Because of the recent North Korean nuclear crisis, there is a fear of problems with transportation of food from overseas during a war. While a sea-lane to Japan has a problem of proper transportation, we cannot expect an accurate supply of food from overseas. So, it is wise to keep maintaining local food production systems and keep a distance from international rice free trade systems.
On the other hand, in many urban areas, many rice conservationists predicted destruction of rice farms and construction of skyscrapers damage biodiversities, and serious problems such as flooding, but this did not happen. Japanese rice production has strongly relied on machineries, which require fossil fuels from overseas. Japan has imported almost all its oil commodity (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.193-201). Even if Japanese people do not import rice itself, it does not mean we can produce our food without international trading anymore. Opinions of rice conservationists have to be reviewed again.
Moreover, there was nowhere Japanese could export rice products because of the expensive production cost and high pricing. These days, because of the economic development in China, people are able to buy high quality Japanese rice even though the price is high.
Therefore, I would like to look at what an exact impact of rice free trading would be on the world economy and environment. If the free trade of rice has negative impacts on the economic and environment in both of exporting and importing countries, people should not move toward it. However, if it has only a positive impact on both countries people should improve the amount of international rice trading. Then, even if there are negative impacts on one side and positive impacts on the other side, comparison of both would provide an answer.
1.2 Background / History
Rice is the most popular source of energy for people all over the world. More than 550 million ton has been produced every year and it is a staple food for more than half of the world population. However, less than 30 million tons of rice has been internationally traded every year. China and India are sources of more than a half of the whole rice production, but Thailand, India, US and Vietnam are major exporters. The rice is likely to be more for domestic consumers, not for foreign markets. As a comparison, about a fifth of the world wheat production is traded through an international market. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.209-280). The worth of rice as a global commodity is lower than wheat.
Asian countries have longer history of rice farming and they are also major rice producers. Nevertheless, in the US farmers produce about three times more rice from a square of farm as people do in Thailand. It means that the US agricultural industry has more productivity than Thai. In the case of wheat trading, more than a half of wheat at the international market is produced in developed world such as the US, Australia, France and Canada, yet China and India are major wheat producers. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.209-280).
In Japan, an average farmer has 2.1 hectares of cropland, and this index is 1.1 hectare in China, 1.0 hectare in Thailand, 141 hectares in the US, 1011 hectare in Australia and 102.6 in New Zealand. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.216-219). Farmers in major exporters of wheat have larger cropland. Still, there is not any relationship between rice exporting countries and their size of cropland per a farmer.
Bouman, Humphreys, Tuong and Barker (2007) say that to meet the increase of food demand with a growing world population, rice production should be increased at a low cost for poor consumers, ensuring profits for farmers. Seeking water-saving technology and sustainable rice farming improves productivity and it will increase on-farm yields by fifty to a hundred percent during the next ten years. (Bouman, Humphreys, Tuong & Barker, 2007).
At least, if a fifth of the rice production became a global commodity like wheat, the trade volume will be the biggest as a crop. So, it would have a wider impact on the world economy.
On the other hand, in many urban areas, many rice conservationists predicted destruction of rice farms and construction of skyscrapers damage biodiversities, and serious problems such as flooding, but this did not happen. Japanese rice production has strongly relied on machineries, which require fossil fuels from overseas. Japan has imported almost all its oil commodity (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.193-201). Even if Japanese people do not import rice itself, it does not mean we can produce our food without international trading anymore. Opinions of rice conservationists have to be reviewed again.
Moreover, there was nowhere Japanese could export rice products because of the expensive production cost and high pricing. These days, because of the economic development in China, people are able to buy high quality Japanese rice even though the price is high.
Therefore, I would like to look at what an exact impact of rice free trading would be on the world economy and environment. If the free trade of rice has negative impacts on the economic and environment in both of exporting and importing countries, people should not move toward it. However, if it has only a positive impact on both countries people should improve the amount of international rice trading. Then, even if there are negative impacts on one side and positive impacts on the other side, comparison of both would provide an answer.
1.2 Background / History
Rice is the most popular source of energy for people all over the world. More than 550 million ton has been produced every year and it is a staple food for more than half of the world population. However, less than 30 million tons of rice has been internationally traded every year. China and India are sources of more than a half of the whole rice production, but Thailand, India, US and Vietnam are major exporters. The rice is likely to be more for domestic consumers, not for foreign markets. As a comparison, about a fifth of the world wheat production is traded through an international market. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.209-280). The worth of rice as a global commodity is lower than wheat.
Asian countries have longer history of rice farming and they are also major rice producers. Nevertheless, in the US farmers produce about three times more rice from a square of farm as people do in Thailand. It means that the US agricultural industry has more productivity than Thai. In the case of wheat trading, more than a half of wheat at the international market is produced in developed world such as the US, Australia, France and Canada, yet China and India are major wheat producers. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.209-280).
In Japan, an average farmer has 2.1 hectares of cropland, and this index is 1.1 hectare in China, 1.0 hectare in Thailand, 141 hectares in the US, 1011 hectare in Australia and 102.6 in New Zealand. (Yanotsuneta-kinenkai, 2004, pp.216-219). Farmers in major exporters of wheat have larger cropland. Still, there is not any relationship between rice exporting countries and their size of cropland per a farmer.
Bouman, Humphreys, Tuong and Barker (2007) say that to meet the increase of food demand with a growing world population, rice production should be increased at a low cost for poor consumers, ensuring profits for farmers. Seeking water-saving technology and sustainable rice farming improves productivity and it will increase on-farm yields by fifty to a hundred percent during the next ten years. (Bouman, Humphreys, Tuong & Barker, 2007).
At least, if a fifth of the rice production became a global commodity like wheat, the trade volume will be the biggest as a crop. So, it would have a wider impact on the world economy.