Straw burning control must rely on market mechanisms

Every summer harvest, all localities must face the "major test" of straw burning. This year, although all localities have imposed strict "burning bans," some places still have thick smoke billowing, with PM2.5 indices off the charts.

Meteorological satellite monitoring shows that in June this year, straw burning in the country's main summer grain harvest areas decreased overall compared with last year, but straw burning in some provinces remains serious.

Reciting the "ban" formula well is the common experience of all localities in dealing with straw burning. In addition to distributing pamphlets and putting up slogans in the early stage, during the peak period of straw burning, all localities have organized ban inspection teams to patrol and supervise, with multiple departments responsible for designated areas, and town and village cadres have also formed straw burning ban supervision teams to patrol the fields.

Administrative means of strengthening supervision have indeed achieved certain results in several major grain-producing provinces, but in the long run, this can only treat the symptoms. First, this method requires a large investment of manpower and material resources, and the supervision cost is too high. Second, no matter how many blocks are put up, there will always be a gap. Farmers play cat-and-mouse and seize loopholes to burn straw, making it impossible to guard against completely. Improper handling can also easily intensify conflicts between cadres and the masses.

To find the cure for the root cause, it is necessary to analyze the root cause of straw burning. In order to rush to cultivate the land, farmers need to quickly deal with straw. Burning it all with one fire is the most time-saving and labor-saving, so burning is of course the first choice.

In fact, in today's era of vigorous promotion of mechanized operations, returning straw to the field is not only convenient, but returning it to the field also has the effects of increasing fertility, improving soil, and preserving moisture. Why do some farmers still prefer burning? Because in the eyes of farmers, attaching a shredder to the harvester not only affects the progress of harvesting, but also increases the harvesting cost. Farmers are unwilling to do a business that loses money.

There is another way to turn straw from waste into treasure: sell the straw to fertilizer plants or purchasers. But many farmers still do not buy it. Generally, the purchase price of one ton of straw is more than 200 yuan. Farmers believe that sorting straw does not earn as much as doing odd jobs, so they are unwilling to do it. In this way, "wealth" is either wasted or burned, while enterprises, sitting on the straw "gold mine," still cannot get enough.

Farmers do not buy it because it is "not cost-effective," and the market has not played its role well. To cure straw burning pollution at the root, it is necessary to recite the "market sutra" well.

First, let professional people do professional things. Cultivate more brokers in rural areas to connect the fields with the market. In some places, brokers clear straw from farmers' fields for free and obtain it without compensation, then sell it to feed enterprises or papermaking enterprises, earning tens of thousands of yuan in one summer. When using straw is turned into a "business" profitable for farmers, brokers, and enterprises alike, farmers naturally will not need to burn straw.

Second, incorporate small accounts into the big bill. Farmers are willing to return straw to the field because it can effectively increase soil fertility and help increase crop yields. But if farmers do not have much land and cannot produce economies of scale, then this extra cost becomes a burden. If the government subsidizes specialized cooperatives and lets them fully play an organizing role, expand scale operations, and carry out unified operations, then small accounts can be incorporated into the big bill. In this way, efficiency increases and costs decrease, and returning straw to the field will change from passive to active.

Furthermore, use price as a lever and treat straw recycling as a point for increasing farmers' income. On the one hand, straw recycling can be encouraged through policy incentives to prevent operating companies from driving prices down and dampening farmers' enthusiasm. On the other hand, it is also necessary to give subsidies or tax reductions and exemptions to enterprises engaged in straw recycling and reuse, or provide technical support and innovation encouragement, so that enterprises can further broaden channels for straw recycling and utilization and benefit more farmers. In addition, it is necessary to further improve comprehensive straw utilization technology, let straw generate more added value, and let farmers enjoy more profit dividends from it. When straw also becomes a point for increasing income and farmers "think highly" of straw, the problem of straw reigniting year after year can truly be solved.