Challenge of Plant and Agriculutral Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century

ENVIRONMENTAL INTELLIGENCE UNIT

Biotechnology Intelligence Unit Environmental Intelligence Unit Medical Intelligence Unit Molecular Biology Intelligence Unit Neuroscience Intelligence Unit Tissue Engineering Intelligence Unit The chapters in this book, as well as the chapters of all of the five Intelligence Unit series, are available at our website.

Kazuo Watanabe • Atsushi Komamine

Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century

EIU

Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century

• The chapters comprise a comprehensive bioscience and biomedical Report database. • Reports (chapters) from this book and all Intelligence Unit books are updated annually so information at the website is current. • Many Reports are linked to brief, animated depictions of molecular mechanisms described in the text. These so-called “Biotoons” can be viewed at the site. • Access to Eurekah.com is unrestricted and free of charge.

WATANABE • KOMAMINE

INTELLIGENCE UNITS

ENVIRONMENTAL INTELLIGENCE UNIT

The Twelfth Toyota Conference

ENVIRONMENTAL INTELLIGENCE UNIT

Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century Kazuo Watanabe Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science and Technology Kinki University Uchita-Cho, Naga-gun Wakayama, Japan and

Atsushi Komamine Research Institute of Evolutionary Biology Kamiyoga, Setagaya Tokyo, Japan

LANDES BIOSCIENCE GEORGETOWN, TEXAS U.S.A.

EUREKAH.COM AUSTIN, TEXAS U.S.A.

Environmental Intelligence Unit

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 12TH TOYOTA CONFERENCE: CHALLENGE OF PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES TO THE CRISIS OF BIOSPHERE ON THE EARTH IN THE 21ST CENTURY EUREKAH.COM/LANDES BIOSCIENCE designed by KimMitchell Copyright ©2000 EUREKAH.COM All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed in the U.S.A. Please address all inquiries to the Publishers: Eurekah.com/Landes Bioscience, 810 South Church Street, Georgetown, Texas, U.S.A. 78626 Phone: 512/ 863 7762; FAX: 512/ 863 0081

ISBN: 1-58706-015-9

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Toyota Conference (12th : 1998 : Shizuoka, Japan) Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference : Challenge of plant and agricultural sciences to the crisis of biosphere on the earth in the 21st century / Kazuo Watanabe, Atsushi Komamine p. cm. -- (Environmental intelligence unit) ISBN 1-58706-015-9 (alk. paper) 1. Crops -- Genetic engineering Congresses. 2. Plant biotechnology Congresses. I, Watanabe, Kazuo N. II. Komamine, Atsushi, 1929-. III. Title. IV. Title: Proceedings of plant and agricultural sciences to the crisis of biosphere on the earth in the 21st century. VI. Series SB123.57.T69 1998 631.5'233--dc21 99-34880 CIP

CONTENTS Section I Introduction to the Challenge: Guide for the Book .......................................... 1 A. Komamine, T. Fujimura and K. N. Watanabe

Section II Introduction—Prospects of Supply and Demand for Food: Research Strategies for the Coming Century ..................................................... 3 H. Ikehashi 1. Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research .......................................................................... 5 H. Tsujii Introduction ............................................................................................. 5 Factors Determining Food Shortage in the Early 21st Century ............ 7 Conclusion ............................................................................................. 23 2. Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century ............. 29 H. Zhai Food Demand Analysis ......................................................................... 29 Grain Supply Potential .......................................................................... 32 Countermeasures Toward Making up the Balance Between Grain Supply and Demand ............................................................... 34 3. Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future ........................ 39 M. Rai and A.K. Bawa Indian Scenario ...................................................................................... 39 National Agricultural Research System ................................................ 40 Challenges Ahead .................................................................................. 41 Opportunities and Strategies ................................................................ 42 Agricultural Extension .......................................................................... 48 Programs and Policies ........................................................................... 48 Human Resource Development ........................................................... 49 Conclusion ............................................................................................. 50 4. Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience ........................................................................... 51 D. Gollin Research Priority Setting: Theories and Models .................................. 52 Basic Principles ...................................................................................... 52 Congruence Rules .................................................................................. 53 Supply-Driven Resource Allocation ..................................................... 53 Economic Approaches to Priority Setting ............................................ 53 From Theory to Practice: A Case Study of the Rockefeller Foundation’s Decision to Prioritize Rice Biotechnology ................ 55

Priority-Setting and the Rockefeller Investments ................................ 56 Some Shortcomings of Existing Methods and Lessons for the Future ..................................................................................... 58 Managing a Portfolio of Research ........................................................ 58 Pursuing Comparative Advantage ........................................................ 58 Taking Advantage of Research Spillovers ............................................. 59 Realizing the Benefits of Delay .............................................................. 59 Conclusion ............................................................................................. 59 5. Sustainable Agriculture and Strategies in Rice Breeding ...................... 63 H. Ikehashi Rice Cultivation as a Model for Sustainable Agriculture .................... 63 Green Revolution .................................................................................. 64 Problems and Tasks in the Post Green Revolution Era ....................... 65 Strategies for Enhanced Yield Level ...................................................... 65 Application of Molecular Biology to Rice Breeding ............................ 67

Section III Introduction: The Present Situation of Biological Production and the Approach to the Sustainable Production in Arid Lands ................... 71 Satoshi Matsumoto 6. Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production ................................................. 73 J.F. Reynolds, R.J. Fernández and P.R. Kemp Introduction ........................................................................................... 73 Drylands and Global Change ................................................................ 73 Climate Variability ................................................................................ 76 Case Study .............................................................................................. 78 Integrating Ecological and Social Science Issues .................................. 82 Conclusion ............................................................................................. 85 7. Sustainable Water Management and Agriculture ................................. 87 W. Kinzelbach, D. McLaughlin and H. Kunstmann Introduction .......................................................................................... 87 The Global Water Situation ................................................................. 87 Important Water Resource Issues ......................................................... 89 Conclusions ........................................................................................... 96 8. Crop and Resource Management for Improved Productivity in Dryland Farming Systems .................................................................. 99 O. Ito and M. Kondo Introduction ........................................................................................... 99 Agriculture in the Semi-Arid Tropics ................................................. 100 Intercropping as One Cropping Option ............................................ 100

Interaction Among Water, Nutrients and Roots ............................... 102 Crop and Resource Management in Low Input Farming Systems ............................................................................................. 104 9. Sustainable Irrigated Agriculture in Arid Lands: Kazakstan Case Study ........................................................................... 107 T. Yano and S. Wang Introduction ......................................................................................... 107 Present Situation of Salt Accumulation in the Study Area ................ 107 Reclamation of Salt-Affected Soils ...................................................... 110 Permeability of Salt-Affected Soils ..................................................... 111 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 112 10. Distribution and Amelioration of Alkali Soils in Northeast China ... 113 S. Matsumoto Introduction ......................................................................................... 113 Alkali Soil Formation, Characterization and Its Distribution in China ........................................................................................... 114 Reclamation of Alkali Soils ................................................................. 115 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 119

Section IV Introduction:Conservation and Contribution of Plant Genetic Resources ........................................................................................... 123 Kazuo N. Watanabe 11. Integrated Plant Genetic Resources Management Systems for Sustainable Agriculture ................................................................... 125 M. Iwanaga, P. Eyzaguirre and J. Thompson Introduction ......................................................................................... 125 Biodiversity: A Foundation for Food Security, Poverty Elimination and Environmental Protection .................................. 125 Challenges of Agricultural Systems .................................................... 127 Plant Genetic Resources Systems View: Avenues for Meeting Agricultural Challenges ................................................................... 129 System View and Institutional Framework ........................................ 131 Conclusions ......................................................................................... 136 12. Genebank Management of Crop Genetic Resources ........................... 139 M.Nakagahra, S. Miyazaki and D.A. Vaughan Introduction ......................................................................................... 139 Features of Genebank Management in Japan .................................... 140 Success Stories in Management of Crop Genetic Resources ............. 145 Evolving Issues Related to the Management of Crop Genetic Resources ........................................................................... 148

13. Biodiversity Conservation Ex Situ and In Situ Conservation: A Case in Turkey ................................................................................... 151 A. Tan Introduction ......................................................................................... 151 Biodiversity Conservation Activities in Turkey ................................. 153 14. Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture: Status and Future Prospects ................................................................. 159 K.V. Raman and K.N. Watanabe Contribution and Value of PGRFA .................................................... 159 Utilization of PGRFA Including Genetic Vulnerability and Genetic Erosion ........................................................................ 161 Genetic Improvement and Use of Biotechnology Applications in PGRFA ......................................................................................... 162 Potato Late Blight as a Case Study ...................................................... 164 Conclusions ......................................................................................... 167

Section V Introduction: Improvements of Plant Function with Conventional Methods and Biotechnology ................................................................. 171 T. Fujimura 15. Engineering Carbohydrate Metabolism in Transgenic Plants ........... 173 A.G. Heyer Introduction ......................................................................................... 173 Source Capacity ................................................................................... 173 Sink Capacity ....................................................................................... 174 Transport Processes ............................................................................. 175 Altering Carbohydrate Composition: Starch ..................................... 176 Altering Carbohydrate Composition: Fructan ................................... 177 16. Super-RuBisCO for Improving Photosynthesis .................................. 183 A. Yokota, S. Okada, C. Miyake, H. Sugawara, T. Inoue and Y. Kai Introduction ......................................................................................... 183 Why is RuBisCO the Target? ............................................................... 183 Is Plant RuBisCO the Most Evolved Enzyme? ................................... 184 Structural Analysis ............................................................................... 185 Physiological Implications .................................................................. 189 17. Molecular Physiology of Nitrogen Recycling in Rice Plants .............. 191 T. Yamaya, S. Kojima, M. Obara, T. Hayakawa and T. Sato Introduction ......................................................................................... 191

Physiology and Biochemistry of Nitrogen Recycling in Rice Plants ................................................................................... 192 Export of Glutamine from Senescing Leaves ..................................... 192 Re-Utilization of the Transported Glutamine in Developing Organs .............................................................................................. 194 Primary Assimilation of Ammonium Ions in Rice Roots ................. 194 Variation in the Amounts of GS1 and NADH-GOGAT Protein in Rice Plants ...................................................................... 196 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 196 18. Agrobacterium-Mediated Cereal Transformation: Low Glutelin Rice Development ................................................................................. 199 T. Kubo, Y. Hiei, Y. Ishida, Y. Maruta, J. Ueki, N. Nitta and T. Komari Introduction ......................................................................................... 199 Agrobacterium-Mediated Genetic Transformation of Cereals .......................................................................................... 199 Development of Low Glutelin Rice .................................................... 201

Section VI Introduction: Environmental Adaptation and Generation of Resistant Plants ........................................................................................... 205 H. Uchimiya 19. Stress Tolerance in Crops—How Many and Which Genes? ............... 207 H.J. Bohnert, H.-X. Li and B. Shen Introduction ......................................................................................... 207 Osmotic Adjustment ........................................................................... 208 Functions of Compatible Solutes ........................................................ 210 Radical Oxygen Species are Unavoidable and Increase During Stress Episodes .................................................................... 210 Manipulation of Reducing Power ...................................................... 212 Controlled Ion and Water Uptake ...................................................... 212 How Many and Which Genes for Stress Tolerance? ......................... 216 20. Improving Drought, Salt and Freezing Stress Tolerance in Transgenic Plants .............................................................................. 223 K. Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, M. Kasuga, Q. Liu, Y. Sakuma, H. Abe, S. Miura and K. Shinozaki Introduction ......................................................................................... 223 Function of Water Stress-Inducible Genes ........................................ 224 Expression of Dehydration-Induced Genes in Response to Envitonmental Stresses and ABA ............................................... 224

Identification of Cis-Acting Element, DRE, Involved in Drought Responsive Expression .................................................................... 224 Important Roles of the DRE Binding Proteins During Drought and Cold Stresses ............................................................................. 225 Analysis of the In Vivo Roles of DREB1A and DREB2A by Using Transgenic Plants ............................................................. 227 Drought, Salt and Freezing Stress Tolerance in Transgenic Plants ................................................................................................ 227 21. Characterization of Salt Inducible Genes from Barley Plants ............ 231 T. Takabe, T. Nakamura, Y. Muramoto and S. Kishitani Introduction ......................................................................................... 231 Nuclease 12 .......................................................................................... 231 ATP-Dependent RNA Helicase .......................................................... 232 Betaine Aldehyde Dehydrogenase ...................................................... 233 Production of Transgenic Plants with Increased Salt Tolerance ......................................................................................... 234 22. Transgenic Rice: Development and Products for Environmentally Friendly Sustainable Agriculture ...................... 237 S.K. Datta Introduction ......................................................................................... 237 Case Study of Transgenic Rice ............................................................ 237 Environmentally Friendly Selectable Marker Genes ......................... 241 23. Plant Programmed Cell Death and Environmental Constraints—Adenylate Homeostasis and Aerenchyma Formation .............................................................................................. 247 H. Uchimiya, P. K. Samarajeewa and M. Kawai Introduction ......................................................................................... 247 Stimulation of Adenylate Kinase in Rice Seedlings Under Submergence Stress Introduction ....................................... 247 Sodium Chloride Stimulates Adenylate Kinase Level in Seedlings of Salt-Sensitive Rice Varieties ................................... 250 Dissection of Programmed Cell Death in Root Cortex in Rice ....... 251 Effects of NaCl on Cortical Cell Death ............................................... 253

Section VII Introduction: Biotechnology of Woody Plants ............................................. 257 S. Kitani Micropropagation ............................................................................... 257 Genetic Engineering ............................................................................ 257 Molecular Tools ................................................................................... 257

24. Molecular Tools for Capturing the Value of the Tropical Rain Forest ............................................................................................. 259 M. Van Montagu Introduction ......................................................................................... 259 The Model Plant Arabidopsis .............................................................. 259 The Genome Research ......................................................................... 260 Functional Genomics .......................................................................... 260 Biosynthetic Pathways for Secondary Metabolites ............................ 262 Tropical Diversity Studies ................................................................... 262 Forestry Research ................................................................................. 263 Stronger Plants Through Plant Engineering ...................................... 264 The Changing World of Industry ....................................................... 264 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 265 25. Improvement of a New Transformation Method: MAT Vector System .............................................................................. 267 H.Ebinuma Introduction ......................................................................................... 267 Principle of MAT Vectors ................................................................... 267 Transformation Procedure ................................................................. 267 Improvement of MAT Vectors ........................................................... 271 Plasmid Release .................................................................................... 274 26. Formation and Characterization of Transformed Woody Plants Inhibiting Lignin Biosynthesis .................................................. 275 Noriyuki Morohoshi Introduction ......................................................................................... 275 Development of the Technical Requisites to Inhibit Lignin Biosynthesis ..................................................................................... 276 Identification of a Peroxidase Enzyme Involved in Lignification ................................................................................ 276 Properties of the Poplar Controlled by the Peroxidase Gene ................................................................................................. 278 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 278 27. Tolerance of Acacia Mangium to Acid Soil ............................................................................................. 281 S. Kitani, N. Higuchi and I. Yasutani Introduction ......................................................................................... 281 Materials and Methods ........................................................................ 281 Results .................................................................................................. 283 Discussion ............................................................................................ 283 Introduction ......................................................................................... 289

28. Developing a Mass Propagation System for Woody Plants ................ 289 T. Kozai, C. Kubota, S. Zobayed QT Nguyen, F. Afreen-Zobayed and J. Heo Reasons for High Production Costs and Their Reduction by Photoautotrophic Micropropagation........................................ 290 Growth Promotion and Quality Improvement Using Small Culture Vessels ................................................................................ 290 Forced Ventilation Micropropagation Systems and Their Application ...................................................................................... 296 Scaled-Up Micropropagation System by Use of an Aseptic Culture Room25,26 ......................................................................... 300 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 300 29. Advances in Conifer Tree Improvement Through Somatic Embryogenesis ....................................................................................... 303 P. K. Gupta, R. Timmis, K. Timmis, J. Grob, W. Carlson, E. Welty and C. Carpentar Introduction ......................................................................................... 303 Culture Establishment ......................................................................... 303 Embryo Development, Maturation and Germination ...................... 304 Cryopreservation ................................................................................. 304 Field Performance ............................................................................... 305 Large Scale Production ........................................................................ 305 Embryo Sorting .................................................................................... 306 Manufactured Seed .............................................................................. 307 Clonal Field Tests ................................................................................ 307 Conclusion ........................................................................................... 308

EDITORS Kazuo Watanabe, Ph.D. Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science and Technology Kinki University Uchida-Cho, Naga-gun Wakayama, Japan

Atsushi Komamine, Dr. Sc. Research Institute of Evolutionary Biology Kamiyoga, Setagaya Tokyo, Japan

CONTRIBUTORS Hans J. Bohnert, Ph.D. Department of Biochemistry The University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A. Chapter 19

Pramod K. Gupta, Ph.D. Strategic Biology Research Weyerhaeuser Co. Tacoma, Washington, U.S.A. Chapter 29

Swapan K. Datta, Ph.D. Plant Breeding, Genetics and Biochemistry Division The International Rice Research Institute Manila, Philippines Chapter 22

Arnd G. Heyer, Ph.D. Max-Planck-Institute for Molecular Plantphysiology Golm, Germany Chapter 15

Hiroyasu Ebinuma, Dr. Agriculture Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd. Tokyo, Japan Chapter 25 Tatsuhito Fujimura, Dr. Sc. Institute of Agriculture and Forestry University of Tsukuba Ibaraki, Japan Introduction, Section V Introduction, Chapter 11 Douglas Gollin, Ph.D. Department of Economics Williams College Williamstown, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Chapter 4

Hiroshi Ikehashi, Dr. Agriculture Department of Agronomy Graduate School of Agriculture Kyoto, Japan Section II Introduction, Chapter 1 Osamu Ito, Ph.D. Plant Physiology and Agroecology Division International Rice Research Institute Manila, Philippines Chapter 8 Masaru Iwanaga, Ph.D. International Plant Genetic Resources Institute Rome, Italy Chapter 11

Wolfgang Kinzelbach, Dr. Ing. Institut für Hydromechanik and Wasserwirscchaft Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zurich, Switzerland Chapter 7 Shigekzu Kitani, Ms.Sc. Biology Research Lab Toyota Motor Corporation Toyota, Japan Section VII Introduction, Chapter 27 Toyoki Kozai, Ph.D. Department of Bioproduction Science Faculty of Horticulture Chiba University Matsudo, Japan Chapter 28 Tomoaki Kubo, Ph.D. Plant Breeding and Genetics Research Lab Japan Tabacco Inc. Shizuoka, Japan Chapter 18 Satoshi Matsumoto, Dr. Agriculture Graduate School of Agriculture University of Tokyo Tokyo, Japan Section III Introduction, Chapter 10 Noriyuki Morohoshi, Dr. Agriculture Graduate School of Bio-Application and Systems Engineering Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology Fuchu, Japan Chapter 26 Masahiro Nakagahra, Dr. Agriculture National Agriculture Research Center MAFF Tsukuba, Japan Chapter 12

Mangala Rai, Ph.D. Crops Sciences Indian Council of Agricultural Research New Delhi, India Chapter 3 Kandukuri V. Raman, Ph.D. Department of Plant Breeding Cornell University Ithaca, NY, U.S.A. Chapter 14 James F. Reynolds, Ph.D. Department of Botany Duke University Durham, North Carolina, U.S.A. Chapter 6 Tetsuko Takabe Bioscience Research Center Nagoya University Nagoya, Japan Chapter 21 Hirofumi Uchimiya, Ph.D. Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences The University of Tokyo Bunkyo-ku, Japan Section VI Introduction, Chapter 23 Ayfer Tan, Ph.D. Plant Genetic Resources Department Aegean Agricultural Research Institute Menemen Izmir, Turkey Chapter 13 Hiroshi Tsujii, Ph.D. Division of Natural Resource Economics Graduate School of Agriculture Kyoto University Kyoto, Japan Chapter 2

Marc Van Montagu, Ph.D. Flanders Interuniversity Institute for Biotechnology Gent University Gent, Belgium Chapter 24 Kazuko Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, Dr. Sc. Biological Resources Division Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences MAFF Tsukuba, Japan Chapter 20 Tomoyuki Yamaya, Dr. Agriculture Department of Applied Plant Science Tohoku University Sendai, Japan Chapter 17

Tomohisa Yano, Dr. Agriculture Arid Land Research Center Tottori University Tottori, Japan Chapter 9 Akiho Yokota, Dr. Agriculture Department of Molecular Biology Nara Institue of Science and Technology Nara, Japan Chapter 16 Huqu Zhai, Ph.D. Nanjiing Agricultural University Nanjiing, China Chapter 2

FOREWORD For contribution to the growth and advancement of emerging fundamental science and technology, the first Toyota Conference was organized in 1987 in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Toyota Motor Corporation. Since then, this converence has been held every year, dealing with a broad range of subjects in different fields. In this conference, dozens of Japanese and foreign experts spend four days and three nights living together, discussing a common theme. Participants have consistently praised this format, which encourages deeply involved discussions and fresh insights. Each Toyota Conference is planned and executed independently by a third-party organizing committee under the sponsorship of Toyota Motor Corporation, and its secretariat is placed in Toyota Central R&D Labs., Inc. One essential idea for the 21st century is “sustainable development.” I believe that agriculture has a vital role for this development. Many people are optimistic about plants’ ability to cleanse and protect the environment; for example, to help prevent global warming by fixing carbon monoxide with photosynthesis. Furthermore, experts forecast the global population topping 10 billion by the middle of the next century. If all these people are to enjoy meaningful lives, we must find environmentally friendly ways to produce sufficient supplies of safe foods. In other words, the world must adopt the principles and practices of sustainable agriculture. In view of this issue, the theme chosen for the 12th Toyota Conference was the “Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century.” I understand that 56 researchers from 16 countries have considered this theme, conducting lively discussions not only covering scientific subjects like biotechnology but also addressing social and economic issues. Today marks the release of the Toyota Conference record as part of the Environmental Intelligence Unit series published by Landes Bioscience. On this occasion, I would like to thank and congratulate all those who submitted papers, as well as those who helped edit the transcript of the conference proceedings. At the same time, I sincerely hope the proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference will spur biological and scientific researchers around the world to take on this difficult challenge, while fostering greater cross-pollination efforts with other fields of study. And I also hope that these proceedings help mankind motivate to overcome the crises facing the earth’s biosphere in the 21st century. May 1999 Tatsuro Toyoda Chief Executive Officer Toyota Central R&D Labs, Inc.

ORGANIZING COMMITTEE OF THE 12TH TOYOTA CONFERENCE Chairperson:

Vice Chairperson:

Members:

Professor Atsushi Komamine Research Institute of Evolutionary Biology 2-4-28, Kamiyoga, Stegaya, Tokyo 158-0098, Japan Professor Tatsuhito Fujimura Institute of Agriculture and Forestry University of Tsukuba 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba. 305-8571, Japan Professor Hiroshi Ikehashi Department of Agronomy, Graduate School of Agriculture Kyoto University Kitashirakawa Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8502, Japan Mr. Shigekazu Kitani Toyota Motor Corporation 1 Toyota-cho, Toyota 471-8572, Japan

Professor Satoshi Matsumoto Department of Applied Biological Chemistry, Graduate School of Agriculture The University of Tokyo 1-1-1- Yayoi. Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan Professor Hirofumi Uchimiya Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences The University of Tokyo 1-1-1- Yayoi. Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan Professor Kazuo N. Watanabe Faculty of Biology-Oriented Science and Technology Kinki University Uchita-cho, Naga-gun, Wakayama 649-6433, Japan Dr. Yukio Yamada Toyota Central Research and Development Laboratories, Inc. Nagakute, Aichi 480-1192, Japan Auditor:

Secretary General:

Dr. Atsushi Danno Toyota Central Research and Development Laboratories, Inc. Nagakute, Aichi 480-1192, Japan Ms. Sakoto Tanabe Toyota Central Research and Development Laboratories, Inc. Nagakute, Aichi 480-1192, Japan

TOYOTA CONFERENCES SPONSORED BY TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION The 1st TOYOTA Conference Molecular Conformation and Dynamics of Macromolecules in Condensed Systems September 28-October 1, 1987 Aichi, Japan organized by M. Nagasawa The 2nd TOYOTA Conference Organization of Engineering Knowledge for Product Modelling in Computer Integrated Manufacturing October 2-5, 1988 Aichi, Japan organized by T. Sata The 3rd TOYOTA Conference Integrated Micro Motion Systems—Micromachining, Control and Applications October 22-25, 1989 Aichi, Japan organized by F. Harashima The 4th TOYOTA Conference Automation in Biotechnology October 21-24, 1990 Aichi, Japan organized by I. Karube The 5th TOYOTA Conference Nonlinear Optical Materials October 6-9. 1991 Aichi, Japan organized by S. Miyata The 6th TOYOTA Conference Turbulence and Molecular Processes in Combustion October 11-14, 1992 Shizuoka, Japan organized by T. Takeno The 7th TOYOTA Conference Towards the Harnessing of Chaos October 31-November 3, 1993 Shizuoka, Japan organized by M. Yamaguti The 8th TOYOTA Conference Toward Global Planning of Sustainable Use of the Earth—Development of Global Eco-Engineering November 8-11, 1994 Shizuoka, Japan organized by S. Murai

The 9th TOYOTA Conference Brain and Mind—for Better Understanding of the Dynamic Function of Mind and Its Supporting Brain Mechanism December 5-8, 1995 Shizuoka, Japan organized by M. Ito The 10th TOYOTA Conference Atomic, Molecular and Electronic Dynamic Processes on Solid Surfaces November 5-8, 1996 Shizuoka, Japan organized by M. Aono The 11th TOYOTA Conference Nanostructured Materials in Biological and Artificial Systems November 5-8, 1997 Shizuoka, Japan organized by A. Yamagishi The 12th TOYOTA Conference Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century November 25-28, 1998 Shizuoka, Japan organized by A. Komamine The 13th TOYOTA Conference Affective Minds November 29-December 2, 1999 Shizuoka, Japan organized by G. Hatano

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

W

e take this opportunity to thank all participants in the Conference and the following members of the Organizing Committee of the Conference for their helpful cooperation.

Professor Tatsuhito Fujimura University of Tsukuba, Vice Chairperson Professor Hiroshi Ikehashi Kyoto University Mr. Shigekazu Kitani Toyota Motor Coporation Professor Satoshi Matsumoto The University of Tokyo Professor Hirofumi Uchimiya The University of Tokyo Dr. Yukio Yamada Toyota Central R&D Labs., Inc. Dr. Atsushi Danno Toyota Central R&D Labs., Inc.

We express our sincere thanks to Toyota Motor Corporation for sponsoring this Conference and to Ms. Satoko Tanabe, Secretary General, Mr. Kazufumi Morimoto and other members of Secretariat of Toyota Central Research and Development Labs., Inc. for their excellent organization of this fruitful conference and the Proceedings.

PREFACE

T

he most serious problem which we, as human beings, will face in the early 21st century is whether or not we can overcome the crisis in the biosphere that will occur on this planet. There are two reasons why we should anticipate a crisis in the biosphere. One is that we may be unable to achieve a sufficient level of agricultural production to support an explosively increasing population. If so, there will be rampant famines. The other is that all life on this small planet will be jeopardized by destruction of environments caused by pollution, global warming and desertification of lands. Such global disruptions would happen in the course of increased industrial production for raising the standard of living, and excessive use of fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides for promotion of crop production. Plants and agricultural sciences are playing a leading role in the rescue of human beings from the crisis in the biosphere; plant biotechnology may improve crop functions to rapidly promote food production. Plant and agricultural sciences also may produce plants tolerant to environmental stresses such as drought, salinity and coldness, and thus would expand land available for cultivation. It is also possible to produce crops resistant to diseases and arthropods using plant biotechnology, suppressing the excess usage of agricultural chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides. Woody plants will also play important roles in the suppression of CO2 increase in the atmosphere and in producing plant biomass. Plant biotechnology will improve the functions of woody plants and provide seedlings on a large scale to replace the destroyed tropical forests and to preserve environments. The aim of this international conference and the Proceedings was to discuss strategies for global crop production and environmental problems from the aspect of plant and agricultural sciences. With distinguished speakers and delegates from various areas of the world, we intended to discover research priorities toward overcoming the crisis in the biosphere in the coming century. The conference encompassed the following topics: 1. Prospect of supply and demand for food and research strategies for the coming century. 2. Improvements of plant functions with conventional methods and biotechnology. 3. Environmental adaptation and generation of resistant plants. 4. The present situation of biological production and an approach to sustainable production in arid lands. 5. Conservation and contribution of plant genetic resources. 6. Biotechnology of woody plants. It is my great pleasure to publish this book as the Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference, “Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century”, which contains 29 articles on the subjects mentioned. I trust that these proceedings may make a great contribution to rescue human beings from the biosphere crisis of the upcoming 21st century. Atsushi Komamine Chairperson of the Organizing Committee of the 12th Toyota Conference

SECTION I

Introduction to the Challenge: Guide for the Book A. Komamine, T. Fujimura and K. N. Watanabe

T

he most serious problem which we, as human beings, will face in the early 21st century is whether or not we can overcome the crisis in the biosphere that will occur on this planet. There are two reasons why we should anticipate a crisis in the biosphere. One is that we may be unable to achieve a sufficient level of agricultural production to support an explosively increasing population. If so, there will be rampant famines. The other is that all life on this small planet will be jeopardized by destruction of environments caused by pollution, global warming and desertification of lands. Such global disruptions would happen in the course of increased industrial production for raising the standard of living, and excessive use of fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides for promotion of crop production. Plants and agricultural sciences are playing a leading role in the rescue of human beings from the crisis in the biosphere; plant biotechnology may improve crop functions to

rapidly promote food production. Plant and agricultural sciences also may produce plants tolerant to environmental stresses such as drought, salinity and coldness, and thus would expand land available for cultivation. It is also possible to produce crops resistant to diseases and arthropods using plant biotechnology, suppressing the excess usage of agricultural chemicals such as herbicides and pesticides. Woody plants will also play important roles in the suppression of CO2 increase in the atmosphere and in producing plant biomass. Plant biotechnology will improve the functions of woody plants and provide seedlings on a large scale to replace the destroyed tropical forests, to preserve environments and biodiversity. The aim of this book is to discuss strategies for global food production and environmental problems associated with plant and agricultural sciences. With distinguished contributors from various disciplines around the world, we intend to discover research priorities for overcoming the crisis in the biosphere in the coming century.

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

SECTION II INTRODUCTION

Prospects of Supply and Demand for Food: Research Strategies for the Coming Century H. Ikehashi

T

his session is organized as an interface between understanding of social or agricultural situations in the near future and evaluation of research strategies. Two papers from economists, two papers from leaders of national agricultural sciences and an additional one on genetic improvement of rice have been prepared for the discussion. An outlook for food supply and demand is delineated by Professor H. Tsujii, who predicts a substantial deficit of food in view of population growth and other factors. Following this general view, demand for food and agricultural sciences is discussed by one

leading agricultural scienticst from each of China and India, which support the largest and the second largest population, respectively, in the world. Each of the reports emphasizes the need for developing agricultural research. Then, policies to set priorities on each research area are discussed by Dr. D. Gollin, on the bases of past experience and economic principles. Lastly, a short note on the past achievements and expected potential in the genetic improvement of rice is given by the session organizer, who cites a set of available tools in the area.

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

CHAPTER 1

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research H. Tsujii

Introduction

T

he world grain stock/use ratios (ratio of stock volume against use volume) which are the criteria for global availability of grain have shown a tendency to fall since 1987. According to USDA data, except for 1997/98 the world average stock/use ratio for all grain has been below 17% since 1994/95; FAO considers this a dangerously low level. The ratio is at around the lowest level since the war, and is about the same as the level during the food crisis year of 1974. The stock/use ratios for rice and coarse grain have been lower than the average stock ratio since 1989/90, and they have been lower than 17% since 1993/94. The ratio for rice is projected to be at the dangerously low level of little more than 11% in 1998/ 99. These low stock/use ratios are caused by the following long term factors: transformation in agricultural policy during the late eighties and the nineties in both Europe and the United States, the stagnation in agricultural technology improvement, scarcity in and degradation of natural resources such as soil and water, yield constraint due to increased cropping intensity, the world population explosion and the rapid increase in demand for feed grain caused mainly by the high economic growth in Asia, most notably in China. In this paper, effects of these factors on the world food demand and supply in the past and in the near future are investigated and their implications to agricultural research are considered.

Since the last half of the eighties, the agricultural policies in Europe and the United States have changed from protectionist, surplus producing and dumping export policies to policies of reducing price support, subsidizing income on a decoupled basis, curtailment of surpluses, correction of interregional differences and environmental protection. Since these policy changes have been made under the influence of the Uruguay Round agricultural trade negotiations during 19861993 and under the WTO framework, these changes will continue into the 21st century and thus will keep the stock ratios for grain at a low level. The limitation in agricultural technology improvements and in natural resources is clearly represented by the sharp decline in the growth rates in grain yields across the globe during the post-Second World War years. According to the FAO data, the annual growth rate of the yield has declined continuously from about 3% during the 70s to about 1% during 1985 and 1996. Agricultural research expenditures in the international and national research institutions have been decreasing considerably. Yield decline or constraint for grain due to increase in cropping intensity has been reported in many parts of Asia. In order to cope with the exploding population, the grain yield must grow at 3% annually, and this seems very difficult to attain in the near future.

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

6

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Water shortage for agricultural production has been worsening, especially in fast growing Asia. Water demand for nonagricultural purposes has been growing at high speed in many developing countries. Annual stoppage of water flow in the Yellow River in China, which is a good indication of water shortage in northern China, has been rapidly worsening since 1990 in terms of number of days per year and distance of no water flow from the mouth of the river. In 1997 the number of days became more than 250 days and the distance became more than 700 km. In my interview with farmers and researchers in Punjab, India, which is the granary for the whole of the Indian people, in August this year, I heard that the underground water table in most of the Punjab is declining at about 50 cm per year because of too much pumping of water for agricultural production. This is also the case in many other places in India. If the decline continues at this speed, in the near future it will cause a severe reduction in Punjab grain production. Water supply suspension in most cities in India lasts very long hours every day, and rivers near large cities on the Deccan Plateau in India are extremely polluted. Arable land and planted areas of grain have been decreasing the last two decades over the globe. Soil degradation such as erosion, desertification and salinization has been spreading very fast on the globe. A very wide area of forest has been cut and burnt on the globe, and afterwards the area has been used for agricultural purposes, often by extensive soil mining techniques. The world population had increased by 2.5 billion over the past 4 million years. But, it increased by the same amount between 1950 and 1985. This population explosion started around 1960, and it will continue up to the year 2025.1 Annual growth of the world population is more than 70 million for the period of 1955/60 and 2020/25. It is more than 80 million during 1875/80 and 1995/ 2000. Population explosion is an important factor in increased food demand. Fast economic growth, especially in the developing countries, accelerates the increase in the world demand for food because fast income growth of the people causes shifts in the dietary

pattern of the people from more carbohydrate consumption to more animal protein consumption. This leads to a rapid increase in the demand for feed grain. Recent negative economic growth of the developing countries caused by monetary crises creates a temporary reversal in this tendency. Incorporating all the factors affecting world grain demand and supply discussed just above, using a simple projection model and assuming future values of exogenous variables of the model such as population, income, income elasticity and conversion ratio between feed and meat, I have projected the world demand and supply of grain in the year 2020. The projected world deficit of grain in 2020 is 417 million metric tons. The current world total grain trade is about 200 million tons, and the projected deficit is very large. Assuming world price elasticity of demand and supply of grain to be about 0.15, the world trade price of grain will increase by about 50% in the year 2020 compared to the base year of 1993. Lester Brown,2 Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery of Japan, and FAO3 predict a shortage of grain in the early 21st century. International organizations such as IFPRI and the World Bank predict that grain prices will decrease by 10 to 30%, and thus think that we will face a surplus of grain in the world in the early 21st century. Reading the publications projecting the surplus, I think the assumptions for their projection are too optimistic, for instance, no limitation in arable land and water, positive price response in planted areas of grain, and considerable yield growth of grain in the future supported by technological improvements in agricultural production. A green revolution in rice and wheat that is based on intensification in modern inputs such as fertilizers, chemicals, agricultural machinery and irrigation water increased, on one hand, production of these grains in the world to reduce the huge number of world hungry. But, on the other hand, it destroyed natural environment and overused natural resources. Population explosion and income growth in the developing countries will cause an explosion of grain demand. This may lead to severe environmental destruction and exhaustion of natural resources if the demand is met by growth of grain production based

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research on the conventional technology. The severe environmental destruction and exhaustion of natural resources will aggravate the constraints on the world grain supply, as has been shown by a large decline in the growth rate of grain yield during the last decade and a half. These factors will cause severe food shortage in the 21st century, and we will need further increases in food supply. I believe that developing countries should take more measures to slow down the population explosion, and high income countries should slow down economic growth, as was recommended by the Club of Rome in 1972.4 On the other hand, agricultural research that has pursued only yield increase in the past must emphasize technological improvements which not only increase yield but also conserve environment and natural resources at the same time. This means that so called socially optimal yield increase must be sought in agriculture. Researches for crops’ resistance to drought, pests, insects and salinity, etc. should be carried further, since improvement in these resistances will increase yield and at the same time reduce environmental destruction. Socioeconomic and engineering research may yield large supply increases of grain. Restructuring in the distribution of research funds is needed. Individual researchers would find it difficult to influence this restructuring because research is extremely sectionalized. There is a strong need for public research policy to direct and organize agricultural research in this direction.

Factors Determining Food Shortage in the Early 21st Century The world grain stock/use ratios (ratio of stock volume against use volume), which are the criteria for global availability of grain, have shown a tendency to fall since 1987 (Fig. 1.1). According to USDA data, except for 1997/98 the world average stock/use ratio for all grain has been below 17% since 1994/95; this is considered by the FAO to be a dangerously low stock level. The ratio is at around the lowest level since the war, and is about the same as the level during the food crisis year of 1974. The stock/use ratios for rice and coarse grain have been lower than the average stock/use ratio for all grains since 1989/90, and they have

7

been lower than 17% since 1993/94. The ratio for rice is projected to be at the extremely low level of little more than 11% in 1998/99. Grain prices rose during the first half of the nineties. Mr. J. A. Sharples, a specialist on the world grain market In the United States Department of Agriculture, mentioned in the fourth issue of “Choices” magazine in 1995 that the stockpile of major grain exporting countries such as America and Canada, which have played the role of international grain reserve stockholders since the war, has decreased in stock down to only 1.4% of the low world grain stock. The world grain market has been in a serious shortage situation. Although this reduction in grain stock/ use ratios and the increase in grain prices are partly caused by short term factors, such as reduced production of rice and coarse grain in the 1995 crop year in America, surplus investment funds flowing into the grain futures market, caused by a general slowdown in the economies of high income countries, and the increased price of feed grain, caused by an increase in the price of American beef due to mad cow disease in the UK. But, basically the ratios are affected by the long term factors, such as transformation in agricultural policies during the late eighties through to the nineties in both Europe and America, limitation in agricultural technology improvement, increasing scarcity in and degradation of natural resources such as soil and water, yield stagnation due to increase of cropping intensity in many developing countries, the world population explosion and the rapid increase in demand for feed grain, caused mainly by the high economic growth in Asia, most notably in China. In this paper, the effects of these long term factors affecting food supply and demand in the 21st century are first investigated. Then, a projection of world food demand and supply in the early 21st century is made and compared with other projections. Finally, implications of these analyses for agricultural research are presented.

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

stock/use ratios (%)

8

crop year Fig 1.1. Stock/use ratios of world major grains at the end of each crop year. Data source: USDA Database by internet and other USDA publications. est: estimates; proj: projected values.

Declining Trend in the World Grain Stock Ratio and Transformation of Agricultural Policies in Europe and America After the Last Half of the Eighties The EC and the United States have been the major holders of international reserve stock in and exporters of agricultural commodities until recently. Since the last half of the eighties, the agricultural policies of these countries have changed from protectionist, surplus producing and export dumping

policies to policies of reduced protection, curtailment of surpluses, correction of interregional income differences and environmental protection. The EC earlier achieved increased agricultural production, improving its farm size structure and increasing the farm income level through variable import levies of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), export subsidies and domestic price support. Until the seventies, it has been a net importer of grain, at an average of approximately 30 million tons

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research annually. It became self-sufficient in major agricultural products by the first half of the eighties, and in 1984 it became a net exporter. It exported more than 20 million tons annually by the end of the eighties, supported by the export subsidies of CAP. The surplus agricultural products stock in the EC reached enormous levels in the middle of the eighties. 5 The financial burden for the price support and the export subsidies for the excess agricultural products reached an unbearable level. The transformation in the EC agricultural policy started with production control and decreasing the support price in 1982, and it was gradually strengthened afterward. Then it was expanded to environmental maintenance and reduction of interregional differences, whilst ensuring the objectives of improved productivity, stability of supply and farmers’ livelihoods, and sound pricing of CAP, as stated in the Prospects of the Common Agricultural Policy (Green Paper) in 1985. A comprehensive financial reform plan (Delor package) in 1987 was also heading in this direction, and was agreed upon by the European Board of Directors in February 1988. The stabilizer and set aside were introduced in 1988. Finally, a significant agricultural reform in 1992 was agreed upon that has the objectives of large reductions in the support prices complemented by decoupled income subsidy, production control, protection for the medium and small scale farms (e. g., special assistance for agricultural management by youth), the preservation of the environment by the extensification policy (e. g., special action for the disadvantaged areas and environmental preservation areas). Then, these reforms were subsequently merged with the agreements of the Uruguay Round Talks of 1993, whose major characteristics were tariffication of the variable import levies, minimum access import, reduction of export subsidies and decrease of domestic protection. Annual grain export from the United States has continued to increase, reflecting strengthened U.S. agricultural protection and increased agricultural production following the world food crisis in 1974, from 40 million tons in the sixties to a peak of 112.7 million tons in 1981. However, grain exports fell

9

sharply during the first half of eighties, reflecting excessive domestic protectionism, a strong dollar and the rapid increase of grain exports from the EC. The total U.S. grain stock increased significantly, from 50 million tons in the mid-seventies to 200 million tons by 1986. Stocks of other agricultural products also increased.6 The financial expenditure increased rapidly to an excessive level, in order to protect domestic agriculture and to subsidize export of the surplus agricultural products. To cope with these problems, the 1985 Agricultural Law introduced the 50/92 policy in order to reduce planted area of grain for the first time: reductions in the target price and in the farm support price (loan rate); the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), which took a total of 18 million hectares of high erosion risk areas out of production through the grant of an annual average rent of $121/ hectare to the owners; and new subsidy of marketing loans, which decreased the grain export price to the international price level. These measures, except marketing loans, were production restriction policies. These policies were further strengthened in the 1990 Agriculture Law by the expansion of flexible planting and by fixing the program yield. These measures to reduce agricultural protection, surplus and financial expenditures were finally absorbed into the agreements reached in the Uruguay Round agricultural trade agreement in 1993. Thus agricultural policies of the EU and the United States have been greatly transformed from those of the mid-eighties, high protection, surplus accumulation and heavy export subsidy, to those of lower protection, less surplus, less export subsidy and more concern for environment and less advantaged areas. This transformation is clearly reflected in the long term reversal in the trend of net food (excluding fish, hereafter simply called food)7 export quantity between the developed countries and the developing countries of the world since the last half of the eighties, as shown in Figure 1.2. Before 1985, the EU and the United States dominated food exports among all developed countries. During the same period, the EU and the United States had continued to increase their food exports, while the

10

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

developing countries deceased their food import. The developed countries had been net importers of food during the sixties and early seventies, and they become net exporters beginning in 1977; then they increased their net export quantity rapidly during the late seventies. On the other hand, the developing countries changed from being net exporting regions of food to net importers in 1977, as shown in the figure, and their net import quantity increased rapidly. This change in the food trade balance between developed and developing regions is caused by the fall in food prices in developing countries, resulting from dumping exports of surplus agricultural products by the EU and the United States and by the policy of agricultural exploitation in the developing countries themselves. The change is unjust because rich industrialized countries dumped their surplus food to suppress food production and agricultural income in the poor agricultural developing countries, and the developing countries exploited their own poor farmers. This change is also not desirable from the viewpoint of the theory of comparative cost. A reversal of this change started in 1985, as shown in Fig. 1.2. This reversal was brought about by transformation of the agricultural policies of the EU and the US, in order to reduce the excessive financial burden from domestic agricultural protection and export subsidy for huge agricultural surpluses, to preserve the environment and to correct interregional differences in the EU and the United States, as mentioned above.8 Net food exports from developed countries decreased considerably in 1985 and 86, and declined rapidly from the late eighties. The transformation had reduced the grain stock of the EU and the US and thus the world grain stock, and raised world grain prices until recently, as previously described. This transformation will be maintained into the 21st century, since the reductions in agricultural protection in the transformation were integrated into the Uruguay Round trade agreement in 1993 and they will be executed and intensified under the World Trade Organization (WTO) system, which is the international organization for freer trade. Decoupled direct farm payment and liberalization in the kind and

acreage of grain to be planted by American farmers, with abolition of the target price in the 1996 Agricultural Law of the United States, will continue. Further decrease of agricultural protection in the CAP of the EU in the near future, as expressed in the EU’s Agenda 2000, will be executed, since without it agricultural surplus will be accumulated as more middle and east European countries will be included in the EU in the near future. Thus, the EU and the US will not hold large agricultural surplus in the 21st century as they did before. Low global grain stocks, and thus high and unstable grain prices, will be the usual condition in the early 21st century. Thus the world’s 1.1 billion poor and 800 million starving, the majority of which is concentrated in Asia,8 will face the high probability of serious food crises, as they consume grain as their main energy source. 9

Supply Factors Long term supply factors that regulate grain production are natural resources such as land, water and irrigation, and agricultural technology. The constraints on land are becoming severer. The annual growth rates of global cultivated areas for grain have been falling the last three decades, according to the FAO data. The growth rate was 0.33% for the sixties, 0.28% for the seventies and 0.18% in the eighties. The world total arable area has increased from 1.27 billion hectares in 1961 to a peak of 1.44 billion hectares in 1987, and then decreased to 1.38 billion hectares in 1996. As shown in Figure 1.3, the global per capita grain harvested area has continued to fall from 0.24 hectares in 1950 to 0.12 hectares in 1994 as population explosion has continued. The total grain harvested area in the world increased to a peak of 760 million hectares in 1977 as shown in the same figure, but it has since fallen to 690 million hectares in 1994. According to the data from the USDA, the grain harvested area in China had been falling since reaching a postwar peak of 98 million hectares in 1976, and since then has been reduced by 7% to 91 million hectares by 1992. The grain harvested area in India increased by 14 million hectares from 1961 to its peak of 106.6 million in 1983; since then it has fallen by 6.26 million hectares up to 1992.

11

100 mill $ (1966 base year)

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research

Fig 1.2. Net food export. Data source: FAO, Trad yearbooks According to the FAO data for 1989, the total arable area in the world is approximately 1,500 million hectares, about 800 million hectares of which are in developing countries. Also, the total area of pasture and forest in the world is 7,400 million hectares, 42% of which is in developing countries. How much of this pasture and forest area in the developing countries can be turned into arable land for grain production and how much should be conserved as they are is an important issue in coping with the trade-off problem between food and local environment. An FAO report10 estimated that the potentially cultivable area in 92 developing countries, excluding China, was more than 1,800 million hectares, more than twice as much as the current arable area in the developing countries. Most of this potentially cultivable area exists in South America (48%) and sub-Saharan Africa (44%). Other research institutions and researchers came up with similar estimates during the seventies. Can this vast ,potentially cultivable area which is mostly pasture and forested land be brought into agricultural production? In the same report, the FAO estimated that actual cultivated area would increase only by 93 million hectares in these developing countries by 2010. The reasons that actual reclaimed area in Africa and

South America is estimated to be so small are such strong constraints as: 1. The need for linkage among regional food production, farm income and food demand, by which I mean that reclamation of land in a region must be done by the people in the region, in the sense that the increased income of the people in the region by the reclamation and food and agricultural production on the newly reclaimed land should be spent for increased food production, in order for the reclamation to be sustainable and equitable;11 2. Low population density in Africa and South Africa; 3. Environment and other externality (AUTHOR: externally?) related needs, to maintain forest and pasture; and 4. Economic cost for reclamation.12 In developing countries, competition for land use among economic sectors has been intensified during the last few decades. The agricultural sector has been losing ground in this competition. In my recent survey of agricultural resources on the Deccan Plateau in India in September 1998, I found that most

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Harvested area: 10 million hectares

12

Fig 1.3. World total harvested area of cereals and per capita harvested area of cereals. Note: used mainly the FAO data and additionally the USDA data. of the agricultural land along the main roads (about 500 meters on both sides) within about 50 kilometers radius from main cities had probably been purchased by some nonagricultural entities, and agricultural production there was abandoned. According to my own observations during the last twenty years, a large part of one million hectares of good paddy land in the Menam Chao Phraya Delta surrounding Bangkok, Thailand has been converted to factories, houses, roads and vast unused land. Agricultural land conversion has been rapid in China, Thailand, the Philippines, Java, India, etc. These countries do not have effective agricultural land conservation laws or institutions such as the Agricultural Land Law and supporting institutions in Japan.13 This is the main reason that these countries have lost large amounts of good agricultural land.

Soil quality has been deteriorating throughout the world. According to one study, 15% (2 billion hectares) of the globe’s total 13 billion hectares of land has been degraded.14 Of that total, it is said that 16% (300 million hectares) is severely degraded. In the intensive research interviews which I undertook in 1993 and 1994 with about thirty farmers scattered over semi-arid northeastern Thailand, every farmer without exception said that they have experienced a decrease in the yield of rice and cassava within the last twenty years, and blamed a decrease in soil fertility as the cause. Many farmers told me that they did not have enough barnyard manure to apply to their fields, as agricultural machines had replaced draft animals. They told me that they reluctantly had to start applying small amounts of expensive chemical fertilizer to non-irrigated paddy and upland crop fields in order to cope with the soil degradation. In

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research my extensive Indian rural survey in August 1998, I found that drying cow dung cakes on farmhouse walls has decreased considerably from two decades ago. This is probably a reflection of the decrease in the number of animals replaced by machines. If so, organic materials input into Indian soil must have decreased considerably. Although the growth rate of global irrigated area was above 2% annually in the sixties and seventies, it fell to just above 1% in the eighties.15,16 An increasing trend in the irrigated area per person has reversed since 1978, and this measure decreased by 6% from 1978 to 1991. The FAO considers that these are serious limitations in food supply, for more than half of the increase in the global food production resulted from the increase in irrigated area from the mid-sixties to the mid-eighties. Causes for the declining growth rate in the irrigated areas are the post-Second World War declining trend in real world grain prices; increases in the cost of building large scale surface irrigation systems in recent decades; severe deterioration in more than half of the irrigation facilities, and shortage of government funds to build new irrigation systems, in developing countries; underutilization of irrigation systems, increasing water wastage, waterlogging, salinization and environmental destruction by dams; human diseases related to irrigation water; and external benefits derived from irrigation facilities.12,17 Soil salinization is said to occur in 10% of the global irrigated area. In 1998, I heard from an expert on Chinese irrigation systems that most of the Chinese irrigation facilities are severely deteriorated and/or were poorly constructed. But there are not enough government fund and time to build new systems against the exploding population. Thus, the main emphasis in the irrigation policy of the Chinese government is now water saving. In 1995 a high Philippine government officer in charge of irrigation told me in my interview that there is not enough government funding to construct the irrigation facilities planned, so the limited funds must be used for rehabilitating and repairing deteriorated facilities. Agriculture now uses two-thirds of the world’s fresh water supply; there are growing limitations to it. Increasing amounts of fresh water resource are being diverted to indus-

13

trial and household uses as the economy grows. Water shortage is especially severe in northern China and western India. Drying up of the Yellow River is a good indication of water shortage in northern China. The drying up has been worsening every year since 1972. It reached the peak of 700 kilometers from the mouth of the river and of about 300 days in 1996. In my field survey in China in September 1998, I found that irrigation in rural Beijing was often restricted in order to supply water to Beijing City. In that month the Feng River was barely flowing at Taiyuan City in Shanxi Province, but many other rivers in that province have dried up. The underground water table in many places in Shanxi has been declining at the alarming speed of 1 to 2 meters per year during the past 30 years. Stoppage of water supply to houses in big cities was common then. 18 In my Indian survey in August 1998, I gathered that, for about 18 hours of each day in most Indian cities, water is not supplied to the city’s people. Most rivers on the Deccan Plateau were extremely polluted. In the Punjab, the grain bowl of India, the underground water table has been declining by 50 centimeters per year because of excessive pumping due to the free electricity for pumping policy. During my survey in America in the late eighties, I have personally witnessed the fear of long run water shortage in California due to difficulties in building irrigation dams because of environmental protection movements. Exhausting underground water resource by overutilization for various purposes has been occurring in the United States, Northern China and India.19 A rice farmer in Texas told me in the late eighties that he might have to abandon his rice production in 10 years because of the declining underground water table. The needed future increase in the world grain supply must rely on yield increase because of the restrictions on cultivated land, irrigated area and water. The green revolution considerably increased the yield of wheat and rice during two and half decades after 1961, as shown in Table 1.1. The yields of maize, barley and total grain have also increased considerably during the same period. However, the growth rate in the yield of grain has declined rapidly from about 3%

14

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

during 1961-70 to about 1% during 1985-96, as shown in Table 1.1. This long run decline in the growth rate of yield of major grain is a very serious problem in coping with the global population explosion, as constraints on agricultural land, water, and irrigation are becoming more serious, as described above. Yield of grain must grow at an annual growth rate of about 3% in order to cope with population explosion. Although the theoretical or potential yield of new varieties of rice and wheat is clearly greater compared to the ordinary varieties, it is sometimes lower in experimental fields and farmers’ fields.20 Yield of new high-yield rice varieties in the experiments at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), and national rice research centers and at farmers’ fields in Asian countries, have recently been static or reducing.21,22 Various factors can be considered in the postwar decline in the growth rates of, and recent stagnation in, global average grain yield. The fast grain yield increase of the green revolution was made possible mainly by the increased use of fertilizers. The world total fertilizer use started to fall from the late eighties, and it had continued to fall until the midnineties; it is expected to be stabilized during the nineties as a whole. 23 Lester Brown showed that the effectiveness of chemical fertilizers in increasing grain yield has decreased globally, and it was only one-fifth as effective for the period 1984-89 as for 195084.24 The recent yield stagnation may reflect the exhaustion of our accumulated technical knowledge of the grain varieties. The global stock of agricultural technical knowledge, which in the past had been accumulated rapidly by high research investment, and had resulted in the green revolution, has recently been exhausted because of the decline since the eighties in global research investment.21,25 Investment for agricultural/rice research in Asia has also stagnated, along with the rapid decrease in the global price of rice in real terms, since the eighties.26 Another reason for the yield stagnation is the decline of soil fertility due to the expansion of double or triple rice harvests per year in Asia and of double cropping of rice and wheat in the Indo-Gangetic region.22,27 Yields of rice and

wheat have recently seemed to be reaching a plateau and it is feared that they are near the biological limits for rice and wheat. 28,29 Global shortages in water resource for agricultural production and global deterioration of soil fertility have worsened during past decades, as mentioned previously. The significant reduction in growth rates of global grain yield and in global planted area of grain has caused stagnation or reduction in grain supply and continuous reduction in the global grain stock ratio since the mid-eighties. Let us look at the movement of crop yield and production in China, a very significant world agricultural country. According to the FAO data, grain yield has increased substantially after the Second World War, from 1.9 tons per hectare in 1961 to 4.5 tons in 1994. Although grain yield has undoubtedly increased, I thought the yield in 1994 was too high. Surprisingly, it became clear from a recent investigation by the Chinese Science Academy that statistics of cultivated area in China are 40% less than the actual amount. If we recalculate the yield in 1994 with this actual area, it is about 3.2 tons. Even the revised yield is at the same level as the average grain yield in Japan, America and Europe in the same year and is still very high. Water shortage is a serious short term and long term problem in northern China, as described above. The prices of agricultural inputs such as chemical fertilizers have increased rapidly from the early nineties, and will remain at high levels in the future. Agricultural research investment has stagnated.30,31 Consequently, rapid increase in the crop yield, such as in the recent past, will be difficult in the long term. In my recent survey in China, I gathered that superior agricultural land had been rapidly converted to nonagricultural uses because of the extremely rapid economic growth up to the early nineties. The harvested area of grain has been reduced at an annual rate of 0.462% from the postwar peak in 1976 to 1992, as described above. Grain production (including soy beans) in China has increased at an annual rate of 3.42% from 130 million tons in 1950 to a midterm peak of 407 million tons in 1984, and although it reached a historical record of 466 million tons in 1995, it has only increased at a rate of 1.27% annually from 1984 to 1994.

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research

15

Table 1.1. Long run decline in the annual growth rate of the world average yields of major cereals All Cereals

Rice

Wheat

Maize

Barley

61/70

3.02

2.72

3.61

2.17

3.46

70/85

2.41

2.13

2.50

3.12

1.26

85/96

1.20

1.22

1.44

0.90

0.63

Unit: % Data Source: FAO Production Yearbooks via FTP.

The Chinese government raised the buying prices of the grain under the quota system from the farmers by 88% in July 1994, and by 20% in 1996 as well. However, these were still a long way off the free market grain prices. It is reported that many farmers stopped rice and grain production because of the government’s low buying prices.32 What will be the global grain yield in the 21st century? I think it will not grow very fast, for the following reasons. First of all, I think stagnation in the growth of grain yield will continue into the early 21st century. Water shortage and soil degradation will worsen in the early 21st century as population explodes and economy grows. The long run decline in the growth rate of grain yield cannot be reversed in the short run. The type of technology in the near future is also relevant. The green revolution technology with high yielding varieties of grain and high inputs of chemical fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals will basically be used for the grain production of the globe. Higher input of chemical fertilizers will be needed in order to produce more grain to provide for an exploding population. But, marginal productivity of chemical fertilizer will decline. In developing countries, lesser amounts of organic matter will be input, as farmers will keep less animals and more agricultural machines will be used, and more biomass will

be used for cooking and other household uses. This will cause deterioration of soil structure and soil fertility in the long run. As more chemical fertilizers are used, more pests and diseases will attack grain. Then, increasing amounts of chemicals will be used, against which resistance will be formed in pests and diseases. 16 And, more chemicals will be needed which will destroy environment. But I think we cannot expect that an alternative technology which will increase grain yield with much less environmental destruction and soil degradation will be developed and be adopted by world farmers on the global scale by the early 21st century. Thus, the technology in the near future will be one of less yield increase and more environmental destruction. It is more difficult to increase yield of wheat, barley, sorghum and millet than rice and maize under current agricultural technological conditions.16 However, some are of the opinion that the significant differences that exist in the yield of each grain among various countries or regions in the world show the possibility of adopting existing technology and increasing yield through increased use of chemical fertilizer, and at the same time decreasing the environmental damage and soil deterioration, especially in developing countries.23 The difference in the yield, however, shows in most cases not a difference in

16

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

potentiality in the existing technology, but in the restrictions of natural conditions such as soil and climate on the yield, as is clearly seen in the big difference between the yield of wheat in Western Europe and North America. As previously described, the growth rate of grain yield has decreased significantly since the last half of the eighties, and yield of new high-yielding rice varieties has been stagnating or decreasing in Asia. The harvested area of rice, 90% of its production and consumption concentrated in Asia, has been decreasing as well. As mentioned above, a 3% annual increase in rice yield will be needed to cope with the highest level of population explosion until 2020.29 Although until now the potential yield of various crops has been raised annually by 1-2% through the efforts of genetic research,20,22 a 3% annual increase in rice yield in the long term is very difficult. How will such new technologies as biotechnology and hybrid varieties contribute to increasing grain yield? Since the appearance of hybrid corn in America in the thirties, F1 vigor has been considered the breakthrough technology that would be the best means of increasing yields. But those views are too optimistic. The only country where hybrid rice varieties have been planted on a sizable scale is China. They were planted to 55% of the country’s rice harvest area in 1992. This was possible because the high cost of hybrid seed production has been mitigated by cheap labor cost and government subsidies. It is said that yield of the hybrid rice on the average was only 20% higher than the ordinary varieties. In my field survey in China over the last few years, I heard from farmers and experts that Chinese consumers had been shifting from less delicious hybrid rice to ordinary rice and farmers had been abandoning hybrid rice planting. Although efforts have been made for the last twenty-five years, hybrid wheat seeds have not been successful, due to the prohibitively high cost of seed production.20,33 Although significant increase in crop yield has been expected from biotechnology utilizing gene transformation and gene mapping, virtually no useful result that considerably increases crop yield has been achieved so far. Many researchers now consider that it takes several decades to extend new seeds developed

by biotechnology among the majority of the farmers in the developing countries. Biotechnology is considered as an important means for genetic research and it will bring gradual increase rather than a breakthrough in yield.20 The “super rice” developed by IRRI in the Philippines using biotechnology increases rice yield by 30%. The rice has a plant type 90 cm in height with four or five short and strong stalks with big ears, eliminating stalks with no ears.33 However, I heard in my discussion with Professor T. Horie of Kyoto University, who is knowledgeable about the results of experiments with this rice in Japan, that the yield increase has not yet been achieved because of many non-filled grains. My judgement about the yield increasing potential of biotechnology in the near future, listening to discussions among the world’s leading genetic engineers at this 12th Toyota Conference, is very pessimistic.

Demand Factors According to the estimates of the United Nations, the population explosion that has occurred mainly in the developing countries after the Second World War will maintain its peak level during the period of 1990 to 2020. The world population increases annually by from 90 to 100 million during this period, and the world population will reach to 8050 million by 2020, from 5300 million in 1990. The population in the developing countries will increase at the annual rate of 1.7%, from 4080 million to 6660 million, during the same period. Population in Asia will increase at the annual rate of 1.64 % from 2900 million to 4500 million. The world population will double to 10,000 million by 2050. Grain (rice, wheat, barley, rye, corn, oats, sorghum and millet) will be the main source of the direct and indirect calorie intake for the exploding global population in the early 21st Century.26 The indirect calorie intake is from consumption of animal and fish meat produced by feeding feed grain to animals and fish. Population explosion will occur only in the developing countries, and the population there will be about 80% of the world total population in early 21st century. Both direct and indirect calorie intake, and thus grain demand or need, in the developing countries will increase very rapidly during the

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research period from 1990 to 2020 as the population explosion occurs there, and their economies will grow relatively faster, especially in Asia. Grain demand increases because of increase in income as well as because of population explosion. When per capita income increases in the developing countries, the immediate result is an increase in direct grain demand as food. The importance of animal protein in the food consumption pattern will increase as per capita income increases in the developing countries. This will lead to a rapid increase in the demand for feed grain for animals. According to the World Bank statistics,34 the per capita GNP in Asian developing countries has grown significantly. It had grown at annual rates of 3.0% to 6.4% during 1980 and 1993, while for other developing countries as a whole it had experienced negative growth during the same period. The average per capita GNP growth throughout all developing countries was approximately 1% per year during the period from 1980 to 1993. The total GNP has grown at around 3.5% per year. This rapid per capita income increase, especially in Asia, brought about significant increases in the demand for grain, which is the staple diet of the people in the developing countries, and also rapid increases in the demand for animal protein in Asia, especially in China, resulting in explosive increases in the demand for feed grain. Let’s now investigate the actual situation for the rapid increase in grain demand within China. China had 22% of the world’s total population in 1990, and thus she is a significant influence on future food demand. According to the UN estimates, although the Chinese population growth rate has been relatively low (an annual rate of 0.9%) compared to the other developing countries, due to “the One Child Only Policy”, the population increased from 680 million to 1.2 billion during the period of 1958-92, and will continue to increase to 1.5 billion by 2020. This rapid population increase will cause a rapid increase in China’s grain need. Economic reforms started in 1978, which allow free decision by individual agricultural households, brought about a rapid increase in grain yield and production in China in the early years. According to the FAO database, the grain supply per person increased quickly from

17

230 kg in 1961 to 354 kg in 1995. However, it has remained static since 1985 due to the rapid population growth, reduction of cultivated area and slowdown in the increase rate of grain yield, as previously mentioned. Although the five year moving average of annual increase rates of grain yield has been increasing at an annual rate of over 5% during the period 19611984, it fell to between 0.3%-3% afterward until 1992. This trend is likely to continue in the future. The per capita GNP in China has seen the very high growth rate of 8.2% per year from 1980 to 1993, and an explosive growth rate of around 10% from 1992-95. This high economic growth in China will be maintained in the future, as China has planned her economic growth rate at 7-8% until 2010, as agreed at the People’s National Congress on March 5, 1996. This recent rapid income increase brought about a rapid increase in demand for meats, mainly pork, which is the most popular meat among Chinese, at an annual rate of 10%. One kilogram of pork production needs 4 kilograms of feed grain. The grain prices have rapidly risen through the explosion in the demand for feed grain. Corn prices doubled within one year in 1995. The domestic free market rice price increased 3.2 times between January, 1993 to June, 1995, and it has became more expensive than the export price of the low grade 35% Thai rice which is almost equivalent to the domestically available rice in China since May, 1994.32 The Peking government prohibited the export of corn in November, 1994, and soy beans from April 1995, to ease the domestic shortage. Grain exports from China (including soy beans) fell to almost nil in 1994 and 1995, as shown in Figure 1.4, and the net imports rose to 15 million tons annually. Actually, the import of a large net volume of grain into China is not a recent phenomenon, but it has been 10-20 million tons annually since 1977, except in 1985, 86, 92 and 93, according to the FAO data as shown in the same figure. China banned corn export again in late 1997. According to a recent publication of the USDA,32 the Peking government was forced to consider the long term demand and supply balance of food in China for foreign and domestic reasons in 1994 and 95, and conducted research within

18

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

some ministries and universities. Based on the research results, the government decided to change its food policy from a long held food self-sufficiency policy to an 88-95% self-sufficiency policy. China consumed 112 million tons of wheat, 109 million tons of corn and 129 million tons of rice in 1995. An enormous amount of grain totaling 42 million tons annually (including 15.5 million tons of white rice) needs to be imported if the self-sufficiency rate is only 88%. Since the world trade markets in wheat and corn are thick, meaning that the total trading volume is large compared to the global total production, the markets can manage the large import by China. But a catastrophic increase in the world rice trade price and resultant confusion can be expected, for the world rice trade market is thin, meaning that only 4% (15 million tons) of the world total production is traded. It can be concluded that the rapid increase in demand for grain by the developing countries which has occurred from the eighties until now, especially in China and other Asian countries, has had the effect of reducing the global grain stock ratio. This rapid increase will continue into the early 21st century, as population explosion and relatively fast economic growth in the developing countries will continue in the long run. Prospects of World Grain Supply and Demand for the Year 2020 As shown in the above analysis, the world grain stock as a trend will remain at dangerously low levels into the early 21st century, and the grain prices will remain at high levels. The reasons for this are the transformation of the European and American agricultural policies after the late eighties, the restrictions on natural resources and agricultural technology improvement, and rapid increase in the need for feed and food grain, principally in China and Asia, due to the population explosion and high economic growth. Supply and demand of grain in 2020 is projected in Table 1.2 for the world, groups of countries classified by income levels, China, India and Japan, based on assumptions according to the above analyses of long term supply and demand of grain in the world. Regarding the assumptions for demand, the production

conversion ratio from grain to meats and eggs for each region and country is estimated based on the supply and demand balance data of the FAO for 1984-86 and on expected long term increase in feed grain use in the livestock sector. Increase in the demand for feed grain is estimated by projected population growth rate, GDP growth rate and income elasticity of demand for meats and eggs. Medium estimates of the UN are used for the population and population growth rate. The year 1993 is used as the base year. The FAO statistics were used to determine demand for meats, eggs and grain in 1993. Regarding supply, the growth rates of grain production, listed in the same table, are determined so as to reflect the recent decline in the growth rates of grain production mentioned above. There are two ways to make a long term forecast of grain supply and demand. One is forecasting demand and supply independently, and analyzing their impact on grain price afterwards. I, in this paper, and Lester Brown have used this method. The other method projects supply and demand, incorporating the effect of the difference between supply and demand on the product price. This method is used by the World Bank, FAO, IFPRI and the Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery.35-38 Lester Brown, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery and I forecast a significant global grain shortfall in 2020 and/or 2030 and a considerable grain price rise, and others forecast that the world grain prices will decrease by 10 to 30 percent in the early 21st century. I think the reasons for the totally different forecasts are basically differences in the assumptions for the projections, and thus critical evaluation of the assumptions is very important. I judge the assumptions made by the World Bank, FAO and IFPRI to be too optimistic and contrary to the recent reality. The assumptions for these future surplus projections are: no limitation in arable land and water, positive price response in planted areas of grain, and considerable yield growth of grain in the future supported by technological improvements in agricultural production. According to my projection, there will be an enormous grain shortfall of 320 million tons in developing Asian countries in 2020. The breakdowns are 170 million tons for

19

net import, import, and export 10 million tons

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research

Fig. 1.4. Chinese cereal quanitites traded: net import, import, and export. Data source: FAO and USDA estimates for recent years. China, 15 million tons for India, 33 million tons for Japan and 417 million tons throughout the world. Although the high-income countries such as the United States and the EU export 172 million tons, that is far below the projected deficit in year 2020. This shortfall is significant, especially when one considers that the total world grain trade volume was 230 million tons in 1993. The reasons for my projection of such a significant grain shortfall are: The population explosion and high economic growth in developing countries, principally in China and Asia, will bring about a fast increase in consumption of animal protein, which will lead to an explosive increase in demand for feed grain; and, increase in grain supply will be restricted by limitations in natural resources and in the improvement of agricultural technology in the developing countries, and by continuation of the agricultural policy transformation in Europe and America into the early 21st century. The projection by Brown of a significant future shortfall is for similar reasons, with an emphasis on land shortage in China. The estimated significant grain shortfall, by Brown and me, would bring about a rise

in the prices of grain in the world trade market. According to my forecast, assuming the long term price elasticity of the world grain supply and demand to be 0.15 (ratios between rates of change in supply and demand against the price change rate), the international grain trade price will increase by 50% compared to its 1993 level by 2020. This increase in the grain trade price will lead to a considerable increase in the domestic price of rice and other grain. This will cause significant difficulties to the huge hungry in the developing countries, who now number more than 0.8 billion, more than 0.5 billion of which concentrate in Asia,39and it will likely be larger in the year 2020. A significant global shortfall of grain is forecast for the year 2020. China and Japan will be important players in the long term world demand and supply of food, especially rice. Japan was forced to open her long selfsufficient rice market by accepting minimum access rice import ,under American pressure at the Uruguay Round negotiation in December, 1993. She will accept tariffication of rice import in April 1999. I think these concessions will lead to a gradual increase of Japanese rice import,

5522 4289 3058 1185 885 1228

124

Low and medium income countries

Asian developing countries

China

India

High income countires (a)

Japan

Population (millions)

World

Demand

47.80

93.10

3.96

34.50

20.70

23.90

39.50

Per capita demand for animal and chicken meat, and eggs (kg)

1993

40

767

173

366

730

1072

1830

Total demand for cereals (million tons)

Table 1.2. Projection of world demand and supply of cereals for the year 2020

52.8

100.0

6.4

91.3

54.1

58.4

58.4

Per capita demand for animal and chicken meat, and eggs (kg)

2020

42

927

298

777

1473

2342

3269

Total demand for cereals (million tons)

20 Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

1804 930 675 340 167 870

11

Low and medium income countries

Asian developing countries

China

India

High income countries (a)

Japan

Production (million tons)

1993

World

Supply

9

1100

283

610

1153

1752

2852

Production (million tons)

Table 1.2., cont. Projection of world demand and supply of cereals for the year 2020 2020

33

-172

15

167

320

590

417

Estimated deficits (million tons)

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research 21

0.0164 0.0147 0.089 0.0152 0.0045

0.0014

Low and medium income countries

Asian developing countries

China

India

High income countries (a)

Japan 0.00373

0.00262

0.01794

0.03667

0.03628

0.03354

0.01458

Per capita demand for animal and chicken meat, and eggs

0.02

0.022

0.06

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.034

GDP

-0.0081

0.0087

0.0120

0.0152

0.0200

0.0237

0.0171

Cereal production (%)

1993-2020 Annual Growth Rates (%)

Note: a; US, former USSR, Eastern and western Europe, Japan, Oceania

0.0141

Population

World

Assumptions

Table 1.2., cont. Projection of world demand and supply of cereals for the year 2020

0.2

0.15

0.4

0.6

0.35

0.7

0.68

Income elasticity of demand for animal and chicken meat, and eggs

3.30

5.88

2.00

3.00

1.80

2.40

3.00

Feed grains/ animal and chicken meat, and eggs conversion rate (FAO food balance)

22 Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research to end up with large amounts of rice import and disappearance of the rice sector on the Japanese volcanic archipelago. Huge external benefits to Japanese people associated with self-sufficient rice production and consumption will be lost. In addition to this and more importantly, the Japanese must face a very thin, unstable and unreliable international rice trade market. Only 4 percent (16 million tons of milled rice) of world total rice production is traded. In Japan and other Asian countries, rice supplies 25 to 80 percent energy intake of the people, and thus rice is political goods in the sense that it must be supplied with certainty and at stable price. Since disappearance of the rice sector in Japan is so great a loss in external benefits and political stability, I think Japan should not have accepted minimum access and should not accept tariffication. On the other hand, large and continuous Japanese rice imports will raise and destabilize the rice price considerably throughout Asia, which will result in a crisis for the huge Asian hungry. Large Japanese rice imports will also cause environmental destruction in Asia.40 The Japanese self-sufficiency ratio for grain is forecast to decrease from 28% in 1993 to 21% in 2020, as shown in Table 1.2, if the current Japanese agricultural policy is maintained. The Japanese feel insecure with the current self-sufficiency level of 28 percent; according to a recent opinion poll, 83 percent of Japanese think Japan should maintain rice self-sufficiency even it is very expensive. The decline of self-sufficiency ratio for grain to 21 percent will increase the Japanese sense of food insecurity very much. The import of agricultural, forestry and fishery products by Japan increased much faster than the European countries’ import after the Second World War, and it caused serious euphorization problems for inland waters and nearby seas in Japan. It also caused severe environmental destruction abroad, as symbolized by Japanese shrimp import and tropical timber and wood imports. I believe Japan imports too much agricultural, forestry and fishery products, for of the following reasons: Serious environmental problems in Japan as well as in developing countries caused by Japanese import; the crisis to the huge poor in Asian

23

developing countries in the case of rice import; and the serious concerns by Japanese about loss of food security and of external values derived from the primary industries. We should reform Japan’s agricultural, forestry and fishery policy and their system, emphasizing more domestic production of the agricultural, forestry and fishery products, including rice, which will lead us to a higher self-sufficiency ratio for these products, using less environmentally destructive technology incorporating cyclical use of fertility among crops, animals and humans. This reform will lower domestic and foreign environmental destruction by Japan’s import of primary commodities, maintain external values of the primary sector and rural society and increase food security level in Asian developing countries.41 I think China will be a large importer of grain, including rice, in the near future considering her fast economic growth, large population growth, natural resource limitations and deterioration of agricultural resource base. If China continues her past growth pattern in the future, and it is likely now for China to follow it, the size of her rice import will be enormous and it will have devastating effects on Asian rice price, the Asian hungry and the Asian natural environment.

Conclusion Because of severe limitations on natural resources, environment and technological improvement against population explosion in the developing countries, and of the transformation in agricultural policies in the United States and the EU, severe food shortage is expected in developing countries for the period from now to the year 2020. The green revolution technology, which has used increasing amounts of modern chemical inputs and is still widely used in the world, had increased grain yield considerably but at the same time had destroyed environment considerably until the mid-eighties. As the effect of the new technology on grain yield has declined since then, annual growth rates of the yield have declined to about 1 percent per year from about the 3 percent before 1970 which is required to provide food for exploding populations in the developing countries. Thus, there is a strong

24

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

need for finding and applying a new technology that will realize sustainable and considerable yield increase of grain in the near future. In other words, socially optimal yield increase is needed that will increase grain yield but will also conserve the soil and water which are the basis for grain production, and will protect the environment. Genetic engineering is one approach to attaining this goal. IRRI has publicized many modern rice varieties having increasingly more resistance to insects and diseases, developed by both genetic engineering technology and conventional technology.42 These varieties have been adopted widely by Asian farmers. This type of research will decrease input of agricultural chemicals and increase yield. But, based on the information I gathered at the 12th Toyota Conference, as well as from other publications and discussions with experts, I think the genetic engineering approach alone is not sufficient for providing food to the exploding population in developing countries for the period from now to the year 2020. This type of research has not and will not be able to create a breakthrough in increasing grain yield on the farmers’ plots in the period from now to the year 2020. International and national agricultural research strategy needs a serious reconsideration. The structure of research emphases must be reevaluated. Research on research is one method for this reevaluation. First of all, the past paradigm of research strategy emphasizing modern technology must be reconsidered. I think we have to study traditional and local agricultural technologies more; many of them are natural resource maintaining and environment sustaining. Traditional rice culture in Asia, which had been followed for thousands of years without much modern input before the green revolution, is a typical example of environment-sustaining agriculture, although yield is low. In some mixed cropping fields on the Deccan Plateau, where I visited during my field survey in September 1998, about 3 to 10 crops were planted in each field at the time of my field survey. Traditional sawing and cultivating machinery is used and barnyard manure is also used. Here is another example. Dr. Ochi, a geographer, and Tanaka and Watabe, agronomists who have studied this mixed cropping

practice applied widely on the Deccan Plateau, think that this is one of the most productive and sustainable agricultural technologies on a semi-arid tropical plateau. 43,44 Shifting cultivation in northern Thailand, with long fallow periods, is another type of sustainable agriculture.45 Traditional agricultural technology has used large amounts of organic fertilizers which maintain soil structure and soil fertility in Asian countries. This is an important cyclical and sustainable relation among field crops, domestic animals and humans in traditional Asian agricultural technology. The green revolution technology has severed this cyclical and sustainable relation by using large amounts of chemical fertilizers and agricultural machinery in order to obtain short run grain yield increase. This was a necessary evil, since when the green revolution technology was introduced in the middle of sixties, world food shortage was very severe. But in the long run I think this severing has degraded soil fertility, overused natural resources and destroyed natural environment and caused stagnation in the increase of grain yield in the world after the mid-eighties. I believe that the cyclical nature of agricultural technology must be restored in both developing and developed countries, especially by more input of organic fertilizers. Combining the traditional and local technologies with modern technologies, we may be able to create a new technology that restores the cyclical relations and leads to sustainable yield increase of food. Some successful examples of this combination in various countries do exist.46,47 I think this approach is important because modern technology has been intensifying its use of modern input, and thus has been increasing environmental destruction. I was surprised to observe, in my village survey in September 1998, that many villagers in Central Java are organized by the government extension service system to perform IPM rice practices. Wide practice of IPM may be an effective approach to attaining socially optimal yield increase of rice and other grain. I believe that water shortage is the most critical factor constraining future increase in food supply in developing countries, based on my field surveys in China, India and other Asian countries. Thus, researches relating to

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research water use institution and policies which influence water use efficiency, and to water saving technology, must be emphasized. Degradation of soil and decline in arable land are other important constraints to future food supply increase in Asia and in the world. Socioeconomic and natural science researches to these problems are also important. Socioeconomic research can increase food supply considerably. Socioeconomic factors reducing food production, increasing post-harvest losses and increasing waste in food consumption must be further studied. Firstly, socioeconomic factors to reduce food production must be identified in each country. Then, socially optimal measures balancing economic cost, environmental effects and burdens to natural resources could be found, in order to increase food production in each country. IRRI and FAO studies have estimated that about 10 to 40 percent of rice is lost at all production and marketing stages from harvest to before retail. In the current academic knowledge, there is no solid information about the magnitude of post-harvest food losses and how these losses could be reduced, but concerning staple food it seems an important problem to solve. The post-harvest loss means not only human hunger and financial loss to the farmers, but also significant environmental destruction.48 Research and policy must cope with this problem. Huge amounts of food supplied to consumers is not consumed, but rather wasted, in Japan and probably in other high income countries. Research and policy must handle reduction and recycling of this food waste. I do not have solid data with me now about how great this waste is. I personally observed in my field surveys in Vietnam and China in recent years that a lot of food wastes from households and restaurants are recycled to feed pigs and other domestic animals. In developing countries this waste seems much less. Decades ago in Japan this waste was well recycled to feed domestic animals and to crop land. Research on agricultural policy and trade rule of agricultural products is important in order to increase food supply and food security, and to reduce environmental destruction and burdens to natural resources. The people of each country, especially the huge poor and hungry in developing countries, require not

25

only a larger food supply but also stability or sure daily access to staple food. I believe liberalization of rice trade under the WTO system will destroy this stability and sure access to the huge Asian poor. This is because the international rice trade market is extremely small, unstable and unreliable compared with such important grains as wheat and maize. Also, Asian countries, which comprise about 90 percent of the world total rice production, have pursued and will maintain rice self-sufficiency policies in order to secure food security for each country. Liberalization will greatly destabilize the world rice market.49 As agricultural policy and trade rule influence environment, natural resources and income distribution, research to identify an optimal policy and trade rule is important. The agricultural trade liberalization under the WTO system will reduce food production in the north much more than food production increase in the south, and thus increase food prices, which will lead to more use of chemical fertilizer and agricultural chemicals. Liberalization will lead to more food production far away from densely populated developed and developing countries, in sparsely populated countries. Given sparse population and soft state50 in the case of developing countries, less attention will be paid to negative environmental impact and overuse of natural resources for liberalized, increased food production in these countries. These negative impacts of food production are, I believe, best controlled when more food is produced in each country. People in each country can best observe these negative impacts and can influence government policies and other measures to reduce them. More food production in the densely populated developing countries will reduce poverty and equalize income distribution by increasing income of the huge agricultural poor in these countries.51 These are the reasons why I think the free trade rule of the WTO should be modified, and socially optimal agricultural policies oriented toward self-sufficiency of staple foods in each country, and socially optimal food trade rules, should be sought by policy research. Demographic research is also critical, in order to reduce population explosions in developing countries.

26

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

References 1. Kuroda T. Considering decline in the number of children per household and aging; Japan as a leading nation, Paper presented at the Seminar: Can human survive into the 21st Century? November 13, 1998. 2. Brown L. Tough Choices. New York: Norton & Company, 1996. 3. Alexandratos N, ed. World Agriculture: Towards 2010, An FAO Study. Rome: FAO, 1995. 4. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J et al. The Limits to Growth. New York: Universe Books, 1972. 5. OECD. National Policies and Agricultural Trade. Paris: OECD, 1987:52-53. 6. OECD. National Policies and Agricultural Trade. Paris: OECD, 1987:56. 7. The net export volume of food, excluding fish, is calculated by taking the difference between the export and import values of food for the group of countries in question, deflated by the FAO agricultural export/import price indices, respectively, with 1966 as base year. FOB import value is adjusted by the coefficient of 1.07 for balance with CIF import value. 8. FAO. Food for All. Rome: FAO, 1996:14. 9. Tsujii H. The world food shortage in the year 2020 and the needed agricultural transformation in Japan. Natural Resource Economic Review 1997; 3:5-8. 10. FAO. Agriculture: Toward 2010. Rome: FAO, 1993. 11. Tsujii H. The world food shortage in the year 2020 and the needed agricultural transformation in Japan. Natural Resource Economic Review 1997; 3:10. 12. Crosson P. Future supplies of land and water for world agriculture. In Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:154-156. 13. Tsujii H. An econometric study of paddy field transactions by rice farmers in Hokkaido in Japan (in Japanese). In: Noseichosa Iinkai, ed. Research Report on Basic Agricultural Problems. Tokyo: Noseichosaiinkai, 1993:28-43.

14. Oldeman L, Hakkeling R, Sombroeck W. World Map of the Status of Human-Induced Soil Degradation: An Explanatory Note. 2nd ed., Wageningen, The Netherlands; Nairobi: International Soil Reference and Information Center and United Nations Environment Program, 1991. 15. World Bank and UNDP. Irrigation and Drainage Research: a Proposal. Washington, D. C.: World Bank, 1990. 16. Oram PA, Hojjati B. The growth potential of existing agricultural technology. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:167-189. 17. Postel P. Last Oasis: Facing Water Scarcity. The World Watch Environmental Alert Series, New York: W. W. Norton, 1992. 18. This survey was supported by Research Center for Rural Economy in Beijing, Agricultural Committee of Communist Party of Shanxi and a capable research assistant, Ms. Guo Jin Ping. 19. Brown LR. Future supplies of land and water are fast approaching depletion. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:161-166. 20. Duvick D. Plant breeding and biotechnology for meeting future food needs. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:222. 21. Evenson R, David C. Rice research and productivity. In: OECD. Adjustment and Technology: The Case of Rice. Paris: OECD, 1990:57-84. 22. Plucknett D. Prospects of meeting future food needs through new nechnology. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:208.

Food Shortage in the 21st Century and Its Implications for Agricultural Research 23. Bumb B. Growth potential of existing technology is insufficiently tapped. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:191-205. 24. Brown LR. Full House, New York: Norton, 1994. 25. Author’s personal communication with Professor Takeshi Horie (a leading Japanese crop scientist), Kyoto University. 26. IRRI. IRRI Rice Almanac, 1993-95. Manila: International Rice Research Institute, 1993:8. 27. Chand R, Haque T. Rice-wheat crop system in Indo-Gangetic region—issues concerning sustainability. Economic and Political Weekly 1998; 33(26): A108-112. 28. IRRI. IRRI 1992-1993, Rice in Crucial Environments. Manila: IRRI, 1993:8. 29. IRRI. IRRI Rice Almanac, 1993-95. Manila: International Rice Research Institute, 1993:6. 30. There is an opinion that Chinese grain yield will increase much more than presently because of this underestimation, and the comparison of yield with Japan, Britain and America. 31. Gen Z. Structural analysis of Chinese food economy and supply and demand prospects. Azia Keizai 1996; 37(2):33-62. 32. USDA, ERS. Rice, Situation and Outlook Yearbook. Washington, D. C.: USDA, 1995:13. 33. IRRI. IRRI Rice Almanac, 1993-95. Manila: International Rice Research Institute, 1993:110. 34. World Bank. World Development Report 1995:162-63. 35. Brown LR. Tough Choices. New York: Norton & Company,1997. 36. Rosegrant MW, Agcaoili-Sombilla M, Perez ND. Global Food Projections to 2020: Implications for Investment. Washington, D. C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995. 37. Anderson K, Dimaranan B, Hertel T, Martin W. Asia-Pacific food markets and trade in 2005: A global, economy-wide perspective. A paper commissioned for the international general meeting of the Pacific Basin Economic Council, Washington, D. C.: World Bank, 1996.

27

38. Mitchell DO, Ingco MD. Global and regional food demand and supply prospects. In: Islam N, ed. Population and Food in the Early Twenty-First Century: Meeting Future Food Demand of an Increasing Population. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:49-60. 39. FAO. World Food Summit—Rome Declaration on World Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 1996:37. 40. Tsujii H. The World Rice Warfare. (in Japanese). Tokyo: Ienohikari Kyokai, 1988. 41. Tsujii H. World Food Uncertainty and Japanese Agriculture. (in Japanese) Tokyo: Ienohikari Kyokai, 1997. 42. IRRI. IRRI Rice Almanac, 1993-95. Manila: International Rice Research Institute, 1993:113-114. 43. Ochi T. Farming practices in millet agriculture in the southern part of Deccan Plateau (in Japanese). In: Sakamoto S. ed. Agro-pastoral Culture in the Indian Sub-continent (In Japanese). Tokyo: Gakkai Center, 1991:141-172. 44. Tanaka K, Watabe T. Traditional cropping systems of small farmers in the central and southern Deccan Plateau Area. Southeast Asian Studies 1981; 19(2):205-221. 45. NRCT. Shifting Cultivation in Northern Thailand. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 1985. 46. Gill GJ. Indigenous erosion control systems in the mid-hills of Nepal. In: ICRISAT. Farmers’ Practices and Soil and Water conservation Programs. Ptancheru, Andra Pradesh, India: International Crops research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, 1991:17-21. 47. Gill GJ. Major natural resource management concerns in South Asia. Food, Agriculture, and Environment Discussion Paper 8. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute, 1995:29. 48. The World Resources Institute, UNEP, UNDP et al. World Resources 1998-99. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998:155-156. 49. Tsujii H. Characteristics of and the trade conflicts in the international rice market. The Natural Resource Economic Review 1995; 1:119-135.

28

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

50. Myrdal G. Asian Drama—An Inquiry into the Poverty of the Nations. 3 vols. New York: Twenties Century Fund, 1968. 51. Tsujii H. International effects of emergency rice imports by Japan—the crisis to the huge poor in developing countries (in Japanese). Kokusai Mondai 1994; 416:37-52.

CHAPTER 2

Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century H. Zhai

C

hina has successfully fed 22 percent of the world population by its 7 percent of the world’s arable land. Before 1978, low-priced cereals and potatoes were the staple food of the Chinese people, due to the low standard of living. Food supply has been targeted to meet the needs of this lower standard. Since China began economic reform in 1978, it has made great progress in gain production. From 1978 to 1995, the total grain output increased by 50 percent (Table 2.1). The grain production has meet the basic needs of the Chinese people. However, with rapid economic development, road and housing construction has taken over a large area of cultivated land, which resulted in a tenser situation regarding the scarce land resources. On the other hand, there is an increasing demand on feed grains due to the rising income of the Chinese people and the increased meat consumption in their diet pattern. The grain shortage resulted in grain import and the continuing growth of grain price, which inevitably caused a series of economic problems. The grain issue has a significant impact, not only on the immediate interests of the Chinese people, but also on the international grain market and price indicators. Therefore, it is not surprising to see that wide attention has been paid by both foreign and domestic experts and scholars to the grain issue in China. Herewith, I would like to give a brief analysis on the grain supply and demand prospects in China.

Food Demand Analysis Factors Influencing Food Demand The factors which influence the total demand for future grain are various, among which the following are the key ones. Population Growth China has a large population baseline. Consequently, the growth rate of the population is also noticeable. This determines not only the increase of food grain, but also of the grain demand for other purposes. Since the family planning policy was started in 1978, the population growth rate has declined steadily (Fig. 2.1). However the absolute number is still gradually increasing (Fig. 2.2). Income Level of Households The per capita gross domestic product (GDP) represents the economic development level of a country . It also has a direct influence on the structure and level of food consumption. Viewing the development of all the countries in the world, the higher the national income level, the more indirect grains will be consumed. The direct consumption of grain ration will continually decrease while the absolute demand of food will increase. According to the relevant statistics of Penn World Table 5.61 the per capita GDP in China has exploded from $567 US in 1960 to $1,493 US in 1992, with an average growth rate of 3.0

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of the Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

30

Table 2.1. China’s grain yield (10,000 ton) Year

Grain gross

Rice

Wheat

1978

30,477

13,693

5,384

1979

33,212

14,375

6,273

1980

32,056

13,991

5,521

1981

32,052

14,396

5,964

1982

35,450

16,160

6,847

1983

38,728

16,887

8,139

1984

40,731

17,826

8,782

1985

37,911

16,857

8,481

1986

39,151

17,222

9,004

1987

40,298

17,426

8,590

1988

39,408

16,911

8,543

1989

40,755

18,013

9,081

1990

44,624

18,933

9,823

1991

43,529

18,381

9,595

1992

44,266

18,622

10,159

1993

45,649

17,751

10,639

1994

44,510

17,593

9,930

1995

46,662

18,523

10,221

95/78

153%

135%

190%

percent. From 1993 to 1995, the per capita GDP registered an annual growth rate of over 6 percent. With the increase of per capita gross national product, there will be a corresponding increase in the absolute demand of grains. Dietary Structure The dietary structure is mostly influenced by the per capita income level. The other factors are tradition, geographic environment and food supply situation, etc. With the rising per capita income level, the proportion of animal product consumption in the dietary structure will get higher, which means a decrease in direct grain consumption and an increased consumption of converted food

products. It is estimated that by 2010 per capita energy intake will be 2,750-2,800 calories, and 2,800-3,000 calories by 2030. The proportion of the energy intake from animal products will increase, while that of the energy intake from cereals will decline (Fig. 2.3).

Prediction of Grain Demand in the 21st Century in China The Total Demand for Grain Will Increase Firstly, we consider the increase of food grain. Grain is people’s daily necessity. It is rigid in consumption and is positively correlated with the size of population. With the increase of population and per capita GDP, the daily

Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century

31

Fig. 2.1. Tendency of population growth: Growth rate. per capita energy intake gradually grows higher. The relationship between per capita energy intake and grain consumption is that every 3,500 calories of energy intake needs to consume 1kg of grain. On this basis, it is roughly estimated that the demand of per capita food grain will be 152-164 kg, and the total demand for food grain will be 213-230 million tons, by the year 2010. By 2030, the demand for per capita food grain will decline to 140-160 kg, while the total demand will be 224-234 million tons. Secondly, there is the issue offeed grains. Considering the technological progress in animal production in the future in China, we forecast that the average conversion efficiency of feed grains to animal products will be 3.5:1 by 2010, which means 3.5 kg feed grains will be converted to 1kg animal products. According to the energy intake requirements for animal products, feed conversion efficiency and the proportion of energy intake to grain consumption, we predict that the demand for feed grains will be about 260-340 million tons and 320-420 million tons, respectively, by 2010 and 2030 (Table 2.2).

In addition, the grain demand in industry, new stocks and wastage will not show big changes. Therefore, the demand in these aspects will only register as 12 percent of the total demand. The prediction of per capita grain and meat demand is shown in Table 2.3. The Structure Of Grain Demand Will Change Considerably. With the continuing increase in income of both urban and rural households, the per capita food grain will drop by a large margin in food consumption structure. Apart from this, there will be an increasing demand for feed grains, not only in the absolute volume, but also in its proportion of the total grain consumption. Consequently, feed grains will surpass grain for daily use and take the leading position in grain consumption by 2010 or so. With the continuing demand for feed grain consumption, the demand for per capita animal products and indirect grain consumption will all increase noticeably. Due to the great demand for feed grains, food grain will decrease due to large population and limited arable land. The contradiction of competion for grain between man and animals

32

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 2.2. (Above) Tendency of population growth: Total population.

Fig. 2.3. (Above) The proportion of caloric intake from different resources. will become increasingly sharp. To some extent, it can be said that the future grain problems in China will be the feed grain issue.

Grain Supply Potential At any point of time, total grain supply equals the sum of domestic production, imports and existing reserves. Among these three parts, the domestic grain production is

the main source of the grain supply. China is a large consumer due to its large population. The imported grain is mainly used to redistribute grain varieties and compensate the shortage of grain production. Grain reserves are generally used to smooth supply against fluctuations in production and price. Here, I would like to put the emphasis on analyzing the future supply of grain production.

Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century

33

Table 2.2. Prediction of grain demand and supply (million tons) Year

Human consumption

Feed

Industry and other

Total demand

2010

213-230

260-340

12% of the total demand

554-627

2030

224-234

320-420

642-741

Table 2.3. Prediction of grain and meat capitation (kg) Year

Grain ratio

Feed

Meat

2010

152-164

186-243

53.1-69.4

2030

140-160

196-258

56.0-74.0

Cultivated Land Area and Grain Sown Area At present, China has three sources of statistics on cultivated land area (Table 2.4). Among these three sources, the data provided by the Land Survey Committee is believed to be reliable. The committee is comprised of land experts who usually spend several years in the general survey. As errors might occur during the process, it is estimated that the current cultivated land in China will be between 138 and 151 million hectares. Since 1978, the cultivated land area has decreased year after year (Table 2.5). Therefore, the Chinese government clearly states in its “Ninth Five-year Plan” and “Long-term Outlook for 2010” that land for other uses should be strictly controlled. As a result, the cultivated land area will decrease more slowly than before, with a predicted annual decrease rate of 100,000-200,000 hectares. It is estimated that the cultivated land area will be 136-149 million hectares in 2010 and 133-146 million hectares in 2030. Due to the decrease of cultivated land area and the increase of cash crop grown area through crop structure readjustment, the grain sown area continuously decreases. Its percentage in the total crop sown area is also declining. In accordance wiht the average decrease

rat of the grain sown area from 1978 to the present, the grain sown area will be about 70 percent of the total crop sown area by 2010. Considering the importance of the grain in people's livlihood, the Chinese government will take measures to encourage farmers to grow grain crops. On the other hand, farmers are not willing to sacrifice too much of their land for other uses because of the vigorous grain market and factors like changing crops, crop sequence arrangement and the selection of crop varieties, etc. It is predicted that the grain sown acreage will be about 65 percent of the crop sown acreage. Multiple crop index is another key factor influencing grain sown area. From 1980 to 1990 in China, the average multiple crop index was 115 percent. According to the sunlight condition of different areas in China, there is little potential in raising the multiple crop index in the northeast China, norhtern China and northwest China. The highest average multiple crop index can reach approximately 165 percent. Apart from the restriction of comparative advantage on growin grain crops, other factors influencing the index rise are: the extension and utilization of agricultural mechanization useful for crop sequence, the selection, breeding, extension and application

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

34

Table 2.4. Arable area statistics (10,000 ha) Office

9,510

Survey

13,800

GIS

15,100

of early-maturing varieties. As a result, China has not the capacity to tap the potential of all the multiple crop indexes even in 2030. Through our strenuous efforts, the average index can be expected to reach 150 percent and 160 percent by that time. Based on these analyses, the sown area of grain crops in 2010 and 2030 will be 143-156 million hectares and 138-152 million hectares respectively.

Analysis of the Yield Growth Possibility of Per Unit Grain Area and the Total Output From 1961 to 1995, the average growth rate of per unit area yield was 2.12 percent. Constrained by the comparative advantage of growin grain crops, the farmers slow down the growht rate of capital investment. In addition to this, the other factor which influences the decline of per unit area yield growth rate is the rising baseline grain unit yield. On the foundation of regression analysis on grain unit yield increase, it is concluded that the annual growth rate of the grain unit yield will be stable at about 1.5 percent from 1995 to 2010 and about one percent from 2010 to 2030. Based on the above analysis, it is predicted that the per unit area yield by 2010 can reach 5.25-5.85 tons/hectares and 6.47-7.05 tons/hectares by 2030 in China. Considering the changes of cultivated land area, multiple crop index and combining with the analysis of the per unit area yield growth possibility, we predict that the total grain output will be around 546-558 million tons in 2010 and 649-654 million ton sin 2030 (Table 2.6).

Forecast of the Difference Between Grain Supply and Demand Changes in population and consumption levels lead to continuing grain demand. Furthermore, various factors restrict the increase of grain supply. Therefore, the situation of grain demand and supply is not so optimistic. The above analysis tells us that the grain demand and supply is around 591 million tons and 552 million tons, respectively, in 2010. Obviously, there are approximately 41 million tons of grain demand to make up. By 2030, the grain demand will be about 692 million tons while the grain supply is about 651 million tons, which means the same amount of food demand to make up (Table 2.7).

Countermeasures Toward Making up the Balance Between Grain Supply and Demand In recent years, the Chinese government has formed a series of policies to support grain production. The total grain output has risen to a higher level. It has not only satisfied the domestic need, but also led to structural surplus. The reasons lie in, first of all, the low quality of some grain varieties, which can not meet the need of the rising living standard of consumers; secondly, the limited stock capacity; and thirdly, the low conversion efficiency of grains. Viewing the present situation, there is no problem in realizing the balance between grain supply and demand. However, from the long term point of view, there will still be a big gap to fill. due to factors like the increasing population, the decreasing land area and the rising living standard of households. Therefore, from an overall point of view, the strategies to solve the discrepancy between grain supply and demand are to rely on domestic forces, strengthen grain production, restrict demand and stick to moderate and appropriate grain import.

Support Grain Production and Increase the Overall Domestic Supply The general policy of grain production in China is to stabilize the grain production area, adjust crop structure, raise per unit yield and increase the total output. The central and the local governments should encourage and

Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century

35

Table 2.5. Changes in China’s arable land (103 hectares)

Year

Land Areas Practically Used

Decreased Land Areas

Newly Increased Land Areas

Net Increased or Decreased Land Areas

1978

99,389.5

800.9

1980

99,305.2

940.8

748.0

-192.8

1984

97,853.7

1,582.9

1,077.0

-505.9

1988

95,721.8

644.7

477.8

-166.9

1989

95,656.0

517.5

451.7

-65.8

1990

95,672.9

467.4

484.3

+16.9

1991

95,653.6

488.0

468.7

-19.3

1992

95,425.8

738.7

510.9

-227.8

1993

95,101.4

732.4

408.0

-324.4

1994

94,910.0

708.6

517.2

-191.4

support the main grain production areas to industrialize their management through giving favorable treatment for finance, credit, taxes, personnel utilization and technology. On the one hand, cultivated land area should be protected by law and the grain sown area should be maintained. On the other hand, preferential policies should be made to protect the initiative of grain producers. In addition, investment should be increased from various channels to ensure meeting the needs of grain production.

Strengthen the Development of Agricultural Infrastructure and Improve the Capacity of Comprehensive Grain Production After more than 40 years’ development, the agricultural infrastructure has been improved to a certain level. However some aspects still lag behind, especially the low flood control standard of farmland embankment, as well as the underdeveloped corresponding facilities of irrigation and drainage. Every year, Chinese people suffer from a number of flooding and drought disasters. Statistics show that the average area suffering from natural calami-

ties from 1980 to 1995 was 340.16 million mu (approximately 22.67 million hectares ). Calculating for an annual decrease of 30 percent in grain yield, we can figure out that the annual output will decrease 24,945,000 tons, which accounts for 4.2-9.0 percent of the total grain output and 6.05 percent of the average output of the year. Therefore it is urgent to set up and improve a number of large scale irrigation and drainage facilities. These will play a significant role, not only in strengthening the comprehensive capacity of grain production. Apart from this, there is a great potential in the reserve resources of agriculture, though the cultivated land resource is limited in China. China has 500 million mu ( approximately 26.7 million hectares ) grass land and grass hillsides which can be developed. Consequently, cultivating undeveloped land and ameliorating fields with moderate and low output in order to protect cultivated land area and increase the per unit area yield will play a decisive role in raising grain output.

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

36

Table 2.6. Prediction of grain yield Year

Ton/ha

Grain gross (0.1 billion ton)

2010

5.25-5.85

5.46-5.58

2030

6.45-7.05

6.49-6.54

Rely on Scientific and Technological Progress to Achieve the Balance Between Grain Supply and Demand To promote agricultural development through scientific and technological progeress has become the basic feature of modern agriculture. In the past several decades, the proportional contribution made by scientific and technological progress in agricultural growth has been getting higher (Table 2.8). Research on crop germplasm in China has held the leading position in the world. Breeding research on main cereal crops has produced a higher level in the yield, quality and disease resistance of the new varieties. A large number of improved varieties bred all over the country have the capacity to replace the currently produced varieties, taking the grain output increase to 10 billion kg. Also, extending modelized cultivation and applicable technologies such as dry land farming, plastic mulch, water saving farming, scientific fertilization, integrated management of insect pests and decreasing post-harvest losses all contribute to the rapid growth of the per unit area yield and the total grain output. With the extensive application of biotechnology in agriculture, it is estimated that biotechnology and output growth measures will generate more than 80 percent of the increase in agricultural products by the end of this century. So, the application of biotechnology to breeding new crop varieties such as super-rice, the development of nitrogen-fixing technology, the improvement of crop photosynthetic efficiency, and the wide application of biological chemicals will open up new channels for grain production and provide sound technological guarantees for output growth.

Table 2.7. Prediction of the balance between grain supply and demand Year

Demand

Supply

Balance

2010

5.91

5.52

0.39

2030

6.92

6.51

0.41

Adjust Planting Structure in Accordance with the Need of Grain Ration and Feed Grains From the overall situation of planting development, particular attention should be paid to feed production, including feed grain crops and feed crops, while making overall plans on the allocation of food grain, grains for seed industry and for industrial use and various cash crops. The emphasis should be on the harmonious development of a threecomponent crop structure: cereal crops, cash crops (including crops like melons and vegetables ) and feed crops. This means that a part of the feed grain area in Southern China which is brought under grain crops should be converted to growing grain/feed crops or feed-specific varieties, such as high yield rice or corn for feed use. Meanwhile, an appropriate area of the land should be increased to grow feed/manure crops (such as some green manure crops) and feed crops (such as alfalfa, sweet clover etc.) so as to form a feed basis and stimulate the crop structure to the greater diversity of the three-component one (cereal crops-cash crops-feed crops ) compared to the dual structure (cereal crops-cash crops). According to the estimation of the Long and Medium Term Food Development Research Team of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, the future proportion of the three crops in 2000 and 2020 is as shown in Figure 2.4.

Redistribute Grain Import and Export on the Basis of Stablizing Domestic Grain Market To avoid the grain price fluctuation generated by grain fluctuation in the domestic market, there should be a certain differentiation

Prospects for Grain Demand and Supply in the 21st Century

37

Fig. 2.4. The future tendencies of three types of crops: grain crops, feed crops and cash crops.

Table 2-8.The contribution of science and technology to yield Years

Contribution

1972-1982

27%

1983-1990

35%

1990-1996

40%

between the domestic grain market and the international market. Grain import and export should still be managed by the state-run grain industries. The national grain reserves can participate in the international grain trade to some extent. When the grain price rises rapidly in the international market, the central government can then sell a certain amount of the grain reserves to the grain business sectors for export, in order to relieve the impact of rising international prices on the domestc market. When the grain price in the international market is much lower than that in the domestic market, the central government can purchase some of the imported grains as national grain reserves. An appropriate amount of the imported grains can be used to compensate the domes-

tic grain shortages. When there is a grain shortage caused by the lower grain price in the domestic market compared to the international market, the grain importerts should be subsidized with the surplus, “the grain price in the intertnational market + tariff - the grain price in the domestic market,” apart from enjoying tariff preferences. When the grain price in the domestic market is higher than that in the international market, a target price should be set, to raise the grain purchasing price. Theoretically, the volume of grain needed to fulfill the target price should be the basis of the grain imports. Surplus grains are exported when the grain price in the domestic market is lower than that in the international market. Grain exports undoubtedly raise the grain price in the domestic market, which benefits grain producers. It will not result in raising the grain price in the market. Grain exports will also decrease the volume of grain purchased by the central government at target price and therefore lighten the financial burden of subsidies. However, one consequence should be avoided, which is that the excess exports should cause grain shortages in the domestic market.

References 1. Summers R, Heston A. An expanded set of international comparisons, 1950-1988. Quarterly J Econ, 1991; 16:327-368.

CHAPTER 3

Agricultural Science In India— Shaping for the Future M. Rai and A.K. Bawa

I

n the year 1996, from an estimated 1362 million hectares of arable land, 2050 million tons of cereals, 565 million tons of vegetables, 413 million tons of fruits and 536 million tons of milk were produced. In this global agricultural production, 88.6 kg/ha of fertilizer was used, consisting of 53 kg N, 21kg P2O5 and 14 kg K2O. An estimated 2592 million people were engaged in agriculture. In India, from 166 million hectares of arable land, 185 million tons of cereals, 65 million tons of vegetables, 39 million tons of fruits and 67 million tons of milk were produced, an average 81.8 kg/ha of fertilizer being used. Nearly 541 million people were engaged in agriculture. The projected world population of 6.17, 8.35 and 11.0 billion by 2000, 2025 and 2050 CE, respectively, would require far greater vertical agricultural growth through almost 100 per cent productivity enhancement in the next 50 years. The same would be true for India, whose population is likely to cross the 1500 million mark by 2050 CE. In order to address the multiple and interwoven problems of ensuring household food and nutritional security, enhancing productivity, sustaining production, protecting environment, conserving natural resources and improving the profitability of farming as an occupation, there is an urgent need to redefine the agricultural research agenda. The important areas of science and technology, viz., biotechnology, seed technology, post-harvest technology, hybrid technology, information technology, remote sensing, GIS-based modeling and land use planning, integrated pest management,

integrated plant nutrient management etc., are expected to provide the necessary boost to agriculture productivity in the times ahead. Indian agriculture will have to achieve ecological, economic and social sustainability, for which a change, both in agricultural research priorities and strategies, and in public policies, will be needed. It will be desirable to examine the directions of this change and to understand its multidimensional effects on farm, family, livestock, science and society. Capital formation in agriculture; critical human resource development for upstream research; institutional mechanisms; congenial policies; public/private interface; system-wide systems approach; market-oriented and demand-driven technological upgradation; technology assessment, refinement and transfer; proprietary products, processes and marketing systems processing; product development and value addition etc. will be required to bring in a much needed agricultural commerce which would withstand the globalized market based on its competitiveness in terms of cost and quality. Equity, social and economic justice and sustainable growth would be expected only with a sound development strategy that must rally around conservation of natural resources, so that these are available for rational use on sustainable basis.

Indian Scenario The “green revolution” is one of the success stories of post-independence India cited globally. It enabled India to convert its

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of the Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

40

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

“begging bowl” status into that of “selfsufficiency.” It also brought about an element of resilience in agriculture to ward off the vagaries of nature, and infused much needed confidence in the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). The green revolution ushered in an era of overall rural prosperity. This massive transformation was possible due to two basic factors, i.e., research infrastructure and trained human resource. Both of these were critical for the technological development which flourished under effective, efficient and reasonable public policies. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) as the apex agricultural research organization had been at the forefront in setting the national research agenda and in guiding its development. As a result, the total food grain production increased from a mere 50.8 million tons (mt) during 1950-51 to 199.3 million tons in 1996-97. The production of wheat (69.3 mt), rice (81.3 mt) and oilseeds (25.0 mt) have recorded an all time high. In the process, India emerged as the second largest producer of wheat, surpassing the USA in both production as well as productivity. Tropical, subtropical and arid fruit crops together produced 40 million tons from 3.94 m ha, and enabled India to occupy a leading position in the world. In vegetable production (64.67 mt) India is now the second largest producer, after China. In this total agricultural endeavor, 14.3 million tons of NPK fertilizers and 56 thousand tons of pesticides were used. All this was made possible due to adoption of good quality seeds, enhanced use of fertilizers and plant protection practices, and an increase in assured irrigation. The distribution of certified/quality seeds to the farmers from public sector outlets alone increased to 700,000 tons in 1996-97 from 250,000 tons during 1980-81. Interestingly, during the nineties seed production and availability through the private sector has gone up many fold. There are over 500 small and large seed companies, including several multinationals. The livestock sector, as well, continues to play an important role in India’s economy in terms of income, employment, earning foreign exchange and enhancing household nutritional security. India has a population

of 193 million cattle and 79 million buffalo, contributing about 71 million tons of milk. Besides, 28.5 billion eggs and 44.6 million kg of wool are produced in this sector. India has also achieved fish production of 5.39 million tons from marine and inland resources during 1997-98, to become one of the leading nations producing fish and fish products. The negligible imports of cereals during the last decade, and improvement in the per capita availability; per capita calorie intake closer to the accepted norms (about 2200 calories/day); the export of food grains exceeding on average the imports; considerable stability in food grain production and availability; diversified crop production increasing physical access to other commodities such as oilseeds, vegetables and fruits, sugarcane, condiments and spices in different regions; and the increase in economic access to food through increased per capita income are the positive features of an emerging strong agriculture-based Indian economy.

National Agricultural Research System The National Agricultural Research System of India is one of the largest in the world, with over 30,000 highly qualified scientists. The Central and State Governments provide most of the funds. The private sector in recent years has started to invest in agricultural research, mainly in seed improvement and production. Its share is expected to increase further with the existing and emerging congenial public policies, including appreciation for Intellectual Property Protection. Although the history of agricultural research in India goes back to the early years of the century, much of the present growth of the system has taken place in the past four decades. A significant part of it can be traced to the reorganization of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in 1966 when, as the main executive agency, it was given responsibility and considerable autonomy to plan and coordinate research and to be the main funding body. ICAR has been described as the research arm of the Ministry of Agriculture, performing a variety of functions, including determination of national research policies and priorities, linking them with the government’s development

Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future objectives, and establishing and managing a large network of research institutes and centers (Fig. 3.1).

ICAR Institutes The network of research institutions includes 4 National Institutes deemed to hold university status, 41 Central Research Institutes, 4 Bureaus, 28 National Research Centers, 10 Project Directorates and 82 All India Coordinated Research Projects (Table 3.1). These diverse institutions cover agricultural research in its wide sense, including crops, veterinary and animal science, fisheries, agroforestry, soil science, agricultural engineering, post-harvest technology, socioeconomics and other related disciplines, as shown in the table. State Agricultural Universities While the reorganization and growth of the ICAR and its institutes has been a significant development, an equally important development has been the setting up of 28 State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) on the pattern of the land grant Colleges of Agriculture in the United States, with suitable adjustments. These universities have taken over the teaching and research functions from the Departments of Agriculture in their respective states. The State Agricultural Universities, with most states having one or more of them, are the regional institutions responsible for providing technological support for the development of agriculture in the states. They receive their funding support primarily from the state governments, but also from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in the form of coordinated projects and development grants. In recent years, the Council has set up an Agricultural University in the central sector for the northeastern states which functions like the SAUs. The State Agricultural Universities have a multifaculty and multicampus structure in order to develop location-specific technologies. They also have a network of over 120 Zonal and Regional Research Stations. The Zonal Station in an agroclimatic region coordinates and monitors the work of all the other university stations in the region.

41

Challenges Ahead Despite these favorable trends and set up, both poverty and malnutrition still remain serious problems. The average figures hide severe inequalities that prevent the poor from taking advantage of the increased supplies of food. These include lack of productive employment, particularly in rural areas, as well as lack of access to both food and non-food goods and also to services, due to insufficient infrastructure. It is estimated that one out of every five persons still does not have the means to buy two square meals a day, and around 100 million children below 5 years of age are protein energy malnourished. Further, the increase in population and agricultural intensification has brought the natural resources under considerable stress. How to protect them? How to increase their income and access to food and provide nutritional security are the key issues. Apart from the role of foodsupplier, there is an increasing awareness of the role of agricultural development as a driving force for overall economic growth, agriculture-based industrialization, employment generation, poverty alleviation, food and nutritional security and sustainability. For India, overall economic growth is inconceivable without growth in the agricultural sector. Therefore, an agriculturebased development strategy relying on increase in productivity and profitability, especially that of small holders, the availability of food at affordable cost for both poor and rich, and the provision of employment opportunities in the farm and rural non-farm sectors would be intrinsically poverty-reducing and food security- promoting. In this endeavor, some of the concerns are: 1. Recent slow pace of food grain production and plateauing of yields of major food crops like rice and wheat; 2. Practically no significant yield improvement in pulses; 3. Still limited choice of high yielding varieties and production package for highly risk prone and diverse rainfed ecologies, which account for twothirds of the cropped area; 4. Serious pest problems, which at times cause over 25% yield losses;

42

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 3.1. National Agricultural Research System in India. 5. Appearance of new virulent strains, pest resurgence and pesticide resistance; 6. Environmental safety; 7. Declining productivity factor; 8. Sharp decline in area under coarse cereals, and likely high demands on the feed front; 9. Erosion in genetic variability, soil degradation, soil erosion, waterlogging and water quality deterioration; 10. Inadequate seed production and limited quality seed availability; 11. Inadequate basic and strategic research support.; 12. Limited systems approach; 13. Limited dissemination of farmworthy agroproduction and protection technologies; 14. Limited processing, product development, value addition, marketing and trade facilities. 15. Inadequate investment in agriculture, i.e., about 0.46 percent of AGDP against its about 28 percent contribution to GDP;

Opportunities and Strategies Physical Bridging the Yield Gap A very large proportion of the area under various food crops fall under a low productivity category. The share of low productivity area varies from 57% in coarse cereals to 92% in oilseeds. Their yield levels are about 40% less than in high productivity areas. For instance, in rice and wheat the yield level in low productivity areas are respectively 2538 and 2032 kg/ha as against 2867 and 3828 kg/ha in high productivity areas. In these areas technology transfer and measures for enhancing input use holds the key. Waste Land Improvement Over 24.5 million ha remains as wasteland and 16.6 million ha as fallow lands. There are prospects of bringing under cultivation a sizable part of this large unutilized area through soil amendment and introduction of choice crop in the wastelands. Moisture conservation measures, development of facilities for life saving irrigation wherever feasible and introduction of crop species/varieties matching the available water balance in fallow lands would be the most rewarding. There is a good possibility of bringing much needed

Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future

43

Table 3.1. ICAR Research Institutions in Different Disciplines

National Bureau

National Research Centers

Coordinated Projects

Disciplines

Institutes

Project Directorates

Crop Science

10

5

1

6

33

Horticulture

8

1

–

10

16

Animal Science

7

2

1

6

7

Fisheries

6

–

1

1

–

Natural Resource Management

2

1

3

Agricultural Engineering

5

–

–

–

10

Agricultural Extension

–

–

–

1

–

Agricultural Education

1

–

–

–

–

Social Science

1

–

–

1

–

Total

45

10

4

28

82

16

Agricultural

improvement to salt affected soils, which occupy over 20 million hectares. Capitalizing on Rainfed Low Lands About 8-10 million ha of saturated soils in the rainfed lowland areas of eastern India remains the least exploited. Through concerted research and development efforts, crop intensification is possible over a sizable area. In the near future about 1 million ha can be brought under winter rice in the states of Bihar, Assam and Orissa. Similarly, effective drainage could enhance production efficiency in many states, viz., Assam, West Bengal, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.

Inter Cropping Inter-row space and time space available in crops like sugar cane, banana, cotton, sorghum etc. are least utilized. With the introduction of paired row planting and drip irrigation, the potential of using an intercrop of short duration pulses or oilseeds is enormous. When there is no room for increasing any more gross area under pulses and oilseeds, this is an opportunity to increase the area under them by 10-12 million ha over years. Water Harvesting India is fortunate to receive higher precipitation as compared to other countries of its size in the world. Watershed development

44

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

in such areas would greatly help provide protective irrigation for rainfed crops while helping recharge the wells. With in situ and ex situ water conservation, water harvesting, and water use and reuse, can provide a vast scope for enhancing cropping intensity, which has increased by only about 25% from 111% in the last four decades. Rice fallow again offer tremendous opportunity for area expansion in such crops.

Technical Conservation of Biodiversity India’s biological diversity continues to be rich, one of the 12 megacenters of plant diversity. This diversity needs to be preserved, and the immediate task will be to devise and enforce time bound plans for saving endangered plant and animal species as well as habitats of biological resources. This is considered most important, as with the advent of new tools and techniques there is no barrier to gene flow, and the living systems could be termed one gene pool with tremendous options and potentialities for new combinations. Requirement of capital resources at every level for agrobiodiversity conservation and management is critical to its success. Thus, every effort for resource mobilization, from within the country as well as from international arrangements has to be made. Intemationally, the endeavor should be to develop effective, efficient and transparent mechanisms for fair and equitable benefit sharing among nations, including technology transfer and capacity building. Consolidation of Yield Gains High yielding dwarf varieties in wheat and rice, as well as heterotic hybrids in maize, sorghum and pearl millet brought about a major advance in food grain production. Yield gap analysis reveals that a sizable part of the potential of these crops is yet to be fully tapped. Differences between experimental and farmers’ yields are quite wide. Equally, the gap is wide between potential and realizable yields. For instance, in rice about 40% of the potential available in the present day high yielding varieties is still to be exploited. In wheat, the

national average yield is 2.6 tons/ha as against the realizable 4.0 t/ha and genetic potential of 8 t/ha. In the case of hybrids, average yield of maize is 1.8 t/ha as against realizable 5 t/ha and genetic potential of 7.5 t./ha. Equally, the prospects for stepping up the yield level to 5 and 2 t/ha in sorghum and pearl millet do exist. What is required to achieve such yield targets is diagnosis and correction of factors constraining the yield increase. Insulation of all future varieties with desired levels of resistance to key pests and diseases, and tolerance to major abiotic stresses like salinity, drought, temperature extremes etc., could be the priority research area to consolidate the genetic yield potential already achieved in the plant type based varieties and hybrids. Maximization of Productivity of Rainfed Crops Over 97 million hectares (72%) of the cropped area is rainfed. It accounts for 44% of food (55% rice and 91% pulses), 90% groundnut and 68% of cotton. Even if the ultimate irrigation potential of the country is realized, about 50% of the cultivable area may continue to be rainfed. Since vagaries of weather affect production from drylands and thereby the stability of the food production in the country, strategic research on rainfed agriculture may be a priority area, to insulate the farmer from the high risks of dryland farming. The thrust areas of research could be a detailed characterization to optimize land use for rainfed crops and development of other alternate land use systems, understanding of crop/ weather/soil relationships for providing better agro-met advisory services and and rain water conservation and integrated nutrient management. Watershed development for raising productivity of rainfed crops, improvement of agricultural credit; insurance cover for risk prone areas and crops, and marketing facilities are some of the areas which need more attention. In spite of wide variation in the level of precipitation, rainfed areas are very low in productivity and predominantly monocropped. The productive potential of rainfed uplands, in particular, has deteriorated due to poor management rather than overexploitation. By developing land capacity based cropping and

Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future management strategies, productivity level could be further enhanced and sustained. Four decades of experience with hybrid crops suggests that hybrids in general, in preference to varieties, have higher resilience to critical environments. Development and use of short duration hybrids/composites/varieties of millets, cotton, sunflower, castor etc. in low rainfall areas is one of the crop planning strategies based on locational advantages. Plantation of horticultural crops in some of the arid and semi-arid environments is found to pay more than some of the annual food or oilseed crops.

Varietal Improvement Following the introduction of the Norin dwarfing gene-based high yielding varieties of spring wheat Sonora 64 and Lerma Rojo in the early sixties and the Dee-Geo-Wu-Gen dwarfing gene-based high yielding rice varieties Taichung (Native) 1 and IR8 in the mid-sixties, a major breakthrough in yield was achieved. Whereas high level of response to applied fertilizer combined with non-lodging habit ensured high yields, photo-insensitivity conferred wide adaptability and early maturity helped increase the cropping intensity. India is one of the few countries to take immediate advantage of the phenomenon of hybrid vigor for improving the productivity of as many as 10 field crops. India’s more than four decades long experience in hybrid technology prompted the ICAR to explore the possibilities of exploiting hybrid vigor in non-traditional crops like cotton, rice, rapeseed-mustard, safflower, sesame, pigeonpea etc., in addition to extending the hybrid technology of traditional crops like maize, pearl millet, sorghum, sunflower etc. to new and still underexploited niches. India has become the second country, after China, to make hybrid technology in rice a field reality. Now hybrids in rainfed crops like safflower and pigeonpea are also on the ground. Success of hybrid technology in any crop plant depends on the efficiency of producing and supplying adequate quantity of quality seed. In spite of a wide choice of productive hybrids available in several crops, desired pace of growth in terms of area coverage is yet to be achieved. As hybrid culture in agriculture, cutting across crops and commodities and ir-

45

respective of the nature of the crop, is likely to prevail in the 21st century, accelerated hybrid research and development efforts are on. Intensified efforts through interdisciplinary modes of operation on tailor-made varietal development, with tolerance to multiple biotic and abiotic stresses, continue to be the priorty. In the chain of events, environmental impact assessment for realizing enhanced and sustained crop productivity are considered of importance. Biotechnology has emerged as an indispensable tool globally for crop improvement. It is essential that it become fully integrated with the conventional breeding program for achieving rapid growth in agricultural production. Recognizing this fact, resources are being mobilized to establish infrastructure facilities in different institutes/universities in the country for undertaking biotechnology research and education. Over the years, there has been rapid growth in this area and a number of organizations have graduated from tissue culture technology to recombinant DNA biotechnology. Sustaining the enhanced production potential would be possible by engineering the plants against biotic and abiotic stresses. Sterility systems, derived from alien cytoplasms by genetically engineering male sterility in crops in a non-specific manner, would enhance the exploitation of hybrid vigor. Apomixis, as an extension of hybrid technology, would offer new promise in realization of hybrid advantage on a sustainable basis. Molecular markers could be linked to apomixis, which would facilitate marker-aided selection. Reduction in cost of production by replacing costly inputs like chemical fertilizers and pesticides would be possible. Genetic modification for better processing and storage, mechanical agriculture, and appropriate size, shape, color, flavor, texture, taste etc. of the useful part would open possibilities of an icing on the cake for a holistic approach in crop improvement and production. Identification of physiological and biochemical determinants of metabolism, growth and development would be another essential component for research. Crop growth models linked with GIS and remote sensing would provide new opportunities to design eco-region specific plant type designs to extrapolate

46

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

performance across different regions. The renewed emphasis on quality of food would make it imperative to understand plant regulation of nutrient uptake as it affects tissue composition and crop nutritional quality, including the efficiency of utilization of nutrients in the soil and plants by genetic and agronomic means. Protected cultivation would be far more important, and it would be important to determine optimal environmental factors and desired crop characteristics for maximizing the production of greenhouse crops. For water-deficit environments, understanding the physiological effects of water stress and response to water availability would be necessary in order to manipulate genetically different crops for greater adoption and productivity. Understanding the mechanism of crop/ weed competition, allelopathy and host/parasite relationships to develop crop production strategies will contribute to sustainable crop management practices. The vast majority of marine microorganisms have yet to be identified. Even for known organisms, there is insufficient knowledge to permit commercial exploitation. Oceanic organisms constitute a major share of the earth’s biological resources and often possess unique structures, metabolic pathways, reproductive systems and sensory and defense mechanisms. They have adopted to extreme environments, ranging from the cold polar seas to the great pressures and temperatures of the ocean floor. Enzymes produced by marine bacteria are important in biotechnology due to their range of unusual properties. Some are salt resistant, a characteristic that is often advantageous in industrial processes. An unusual group of microorganisms from which enzymes have been isolated are the hyperthermophilic archae (archaeobacteria), which can grow at temperatures of over 1000°C and produce enzymes that are stable at high temperatures. Transferring genes of interest from marine into non-marine microorganisms would be an another area with unfathomed prospects. Knowledge of the mechanisms underlying carbon allocation and sink-source relationships could help to modify the size of desired organs in a crop. Rhizobium strains

with improved symbiotic properties for efficient nitrogen fixation, even in non-leguminous plants, is another possibility. Optimization of mineral nutrition, transport and assimilation in stressed environments to make the most of limited fertilizer input will contribute to efficient crop production. Engineering of oils for modern human diet and for use as feedstock for chemical industry is a real possibility. Production of enzymes in forage crops that will enhance the efficiency of their digestion by the livestock is another area with great promise. The value of incorporating the shortlisted physiological traits has first to be demonstrated before recommending them as selection criteria. New opportunities using biotechnology approaches are now available to create genetic variation for physiological and biochemical traits, including those for realizing enhanced photosynthetic efficiency. Water is a major constraint in many parts of India. Hence, efforts to manipulate genetically different crops for greater adaptation and productivity in water-deficit environments would be important. Water deficiency coupled with salinity/alkalinity is another paradigm for research. Abrupt weather/temperature fluctuations is yet another challenging research area.

Integrated Nutrient Management Exhaustive cropping systems like wheat/ rice, wheat/cotton, rice/rice etc. have hastened the pace of soil health degeneration. The impact is seen in the plateauing yield levels of major crop-based rotations. At present Indian agriculture is mining nearly 10 million tons of nutrients. In spite of the new technologies continuously emerging on the scenes of action, maintaining the yield growth has become increasingly difficult and costly, mainly due to inefficient input use and declining quality of resource base, manifested by increasing incidence of micronutrient deficiencies, decline in soil organic matter etc. No matter how successfully the plant potential for higher productivity is expanded, future gains would depend on meeting the nutrient requirement of plants through development of integrated nutrient management systems (IPNS) for sustainable resource management. Recent reports suggest that cereal

Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future food deficient in mineral nutrients decreases the IQ of children by 10 points. The potentiating effect of protein-, energy-, mineral nutrient-deficient cereal food may adversely affect about half the population in south Asia. Therefore, promotion of nutrient management through IPNS is an important component of the Indian strategy for food and nutritional security. In the quest for greater productivity, we have a responsibility to promote the use of fertilizers, organics including farm wastes, crop residues, green manure and urban city composts and microbial inoculant to bridge the demand/supply gap of mineral nutrients. The nutrient gap has to be met by enhancing the input use efficiency through development of integrated nutrient management systems for harnessing the positive interactions of crops with growth factors in major production systems in different agro-ecological regions. In fertilizer consumption statistics, a matter of serious concern is the widening N:P:K fertilizer use ratio. A widening N:P:K ratio indicates an imbalanced fertilizer use. On a macro scale the deviation from the ideal 4:2:1 NPK consumption pattern would suggest that the greater the departure from this ratio, the more the imbalance in the N:P:K ratio. It must be fully recognized that the ideal N:P:K consumption pattern would be different for irrigated, dryland, horticultural and plantation crops. Most organics have N, P and K in proportions such that it is not possible to correct the N:P ratio through their use. Organics having low N and high K (e.g., rice straw) can at best correct the N: K ratio. It is only through the use of enriched phospho-composts that the widening N:P nutrient pattern can be corrected; otherwise, we must promote the use of phosphatic fertilizers.

Integrated Pest Management Excessive use of pesticides in some of the crops, viz., cotton has made pest management increasingly difficult because of new problems such as pest resurgence and pesticide resistance. Pollution of environment and pesticide residues at toxic levels in the food chain are other problems associated with the indiscriminate use of pesticides. It is increasingly evident that chemical pesticides alone can not provide the desired level of protection against some of

47

the key pests. For instance, management of Heliothis, a polyphagous pest having a wide host range, has become a challenge, as it resists to different degrees many known chemical pesticides. In such cases, integrated pest management involving all available control techniques, namely host plant resistance, pest-specific biocontrol agents, botanical pesticides and cultural practices has been found not only to be an effective remedy to the pest problem but also highly cost effective and environment friendly . A wide choice of resistant varieties now available against many of the pests in different crop plants, and introduction of innovative approaches, are good signs for the reduced use of toxic pesticides. Integrated pest management(IPM) utilizing the best combination of available control techniques has been found to be an effective remedy to the pest problems of major crops like cotton, rice, sugar cane, tobacco and a wide range of pulse and vegetable crops. While giving due emphasis to IPM approach as environment friendly and cost effective, it is worth mentioning that India is not among the countries that use very high levels of pesticides. Moreover, the pest is a serious constraint on tropical crops and, also, biodegradation of the pesticides is fast under tropical conditions. Integration of components of pest control and management require far greater capitalization on complementarities and synergies of crops, varieties, cropping pattern, agronomic management, chemical use, biological balance etc. This would require effective, adaptable and viable capsules, their promotion and use.

Post-Harvest Management It is estimated that food grain losses in the country are at about 10% in the case of cereals, pulses and oil seeds and up to 40% in the case of fruits and vegetables. In order to ensure Indian agriculture to be globally competitive, processing, product development, value addition, packaging, storage and marketing are considered of paramount importance. We believe that post-harvest technologies have to be an essential element of our overall strategy of enhancing productivity , production and net monetary returns per unit area, input

48

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

and time. The research intervention in this area has led to the diversification of agricultural crops/commodities/processes/ products to further boost our agricultural production, consumption and export. With the development and application of post-harvest technologies, the exports in agriculture have been steadily increasing. It is believed that wealth could be had from the waste, byproducts could become main products and full use of agricultural produce in various farms and functions could enhance substantially the competing ability of agriculture, its produce, products and processes.

Agricultural Exports In the last few years, India has been emerging as a leading exporter of agricultural produce, both fresh and processed. Our national exports of agricultural commodities during the year 1997-1998 were RS1262860 millions (million rupees). Oilmeal and oilcake, fresh fruits and vegetables and marine products are major foreign exchange earners. Fine quality basmati rice, meat and meat preparations, spices and cashew have made considerable breakthroughs in the international markets. With the globalization of markets, commerce in agriculture would be witnessed far more than ever before and hence it would be congenial for technology transfer to take place in realizing enhanced productivity and production. Efficiency would hold the key to attain and sustain advantages in terms of cost and quality locally, regionally and globally.

Agricultural Extension The increasing complexity of production environment demands efficiency, information, dissemination and training in the use of modern technologies. For this, an appropriate extension service needs to be in place to stimulate and encourage both top-down and bottom-up flow of information between farmers, extension workers and researchers. Technology transfer, in order to be effective, must be preceded and succeeded by technology assessment. How reliable an assessment has been can be judged by the effectiveness of transfer of a given technology. Therefore, technology assessment and technology transfer are complementary to each other. Technol-

ogy transfer must be based on needs and capabilities of agro-ecological settings, resource endowments, agro-production and distribution systems and farm households. Transfer of farmworthy technology is vital for harnessing the fruits of research. In this endeavor, re-orienting of agricultural extension systems to respond to the changing diverse needs of different agro-climatic situations would be important. Special emphasis will have to be given to the extension needs of hilly, tribal and rainfed areas, and especially the needs of women in agriculture. The priorities in the area of front-line extension approach would necessitate: 1. Stress on technology assessment, refinement and transfer through Institute-Village Linkage Programs; 2. Analysis of cost-risk return structure of major farming systems in different agro-eco-regions/subregions; 3. Consensus on the unified and field tested recommendations to the farmers; 4. Technology dissemination through active involvement of mass media; 5. Accelerated interface, between public/ private and research/development systems.

Programs and Policies Our development policies at times are placed on conflicting objectives.The environmental problems and policies need coordinated appraisal, as they are inextricably enmeshed in their impacts, value orientation objectives and attainments, irrespective of geo-political barriers. The specific concern at this juncture should pinpoint critical conditions for success so that development becomes truly an ally for providing social justice. Obviously, there is no simple or single solution to the complex ecological, socioeconomic and technological problems facing those engaged in promoting sustainable advances in the productivity of terrestrial and aquatic farming systems. This scientific challenge can be met through accelerated efforts in the blending wisdom of traditional technologies and modern science and technology.

Agricultural Science In India—Shaping for the Future Scientists must work in partnership with farmers, industry and entrepreneurs to bring a new culture in agriculture. Transformation of the most marginalized farmers into agents of poverty alleviation, and environmental management through the blending of traditional and frontier technologies in socially equitable, economically viable and environmentally sustainable backgrounds and through production of more food from a diminishing resource base, with new agricultural technologies and management systems providing increased productivity per unit of land, water, energy, labor and investment, would be worth perusing. Part of this will involve focusing research on neglected crops such as minor millets, grain legumes and tubers, which can perform in times of environmental stress and in neglected areas such as arid and semi-arid/ coastal and mountain areas.

Eco-Regional Planning In the present scenario, ecoregional planning will have to aim at enhancing agricultural productivity and production on a sustainable basis to meet the ever growing needs of the farm family and livestock for food, feed, fodder, fuel, fiber etc. This would imply an upscaling of research activities within the eco-regions and dovetailing research and development priorities between and within the eco-regions. This would call for an effective collaborative mechanism, i.e., responsibility for a higher level of integration in research and development efforts. Thus, a lucid distinction of collaborative mechanisms and a clear distinction between priority setting at the ecoregional level and its effective execution at the local levels would be essential. In the ecoregional approach to research and management of natural resources, a balance in development and utilization of biodiversity would be important. The research should aim at improving the productivity of scarce resources while protecting the quality of soil and water, and at the same time safeguarding biodiversity for posterity. Concerning the management issue, the following points would need attention: 1. Research on conservation and management of ecosystems that include

49

multicrop and multi-economic farming systems in a program mode; 2. Accelerated research on the management of production systems; 3. Socioeconomic and public policy research to understand farmer and community decision making processes regarding the utilization of resources and factors affecting farmers’ incentives and their adoption of improved technologies; 4. Development of capacity of NARS for far more effective understanding of the intricacies of natural resource management. This would require fresh defining of NARS as everyone who can contribute to the cause of Agricultural Research and Development as a part and partner in the national agricultural endeavor. The most important end product of an ecoregional approach may be to provide a framework for sustainability. Incorporation of social and economic components would ensure success of the ecoregional approach. It is also recognized that training in various facets of a multidisciplinary approach in program mode would be extremely important for the success of the contemplated efforts. Compiling the existing information to identify the driving forces of land use changes and resource base degradation would be important in the first instance. This could address the issues of natural resources, innovations and technological options, present use of resources, potentials for agricultural production, policy objectives and short to long term goals, research capacity building, population dynamics, farmers’ decision making processes and capabilities, and market evaluation and intervention processes.

Human Resource Development Human Resource Development is a necessary concomitant of all dynamic systems for stability and attaining equilibrium with external forces. Human resources are the most important of any research systemsm since its performance depends not only the quality of its scientific and behavioral manpower but also on their motivation and morale. The human

50

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

and organizational resources are of much greater importance than material resources. There is an incredible variation in human capability, both physical and mental. Equally incredible is the degree to which an individual or group can evolve or degenerate based on the effort put in the process. This simply underscores the need to develop the human resource irrespective of the area of activity which, in fact, is a management tool equally applicable in agricultural science as it is in other disciplines. Changes due either to the stimulus of external environment or to internal pressure, can not remain static in any dynamic system. The only alternative to change is decay. Any vibrant, forward looking organization sensitive to the forces of change impacting it has to have a set of integrated and interrelated initiatives in HRD. The problem acquires complexity because it is not only acquisition of simple skills, but also of knowledge, attitudes and, more importantly, of values. These together constitute the work culture of the organization and the nation.

Conclusion The task ahead is much more complex in nature and severe in intensity. Apart from accelerating growth in production, issues of sustainability and environment are to be addressed. At the same time, integration of our economy with the rest of the world and competitive trade environments call for much more efficient production systems. Obviously, in this emerging agricultural scenario, development and dissemination of appropriate technologies have to play an important role.

Higher agricultural growth is necessary for alleviating poverty, and for economic transformation of rural India. In spite of the progress on several fronts, from a global perspective the environment has continued to degrade during the past decade and significant environmental problems remain deeply enmeshed in the socioeconomic fabric of nations in all regions. Internationally and nationally, funds and efforts need to be enhanced substantially to halt further global environmental degradation and to address the most pressing environmental issues. To meet these challenges, agriculture has to become vibrant, productive and competitive. Science, science culminating into technology, technology realized as practices, practices translated into production, productionbased consumption and consumption impacting on health would rally around energy conversion, its cycle and recycling, which would obviously require a balanced production to consumption mode of research and development to sustain the system and society for posterity. It is hoped that increasing population pressures culminating in ever growing demands will catalyze capitalization on uncommon opportunities, through added investmentd in the area of exploitation of the vast common gene pool, in various permutations and combinations which, in conjunction with efficient utilization of added inputs, would be able to meet what the Indian population would need. A vast experience and expertise would be the most vital tool in managing the change and making it a change for the better.

CHAPTER 4

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience D. Gollin

T

he close of the 20th century has brought new and daunting challenges to the agricultural and biological sciences. Confronted with population growth and the continual emergence of new diseases, pests, and environmental problems, researchers face pressure to develop improved technologies at an everincreasing rate. Agricultural researchers are charged with the responsibility of producing more food and fiber, lowering the costs of production, and protecting the natural environment. They are urged to design plant varieties that benefit the poor and remedy social injustice; they are encouraged to create technologies that meet the needs of women; and they are asked to target marginal environments in which producers use few inputs. For those who manage research organizations or allocate funding for agricultural research, this portfolio of responsibilities can be overwhelming. An increase in funding levels would always help, but the allocation problems remain. Should resources be spread across all the potentially useful subjects? Or should they be concentrated in a few priority areas? If so, which ones? Should they be devoted to long term projects with uncertain payoffs? Or to short term efforts with relatively modest—but predictable—returns? Should “upstream” research be a priority, or should agricultural researchers simply draw on tools and techniques developed in other fields of biological research? Should public money be used to fund research, or will the “right” technology be created in the private sector, where an emergent agro-biotechnology industry is generating new

products daily? A host of similar questions can be identified. Such questions about the efficient and equitable use of resources go to the heart of economics. Although many biological scientists are wary of economic analysis, the real strength of the discipline lies in its ability to shed light on the effective use of resources. Economics is usually defined as the study of how to achieve desired objectives with limited means, and this seems to be an appropriate way of thinking about the problems of research in the years ahead. Moreover, careful economic analysis forces research managers to set out their assumptions. This can occasionally reveal priorities that are “non-obvious” and that have previously been overlooked. Priority setting for research is complex, however. Research is an inherently uncertain process: We do not know in advance whether or not certain avenues of work will be fruitful, nor how long they may take. The people who are best able to evaluate research - the scientists involved - often differ widely in their views concerning which approaches are best. Furthermore, we typically lack good data on the payoffs associated with research success. Nevertheless, several models and techniques have been developed for attempting to prioritize agricultural research. This paper will briefly consider the relevant concepts, techniques, and models for ex ante evaluation of agricultural research. A number of examples will be considered. In particular, this paper will focus on an interesting

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. © 2000 Eurekah.com.

52

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

case study: the Rockefeller Foundation’s priority setting process for rice biotechnology research. It then asks whether similar priority setting methods are well suited for other decision makers, or whether different tools are appropriate in different settings. Finally, the paper speculates on what issues may emerge as central ones in the decades ahead.

Research Priority Setting: Theories and Models A substantial literature deals with the problem of allocating resources for agricultural research. Ruttan traces the literature to work by Fishel in the early 1970s.1-2 In recent years, the literature on research planning has experienced a minor boom, perhaps driven in part by decreases in funding for public sector agricultural research. Two recent books on the subject are Alston, Norton and Pardey and Evenson, Herdt, and Hossain.3-4 Numerous articles and manuscripts address specific applications of the priority setting literature. The literature distinguishes between “priority setting” and ex ante evaluation.” This paragraph, and the following one, drew heavily from work by Evenson, Herdt, and Hossain.4 Taking these categories in reverse order, the latter involves relatively detailed accounting of the expected costs and benefits of narrowly defined research projects. For example, it might be possible to conduct an ex ante evaluation of a project aimed at breeding for powdery mildew resistance in bread wheat. By contrast, “priority setting” is usually taken to be the process by which resources are allocated across broad problem areas. For example, priority setting techniques might be used to allocate research funds across different crops or regions, or between plant breeding and entomological studies. In principle, it would be possible to conduct priority setting exercises simply by aggregating information from ex ante evaluations of specific projects. In practice, however, there is seldom enough data to proceed in this fashion. Moreover, ex ante evaluations are perhaps too narrowly focused to be useful for priority setting. They typically ignore the interactions among different research projects; in some cases, there may be several projects that could achieve a particular objective.

Considered on their own, all of them may look like sensible investments, but at the aggregate level they may be redundant. Priority setting thus requires a certain breadth of perspective; it involves a kind of macro analysis that cannot be simply developed from the microanalysis of ex ante evaluations.

Basic Principles There is substantial agreement among economists about the basic principles of priority setting for research. In essence, the main economic idea is that priority setting should move a research system towards “allocative efficiency.” The notion of allocative efficiency is that resources should be allocated across research problem areas (RPAs) so that the expected net benefits of research are maximized. A necessary condition of allocative efficiency is that an additional dollar of funding will have approximately the same expected payoff regardless of the particular activity in which it is invested. In other words, the added benefit that we can expect from an increment of $100,000 in research support should be identical whether we allocate the money to plant physiology or to soil science. Moreover, the expected payoff should be the same whether we allocate the money to “upstream” research in basic science or to “downstream” research in agronomy. Note that the expected benefit is the product of: 1. The productivity gain that would be obtained if the research is successful; and 2. The probability that the research program will succeed in solving the problem. If this condition were not satisfied, there would be the potential to increase expected net benefits by reallocating resources from activities with (relatively) low expected payoffs to those activities with (relatively) higher expected payoffs. It would be efficient for such reallocation to continue until there is no further potential for increasing benefits in this fashion. How can allocative efficiency be achieved? In many contexts, competitive markets tend to result in the efficient allocation of resources. With public sector research, however, markets offer little guidance for allocating resources.

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience Instead, research administrators typically rely on a variety of different techniques. Some of these are sensible; others are not.

Congruence Rules Research planners often cling implicitly to ideas of “congruence” or “parity” in research funding, i.e., the notion that research resources should be allocated to different RPAs proportionately to the value of production. This is an idea particularly beloved by legislators, finance ministry officials, and non-scientists. A simple “congruence” rule might allocate research funds so that research expenditures per dollar of crop production were equalized across crops. There are many other possible congruence rules. For example, other rules might allocate research funds proportionate to the number of people employed or the amount of land used. These rules share, however, the common feature that they propose allocating research funds in a way depending entirely on the “demand” for research; they do not attempt to account for differences in the “supply” of research across RPAs. It would similarly be possible to equalize research dollars per dollar of crop production across regions or ecosystems. Let Eij represent research expenditures on crop i in ecosystem j; and let Y ij represent the production of crop i in region j. Similarly, let pi give the price per unit of output of crop i (usually, though not necessarily, taken to be invariant across regions). Then, if ˆC is a constant; then the congruence rule holds that Eij / piYij = ˆC, i,j Although the congruence rule is easy to understand and has the virtue of simplicity, it is typically suboptimal in an economic sense. One reason is that there may be greater potential for successful research in some crops or regions than in others. A second reason is that there may be unusually large benefits associated with research gains in particular crops or areas; basing research expenditures on the current value of production will not necessarily capture these benefits. For example, suppose there is a simple constraint to production of maize in one geographic area, such as a particular nutrient deficiency. In the presence of this constraint, the value of production is zero. If the constraint could be removed, the area might produce a great deal

53

of maize. In this situation, then, a congruence rule that is based on the current value of maize production might not allocate any research resources to this area. That might be a shortsighted decision, however, because there is a high potential for research to generate large payoffs. In general, the problem with congruence methods is that they focus exclusively on the “demand” for research and neglect differences in the “supply” of research that might lead to higher payoffs for some RPAs than for others.

Supply-Driven Resource Allocation

Ruttan (pp. 269-70)1 notes that in spite of the problems with congruence methods of priority setting, the basic notion of congruence offers a useful reference point for resource allocation. He suggests that research administrators should be prepared to justify large deviations from congruence. Ruttan notes that research administrators often prefer to focus entirely on supply-driven research agendas, in which nearly all programs are motivated by perceived scientific opportunities. He wryly observes that “there are an infinite number of interesting scientific problems, but not all of them are important.”1 To some extent, supply-driven allocation may be embodied in competitive approaches to research funding. For example, some research is funded through a competitive grant-seeking process in which grants are screened and rated by panels of experts. Although this peer review process is valuable, it may tend to reinforce a supply-driven view of research priorities. Such awards panels may tend to support “interesting” research at the expense of research that is useful but unglamorous. Similarly, in many fields there are substantial professional rewards (e.g., publication, tenure, etc.) that are based on scientific accomplishment rather than on the “importance” of research.

Economic Approaches to Priority Setting Priority setting thus involves balancing the competing pulls of “problem-driven” research (whose value is apparent in the short run) and “frontier” research that is driven by

A

54

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

longer term ambition to shift the scientific frontier, regardless of immediate applications. In effect, this means integrating “demand” factors and “supply” factors in considering alternative investments in research. A set of difficult questions arises: Which research areas have the biggest potential payoffs? Which are most likely to generate successful outcomes? Which are most likely to benefit the poor or to alleviate stresses on marginal environments? Which are most likely to advance the state of knowledge in ways that will subsequently generate useful applications? A number of approaches have attempted to integrate the supply and demand factors for research.5 Typically, these approaches involve the following ingredients: 1. An assessment of the benefits associated with achieving particular research goals; 2. A weighting of benefits in accordance with social objectives or other desired outcomes; 3. An assessment of the likelihood of success; 4. An estimate of the time at which benefits are likely to be realized; 5. An assessment of the costs of the research. In some cases, past experience may offer insights into the likely payoffs from different types of research. In such instances, ex post evaluations of research may serve as priority setting tools. Thus, Evenson (p. 99)6 notes that upland rice research has demonstrated few past payoffs. If nothing has changed that would alter the potential for upland rice research, a planner might want to consider the ex post evaluation data before investing funds in further upland rice research. In most cases, however, priority setting will depend on data-intensive analysis of benefits, costs, and probabilities of success. Among the methods that have been used are scoring methods, expected economic surplus models (including benefit/cost analyses), and programming models. Scoring models simply assign different weights to different criteria, allowing the planner to rank different RPAs accordingly. Expected economic surplus models attempt to quantify the gains to consumers and producers (or subcategories of

consumers and producers) from research that will alter the supply and/or demand for commodities. Finally, programming models solve an optimization problem involving the allocation of fixed quantities of scientific manpower and other resources, based on specified assumptions about the relationship between research inputs and expected outputs. One type of information critical for priority-setting exercises is data on the benefits of research. Benefits may be estimated from crop loss data; from estimates of “yield gaps” between farmers’ fields and experimental fields; or from subjective assessments of scientists working in a particular field. The benefit estimates depend on the production gains from “solving” a particular problem, the rate of diffusion of improved technologies, the duration of the gains, and the time lags until the gains are realized. The gains from a new crop variety or a new source of disease resistance will not be permanent. Typically, disease resistance depreciates over time. The duration of effective resistance is not surprsingly important for the calculation of benefits. Benefits also depend on the ways in which markets will respond to the new technology: They are sensitive to the slope of supply and demand curves for the final product. This is particularly critical for assessing the effects of new technologies on different categories or classes of consumers and producers. A second category of information critical to the priority-setting process relates to the supply of research and, in particular, the probabilities of success and the likely time to success. In many cases, such information can only be obtained from surveys of knowledgeable scientists. These scientists may have overly optimistic assessments of new technologies, but they may also fail to anticipate successes that are near at hand. In general, subjective probability estimates from scientists seem to be relatively reliable, and they are better than any alternative estimates of research time lags and success probabilities. Methodologies for eliciting scientists’ input in priority setting are now well established. Some recent studies that use scientists’ estimates to assign research priorities are Mills and Karanja for the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute’s wheat program; Mills for

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience sorghum in Kenya; Mutangadura and Norton for the Zimbabwean agricultural sector; and Evenson, Dey, and Hossain for rice in Asia.7-10 This literature is now well established. Although researchers have encountered some difficulties in utilizing data from scientists, the methods employed have become increasingly sophisticated. Moreover, with more experience in priority-setting studies, economists are beginning to have some opportunities to check the validity of scientists’ responses. For example, Evenson examines changes over time in the subjective probability estimates of scientists participating in the Rockefeller program on rice biotechnology.11 A group of 15 scientists was surveyed in 1993 and again twelve months later. Although the sample was small, it allowed Evenson to test the hypothesis that scientists set “moving targets” for research completion dates. This hypothesis suggests that scientists will predict today that a project will come to fruition in, say, ten years; but, when they are asked about the same project two years later, they may still say that it will take ten years to achieve success. Evenson found little evidence of moving target problems, however.11 This reinforces the idea that subjective probability estimates may be of adequate quality for priority-setting studies.

From Theory to Practice: A Case Study of the Rockefeller Foundation’s Decision to Prioritize Rice Biotechnology Perhaps the most noteworthy example of research priority setting in recent years was undertaken by the Rockefeller Foundation as part of its decision to concentrate its agricultural investments in the relatively narrow field of biotechnology for rice. Since 1984, the Rockefeller Foundation has spent about $70 million to support a program for rice biotechnology research in the developing world. As Herdt (p. 19)12 notes, “rice was chosen because 90 percent or more of the world’s rice is produced and consumed in the developing world, and as a result, gains from technical change in rice will largely accrue there.” An added reason for the focus on rice was the sense that public and private research agencies in industrial countries would be unlikely to invest much in rice technologies that would be useful

55

for the developing world. Although there is abundant rice research in Japan, the United States, and a number of European countries, this research may not generate very many direct benefits for developing countries because of differences in climate, photoperiod, indica vs. japonica differences, etc. Consequently, the Rockefeller program aimed at achieving two objectives: generating technology useful for developing countries, and strengthening the capacity of laboratories and scientists in the developing world to perform rice biotechnology research. To date, a network of 200 senior scientists has been developed, with 300 additional scientific trainees. Evenson (p. 328)11 notes that as of early 1994, the program had supported some 130 projects in 26 countries, including 69 projects in developing countries. More than half of these projects included “biotechnology tool development” as a goal, and more than half specified “yield-enhancement technologies” among their objectives. Disease and insect resistance also accounted for a number of projects, with grain quality technologies and stress resistance technologies accounting for most of the remainder. It is arguably too soon to see results from the Rockefeller Foundation’s investments, but some preliminary results have already been achieved. Participating scientists succeeded in transforming rice in 1988, making it the first of the cereal crops to be transformed. There are now transformed lines containing economically useful traits. Herdt reports that, in China, a rice variety produced with anther culture at the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences has incorporated genes for resistance to pathogens and to cold.13 This variety has been field tested on over 3000 hectares (ha) in Anhui and Hubei provinces, with yield improvements of 6-24 percent over the most popular current varieties. Herdt notes a number of additional attainments in rice biotechnology in Asia and predicts (p. 6)13 that “the contributions to rice yield increases from biotechnology in Asia will be on the order of 10 to 25 percent over the next ten years.” These are striking benefits, but the yield increases do not by themselves convey the full impact of biotechnology. The incorporation of disease resistance through genetic

56

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

manipulation can reduce the quantities of pesticides used on rice. The ability to incorporate useful traits from wild relatives raises the potential for a vast broadening of the genetic base for rice and other crops. These gains are not without dangers; many critics of biotechnology worry that hidden flaws will emerge as genetically modified plants become increasingly common. But, for now, the potential for improving human welfare through biotechnology seems to create a strong imperative. At a less controversial level, biotechnology investments have paid off by improving the speed and efficiency of conventional plant breeding. For example, biotechnology has facilitated the development of molecular markers that allow breeders to easily discern whether a plant possesses traits of interest. Such approaches can improve the productivity of conventional breeding.

2.

Priority-Setting and the Rockefeller Investments Although the decision to concentrate on rice biotechnology for developing countries was in itself an example of priority setting, the Rockefeller Foundation faced another challenge upon beginning the biotechnology program. Which areas of rice biotechnology were most worthy of support? Would the payoffs be greatest in disease and pest resistance? In breeding for abiotic stress tolerance? In the development of tools useful for breeding? In the identification of molecular markers that could be used to test for genetic diversity? In the face of such questions, the Rockefeller Foundation undertook a careful and deliberate program of priority setting. This analytic framework has continued to guide the Rockefeller Foundation’s investments in biotechnology since the mid-1980s. The priority setting experience has been documented effectively in Herdt.14 The exercise involved an eight-step process, summarized below: 1. The target environments and regions were defined. These covered six geographic regions and four cross-cutting rice agroecologies. A critical step in any priority-setting process is to decide how to break down the different potential categories of research

3.

4.

5.

into RPAs. This decision in itself requires expert opinion to delineate the boundaries of specific RPAs. The importance of different research problem areas was estimated in three different ways. First, “knowledgeable scientists” estimated the yield losses due to different problems in each environment and region. As an alternative measure, a group of scientists “scored” each problem in each region, giving the relative importance of the various problems; the scientists were also asked about the maximum benefits that could be obtained from “solving” all of the relevant problems. Third, yield losses in specific regions were compared to a “reference region”, allowing for some consistency in estimates of importance across regions. The challenge here is to arrive at useful relative measures of the importance of different RPAs while keeping sight of the aggregate plausibility of the assumptions. In other words, it is not credible to find that six insect pests each cause an average of 15 percent yield losses annually in wheat. Some adding-up constraint must be imposed if the results are to be believed. Yield losses were converted into monetary terms by multiplying by areas and prices. This is perhaps the most straightforward step in the process. Environmental effects were taken into account by creating a set of weights for each problem in each region and agroecology. These weights were designed to reflect the added benefits that could be gained from using genetic methods to alleviate a problem that currently required pesticide use, herbicide use, or other environmentally harmful practices. Equity considerations were added by making an assessment of which RPAs would have the greatest benefits to the poor. Net benefits were then adjusted to yield an “equity- weighted” measure of the payoffs from achieving success in different RPAs. The point

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience of this step was to allow planners to place greater weight on research that might be expected to benefit the poor. 6. The net present value of research benefits was computed for each problem and each agroecology. This depended critically on the assumed time lag until the problem was solved. Time lags were based on the elicited responses of scientists, who were asked how long they would expect it to take to find a solution for a problem-region-agroecology bundle, given a rate of research investment of $0.2 million per year. Although the figures elicited in this way may not be accurate in absolute terms, they probably offer a decent index of likely time lags. In other words, all else being equal, we would be inclined to believe that scientists might do a decent job of guessing which RPAs might take longest to “solve” and which might take less time. 7. The problems, regions, and agroecologies were ranked for susceptibility to a biotechnology solution. This was based on subjective probability estimates of knowledgeable scientists. This issue arises because some RPAs may be very important but may be solvable with conventional breeding techniques more readily than through biotechnology. Since the goal here is to set priorities for biotechnology research, there seems to be little point in selecting RPAs that are equally well addressed through conventional breeding or other techniques. 8. An investment rule was developed. This was a rule converting the overall rankings into actual funding decisions. Having established “priorities”, in the sense of a ranking of the importance of alternative research problems, there is still a need to convert these priorities into some action. This list is based on Herdt.14 The Rockefeller exercise led to a detailed priority listing for rice biotechnology research. The top priority after adjusting for equity issues, environmental impacts, and the likely

57

usefulness of biotechnology techniques, was the search for resistance to the rice tungro virus. Other top priorities were submergence tolerance, gall midge resistance, and a source of cytoplasmic male sterility. Some of the problems that were ranked as most serious, in terms of raw crop losses, did not emerge as high priorities after the rankings were adjusted to reflect environmental and equity concerns and their susceptibility to biotechnology solutions. For example, weed problems were the biggest single source of crop losses in the data, but they ultimately ranked 15th among RPAs in terms of priorities for research. Conversely, submergence tolerance, which ranked seventh in terms of crop losses, ended up as the second highest priority after all the requisite adjustments. This suggests that a formal prioritysetting process can lead research planners to identify priorities that would not otherwise have been obvious. Moreover, it can lead researchers to discard problem areas that seem unlikely to be worthwhile. In the case of the Rockefeller undertaking, within a relatively brief time from the beginning of the priority-setting exercise, Herdt was able to report that “rice plants transformed with various gene constructs for resistance to rice tungro virus have been produced and are being evaluated at IRRI.”15 This suggests that the priority assigned to tungro research—based in part on the expectation that research could be effective—may have been well founded. Rice tungro virus is one of the most damaging crop diseases in the world, destroying as much as 7 million tons of rice output annually.15 Such claims of success warrant careful analysis. Although it is too soon to evaluate the priority-setting exercise formally, Evenson has undertaken an interim evaluation of the rice biotechnology program. One conclusion is that the benefits appear large. A second conclusion is that interim results support the original prioritization of biotechnology research across categories. Finally, Evenson concludes that there are high payoffs to continued rice biotechnology research for developing countries.11

58

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Some Shortcomings of Existing Methods and Lessons for the Future The rice case study illustrates the power of the priority setting tools described above. Fairly simple economic concepts led to a dramatic result: the decision to focus resources on a relatively small range of programs with high potential payoffs. Other studies show that the same techniques can be used in a wide range of research organizations at the local, national, and international level. Still, the priority-setting techniques currently in use are limited. On some issues, they offer little guidance. The sections that follow lay out a few areas in which the priority-setting literature seems inadequate.

Managing a Portfolio of Research The priority-setting approach described by Herdt generates a ranking of alternative research programs.14 It does not, however, describe an optimal portfolio of investments. For a research manager, however, the optimal portfolio is of keen interest. Other priority-setting methodologies can generate recommendations for portfolios. For example, Evenson, Dey, and Hossain recommend research portfolios for different regions and agroecosystems.10 The portfolios described here and in similar studies, however, are based on equalizing net benefits per dollar of funding across research programs. But note that research programs involve uncertain outcomes. Some programs have low probabilities of success, but high payoffs. Others have high probabilities of success, but relatively modest payoffs. Research planners can usefully approach their task as a portfolio selection problem. Like stock market investors who choose a portfolio of investments to trade off risk against return, research planners should seek a balanced portfolio of safe and risky investments. For example, maintenance breeding for disease and pest resistance is generally low risk but has a low return. The search for drought tolerance, by contrast, is high risk but has a high return. In the economic literature, it is often argued that public actors can ignore the riskiness of investment projects because individual projects are small relative to the size of the state

sector and relative to the economy as a whole. For a research manager, however, the riskiness of a project is highly relevant. Few research programs can afford to gamble everything on a low probability, high payoff project. The Rockefeller Foundation’s investment in rice biotechnology was probably appropriate for a private foundation with limited accountability to legislators or the general public. A public research institution, by contrast, may need to invest in a less ambitious portfolio of projects, diversified across commodities and research techniques. This problem seems not to have been explored as extensively as might be warranted. For most institutions, priority setting and portfolio selection need to be based on some explicit treatment of risk.

Pursuing Comparative Advantage Just because a particular research program is worthwhile does not imply that a research organization should undertake it. There are many worthwhile programs, and no single organization should undertake them all. Instead, it makes sense for particular research organizations to focus on the activities in which they have a comparative advantage. This means simply that research organizations should specialize in the activities at which they are, relatively speaking, the best. Other research products may be borrowed or copied from other organizations or other countries. Herdt (p. 398)16 makes this point explicitly and notes that “different research organizations have different responsibilities.” It does not make sense to conduct a priority-setting exercise without thinking critically about the comparative advantages of the particular research institutions in question. To continue with the example of the rice biotechnology program, it would be foolish for every rice research establishment to imagine that it faced the same priorities as the Rockefeller Foundation. Different research organizations should specialize in different types of research. To some extent, considerations of comparative advantage can be pulled into the priority-setting process by incorporating an appropriate score into measures of the likelihood of achieving success. Even so, the

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience priority-setting process cannot substitute for careful reflection by research administrators. These administrators need to think clearly about what their organizations can best accomplish themselves, and what can be borrowed from elsewhere. The possibilities for borrowing are discussed in the next section.

Taking Advantage of Research Spillovers In many cases, agricultural researchers can benefit from “spillovers”originating in research conducted in other crops, other countries, or other areas of science. Biotechnology offers some immediate examples. The pace of biotechnology research has been rapid over the past decade, and repeated breakthroughs have taken place in techniques, tools, and scientific understandings. Although agricultural scientists have been at the forefront of some advances, it is not clear that agriculture can or should lead in the development of upstream biotechnologies. Possibly it makes greater sense for the agricultural sciences to borrow tools and techniques that are developed for other purposes. Similarly, there may be some RPAs where progress can be made effectively by borrowing from work done in other fields. An example might be research on animal diseases such as trypanosomiasis, a disease that affects both humans and animals. If researchers are currently busy on a trypanosomiasis vaccine for humans, it might be foolish to allocate research resources to the development of a vaccine for cattle. Once a human vaccine is available, it would presumably not take much time to develop a comparable vaccine for livestock. The existence of spillovers may imply that it is optimal to delay certain research programs or to ignore others altogether, perhaps while devoting added resources to programs that are unlikely to benefit from spillovers. This issue is discussed in more detail below.

Realizing the Benefits of Delay Just because a research program is justified does not imply that it needs to be begun today. In some cases, it will be preferable to delay the start of a research program. By delaying, the researchers incur a cost, namely, the expected delay in payoffs from the research

59

program. But there are benefits as well, since the research funds are available for other uses. A key question is how much it will delay the payoffs from a particular RPA to postpone the initiation of the project by one year, for example. Given the rapid improvement in biotechnologies—and especially in tools and techniques—it would seem to make sense for researchers to postpone many research projects with the expectation that projects deemed “difficult” today might become very tractable in a few years. The effort exerted today may prove in a few years to be wasted, if new techniques allow researchers to find shortcuts. A relevant question for the Rockefeller Foundation rice biotechnology program is whether there would have been any great cost associated with starting the program five years later. If the research had begun in 1998 instead of in 1988, how long would it have taken to “catch up”? Would the costs of delay have been outweighed by the benefits of having extra research funds to use for a decade?

Conclusion How useful is it, ultimately, to apply economic concepts to research planning? If priority-setting exercises are costly and time-consuming, are they worthwhile? Do they increase research output sufficiently to justify their costs? Ruttan notes that agricultural research typically displays very high rates of return in ex post evaluations. Given these returns, he asks whether the resources devoted to priority setting would be better allocated to research.1 These are difficult questions. Even “unimportant” research may generate some benefits, and it seems to be true empirically that “more research is better.” But the real cost of misallocating research funds is that the best projects will be underfunded. Suppose that priority setting allows research administrators to transfer funds from the least productive project in their portfolio to the most productive. This is a direct gain. Given the magnitudes of the benefits that emerge from agricultural research, it might not take many transfers of this type to pay for the costs of priority-setting studies.

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

60

Whether or not a research organization undertakes formal priority-setting activities, the concepts embedded in priority setting are useful. Even if the priority-setting process is an informal one, with no data collection and no survey of expert opinion, it can provide a useful discipline for resource allocation. Research planners need to ask at every juncture where the expected payoffs from research are greatest. They should consider the demand for research—driven by the importance of different crops and commodities—and also the supply. At the dawn of a new century, with rapidly changing technologies, with new and different research needs, and with research funds ever tighter, it will be vital to manage research effectively. Priority setting can play a useful role in pointing out critical areas for agricultural research.

Ackowledgments I am grateful to the organizers of the 12th Toyota Conference for their interest in this research. I also acknowledge the helpfulness of Robert W. Herdt of the Rockefeller Foundation program on agricultural sciences, who made available his insightful and thought-provoking papers in this area. George W. Norton of Virginia Tech also provided a number of relevant and useful papers. Finally, I am indebted to Robert E. Evenson of Yale University for his profound influence on my thinking about agricultural research strategies and the economics of priority setting for research, and to the staff of the CIMMYT Economics Program for stimulating my thinking in this area.

References 1. Ruttan VW. Agricultural Research Policy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1982. 2. Fishel WL, ed. Resource Allocation in Agricultural Research. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1971. 3. Alston JM, Norton GW, Pardey P. Science Under Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Research Evaluation and Priority Setting. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1995.

4. Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M, eds. Rice Research in Asia: Progress and Priorities. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1996. 5. Barker R. Methods for setting agricultural research priorities: Report of a Bellagio conference. Cornell University Working Papers in Agricultural Economics No. 88-3. Ithaca, NY: Department of Agricultural Economics, 1988. 6. Evenson RE. Priority-setting methods. In: Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M eds. Rice Research in Asia: Progress and Priorities. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1996; 91-108. 7. Mills BF, Karanja DD. Processes and methods for research programme priority setting: The experience of the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Wheat Programme. Food Policy 1997; 22(1):63-79. 8. Mills BF. Ex-ante agricultural research evaluation with site specific technology generation: The case of sorghum in Kenya. Agricul Econo 1997; 16:125-138. 9. Mutangadura G, Norton GW. Analysis of strategic research priorities in the department of research and specialist services. Manuscript, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA. 10. Evenson RE, Dey MM, Hossain M. Rice research priorities: An application. In: Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M, eds. Rice Research in Asia: Progress and Priorities. Wallingford: CAB International, 1996; 347-392. 11. Evenson RE. An application of prioritysetting methods to the rice biotechnology program. In: Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M, eds. Rice Research in Asia: Progress and Priorities. Wallingford: CAB International, 1996; 327-346. 12. Herdt RW. Equity considerations in setting priorities for Third World rice biotechnology research. Development: Seeds of Change. 1987; 4:19-24. 13. Herdt RW. Agricultural biotechnology in the 21st Century. Paper presented at the NABC 9 Resource Management in Challenged Environments Meeting, June 1-3 1998, Saskatoon, Canada.

Setting Priorities for Agricultural Research: Theory and Experience 14. Herdt RW. Research priorities for rice biotechnology. In: Khush GS, Toenniessen GH, eds. Rice Biotechnology. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1991:19-54. 15. Herdt RW. The potential role of biotechnology in solving food production and environmental problems in developing countries. In American Society of Agronomy Special Publication no. 60, Bridging Food Production and Environmental Protection in Developing Countries. Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America, 1995:33-54.

61

16. Herdt RW. Summary, conclusions and implications. In: Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M, eds. Rice Research in Asia: Progress and Priorities. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1996:393-406.

CHAPTER 5

Sustainable Agriculture and Strategies in Rice Breeding H. Ikehashi

T

wo topics are taken up on the basis of the author’s experience in rice research. The first is a renewed understanding of rice farming as a type of sustainable agriculture, a summary of many preceding views. The second is a discussion of strategies in rice breeding. In this part some of the author’s immediate experiences are cited.

Rice Cultivation as a Model for Sustainable Agriculture Ecological Stability of Irrigated Rice Farming Among prevailing agricultural systems, rice cultivation is predominant for densely populated areas with the Monsoon climate. Rice is a unique crop for flooded soils. Submergence of soil makes it possible to cultivate rice every year without any fallow land, because many pathogenic fungi do not survive the anaerobic condition. Light power is enough for cultivation. Because the weight of the soil block is decreased in water, a single cattle power, usually a water buffalo, can easily plow and paddle the soil, which is otherwise very heavy. Levees keep irrigation water in terraced farms; thus, rice cultivation is protected against soil erosion. Electrochemical changes that occur in submerged soils were earlier discussed in detail by Ponnamperuma.1 According to his paper, in normal tropical soils a set of soil conditions are achieved by submergence, where availability of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, manganese and silicon is high, while the supply of copper, zinc and

molybdenum is adequate. The decrease in redox potential (Eh) increases pH of acid soils and decreases pH of alkaline soils. Soil fertility can be conserved better under anaerobic conditions, because ammonium in soil from crop residues or other organic matter is not easily oxidized into nitrate compounds which are carried away by water or volatilized into air. Mineral nutrition for rice is also supplied through irrigation water. This is the reason for the traditional no-input rice farming, which consistently yields about 1.5-2.0 tons per hectare (t/ha). Nitrogen can be supplied through fixation by algae and other microorganisms. Weeds are controlled by irrigation, because many kinds are not adapted to submergence. No other crop is planted to flooded soil except rice. Besides, there are some additional merits in irrigated rice farming. Cattle can be fed with the weeds on levees. Fish culture in canals or swamps provides protein resources. The nutritional balance of rice proteins is one of the best among the staple cereals. Farms in arid regions are desalinized by a regular rotation of rice planting. For introduction of rice cultivation to new areas where rice has not been cultivated, there are a set of problems. Supply of water is a limiting factor. Accumulation of salts can be a problem in arid areas, where salts are carried from underground to the surface and water evaporates, leaving salts. The advantages of rice farming can be better understood in contrast with other farming systems like those in Europe, which

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

64

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

are characterized by the need of fallow land. No crop can be planted in consecutive years in a field plot, due to disease buildup; therefore, fallow land, pasture or rotation of crops is essential. In European types of agriculture, a major part of the nutritional proteins are supplied through animal husbandry, which requires forage crops. Uptake of proteins through animal products is estimated to require seven times more land area than relying on proteins of plant products. There is also potential soil erosion through overgrazing and rainfall. Similar problems can be seen in dryland farming, and also in nomad agriculture. In conclusion, the ecological stability of rice farming is excellent, being comparable only to some plantation agriculture of perennial plants such as tea, coconut, oil palm, rubber tree, cacao bean and so forth. Rice farming will be one of the best models for agricultural systems in the future.

Socio-Economic Aspects of Traditional Agricultural Systems in Asia Stability of farming through each production cycle has been guaranteed in rice farming. But, this system has been a subsistence farming without a marginal surplus that could have been invested for other local industries. Feudalistic land systems used to abide with the farming system. Villages provide a pool of landless farm laborers and unemployed laborers from city areas. There has been always a kind of vicious cycle: Without local industries people flow into cities to get employment; for them, food prices should be kept at a minimum; but, then there is little opportunity for villages to develop new industries. The green revolution was one of the attempts to improve such stagnant rural structures in Asia.

Green Revolution Its Start and Impacts After World War II most of the Asian countries attained independence from colonialism. At the same time, the limit for extension of farming was evident, due to population increase, particularly in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. In the pre-green revolution years,

there were some experiences in varietal improvement in many countries in Asia. There was a strong motivation for intensive agriculture following the model of the countries in the Far East, where land reform was successful and recovered heavy industries were able to provide sufficient chemical fertilizers. Under such situations, international collaborative approaches were initiated for attaining higher yields of rice. The first model of a high yielding variety, Taichung Native 1 and several similar varieties were entered in cooperative trials sponsored by The International Rice Committee(IRC) of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) for 1961-1963 in several countries. 2 The first crosses using such varieties were made in 1962 at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines. International collaborative approaches by scientists became easier by development of transport and communication. A new plant type of rice was identified in such a network of international testing. Then, the new plant type was further improved through breeding programs into the release of IR 8 from IRRI in 1967. The improved type was characterized by a single gene for semi-dwarfism, sd-1, which is a basis for the short stature and improved response to increased fertilizer application. This type performed best with a combination of increased fertilizers under irrigation. Similar approaches were adopted in other crops like wheat. The new technologies were adopted through the 1970s, and led to self-sufficiency of rice in chronically deficient areas. New areas for rice cultivation were explored, because sufficient return on investments for irrigation and related infrastructures was predictable. Research at national centers was also strongly supported. The intensified rice farming was further developed in Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Egypt and China.

Associated Breeding Works with the Green Revolution To stabilize the initial success, there were some immediate tasks in intensive farming, as well as new attempts to improve rice in marginal areas.

Sustainable Agriculture and Strategies in Rice Breeding First, breeding for resistance to diseases and insect pests was urgent, because the adoption of intensive rice farming, particularly of rice cultivation in the dry season, provoked an outbreak of pests and diseases which had been only minor problems in traditional systems. Breeding for resistance has been successful in wide areas, and by and large it has protected the gains from the improved plant type. Second, some resources were allocated to genetic improvement of varieties in marginal areas, which the green revolution had bypassed due to deep water, adverse soils or drought. The author was once assigned to such areas of breeding as tolerance to adverse soils, resistance to blast disease and deep water rice. But progress in these areas was not significant due to limited time, lack of scientific means and social structures, which can still be seen in the northeastern states of India. Often, the target environments are too variable to set any clear focus. Any gain expected is assumed to be marginal, even if some success is achieved. Third, improvement of grain quality is another area where steady progress has been attained. But there is a tendency for the market pressure for high quality to constrain breeders’ effort toward a higher level of yield. A decline in productivity of rice is indicated in some areas of intensive rice production. The reason for this still remains for scientific analysis. A part of this decline may be attributed to the grain quality issue. For instance, Basmati 370 and Khaw dawk mali 105, reputed varieties for high market price but with low yielding capacity, have extensively been planted to wide areas in Myanmar, Thailand and other countires.

Problems and Tasks in the Post Green Revolution Era New Problems Which Were Outside of Targets of the Green Revolution As mentioned above, the technological plateau of yield has been attained, with an emphasis on grain quality. Budget cuts have been serious for cereal production and related research. Concerns for ecological stability of agriculture and rice cultivation have been raised in light of a new concept for evaluating agricultural systems, the issue of Low Input

65

Sustainable Agriculture (LISA). The emission of methane and ‘green house effects’, as well as salt accumulation in arid regions, are indicated as adverse factors from rice cultivation, although these aspects are not adequately studied. Fear of pollution by spraying insecticides, fungicides or herbicides has led a series of new ideas, such as organic farming, to the forefront.

Socio-Economic Aspects In the post-green revolution era, a new series of socioeconomic problems have emerged with self-sufficiency of rice . The new trend of industrialization caused domestic competition for land use, labor, etc. Fragile infrastructures for grain storage, transportation and sales became clear in rural industries. There has been criticism from the point of social equity to the outcomes of the green revolution. There are also clashes between subsistence farming versus profit-seeking international agricultural business under the GATT (WTO) agreement. Fledging industries, mature societies with family farming, and workers in the middle classes are likely to be affected as well as small farmers. Those are far beyond the scope of any review by a rice breeder.

Strategies for Enhanced Yield Level Prediction of Supply and Demand While self-sufficiency in rice has been achieved in major rice-producing countries in Asia, the demand for rice is estimated to be increasing beyond the capacity of production. According to an estimate of attainable rice yield, out of eight countries surveyed, only Thailand and Myanmar will be in a comfortable position for meeting the rice needs of their populations. 3 Vietnam and India will be in a tight situation, even if they can exploit the full potential of the technologies. China, Indonesia, the Philippines and Bangladesh are likely to face severe shortages, unless there is further investment in transforming the rice area from unfavorable to favorable ecosystems and technological breakthroughs. Substantial yield loss is predicted due to various technical constraints.3 For the irrigated ecosystem, yield loss due to all technical

66

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

constraints is 962 kg/ha, i.e., about 20%. For rain-fed lowland and flood-prone ecosystems, such a loss is estimated to be about 33% and 40%, respectively. Yield loss due to submergence, drought and cold is estimated to be 20% and 28 %, respectively, for upland and flood-prone ecosystems. Yield loss due to insects and diseases is also predicted to be severe, particularly in the rain-fed ecosystem.

Strategies in Rice Breeding Improvement for yield level will still be the target of first priority in the coming century. According to the report of IRC of FAO in 1994, the yield of modern varieties has become stagnant. Hybrid rice is the only technology presently available to overstep these yield barriers. 4 Having been in a position to review the hybrid rice technologies, I would like to discuss the potential of this technology. Doubtlessly, hybrid rice using cytoplasmic male sterility(CMS) is one of the most significant achievements after the introduction of semi-dwarf high yielding varieties. The yield increase is estimated to be 15-20 % over the ordinary varieties. It is reported that this hybrid rice covered nearly half of the total rice areas in China. But the initial gains by hybrid rice have not been improved in China, perhaps due to the difficulty in breeding stable CMS lines and shifted emphasis on grain quality. Since the 1990s hybrid rice breeding has been one of the first priority programs in India, where hybrid rice is being increased from the initial adoption of 50,000 ha in the mid-1990s. What is interesting in hybrid rice breeding is a series of unique innovations in the technology. After the success of the CMS system, hybrid seed production along the idea of two line hybrids has been a fascinating target. With the use of environment-dependent genic male sterility (EGMS), fertile plants can be propagated by self-pollination under one set of conditions, while the same genotype can be male sterile and be hybridized with any other variety. When the new type of hybrid was first proposed in China, few scientists were confident in it. But it is now a reality showing further yield increase. Hybrid rice technology will be improved further by the further study of EGMS.

Another idea is to overcome hybrid sterility between different groups of rice varieties (Table 5.1). Partial sterility is commonly found in the panicles of F1 hybrids between Indica and Japonica groups in rice. It is known as a barrier in the use of pronounced heterosis of Indica-Japonica hybrids. I started a genetic study in the early 1980s, and found that the panicle sterility in Indica-Japonica hybrids is caused by an allelic interaction at locus S-5 on chromosome 6, where Indica and Japonica varieties have S-5i and S-5j, respectively (Fig. 5.1.) The heterozygote S-5i/S-5j produces semisterile panicles because of the partial abortion of the female gametes carrying S-5j. Some varieties such as Ketan Nangka (KN) and Dular, have a neutral allele S-5n, and the genotype S-5j/S-5n and S-5j/S-5n produce fertile panicles. S-5n is called the wide compatibility gene (WCG), and has been incorporated into Indica or Japonica varieties to overcome the sterility in Indica-Japonica hybrids. 5 In the past decade, several Indica-Japonica hybrids which have the neutral allele S-5n have been developed to determine the yield potential in China. Such hybrids showed strong heterosis, but their seed set were unstable under some environments. One way to solve the problem is to use Javanica varieties instead of Japonica. This idea has been utilized for the new generation of hybrids, inter-subspecific two line hybrids, which showed increased yield and were planted to 0.7 million ha in 1996 in China. An ultimate technology in hybrid rice breeding will be the use of apomixis, which functions in some plant species to produce genetically the same progeny via seed. In this way hybrid plants may produce hybrid seed without any artificial crossing. So far there is no basis on which further progress can be seen in rice breeding.

A New Plant Type Yield gains of 25% is envisaged by improving plant type on another front. Promising new lines with big panicles and a few thick stems are being developed at IRRI.6 So far the performance of the new types are not yet widely available. This approach reminds us of the project for ‘super high-yielding rice’ in the 1980s in Japan. A series of high-yielding lines were actually produced through this project.

Sustainable Agriculture and Strategies in Rice Breeding

67

Table 5.1. Loci for hybrid sterility Locus

Chromosome

Marker genes in order

Crosses

S-5

6

C, S-5, Amp-3; Est-2, Pgi-2, RG213, alk

indica x japonica

S-7

7

Rc, S-7, Est-9, rfs, ga-11, Acp-4

Aus x javanica

S-8

6

Cat-1, Pox-5, S-8

IR2061-481 x javanica

S-9

4

Ph, 1g, Mal-1, Est-1, S-9

Aus x javanica

S-15

12

Acp-1. Pox-2, S-15, Sdh-1

IR2061-628 x Dular (Aus)

S-16

1

Est-5

China Native Rice x javanica

S-17(t)

12

Pox-2, S-15, Sdh-1, S-17(t)

P.B. II x japonica

Revised from Wan and Ikehashi 1996.16

In any breeding program, if the yield level is emphasized by ignoring other traits, there will be potential for a higher level of yield.

Extension of Elite Breeding Lines Through International Networks A more routine approach, though no less important than those mentioned above, is systematic exchange and tests of promising lines through an international network (INGER). Further support to such a system is important. The preceding program, the international rice testing program, had enormously promoted exchanges of better lines, as well as experience among breeders in each of the national programs. Such a program, if supported adequately, would contribute significantly to food security.

Application of Molecular Biology to Rice Breeding For those plant breeders who were assigned, with conventional tools, in the 1970s to some areas of rice breeding such as tolerance to adverse soils and host resistance to blast disease, the set of new tools based on molecular

biology seems to be powerful and attractive. The following are some new challenges from our laboratory to such tasks with a renewed set of weapons.

Development of Molecular Markers in the Breeding for Tolerance Of environmental stresses in rice production, tolerance to excess of soluble iron is known to show a clear genetic difference. The severest abiotic stress in the lowlands is iron toxicity in west Africa’s lateritic soils. It has been shown that genetic tolerance to iron toxicity can contribute significantly to rice production in toxic soils. 6 We started a program to search for genetic markers for this tolerance. Initially, the testing method had to be improved. An improved screening method was developed on the basis of solution culture. Then, a search for RAPD markers which might be linked to the tolerance was started. To obtain stable PCR products as selection markers, the sequence of RAPD markers had to be determined as site-tagged sequences (STS), for which a set of new primers could be developed. This approach enabled us to identify, with a

68

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 5.1. Two types of allelic interaction at a hybrid sterility gene locus Si gametes are abortion in the sporophyte genetype Si/Si. high level of precision and reproducibility, a monogenic segregation in the tolerance, and can be a standard in any selection for highly variable tolerance to environmental stress.

Search for Antifungal Proteins as New Resources of Host Resistance Incorporation of exotic resistance genes had been a major means in the breeding to rice blast (Pyricularia oryzae) resistance. But such new resistances break down sooner or later.

Sustainable Agriculture and Strategies in Rice Breeding

69

Table 5.2. Pathogenesis-related proteins found in floral organs Proteins

Plants

Organs

Reference

RNAses

Rosaceae

Pistil

Sassa et al 1993.8

PR-1

Camellia

Pistil

Tomimoto et al 1999.13

Chitinase

Rice

Husk

Nakazaki et al 1997.12

Chitinase

Rice

Pistil

Takei et al 1998.14

Thaumatin

Rosaceae

Pistil

Sassa et al 1998.15

In early 1990s, we have initiated a minor study to identify self-incompatibility genes of fruit trees in Rosaceae, and identified a series of pistil-specific RNAses which corresponded to the self-incompatibility genes.8 That work suggested that plants may contain a variety of proteins against disease infection, and that such proteins may be utilized in breeding for host resistance. The proteins for self-incompatibility might be recruited from one of the antifungal proteins in floral organs, which seem to be most vulnerable to fungal infection.9 In the light of recent work to isolate host resistance genes of tomato and rice against bacterial diseases, the host resistance genes seem to function in signal transduction and do not seem to be antifungal agents for invading organisms. At the end of such responses there seem to be a set of proteins which are called pathogenesis-related proteins (PR proteins). They are initially defined as those induced by viral or fungal infection or by some chemicals like salicylic acid and benzothiadiazole.10 They can be involved as antiviral or antifungal agents in a systemic acquired resistance, because such proteins directly inhibit propagation of pathogens. 11 What, then, can be seen if such proteins are incorporated and constitutively expressed in plants ? In fact, the antifungal function of chitinases and PR-1 have been proved by gene transformation or in vitro testing. In our preliminary search for PR-like proteins, some genes which encode novel PR-1 or chitinases were isolated (Table 5.2).12,13 They are basic types and endogenously induced

in the course of development. So, their functions may be different from those expressed by other PR-l proteins, but the isolation of such types of PR proteins, and their subsequent incorporation into rice plants, are expected to reveal a new aspect of host resistance.

References 1. Ponnamperuma FN. Electrochemical changes in submerged soils and the growth of rice. In: Soil and Rice. Los Banos: International Rice Research Institute, 1978:421-441. 2. Dalrymple DG. Development and spread of high-yielding rice varieties in developing countries. Bureau for Science and Technology. Washington DC: US AID, 1986. 3. Rice Almanac 2nd ed. Rice around World. Los Banos: International Rice Research Institute and Cali, Colombia: Centro International de Agricultura Tropical, 1997. 4. FAO. Report of the international rice commision, 18 th session, FAO, Rome, Italy, 5-9 September. Rome: FAO, 1994. 5. Ikehashi H. Genetics of hybrid sterility in wide hybridization in rice (Oryza sativa L.) In: Bajaj I, ed. Biotechnology in Agriculture 14. Rice. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1991:113-127. 6. Khush GS. Breaking the yield frontier of rice. Geo J 35. 1995; 3:329-332. 7. WARDA. Annual Report 1977. Bouake, Ivory Coast: West Africa Rice Development Association , 1998.

70

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

8. Sassa H, Hirano H, Ikehashi, H. Identification and characterization of stylar glycoproteins associated with self-incomaptibility genes of Japanese pear, Pyrus serotina Rehd. Mol Gen Genet 1993; 241:17-25. 9. Dickinson H. Self-pollination simply a social disease. Nature 1994; 367:517-518. 10. Van Loon L C, Pierpoint WS, Boller Th et al. Recommendation for naming plant pathogenesis-related proteins. Plant Mol Biol Rep 1994; 12:245-264. 11. Friedlich L, Lawton K, Ruess W et al. A benzothiadiazole derivative induces systemic acquired resistance in tobaco. Plant J 1997; 10(1):61-70. 12. Nakazaki T, Tomimoto Y, Ikehashi H et al. A new chitinase in rice detected from husk proteins and its gene locus. Breeding Science 1997; 47:363-369.

13. Tomimoto Y, Ikehashi H, Kakeda K et al. A pistil-specific PR-1 like protein of Camellia, its expression, sequence and genealogical position. Breed Sci 1999; 49:97-104 14. Takei N, Nakazaki T, Tsuchiya T et al. Isolation of a pistil-specific chitinase gene in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Breed Sci 1998; 48 (suppl. 1):281. 15. Sassa H, Hirano H. Style-specific and developmentally regulated accumulation of a glycosylated thaumatin/PR-5 like protein in Japanese pear (Pyrus serotina Rehd.). Planta 1998; 205:514-521. 16. Wan J, Ikehashi H List of hybrid sterility gene loci (HSGLi) in cultivated rice (Oryza sativa L.). Rice Genetics Newsletter 1996; 13:110-114. 17. Nakazaki T, Ikehashi H. Genomic sequence and polymorphisms of a rice chitinase gene. Breed Sci 1998; 48:371-376.

SECTION III INTRODUCTION

The Present Situation of Biological Production and the Approach to the Sustainable Production in Arid Lands Satoshi Matsumoto

M

ore than 60% of the land surface of the earth consists of arid and semi-arid soils, which are generally too dry to produce a good yield. If enough fresh water is available and the soil conditions are suitable, these soils can be irrigated and used for agricultural lands. These regions, therefore, have been expected to be the new promising land resources for food production with the progress of agricultural technologies. From this background, much attention has been paid to arid and semiarid soils, and more agricultural projects are being planned and executed. However, many projects have failed in the past and even now, because some years after irrigation the salinity or alkali hazard increases. According to the estimates of FAO and UNESCO, as much as half of all the existing irrigation agricultural farms of the world are more or less under the influence of secondary salinization, alkalinization and waterlogging. They also report that 10 million hectares of irrigated land are abandoned yearly as a consequence of the adverse effects of irrigation, mainly secondary salinization and alkalinization. This phenomenon is very common not only in old irrigation systems but also in areas where irrigation has only recently been introduced. In addition,

the recent prolonged droughts or unstable weather in arid regions is wreaking fatal damage on dry farming lands, leading to the main cause of desertification. It is debatable whether sustainable agriculture can be established in areas which are saline or alkaline, or which are potentially saline or alkaline. Aiming for sustainable agriculture in dry regions, on the other hand, many technologies for improved biological productivity in arid and semi-arid lands have been developed. They include ground water management, soil and water management, crop and resource management, and soil amelioration. However, since we postulate sustainability in dry land agriculture, we should keep an economical background in technology. In this session, we will focus on the possibilities of sustainable production in arid regions for the coming century as well as discuss, from several aspects which include the influence of climate variability on productivity, the fundamental technologies for water and soil management, the actual management for crop and resource in dry land farming, and the reasonable production of soil amendment in alkali soil.

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

CHAPTER 6

Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production J.F. Reynolds, R.J. Fernández and P.R. Kemp

Introduction

O

ver a third of the land surface of the earth is composed of drylands and much of this (about 65-70 %) is seriously degraded or desertified. The two major desertification drivers—climate change and human activities— have ecological and social impacts on various temporal and spatial scales. These impacts include potential alterations of carbon, water, and trace gas budgets, loss of vegetation cover, and increased wind-borne dust, all of which may affect global biogeochemistry, radiation balance, and climate. The societal consequences of land degradation are also serious, since the fate of rural people in drylands is dependent on the effective use of natural resources, e.g., water, soils, plants, livestock and wildlife. Here we discuss how ecosystem-level predictions may be used to address issues relevant to sustainable development of these semi-arid regions. We argue that the next step in assessing sustainability is to incorporate ecological impacts into higher level models that consider direct and other human impacts on these systems. This will require further testing and evaluation of ecosystem-level models in the context of different management and land-use alternatives. We propose the incorporation of both “natural” and human factors into a spatially explicit model of landscape elements and human land-use patterns in order to develop predictive tools capable of dynamic, integrated assessments of impacts of

global climate change on human-dominated ecosystems.

Drylands and Global Change The purpose of this chapter is threefold. First, we review the extent of global change in drylands and some of its ecological and societal consequences. Second, we discuss one component of potential climate change—rainfall variability—and how it affects primary production in rangelands. We illustrate this with a case study of a rangeland in southern New Mexico using a physiologically-based ecosystem model. Lastly, we suggest that basic ecological knowledge, such as presented in our case study, should be an essential component of assessment frameworks. Doing so will not only improve assessments, but will increase its usefulness to scientists, land managers and policy makers.

Land Degradation and Desertification Arid and semi-arid drylands compose one third of the land surface of the world and are home to about 20% of the human population.1 The vast majority of these drylands consist of rangelands (~88%), whereas the rest are classified as rainfed (3%) and irrigated croplands (9%) (Table 6.1). The rapid growth of populations in many of these regions, often in conjunction with imprudent land

Proceedings of the 12th Toyota Conference: Challenge of Plant and Agricultural Sciences to the Crisis of Biosphere on the Earth in the 21st Century, edited by Kazuo Watanabe and Atsushi Komamine. ©2000 Eurekah.com.

74

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

management, has led to increased social vulnerability and to rapid land degradation. Soils in drylands are especially vulnerable to wind and water erosion, loss of organic matter, decline in fertility, salinization, and compaction. This is particularly evident when the natural vegetative cover is reduced through human activities such as intensive livestock grazing, excessive cultivation, urbanization, and other land uses. While global rates of land degradation and the total areas affected are difficult to estimate,2,3 there is ample evidence that extensive areas of the world’s drylands have experienced some form of chronic degradation during the last century. It is estimated4,5 that approximately 80% of the world’s rangelands, 60% of rainfed croplands, and 30% of irrigated croplands are threatened by various types of degradation, generally referred to as “desertification.” Thus, desertified drylands make up about 65-70% of the total dryland area of the globe (arid, semiarid, and dry subhumid regions, but excluding hyperarid regions).6 All three of the developing regions of the world—Africa, Asia, and Latin America—have similar percentages of land degradation (Table 6.1). The two major desertification drivers— climate change and human activities—have ecological and social impacts at various temporal and spatial scales, ranging from local (and short term) to global (and long term) (Fig. 6.1). Carbon, water, and trace gas budgets may be significantly altered; losses of vegetation may modify regional albedo, raise air temperatures, and increase wind-borne dust; all of these changes have the potential to act in concert to affect global biogeochemistry, radiation balance, and climate. The societal consequences of land degradation are equally serious. The fate of rural people in drylands is dependent on the effective use of natural resources, e.g., water, soils, plants, livestock and wildlife. In spite of this, over large areas natural vegetation continues to be degraded, soils are eroding, and the capacity of the land to support livestock and wild herbivores is being reduced. Combined with complex political, social, and economic factors, which often tend to have equally important roles, adverse human impacts are inevitable.1

Sustainability Natural, semi-natural, and intensively managed dryland ecosystems of the world offer a wide range of different goods and services vital to human populations. The list is extensive and includes food production (humans and livestock), construction materials, climate regulation, soil maintenance, nutrient recycling, wildlife habitat, erosion control, tourism/recreation, and aesthetic enjoyment.7 When weighing the advantages and disadvantages of some particular course of action that affects these ecosystems—and hence their “sustainability”—decision-makers need quantitative assessments in order to consider these goods and services. While it is seldom possible (or desirable) to exercise complete control over a landscape, it may be possible to exercise different management regimes on parts of the landscape, and in so doing maintain a disproportionate set of ecosystem services. For example, some services (e.g., plant production) are highly dependent on “key” landscape units such as source zones for water and sedimentation, areas of reserve forage for herbivores, and fertile patch mosaics.8 Understanding the interplay between ecosystem services and ecosystem functioning and structure has urgent application to land use planning and management in dryland areas. These are examples of what constitutes the knowledge base necessary to achieve environmental sustainability. Goodland and Daly9 identify three types of sustainability—social, economic and environmental. While there are obvious linkages and overlaps, Goodland and Daly argue that their true meanings are obvious only when considered separately (Table 6.2). In the context of global change and its potential impacts on drylands, it is inconceivable that one type of sustainability could be realized in the absence of the others since the interdependencies are so strong. While the focus in this paper is on the environmental aspect of sustainability, we believe that its usefulness as a concept is limited without consideration of social and economic issues.

92 1.9 11.9 20.9 8.4

Asia

Australia

Europe (Spain)

North America

South America 43.15

1.42

5.86

1.91

0.25

31.81

1.9

Degraded

30%

17%

28%

16%

13%

35%

18%

(%)

457.7

21.4

74.2

22.1

42.2

218.2

79.8

Total

215.6

6.6

11.6

11.9

14.3

122.3

48.9

Degraded

Rainfed cropland

47%

31%

16%

54%

34%

56%

61%

(%)

4,556.4

390.9

483.1

111.6

657.2

1,571.2

1,342.4

Total

3,333.5

297.8

411.2

80.5

361.4

1,187.6

995.1

Degraded

Rangelands

73%

76%

85%

72%

55%

76%

74%

(%)

The area most affected in any individual country is a result of a combination of factors, including population density, climate and land-use history. In the United States, desertification is best exemplified in rangelands of the arid and semi-arid southwest.29 In Latin America, the majority of degraded land is found in highland pastures and grasslands of Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia, the central basin of Chile, the northeastern region of Brazil, and in the central plateau of Mexico.30 In Asia, China is the dominant country that must contend with desertification, and the greatest concentration of degraded land is found in the northwestern, northern and northeastern regions.31 Three distinct regions of Africa are at most risk: Mediterranean Africa, the Sudano-Sahelian region, and the Kalahari-Namib region in southern Africa.32 Compiled from Grainger,2 Kassas,22 and Lopez-Ocaña.4

145.5

10.4

Africa

Total

Total

Continent

Irrigated cropland

Table 6.1. Amounts (millions of hectares) and percentages of irrigated cropland, rainfed cropland, and rangeland degraded in the world

Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production 75

76

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 6.1. Conceptual model linking changes in ecosystem properties during desertification to changes in global biogeochemistry. Reprinted with permission from Schlesinger et al,28 ©American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Climate Variability Long- vs. Short-Term Impacts Drylands are particularly vulnerable to climate variability, of which precipitation is the most important component. For example, a slight shift in seasonal precipitation and/or frequency of extreme rain events could potentially lead to overexploitation of the meager resources of drylands and contribute to further degradation of the very resource base on which human populations are so dependent. Preliminary studies with general circulation models (GCMs) projected that a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide (due to the rapidly expanding human population and associated activities) would result in lower precipitation, as well as shifts in the timing and frequency of rains, in the interior of large continents.10 Recent GCM studies also predict increases in rainfall intensity and longer dry periods in many dryland regions of the globe.11 Since nearly all drylands are characterized by extreme year-to-year weather fluctuations, it is often difficult to distinguish between short-term variability and long-term changes

in ecosystem appearance, as well as between temporary and permanent changes (Fig. 6.2).12 Short term variability tends to affect the range and frequency of “shocks,” whereas long term change alters the resource base.13 Shifts in vegetation may or may not be reversible, depending on the interactions of numerous climatic, edaphic, and biological factors. In the long run, however, global climate change may further exacerbate the already high natural variability of drylands, leading to permanent degradation of their productive potential, particularly since there is a lack of “buffering” by large reserves of organic matter in the soils or in woody vegetation.1

Rainfall Variability and Plant Production Ranchers and farmers in arid and semiarid regions of the world have long recognized the importance of short term rainfall variability on farm and livestock production, and rainfall variability continues to be the principal source of fluctuations in global food production, particularly in developing countries. For example, communally-owned Mexican

Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production

77

Table 6.2. Comparison of social, economic, and environmental sustainability. Social sustainability (“-SS”-). Social cohesion, cultural identity, diversity, sodality, comity, sense of community, tolerance, humility, love, compassion, patience, forbearance, fellowship, fraternity, institutions, pluralism, commonly accepted standards of honesty, laws, discipline, etc., constitute the part of social capital that is least subject to rigorous measurement, but probably most important for SS. This “-moral capital”-, as some have called it, requires maintenance and replenishment by shared values and equal rights, and by community, religious, and cultural interaction. Without this care it will depreciate just as surely as will physical capital. SS will be achieved only by systematic community participation and strong civil society.

Economic sustainability (“-EcS”-) EcS is concerned with “-maintenance of capital,”- or keeping capital intact. Of the four forms of capital (human made, natural, social, and human), economists have scarcely been concerned at all with natural capital (e.g., intact forests, healthy air) because until relatively recently it had not been scarce. Economics also prefers to value things in monetary terms, so it is having major problems valuing natural capital—intangible, intergenerational, and especially common-access resources such as air, etc. In addition, environmental costs used to be “-externalized,”- but are now starting to be internalized through sound environmental policies and valuation techniques. Because people and irreversible impacts are at stake, economics has to use anticipation and the precautionary principle routinely, and should err on the side of caution in the face of uncertainty and risk.

Environmental sustainability (“-ES”-) ES means maintaining natural capital, akin to the definition of EcS. Although ES is needed by humans and originated because of social concerns, ES itself seeks to improve human welfare and SS by protecting the sources of raw materials used for human needs and ensuring that the sinks for human wastes are not exceeded, in order to prevent harm to humans. Humanity must learn to live within the limitations of the biological and physical environment (“-sources”-) and as a “-sink”- for wastes. This translates into holding waste emissions within the assimilative capacity of the environment without impairing it. It also means keeping harvest rates of renewables to within regeneration rates. Quasi-ES can be approached by holding depletion rates equal to the rate at which renewable substitutes can be created. From Goodland and Daly.9

rangelands were recently authorized to begin privatization in hopes of improving resource conditions and productivity. However, a recent study showed no differences between private and communal tenure systems in these ecosystems; instead, annual precipitation was still the most important factor related to rangeland conditions.14 Given the extreme variability of rainfall in drylands and the low primary production,

we might ask: Is there a relationship between rainfall variability and aboveground primary production? Le Houérou et al15 examined this relationship for a variety of vegetation types around the world and concluded that dryland ecosystems are highly variable in response to water inputs. They reported that variability in annual production was 50% greater than the corresponding variability in annual rainfall on sites receiving less than 600 mm (Fig. 6.3A).

78

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 6.2. Simplified model of various factors (natural, human-caused) that play a role in dryland desertification. Note that drought and desertification operate at different time scales (short vs. long term, respectively). Shifts in vegetation (grass-shrub) may or may not be reversible, depending on the interactions of numerous climatic, physical, and biological factors. However, the great diversity of sites evaluated (e.g., shrublands, grasslands, etc.) makes it difficult to understand what causes the high variability in plant production in relation to rainfall. For example, we might expect that arid shrub communities should show less variation in production than semi-arid grasslands because the former are deeper rooted and, therefore, less dependent on the current year’s precipitation than shallow-rooted grasslands. A number of factors could influence the relationship between rainfall and plant production, including:

1. Interactions between various aspects of water input, such as timing, frequency and intensity of precipitation events, and the particular requirements of different plant functional types (shrubs, grasses, forbs, etc.); 2. Topographic and edaphic characteristics of the landscape via their influence on the pattern of spatial redistribution and retention of water; and

3. Factors other than water availability, such as herbivory or nutrient limitations. We are conducting a series of field, laboratory, and modeling studies in rangelands to elucidate the relative importance of each of these explanations under different climate scenarios and management practices. Next, we present a brief case study that illustrates the importance of the first explanation—quantitatively, how do the different plant functional types respond to variation in seasonal and annual precipitation?

Case Study Our case study is based on work in the Jornada Basin of south-central New Mexico. The Jornada Basin is part of the Mexican Highlands Section of the Basin and Range Physiographic Province within the extreme northern portion of the Chihuahuan Desert. The Jornada Basin was once dominated by warm season perennial grasses (e.g., Bouteloua eriopoda), but much of the area is now dominated by shrubs (e.g.,

Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production

79

Fig. 6.3. Relationship between the coefficient of variation in precipitation and the coefficient of variation of net productivity. (A) Based on data presented in Le Houérou et al15 (B) Results from PALS-FT based on three decades of precipitation (normal, wet, dry; see Fig. 6.4) and shown by functional types. Modified from Reynolds and Kemp.17

Larrea tridentata and Prosopis glandulosa). This transition—which was initiated in the late 1800s or early 1900s— is believed to have been driven by overgrazing and global change (Fig. 6.2). The Jornada Basin now contains

remnant grassland communities, and most areas are dominated by shrubs or codominated by shrubs, subshrubs, forbs, succulents, and

80

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

grasses. The perennial grasses provide the most valuable forage for livestock in this region. To address the importance of rainfall variability and rangeland production, with particular emphasis on the relative effect on different plant functional types, we used the Patch Arid Land Simulator (PALS) developed for the Jornada. PALS is a physiologically-based ecosystem model that contains the principal components of ecosystem carbon, water, and nutrient cycles.16,17 The results presented below are from our phenology-based version (PALS-FT), which includes the key plant functional types (FT) of the northern Chihuahuan Desert—shrubs, cool season annuals, summer annuals, forbs, and perennial grasses. Further details of the vegetation of the Jornada Basin, PALS-FT, and this modeling study are given elsewhere.16-18 In the first series of simulations, we examined the potential impacts of historical variations in precipitation on productivity, on both a year to year basis and over periods associated with decade-length climate shifts. We selected three periods from the long term records at the Jornada Basin (1914-1997, average annual rainfall = 247 mm): a “normal” decade (1968-1977, average = 250 mm); a “dry” decade (1947-1956, 33% below normal or 166 mm); and a “wet” decade (1984-1993, 32% above average rainfall or 325 mm) (see Fig. 6.4). Grouping all of these years together, our model simulations show that rainfall has large impacts on simulated annual net primary production (ANPP), although the absolute magnitude varies with plant functional type (Fig. 6.5). The scatter for these simulated results is substantial, which illustrates that, while there is a general increase in productivity with increasing annual precipitation, there is also considerable variation associated with the timing of that rainfall within individual years and with the utilization of this moisture by different functional types. During the “dry” decade of 1947-1956, simulated ANPP was reduced by an average of 38%, but ANPP of the perennial grasses declined by 60%, whereas ANPP of the shrubs declined by only 25%. These results are consistent with the finding of Gibbens and Beck,19 who reported that above ground cover of the principal range grasses of the Jornada

Basin was reduced by 75% or more during this dry decade (they also speculated that this may have been a period favorable to increase in shrubs, and indeed our model simulations suggest that shrubs would have been less impacted than grasses—see Table 6.3). The reductions in simulated productivity of the seasonal annuals (50% for summer annuals and 20% for winter annuals) parallels the overall reductions of seasonal precipitation during the dry decade: Summer rainfall (July-September) was reduced by 60%, whereas winter rainfall (November-March) was reduced by about 25%. The “wet” decade of 1984-1993 (Fig. 6.4) was a period of slightly increased summer moisture (10%) and greatly increased winter rainfall (50%). However, the perennial grasses, in which most growth occurs in the summer, were the most impacted in our simulations, having a 500% increase in productivity over this decade (Table 6.3), which seems counterintuitive. However, during this wet decade spring rainfall increased by 85%. Spring is normally the dry period in the northern Chihuahuan Desert, and a time of severe stress and tissue loss for grasses, which break dormancy in spring. The unusually wet spring periods of the wet decade not only alleviate drought stress in the grasses, but contribute to increased grass cover, allowing them to be more competitive with the other functional types for early summer moisture. However, these increases in grass cover are contingent upon having sufficient grass biomass in the community to take advantage of this moisture, and the model does not account for grass establishment. In fact, Brown et al20 reported that shrubs were the apparent beneficiaries of increased winter/spring rainfall during this period in another Chihuahuan desert community. In our simulations, shrubs also exhibited a large increase (150%) in ANPP during this period, largely by taking advantage of several periods of deep soil moisture recharge during heavy winter rainfalls. This is also consistent with some of our experimental findings.21 To more specifically assess the impacts of year to year variability of rainfall on productivity of plant functional types, we conducted ten series of 10 year model runs using the rainfall of the normal decade (1968-1977), but

Drylands and Global Change: Rainfall Variability and Sustainable Rangeland Production

81

Fig. 6.4. Annual precipitation at the Jornada Experimental Range (New Mexico, USA) for the last 80 years (average = 247 mm, dashed line). Maximum was 507 mm in 1984 and minimum was 79 mm in 1953. The seasonal distribution is approximately 65% in summer (July-October), 25% in winter (November-March) and 10% in Spring (April-June). The coefficient of variation (CV) of precipitation = 0.353 is identical to that reported by Le Houérou et al15 for 77 rangeland sites (see Fig. 6.3). in which each year’s rainfall was modified by a random amount varying from -30 to +30% (leaving daily distributions fixed). Thus each 10 year rainfall series had a coefficient of variation (CV) varying from a low of 0.25 to a high of about 0.45, and for the 100 year period, the CV was 0.351 (identical to that of the natural rainfall for the period 1915-1997). A plot of CV of rainfall of the decade compared with the CV of production of plant functional types (Fig. 6.3B) illustrates three somewhat distinct patterns. First, both the shrubs and forbs in PALS-FT had low CVs (~0.4) that were statistically invariant with increasing variation of rainfall (p>0.05) (Fig. 6.3B). This CV is close to the long term average CV of rainfall in the Jornada Basin (0.35). These functional types best exemplify plants capable of utilizing moisture that may occur during any season (note that the dominant shrub is a drought-tolerant

evergreen and the forbs are short-lived, herbaceous plants that can grow in any season). Second, both winter and summer annuals had production CVs that were much higher than that of rainfall (~1.45 for winter annuals and 1.25 for summer annuals) and, again, not dependent on rainfall. This high variation reflects the fact that productivity in these species depends on germination responses that are highly seasonal and rainfall specific. Small rainfall events within a season or large rainfall outside of their strict seasons result in almost no productivity because of lack of germination. Furthermore, their roots are located in the upper soil profile, which is subject to rapid drying. Thus, there are a number of seasons where substantial rain may not translate into any production; at other times, a small amount of rainfall that happens to be precisely timed for use by a seasonal annual species may result

82

Challenge to the Crisis of the Earth's Biosphere in the 21st Century

Fig. 6.5. Predictions from PALS-FT for the relationship between net production and annual precipitation. Based on three decades of precipitation (normal, wet, dry; see Fig. 6.4) and shown by functional types. Modified from Reynolds and Kemp.17 in substantial productivity. The third pattern of variation is shown by grasses, which are the only functional type with a significant increase (p