Pooling agricultural support funds and projects to form a joint force

In recent years, governments at all levels have continuously increased funding input to support rural areas in improving agricultural infrastructure and enhancing agricultural production capacity, playing an important role in accelerating rural development. However, the author's investigation found that because projects and funds are relatively scattered, their economic, ecological and social benefits have been affected. This is mainly shown in the following aspects:

First, preliminary planning is extensive and crude, and project setting is not precise enough. As far as macro management departments are concerned, insufficient overall consideration has been given to how to improve the precision of agricultural support fund projects, and the construction of the project database is not complete. As far as the grassroots level is concerned, there is not enough forward-looking planning regarding which projects are urgently needed locally. When seeking projects from higher levels, they often cannot carry out project planning according to local rural social and economic development plans and in light of key development areas, key industries and key projects; instead, they mostly report projects for the sake of competing for projects, and as a result the projects obtained do not fit reality.

Second, management is fragmented, and project funds are difficult to coordinate. Improving the agricultural production capacity of a region requires land leveling, transformation of low- and medium-yield farmland, supporting small-scale farmland water conservancy and other projects to be advanced synchronously as a whole before results can be achieved. However, existing agricultural support projects often involve multiple departments, and the planning, standards and procedures of project construction differ, as do requirements for timing, technology and investment scale. Each department does its own thing and sings its own tune, "each frying its own dish," making it difficult to "prepare one banquet together."

Third, existing agricultural support projects have multiple sources of policy and multiple sources of "funding." From the national level to provincial and municipal higher-level competent departments, in the formulation and implementation of plans for agricultural support project construction, there are many uncertain factors encountered when integrating funds and arranging them in concentrated contiguous layouts, making it difficult to achieve overall coordination and scientific rationality in project design, approval and application.

Fourth, there is a lack of joint force in promotion, and the effectiveness of project implementation is low. In some places, because relevant departments have loose connections and are unclear about project approval, application and implementation progress, duplicate applications and duplicate investments occur. In some places, "road zipper" style construction appears: this year land leveling requires breaking roads and compensation, next year low-yield farmland transformation requires breaking roads and compensation, and the year after that supporting small-scale farmland water conservancy also requires breaking roads and compensation. At the same time, because responsibilities, powers and interests among multiple departments are not unified, phenomena such as mutual constraints and shifting blame and wrangling often occur.

If national agricultural support project funds are too scattered, by the time they reach the grassroots level they are at most a "drizzle." If funds are not integrated, only addition is done, and it cannot accomplish much; integrating funds turns scattering into concentration and gathers the fingers into a fist, and only then do benefits increase greatly. To use good steel on the blade's edge, it is necessary, according to the principle that projects follow plans and funds follow projects, to take the city as the main body and projects as the platform, and to invest in a concentrated way and bundle their use. To this end, three suggestions are put forward:

First, according to the division of authority, promote the effective integration of agricultural support funds. On the basis of improving long-term development plans for agricultural support projects from the bottom up, and according to the principle of "channels unchanged, purposes unchanged, overall arrangement, concentrated investment, each taking responsibility, forming a joint force," carry out fund integration around key areas, key industries and key projects.

Second, establish and improve a performance evaluation index system for agricultural support funds and an analysis system for the use efficiency of agricultural support funds, improve assessment of the use of agricultural support funds, and establish and improve reward and punishment mechanisms for the allocation and use of agricultural support funds.

Third, strengthen supervision over the use of agricultural support funds, establish a multi-level, multi-faceted and multi-form supervision mechanism, strengthen whole-process supervision before, during and after agricultural support fund projects, and effectively avoid various violations of discipline and law.