Humanize Hong Kong

Date: May 29, 2008

The Real Price of Rice
By Tony Henderson,
chairman, Humanist Association of Hong Kong

Suddenly, price rises for foodstuffs! Yet, the growing of these foodstuffs has continued as usual with only localised problems - for example as caused by cyclone Sidr in Southern Bangladesh. But the phenomenon is worldwide. This points at a marketing issue, a subsidies issue, not a growers issue. What it might be pointing at is the system of agro-business and tied distribution, its malfunctioning or worse - the entire trade being intentionally mis-handled.

With overall incomes rising among the contentedly employed, people are buying more food but there is considerable wastage - while the poor cannot even get food on the table. Rice production is rising but consumption is increasing at a faster rate. Biofuel policies are also negatively affecting prices on the world stage of food production.

According to the World Bank, global maize production increased by 51 million tonnes between 2004 and 2007. During that time, biofuel production in the US alone (mostly ethanol) rose by 50 million tonnes, absorbing almost the entire global increase. Agricultural subsidies are at the root of this problem - also trade barriers. It is the subsidised foodstuffs that are supplied as aid to economically problematic countries. The snake has hold of its own tail!

To paraphrase Tom Holland writing in the South China Morning Post (May 6, 2008): Encouraged by those subsidies, US farmers grew 18% more corn last year than in 2006, encroaching heavily on to land formerly devoted to food and animal feed crops to do so.”

Subsidies mean rich countries are undercutting the poor country’s farmers and discouraging investments where it is most needed.

No one doubts the system of distribution is tied tightly into the commodities market and there is a major amount of cash slurping around in both futures and commodities markets. The ‘players' having recourse to those funds have interests far from those of the end-consumer.

Then, there is the currency problem that in its entirety hinges around the weak US dollar. As trades are largely effected in that international currency commodity prices reflect the volatility presently seen in currency trades. Dealers are buying ahead to secure their accustomed profits not in the least concerned about the effects of those essentially unenlightened capitalist practices that lift prices indiscriminately.

All the evidence points at the US intentionally weakening their dollar to offset the country's impossibly huge debt as the dollar US is getting cheaper as each day passes and the Iraq-Afghanistan invasions continue.

Then, in parallel, there are the protectionist moves disguised as the promotion of environmentalism, fair trade and labour rights where developed-country style provisions were lobbied into undeveloped countries' manufacturing sectors. The effect of these policies in such as Bangladesh, was to put many young girls in the textiles trade on the street, as factories closed for reasons of no under-age employment. But it wasn’t as if there were schools for the unemployed young people to go to instead!

This kind of protectionism is also going toward the defeat of China as manufacturing giant invincible, and true enough, factories are moving out of the special zones and into the remoter regions of China - Chengdu in Sichuan and Changsha in Hunan - and factories are even abandoning China altogether and moving to Vietnam and India.

The trend is for large multi-national corporations to adopt a ‘China-plus-one’ strategy to balance out their Asia manufacturing presence and to minimise risk by having that open-ended choice to pick the cheapest and leave the others and move on. Even Chinese manufacturers are opening up plants in other parts of Asia - TCL Corps is upgrading its facilities in Thailand, Vietnam and the Philippines.

The same happens in agribusiness.

Farming today in most places is controlled by vested interests like the innocent sounding graziers unions that hold courses where corporate outsiders or government officials - of governments that have sold out to those corporations - come in and inform of the latest in seed varieties and their associated fertilisers, weed killers and pesticides, the schedule of planting plus applications, the sources where you get those - and yes: "...we stock them and offer free delivery and you get a juice blender if you join up today."

Those graziers unions are locked in to larger corporations and when investigating the origins of those corporations you get back to a Dow Jones or Nestle. It is amazing how far and deeply the tentacles of those multi-national conglomerations stretch. Farmers need to be able to operate freely but in making their own decisions, they need free access to information, not information dovetailed by others.

As eager-for-dollar countries earmark more land for industrial use and residences for their own high flyers, because this money-go-round is creating a bubble of the upper monied-class in economically undeveloped countries, the small-medium sized farmers are getting squeezed and the landless are increasing in number and are in some instances on the rebound from the big cities - having learnt the hard way that to be destitute in a city is much worse than being unemployed in one's own home town among relatives.

It is as though everything was out of control but no, that is a fallacy. In the end, it all depends on the little man seeing that what is done on the micro-level really does make a difference - immediately, to that one, that family, that company in its local situation - thus the country as a whole.

That's where the effort must be placed. The whole shebang needs to be decentralised. That in turn can effect changes at the macro-level - ‘the trickle-up effect'. Then, people can cease worrying about the macro-news so daily repeated as problematic. There is quite enough to do locally and within the immediate situation to keep everyone busy - and fed.

In the instance of rising rice prices in the Philippines - the world's largest rice importer - beyond the afford-ability of the poorer sector, the government response, the promise by the Arroyo crowd of putting lots of money into rejuvenating farming, is so predictable. Where will that money go? Will it get to the small farmer? No! It will go to the already well funded institutes like the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), into high yield variety research. While the IRRI has done and is doing excellent research - they have been into that for 20 years - how will they solve any problem now? They have already supplied the answers: these need implementation.

That Institute’s Reiner Wassmann, a climate change specialist: “Methane emissions are unique to rice," he said. "If Asian countries are exploring possibilities to reduce greenhouse gas, they have to look at rice production. I'm not saying it's the biggest source, but in Asia it's a source that cannot be neglected."

As small-time rice farmers cannot afford to drain rice fields between crops the only answer is to have those small farms combined into one big one and then what? It’s Big Brother taking over yet again. No. It becomes clear just which sector the IRRI is looking after.

The media release from that government tells that: "...not enough rice reaches every table because of national problems such as the low amount of public investment in research, development and extension, irrigation, and farm-to-market roads; and limited mechanisms for extensions to facilitate adoption of available technologies for rain-fed and other unfavourable ecosystems."

There is truth in all that but the real problem is the block at the high-end, the circulation of ‘fluids' limited to the upper strata of society, the absence of the famous ‘trickle down' effect. Today the Filipino rice farmer farms a lot more efficiently - the IRRI says double - than their much applauded Thai counterparts - Thailand being the biggest rice exporter in the world, well, until so recently when all exports were stopped.

While those countries with deltaic river systems supplying constant water can use the irrigation system that has been found most efficient - called the "System of Rice Intensification"- that requires less water, the Philippines cannot follow that route as the country largely depends on rains.

But rice is quite marvellous because there are varieties that can handle every situation from flood plain to upland - swamp rice varieties and upland varieties - it's a question of choosing the correct variety for the farm location. Rice culture as is can be contemplated because any major shift would adversely affect the majority of rice farmers. That is not an option in a democracy.

But the world's big rice producers are caught by the very nature of big business in the net of the banks and industrial conglomerates that control seeds and chemical fertilisers-weed killers-pesticides because mass production - to feed the peoples of mega-cities - demands agro-business practises thus HYV - high-yielding varieties seed, fertilisers and weed killers and pesticides.

Also, in the use of transgenics (or GM), many scientists remain unsure about the biological impact which remains uncertain. Besides that, these outfits cannot help but be part of the problem. So let the small growers turn elsewhere seeking that solution and incorporate the new with the old. Yes, GM will have a place but not a dominant role.

One big issue with artificially cultivating genetic properties, such as insect resistance, is, will those characteristics carry over to other plants with unexpected results - with those transgenic varieties entering the wild to disrupt bio-diversity by short-circuiting the long term (natural) tests over time?

The UN is under criticism for advocating agro-ecological approaches and organic farming (International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development report 2008) because that implies abandoning use of chemicals in farming. However, that is too black and white as fertilisers such as obtained from dolomite limestone are still applicable and where needed, surely chemical fertilisers etc can be used if priority is given to other means of supplying those nutrients and prophlactics when the aim is production efficiency and not Green Fundamentalism.

For the small producer, the idea is to limit use of those more expensive bi-products of the petroleum industry and make the most of green manuring and the likes to reduce dependancy on imported or distantly transported raw materials. The methane produced - and by grazing animals - is acceptable given oil use is curtailed.

It is widely understood that too small an acreage is inefficient, so, on a family-by-family level people have to relearn old things and see the importance of co-operation. There is too much tribalism in villages and small towns. Under that mentality co-operative ventures are in practice very difficult to get off the ground - but that co-operative form of organisation is critical for small-plot land owners.

Then there is the matter of land security and legal titles. Unless a small grower has title to his land there is no guarantee of security and it takes time consuming TLC to build a good soil; thus legalisation of ownership is an imperative. For the big landowners this is not a problem because they can buy their way through the legal process if someone arrives on the doorstep threatening long term security of tenure.

Most of Asia is without that infrastructure of laws that make the carrying of capital possible. Capitalism works within a legal framework and without that there is no way to accumulate capital, to organise value, and to be able to transfer it. It is the rule of law that makes the market economy. - a legal property system, good contracts, good administration of justice and proper representation on paper. No contract means no credit, no way of constituting a company that can issue shares thus nothing to sell against investment.

The smaller scale rice farmer can opt out of the agri-biz approach and bring in methods of cultivation where preparing the land prior to planting is the norm, using locally available leaf toppings and green manuring with much less reliance on synthetic fertilisers - also falling back on old proven varieties that cannot match the HYVs in terms of volume of product but are less (up-front financially) demanding and versatile, hardier, meaning less disease and pest worries - as slower growth means a stronger more resilient plant. Rice and other products from hardy plants also store better.

Many learned farmers argue that a lack of genetic variation makes specific strains more susceptible to getting wiped out by a single pest or pathogen, or to gradual climate change. In 1970, 15% of the US corn crop was destroyed when blight swept the grain belt. In the mid-19th century, the Irish potato crop crashed, causing famine that killed a million people. The reason? Dominant plant varieties were too genetically alike and therefore vulnerable to the same enemies.

Local produce needs to feed the locals first with only the surplus going for export to far away places - of course a region can have a cash crop but profits must go to regional coffers not central government-business groups. This will wrest away from others control over the distribution and assure neighbours are fed first. This done countrywide would have the desired decentralisation effect.

Re-invigorating the Countryside
Small size allows intercropping and variety and a thousand-and-one ways of niche cultivation that makes a more interesting farming experience. In turn, positively effecting home life and its quality. This goes toward offering the young farmer a more rounded experience and may keep him or her on the land, in the hometown, or in a nearby larger town not so far removed from his or her socially normalising roots.

This latter point needs to be revisited in light of the negative consequences of industrialisation and mass migration to big cities, the rampant abuse of youthfully keen energies and that young willingness to ‘go anywhere; do anything' attitude to make it - a way of thinking long lost among the passing generations who just want to hold on to their power positions!

All the countries of Asia are busy industrialising and the lucrative markets - dominated by a few big buying groups - pick and choose from the best and cheapest and leave the rest floundering in a choppy wake of closures, sells offs, worker disputes, bankruptcies, disillusionment - and ruined lives.

The Indian economy is growing and doing extremely well and the way the Indians are approaching economic development is radically different from China. This was highlighted in a talk: The Countryside and the City (November 2007, Chile), given by South American olive tree farmer-penman Mario Rodrigues Cobos - who writes under the pseudonym of Silo.

"In India 70% to 80% of the population live in the countryside, in small villages. This is quite different from China. There is no gulf between city and countryside and India has always maintained this base. It is something very wise and only a few large cities exist in relation to the size of the population. Most important was the response India made some 50 years ago to farm land that was exhausted and that each year produced less leaving the populace with less production, with less food."

India accomplished that feat using chemical fertilisers - those products reputed to be ‘so bad' by the ‘Pure Greens' helped rescue a serious situation. Since then the growth in production figures of crops has never ceased.

"This is the opposite situation to that of China where a great gulf exists and they confront a serious problem," adds Silo. "It's the centralisation and industrialisation - whereas India still has its ancient culture and is still an agrarian-based society depending more on small decentralised farms."

China lost a lot during its infamous Cultural Revolution and the Chinese leadership is well aware of the Green-Gray divide problem as evidenced by the pronouncements of the new General Secretary of the Central Committee Hu Jintao, who affirmed the government's commitment to bridging that rural-urban gap at the October 2007 17th CPC National Congress.

For Silo, "The countryside needs to be fortified. If farming is going to be tilted towards the production of biofuels it will be coveted, as never before, by the rest of the world." This latter point speaking of South America, but the same conclusion can be drawn for Africa and Asia.

The little Man holds the key to the door of the path to the only way out. He and she must regain control. It’s the David and Goliath scenario in the 21st Century. On the macro level, governments as country managers need to take another look at the benefits of unenlightened industrialisation of everything. What is the real merit in producing the cheapest shoe? Will your cheap shoe be the one chosen by Wal-Mart? What is the reason to sacrifice an entire strata of working class people on the alter of consumerism?

The price of foodstuffs needs to be locally contained and the distribution and marketing controls wrested away from those whose motives are profit-based. Decentralisation is the key. The rich-poor gap must be bridged locally then the Big City will also look after itself and live in a more proportionate way with lifestyles that do not marginalise the countryside.

**************************
Dear Editor,

Your Behind The News column on January 15, 2008, has a lot of stats. on the ins and outs of nuclear energy production and the nuclear power road’s potential but the few negatives in the writing clearly annul any advantages. In summation: it is well understood that nuclear power is clean - if just it wasn’t so dirty and dangerous!

Global warming is a natural cyclical phenomenon that is being exacerbated by uncontrolled industrialisation and industrialise agriculture, thus it is true we have to look at the way we are doing things. However, this should not align the word fashionable to nuclear power; that’s un-affordable fashion. The nuclear power industry is demonised because there is a demon inside it.

Storage of radioactive waste - which can remain toxic for tens of thousands of years - is an outstanding problem, as is dealing with the shutting down of plants as they inevitably become no longer safe to operate. Also, why supply the Dr Strangelove’s among us with supplies of bomb making plutonium?

Nuclear fusion is as far away as ever and that is a great relief because, the last straw for our tumultuous plant Earth would be unlimited energy for the still evolving, yet to be enlightened, human race.

Yes, even Hans-Holger Rogner, head of the IAEA's planning and economic studies section, says he is, "suspicious when people say the next [reactor] generation will be safer than the one we have". The industrialists and militarists are not even listening to experts from within there own camp, let alone the antis.

No to nuclear power for mass production of energy. No nuclear power, no nuclear weapons. No nuclear weapons - then we can begin talks on dismantling all attack weapons.

Do you love your children or not?

Yours sincerely

Tony Henderson
Chairman, Humanist Association of Hong Kong
******************************
nuclear disarmament campaign



>From the media... reporting on the Hiroshima commemorations.



Everyone must bear these words in mind when engaged in this very

wothwhile campaign that has the full support of the New Universalist

Humanist movement highlighted by Silo's anto nuclear weapons video and

accompanying campaign by all in association with Silo.



We are glad oat these fine words from Japan. We look forward to real

engagement in the issue.



Peace, Force and Joy



Tony





Hiroshima marked the 62nd anniversary of the world's first-ever atomic

bomb attack today, which killed more than 140,000 people. There, Prime

Minister Shinzo Abe pledged to work toward the abolition of nuclear

weapons.



After the Hiroshima bombing, a bombing on Nagasaki in southern Japan

three days later killed another 74,000.



"Japan has been taking the path toward global peace for 62 years since

World War II. The tragedies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should never be

repeated in any place on earth," Abe said at a speech Monday at

Hiroshima Peace Park, near the bomb's epicenter.



"We will take an initiative in the international community and devote

ourselves wholeheartedly toward the abolition of nuclear weapons and

realization of peace," he added.



Abe also said Japan will remain committed to the country's three

principles of not possessing, developing or allowing nuclear weapons on

Japanese soil.



Hiroshima Mayor Tadatoshi Akiba urged the central government to stick to

its war-renouncing Constitution.



"The Japanese government should comply with the nation's pacifist

Constitution as it is and clearly say no to wrong and outdated policies

of the United States," Akiba said.



Japan surrendered on Aug. 15, 1945, bringing World War II to an end.



Further...



Cities Are Not Targets (CANT) - project Petition Drive



Please tell the nuclear powers that Cities Are Not Targets!

Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation



“Mayors for Peace calls cities together to build a nuclear-weapon-free

world.”



Since our experience of the atomic bombing 62 years ago, Hiroshima has

continually called for the abolition of nuclear weapons and realization

of lasting world peace. Despite our efforts, many areas around the

world remain trapped in chains of hatred, violence and retaliation, our

planet still bristles with vast arsenals of nuclear weapons, and the

probability that such weapons will be used is increasing.



In response to this crisis, Mayors for Peace, an NGO over which we

preside that now has 1,578 member cities in 120 countries and regions,

is conducting an emergency campaign to eliminate all nuclear weapons by

2020 globally. This is our 2020 Vision Campaign.



The year 2006 was the 10th anniversary of the International Court of

Justice advisory opinion that, “The threat or use of nuclear weapons

would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable

in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of

humanitarian law.” Mayors for Peace marked this landmark finding by

launching Phase II of our 2020 Vision Campaign. The centerpiece of this

phase is the Good Faith Challenge, a program for demanding that all

governments abide by the other ICJ finding that, “There exists an

obligation to pursue in good faith and bring to a conclusion

negotiations leading to nuclear disarmament in all its aspects under

strict and effective international control.” As a further contribution

by cities, we have also initiated a Cities Are Not Targets (CANT)

project to demand assurances from nuclear weapon states that no cities

are targeted for nuclear attack.



< Please support the Cities Are Not Targets project. >



Nuclear weapons are illegal, immoral devices designed to obliterate

entire cities. Despite the end of the Cold War, the danger of nuclear

weapons remains virtually unchanged. We still have thousands of nuclear

warheads deployed and ready to fire on warning. At the push of a

button, nuclear-tipped missiles can be on their way to a target city.

If such an event were to take place, some city, home to children and

hundreds of thousands of innocent noncombatants, would suffer utter

devastation.



The Mayors for Peace project is designed to lift the voices of cities

and citizens to say, “No! You may not target cities. You may not

target children.” Through these activities, we intend to bring to the

attention of mayors, citizens and national leaders the fact that cities

are, in fact, still being targeted for annihilation and the

International Court of Justice has found this threat itself to be a war

crime. Furthermore, we hope this project will intensify our demand that

the nuclear-weapon states fulfill their promise to “negotiate in good

faith” to abolish all nuclear weapons.



The goal of this project is not a shifting of nuclear weapons away from

cities but their total elimination. And, when we speak here of

‘cities’, we refer not to a municipal entity of a certain size but to

any area in which children and non-combatants are living routine daily

lives.



Please participate in the petition drive associated with this project.

Mayors for Peace will deliver your message to the nuclear-weapon states

and to the United Nations. Let all peoples around the world come

together and bequeath to our children a genuinely peaceful world free

from nuclear weapons!



Please support this petition.



To express your support for our CANT project, please print the petition,

sign it, and send it back to us by post or fax. Your name, address and

other personal information provided will not be used for any other

purpose.



Petition Form (.pdf)



http://www.mayorsforpeace.org/english/topic/list/36.htm



Mayors for Peace Secretariat

c/o Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation

1-5, Nakajima-cho, Naka-ku, Hiroshima 730-0811, Japan

Tel: +81-82-242-7821

Fax: +81-82-242-7452

Email: mayorcon@pcf.city.hiroshima.jp