Industrial structure upgrading must not neglect food security
According to media reports, since this year's summer harvest, floods have been relatively severe in some areas of southern China, summer grain has been seriously affected by disease, the problem of excessive unsound kernels has been fairly prominent, and in addition some grain fields have been submerged, so the grain harvest has been considerably affected. Recently, the State Administration of Grain issued a special emergency notice, requiring that summer grain procurement in the disaster-hit areas be carried out properly, and that over-standard wheat in the disaster-hit areas must not simply be rejected.
China is a country with a large population, and the issue of food security has always been a core issue. Grain production is a matter of paramount importance concerning people's livelihood and must not be handled carelessly in the slightest. Ensuring the grain harvest admits not the slightest discount. The impact of floods on grain production is a short-term impact and should be taken seriously; but from the perspective of long-term impact, promoting industrial structure upgrading may have a relatively large impact on grain production, and this should be taken even more seriously.
Correctly handling industrial upgrading
and its relationship with grain production
The purpose of industrial structure upgrading is to achieve the upgrading of the industrial structure, that is, to increase the proportion of a country's high-value-added industries within its industrial structure. Industrial structure upgrading is an important way for a country to enhance its core competitiveness, and it is also an inevitable direction of a country's economic development. Generally speaking, the process of industrial structure upgrading is a process in which the proportion of manufacturing and services in the industrial structure keeps rising. However, in the process of promoting industrial structure upgrading, a country easily neglects agricultural development and easily neglects the issue of food security. Because some developing countries failed to properly handle the relationship between industrial structure upgrading and grain production, famines sometimes resulted. Promoting industrial structure upgrading should be carried out on the basis of ensuring food security. If food security is sacrificed in order to promote industrial structure upgrading, the losses will outweigh the gains.
In fact, if handled properly, industrial structure upgrading and attaching importance to grain production are not contradictory. From the perspective of trends, the proportion of agricultural production, including grain production, in the industrial structure gradually declines, but industrial structure upgrading can improve a country's resource allocation efficiency and productivity, and can reduce the input-output ratio of grain production. Of course, this only means that it can be achieved technologically. If, in terms of economic strategy and institutional design, industrial structure upgrading is blindly promoted while grain production and the issue of famine are neglected, that is extremely dangerous.
A country's industrial structure upgrading will inevitably produce a "corresponding" resource surplus, and it should be ensured that part of it is used for grain production. That is, on the basis of ensuring the existing stock of resources invested in grain production, a certain increment should be ensured within the "corresponding" resource surplus.
The experience of the United States in handling the relationship between industrial structure upgrading and grain production is worth drawing on. While promoting industrial structure upgrading, the United States has never neglected grain production. Through long-term development and industrial structure upgrading, the United States has optimized its industrial structure, with high-technology industries and high-value-added industries occupying a dominant position in the industrial structure, and modern services represented by the financial industry holding a prominent position in the industrial structure. However, in the long-term process of promoting industrial structure upgrading, the United States has never neglected agricultural production and has always attached great importance to food security. A developed country like the United States, whose industrial structure is clearly de-agriculturalized, still does not dare to neglect agricultural production, especially grain production; developing countries, in the process of optimizing their industrial structure, should be even less negligent of grain production.
Achieving sound development of industrial upgrading
and grain production
The goal of China's industrial structure upgrading and optimization of its industrial structure is to raise the position of high-technology industries and high-value-added industries in the industrial structure and gradually make them dominant. However, throughout the entire process of industrial structure upgrading, the share of agriculture in the industrial structure will gradually decline, but agricultural production still must not be neglected, and the issue of food security must not be neglected.
First, accelerate the pace of industrial integration and raise the level of intelligentization of grain production. Achieving intelligentization, mechanization and automation of grain production is the trend and direction of grain production in today's world. Generally speaking, when people deal with intelligent production, they highlight its application in manufacturing. In fact, in grain production, intelligentization should likewise be gradually achieved. To raise the level of intelligentization of grain production, the focus is on introducing control technology, information technology and so on, and raising grain production efficiency through industrial integration. Traditional grain production methods no longer meet the requirements of economic and social development. After nearly several decades of development, China's grain production has achieved a certain degree of mechanization and automation, such as sowing, rice transplanting and harvesting, but the degree of intelligentization is not high. The level of intelligentization of grain production should be raised by achieving a high degree of integration between grain production and high-tech industries.
Second, intensify institutional innovation and further raise the degree of marketization of grain production. Historical lessons from abroad show that after institutional innovation, major problems in grain production often arise, sometimes even triggering famine. From 1932 to 1933, a large-scale famine occurred in the former Soviet Union, with the most severe situation in the Ukrainian region. Ukraine has long had the reputation of being the "breadbasket of Europe." The great famine of the 1930s brought profound disaster to the Ukrainian people, and what shocked us about this calamity was not merely the unpredictability of the natural environment, but more that it reflected a deformed world under a totalitarian system, showing that backward institutions and insufficient institutional innovation sometimes inflict greater harm on grain production than natural factors. In a country like the former Soviet Union, which itself emerged from a backward small-peasant economy, the forced implementation of collectivized and nationalized economic systems did not enable agricultural rulers to develop with high efficiency as they wished, but instead dealt heavy blows to agricultural laborers. The lessons of the former Soviet Union in this regard show that after agriculture under a totalitarian system underwent such a series of transformations, its defects were ultimately gradually exposed in economic practice, and what exposed these defects were endless grain crises and great famines. These lessons should be learned. The key to institutional innovation in grain production is to further raise the degree of marketization and internationalization of grain production, and with an open attitude, expand the market scope of grain trade, paying attention not only to the domestic market for grain trade but also participating in the international market on a larger scale and in a larger scope, so as to improve China's food security and guard against risks related to grain.
Third, the red line of 1.8 billion mu of cultivated land must not be shaken for a long time, and the regional structure of grain production should be optimized. Some views point out that China can relax the bottom line of 1.8 billion mu of cultivated land, and some views even point out that China's future grain will mainly depend on imports. Undoubtedly, these views are wrong. China's large population is a basic national condition. Relying mainly on imports to solve the grain problem is equivalent to handing one's lifeblood to other countries, and the possibility of famine will increase. Therefore, the red line of 1.8 billion mu of cultivated land is the bottom line. At present, China's cultivated land stock is 2.026 billion mu, which shows that, at present, the goal of holding the red line of 1.8 billion mu of cultivated land has been successfully completed, providing a solid foundation and guarantee for ensuring absolute food security. From the perspective of future development trends, holding the cultivated land red line requires not only protecting the effective quantity of cultivated land but also paying more attention to quality, so as to place equal emphasis on quantity and quality. At the same time, it is necessary to optimize the regional structure of grain production and guard against the impact on food security caused by poor harvests in traditional major grain-producing areas due to floods.