Today, satellites observe 26 of the 56 climatic variables, hence the importance of their presence in understanding the phenomena that surround us. The Copernicus program is 20 years old. The.
Since the summer of 2020, the price curve for cereals has been steadily rising. Various concomitant factors are at play: the Niña phenomenon, the pandemic, Chinese demand and Russian policy?.
Chinese, Russians and Americans are gaining a foothold in Africa. They understood that this continent still has untapped potential. Africa has already welcomed a large number of investing countries, always.
Michel Dron, secretary of the plant section at the French Academy of Agriculture, brings his thoughts on the need for a thoughtful agricultural transition, in collaboration with the agricultural world.
The global spread of the coronavirus epidemic is significantly disrupting the functioning of agricultural markets. Operators fear a decrease in trade, while their most pressing problem is logistics. During the.
The 2020 edition of Le Déméter, a yearly survey of agriculture, food products and development in France, Europe and throughout the world, has just been published. This 400-page publication brings.
[inbound_button font_size="14" color="#8d0100" text_color="#ffffff" icon="download" url="https://dev.willagri.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Dossier-Willagri-02-20-EN.pdf" width="" target="_blank"]Download the article[/inbound_button]
Despite appearances, the agriculture and mining industries have several things in common, not least the race to scale up and up. This is old news in mining. But, contrary to perceived wisdom, the same is true of farming, at least when it comes to supplying global markets. Huge farms supply the agri-food industries and supermarkets' purchasing groups. These farms often focus on producing a single product. They are not scattered randomly but concentrated in a small number of highly specialised agricultural regions.
In the middle ages, Europe was dotted with small lead, zinc, tin, copper and other mines. Having become too small, isolated and unprofitable, these mines and associated industrial units in the Massif Central region of France, Thuringia in Germany and Bohemia in the Czech Republic barely survived the First World War. Despite their glorious pasts, the mines in the coal fields of northern France, Belgium and Great Britain and even the Ruhr were in turn shut down one by one after the Second World War.
The only mines that survive worldwide are gigantic operations in places like Canada, Chile, Mauritania, South Africa and Australia. These are open-cast mines that process enormous quantities at very low production costs. They are linked by railways to specialist ports where large cargo ships dock to load.
The same kind of mergers are now happening in agriculture, albeit a few years after they happened in the industrial sector. Today, the big agricultural production areas supply world markets. They are made up of huge holdings covering tens or even hundreds of thousands of hectares. For example, 47,000 Brazilian farms are more than 1,000 hectares in size (a quarter of them are over 10,000 hectares) and account for nearly half of the farmed area in the country, while 5,700,000 farms of less than 100 hectares farm less than 21% of the farmed area. In Ukraine, one holding manages over 600,000 hectares and several firms in the hands of Russian oligarchs are over 1 million hectares in size. These massive businesses are fully equipped, managed rationally, and obviously employ salaried workers. Harvests are transported to loading ports by water, train or a constant toing and froing of trucks. This happens on the North American plains, via the Mississippi and St Laurence rivers, in the "Black Sea" countries where produce is taken to ports on the Sea of Azov, and in Argentina, where the Rosario terminal on the Paraná River is the destination.
But despite their size, these production areas cover only a fraction of cultivated land worldwide and satisfy only a minority share, albeit a large one, of human dietary needs. The vast majority of these needs are met by hundreds of millions of very small holdings. Of course, these micro-farms play only a very marginal role in supplying world markets. But they are essential for feeding the general populations of rural areas and even neighbouring cities.
A few large production areas dominate all these international markets, whether for grain, sugar, oilseeds or dairy products. And the same is true of bananas, avocados, coffee, cocoa and tea. This is because each of these large crops comes from a very small number of highly specialised regions able to supply huge quantities of products that comply with strict standards at very competitive prices. It is these precise characteristics that are sought by the large traders, agri-food manufacturers and purchasing groups in buyer countries and ultimately the retail sector.
Of course, consumers benefit in turn, year round, from a regular supply of low-price, consistently high-quality produce. But obviously this produce might come from the other side of the world, because the market decides.
Let's take the case of wheat. This grain crop, widely grown and eaten around the world, needs a lot of space. But most of the areas supplying the world market with wheat are located in regions that are particularly conducive to this crop because of their soil and weather conditions and arable production arrangements. This applies to the North American plains between the Great Lakes and the Rocky Mountains (nearly 20 million hectares of wheat fields), the Pampas in Argentina, the black-soil regions of Ukraine and southern Russia, and the plains of the European Union.
In 2019-20, global wheat production is predicted to total 765 million tonnes. Around 175 million tonnes (22.6%) might be traded internationally. Out of this total, the Black Sea countries are forecast to export 60 million tonnes, the US and Canada 24 to 25 million tonnes each, and the EU nearly as much (including 11.7 million tonnes by France). To this we can add Argentina, which exports 14 million tonnes, with a similar amount from Australia, although it is, even more so than other countries, exposed to very frequent unpredictable weather conditions. In total, this handful of countries will export 162 million tonnes of wheat, or nearly 93% of the global total.
On the other side of the scales, there are many more importer countries. And some have large trade deficits as a result of growing needs and structurally weak harvests. For example, in 2019-20, the five North African countries will likely import 28 million tonnes of wheat. But the Middle East, Indonesia, South Korea and Japan are also big importers, while sub-Saharan Africa's wheat imports are growing rapidly.
If we move on to all grains except rice, we need to add to this small group the major corn exporters, who are, essentially, besides the US, Brazil and far behind it South Africa.
The soya market is even more concentrated because three countries, the US, Brazil and Argentina, account for almost all production and exports. China takes in 60% of these, and the EU a good proportion of the remainder. The same is true for palm oil, which is essentially produced in Indonesia and Malaysia, and mainly imported by China and India.
The market for dairy products is dominated by New Zealand and the EU, with the US a distant third.
The production of exotic fruit, vegetables and flowers is also very concentrated. Take bananas. They are consumed in large quantities in the US and Europe and are produced by huge plantations in the small, rich coastal plains of four Central or South American countries (Costa Rica, Guatemala, Colombia and Ecuador). If we add the Philippines, these five countries account for 83% of international banana production. The plantations and trade are controlled by large consortia such as Chiquita, Dole and Del Monte, which each cultivate tens of millions of hectares.
Ghana and Ivory Coast, meanwhile, account for 60% of cocoa production, while coffee production is dominated by Brazil, Vietnam and Ivory Coast.
This concentration of agricultural production therefore offers major and obvious advantages for big farmers, middlemen and processors, but also, at least in the short term, for consumers. However, it also presents serious drawbacks.
According to Agrex Consulting, which every year conducts an analysis of the competitivity of the dairy cattle industry on an international scale on behalf of FranceAgriMer, global production is showing.
Unlike the most pessimistic forecasts on the negative effects of global warming, the world’s agricultural production has increased over the past 20 years and should continue to do so, claims.
Contrary to all predictions, in the 21st century, agriculture has emerged as one of the most pressing issues of our times. Until now, and for centuries, people’s great fear was that they would not be able to produce enough to feed themselves properly. But today, the future of human societies and even the sustainability of life on earth is at stake. Agriculture will not, by itself, solve these problems crucial to the future of humankind. But it can contribute to solving them.
Within this context, agriculture must also respond as positively as can be to four major challenges:
Nobody can argue with the importance of each of these four challenges taken in isolation. The problem is that the objectives to be achieved are, in part, incompatible. Essentially, we must square the circle by conserving core objectives, but by making sacrifices in certain respects.
In 2015, the FAO estimated that it would be necessary to increase agricultural production by 50% by 2050. It was an ambitious objective, but one which seemed compatible with progress observed in the 20th century. But is it compatible with our three other objectives? Unfortunately, that seems unlikely. Such an increase would require higher agricultural yields, an expansion of agricultural land and an increase in industrial livestock farming.[1]
A significant increase in agricultural production is probably incompatible with the need to reduce greenhouse gases. This is because it would both require continuing to clear forests and cultivating the best grazing lands (both of which are excellent carbon sinks), using large quantities of nitrogen fertilizers (a source of N2O, which is very harmful to the environment, and to increase industrial livestock farming. The FAO also recommends increasing the number of rice fields, particularly in Africa. However, these produce large quantities of methane (CH4), a powerful greenhouse gas whose effects on global warming represent, it has been claimed, over 10% of emissions for the entire agricultural sector.
In this way, increasing agricultural production at the same rate or greater than in the past can only harm the environment and biodiversity. Previous forecasts should therefore be revised more or less extensively, while ensuring people throughout the world are fed enough and healthily.
[1] Despite the size of natural grazing lands worldwide (3,300 million hectares, or almost twice the area of farmland), the potential for production is very low as these are often in arid or semi-arid zones.
Reducing obesity and food waste would, in theory, reduce global needs. Indeed, a section of the population in Western countries is already reducing consumption of meat, sugar and oil for health reasons. But we also know that, until now, obesity levels have continued to increase, in particular (but not only) in developing countries. In certain countries, 50% of the population is already overweight. Significant savings are therefore possible in this area, but they currently remain out of reach. However, any improvement in agricultural losses (up to 30% in certain countries) and food waste would represent direct progress in reducing needs.
Tens of millions of hectares of arable land have been assigned to production of cereals, oleaginous grains and sugar cane for ethanol or diester. Abandoning this production would free up land or avoid clearing thousands of additional hectares of forests. For example, the United States uses 300 million tonnes of maize for ethanol production, which requires at least 30 million hectares of good agricultural land. This represents around 2% of arable land worldwide (around 1,600 million hectares). And yet, the USA, the world’s number one producer of petrol, does not need this type of fuel. It could therefore give up ethanol production without any losses, except to producers.
The latest available statistics show that, contrary to the hopes (and objectives) of the FAO, the number of people going hungry, which had dropped to 200 million at the start of the 21st century, is now rising again. In 2017, 821 million people, or one person in nine worldwide, were going hungry. Unfortunately, it seems that this number will remain steady, and may even increase. This will be due to overpopulation (in certain countries in sub-Saharan Africa in particular), climate change and political uncertainty in various countries. If this hypothesis turns out to be true, world food production will automatically drop. This, it goes without saying, is not morally acceptable.
Of course, agriculture, like all other economic activities, contributes to the production of greenhouse gases. It is estimated that it accounts for 13.5% of greenhouse gases (30% including downstream businesses). There are many sources of gases: direct consumption of energy by agricultural machines, N2O emissions from nitrogen fertilizers, production of methane... If we want to limit global warming, these emissions must urgently be reduced. Of course, agriculture must play its part, but in what form and in what proportions?
As a priority, let’s stop clearing forests or prairies and get better at fighting forest fires, which wipe out millions of hectares every year. Also, let’s avoid setting fire to the vast African savannahs during the dry season.
Simplified agricultural techniques will reduce fuel consumption. These practices are developing rapidly throughout the world. They must continue.
By modifying certain agronomic practices, it is also possible to reduce the use of nitrogen fertilizers and therefore the amount which is emitted into the atmosphere. But it will be difficult to avoid a drop in yields (in countries where these are very high, such as Europe or China), whereas agricultural production must increase because an extra 2 billion people will have to be fed by 2050.
Even though the majority of the 3,300 million hectares of natural grazing lands often have low productivity, too often they are over-exploited. To resolve this situation, flock sizes must be reduced, and grasslands must be restored so that CO2 can be trapped in the soil.
Scientists are researching types of feed which lead to less methane being released by ruminants. This path should be explored further too. It is also possible to reduce animal numbers, for example by eating less red meat or breeding more productive and therefore fewer dairy cows. Think of the millions of cows in India which are virtually unproductive and yet are releasing methane!
The increase in the size of farms and the widespread use of modern production techniques has harmed the environment, in particular wild flora and fauna. Ever larger plots, the disappearance of hedges, the destruction of humid zones and increased use of crop protection products have led to these phenomena. We now know that their consequences for soil protection, water and air quality, and simply the future of agricultural production are extremely serious and long-lasting. For example, atrazine can still be found in groundwater, even though its use has been forbidden in maize production for 20 years.
However, these difficulties do not mean we should set aside our objectives, even though much work remains to achieve them.
This will be very difficult. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine dividing up huge agricultural plots in new countries to return to a more human scale. However, small or medium farms are better adapted to the preservation of traditional plots and to good use of rural land. These must be protected.
The priority should be to stop clearing forests and cultivate natural grazing lands. However, this is less than ever the direction taken by countries such as Brazil, which are claiming the right to grow their exports of soya, cereals or meat as they please.[1]
In the same way, soil restoration with its flora and fauna is complicated, as it requires completely modifying agricultural methods. This is one of the objectives of organic farming and agro-ecology.
A network of hedges should also be created or brought back around fields. In France, Brittany has already started re-planting some hedges, particularly in catchment areas to prevent chemicals from being swept into rivers. Currently 2,500 kilometres of new hedges are thus planted every year, which is good. But in the 1960s and 1970s, we destroyed 250,000 km of hedges!
All of this can be expensive, pushing up cost prices for agricultural products.[2] While managers of large farms are perfectly able to implement these changes when they are imposed, smaller farmers must be given training in these new techniques.
[1] Based on satellite observations, deforestation has accelerated dangerously in Brazil (+278% between 2018 and 2019).
[2] It should be remembered that, in organic farming, yields are lower than in conventional farming, leading to higher production costs and therefore higher sales prices.
Will Agri est un blog consacré à l’agriculture, plus précisément, comme on a coutume de dire aujourd’hui, à l’agriculture écologiquement intensive et inclusive.
Will Agri is a blog dedicated to agriculture, specifically focusing on what is now commonly referred to as ecologically intensive and inclusive agriculture.
