, confirming that 38 countries around the world will achieve the set goal of fighting hunger before the 2015 deadline. According to FAO statistics, 20 countries in the world have achieved the first of the UN Millennium Development Goals, that is, the goal of halving the proportion of hungry people established by the international community at the UN General Assembly in 2000, including Algeria, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Indonesia, Maldives, Uruguay, etc. At the same time, 18 other countries have achieved both the first Millennium Development Goal and the more stringent target set by the 1996 World Food Summit to halve the absolute number of undernourished people, including Azerbaijan, Cuba, Ghana, Kuwait, Peru, Thailand, Venezuela, Viet Nam and others. This proves that with strong political will, coordination and cooperation, hunger can be reduced rapidly and sustainably. In this regard, FAO urges all countries to maintain the momentum of development and commit to the total eradication of hunger, in response to the "Zero Hunger" campaign proposed by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon at the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development. FAO data show that the number of hungry people in the world has decreased from 0.925 billion in 2010 to 0.87 billion in 2012, mainly in developing countries, mainly in South Asia, East Asia and sub Saharan Africa. Agriculture plays a pivotal role in providing food. More than 70 per cent of the poor live in rural areas, most of whom depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their livelihoods. Increasing agricultural productivity is therefore an important factor in improving access to food. FAO calls on more countries to redouble their efforts to end hunger and malnutrition through sustainable agriculture and development. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=45153#.Ublt4rKBSAg (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-06-23
Smithfield and Shuanghui Announce MergerSmithfield Food Co., Ltd. (Smithfield Foods,Inc.) and Shuanghui International (Shuanghui International Holdings Limited) announced on May 29 that the two companies have signed a final merger agreement to acquire Smithfield's assets worth approximately US $7.1 billion, including the assumption of Smithfield's new debt. Shuanghui International is the main controlling shareholder of Henan Shuanghui Investment & Development Company, located in Hong Kong, is a company engaged in global business activities, including food, logistics and condiments. According to the market sales capital, Shuanghui is the largest meat processing enterprise in China and the largest meat sales company in China. Founded in 1936, Smithfield Foods has become the world's largest pig and pork producer, operating in 12 countries around the world. The company's previously announced fiscal year 2012 results showed that net profit reached $0.3613 billion, diluted earnings per share of $2.21; sales reached $13.1 billion, an increase of 7%. In fiscal 2011, Smithfield Foods net income was $0.521 billion, or $3.12 per diluted share. Smithfield is also the largest meat processing company in the United States, with brands such as Smithfield.®,Eckrich®,Farmland®,Armour®,Cook's®,Gwaltney®,John Morrell®,Kretschmar®,Curly's®, Carando®,Margherita®and Healthy Ones®. Under the terms of an agreement unanimously signed by both shareholders, Shuanghui purchased shares of Smithfield at $34 per share. Based on the purchase price of the shares and the closing price of Smithfield on May 28, 2013, the premium is approximately 31%. Completion of the closing is also subject to certain conditions, including obtaining Smithfield shareholder approval, obtaining CFIUS approval in accordance with the relevant requirements of U.S. and specialized foreign antitrust and anti-competition laws, and a number of other closing terms. Upon completion of the acquisition, this new global pork company will have more access to the world's largest and growing Chinese market and maintain world-leading food safety and quality control standards. The merger between Shuanghui and Smithfield is positive for the North American hog industry. After the merger, China will import more pork from the United States. The United States has a price subsidy for any pork exported. After a successful merger, the North American hog market will increase by 5 cents per pound of pork in the next 5 to 10 years. http://www.thepigsite.com/swinenews/33347/pork-commentary-smithfield-foods-sale-a-real-game-changer (Responsible editor: Shixin)
2013-06-23
Study on Reducing Food Loss and WasteJune 5 is World Environment Day. On the same day, the World Resources Institute (World Resources Institute) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) jointly released the "Food Loss and Waste" (Reducing Food Loss and Waste) research report, saying that 1/4 of the food produced by the global agricultural system is lost or wasted. This poses a serious challenge to reducing the hungry and meeting the food needs of the world's rapidly growing population. The report shows that more than half of food loss and waste in developed countries such as Europe, the United States, Canada and Australia occurs during the consumption stage. In contrast, in developing countries, about two-thirds of food loss and waste occurs during the harvest and storage stages. The world's annual land area used to produce lost and wasted food is equivalent to the land area of Mexico, consuming about 28 million tons of chemical fertilizers, and the inefficient use of chemical fertilizers is related to climate change and the increase in marine dead zones where aquatic life cannot survive due to severe pollution. On the other hand, if the greenhouse gas emissions from the production of the world's annual lost and wasted food are compared to the emissions of a country, then it will become the third largest greenhouse gas emitter after the United States and China. According to the current global food consumption trend, the global food demand will be 1.6 times that of 2006 by 2050, but if the current huge food loss and waste are reduced by half, the gap will be reduced by 1/5. Reducing loss and waste is therefore a key link in the transition to more sustainable food security. Food production requires energy, water and land resources. Under the severe challenges of increasingly scarce natural resources and increasingly serious environmental problems, wasting food is equivalent to wasting natural resources and destroying the environment. The report recommends setting universal standards for governments and private enterprises to measure and report food loss and food waste; setting global, national and corporate reduction targets for food loss and food waste; expanding investment to reduce food losses during the harvest stage in developing countries; and establishing institutions and organizations in developed countries to reduce food waste. http://pdf.wri.org/reducing_food_loss_and_waste.pdf (Responsible editor: Shixin)