“The average person is still under the aberrant delusion that food should be somebody else’s responsibility until I’m ready to eat it.”
~ Joel Salatin, an American farmer, lecturer, and author.
EVERYONE needs food, and if possible, they need to plant it. However, in the latter case, many people or nations can’t do so due to many factors. To most people, even those in positions of authority and responsibility, the tendency may be to think along the line of the average person mentioned in the above quotation. Maybe, we can even name someone we know who fits the mould or description.
The quote above also reminds us of the childhood story we read about the ant and grasshopper, where the diligent and hardworking ant managed to survive the winter while the fun-loving, ‘don’t care less’ grasshopper died of starvation.
This post relates to the issue of food production, supply security and affordability which it is submitted has emerged as one of the most imminent threats and a key concern for the world today. Recently, on the occasion of the nationwide celebration of His Majesty’s birthday, the King called upon the country to address the food security issue immediately, thereby registering His Majesty’s concern over the potential crisis.
The subject has been a top of mind issue for me, triggered in part from personal observation as I travelled into the interior and regular discussion on the subject with friends in Singapore and of late, joined by a friend from Switzerland. The poser is: will we be the ant or the grasshopper when it comes to this real-life, life and death situation?
Many countries are currently facing growing levels of food insecurity, which threatens to reverse many of the gains achieved through various development policies, programs and efforts over the years. The focus on food production has been put on the slow burner as attention was being diverted towards other sectors of the economy in the race to increase the economic performance of the country through export-oriented production. It’s as if we have somehow taken our eyes off the ball on this one. That we take for granted the easy availability of food, that food security is a guaranteed thing. But is that so?
The latest indications point otherwise. As a result, even before the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic which has reduced incomes and disrupted supply chains, chronic and acute hunger was on the rise in many parts of the world due to various factors, including conflict, socio-economic conditions, natural hazards, climate change, pestilence and infestations.
The impact of the war in Ukraine, coupled with other factors to be discussed below, has further added to the heightened risk of global food insecurity, where food prices are likely to remain high for the foreseeable future and as a result, may push millions of additional people into acute food insecurity.
The number of undernourished people in the world is without doubt unacceptably high, with some numbers I saw close to a billion people? That’s a hell lot of people. Therefore, global food security issues are a present risk and imminent danger. And if one were to postulate on the expected increase in world population in the next 30 – 40 years, the need to do something about food supply is even more critical.
Of late, we have read headlines about rising food prices or food inflation and perceived food supply shortages – all of which have brought into clear focus, and demanding urgent attention, the question of the state of the global agricultural production and associated supply chains which are so vital to linking supply sources to the demand centres. The issue had also brought into glaring relief, national or local food production capabilities and the capacity to address the challenges at hand and thereby raising serious questions on policy priorities and sense of urgency, and the lack of the right focus of attention being directed at the issue.
It has also become very apparent that food production and security of supply have been severely affected or disrupted by many factors, which include increasing occurrences of adverse conditions triggered by the climate change phenomenon, unfavourable economic factors, the prolonged effect of the covid-19 pandemic, intermittent wars and conflicts, and the dynamic adverse impacts of geopolitics and agricultural systems.
At the local level, there is a shortage of manpower in the rural areas to tend to the overgrown padi fields as the young people have migrated to the towns and cities to look for employment and economic opportunities. Only the old folks and very young are left in the villages.
The year 2022 and possibly beyond, will be another time of unprecedented supply and demand shocks, tight food supplies, and uncertain climate conditions. Given this coming together of several critical triggers, where the convergence of these factors is creating a perfect storm, one of the next crises which we will need to confront revolves around food production, food availability, food affordability and reliability of food supply. We are not talking just about food nutrition but survival.
The La Niña global weather pattern is back for a second year, with frequent rains and repeated floods within short spans of intervals. This could have big ramifications for 2022 crops around the world. In some places, droughts are prevalent at the same time. For example, in South America, drier than normal weather could once again reduce soybean and corn harvests. When the El Niño effect follows, after the La Niña weather pattern – the two always come as a pair, the effect and ramifications on crops and food production around the world will be massive.
Change in weather patterns is for real and the swings are not only regular but violent in terms of intensity.
And when the disruptions happen, the ensuing and inevitable crisis will be most felt by countries that are not major food producers in the first place and those who rely mainly on food imports to meet their needs. Obviously it will be most felt by the poorest sections of the population — the very people who can least afford it and are not in any position to mitigate the risk and consequences.
Rising food prices, which, based on a report I recently saw, are currently up 24% year over year, in the US, which is at its highest level since the COVID-linked spike of mid-2020, and underscoring the risk that food price inflation will be an ongoing concern. And as for Brazil, the food price index was also said to be at its highest level ever, being up 63% since the first set of lockdowns in Brazil in May 2020.
As a food importing country, Malaysia’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) in March 2022 rose by 2.2 per cent to 125.6 against 122.9 in March 2021, surpassing the average inflation for the January 2011-March 2022 period which stood at 1.9 per cent, according to a report from the Statistics Department.
Malaysia imports nearly 60% of its food requirements. As a result, food security is a major concern. Malaysia only produced 46 per cent of its vegetables, 70 per cent of its rice, 61 per cent of its fruits, 25 per cent of its beef, 11 per cent of its mutton, and 5 per cent of its dairy requirements in 2019.
Prices of food were also affected by the higher cost of logistics which faced major disruptions due to the effects of the lockdowns during the pandemic. Higher prices at source, for example in the US or Brazil which are major food producers and exporters, will have a knock-on effect on the importing countries that get their food supplies from the US or Brazil, and other exporting countries.
Even today, the supplies of many commodities and agricultural supplies remain at their tightest levels in years, and that will likely prolong inflationary pressure for food items well into the foreseeable future. As demonstrated very recently, the suspension or disruption of wheat exports from Russia and Ukraine due to the Russia – Ukraine conflict resulted in grain supplies being severely affected and leading to shortages worldwide.
Similarly, due to policy changes, Indonesia recently announced a ban on the export of palm oil from the country due to the shortage of cooking oil in the nation. Combined with the disruption and stoppage of sunflower oil from Russia and Ukraine, this action by Indonesia badly affected the world’s edible oil supply.
The interruptions we have noted so far may have been triggered due to quite understandable reasons or causes but it is not farfetched to imagine food supply as being a tool of leverage by some countries. However, to ‘weaponise’ the food supply is unthinkable and inhuman but it is not impossible to happen. Non-food producing countries will be put at a strategic disadvantage if food supplies are artificially constrained or outrightly stopped for whatever reason.
Again, it was the Russia-Ukraine conflict which has demonstrated that the world’s food supply and food security system is very susceptible to disruption. And recently, we read that India was planning to restrict sugar exports for the first time in six years to prevent a surge in domestic prices, which action if taken will potentially cap this season’s exports at some 10 million tonnes.
It was reported that the stated aim of such an action was to ensure there are adequate stockpiles before the next sugar season starts in October 2022.
Incidentally, it was reported that India had also banned the export or sales of wheat a week before the announcement on the capping of sugar export was made.
Within the context of the world trade rules, the unreasonable export restriction on commodities and food products or other products for that matter could be tantamount to protectionist moves by the countries concerned. We all know that as a general rule, export prohibitions and restrictions are generally prohibited in the WTO. For example, Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994 prohibits members from introducing or maintaining any form of export prohibition or restriction other than allowable duties, taxes or other charges.
As usual, there are exceptions to the rule through “carve-out” provisions. Conversely, importing countries may impose prohibitions and import restrictions on products from certain countries or specific products which are actions are also challengeable under the GATT Rules which provide for the general elimination of quantitative restrictions.
When we talk about food supply and security, it is important to take note of several fundamentals. One of these important characteristics is the fact that due to their bigger land sizes and the availability of wide areas for agriculture, substantial agricultural production tends to be concentrated in the largest countries in the world.
When such countries are blessed with the right geography and climatic conditions their good fortune will make them ideal agricultural growing regions or areas. These countries will inevitably become the food-exporting countries of the world or are ‘the breadbaskets’ of the world because they can produce more than they can consume, the balance being exported globally.
Another factor to be noted is the fact that food production tends to relate to population size since the population size is crucial to providing the local demand which will incentivise the bulk production of agricultural produce to be consumed locally or domestically.
Population size will also provide the necessary labour supply dynamics required for the food production, handling, and processing unless, of course, where the country is advanced enough in terms of mechanisation and automation technology which could replace human labour as a key input to the food production process.
So based on the fundamentals mentioned above, it is not surprising to note who are amongst the world’s top food-producing countries, namely —China, India, the U.S., and Brazil— all of whom share the advantages of large populations, ample land area, and climate zones suitable for growing a variety of crops.
From the literature review, the comparative agricultural strengths and land weaknesses of each of the four leading food producers are given as follows:
• The world’s top food-producing countries—China, India, the U.S., and Brazil—also ranked in the top 10 by land area.
• China is the world’s largest grain producer yet has grown more dependent on food imports in recent decades.
• Much of India’s output is produced by subsistence farmers and consumed locally.
• The U.S. is the world’s top food exporter thanks to high crop yields and extensive agricultural infrastructure.
• Brazil is the world’s fourth-largest food producer and second-largest importer; it is heavily dependent on imports by China.
In terms of food export, the United States is the largest exporter of food, accounting for more than 10% of total global exports. On the other hand, China is now the world’s largest agricultural importer, surpassing both the European Union (EU) and the United States in 2019 with imports totalling $133.1 billion.
The bottom line is this: Food production is one of the key strategic investments for the future, not just for traditional food-exporting countries but more so for food-importing countries with the right climatic conditions and arable land but have ignored or overlooked the importance of food production as being a strategic imperative. Countries with plenty of good agricultural lands and affordable labour force or mechanisation to match will be the influential and powerful countries of the future. And will become major food exporters.
Coupled with the impact of climate change and the global warming phenomenon, the capacity for food production will be severely eroded and the resulting disruption in supply will lead to global food shortages and famine-like conditions. These are real issues facing the world.
We also know that wide-scale food production depends on the reliable and plentiful supply of fertilisers. We also know that this supply is susceptible to disruption and when it happens crop yields will suffer and the quantities for export severely reduced or stopped altogether. Any disruptions in the supply of fertilisers will severely impact crop yields. Therefore, artificial fertiliser production will also be a critical investment requirement going forward.
An evaluation of long-term studies has shown that the average per cent of yield attributable to fertilizer inputs generally ranged from about 40 to 60% in temperate climates (USA and England) and tended to be much higher in the tropics. All things considered, inorganic fertilizer plays a critical role in world food security, but it must be recognized that the highest yields are in some systems the result of using both organic and inorganic nutrient sources.
In addition to fertilisers, boosting crop yields and closing the gap between actual and attainable yield can also be achieved by the implementation and advancement of numerous practices and technologies, including nutrient management practices and fertilizer technologies. Modern farming methods can also be employed to increase yields based on per square metre footprint and vertical farming practices. Matching capital, technology and innovation to the availability of land for agriculture will be an important capability in the future.
In conclusion, we must take note and be aware that many factors influence the level of food production in a country, including land area, population size, climate, and the quality of agricultural infrastructure and technology.
It is critical that a sense of urgency to tackle food production and ensure the long term security of food supply, as well as its affordability, be noted and acted upon before it is too late.
It is heartening to note that Sarawak has put due attention on agriculture and its modernisation as part of the key strategy for the future as contained in the Post-Covid-19 Development Strategy 2030. Translating the aspiration into reality will be the true game-changer in terms of food security, especially in Sarawak.
Note: The opinions and conclusions made in this article belong to the author and intended to induce meaningful discussions and reflections on the subject of this article and do not necessarily represent the paper.
