World Agriculture
Developments, trade, data, and topics in world agriculture
-
Fisheries and food security~ ~ Fishing for food security February 19, 2016 Local fishermen in Indonesia are catching less fish. Whatever the reason, it is a significant problem for those who live on small islands in particular, as fish make up about 90 per cent of the protein they eat. A team of Indonesian and Australian social scientists is looking at how communities adapt to these changes. Initially, in a pilot project study financed by the Australia Indonesia Centre, the researchers are examining whether there is a link between fishing productivity and feelings of food insecurity in the small islands off Kai Kecil, and if so, whether a weakening of local management of fish populations and a rise in intercommunity conflicts over fish resources play a role. The researchers are also studying how individuals cope with food insecurity, and attitudes to alternative ways of making a living. "There are a lot of small islands in the world," says project coordinator Dr Budy Resosudarmo of the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University (ANU). "And Indonesia is a good case for this issue. If we can find out how to handle this, maybe we can provide answers to the rest of the world, particularly the islands of the Torres Strait and the Pacific Ocean ." The collaboration has been able to draw upon resources of two universities in Indonesia, Hasanuddin in Sulawesi and Pattimura in the regional capital of Ambon; the Tual Fisheries Polytechnic in Kai Kecil; and from two universities in Australia: the Australian National University and the University of Tasmania, where there are experts in fisheries economics. Fishing for food security Scientists are investigating whether there's a link between fishing productivity and feelings of food insecurity in the small islands off Kai Kecil. Credit: Australia Indonesia Centre "The two local institutions are important as they have been working in the area continuously, so a lot of background information already exists," says Budy. "They can provide us with literature on local fisheries management, for instance, where each village decides and enforces its own seasonal or species restrictions ." The team has been updating this information using what they call a 'rapid rural appraisal approach,' visiting the villages, talking with the heads and the local people, observing what is happening, and checking whether the questions they propose asking in a forthcoming questionnaire are relevant and will provide them with meaningful information. The bulk of the initial phase of the study will involve analysis of the information gained from the questionnaire, including questions on food security, impressions of fish stocks, fishing productivity, fisheries management, conflict and attitudes to alternative livelihoods. The questionnaire will even carry queries about electricity issues and supply which will provide information to another Australia Indonesia Centre project on remote electrification. Electricity is important to fishing communities for the production of ice to preserve their catch. Fishing for food security Local collaborators have provided valuable information on fisheries management. Credit: Australia Indonesia Centre Originally planned to be held in November, the questionnaire has had to be postponed until February 2016 because an early start to El Niño brought high waves to the area increasing the dangers of sea travel and the level of boat maintenance for locals. Budy believes that alternative livelihoods, such as switching to other fish or marine resources or supplementary occupations, are likely to turn out to be short term solutions of limited appeal to local fisherman. A longer term bet, in his opinion, would be a willingness for fishing families to put more money in educating their children so they can take advantage of other job opportunities, but he has little idea of how fishing people would feel about this strategy. Another area being explored is forging stronger regional connections through modern transport. "Improved transportation could create a better flow of goods and services, and that could generate the possibility of great trade with the rest of the world and a bigger market for Australian agriculture, in particular," Budy says. The Kai Islands are in Indonesia's Maluku Region, which sits between Darwin, Timor-Leste, Ambon and Irian Jaya. http://phys.org/news/2016-02-fishing-food.html
-
American Agricultural Association: TPP helps agricultural exports~~Farm Bureau: TPP Will Boost Farm Exports, Income WASHINGTON, D.C., February 23, 2016 - The Trans-Pacific Partnership will tear down trade barriers and help level the playing field for U.S. agricultural exports to 11 nations across the Pacific Rim. Ratifying TPP will boost annual net farm income in the United States by $4.4 billion, compared to not approving the pact, according to an economic analysis conducted by the American Farm Bureau Federation. “TPP will mean a boat-load of expanded exports and increased demand for America's agricultural products," AFBF President Zippy Duvall said. “Clearly, America's farmers and ranchers have much to gain from approval of TPP and we support its ratification. American agriculture is a growth industry, and to continue that trend, we must expand our market opportunities ." Not approving the trade deal would have adverse effects, too. “While our farmers and ranchers have a lot to gain with passage, the consequences of not approving the deal would be harmful," Duvall said. “Every day we delay means lost markets as other TPP countries implement the deal's advantages with each other. We are already arriving at the party late because, right now, expanded trade due to TPP is going on across the Pacific Rim - just without us ." While procedural steps along the way will take time, Duvall said “the sooner TPP is ratified, the better it will be for American agriculture ." AFBF's analysis forecasts farm-price increases for corn (5 cents per bushel), soybeans (12 cents per bushel), wheat (2 cents per bushel) and rice (16 cents per hundredweight). While cotton prices are not projected to change, cash receipts are projected to increase by $21 million. AFBF also predicts price increases for beef ($2.66 per hundredweight), pork ($2.45 per hundredweight) and poultry ($1.40 per hundredweight). In the dairy sector, prices will increase for butter ($2.81 per hundredweight), cheese ($1.68 per hundredweight), nonfat dry milk ($1.29 per hundredweight) and all milk (21 cents per hundredweight). Net trade is expected to increase for rice, cotton, beef, pork, poultry, butter, cheese, soybeans and products and non-fat dry milk, according to AFBF's analysis. While the analysis projects that the net trade for corn will decline by 45.3 million bushels, overall demand and use for corn is forecast to increase by 54.2 million bushels. Corn revenues are expected to rise by $680 million per year and prices are projected to rise by 5 cents per bushel, due to higher domestic feed use from additional beef and pork exports created by TPP. The agreement has been approved by negotiators from the 12 TPP nations. The U.S. International Trade Commission is preparing an official analysis for the administration, which will formally ask Congress to ratify the deal. The full analysis is posted here. State fact sheets are posted at: http://www.fb.org/issues/tpp/
-
Food security is not just about production.~ ~ Food security: It's not only about production Food security exists when all people, at all times, have access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to maintain healthy and productive lives. The key elements of food security are: (a) availability of enough food from domestic production and/or imports to meet the demand, (B) access of the food to all people at all times through enough incomes and affordable prices, (c) proper hygiene and sanitary practices and safe water for utilisation of food to have optimum impact on health and nutrition, and (d) a regulatory framework in place and its proper implementation for controlling contamination to ensure food safety. So when we talk about food security status in Bangladesh, we need to keep in mind that it's not only about food production. Food security is a larger canvas - where production of food is definitely an important part but, that's not all of it. Once production of food is enough to meet consumers' demand, it fulfils one criterion of food security but a whole range of other issues still remain to be addressed. Even after producing sufficient volume of food grains, system may fail ensuring its availability at all the places, all the time in a certain geographical territory, in certain market, in certain pocket. Once foods are transported, marketed and managed properly and distributed in every nook and corner, still some consumers can miss out accessing the same because of their poor buying capacity. So the question of making food available, making food affordable are no less important issues than the challenge of producing food for the people. Besides, the full cycle of food production is equally important. Maintaining proper hygiene and sanitary practices are crucial. Unless foods are produced safe, consumers would remain exposed to unsafe food. This is a public health concern. From farm-to-fork food can be contaminated, adulterated at any stage of production, marketing, preserving and distribution cycle. Unless necessary regulatory frameworks are in place; and even if, those are in place, but not enforced than we are asking for a great public health danger. Right at the moment Bangladesh is a case of success as far as producing food is concern, particularly rice, the staple. But, is it safe to have food in Bangladesh remains a big question. Food contamination and food adulteration remain a nagging problem here. Thanks to 18 million farming households and their back-breaking jobs that Bangladesh today able to grow over 35 million tonnes of food grains annually, over three times higher what it used to produce back in 1971 (11 million tonnes). Unfortunately, our regulators, policy planners, and political leadership in charge of ensuring food safety governance, failed us in having access to safe food yet. Till the time we have safe and unadulterated safe food in our plates, food security will remain a far cry no matter how much we produce, how efficiently we market, how wonderfully we distribute. At times, unsafe food is worse than no food. People can survive starvation for limited period but, may have to die from consumption of adulterated food. We have heard enough of outdated laws such as pure food act, and heard enough of government enacting stringent, modern laws in place but any visible enforcement is yet to come by. Couple of years gone by since parliament passed safe food laws and it has been almost a year now that safe food authority is formed but public confidence on safety of food items served to their dishes is still very low. ADVERTISEMENT Over the last three/four decades, Bangladesh as well as entire South Asia has overcome the problem of food availability. All countries now have enough food for people to meet their minimum energy requirements. However many people still lack money to buy sufficient quantities of nutritious food. This is manifested in high level of malnutrition, hunger and poverty. Rising income inequality acts as deterrent in reducing poverty, hunger and malnutrition in a faster pace. This is evident from the fact that in Bangladesh, India and Pakistan more than two out of every five children are stunted (low height for age), one in three are underweight (low weight for age), and over 15% are wasted (low weight for height). Similarly, about half of the women in these three largest countries of South Asia are suffering from anaemia. Over the last three decades, food production and availability has increased at a good pace in Bangladesh as well as entire of South Asia. Food production grew annually by 1.2% between 1980 and 2010 regionally. This increase was attributed to the impressive performance of Bangladesh, India and Pakistan, where per capita food production increased by 1.1%, 1.4% and 1.0% respectively. While India and Pakistan are self-sufficient in the production of most food commodities, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka have also become self-reliant in production of their staple rice. As a result, South Asia's per capita food availability increased from 2,259 kcal/person/day to 2,434 kcal/person/day between 1991 and 2011. Malnutrition, poverty and hunger have decreased in Bangladesh over the last three decades. This can be attributed to pro-poor growth policies coupled with specific educational and nutritional interventions. The government's budget allocation for the social sector has increased significantly and non-government organisations played an important role as well. Also, the country has formulated a comprehensive social safety net which has benefited the population, particularly the vulnerable ones. The nutritional status of women has improved over the last several decades, yet disparities exist by income and social status. In 2011, nearly a quarter of women (aged 15-49 years) suffered from chronic energy deficiency (with a BMI of less than 18.5) compared to half of the women in late 1990s. Micronutrient deficiencies in iron, iodine and vitamin A are also a challenge. Though decreasing, yet anaemia among pregnant women is still high. Thanks to farm mechanisation, agricultural technology developments, better breeding and farm subsidy and other policy supports, farmers in Bangladesh are still being able to grow more crops from fast depleting farmlands. Resources (land, water, etc.) are scarce; demand for food is on the rise thanks to an increasing population. Choice is limited here. Higher demand for housing, road-building and industrialisation is taking away fertile farmlands while challenge is getting bigger and bigger in meeting greater food demand of increasing population. Though the birth rate is stabilised yet because of an existing large population base, Bangladesh needs to grow nearly half a million tonnes of additional rice year-on-year just to keep pace with the increased number of mouths to be fed. Photo: Strar Almost 30% of the households do not own any land and another 30% own only up to half an acre. Such tiny landownership is insufficient to meet the food needs of four to five-member households, whatever advanced technology the farmer use. There has been no move, whatsoever, for any sorts of land reforms. Tenancy farming is order of the day. People who own land largely don't do farming while people who don't own land mostly do the job as lessees. Economic disparities, relative opportunity costs, flourishing non-farm sectors have got something to do about this phenomenon. Despite such huge challenges it's to the credit of laborious farmers and supporting farm policies that Bangladesh is being able to self-sufficient in rice production. In wheat, we're largely import-dependent but in maize growth has been fantastic over the last two decades. There has been tremendous growth in yields of potato and vegetables and rise in fish productions is quite significant as far as meeting nutritional needs is concerned. But still for the poorer section of the population, rice-centric dietary habit and serious absence of dietary diversities remain a great challenge. Probably that explains why the number of undernourished people in Bangladesh has remained almost static in recent years despite the country's commendable improvement in food security status since 1990. Number of undernourished people stands at 26.3 million in 2015 compared to 26.5 million in 2010-12, said the State of Food Insecurity (Sofi) report-2015, a UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) flagship published annually on the eve of World Food Day (October 16). Sofi statistics show that number of Bangladeshi undernourished people dropped from 36 million in 1990 to 27.7 million in 2000 and further down to 24.3 million in the 2005-07 period. But the pace has rather lost momentum in recent years as the number of undernourished people increased to 26.5 million in 2010-12, from which it has dropped by a mere 0.2 million now. Undernourishment means that a person is not able to acquire enough food to meet the daily minimum dietary energy requirements over a period of one year. Bangladesh has done well and we all know that it achieved some of the vital MDGs even ahead of time. In fact, Bangladesh is one of the forerunners in achieving the first of eight Millennium Development Goals - reducing extreme poverty rates by a half (from 58% to 29%) between 1990 and 2015. Probably we have reached a point now that we need to identify the 'pockets' where things are not moving fast. We have to look into the areas where people lost their traditional occupations; we have to look into the vulnerabilities of elderly people; people lacking skills, differently-able persons and ethnic minorities. In order to further reduce the number of undernourished people, Bangladesh also needs to focus on people living in shoals, river-erosion areas, khas lands and saline-prone areas. The writer is Assignment Editor The Daily Star.
-
Automated agriculture: good news for food security, bad news for job security?~~Automated farming: good news for food security, bad news for job security? New technology is revolutionising modern farming, but this brave new world of robot farms and hi-tech sensors could have consequences for rural livelihoods Evan Fraser and Sylvain Charlebois Thursday 18 February 2016 07.00 GMT Last modified on Thursday 18 February 2016 07.03 GMT Around the world, but especially in the developing world, food and farming systems continue to rely on 20th century technology. But this is changing. The same information technologies that brought us the internet and transformations in medicine are now revolutionising farming. It's a new era for agriculture and it's taking off in at least two distinct areas. On the farm, technology is changing the way farmers manage farmland and farm animals - such as the use of satellite driven geo-positioning systems and sensors that detect nutrients and water in soil. This technology is enabling tractors, harvesters and planters to make decisions about what to plant, when to fertilise, and how much to irrigate. As this technology progresses, equipment will ultimately be able to tailor decisions on a metre-by-metre basis. Related: Gene editing could create medicines and self-fertilising crops. But are we facing another GM food-style furore? Robots already do much of the harvesting of lettuce and tomatoes in our greenhouses. And it's even becoming feasible to place fitness trackers on farm animals to monitor their health and welfare. The dairy industry has been at the vanguard of this where robotic milking and computer controlled feeding equipment allow for the careful management of individual animals within a herd. sustainable business Join Guardian Sustainable Business Sign up today and receive exclusive member newsletters, networking opportunities, member-only discounts and more. Click here A similar tech revolution is happening with the genetics of the plants we grow and the animals we raise. Genomic tools are on the cusp of allowing scientists to rapidly and inexpensively evaluate the genetic code of individual plants and animals. This makes it much easier to identify individual plants and animals that are particularly robust or productive. This knowledge, in combination with traditional breeding, can accelerate how quickly we improve the genetic potential of our crops and livestock. Scientists at UK research institute the John Innes Centre, for example, are attempting to create a strain of barley that would make its own ammonium fertiliser from nitrogen in the soil, something which could save farmers the cost of artificial fertilisers. Taken together, both farm and genome-scale technologies are boosting the efficiency of modern farming, which is increasingly important to feed a growing population set to reach almost 10 billion by 2050. But this is just the beginning. Many experts are looking forward to a future where the Internet of Things (where physical objects such as vehicles, buildings and devices are connected to collect and exchange data) is applied to food and farming to create an Internet of Living Things. In this future, advanced sensors embedded in fields, waterways, irrigation systems and tractors will combine with machine-learning systems, genome-identifying devices and data dashboards to give rise to a generation of smart farming technology that will have the capacity to sense and respond to its environment in a way that maximises production while minimising negative impact. However, there are problems. In many of the poorer parts of the world, sophisticated agricultural technologies are much less important than education, healthcare, access to capital, sound governance and basic infrastructure. For the HIV positive farmer supporting her family on just one hectare in rural Malawi, satellite driven tractors and high productivity beef germplasm are about as useful as a moondust. Furthermore, many of these technologies require very little human labour. For example, Japanese company Spread has recently announced that robots will carry out all but one of the tasks required to grow tens of thousands of lettuces each day in its indoor automated farm. Related: Japanese firm to open world's first robot-run farm For countries in the industrial world, this growing automation probably means the continued decline of rural life. The issue of labour is even more important for the economies of the global south, where there are fewer urban job opportunities. In those countries, technologies that take labour out of the fields may undermine efforts to reduce poverty and enhance development. Similar to the fear that Uber and Google cars will make taxi and lorry drivers obsolete, will the same thing happen to farmers? In the brave new world of satellite driven tractors and robotic milking parlours, where will rural communities and cultures fit? And for countries still dependent on agricultural labour, what will people do to survive? The answers to these questions are not simple but the outcome of them will help define global society over the next hundred years. Evan Fraser is Canada research chair and professor of geography. Sylvain Charlebois is professor of food distribution and policy. They work at the University of Guelph, Canada and are affiliated with the university's Food Institute http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/18/automated-farming-food-security-rural-jobs-unemployment-technology
-
Freshwater diversity has a positive impact on world food security~ ~ Freshwater biodiversity has positive impact on global food security February 24, 2016 Freshwater biodiversity has positive impact on global food security Girl selling fish in the market at Stung Treng Cambodia, where a high diversity of fish species supports one of the world's greatest inland fisheries. Credit: Dr William Darwall Inland freshwaters with a greater variety of fish species (biodiversity) have higher-yielding and less variable fisheries according to a new study from the University of Southampton and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). At least two billion people depend directly on inland freshwaters, such as lakes, rivers and wetlands, for the provision of food. However, despite thousands of freshwater species contributing to food security, the relationship between biodiversity and yield remains poorly understood. Using datasets from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and IUCN covering 100 countries in Africa, Europe and parts of Asia, researchers from the University of Southampton have conducted the first large-scale test of the impact of freshwater biodiversity on fishery yields and the variability of yield over time. After taking into account other factors that would be expected to have an effect on yield, such as fishing effort, the size of lakes, and temperature and precipitation, they found that those fisheries with a higher number of species are also producing higher yields. In addition, they showed that in parts of the world where there was a higher number of fish species there was also more stability in the yield year on year. Countries with the strongest relationship included Tanzania, Democratic Republic of Congo, Vietnam and Thailand. Emma Brooks, Postgraduate Research Student in the University's Centre for Biological Sciences and lead author of the study, said: "The results suggest that fish biodiversity may deliver benefits for human wellbeing. As such, these results provide a powerful argument for placing biodiversity conservation centrally within fisheries management, particularly in countries with the highest yielding inland fisheries as these also tend to have high freshwater biodiversity ." Dr Felix Eigenbrod, Associate Professor (Spatial Ecology) in the Centre for Biological Sciences and senior author of the study, said: "Our study demonstrates that maintaining healthy freshwater systems that support a wide variety of fish (not just those targeted for fishing) is good not only for freshwater species conservation, but is also critical for food security and livelihoods. This is especially true in developing countries where fisheries provide a major source of protein and micronutrients, are a source of income, and where they are used as a safety net in times of hardship such as when crops fail ." Beyond food security, the researchers say that understanding the degree to which biodiversity underpins freshwater fisheries has particular policy relevance because freshwater systems are of major importance for the conservation of biodiversity. Freshwater habitats are disproportionately species rich given that they cover only 0.8 per cent of the Earth's surface but contain 10 per cent of species described to date and as many as a third of all vertebrates. Dr Will Darwall, Head of the IUCN's Freshwater Biodiversity Unit and co-author of the study, says: "Inland waters are the most threatened systems globally, with dams, water extraction, pollution and invasive species as well as overharvesting of the fisheries themselves recognised as some of the biggest threats. It is imperative that the relationships we explored should be considered within freshwater and fisheries management; the protection and conservation of species diversity in freshwater systems is a win-win outcome for human food security and conservation efforts to preserve freshwater ecosystems ." The findings also highlight the urgent need for more data to fully understand and monitor the contribution of biodiversity to inland fisheries globally. Emma Brooks adds: "There is a lack of data for freshwaters, including a thorough understanding of species compositions and distributions worldwide. Equally, a concentrated effort is required to increase reporting not only of inland fishery yields, but also of fishing efforts. Only by doing this will we be able to fully understand the extent of the role that biodiversity plays in underpinning inland fisheries ." Explore further: Awareness and labeling initiatives can benefit inland fisheries Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-02-freshwater-biodiversity-positive-impact-global.html#jCp
-
Scientists just discovered another threat to world food securityEnergy and Environment Scientists just found another key threat to global food security By Chelsea Harvey February 16 ? Follow chelseaeharvey Cattle graze on hay on the Van Vleck Ranch in Rancho Murieta, California. REUTERS/Max Whittaker With the world's population expected to exceed 9 billion people by the year 2050, producing enough food for everyone is a top concern for global policymakers. And now, scientists have pointed out another threat to global food security. In a new study in Nature Communications, a group of researchers concluded that the world's grasslands are going to need a lot more phosphorus - an important nutrient for plants - if they're going to produce enough grass to meet future food demands. No, all that grass won't be used to feed humans. It's for the livestock, such as cattle, that people eat. Although many farmers increasingly supplement their animals' diets with corn and grain, grass remains a major food staple for livestock all around the world. So being able to feed all those animals depends, in a big way, on the productivity of the world's grasslands. The problem is whether those grasslands will be able to keep up with the future demand for meat, which is only expected to increase. To help answer that question, the authors of the new paper decided to take a closer look at the phosphorus required by the world's grasslands. Phosphorus is just one of many nutrients that plants need to thrive, but it's the subject of increasing concern because of its global scarcity. “We've really focused on phosphorus because it's a finite resource, and there was this notion - and still is this notion - that we need to be very careful with this resource because it's so important for our food production," said senior author Martin van Ittersum, a professor in the plant production systems group at Wageningen University in the Netherlands. Phosphorus is naturally present in soil in a chemical form known as phosphate. It can cycle through a grassland system by being taken up by a plant, being eaten by an animal and then returning to the soil via that animal's manure (or through its decaying organic matter, when the animal dies). But because phosphate is found in relatively small amounts in most soils, it often acts as a kind of limiting factor for grasslands and other plant systems. Adding phosphorus-containing fertilizer to the soil can boost a system's productivity - but that kind of fertilizer is becoming less and less readily available. That's because such fertilizers require large amounts of phosphate rock, which must be mined from the earth. And there's only so much of it left on the planet. Additionally, while there's demand for phosphate all over the world, the mines are concentrated in just a few regions, said Dana Cordell, research principal at the University of Technology Sydney's Institute for Sustainable Futures, who was not involved with the new study. So phosphate rock is not only a finite resource on the Earth, which we may eventually run out of - it's also not equally accessible to all the people who need it. These factors make the study of phosphorus, especially in relation to global food systems, especially important. To conduct their study, the researchers used data from the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization between 1970 and 2005 to inform a model that estimated historical phosphorus uptake by the world's grasslands and calculated how much extra phosphorus would be necessary to get grassland productivity up to the levels required to meet global food demands by the year 2050. They assumed a scenario in which grassland productivity must increase by 80 percent by 2050 to keep up with demand. First, the researchers found that the world's grasslands had a negative phosphorus budget between 1970 and 2005, meaning more phosphorus was taken out of the grasslands than was added in. This likely happened thanks to a number of factors, the biggest of these being the loss of manure. In many farming systems, the livestock's manure is collected and taken away to be applied as fertilizer on cropland - meaning whatever phosphorus it contains is taken with it, rather than being returned to the grass. The researchers did note that the extent of the phosphorus losses differed by region. In parts of Europe, for instance, the grasslands actually had a positive phosphorus budget, meaning more phosphorus was added than taken away. But in many other parts of the world - throughout Asia, Africa and Latin America, for example - the opposite was true. Overall, the models suggested a globally negative phosphorus budget for the world's grasslands. Between 1970 and 2005, about 125 million metric tons of phosphorus was poured into grasslands, while about 264 million metric tons were exported out, leaving a deficit of 139 million metric tons. This presents a problem for global food security. Grassland production needs to ramp up to meet projected future demands for meat - meaning it will need more phosphorus input, not less. In fact, the researchers' model indicated that the world's grasslands will need four times more phosphorus input to meet future demands by 2050. Overall, the researchers estimate that by 2050, about 24 million metric tons of phosphorus-based fertilizer will be required annually to maintain the necessary grassland productivity. The issue to keep in mind moving forward is that phosphate rock remains a finite resource - and even the amount that's still available isn't equally accessible to all, said Cordell, the University of Technology Sydney researcher. And she added that the more phosphate rock we mine, the lower its quality will be, the deeper we have to dig and the more energy we have to use to extract it. So the study could also be seen as a reminder that more sustainable solutions to the phosphorus issue will likely be required in the not-so-distant future - and such solutions will help safeguard not only the world's grasslands, but other systems that depend on phosphorus, such as croplands. One idea is to come up with more efficient ways of extracting and applying phosphate in the first place. “We waste about 80 percent of the phosphate we use specifically for food production," Cordell pointed out. “It's getting lost at all stages, from mine to field to when we produce and consume food." Focusing on more efficient mining and fertilizer production could help minimize these losses. It's also worth noting that there are important environmental consequences to wasted phosphorus as well. Each year, huge amounts of phosphorus from both agricultural and industrial settings end up running off into the environment and getting washed into rivers, lakes and other water systems. When this happens, the sudden surge of nutrients in the water can cause massive algal blooms, which can secrete toxins and deplete oxygen supplies in the water, leading to mass die-offs of fish and other organisms. So preventing phosphorus waste is not only good for food security - it's good for the environment as well. Better recycling of manure and other phosphorus sources would also be helpful, Cordell added. As van Ittersum pointed out, some parts of the world have achieved a net input of phosphorus into their grassland systems by supplementing their animals' diets with phosphorus-containing crops and then allowing the animals to return some of that phosphorus into the grasslands where they graze. “Reusing the manure, keeping manure in the system, managing food losses, returning waste and residues to the field - they all will help to better close the cycles and to avoid the need to use too much phosphate rock, which is a finite resource in the end," van Ittersum said. Finally, Cordell noted that it will be important in the future to consider what types of diets might be most sustainable for the world's growing populations. Many experts have argued that the world's growing demand for meat will not be tenable forever, given the high carbon footprint and large land use required for meat production. “It's certainly an issue that comes up with respect to climate change and water scarcity," Cordell said. Now, with our growing knowledge of the phosphorus requirements for certain food systems, we can begin “strategically looking at what foods have lower water and carbon footprints, but also have low phosphorus footprints as well," she said. All of these considerations are important aspects of the study, which van Ittersum emphasized is “not just a plea to increase fertilizers - it's first of all to raise awareness about our grasslands and [the need] to manage these better ." Chelsea Harvey is a freelance journalist covering science. She specializes in environmental health and policy. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/02/16/scientists-just-found-another-big-problem-for-global-food-security/
-
India's wheat production expected to increase or decrease imports~ ~ india's wheat production expected to increase or decrease imports 2016-02-19 14:13 | source: China Grain Network | india's wheat output in 2015/16 will increase by 8.4 from the previous year to 93.8 million tons, thus easing the pressure of expanding imports and increasing supply. This estimate is higher than the median estimate of 84.5 million tons released last week. Due to the weather, India's wheat production fell to a five-year low of 86.5 million tons last year, and the production of rice, corn and soybeans was also affected to varying degrees. India is expected to import large quantities of palm oil, soybean oil, corn, etc. to meet domestic demand. Pramod Kumar, executive manager of a Bangalore-based agri-food company, said that if the Indian government's estimates were accurate, it would no longer need to import wheat. He believes that India's wheat output this year will not exceed 82 million to 85 million tons due to the reduction of planting area and hot weather during the planting period. Indian farmers sow wheat in October-November and begin harvesting in March of the following year.
-
US corn acreage to increase~ ~ US corn acreage to increase 2016-02-19 09:56 | source: China Grain Network | according to the U.S. nitrogen fertilizer producer, Chicago CF Industries, this year, U.S. farmers will prefer to sow corn instead of soybeans, and corn planting area is expected to increase by 2.5 million acres compared with 2015. CF said that based on the current new season crop futures prices, farmers will be better than soybeans to grow corn. As corn futures prices continue to strengthen relative to soybeans, CF expects the U.S. corn acreage to reach 90.5 million acres in 2016, up from 88 million acres in 2015. Farmers are currently paying close attention to futures market prices to determine which crops should be planted this spring, and the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) new season November soybean prices relative to December corn prices is a key indicator of expected planting returns. Since CF last issued its sown area forecast in October, the ratio has risen to 2.3 to 1, up from 2.2 to 1 at the time. CF's forecast for corn acreage is comparable to the USDA's forecast, but higher than the 88.86 million acres forecast by Informa Economics, a private analyst. Soybeans are nitrogen-fixing plants that absorb crop nutrients from the air. Therefore, the decrease of soybean planting area and the increase of corn planting area will help to increase the demand for nitrogen fertilizer. However, CF said that the expected decline in wheat acreage in the United States in 2016 will offset the impact of the increase in corn acreage, thus keeping the demand for nitrogen fertilizer in North America stable in 2016. CF expects the price of nitrogen fertilizer to rise this spring, as Chinese producers' profits are squeezed and farmers will increase fertilizer application to make up for the impact of less fertilizer application in 2015. CF said that in the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2015, the average selling price of ammonia fertilizer fell by about 18% to US $458 per ton, while the average selling price of urea ammonium nitrate fell by 12.5 to US $230 per ton. The sharp drop in fertilizer prices was due to weak grain prices and a global production surplus. Editor: Xi Shi (China Grain Network)
-
Soybeans fall to a five-year low for big business benefitsSoybeans fell to a five-year low, companies benefited greatly. 2016-02-22 9:30 Source: First Financial Daily fengyi International, China's largest edible oil supplier, announced its 2015 financial report during the Spring Festival. Benefiting from the sharp drop in soybean prices in the international market, the company's grain and oil business achieved a pre-tax profit of about US $0.69 billion, a year-on-year increase of about 98%. Soybeans are the main raw material for domestic edible oil producers, and soybean prices have fallen. China Grain and Oil Holdings (606.HK), a Hong Kong-listed subsidiary of COFCO, is expected to significantly reduce losses or even make profits. Fengyi International's grain and oil business with brands such as "Golden Dragon Fish" and "Xiangmanyuan" includes the trading and processing of grain and oil raw materials, covering the brand building and distribution of small packaging edible oil, rice, flour, noodles, and rice noodles. Medium packaging and large Packaging grain and oil products are also included. The financial report shows that in the 2015 fiscal year, Fengyi International sold 28.7 million tons of grain and oil products worldwide, an increase of 3.6 million tons over the previous fiscal year. In terms of small-package grain and oil products, Fengyi International's annual sales volume was 5.1 million tons, down from 5.3 million tons in the previous year. Small package palm oil originally belonged to small package grain and oil business, and was transferred to tropical oil business in fiscal year 2015. Fengyi International said that if small package palm oil was added, the sales volume of small package grain and oil products increased by 12.5 in fiscal year 2015 compared with the same period last year. In fiscal year 2015, Fengyi International's grain and oil business achieved a pre-tax profit of about US $0.69 billion, up 98% from about US $0.35 billion in fiscal year 2014. The company said that the main reason was that the profit from soybean crushing was relatively stable. According to the latest research report released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the average soybean price (farm price) in the United States fell by about 15% from $378 per ton in January 2015 to $322 in December. In the 2014/15 market year, the average soybean price (farm price) in the United States was only $362 per ton, the lowest in five years since the 2010/11 market year. In 2015, the international soybean supply and demand remained loose. Under the influence of negative factors such as the South American soybean harvest and the large sown area in the new production season in the United States, the international soybean price showed a downward trend. The overall situation of domestic soybean processing industry improved. China Cereals and Oils Holdings and Fengyi International are both among the top edible oil processing companies in China. In the first half of 2014, China Cereals and Oils Holdings suffered a huge loss of about HK $1.05 billion in soybean and other oilseed processing businesses; after the decline in soybean prices, oilseed processing in the first half of 2015 The loss narrowed to about HK $0.28 billion. In contrast to Fengyi International's grain and oil business, the authors expect China Grain and Oil Holdings to achieve a significant reduction in oilseed processing and even profitability in fiscal year 2015. Ning Gaoning, the former chairman of COFCO Group, once proposed the "whole industry chain strategy". Prior to this, Fengyi International had entered the upstream fields such as palm oil cultivation in the international market and brought it a lot of returns. However, the turbulence of the market has also brought an impact on the enterprises operating in the whole industrial chain. It is possible to lose the mulberry and gain the east corner; it is also possible to gain the east corner and lose the mulberry. In 2015, despite a significant increase in pre-tax profits in the grain and oil business, Fengyi International's palm oil business did not perform well. Take the price of palm oil in Malaysia as an example. In the 2010/11 market year, the average price of palm oil once reached an all-time high of US $1154 per ton. Since then, it has been declining all the way. By January this year, the average price of palm oil in Malaysia dropped to US $550 per ton, almost halving. The sharp drop in palm oil prices affected the overall performance of Fengyi International. In fiscal year 2015, Fengyi International's palm oil sales fell 4.5 percent year-on-year to 23.5 million tons. Coupled with lower prices, full-year revenue fell 23.3 percent year-on-year to $15.6 billion. Combining various business units, Fengyi International's revenue in 2015 was about US $38.78 billion, a decrease of 10% year-on-year; realized a profit of about US $1.06 billion, a decrease of 8.7. http://youzhi.cngrain.com/html/Articles/20160222/138014.html
-
United Nations: Bees can help ensure food security for 2 billion farmers~~Bees can help boost food security of two billion small farmers at no cost - UN A new study suggest that poorly performing farms could significantly increase their crop yields by attracting more pollinators to their land. Photo: FAO/James Cane 19 February 2016 - The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) today highlighted the publication of a new study that quantifies, for the first time, how much crop yields depend on the work of bees that unknowingly fertilize plants as they move from flower to flower. In doing so, the agency says bees may have a key role to play in improving the production of some two billion smallholder farmers worldwide and ensuring the food security and nutrition of the world's growing population. “What do cucumbers, mustard, almonds and alfalfa have in common?" asked FAO in a press release. “On the surface, very little; but there is one thing they share: they all owe their existence to the service of bees ." The agency notes that for centuries, this tiny striped helper has labored the world's fields without winning much recognition for its many contributions to food production. Wild bees, in particular, seemed doomed to slog in the shadow of their more popular cousin - the honeybee - whose day job of producing golden nectar has been far more visible and celebrated. But FAO says bees of all stripes are finally getting their moment in the sun. The paper, published in the magazine Science, makes the case that ecological intensification - or boosting farm outputs by tapping the power of natural processes - is one of the sustainable pathways toward greater food supplies. Food security strategies worldwide could therefore benefit from including pollination as integral component, experts say. “Our research shows that improving pollinator density and diversity - in other words, making sure that more and more different types of bees and insects are coming to your plants - has direct impact on crop yields," said Barbara Gemmill-Herren, one of the FAO authors of the report. “And that's good for the environment and for food security," she stressed, adding that it is beneficial to actively preserve and build habitats in and around farms for bees, birds and insects to live year-round. Focus on developing countries In the field study coordinated by FAO, scientists compared 344 plots across Africa, Asia and Latin America and concluded that crop yields were significantly lower in farming plots that attracted fewer bees during the main flowering season than in those plots that received more visits. When comparing high-performing and low-performing farms of less than two hectares, the outcomes suggest that poorly performing farms could increase their yields by a median of 24 per cent by attracting more pollinators to their land. The research also looked at larger plots and concluded that, while those fields also benefited from more pollinator visits, the impact on yields was less significant than in the smaller plots - probably because many bees have a harder time servicing large fields, far from their nesting habitat. But a diversity of bees, each with different flight capacities, can make the difference. This suggests that bee diversity offers benefits both for small-holder farmers in developing countries, and for larger farms. Why it matters The research comes at a time when wild bees are threatened by a multitude of factors and managed bee populations can't keep up with the increasing number of plots that grow pollination-dependent crops. Climate change poses yet another problem: “Bees will struggle with the higher temperatures," explained Nadine Azzu, Global Project Coordinator in FAO's Plant Production and Protection Division, who also worked on the report. "Plus, flowers in some parts of the world are now opening at different times than they used to, and the bees are not there to pollinate," she said. This means finding ways to keep pollinators buzzing around the farm year-round is becoming even more important. Previously unstudied Pollinators - such as bees, birds and various types of insects that fly, hop or crawl from one flower to another - have for centuries been the invisible helpers of farmers worldwide. Different types of bees have distinct tastes and roles to play in the food system. Bumble bees, for example, are one of the few types of bees that can successfully pollinate tomatoes, which heavily rely on buzz pollination to bear fruit. Honey bees, in turn, are important because they are the least picky in their choice of flowers- and there are many of them, in each hive, even though their more discerning wild bee cousins are more effective in fertilizing the plants they're attracted. The study shows that for smallholdings, crop yield increased linearly with increased visits to the flowers that were being tracked. Pollination was the agricultural input that contributed the greatest to yields, beyond other management practices. This holds promise for one of the major agricultural challenges of our time: How to help smallholders produce more without hurting the environment. How to attract bees The report also found that attracting pollinators to farms is not as easy as planting for the season and waiting for them to arrive. Maintaining habitat and forage resources all year long is key to wooing pollinators and keeping them on the land for longer periods of time. This can be done by planting different trees and plants that flower at different times in the year, for example. Maintaining flowering hedge rows around the farm, and mulch on the ground that bees can hide under, are additional recommended tactics to attract them, as is reducing the use of pesticides. The key to getting the best yields probably lies in a mix of managed pollination services - that is, installing bee hives in plots at flowering time - and wild pollination, experts say. And the latter will require farmers and policy makers to take a closer look at the ecosystems that surround farms. “The take away from our study is that bees provide a real service and should be taken into account when we plan food security interventions," said Ms. Azzu. “And the best part is: their service is free ." News Tracker: past stories on this issue Humans must change behaviour to save bees, vital for food production - UN report http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53274#.VtOv2k3Vxes
-
US ambassador: Ukraine should become agriculture 'superstar"~~U.S. Envoy Urges Ukraine To Become Agricultural 'Superpower' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt urged Ukraine to exploit its rich lands and become an agricultural "superpower ." By RFE/RL February 25, 2016 Ukraine has signed a deal with U.S. agriculture giant Cargill to build a major grain-export terminal that Washington's ambassador said could help turn the embattled country into an agricultural "superpower ." The $100 million deal with Ukraine's M.V. Cargo firm came despite jitters over a political crisis in Kyiv this year and an ongoing conflict with Russia-backed separatists in the east. "Ukraine is already one of the world's great agricultural producers, but it should be an agricultural superpower," U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt said at a signing ceremony for the deal on February 24. About a quarter of the world's black-earth land is in Ukraine, making it a natural global center for food production, and agricultural exports already reached $16.5 billion in 2015, he said, urging Kyiv to stay on the path of economic reform to attract more such deals. Major global corporations like Cargill "are looking for a government and a presidency that demonstrates a clear commitment to continued progress on the rule of law, to include the critical issue of anticorruption reform," he said. Ukrainian officials said the agreement marked an important show of trust in Ukraine's future by a top corporation. "This was a first step made by Ukraine that makes our American partners see us as a truly reliable and good place for making investments," Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk said. Agriculture Minister Oleksiy Pavlenko said Ukraine -- for centuries one of Europe's great breadbaskets -- expects to export a record 37 million tons of grain between July 2015 and June 2016. Ukrainian officials said the new grain port in the Odesa region will have an initial annual loading capacity of 5 million tons, and could later be expanded by about 50 percent. Cargill said it expects the terminal's construction to be completed in about two years. "This new port will benefit Ukrainian farmers, the overall economy and global food security," Cargill executive Andreas Rickmers said. "It will add to our footprint of port facilities in the Black Sea region and confirms our intention to keep investing in Ukraine's agricultural sector ." Cargill is a 150-year-old food conglomerate that operates around 500 cargo vessels a day. Forbes magazine has ranked it as the largest U.S. unlisted company. http://www.rferl.org/content/us-envoy-urges-ukraine-become-agricultural-superpower-cargill-/27572568.html
-
U.S. agricultural exports to fall to 6-year lowU.S. Farm Exports to Be Smallest in Six Years, USDA Says Chuck Abbott 02/25/2016 @ 9:19am WASHINGTON - U.S. farm exports will tumble to $125 billion this year, down 10% from 2015 and the lowest sales total since 2010, USDA said in an updated forecast. Smaller sales to China accounts for one-third of the estimated decline of $14.7 billion in U.S. exports from last year. "In general, strong competition and reduced demand have contributed to falling U.S. export sales," said USDA chief economist Robert Johansson at USDA's annual Ag Outlook Forum. "However, much of the reduction in value this year compared to FY2015 is due to lower prices for grain and feed exports ." Canada would replace China as the number one export market for U.S. crops and livestock for the first time since 2010, with imports forecast for $20.8 billion this year. China and Mexico would tie for second place at around $17.5 billion. In 2015, China bought $22.5 billion of U.S. ag exports. China holds more than half of the world stockpile of corn. "We expect China to slow imports of corn and corn substitutes to prevent its stockpile from growing even larger and to reduce those stocks," said Johansson. China is the leading market for distillers' dried grains and spurred a boom in U.S. sorghum. "In 2014, China imported a combined total of 20 million tonnes of sorghum and barley, projected to fall to 14.5 million tonnes in 2015 and then to 9.6 million tonnes in 2016," said Johansson. China, the buyer of two-thirds of soybeans on the world market, was expected to remain a large importer of soybeans. U.S. farm exports were a record $152.3 billion in 2014, before going into a slump along with commodity prices and U.S. farm income. One-fifth of U.S. farm production is exported. The forecast for this year's export is lowest since $108.5 billion in 2010.
-
U.S. Consumers Use Record High Amount of Biodiesel~ ~ U.S. consumers use record amount of biodiesel Biodiesel industry troubled by rising imports, but optimistic because of end-of-year Congressional action. Published on: Jan 25, 2016 U.S. consumers used more biodiesel than ever before in 2015, but increasing imports are a concern for the young industry. U.S. consumers used nearly 2.1 billion gallons of biodiesel in 2015, but domestic production remained flat at about 1.42 billion gallons, compared with about 1.47 billion gallons in 2014 and 1.5 billion gallons in 2013. Imports rose from 510 million gallons in 2014 to an estimated 670 million gallons in 2015, a 25 percent increase. “While the overall numbers are positive, we are increasingly seeing subsidized, predatory imports undercutting U.S. production - in part by taking advantage of U.S. policies aimed at building up the domestic industry," said Joe Jobe, CEO of the National Biodiesel Board. “This is exactly what we have been warning would happen, and it will continue until we take steps to level the playing field, including by reforming the biodiesel tax incentive as a domestic production credit ." U.S. consumers used a record amount of biodiesel in 2015, reducing U.S. carbon emissions by at least 18.2 million metric tons, according to the National Biodiesel Board. U.S. consumers used a record amount of biodiesel in 2015, reducing U.S. carbon emissions by at least 18.2 million metric tons, according to the National Biodiesel Board. The National Biodiesel Board wants Congress to change the $1-per-gallon biodiesel tax incentive to a producer's credit from a blender's credit. Under the existing blender's credit, biodiesel that is produced overseas and blended in the United States is taking advantage of the incentive. “We welcome competition, but U.S. companies can't fairly compete against foreign companies that are double-dipping on overseas and U.S. incentives while not letting U.S. producers compete in their domestic markets," Jobe said. “This reform is a simple fix that would appropriately focus U.S. tax dollars on creating jobs and stimulating economic development here at home instead of overseas ."? Jobe said the domestic biodiesel industry is optimistic because of stronger policies implemented late last year. In November, the EPA finalized the new biomass-based diesel standards under the Renewable Fuels Standard, the federal policy requiring renewable fuels to be incorporated into the U.S. fuel supply. The standard requires 1.9 billion gallons of biomass-based diesel in 2016 and 2 billion gallons in 2017. In December, Congress reinstated the biodiesel blender's tax incentive through the end of the year. It had lapsed in 2015. Biodiesel is a renewable, clean-burning diesel replacement used in existing diesel engines that is made from ingredients including recycled cooking oil, soybean oil and animal fats. It is the first and only commercial-scale fuel produced across the U.S. to meet the EPA's definition as an Advanced Biofuel - meaning the EPA has determined that it reduces greenhouse gas emissions by more than 50 percent when compared with petroleum diesel. The EPA estimates last year's biodiesel consumption reduced U.S. carbon emissions by at least 18.2 million metric tons. Source: National Biodiesel Board
-
Saudi Arabia to Buy U.S. Farms to Grow Alfalfa~~Saudi Arabia buying US farms to grow hay for their cows Jan 19th 2016 1:36AM Saudi Arabia Buying U.S. Farms To Grow Hay For Their Cows Water scarcity is resulting in a trend that has incited criticism from some American farmers and officials. CNBC reports that companies based in Saudi Arabia and its neighbors are purchasing farmland in California and Arizona. In the case of the former, some is being used to grow alfalfa hay for their own dairy cows back home. The Saudi dairy giant Almarai Company recently purchased 1,790 acres of land in Blythe, California for $31.8 million. It also bought a farm in the Arizona desert last year, according to NPR. To some in the U.S., this activity is the equivalent of "exporting water," and they are calling for government restrictions. Compounding the problem is the fact that alfalfa is particularly water-intensive to grow which is expected to drain more resources from the already drought-stricken southwestern U.S. Saudi Arabia's government has announced limitations on cultivating such crops domestically because of limited water. That said, the country's dairy sector is only expected to grow due to population growth and demographic changes. Related: See how farms have been affected by drought along the Colorado River:
-
Some US farmers forced to sell produce at a lossSome US farmers are being forced to sell their crops at a loss Karl Plume and P.J. Huffstutter, Reuters Jan. 22, 2016, 10:27 PM 1,970 Wheat Field Harvest FarmingREUTERS/Max Rossi CHICAGO (Reuters) - Facing mounting bills and nervous creditors, U.S. farmers are beginning to sell off their crop stockpile - sometimes at a loss - and easing a months-long logjam prompted by the lowest grains prices in at least five years. Farmers now looking for cash to pay off debts and buy seeds for next season have been lured to sell by a four percent rise in corn futures over the past two weeks. That rise came after speculators with huge short positions were caught off guard when the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) cut its corn and soybean harvest views on Jan. 12. Speculators slashed their bearish bets in the CBOT corn market by more than 36,000 contracts in the week ended Jan. 19. They also cut net short holdings by nearly 28,000 contracts in soybeans, according to data released by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on Friday. In the eastern Corn Belt, tiny bumps in grain basis bids - the differential with futures that is paid for cash deliveries - have helped generate some selling interest in recent days. Archer Daniels Midland has lifted its spot corn basis bid at its massive Decatur, Illinois, processing plant by 6 cents per bushel over the past two weeks. Given gains in the futures market, cash prices there are up more than 20 cents a bushel. But the amount of grain that moved into the supply chain is thought to be more of a trickle than a tsunami, say traders. And futures prices have not roared back, they say, in large part because of persistent concerns among grain traders over massive global stocks and tepid demand growth. Soybean prices, up about 1 percent over the last two weeks, are facing headwinds as the harvest of another bumper South American crop ramps up. Wheat Field Harvest FarmingREUTERS/Fabrizio Bensch Benchmark March futures for corn on the Chicago Board of Trade ended on Friday at $3.70-1/4 per bushel while March soybeans closed at $8.76-1/2 a bushel. How much of the near-historic volumes of corn and soybeans stored on farms has been sold and moved into the supply chain in recent weeks is not known. Cash prices for these sales are also hard to pin down in a market without screen trading. But traders are beginning to question the assumption that low prices had farmers hoarding as much grain as they thought. "There's still a significant amount of bushels to be sold, but not nearly as many as we had originally thought," said Ted Seifried, chief market strategist at Zaner Ag Hedge. About 61 percent of the country's corn stockpile was held on farm on Dec. 1, the lowest since 2012, USDA data showed. Grain traders had expected that percentage to be closer to 69 or 70 percent. Nevertheless, on-farm soybean stocks were still the second-highest level in more than seven decades, and on-farm corn stocks hit their third highest in nearly a century, USDA data shows. U.S. farmers typically sell off much of their grain between Dec. 1 and March 1 to pay operational loans, fertilizer and seed purchases, taxes and land rent bills. But selling slowed when grain prices sharply dropped in the fourth quarter of 2015. But now prices still remain lower. Ohio farmer Keith Truckor sold some grain late last year at just over $4, but is holding back some of his crop, hoping for a rally. "Corn prices need to hit $4 for us to make a profit," said Truckor, 53, who is storing the rest of the corn on his 1,400 acre family farm in northwest Ohio. (Additional reporting by Justin Madden; Editing by Jo Winterbottom, Bernard Orr) Read the original article on Reuters. Copyright 2016. Follow Reuters on Twitter.
-
Agricultural surplus is bad news for American agriculture~ ~ The Crop Surplus Is Bad News for America's Farms The American farm boom is all but over. Farmland values are down from all-time highs. Global surpluses left corn and soybean prices below the cost of production. And the amount of agricultural debt relative to income ballooned to the highest in three decades, just as the Federal Reserve has begun raising interest rates for the first time since 2006. è While many growers remain profitable, the global commodity slump is increasing pressure on a Midwest economy that was largely shielded from the worst of the financial crisis by high crop prices and land values. Last year, farm income was the lowest since 2002. This year's agriculture-trade surplus in the U.S. -- the world's top exporter -- will be the smallest in a decade. At the same time, sales are dropping for the likes of tractor-maker Deere & Co. and seed supplier Monsanto Co. “The farm economy had a near-perfect five or six years," built upon record U.S. demand for corn-based ethanol in fuel, surging food purchases in Asia and near-zero-percent interest rates that helped spur land investment, said Brent Gloy, an agricultural economist at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. With the oil slump eroding ethanol margins and a strong dollar eroding U.S. exports, the Fed's decision last month to start raising borrowing costs “means there's nothing left of the boom," Gloy said. With the prices of corn and soybeans, the nation's biggest crops, down by more than half from records in 2012, net farm income probably tumbled in 2015 to a 13-year low of $55.9 billion, down 55 percent from a record $123.3 billion in 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates. Debt is 6.6 times larger than net income, up from 3.8 a year earlier, and the ratio is the highest since 1984, when farm foreclosures were the highest since the Great Depression, government data show. The U.S. crop glut may be worsening. Inventories of corn, wheat and soybeans on Dec. 1 were bigger than a year earlier, the USDA said in a report Tuesday, as farmers kept their bins full waiting for a better price. A separate government report forecast record global wheat production in the current marketing year. Exports Falter As surpluses keep prices low, demand for American farm exports is dropping as other countries boost output and the strong dollar makes competing supplies from Brazil to Ukraine cheaper for importers. With U.S. exports at a six-year low and imports up, the nation's trade balance in agriculture will slump to $9.5 billion in 2016, down 78 percent from a record $43.1 billion in 2014, when shipments were the biggest ever, USDA data show. Compounding the strain is higher borrowing costs, which makes it more difficult for farmers to finance operations or purchase land and equipment. The Fed raised interest rates by a 0.25 percentage point last month -- ending more than seven years at near zero percent -- and signaled its intent for further increases this year. Cheap loans and high crop prices helped fuel a U.S. farmland boom, with values doubling over a decade. è “Low rates pushed ag markets and farmland beyond true value," said Jim Farrell, president of Omaha, Nebraska-based Farmers National Co., which manages more than 5,000 farms and ranches in 24 states. “Rising interest rates are another headwind” that could reduce farmland values by as much as 15 percent within two years, he said. Rural bankers are getting more bearish, according to the Rural Mainstreet Indexcreated by Creighton University from a survey that measures attitudes of lenders across 10 Midwestern states. Its gauge of farm and ranch land prices sank to 28.8 in December, the 25th straight month below a growth-neutral rating of 50. Dim Outlook “Land prices are down very little relative to the drop in farm income," said Dan Kowalski, director of research at CoBank, a cooperative member of the U.S. Farm Credit System in Greenwood Village, Colorado. “As the liquidity situation for farmers changes, buying farmland will become a more difficult decision ." As tight as things are becoming, farmers probably won't see the same kind of economic crisis they did in the 1980s, said Paul Pittman, chief executive officer of Westminster, Colorado-based Farmland Partners Inc., a real-estate fund that on Nov. 30 owned or had under contract 105,000 acres (42,000 hectares) across the U.S. Most are in better shape financially after years of high prices, and the interest-rate increases so far are relatively small, he said. 'Tough Times '' http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/wheat-futures-rise-as-u-s-farmers-reduce-winter-wheat-sowing For Anthony Bush, who farms more than 1,400 acres of corn, soybeans and wheat outside Mount Gilead, Ohio, higher interest rates are just another sign that the boom is over. “I look for a period of pretty tough times," said Bush, 45.“ I need to borrow money in the spring to cover the costs I pay off in the fall, so when you're buying your seeds, your fertilizer, you have to take on your debt all at once ." But even with those increased costs, he expects farming to remain viable. “If you want to stick in this business, you have to be an eternal optimist," Bush said. “We may not have cheap interest rates. But we'll still have to eat ." (Corrects spelling on Anthony
-
Does EU agricultural policy fit its purpose?~~Is EU's agriculture policy 'fit for purpose '? Greening, investment in rural development and policy simplification were the promises on which the EU failed to deliver. Photo: Marek Jobda By Trees Robijns, Fri, 08/01/2016 - 14:37 2015 was a year of great promise and high hopes from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Unfortunately, the EU did not deliver on most of them: greening implementation was stuck in legal loopholes, investment in rural development was lacking, the simplification of the CAP failed to focus on major issues with the policy, and farmers have been rioting as usual. So what does all of this mean for 2016? Our expectations are low in general: the focus will be on further simplification with a special evaluation of greening measures. Commissioner Hogan has announced a public consultation on greening - hopefully this will address both the bureaucratic angle and the actual environmental delivery of the measures. The BirdLife partnership together with the EEB membership is preparing a set of factsheets on Rural Development Plans, evaluating their worth for biodiversity and nature. These will be officially presented at a conference in February. The current system of integrating environmental protection into other funds has also not worked well. Should we instead have a separate fund for nature managed by environment ministries, or should we overhaul the current system, with co-management of funds and better integration of environmental objectives into other policies? The jury is still out on this. 2016 will also be important for tackling the relationship between agriculture and climate change (farming contributes 10% of total EU emissions). Some important pieces of legislation should be published on Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry that could change the direction of the discourse from the one currently being dominated by the trade and production boosting agenda of many Member States to one where agriculture needs to limit its footprint and maybe also production in certain sectors. However, getting all the countries to agree to the same rules won't happen without a fight. Concepts of 'climate smart' agriculture should be handled with care. For biofuels, 2015 marked the end of a long awaited discussion on biofuel production and their displacement of agriculture production (so called ILUC, or indirect land use change). With the introduction of a cap on their subsidies, the EU showed that first generation biofuels produced on agricultural land are no longer a part of the future. In the mix of policies being introduced next year, a big debate will be on biofuels and their sustainability, which will tie into the discussion on other forms of bioenergy, be it from wood or annual agricultural crops; all will need to be re-evaluated equally. Some Member States are also already pre-empting this discussion by setting targets nationally until 2030, while others are still considering how to cap biofuels at a lower level than set at the EU level. As the EU presidency moves from Luxembourg to the Netherlands, we need a good, open and honest debate with all stakeholders about the CAP based on five points so often touted by the fitness check: its effectiveness, efficiency, coherence with other EU policies, relevance and the added value of an EU-wide policy against national ones. Essentially, the EU would finally have to ask itself (and answer) the question: Is the CAP fit for purpose? http://www.birdlife.org/worldwide/news/eus-agriculture-policy-fit-purpose
-
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Decline of European Agriculture~~The TIPP and the Downfall of European Agriculture by Dario Sarmadi A new study has concluded that the Trans Atlantic Trade & Investment Agreement (TTIP) threatens to completely change the way small and medium sized farms operate, through the use of more genetic engineering and more hormone-treated meat. Europe's farmers are in the midst of a crisis, with milk prices at rock-bottom, continuing EU sanctions against Russia and smallholders going under. But the knockout punch could still be yet to come, with the looming behemoth of TTIP, the planned free trade agreement between the EU and USA, on the horizon. If, as intended by negotiators on both sides of the Atlantic, standards in the agri-food industry are harmonised between the two trading blocs, then entire sectors of European agriculture could be endangered. “No one can produce products like cereal as cheaply as the USA”, said a study on TTIP carried out by UnternehmensGrün, an association formed around green economy interests, seen by EurActiv before its publication. The group will formally launch the report tomorrow. The study referenced the use of genetic engineering on a local level, weaker thresholds and larger production areas. “European farmers are, economically speaking, outgunned … it would mean the almost automatic downfall of parts of the agricultural sector ." Currently, the trade in agricultural product and foodstuff exports to the USA total around €15 billion, with imports around the €8 billion mark. But, according to the study, this could all change if and when TTIP is finally negotiated and duties and non-tariff barriers are removed, with US companies gaining near-unlimited access to the European market. The study relied on its own analysis and surveys of small and medium agriculturists to produce its findings. Its conclusion: “TTIP, in its proposed form, strengthens the position of the large agri-food companies, which already overcome trade barriers through the location of their production centres ." The very existence of 99% of small and middle-sized concerns has been ignored by the European Commission, argued the authors of the report. Competitive advantage for USA US farms find themselves in such a superior position not just due to their larger size, but also because of the lower consumer and production standards under which they are obligated to operate, according to the same study. A prime example is genetic engineering. In Europe, all food that contains greater than 0.9% GMO content must be labelled, whereas in the USA and Canada, no such requirement exists. The USA has a markedly different attitude towards GMOs, where they are considered to be safe and are therefore produced at a cheaper cost. Due to this price advantage, European farmers would be forced to at least feed their livestock with GMO products, the end products of which are not governed by the same labelling requirement. Conventional, GMO-free farmers could be squeezed out of the market, warned the study. Furthermore, the German government has legislation in the pipeline that would indeed obligate producers to label products such as milk, meat and eggs if they were produced using GMO feed. TTIP would complicate the adoption of such a law. Hormones, pesticides and chlorine The study also referred to the seemingly insurmountable differences between the US and EU agricultural markets, which on the other side of the pond is primarily aimed towards high-performance, exports and mass production, rather than our own focus on smaller-scale production for the domestic market. The EU ban on growth hormones precludes the majority of US meat from sale in the bloc. This is particularly intended to protect local, conventional farming. The US meat industry has long called upon Washington to eliminate this barrier within the TTIP negotiations. The issue of pesticides is another area in which US farmers can gain an advantage. Legal pesticide-residue levels are around 5,000% higher in the USA than in the EU. A different philosophy on food security is partly responsible for these divergent attitudes towards pesticide use. The European Commission approached the idea of increasing pesticide residue levels in draft proposals drawn up in 2015. Then there is the matter of chlorine chicken, which has become a politically-charged buzzword and which highlights the fundamental differences between the two parties' standards and requirements. While European producers must safeguard the security and hygiene of products through the entire food chain, US producers use chemicals such as chlorine dioxide at the end of the production chain to kill pathogens in poultry meat; a measure that the study says is both cost-effective and hazardous. Regional agriculture under threat The study picked out cereals, meat and milk as the main sectors in which European agriculture could be disadvantaged. A study about TTIP, produced by the Hungarian government and kept under wraps for around a year, concluded that regional farmers are set to be put under immense pressure by the FTA. Hungarian slaughterhouses that deal in poultry, cattle and pork products are threatened, as well as corn farmers and wine producers. “The same goes for the major markets like Germany and Austria”, Katharina Reuter, head of UnternehmensGrün and co-author of the TTIP study, told EurActiv Germany. She called for the agricultural and food sectors to be taken off the TTIP negotiating table. But Peter Pascher, of the German Farmers' Association (DBV), in contrast, does not understand TTIP's detractors. “TTIP gives European producers the opportunity to access the US market, we hope for strong growth and momentum in the industry”, he told EurActiv Germany in an interview. Everything that is associated with so-called 'Old Europe', French cheese, German sausages, Italian pasta etc., has value on the Trans-Atlantic market. “That means: the more refined a product is, the better their sales prospects will be on the US market”, Pascher added. The DBV represents around 280,000 members, more than 90% of German farmers. Peter Pascher is responsible for agricultural structure and regional policy. He wants to protect “sensitive” areas of European agriculture, in a similar vein to the provisions of the already-negotiated FTA between the EU and Canada, CETA. “We are calling for a limit on the import quotas of beef, pork and poultry, mainly due to the lower production costs enjoyed by the USA”, Pascher said. He added that he does not believe that European regional and sustainable production will perish either. “Regional production will not go out the window with TTIP, on the contrary: regional production is on the up in Germany. Also, US consumers appreciate products that have specific European characteristics”, he said. Pascher concluded by adding his voice to the numerous calls that geographical indications and protection is included within the final agreement. Farmers' association 'unrepresentative' Katharina Reuter expressed her doubts that the DBV had consulted its members extensively on the issue of TTIP in forming its opinions: “In many areas, such as the dairy sector, it appears that the association has long since stopped representing its members' interests. Producing for the global market, trade as a miracle cure-all - these are not in the interest of small and medium-sized producers ." The DBV has, however, an influential ally: the German government. The Federal Ministry for Food and Agriculture has been constant in its assurances that TTIP will not lower any standards in the agri-food industry. At the same time it has emphasised that Europe should take the opportunity that TTIP offers. Where market access is currently halted or hamstrung by red tape, exemption from duties and harmonisation of requirements could be engines for growth. The ministry reiterated on its website that “In parallel with the reduction in tariffs and other trade barriers, high German and European standards are to be maintained ." EU to lose big time So far, there are not a lot of studies that concern themselves with the potential effects of TTIP on agriculture. However, the large majority of the ones that have been produced predict nothing but a gloomy future for Europe's farmers. A study carried out by the United States Department of Agriculture, which considered three different scenarios, concluded that American farmers are set to win out in the end. Another study carried out in 2014 on behalf of the European Parliament came to a similar conclusion: agricultural value in the EU would fall by 0.5% as a result of TTIP and would increase by 0.4% across the Atlantic. However, Peter Pascher was quick to point out that all the studies have been produced before TTIP has been negotiated or finalised, meaning the results have been based on a number of assumptions and urged its critics to wait. This article was originally published by Euractiv.com. It is translated from the original German by Samuel Morgan. Dario Sarmadi is a journalist with EurActiv.com. See more articles by this author on Euractiv.
-
Minister: EU membership very important for Sogla agriculture~ ~ Minister: EU membership crucial for Scottish farming By Reuters Media on Jan 26, 2016 at 10:33 a.m. LONDON - Scotland's farming is heavily reliant on subsidies and staying in the European Union is "absolutely crucial", the country's rural affairs minister Richard Lochhead said on Tuesday. Scottish government data, issued on Tuesday, showed that EU subsidies accounted for 74 percent of Total Income from Farming (TIFF) in 2015. "These figures highlight the importance of EU funding to Scottish agriculture," Lochhead said in a press release, adding that Europe was also the number one destination for Scotland's food and drink exports. Britain is seeking to renegotiate its relationship with the EU and then planning to hold a referendum on continued membership. Agriculture was worth an estimated 667 million pounds ($955.54 million) to the Scottish economy in 2015, down 15 percent from the prior year. Subsidies accounted for 490 million pounds of the total. The decline partly reflected a 23 percent dip in average milk prices in 2015. Scottish dairy producers benefited from EU emergency aid last year. "Farmers would prefer to farm without the financial support they receive from the EU, but the reality is that most farms don't make enough from the market for this to be possible," said Andrew McCormick, the vice president NFU Scotland, which represents farmers, crofters and growers. McCormick said, however, there were many questions that needed to be answered before farmers could make an informed vote in the referendum, including what the trading arrangements would be with the rest of Europe if Britain opts to leave. "Access to markets is vital and clarity is required on what this would look like should the vote be to leave the European Union," he said. ($1=0.6980 pounds), http://www.agweek.com/news/nation-and-world/3933031-minister-eu-membership-crucial-scottish-farming
-
EU to sign new agricultural agreement with Morocco~ ~ Algeria: EU to Present a New Version of Agricultural Agreement With Morocco Tagged: Food and Agriculture •Algeria • London - The European Union (EU) is considering a revision of the controversial agricultural agreement with Morocco by presenting a new version in accordance with the international law which emphasizes the need for consultation and agreement of the Saharawi people for all activities relating to the exploitation of its natural resources, reports the London newspaper Al Quds Al-Arabi. The European Commission which has decided to appeal the decision of the Court of Justice (ECJ) which annulled on December 10th, the EU-Morocco agricultural agreement signed in 2012, is convinced that it will not win the case, said Al-Quds Al Arabi newspaper, citing "well-informed" sources. The agriculture agreement concluded in 2012 between Morocco and the EU was in fact cancelled by a decision of the European Court of Justice in December, following a complaint filed by the Polisario Front. The ECJ stated in its ruling released last December 10 that the EU Council has failed in its duty to check whether the exploitation of Western Sahara's natural resources is beneficial or not to the population of this territory. Now, the European Commission wants to propose a new version of the agricultural agreement, similar to the fisheries agreement that set up a monitoring mechanism to verify that the agreement benefits the people of Western Sahara. But, the Polisario Front has already brought an action before the EU court for the cancellation of this fisheries agreement between the EU and the Morocco. \http://allafrica.com/stories/201601151425.html