如何养活世界(来自经济学人的英语阅读精品,含翻译)

[2009.11.17]How to feed the world

如何养活世界

Nov 19th 2009

From The Economist print edition

Business as usual will not do it

一切照旧已不再可行

IN 1974 Henry Kissinger, then America’s secretary of state, told the first world food conference in Rome that no child would go to bed hungry within ten years. Just over 35 years later, in the week of another United Nations food summit in Rome, 1 billion people will go to bed hungry.

1974年，在罗马举行的第一届世界粮食会议上，当时的美国国务卿亨利?基辛格宣称10年内将没有小孩再饿着肚子入睡。而35年之后的罗马，在又一届联合国粮食峰会在罗马召开的这一周内，仍有10亿人饿着肚子上床睡觉。

This failure, already dreadful, may soon get worse. None of the underlying agricultural problems which produced a spike in food prices in 2007-08 and increased the number of hungry people has gone away. Between now and 2050 the world’s populat ion will rise by a third, but demand for agricultural goods will rise by 70% and demand for meat will double. These increases are in a sense good news in that they are a result of rising wealth in poor and middle-income countries. But they will have to happen without farmers clearing large amounts of new land (there is some scope for expansion, but not much) or using up lots more water (in parts of the world, water supplies are stretched to their limit or beyond). Moreover, they will take place while farmers also wrestle with the consequences of climate change, which, on balance, will do more harm than good to farmland round the world.

这样的失败虽已甚为可怕，但很快将会变得更糟。现存的农业问题推动了2007-08年粮食价格的上涨，使饥饿人数有所增加，而这些问题无一得到解决。现在至2050年间，世界人口将增长1/3，但农产品需求将上涨70%，而肉类需求更将翻番。这些增长在一定意义上是个好消息，因为这是中低收入国家财富增长的结果。但是伴随这些增长的却是一些不容乐观的景象：农民无法清理出大量的新地（可耕地有扩大的空间，但并不多），更多的水资源会被耗尽（在世界某些地方，供水量已至其极限甚至超过了极限）。此外，与此同时农民还需应对气候变化造成的影响。总的来说，气候变化对其全球的耕地来说将是弊大于利的。

It may be too late to avoid another bout of price rises. Despite a global recession and the largest grain harvest on record in 2008, food prices are heading up again. Still, countries have a brief window of opportunity in which to set long-term policy goals without being distracted by panic measures. They need to do two things: invest in the productive capacity of agriculture and improve the operation of food markets.

或许想避免下一轮的价格上涨为时已晚。尽管全球经济衰退，而2008年收获了有记录以来

的最大丰收，但食物价格仍再次上扬。然而，各国仍存在一丝机会，能够在避免恐慌措施的同时，制定长期政策目标。他们要做两件事：投资增加农业生产能力，改善食物市场运作方式。

Governments have done one but not the other. Over the past year investment has risen faster than anyone expected. But distrust of markets and a reaction against farm trade are growing. Unless governments restrain those impulses, they will undermine the gains from rising investment.

政府仅为其一而未做其二。过去的一年间，投资增速快于任何人预期。但市场的不信任及对农产品贸易的抵制正在增加。除非政府能够抑制这股潮流，否则增加的投资收益将为其所破坏。

The quarter-century slumber

1/4世纪的沉睡

For most of the past 25 years, investment in agriculture has declined relentlessly. In 2005 most developing countries were investing only around 5% of public revenues in farming. The share of Western aid going to agriculture fell by around three-quarters between 1980 and 2006. This disinvestment laid waste to productivity. During the Green Revolution of the 1960s, staple-crop yields were rising by 3-6% a year. Now they are rising by only 1-2% a year; in poor countries, yields are flat.

过去25年间的大多时候，农业投资都在无情下跌。2005年，多数发展中国家公共收入中仅有5%用于投资农业。西方对农业的援助比例，自1980至2006年间降低了近3/4。投资缩水导致产能的浪费。在20世纪60年代绿色革命时期，大宗作物单产一年便提高了3-6%。而现在一年仅提升1-2%。在贫困国家，产量并未提高。

Fortunately, the food-price spike of 2007-08 shocked governments out of their quarter-century of neglect. The World Bank and many rich countries have doubled the money they put into poor countries’ farming. In the poor countries themselves, agriculture has gone from being a sideshow for the government—something the minister of agriculture does—into its main event, which everyone needs to worry about. This is as it should be: farming is far and away the single most important economic activity in most poor places.

幸运的是，2007-08年间，食物价格的上涨将政府从1/4世纪中的怠惰中惊醒。世界银行及许多富裕国家成倍增加了其对贫困国家农业的投资力度。而对贫困国家自身，农业也不再是场仅有农业部长参与的余兴节目，而成为人人都需思考的头等大事。这才是他所应该成为的样子：农业生产无疑是贫困地区唯一首要的经济活动。

Some of the new splurge of public money is going on safety-net programmes for poor farmers, which are justified on anti-poverty grounds: three-quarters of the world’s poorest live in rural areas. But the money will pay dividends in the long run only if it improves farmers’ access to market. Lack of reliable markets is the biggest barrier to rural development, since without them farmers have little incentive to grow more. So the increase in rural road-building is welcome, as

are measures to improve the operations of local markets by (for instance) spreading price information and building grain stores. There is also a case for temporarily subsidising better seeds and fertilisers in places where local markets are failing to provide them: this is an example of correcting market failure.

挥霍公款的新作之一便是进行针对贫农的安全网计划。真对抗击贫穷来说是合理，世上3/4最为贫困之人居住于乡间。但是仅当改善农民进入市场的渠道后，这些资金才能长期生息助益。可靠市场的缺乏是农村发展的最大障碍，缺乏可靠市场将使农民无心种植更多。因此，增加乡间道路建设是可被接受的，（例如）传播价格信息及修建粮仓以改善当地市场操作的方法也是如此。同时，在农民需要购买当地市场无法提供、更好的种子及肥料时，政府也可提供暂时性的补助政策：这是纠正市场失灵的范例。

Boosting world food production without gobbling up land and water will also require technology to play a larger role in the next 40 years than it has in the past 40, when people have been more or less living off the gains of the Green Revolution. Technology means a lot of things: drip irrigation, no-till farming, more efficient ways to use fertilisers and kill pests. But one way of raising yields stands out: developing genetically modified (GM) crops that, for example, use less water. Here, too, public bodies can overcome resistance. GM crops may be more acceptable if they come from government institutes than big companies or if the seeds are given away, rather than sold (which may be why Monsanto is doing that; see article).

不占用过多土地及淡水的条件下增加世界粮食产量，这也需要科技在今后的40年间发挥比过去更大的作用。绿色革命曾多多少少使人获益。科技意味着许多事情：滴灌、免耕耕种，化肥及农药的更有效使用。但提高产量中有一方法鹤立鸡群：发展（例如可以节省用水的）转基因农产品。这方面，公共机关也能克服阻力。当政府机构而非大公司时，或是分发种子而非出售种子时，人们将更易接受转基因农产品。（这或许是为什么Monsanto要这么做的原因。）

I’m not all right, Jack

老兄，我不行了

There is, however, a danger inherent in all this government activity: the temptation of self-reliance. The food-price rise of 2007-08 made all countries w orry about “food security”—quite rightly. But over the past year “food security” (ensuring everyone has enough to eat) has shaded into “food self-sufficiency” (growing it all yourself). Self-sufficiency has become a common policy goal in many countries (see article).

然而，政府的所有这些活动潜存着与生俱来的危险：自我依赖的趋向。2007-08年食物价格的上涨令所有国家开始担心“食物安全”——这相当正确。但过去一年以来“食物安全”（保证人人有所食）已悄悄转变为“食物自给自足”（全部自己耕种）。自给自足在许多国家已成为一项普遍政策目标。

In itself, self-sufficiency is not bad. If poor countries have a comparative advantage in producing their own food, they should do so (and that will often be the case). The problem is that the new

rhetoric of self-sufficiency coincides with a growing distrust of markets and trade. Grain importers no longer trust world markets to supply their needs. “Land grabbers” are snapping up land abroad to use for food production. Everywhere, governments are more involved in farming through input subsidies. In these conditions self-sufficiency could easily sprout protective walls.

究其本质而言，自给自足并非坏事。若贫困国家在自我生产食物方面存在比较优势，他们应该这么做（事实也经常如此）。问题在于所谓的自给自足恰恰伴随着对市场及贸易的不信任的与日俱增。粮食进口国不再相信世界市场能够满足他们的需求。“土地攫取者”正抢购国外土地以供粮食生产。世界各地的政府都在通过发放补贴而更深介入农业生产。在这种情况下，自给自足中将轻而易举的萌发出贸易保护大墙。

That would be in nobody’s interest. As Europeans have demonstrated over decades, pursuing self-sufficiency above all else is extremely wasteful. Self-sufficiency would also lock in patterns of agricultural production just when climate change is affecting different parts of the world differently, making trade between them all the more important.

这将使无人受益。正如欧洲数十年间所证明的那样，追求自给自足高于一切将是极其浪费的。自给自足亦将使农业生产格局僵化，而当今气候变化对世界各地的影响各有差异，相互间的贸易显得尤为重要。

The food-price trauma of 2007-08 is persuading some countries to say that they need to divert part of their wealth to subsidise food so they can be self-sufficient and avoid future crises. But the demands of feeding 9 billion people in 2050 tell a different story: farming needs to be as efficient as possible. That requires markets and trade. Investing in agriculture is a boon; rejecting agricultural markets would be a disaster.

2007-08粮食价格之伤正促使部分国家宣称他们需要转移部分财富用以补助食品，以使自己能够自给自足，避免未来的危机。然而在2050需要养活90亿人的事实则另有阐释：农业需要尽可能的高效。这需要市场及贸易。投资农业乃是额外恩赐，拒绝农贸市场将是灾难。