China to help Mali build agricultural research center

China has extended a U.S.$9 million loan to build an agricultural research station.

The center, which will be constructed on a 20-hectare piece of land in Koulikoro region, will be used for purposes of "experimentation, research and technical training as well as for the development of sustainable agriculture."

The center will mainly be used for the development of rice and maize farming.

Peoples' Daily 

Mozambique to grow GM cotton with help from China

Mozambique and China are expected in November to conclude negotiations on introducing genetically-modified cotton into the African country, according to Mozambican daily newspaper Correio da Manhã.

At that time a delegation of technicians from the Mozambique Cotton Institute (IAM) and the Mozambican Institute of Agricultural Research (IIAM) is due to travel to China to conclude negotiations, which will be followed by the first tests, initially in the district of Morrumbala, in Zambézia province.

According to the IAM, genetically-modified varieties of cotton are being tested in 57 countries, involving over 14 million farmers and test fields cover an estimated area of 134 million hectares.

The IAM’s projections show that in 2013 Mozambique is expected to earn US$47.5 million from cotton exports, which this year are expected to total an estimated US$43.2 million.

Club of Mozambique

Plans mooted for China to support Tanzanian cotton farmers

A cash crop with a guaranteed market and various kinds of in-season support from the buyer is the dream of many small scale farmers.

China’s ambassador to Tanzania has proposed just such a link between his home country’s cotton buyers and his host country’s cotton farmers.

This model of cooperation between Chinese agro-buyers and African farmers is in place in other countries and other agricultural sectors.

The buyers identify groups of farmers of their crop of interest. Those farmers are assisted with various inputs whose price is then deducted from the agreed price for their crop at market time.

It is a system that is far from perfect and with many possible problems, but it also has the potential to be a win-win arrangement. The willingness of Chinese companies, often backed by their government in one form or another, to do this for raw materials the country needs has given it a wedge into market sectors that were previously dominated by western buyers, who are generally much less willing to be involved in the production chain.

More…

International potato diseases detection workshop; Harbin, China; July 2012

What: 2012 International training workshop on potato diseases detection techniques.

About: Sharing China's know-how/techniques of the detection of the diseases of seed potatoes.

Where: Harbin, Heilongjiang Province, China.


Organizer: Ministry of Agriculture of China (Harbin); Supervision & Testing Center for Virus-free Seed Potatoes.

Working Language: English


Expenses: Accepted participants are to fund their own travel to and from their countries to the airport or railway station of Harbin. Accommodations, group traveling and insurance in Harbin will be taken care of by the Chinese government.

When: July 5- July 24, 2012.

Closing date for applications: June 1, 2012.

Contact and Application Details:  
 
Contacts: Liu Weiting (Angela)

Mobile: 86-138 4512 9354

Tel: 86-451-86677452

Fax: 86-451-86677452

E-mail: potatotraining@yahoo.com

Chinese technology to increase rice yields in Mozambique

Mozambican Prime Minister Aires Ali has challenged the country's young people, as well as its businesses, to increase food production, by banking on the introduction of new agricultural technologies to increase yields.

This would be possible, he said, through the use of knowledge and techniques learnt through the cooperation between Mozambique and China.

According to a report in the Beira daily paper "Diario de Mocambique", Ali was speaking during a working visit to the Lower Limpopo irrigation scheme in the southern province of Gaza. Here, in the Ponela block, a rice production project is underway as part of the twinning between Gaza and the Chinese province of Hubei.

A memorandum signed between the two provinces in mid-2007 stipulates that in an initial phase the Chinese investors should ensure rice production in an area of 300 hectares.

Tests began two years ago, and since then rice production at Ponela has been raised to ten tonnes per hectare. Previously, under the traditional Mozambican system, yields were between two and three tonnes per hectare. The Chinese production techniques have been transferred to about 20 Mozambican farmers to date.

"What we want is that Mozambicans, particularly young people and the business sector, should embrace this project enthusiastically, obtaining the technologies and the machinery to increase production levels", said Ali.
Gaza has educational institutions that specialize in agriculture, and Ali suggested that students from these colleges should go the Lower Limpopo irrigation scheme for apprenticeships where they would assimilate Chinese rice production techniques.

Agricultural engineers and other specialists should also visit Ponela, he said, so that they could understand the Chinese technologies and spread them to other provinces.

The Ponela block covers about 11,000 hectares or arable land. 7,000 hectares are worked by commercial farmers, and the other 4,000 hectares are in the hands of around 8,000 peasant producers.


AIM

Africa is not growing the food commodities China imports

On the face of it, it should be a logical tie-up. China, with its burgeoning middle class and shrinking arable farmland, is facing increasing strains in its agricultural sector to meet domestic food demand. Africa, with its vast stretches of fertile but underdeveloped farmland would appear to be a natural partner to help the world’s most populous nation meet its food needs.

Yet for all the polemics surrounding Chinese “land grabs” in Africa the continent remains a bit player in Beijing’s food security strategy – at least according to this new report from Standard Bank.

The numbers served up in the report certainly offer food for thought.

Food consumption in China over the past decade has increased at an average annual rate of 23.4 per cent (or five time faster than in India) from $57bn in 2000 to $463bn in 2010. The figure is expected to double to over $1,000bn by 2015 as income growth fuels food demand further.

Within this, average per capita consumption of meat in China is expected to rise from 71.2kg in 2010 to 82kg by 2015 – China currently consumes half of the world’s pigs each year.

Higher demand for meat in turn causes a spike in demand for agricultural produce that feed animals – namely corn, wheat and soybeans. Adding to the supply tensions, industrial activity has also spurred demand for certain agricultural commodities. i.e – car manufacturing has stimulated demand for rubber, and textile manufacturing for cotton.

So why is it that Africa – whose wealth of energy and natural resources have long caught the eyes of Beijing – remains on the sidelines when it comes to agricultural trade with the Asia powerhouse?

As Standard Bank noted, the majority of Chinese agricultural imports come from Asia and the Americas. Total China-Africa trade in agricultural goods amounted to less than $4bn, compared to $100bn between the two for the year.

From the report:

…there is a clear disconnect between the agricultural commodities which Africa principally exports and those which China is increasingly importing. In comparing lists of the top ten Chinese agricultural imports with the top ten African agricultural exports, Chaponniere et al (2009) show how only two commodities, cotton and rubber, emerge – and even these products remains relatively modest.

One reason is that boosting domestic agricultural production is a key plank in Beijing’s long-term food security policy. At the moment, China is a net exporter of food and has enormous stockpiles of most soft commodities. Thanks to state support, China’s agricultural output is expected to increase by 26 per cent in 2019. Another reason is agriculture in Africa simply does not enjoy the same economy of scale and subsidies that make food products from Asia and the Americas so much more competitive.

Standard Bank – being the Africa bulls that they are – thinks the relative undeveloped nature of Africa’s agricultural sector can be an attractive proposition for a country like China, particularly as demand-overhangs, driven by demographics, continue to develop. According to the Food and Agricultural Policy Institute, for example, China will adjust from a net wheat exporter of 2.3m tonnes in 2007/8 to a net importer of 1.4m tonnes in 2017/18, while cotton imports will double from 3m tonnes to 6.1m tonnes. Meanwhile, the report reckons that 60 per cent of the world’s available and unexploited cropland is in Sub-Saharan Africa.

According to Simon Freemantle and Jeremy Stevens, authors of the report:

In Africa, two core areas create an allure for China. First, given the manner in which the continent’s agricultural sector has persistently underperformed, the provision of develop-mental and technical assistance allows Beijing an important avenue in fostering and building deeper bilateral ties. And, second, Sub-Saharan Africa’s (SSA)immense and largely untapped agricultural potential is being increasingly viewed by China as a cog in an unfolding and inclusive food security strategy. For now, China’s strategy is overtly developmental, and, though commercialism inspires many of the cooperative farming projects, profits are generated almost entirely in local and regional markets.

However, it is notable that for all Standard Bank’s bullishness about China in Africa there is little current evidence to back it up. Trade between the two – while rising – is low and direct investment by China in Africa is minuscule by its own standards. According to the report, Chinese activity in Latin American agriculture has been substantially more pronounced than in Africa. Thus, predictions of massive Africa-specific growth in the future must be treated with caution – especially given the rising backlash against Chinese investment on the continent.

Perhaps that should be the report’s real message.

Financial Times

China strengthens cotton trade ties with Africa

by James Fuller

The Chinese government's plans to make China itself an outsourcer - to utilise cotton production in sub-Saharan Africa - have been strengthened by an agreement with the region's four leading producers: Benin, Mali, Chad and Burkina Faso.

Announcing the programme at the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Geneva, Chinese commerce minister Chen Deming said it represented an "aid-for-trade" exchange inspired by the WTO's Doha Development Agenda.

China will provide machinery, materials and training programmes to these four impoverished west African countries, who lobby together on cotton issues as the 'C4'. The move will help the group combat hefty cotton subsidies adopted in wealthier producer countries such as the US, which have been a major hurdle in completing the WTO Doha round.

Chen stated greater trade ties could follow, with sections of the Chinese textiles manufacturing industry being relocated abroad. "In [the] longer term, we may relocate some of the textile and apparel industry into Africa," he said.

Just Style

Nigeria, China ink deal to invest $2.55 billion in biorefinery projects

by Jim Lane

In Nigeria, Bloomberg and several local outlets are reporting that the Nigerian government has signed a $2.55 billion development deal with Global Biofuels, to construct 15 integrated biorefineries throughout the West African nation. According to reports, the first pilot plant will be completed in Ilemeso, in Ekiti State by Q4 2012, and projects thereafter will be completed in Ondo, Osun, Kwara, Kogi,Benue, Gombe, Bauchi, Zamfara, Kano, Kaduna, Nasarawa and Plateau states. Project cost for the initial pilot plant is $108M, while full-scale plants are expected to cost $183 million each.

According to Global Biofuels, $1.78 billion, or 70 percent of the financing will come from the Chinese government. The remainder will come from NEXIM Bank, ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development, Africa Finance Corporation; Fond Gari, and First Bank of Nigeria. The projects expect to generate 100 tons of total biomass per hectare, per yearn, using two cropping cycles per year, with total tonnage including tops, leaves, stalks and the primary crop. That equates to roughly 20 tons of total biomass per growing season, per acre.

But the massive Nigerian investment is just one of several announced in recent weeks and months in West Africa.
Nigerian Export-Import Bank:$695M

Just last week, the Nigerian Export-Import Bank gave $695 million to five companies investing in renewables including $12 million for a jatropha project and $56 million for a sorghum ethanol project.

The majority of the funding went to a sugarcane project that will include a bagasse co-generation component while the rest of the funding was for waste-to-energy projects.

Just before the US Thanksgiving holiday, the Ondo State Commissioner for Agriculture, Ademola Olorunfemi, said that the state would approve development of three sugarcane plantations and ethanol plants, with a focus on the production of biofuels and rural economic development. The Commissioner also said that the plants could provide materials for the bio-pharma industry.

The projects, whose goals center around industrialization and employment, indicate a new direction for the economy of this agriculture-heavy area of Nigeria.
Dangote Group, $7.7B

The same week, Aliko Dangote, the president of Dangote Group, announced an investment of $7.7 billion in Rivers Energy City, home of the budding $2 billion fertilizer and ethanol plant project put on by Indorama Eleme Petrochemical Company. His investment, says a top government source, will span into the methane and ethanol industries and provide thousands of jobs in the upcoming energy city.
Global Biofuels: $91M

In August, Global Biofuels has announced plans for ethanol plants across the West African region, with $91 million in sellers credit from COZA of Hong Kong and WEMET of China. The final project is expected to cost over $183 million, and produce 72 million liters of ethanol from 1.95 million tons of sorghum per year, and 216 gigawatts of electricity. Total land use as reported would be 65,000 ha in Nigeria and 32,500 ha in neighboring Economic Community of West African States member countries.

Also in August, Nosak Distilleries Ltd said it would raise production capacity at its Lagos facility to 540,000 liters per day from its current 350,000 liters per day. It also announced plans to commission a new 150,000 liter per day facility in Calabar, Cross River. Its first facility was commissioned in 2001 and together the company supplies about 70% of local ethanol demand.
The Bottom Line

Announcements of MOUs should be taken for what they are – an understanding that steel will go into the ground, as opposed to the actual construction of actual capacity. However, the trend is clear, scale is happening, project financing is becoming easier to source, especially overseas, and China is definitely expanding its ambitions with respect to countering the US lead in advanced biofuels technology, with a Chinese lead in actual gallons of renewable fuel.


Biofuels Digest

China: We have no colonial designs on Africa

by Hu Yinan

China on December 8 said it is not responsible for imposing "actually existing" neo-colonialism on Africa, dismissing earlier reports by certain Western media outlets.

"China has always insisted upon a policy of self-sufficiency in grain. Instead of purchasing piles of land in Africa, it has, to the best of its ability, offered aid in agricultural technology to African countries and helped their agricultural production, as well as boosted the indigenous exploitation of their own natural resources and the capacity to cope with climate change and food security," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a daily news briefing in Beijing.

There is a broad consensus among African nations that China is not pursuing a neo-colonial strategy in Africa, Hong said.

He cited South African President Jacob Zuma's earlier statement that Beijing is not colonizing the continent, but rather is a strategic partner and vast contributor to improving livelihoods in his country.

"Africa is victimized by agricultural neo-colonialism. It is the common responsibility of the global community to facilitate the sustainable development of African agriculture," Hong said. "China urges countries that have taken up and exploited vast amounts of land in Africa to make concrete moves so as to contribute to resolving the issue of food security in Africa," he added.

China is Africa's top trading partner, with bilateral trade growing more than 1,000 percent between 2000 and 2010.

During her visit to Zambia in June, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indirectly accused China of imposing "new colonialism" in Africa.

The West "seems unwilling, or unable, to respond" to changes in Africa, Francis Njubi Nesbitt, a professor at San Diego State University, wrote in an analysis for the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online website on December 7.

"The United States and Europe seem stuck in neocolonial perspectives that continue to paint Africa as an impoverished backwater that at most deserves sympathy and at worst contempt," Nesbitt wrote.

"China has also funded infrastructure and industrialization projects that the West has refused to fund since the days of colonialism. It is to be hoped that these projects will finally help Africa modernize - a dream that seems attainable for the first time since independence."

In a related development, China's Special Envoy for African Affairs Liu Guijin is visiting Sudan and South Sudan to promote talks between the two countries on their dispute regarding oil.

Oil-rich South Sudan became an independent country in July, but is still locked in a series of negotiations with its northern neighbor.

Last week, Sudan said South Sudan owes it $727 million for four shipments of oil released and transferred through oil installations in the north since the latter's independence.

South Sudan, in response, warned it would stop producing oil if Sudan continued to make these demands.

Oil is primarily produced in the south and is exported through a pipeline and harbors in the north.

Beijing has said it is concerned that the negotiations had stalled. Earlier this week, Hong said Beijing expects "both sides to exercise calm and restraint, resolve disputes through consultations and negotiations and safeguard peace between north and south Sudan".

Luo Xiaoguang, China's ambassador to Sudan, last week said there was no reason to stop the oil exports as long as negotiations were ongoing between the two countries.

China Daily

China eyes Africa’s farmland

by Felix Njini


China could use its existing trade channels to source food and commercial farmland in Africa due to dwindling agricultural land, rising income and consumption levels at home.


Economic analysts who have been tracking China’s footprints across Africa say the country’s agricultural sector is faced with severe strains.

China has largely focused on Africa’s mineral resources in addition to viewing the continent as a huge market for its products.

Standard Bank’s economic researchers Jeremy Stevens and Simon Freemantle say this could soon change with China looking at Africa as a source of nutrition.

Rising income and urbanization in one of the world’s fastest-growing economies has resulted in a sharp rise in food consumption.

China is now the second biggest food consumer in the world after the USA and economists expect that by 2015, its food expenditure will double to over US$1 trillion.

However, the rapid pace of urbanization and industrialization has swallowed much of the country’s farmland and has diminished water tables. Analysts say China lost nine million hectares of farmland between 1996 and 2006.

Evidence of China increasingly looking for external sources of nutrition abound.

The analysts say China will use existing trade channels to secure external sources of food supplies.

There are fears that a hungry China could stoke competition for commercial farmland across Africa.

From 2001 to 2010, China’s imports of soya beans rose ten-fold to US$25 billion from US$2.8 billion.

Rubber imports swelled to US$17 billion from US$2 billion, the Standard Bank analysts said.

While a disconnect still exists in China-Africa agricultural trade, trade in cotton, tobacco, timber, rubber, fish and oilseeds among others signals a positive shift.

In 2009, agricultural trade between China and Africa was US$4 billion, less than four percent of total trade.

While Africa has welcomed financial and development aid from China, any linkages in agriculture should place greater emphasis on the continent’s food security, the Standard Bank analysts advise.

Signaling its increasing role in Africa’s agricultural sector, China presently has more than 1 100 agricultural experts stationed on the continent.

It has also established 11 agricultural research stations and there are over 60 agricultural invest-sector Chinese activities in Mozambique alone0.

China has found under-utilized crop land alluring and its developmental and technical assistance leverages its abilities to exploit minerals and food production.

“Sub-Saharan Africa’s immense and largely untapped agricultural potential is being increasingly viewed by China as a cog in an unfolding and inclusive food security strategy,” Stevens and Freemantle say.

“For Africa managing Chinese interest in its agricultural sector will be critical.

“The continent suffers from an acute lack of skills and capital in unlocking its inherent potential.

“Yet, as has been evident in many of the land leasing deals signed in Sub-Saharan Africa over the course of the past decade, too often investments are poorly structured, under-valuing the agricultural assets at stake.”

The Food and Agricultural Policy Institute (FAPRI) estimates that China’s soya bean imports will jump to 52 million tonnes in 2018 from 33.7 million tonnes in 2008.

Palm oil imports will rise to 10.8 million tonnes from 5.5 million tonnes in the same period.

China could likely move away from being a net exporter (2.3 million tonnes) of wheat to a net importer (1.4 million tonnes) in 2018.

Its cotton imports will double to 6.1 million tonnes though exports of rice are expected to buck the trend, rising to 739 000 tonnes from 435 000 tonnes.

China’s imports of cotton from Africa rose to US$462 million in 2010 from US$8m a decade ago; oil seeds to US$420m from US$146m.

Imports of timber swelled 200 percent; while rubber imports went up to US$58m from US$12m in 2011.

Imports of raw hides also rose to US$221m from US$6.7m over the past decade.

China’s history in Africa’s agriculture sector is long.

In the 1960s, China helped develop more than 80 farms across Africa.

Mbarali Farm in Tanzania, for example, was able to supply a quarter of the country’s total domestic rice production.

Zambia Friendship Farm, covering 700 hectares, is another example of China’s developmental and technical assistance.

China has another joint operation in Zambia which produces nearly 10 percent of eggs consumed in Lusaka.

All-in-all, there are 15 Chinese farms (10 000 hectares) in Zambia.

China has built an agriculture demonstration centre at Gwebi College, Zimbabwe’s premier agri-related institute of higher learning, and there have been exchanges among technical experts.

Some of the Chinese companies active in Africa include Da Ping Fishery Group in Angola, Sichuan Sanhetian Bio-Tech in Ghana, Shandong Xinwei Grain and Oil in Mozambique, CGC Overseas Construction in Nigeria.

In South Africa, China has Huagiao Phoenix Group, Hainan Qilin Tech in Tanzania, China Africa Agric. Invest Corp in Zambia, Qindao Textile Union in Zambia and An Hui China State Farms Group in Zimbabwe.

In Mozambique, China has pledged US$800m to modernize that country’s agricultural sector.

It plans to help raise Mozambique’s rice production to 500 000 tonnes from around 100 000 tonnes over the next five years.

“Beijing is seeking to build deeper relationships in agriculture with land-rich and politically stable countries-friendly to China. Investments, backed by state-directed assistance in these countries will increasingly look to produce the types of crops, such as soya-beans and cotton, for which demand in China is elevated,” the Standard Bank analysts note.

Southern Times

China's 'Green Revolution' farming history now misapplied in Africa

by William G Moseley

As sub-Saharan Africa grapples with high food prices in some regions and famine in others, many experts argue that increasing food production through a programme of hybrid seeds and chemical inputs is the way to go.

This approach, marketed as a "New Green Revolution" for Africa, is increasingly supported by a triumphant telling of China's history with this method in the 1970s and 1980s. This Chinese success story is not only distorted, but it is being misapplied in Africa.

China's Great Famine of 1958-1961 reportedly killed 36 million people. This was a seminal moment for the country and, from that point forward, producing enough food would be a major priority. China would subsequently increase grain production dramatically between 1960 and 2000, with wheat output increasing eightfold, exiling the ghost of famine to the margins of that country's collective social imagination.

According to many Chinese and Western observers, these stunning productivity increases were due to two factors. First, the Chinese aggressively embraced a Green Revolution approach. They would both borrow hybrid seeds from the West and develop their own such technologies.

Furthermore, they would massively increase nitrogen fertilizer production by importing manufacturing technology, eventually becoming the world's largest producer of these agricultural inputs.

Second, the Chinese adopted a series of more market-oriented reforms from the late 1970s, allowing for the decentralization and decollectivisation of agriculture, as well as a rise in producer prices.

Now experts from some the world's major development institutes and organizations are arguing that sub-Saharan Africa ought to follow the Chinese example in the realm of agricultural development. They not only suggest that this will increase food production, but that it will build a foundation for future industrial development.

While a renewed focus on African agriculture is welcome (as this is an area that has been ignored for more than 20 years), this particular telling of the Chinese success story is distorted, and the type of agricultural development being promoted is problematic.

While Chinese agricultural production did, indeed, increase dramatically from 1960 to 2000, it was done at great environmental and social cost. China now faces stagnating production and declining yields, which are most likely related to soil degradation - due to, among other factors, the overuse of nitrogen fertilizers.

Untold is the fact that China had been seriously exploring a bio-intensive path to increasing agricultural production up until about 1972, when it began to gradually open up to the West. From that point forward, the Green Revolution approach would take precedence.

Furthermore, while the agricultural reforms of the late 1970s and 1980s did allow some peasants to produce more crops, these reforms also led to dramatic increases in inequality in the Chinese countryside.

The current reality is that a rapidly urbanizing China is experiencing major shifts in dietary patterns. With increasing prosperity comes increasing consumption of meat, and a greater need for grain to feed these animals. With stagnating grain production, China needs to find other sources of food around the world.

By pushing for a "New Green Revolution" in Africa, both China and the West are clear winners. Many Chinese commentators view sub-Saharan Africa as under-populated and land-rich. As such, enhancing agricultural productivity on the continent means that it will have more food to export to China, which increasingly needs such imports.

Moreover, the US is home to some of the world's major seed companies and agrochemical firms. By encouraging an input-intensive approach to agriculture dependent upon imported technology, US firms are destined to profit.

Most egregious are long-term leases of land in sub-Saharan Africa to foreign entities (often sovereign wealth funds of Middle Eastern, North African or Asian countries, as well as Western hedge funds) for the production of agricultural goods for export. These deals are often "sold" to local publics as a source of employment and as a means to bring the New Green Revolution to sub-Saharan Africa.

The reality is that these leases (often for 50 years or more) essentially allow other regions of the world to export their food insecurity to Africa, or for Western investors to profit from a decade-long trend of steadily increasing global food prices.

While China and the West benefit from this New Green Revolution strategy, it is not clear if the same is true for small farmers and poor households in sub-Saharan Africa.

For most food-insecure households on the continent, there are at least two problems with this strategy. First, such an approach to farming is energy-intensive, as most fertilizers and pesticides are petroleum-based. Inducing poor farmers to adopt energy-intensive farming methods is short-sighted, if not unethical, if experts know that global energy prices are likely to rise.

Second, irrespective of energy prices, the "New Green Revolution" approach requires farmers to purchase seeds and inputs, which means that it will be inaccessible to the poorest of the poor, who are the most likely to suffer from periods of hunger.

If not the New Green Revolution approach, then what? Many forms of bio-intensive agriculture are, in fact, highly productive and much more efficient than those of industrial agriculture.

For example, crops grown in intelligent combinations allow one plant to fix nitrogen for another rather than relying solely on increasingly expensive, fossil fuel-based inorganic fertilizers for these plant nutrients. Mixed cropping strategies are also less vulnerable to insect damage and require little to no pesticide use for a reasonable harvest.

These techniques have existed for centuries in the African context and could be greatly enhanced by supporting participatory collaboration between local people, African research institutes and foreign scientists.

This is not the first time that sub-Saharan Africa has been sold a set of flawed policies based on a misreading of another region's history and experiences. In the early 1980s, international financial institutions convinced African nations to adopt neo-liberal economic reforms based, in part, on a particular telling of the economic history of the newly industrialized countries (NICs) and the Asian Tigers.

African countries were told to focus on exports as the NICs had done, and that a free-market approach was required to reach that end. What international advisers conveniently neglected to mention was that the export success of the Asian Tigers was also due to generous government support and intervention (and not the free market).

Now China is being held up as an Asian agricultural tiger for the nations of sub-Saharan Africa to emulate. Africa's leaders ought to carefully study their comparative world history before accepting this advice.

William G Moseley is a human-environment and development geographer. He is a professor at Macalester College in St Paul, Minnesota, US and is the author of several books, including most recently Taking Sides: Clashing Views on African Issues (McGraw-Hill, 2011).

Al Jazeera

Zimbabwe:Chinese investors accused of unfair cotton sector business practices

by Wongai Zhangazhanga

AICO Africa Ltd, one of the leading companies in Zimbabwe's cotton sector, says it lost millions of dollars because of unfair business practices by Chinese investors who he accused of clandestinely buying cotton from contracted farmers.

Pat Devenish, Aico group chief executive officer tsaid his company lost about US$10 million dollars last year after Sino-Zimbabwe allegedly purchased cotton from farmers contracted by the local industry.

“I think we lost US$10 million in March 2010 following farmers breach-selling to Sino-Zimbabwe Holdings,  who had not invested in the production.  That is a lot of money,” Devenish said.

In July last year, Zimbabwe cotton players took steps to stop SinoZim from using political muscle to allegedly purchase cotton from farmers contracted by other companies in the industry.

In court papers filed at the High Court, the Cotton Ginners Association of Zimbabwe (CGAZ) accused Sino-Zimbabwe Holdings of using “political gurus” — including Zanu PF ministers and party youths — to buy the crop from farmers contracted with members of the CGAZ.

The CGAZ represents the interests of local companies involved in the production and buying of seed cotton as well as the ginning and marketing of the product.

Represented by Scanlen & Holderness law firm, CGAZ accused Sino-Zimbabwe Holdings of buying cotton at inflated prices from growers who signed contracts with its members throughout the country.

Sino-Zimbabwe Holdings was operating in Gokwe, Kadoma, Mhangura, Mount Darwin, Bindura, Guruve, Mutoko and Raffingora. Sino-Zimbabwe Holdings, however, rubbished CGAZ’s accusations, arguing in an opposing affidavit that the applicant “is scared of competition” and was abusing the courts.

Sino Zimbabwe director Jimmy Zerenie said the company had not induced anyone to do business with it and had not purchased any contracted cotton.

“The applicant has various other remedies available to it which includes but not limited to suing for breach of contract if there is such a breach between applicant and its contracted farmers.”

“The First respondent has not induced any contracted growers to breach the law. If anything, the first respondent has complied with the law and has operated in a very transparent way,” read Zerenie’s affidavit.

He said the application was misleading the court and that there was no evidence placed before the court to substantiate the allegations of political interference. However, the High Court ruled that the matter was not urgent.

Devenish told Standardbusiness that although contract farming with small-scale holders was profitable, recording a US$7 million profit in March 2011, side marketing remained the biggest problem.

“You will get a company like Cottco or Cargill spending a lot of money funding the production of cotton only to discover that someone who hasn’t invested in the production of cotton will then be licensed to buy.

“So really, that is why statutory instrument 142 is so important because what that does, it says you can only buy cotton if you have invested in its production. So that’s really an important issue to us,” he said.

Section 14 of Statutory Instrument 142 of 2009 makes it obligatory for contracted growers to sell their cotton seed to the company that supported them in terms of the contracts.

Members of CGAZ are all signed up as contractors and buyers with the Cotton Marketing Technical Committee in terms of the law.

The law states that seed cotton produced by a grower in terms of a contract with a company can only be sold to the contracted company.

The Standard

China's corn rush to redraw global food landscape

by Naveen Thukral

When China abandoned its soybean self-sufficiency quest almost 20 years ago and started importing the oilseed feeding its hunger for livestock, it almost single-handedly transformed the industry. Today, it's poised to do the same for corn.

The world's most populous nation is expected to triple corn purchases next crop year and, by its own admission, become a significant importer by 2015, putting more strain on global food supplies at a time when inflation is gnawing away at economic growth and the population nears seven billion.

China has become the dominant force in the global soybean market since emerging as a buyer in the early 1990s. It is now the world's biggest importer and consumer, taking in some 55 million tonnes, or 60% of annual global trade.

If the soybean scenario is a precedent for corn - and traders say all the signs point in that direction - benchmark corn prices in the United States, the biggest producer, could in the long term exceed the $8 a bushel record set in June.

US stockpiles are expected to fall to their lowest levels in 16 years in 2011/12, an ominous sign of how China's rising imports will squeeze supply. Demand for the grain, crucial to fatten the animals that feed the world's growing hunger for meat, shows no sign of abating.

Competition for supplies with Japan, the world's biggest corn importer, will intensify and farmers from as far away as Argentina will start planting more acreage while the amount of corn used to make biofuels could shrink.

Driving this seismic change in the corn industry is a fifth of the world's population, which has developed a voracious appetite for pork, poultry and eggs that China's government is striving to make affordable. For Beijing, high food prices are a potential trigger for social unrest it wants to avoid.

"There are shifting diet patterns with growing wealth and the middle class in China together with climate change, land degradation and water scarcity," said Monika Barthwal-Datta, who heads the food security programme at the Centre for International Security Studies at the University of Sydney. "It means China is going to enter the market in a substantial manner and it is going to compete with other countries in the region that rely on US corn."

Grain stocks and demand are politically charged topics in the world's second largest economy, and biggest pork consumer, which is particularly conscious about its food security.

Last year, China returned to importing corn in earnest after years of blocking foreign grain, buying a record 1.57 million tonnes, up 18 times from the previous year, because domestic production just couldn't keep up.

China is likely to boost imports to four million tonnes in the 2011/12 crop year beginning October from an estimated 1.3 million this year, a Reuters poll showed.

Imports could be even higher, with one analyst forecasting China could ask for as much as 9 million tonnes, which would put it on par with Mexico, the world's second biggest importer.

Corn, and to a lesser extent wheat, are mainly used as animal feed. But with strong domestic demand eating up what is forecast to be a bumper harvest, and state reserves running low, corn prices have shot up in China, stoking pork prices that in turn have helped propel overall inflation to a three-year high of 6.5% in July.

The global tightness in corn supplies comes despite year-on-year bumper harvests in China and the United States, which together account for more than half of the world's production and consumption of corn.

An analyst with the China National Grain and Oils Information Centre, a state-run think-tank, said consumption would continue to dwarf domestic supply as the scope to increase production remained limited. A bad year for farmers could boost China's growing dependence on international markets.

"If the weather is not good in some years, the deficit will be bigger," he said.

Because of their market dominance, any changes to the food patterns in the United States or China will have big repercussions for the rest of the world, and grain prices.

"Imagine if China gets slightly lesser production, it could translate into additional imports and it is exactly the same situation for the United States," said Abdolreza Abbassian, grain analyst at the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation.

China is currently the world's second biggest corn consumer.

Significant Chinese imports would bolster prices, said Luke Mathews, a commodity strategist at Commonwealth Bank of Australia in Sydney. After falling from their record high in June, prices remain largely unchanged this year, compared with almost 20% losses in wheat and a nearly 13% decline in soybeans.

"The explosion in Chinese imports from 1990 through today has certainly been a key driver in the oilseed market and we think a repeat of that in the corn market would certainly be a very supportive influence on world prices," Mathews said.

Relentless demand has also driven China's domestic corn prices to an all-time high this month, depleting reserves to less than one month's supply and worrying a government desperate to control food prices, which on average jumped more than 13 percent in August.

Official fears about food inflation are largely behind China's drive to transform the hog industry from backyard farms to large modern complexes that will require more corn to ensure steady pork supplies.

"When you are a backyard farm you can replace corn with some cheap feed input like waste but you take longer to rear pigs," said Jean-Yves Chow, a senior industry analyst at Rabobank in Hong Kong. "When you turn to the industrialised model you have a feeding programme which is more based on corn and soybean meal and it is pretty much fixed."

Rabobank estimates that by 2015, nearly three-quarters of the pigs in China will be reared in commercial farms compared with 63% in 2010. In 2000, farms with more than 50 pigs constituted just 26% of the output.

Going beyond its borders, China's large corn imports could also threaten feed grain supplies for the US ethanol industry, which consumes 40% of the country's corn output.

In drawing up its balance sheet, the US Department of Agriculture has already said that corn for ethanol would drop 100 million bushels in 2011/12 to 5 billion bushels from its August forecast.

Tightening corn supplies will make for a more competitive environment and could put some plants at risk even though at this point production levels continue to run strong.

"If you see rising demand from food and feed sectors then subsidies on ethanol production in the US don't make sense at all," said Datta. "Focus on biofuels from food grains is quite a dangerous one."

In the longer term, analysts say higher grain prices will provide a bigger incentive for farmers to boost corn production. Brazil and other South American nations are leading the way with investments and farm expansion.

After transforming global agriculture by quintupling their soybean production since 1980, Brazilian farmers are now on the brink of crop breakthroughs in cotton and corn, long dominated by growers in America.

"We should see higher prices opening up new acreage somewhere in the world," said Shawn McCambridge, analyst with Jefferies Bache. "I tend to keep drawing back to South America because the US and China both are limited in how much acreage they can divert to corn.

Reuters

Chinese built agricultural demonstration center in Zimbabwe almost complete

During an Africa-China summit in 2006, China pledged to assist African countries to build 10 pilot agricultural technology centers across the continent over the following three years. That initial number was then increased to 14, then to 20.

The training center in Zimbabwe was begun in October 2009 and is now almost complete. It is on a leading pre-existing agricultural college, Gwebi, located 27 km out of capital city Harare. The new center covers an area of approximately 109 hectares, and includes a demonstration field of 80 ha. The first crops are expected to be planted in October, just before the onset of Zimbabwe's rain season. The crops to be planted include the maize, wheat, soya beans and potatoes.

Xinhua news agency reports that the center will target training middle and small scale farmers, farm managers, agricultural specialists and agro- students, among others, and will open with an initial enrollment of 120 persons per year.

According to Du Yongqi, the project manager, demonstration of the use of low- cost irrigation systems suitable for small-scale farmers will be among subject areas to be covered.

The center, which will be supported by Chinese grants in the first three years, will be transferred to the Zimbabwe government after 15 years of operation. During this period the Chinese will run the center with the support of Zimbabwean experts.

African Agriculture

China's growing African agricultural footprint

China is currently paying particular attention to Africa’s arable land; according to Alex Pestana, investment strategist at Sanlam Investment Management (SIM), South Africa.

Rapid economic growth had extracted a serious environmental bill, with “tens of milions” at risk of “desertification in China.”  The arable land opportunity in Africa was obvious, he said, as only 15 per cent of sub-Saharan Africa’s potential arable land was being used for agriculture.

Pestana reckoned there were 142 Chinese agricultural investment projects scattered over sub-Saharan Africa at the end of 2009. And, that the Chinese Food and Agricultural Organisation had already set up a $30-million trust for investing in Africa.

He said the Chinese Development Bank had granted loans worth millions of dollars to agricultural processing firms in East Africa, and the Chinese had given $1bn in agricultural loans to Angola, as well as pledging $800mn to Mozambique. China had also invested in arable land in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Mozambique.

He argued that China’s increased presence in Africa would have a major influence on food prices and land prices, meaning African agri-businesses would enjoy significant benefits from China.

China rejects German official's criticism of its Africa farm investments

 by Chuin-Wei Yap

When it comes to famine in Africa, China seems an easy target for critics of its rising outbound investments. It’s not much of a secret that the Chinese have been swiftly stepping up their investment profile on the continent, including enough forays into Africa’s agricultural sector that a senior Chinese envoy in June took pains to reassure reporters that the government has not been encouraging Chinese farmers to move to the continent.

It’s one thing to invest overseas in search of energy or metals, the more usual remit of resource-hungry growing nations. Agriculture is far more sensitive ground, as it’s tightly bound up with a basic human need, land ownership and deep-seated suspicions of foreign control.

And so it was that a senior Beijing spokesman found himself responding, in scolding terms, to an apparent accusation by a German diplomat that Chinese land acquisitions have at least partly been responsible for famine in Africa. Shen Danyang, spokesman for the Ministry of Commerce, described the comments by Germany’s Africa policy coordinator as “nonsense,” and asserted that China’s investments in the continent were meant to help Africa raise its agricultural production capacity. “I can say that almost not a single grain of rice has been sent from Africa back to China,” he declared.

In an interview last month with a German newspaper, Guenter Nooke had suggested the causes of the catastrophe in Africa were partly man-made. “In the case of Ethiopia there is a suspicion that the large-scale land purchases by foreign companies, or states such as China which want to carry out industrial agriculture there, are very attractive for a small (African) elite,” he said.

Nooke said the Chinese farm investments were focused on exports – which he said threatened African smallholdings and livelihoods – but also added: “Not everything the Chinese are doing in Africa is bad… Chinese investment has perhaps an advantage: it will show how industrial farming in Africa can be carried out effectively.”

Taken as a whole, Nooke’s comments could be described as a broad criticism of cross-border land purchases as a matter of government policy. But he may have been on more shaky ground when singling out China as growing food for export from Africa land. Judging from official customs records, China in fact has consumed very little in the way of agricultural output from East Africa. According to customs statistics, China last year only imported 32,583 tons of a canola byproduct from Ethiopia – epicenter of the current famine – and hasn’t imported any farm product from any East African nation so far this year.

China does regularly import rubber from West African countries like Cameroon, Ivory Coast and Sierra Leone, and has significant trade deals in metals like iron ore and copper. But when it comes to grains from Africa, it appears Mr. Shen’s riposte was accurate, even if a tad shrill (his full comments also included details of China’s aid donations to the East Africa famine).

China’s practice of the public relations craft in Africa, a continent where many a global power has seen its reputation fall to ruin, has at best been patchy in recent years, running the gamut from rocky lows to more sophisticated heights. The Economist in a May article this year reckoned that “China is by far the largest investor (in overseas farmland purchases), buying or leasing twice as much as anyone else.”

With limited arable land and rising consumer demand likely to push China to purchase even more farmland overseas in the future, the fuss over its role in foreign land deals, whether justified or not, isn’t about to go away.

Wall Street Journal

Have we seen the end of jatropha as a potential biofuel?

by Brian Westenhaus

According to Promode Kant from the Institute of Green Economy in India and Shuirong Wu of the Chinese Academy of Forestry, some 12.8 million ha (49,421 square miles) are expected to be planted with jatropha by 2015. Most anyone would be thrilled that such a large area is going to support jatropha oil for fuel production and offer incomes to subsistent farmers.

But it’s not looking good. One wonders how that can be.

The report is authored by Wu and Kant in an article published in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology, ‘The Extraordinary Collapse of Jatropha as a Global Biofuel.’

For India the story starts in 2003 with the decision by the Planning Commission of India to introduce mandatory biofuel blending over increasingly larger parts of the country with a target of 30% by 2020. The Planning Commission pushed for jatropha as it was considered to be high, early yielding, nonbrowsable and requiring little irrigation and even less management.

That followed with encouraging millions of marginal farmers and landless people to plant Jatropha across India. In 2006, China decided to meet 15% of its transportation energy needs by 2020 and, following India’s example, focused on jatropha, with plans to raise it on more than 1 million ha of marginal lands. Other developing countries took similar measures, in the hope that the crop would provide enhanced income for farmers as well as renewable energy. By 2008, Jatropha had been planted on more than an estimated 900,000 ha, of which 85% was in Asia, 13% in Africa and the rest in Latin America.

What happened in India was the provisions of mandatory blending could not be enforced because seed production fell far short of the expectation. Very little oil, very little blending obviously. A recent study has reported jatropha cultivation has been discontinued by 85% of the jatropha farmers in India.

Things look little better in China where very little production of biodiesel from jatropha seed oil can be found.

To make the potential matters worse some real research has come in from Tanzania where jatropha research found the net present value of a five-year investment in jatropha plantation was negative, with a loss of US$ 65 per ha on lands with yields of 2 tons/ha of seeds and only slightly beneficial at US$9 per ha with yields of 3 tons. Its even more discouraging when the average expected jatropha seed yield on poor barren soils is only 1.7 to 2.2 tons/ha.

There is basic reason for this – the plant has not been domesticated, hybridized and developed across growing conditions. In comparison, U.S. corn has been in development since before the U.S. Civil War, from the simplest farming practice of saving the best of a crop for the next year’s seed to billions of dollars of investment in genetic study and engineering.

... jatropha is busy self propagating – not busily producing seed oil.

It seems obvious now that a few select areas where jatropha grows and excelled was a basis for a conclusion – by a bureaucracy. The authors offer a story form of indictment saying, “These observations are, however, nothing out of ordinary and should have been anticipated by the Planning Commission of India, the powerful apex body that decides national priorities and allocates funds for them, before taking up such a continent sized program involving millions of low income farmers. But the Commission may have relied too heavily on the opinion of one of its top functionaries, who expected an internal rate of return ranging from 19 to 28% across India. National planners’ enthusiasm for the species rubbed off easily on research organizations and universities that rely heavily on the Planning Commission for funding and some of these institutions themselves became partners in raising jatropha plantations.”

The authors also reach into the motivations, and that is where they depart from your humble writers opinion.

“It appears to be an extreme case of a well intentioned top down climate mitigation approach, undertaken without adequate preparation and ignoring conflict of interest, and adopted in good faith by other countries, gone awry bringing misery to millions of poorest people across the world. And it happened because the principle of “due diligence” before taking up large ventures was ignored everywhere. As climate mitigation and adaptation activities intensify attracting large investments there is danger of such lapses becoming more frequent unless “due diligence” is institutionalized and appropriate protocols developed to avoid conflict of interest of research organizations.”

Maybe the authors are right, but they miss the point. Jatropha very well could develop into a major cash crop offering a bonanza of alternative fuel. But it “ain’t gonna happen” without a common sense approach with research, development, investment in hybridization, genetic engineering and dedication by the supplies of the seed and other inputs, the farmers and oil processors – and finally consumers.

The jatropha catastrophe isn’t about jatropha; it’s about central planning, big government, and the concentration of power. It can backfire with astonishing results:

The whole of the U.S. corn crop, some 40% of the world’s production, takes less than 20,000 square miles. Jatropha is set to be planted across 2 ½ times that area. An average U.S. corn acre makes about 420 gallons of ethanol. The best jatropha makes nearly 75 gallons. That’s something to consider very carefully when biofuels are discussed.

Oil Price

Wealthy Chinese begin farming after food-safety scares

by Martin Patience

Juggling their iPhones with spades, a group of young professionals are getting their hands dirty - digging vegetables. During the week, they are teachers, PR consultants, and computer programmers. But at the weekend, these city slickers return to the soil.

"We're worried about food safety," says He Liying, explaining why they grow vegetables.

They toil under the summer sun - not always efficiently - at a co-operative farm called Little Donkey on the outskirts of Beijing. It has about 700 fee-paying members. It is one of dozens of farms which have cropped up across the country catering for China's middle classes, which are increasingly concerned about food safety.

According to state media, the number of consumer complaints over the issue is rising. From glow-in-the dark meat to dye injected into buns to make them look like a more expensive variety, there has been a rash of scandals in recent months.

But the most bizarre case was that of the exploding melons.

Jiang Yan Shi was one of the farmers affected by the problem. It was apparently caused by the overuse of a growth accelerant. But Mr Jiang insists it was something to do with his seeds.

"I was walking in my field when I heard this sound: 'Pah Pah,'" he says, explaining what happened. "All the different pieces flew in different directions."

In total, Mr Jiang says 600 melons were destroyed - a quarter of his crop.

Whether it is exploding melons or pigs pumped full of steroids to produce lean meat, many in China simply do not trust what is put on their dinner tables. This worries the authorities, anxious that people will lose trust in a government if it cannot ensure the safety of what they eat.

That confidence hit rock bottom three years ago when news of China's biggest food-safety scandal broke.

Melamine-tainted baby formula killed at least six children and 300,000 others fell ill. Wang Gang is still living with the consequences. His son - Zi Yuan - developed kidney stones after being fed the baby formula. Mr Wang continues to worry about his Zi Yuan's health. He wants justice for his son.

"I think the government needs to bear responsibility," he says, standing in his kitchen surrounded by papers and packets of baby formula which he has kept for three years. "Our court case keeps getting delayed. I'm boiling with hatred over this but I'm trying to control myself."

The Chinese authorities have enacted stricter policies to ensure food safety. It includes a directive from the Supreme Court calling for the death penalty for cases in which people die as a result of poor food safety.

But regulations are often flouted in China. And with food price inflation rising, some producers will continue to cut corners in order to fatten up the bottom-line.

After a hard day's work, the group of young professionals at the Beijing co-operative farm retired to an upmarket apartment. They cooked a meal using the fresh produce they had harvested.

"It definitely tastes better when you grow it yourself," says one of them.

But they are the lucky few, who have the time - and the money - to produce their own food. Many others have little choice in what they eat.

BBC

Zimbabwe military to partner with Chinese companies in agriculture

by Faith Zaba

The Zimbabwe army is now running private joint-venture companies in the agricultural and mining sectors with Chinese businessess.

In a recent interview...Brigadier-General Douglas Nyikayaramba, who chairs the agricultural production companies, said the Zimbabwe Defence Forces would soon officially launch the private military companies.

“We can’t just be crybabies. We need to find innovative ways of overcoming the challenges the country is facing,” he said. “Besides empowering our farmers, besides ensuring that there is productivity and coming up with mitigatory measures that can avert conflict in our country, we are also ensuring that the country is liquid because there is a lot of money that is coming in to fund these projects from our strategic partners. We are contributing in a very big way.”

Nyikayaramba said the agricultural production companies would be operating on a commercial basis and would export their produce to the region.

“We are putting on the table in terms of the joint ventures our land and our skills — that is human resources. Our friends are coming in with the money and equipment. The joint venture is a 50% share ratio,” Nyikayaramba said. He said they would then pay a dividend to the state, which is the main shareholder.

“We decided that we were not just going to sit and watch from a distance. To us it was just going to be a recipe for disaster in future. We wanted sufficient food to be produced in the country and a solution to ensure that we are able to feed the whole population,” Nyikayaramba said.

“As you are aware — a hungry nation is an angry nation — and that can become a precursor for any potential conflict. The commanders sat down and decided that we needed to assist our farmers to  enhance production and thereby avert possible conflicts.”

He said their objective in setting up the companies was to win a war without having to fight one by making such economic interventions.

Nyikayaramba said they would target idle land which was given to farmers, who due to lack of funding were unable to fully utilise their land. In turn, the resettled families would have a stake in the joint ventures. He said the farmers would provide labour and be given a share of the profits, calculated on the basis of the value of their pieces of land.

Nyikayaramba said they were targeting areas which concentrated mainly on maize production and turning them into cotton growing farms.

Nyikayaramba said in the coming season, they were going to increase the area under cotton to 100 000 ha and then to 200 000 ha next year.

He said the other agricultural production company is a demonstration project, assisting farmers within a radius of 150 kilometres.

“We are also operating another joint venture at Chinhoyi University. There are 30 tractors, 10 combine harvesters which have just arrived from China and several planters. People think it is government mechanisation programme, but it is not. It is a private military company - a joint-venture project,” said Nyikayaramba.

Zimbabwe Independent

Chinese entrepreneurs to invest in Benin palm oil production

by Serge-David Zoueme

A delegation of Chinese agricultural engineers and entrepreneurs decided to invest at least 1 billion CFA Francs ($2.15 million) in Benin’s palm oil industry after a visit to the western African nation.

Benin has vast untapped lands that could be used to produce palm oil and increase the output of agricultural products, the state-owned Office de Radiodiffusion et Television reported, citing Geng Wenbing, Chinese ambassador to the African country and chief of the delegation.

The Chinese will invest in the industry over the next five years to increase production and mechanize the industry. Palm oil is highly sought after in China for the manufacture of various food and cosmetic products.

“The funding plan and the amount will be announced by Chinese entrepreneurs toward the end of the year,” Benin’s Minister of Agriculture Sabai Kate was cited as saying by the Cotonou-based broadcaster.

Bloomberg