Behind the rice controversy, three questions urgently need answers

The "Liangyou 0293" incident that occurred in Bengbu and other places in Anhui has been going on for half a year now, and the final plan for bearing the losses is still under negotiation. No matter which party ultimately bears most of the cost, the questions raised by this lesson in disaster are worth considering by all sides:

First, how should responsibility for reduced yields and total crop failure be clarified? Amid the controversy, clarifying responsibility is the prerequisite; making reckless accusations when responsibility is unclear only muddies the waters. The key point of dispute in this incident is whether the seed production company should bear responsibility and what responsibility it should bear. However, there is currently no authoritative determination on this, and it remains to be further clarified in accordance with the law. Second, does false advertising exist in disguised form? According to the Ministry of Agriculture's measures for confirming super rice varieties, the naming rights for super rice rest with the Ministry of Agriculture. But according to reports, some places still misuse and abuse the name "super rice" in publicity. How should this be supervised in the future, and how can it be avoided? Third, how can agricultural insurance further play its role? The local maximum compensation standard of 330 yuan per mu feels somewhat low. How can agricultural insurance further serve to hedge risks and shield farming households from wind and rain in the future? These all remain to be further explored.

During Qingming, people are busy planting wheat; during Guyu, they plant the fields. Now it is once again the season for sowing new rice. I hope all parties involved can learn from this experience and turn something negative into something positive. This is both a kind of wisdom and dialectics in practice.