http://e-info.org.tw/node/117862
只靠補助的稻作政策行得通嗎？ 聯合國：無法挽救稻農收益
文字大小
60 1 Share1
科技農報2016年8月18日綜合外電報導，張瑞玶編譯；柴幗馨、林韋佑編輯
※編按：農糧署推動的「稻作直接給付」政策在今年5月試辦上路，有別於以往的保價收購，讓稻米價格在自由市場競爭，提升高品質稻米的價格，鼓勵農民轉型升級。然而，新政策真的能夠協助台灣的稻作產業轉型嗎？除了補助，還能怎麼做才可以提升農民收益？聯合國國際稻米研究所的分析報告中，已經替我們找到了答案。
Rice Today 是國際稻米研究所所發行的刊物，每年都會發布報告，針對全世界的水稻栽培現況、研究、推廣、以及文化與政策等提出各項發展的目標。圖片來源：IRRI Photos（CC BY-NC-SA 2.0）。
隨著經濟起飛帶動產業快速成長，亞洲國家的農民與消費者收入亦逐漸增加，貧困人口數目也明顯降低。但同時也伴隨著人口結構、飲食習慣、經濟、與農業結構的大轉變，並衝擊稻米的產業結構。
國際稻米研究所（IRRI）的報告指出，消費者對稻米的需求量越來越少，其成長量遠不如其他農產品，如水果、蔬菜、肉類與魚類等。因此未來亞洲地區的食物生產系統，需要同時考量如何達到農業發展與滿足消費者需求的目標。
農業政策過時 聯合國替東南亞找解方
儘管稻米需求量下降，但部分國家的農業政策仍鼓勵農民生產水稻。諸如鼓勵土地做為水稻生產區、補助農民種水稻、改善水稻灌溉系統，甚至制定國貿易政策維持國內水稻的穩定生產等。
然而這些過時的農業政策，已經不適用於農業發展現況。
不僅如此，維持穩定的稻米價格，雖是亞洲國家穩定國防安全的手段之一，但卻成為降低稻農收益的隱形殺手。若能設計更有成本效益的收購機制，將有助於穩定米價，並且可防止貧窮人口不會因稻米價格變動而受影響。針對這些特殊的貧窮族群，政府應該設立社會安全網，協助他們應對食品價格上漲後之影響。
有鑑於此，世界銀行（World Bank）、聯合國糧食及農業組織（FAO）、國際水稻研究所（IRRI）共同合作，整合東南亞稻米政策的研究數據，提出一份簡單的報告，期望協助各國政府與、非營利組織、非政府組織與相關機構制定出更恰當的稻米政策，解決當地的農業問題。
IRRI（International Rice Research Institute) 國際稻米研究所，是聯合國糧15個農業研究組織中，專門負責研究水稻與推廣水稻栽培的研究中心，總部位於菲律賓。圖片來源：IRRI Photos（CC BY-NC-SA 2.0）。
環保意識覺醒 消費者導向才是稻米未來
提供化學肥料、灌溉水的補助、寬鬆的農藥使用規範等政策，已幾乎無法達到友善環境種植，或是滿足消費者對稻米的期待。相反的，「消費導向的稻作生產」才是稻米產業的發展目標。
隨著環境保護意識崛起，越來越多消費者願意支持友善環境生產的稻米，或是選擇營養價值更高的食物。另一方面，農民也面臨更艱困的環境議題，如土地肥力下降、水資源缺乏等，讓自然資源的取得越來越競爭。但傳統的政策，像是提供化學肥料與灌溉水的補助、寬鬆的農藥使用規範等，都無法達到友善環境種植，或是滿足消費者的期待，像是具有保健效果，或是更營養美味的水稻。
政策改革不僅是來自於外在的環境議題，想爭取更多收入的稻農則是改革的內在壓力。以2011年泰國的水稻保價政策為例，當局以高於市場價格的稻米價格收購泰國農民生產的水稻，期望提高農民收益。這項政策投入大量的成本，但最終仍舊無法提高農民收入（註）。
農業知識增加競爭力 脫貧、抗氣候變遷成關鍵
根據統計，將資金投入在農村的硬體與公共設施例如：農業相關研究或農村便利道路修繕等，比水稻補助更能促進農村發展及達到能夠永續經營的目標。對於現今的稻農而言，想要獲得更多收入的最佳方法，則需要藉由種植多樣化的農作物或從事非農業相關的活動。
提升農民的知識水平增加農民的競爭力，也是脫貧的主要關鍵。不論是公家機關或私營機構的農業推廣系統，都必須以農民所需的農業知識與訊息為主。
隨著農業技術的發展，東南亞地區的水稻栽培研究已經不再以灌溉技術為主。未來將以「氣候變遷」與「脫貧」為主要資金運用的目標。提升農民的知識水平增加農民的競爭力，也是脫貧的主要關鍵。
不論是公家機關或私營機構的農業推廣系統，都必須以農民所需的農業知識與訊息為主，不斷的更新系統並提供合適的資源。另外，透過科技產品，也能有效即時給予農民對專業農業知識的需求。
以稻米為主食的國家，其稻作產業政策必須兼顧商業活動與國際貿易需求。對淨進口國而言，滿足國內自給自足的目標可能需要很高的成本，也會威脅國民的糧食安全。而對稻米出口國來說，想要滿足穩定出口稻米的雄心，則需要公家機關和私營機構的共同合作，提供大量資金投入與訂定一致的農業扶持政策。
註：可參考泰國的稻米保證收購政策。 Paddy pledging policy in Thailand
Rice in the shadow of skyscrapers: Policy choices in East and Southeast Asia
During the past few decades, Asia has experienced a period of rapid economic growth that benefited many farmers and consumers. In fact, the decline in poverty has been historically unprecedented in human history. The resulting changes in demographics, eating patterns, and overall economic and agrarian structures will increasingly shape the Asian rice sector.
In light of these changes, the World Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) joined together to work with other researchers and institutions in East and Southeast Asia to review a range of existing research that analyzes policies that affect the region’s rice sector. The researchers then synthesized the results into short policy notes that are easier to digest by government policymakers, donor organizations, NGOs, and other interested stakeholders.
A range of key issues needs to be examined. For example, rice consumption is growing less rapidly than the consumption of other foods such as fruits, vegetables, meat, and fish. Asian production systems will need to evolve to meet this demand. Policies that encourage farmers to remain dedicated to rice farming— including land-use restrictions, input subsidies, irrigation system design, and international trade policies—are becoming obsolete and may make Asia depend heavily on imports for a range of higher-value foods. The policies also impede better nutrition, as healthy diets rely on people eating a wide variety of foods.
Rice price stability is still important for many Asian countries. Yet, with the declining share of rice in household spending, even among the poor, the benefits of price stabilization are less than they were in the past. Thus, it will help much if we can design more cost-effective mechanisms to make rice prices stable and protect the poor from rice price shocks. Targeted social safety nets may be an option to help the hard-core poor, including those who don’t grow rice, cope with volatile food prices.
Environmental concerns are becoming more important, both in the eyes of consumers and in the context of greater competition for available land and water. Yet, some traditional policy instruments (e.g., fertilizer subsidies, water subsidies, and a lack of pesticide taxes) make it difficult to reduce the environmental footprint of rice and meet consumer expectations in this regard.
Pressure is increasing to support farm income with higher prices. A case in point is the paddy pledging policy in Thailand. This policy was very costly, however, and was ultimately unsuccessful in raising prices for farmers. Investments in public goods (e.g., agricultural research, rural access roads) tend to have more sustainable and broadly distributed results than paddy or input subsidies. For many rice farmers now, a better path to higher income may come from diversifying crops and earning money from nonfarm activities.
In today’s global economy, increased knowledge is becoming critical for competitiveness and poverty reduction. Extension systems, both public and private, need to evolve in order to equip farmers with the knowledge they need. Governments need to intervene in more innovative ways that mobilize the private sector, especially, but not only, in the area of postproduction.Information and communication technology can be used more to meet farmer demand for knowledge and information.
Although rice research in the past has primarily benefited farmers with irrigated or well-watered land, new technological developments are already transforming the lives of farmers who live in areas with poor-quality land that are prone to floods and drought. Future breakthroughs to deal with climate change and help eradicate poverty will materialize only if agricultural research and development receives continued support from donors.
Trade in rice is important in Asia, both as a commercial activity and in balancing domestic supply and demand. For net importers, efforts to achieve self-sufficiency through trade restrictions can have high costs, in terms of harming consumers and overall agricultural sector growth. Supplementing the region’s traditional rice exporters are several emergent players with significant ambitions. Meeting these ambitions will require very significant investments, by both the public and the private sector, and a consistent set of supportive policies.
_________________________________________
Dr. Dawe is a senior economist at FAO. Dr. Jaffee is a lead rural development specialist at the World Bank. Dr. Santos is an economist at FAO. They have put together a compendium of 18 policy notes titled Rice in the Shadow of Skyscrapers: Policy Choices in a Dynamic East and Southeast Asian Setting.
沒有留言:
張貼留言