Author: greendragon

China "intensive agriculture" Vs. USA.. [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-3-22 07:17:12 |Display all floors
Originally posted by greendragon at 2011-3-21 13:40
I think USA has 150 million hectares of arable land, another 200 million hectares of RANCHES.
There is 2.1 million farming families in USA.
.

You are right about that, my mistake

China has only 150 million farming or rural families (another 220 million are land owners, BUT has lease out the plots for payment equal to Rmb300 to 600 a month! to become migrant workers!) on 150 million hectares of arable land, 300 million hectares pastures and 200 million hectare of forest, mines, oil/gas, coal fields!
.

I want a source on the number of Chinese farmers there are. I am seeing several numbers, all of which greater than 300 million.
i.e. CATO institute put it at 700 Million in 2007.

Either way, a ratio of 150:2.1 does not make up for only 2X the production on Tonnage.

I think RICE production, China is WAY AHEAD of USA. (us production is miniscule, so no comparison - coarse grains are just in between season planting).
.

In terms of total, yes, but not in terms of efficiency in land or manpower.

China LARGER farming family means 50 MILLION tonnes of aquaculture, million of tonnes of FRUITS, VEGETABLES, HERBS, FUNGI, SEA WEEDS, FLOWERS, COMMODITY,  largest pork production - some 60 million tonnes alone!

Industrial agriculture - like Mc Donalds, 7-11 means more "limited range" production!
.

Are you kidding? Industrial Agriculture is many times more efficient than what most of the Chinese farms use. That is why there is such a massive difference in the number of farmers despite limited difference in the amount produced.


Larger farmer/rural numbers - BIG DEMAND in cities, Asian Trade Route States, means more DIVERSE RANGE of products, including "high value items" - eg. Shark Fins, Abalone, Clams, Fresh Sea Water caged fish, Shell fish etc.
.

Diversity in products is not limited in Industrial agriculture, it is the lack of demand(in the west) that limits it.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-3-22 12:23:17 |Display all floors

You miss out on the point of "diversity"

........with more "farming families" - some 150 million families at the moment, the variety of products can be "much larger",and the YIELD OF THE LAND is bigger than USA!

Example, if you have 10 million "aquaculture" families - the 'DIVERSITY" of offering will be amazing!
WHILE the 2.1 million "farming families" in the USA will only be producing more mundane "standard offerings"! This is "exactly" what the Dutch farmers are doing at the moment, ONLY China would be MUCH MUCH MORE diverse!

From thousand concoction of herbal soup mixes - HIGH VALUE, Ginseng Root culture could produce more US$ per hectare compared to Wheat or Corn! AND China has such a huge range of herbs that can be "domesticated" and "grown in plantations".

What about Fish species for the Restaurant table?

cheerios!

Green DRagon
Game Grandmaster

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-3-23 00:59:18 |Display all floors
Originally posted by greendragon at 2011-3-22 12:23
........with more "farming families" - some 150 million families at the moment, the variety of products can be "much larger",and the YIELD OF THE LAND is bigger than USA!

Exa ...


It has nothing to do with the number of farm owners/families there exists. It all comes down to supply and demand. There is little demand for Gingseng, or many of the other more exotic produce.

Think of it as a factory. One factory may produce as many different products as it wishes, but to achieve maximum efficiency, the factory must limit as much diversity as possible.

The American agriculture is analogous to a series of large modern factories, largely automated. They produce far more products per person as well as per area, however, due to the focus on efficiency, few different products are made.

The Chinese agriculture is analogous to a few large industrial era factories, with many many smaller household workers who produce different products, are however is by far less efficient.

This is a far more accurate picture than what you are trying to paint.

If China is to have richer farmers, higher efficiency on land and workforce, she cannot maintain 1600s era agriculture techniques.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-3-23 12:02:46 |Display all floors

We cannot pack 97% of the population in cities in China!

There are just TOO MANY Chinese people in China!

With 25% target, it still mean as many as 330 million chinese will be "rural"!
At the moment, we supposed to have 600 million rural BUT 220 million are "migrant workers" - not exactly "rural" - even if it's defined as "rural". Their children, "grandparents", "wifes or husbands" left behind - makes up the 80 to 100 million "rurals" - who's actually in the "city" or "industrial suburban".

So, we are actually talking about the "remaining" 330 million or about 75 million families who are "rural farmers" or "miners" or "village tradesmans"! For the Americans, it's only 2.1 million farming family! - supporting 300 million urban, suburban, industrial based citizens!

- Making farm size in USA = 350/2.1 = 170 hectares per family.
But 2/3 are ranches with even bigger sizes! So, it's recorded in the American Agriculture department, FARM SIZE average is around 60 hectares!

With low American productivity (compared to China's on the per hectare basis) - the 150 million hectares can only produce 350 million tonnes of grain compared to 550 million tonnes of grain in China!

In China, with 600 million urban citizens, 220 million "migrant" floating citizens, 80 million children/old folks consumer invillages and actually 330 million REAL RURAL FARMING, MINING, TRADESMAN citizens!

and it makes possible to produce the HUGE DIVERSITY of products in China.

From 1 hectare fish farms = producing 15 tonnes of fresh water fish a year - Tilipia worth Rmb60,000 at wholesale prices- with just 2 farm workers!

Or 2 hectare of vegetable farms = producing some 50 tonnes of vegetable - worth Rmb50,000 a year at wholesale prices - with just 2 farmers!

Or 1 hectare of pig breeders = produce some 500 x 50kg of pork - Worth Rmb250,000 a year at wholesale prices - with probably 4 workers/farmers!

It's just that we cannot have 1 to 2 hectare RICE farms, CORN farms - GOSH, 2 hectare x 6 tonnes x Rmb2 = Rmb24,000 a year income at wholesale prices! WE NEED to increase farm size of such citizens, usually FAR AWAY from urban centres - increase to 4 hectares to 8 hectares per family to increase income to Rmb48,000 to Rmb96,000 per year!

It just mean that mean reducing "grain farmers" from 1 or 2 hectares per family to 4 to 8 hectare per famil!
It means allowing zoning for pig farming, vegetable farming, aquaculture, herbal culture, flower growing, nurseries, fruits, etc.

AT LEAST in CHINA, we get a richer variety of FOOD, DRINKS, SOUPS, FLOWERS, MATERIALS to use!
(better than USA - increasingly bare offerings!)

cheerios!

Green DRagon
Game Grandmaster

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2011-3-23 13:53:57 |Display all floors
Originally posted by greendragon at 2011-3-23 12:02
- Making farm size in USA = 350/2.1 = 170 hectares per family.
But 2/3 are ranches with even bigger sizes! So, it's recorded in the American Agriculture department, FARM SIZE average is around 60 hectares!

With low American productivity (compared to China's on the per hectare basis) - the 150 million hectares can only produce 350 million tonnes of grain compared to 550 million tonnes of grain in China!


Have you seen my stats, they dispel the myth the American farms are less efficient area wise.
I'll post it
Based on area efficiency:
Wheat: China is 60% more efficient land wise
Cotton Seed: China is 87% more efficient land wise
Cotton: China is 45% more efficient land wise

Course Grain: US is 65% more efficient land wise
Corn: US is 74% more efficient land wise

Oat: US is 75% more efficient land wise
Sorghum: US is 8% more efficient land wise
Rice, probably one of the most important for China: US is 17% more efficient land wise.
Oilseed: US is 18% more efficient land wise
Soybean: US is 57% more efficient land wise
Peanut: US is 14% more efficient land wise



About diversity, again, it is only due to the lack of demands on the US markets that resulted in less diversity. It has nothing to do with number of farming families.

There are plenty of farms in the US that grows multiple crops, but all of them are major crops as they are what the Americans demand.

Seriously, take some time and actually read my posts. Chinese agriculture is NOT more efficient land wise, and definitely not labor wise.
It's diversity is due to the demand, and not the numbers of farming families.

Some examples of the data (I would link the pdf, but this board is blocking it)
Chinese production per area is only more efficient in Wheat and Cotton.

[ Last edited by cataphract at 2011-3-23 01:57 PM ]
corn.JPG
grain.JPG
wheat.JPG
oat.JPG

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-3-23 15:00:20 |Display all floors
China should invest more in irrigation system, especially in Western China,
there's plenty of arid & semi-arid lands that could be reclaimed &
transformed into productive agricultural lands,
yes huge areas in Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Gansu, etc
Grow food & other cash crops that are suitable in these regions - corn, cotton, potatoe, wheat, etc
Western China has plenty of glaciers high up in Kunlun, Tien Shan & Altai mountains that could provide plenty of reliable fresh water sources to irrigate reclaimed agricultural lands in these western provinces.
Please don't shoot, I'm just a babe.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2011-3-24 13:13:09 |Display all floors

Reply #12 cataphract's post

Again you only spend time on "commodity grain" only which China "surpass" USA by wide margins!

I think out of the 75 million farming, rural farming in China.
It should only have 21 million odd families in average 6 hectares farms producing the commodity grains - creating a 6 tonnes x 6 hectares x Rmb2 per kg = Rmb72,000 revenue income per family!

another 22 million odd families should have small 1 to 2 hectares (or the large plantation of 100 to 600 hectares for pasture grazing, or pulp, or more medium 10 - 20 hectares fruit tree, cotton etc.) producing those "high yield" products - chicken, fish, pork, cattle, egg layers, dairy cows, herbs, fungi, vegetables, spices etc.

we then have 32 million odd families to "develop" those "city like lifestyle" - so that the "rural chinese" does not "lack the fun of the urbanites" - like golf courses, tennis courts, bowling alley business, karaoke business, cafe, beer houses, restaurants, small cinemas, DVD rental/sales shops, and other services.

This is "vital" to keep at least 25% of the population rural and keep the diversity of agricultural products!

cheeerios!

Green DRagon
Game Grandmaster

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.