Precise delivery of agricultural subsidies is the key to efficient support for farmers

By clarifying subsidy targets and adjusting subsidy approaches, explore and establish a mechanism that truly links agricultural subsidies to grain production, improve the precision and targeting of subsidies, and let those who produce more grain receive more subsidies

Recently, I visited several major grain-producing counties for interviews and chatted with some large grain growers about agricultural subsidies. Regarding the agricultural subsidy of more than 100 yuan per mu, they generally hold two views: first, they feel that as income from off-farm work and other sources rises, this money is not a large sum, but they still feel the state has them in mind, which warms their hearts; second, under the current policy, no matter how much land they transfer to grow grain, only their own contracted land can receive subsidies, while subsidies for other land are collected by the households that transferred the land. It has become difficult for subsidies to motivate large growers to grow grain. These attitudes are currently fairly common among large grain growers and other new types of agricultural business entities.

Agricultural subsidies are an agricultural support and protection policy commonly adopted by countries around the world today. China's agricultural subsidy policy has entered its thirteenth year since it was rolled out nationwide in 2004. At present, it has formed a basic institutional framework based on the "four subsidies" of direct subsidies, comprehensive subsidies for agricultural inputs, subsidies for the purchase of agricultural machinery, and subsidies for improved crop varieties, supplemented by subsidies for agricultural insurance premiums and subsidies for key agricultural production links. Data show that China's agricultural subsidies last year already reached more than 160 billion yuan. It should be said that the existing agricultural subsidy policy has conformed to changes in China's economic and social development situation, played an important supporting role in promoting consecutive years of growth in grain output and continued increases in farmers' incomes, and won the heartfelt support of hundreds of millions of farmers.

However, some problems have also emerged in the implementation of the agricultural subsidy policy. One of them is the lack of precision in subsidy targets complained about by large grain growers. In recent years, some regions have indeed seen subsidies decoupled from grain production. As long as they comply with the land contracting policy, some farmers leave their land idle and still receive subsidies; some farmers who have gone to cities to work and have completely "left agriculture" still receive every cent of subsidy income. Therefore, some experts say that the stimulus effect of subsidies on grain production is increasingly slowing and gradually evolving into "income-based welfare" for farmers.

In fact, the original purpose of designing and introducing the agricultural subsidy policy was to encourage farmers to produce more grain. But in actual operation in various places, it ultimately basically transitioned to subsidizing farmers according to the area of contracted cultivated land. This is mainly because indicators such as each household's grain sown area, output, and marketable quantity are all very difficult to truly calculate clearly. This is also the objective reason why the targeting of agricultural subsidy policy is not clear enough and its precision is not very high.

Although it is very difficult, some things still have to be done. Because against the background of rising grain-growing costs and continuously declining comparative returns from grain growing, the lack of precision in subsidy targets means that those who truly grow grain cannot receive more subsidies, and farmers' enthusiasm for growing grain declines. This may not only lead to an increasingly serious tendency toward non-grain use of cultivated land, but is also not conducive to the cultivation and development of large grain growers and other new types of agricultural business entities. All of this urgently requires improving the precision of agricultural subsidy policy.

This year's No. 1 Central Document proposed "newly added subsidies shall be tilted toward grain and other important agricultural products, new types of agricultural business entities, and main producing areas," and "in places where conditions permit, pilot subsidies to producers shall be carried out according to actual grain sown area or output." This is a further adjustment of the agricultural subsidy policy as the situation changes. By clarifying subsidy targets and adjusting subsidy approaches, exploring and establishing a mechanism that truly links agricultural subsidies to grain production, improving the precision and targeting of subsidies, and letting those who produce more grain receive more subsidies, we will further raise farmers' enthusiasm for growing grain, more effectively avoid the non-grain use of cultivated land, and safeguard national food security. Of course, to achieve precision and targeting in subsidies, we must not ignore the operability of the policy. We should pursue efficiency while also taking fairness into account, so as to maximize the effectiveness of the agricultural subsidy policy.