17,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Serie: PRS - Polity Resources series
- Sprache: Englisch
Grains - particularly maize, rice, and wheat - are the central component of most people’s diets, but we rarely stop to think about the wider role they play in national and international policy-making, as well as global issues like food security, biotechnology, and even climate change.
But why are grains so important and ubiquitous? What political conflicts and economic processes underlie this dominance? Who controls the world’s supply of grains and with what outcomes? In this timely book, Bill Winders unravels the complex story of feed and food grains in the global economy. Highlighting the importance of corporate control and divisions between grains - such as who grows them, and who consumes them - he shows how grains do not represent a unitary political and economic force. Whilst the differences between them may seem small, they can lead to competing economic interests and policy preferences with serious and, on occasions, violent geopolitical consequences.
This richly detailed and authoritative guide will be of interest to students across the social sciences, as well as anyone interested in current affairs.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 310
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016
Ähnliche
Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Dedication
Acknowledgments
1 Grains for Food, Grains for Feed
Differences in Grains
How Differences in Grains Matter
The Geopolitics of Grains
Notes
2 Grains and the US Food Regime
The US Food Regime and its Origins
The Spread of the US Food Regime
The Effects of the US Food Regime
Notes
3 The Search for New Markets
After the US Food Regime
The Search for New Markets and Economic Conflict in Agriculture
Notes
4 Feed Grains, Food Grains, and World Hunger
World Hunger and Food Security
Hunger and the Geopolitics of Grains in History
World Hunger and the Recent Geopolitics of Grains: The Food Crisis of 2008
Food Security and the Geopolitics of Grains
The Geopolitics of Grains and Addressing World Hunger
Notes
5 Genetically Engineered Grains
What are Genetically Engineered Seeds and Foods?
Adoption and Acceptance of Genetically Engineered Grains
Resistance to GE Grains
Genetically Engineered Grains in the World Economy
Notes
6 Seeds of Change
Expropriation of Land, Land Reform, and the Geopolitics of Grains
The Geopolitics of Grains: Looking Backward, Looking Forward
Notes
Selected Readings
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Figures
1.1 World Production for Maize, Rice, Soybeans, and Wheat, 1960–2015
2.1 World Wheat Production, 1960–2015
3.1 European Wheat Production and Exports, 1960–2015
3.2 European and US Wheat Exports as a Percent of World Exports, 1960–2015
3.3 World Wheat Exports, 1960–2015
3.4 Global per Capita Meat Consumption, 1961–2011
3.5 World Meat Production, 1960–2015
3.6 World Meat Production: Number of Animals Slaughtered, 1961–2013
4.1 Wheat Exports from India, 1867–1910
4.2 Rice Exports from India and Pakistan, 1960–2015
4.3 World Quinoa Production, 1961–2014
4.4 Quinoa Prices in Bolivia and Peru, 1991–2012
4.5 Indian Beef Production and Exports, 1960–2015
4.6 Maize and Soybean Production in India, 1960–2015
5.1 Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States, 1996–2015
List of Tables
1.1 Annual World Production of Grains
1.2 The ABCDs of the Global Grain Trade in 2013
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
ii
iii
iv
v
x
xi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
Resources Series
Peter Dauvergne & Jane Lister, Timber
Michael Nest, Coltan
Elizabeth R. DeSombre & J. Samuel Barkin, Fish
Jennifer Clapp, Food, 2nd edition
David Lewis Feldman, Water
Gavin Fridell, Coffee
Gavin Bridge & Philippe Le Billon, Oil
Derek Hall, Land
Ben Richardson, Sugar
Ian Smillie, Diamonds
Adam Sneyd, Cotton
Grains
BILL WINDERS
polity
Copyright © Bill Winders 2017
The right of Bill Winders to be identified as Author of this Work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published in 2017 by Polity Press
Polity Press65 Bridge StreetCambridge CB2 1UR, UK
Polity Press350 Main StreetMalden, MA 02148, USA
All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purpose of criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.
ISBN-13: 978-0-7456-8807-7
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Winders, William, 1971-author.Title: Grains / Bill Winders.Description: Cambridge, UK ; Malden, MA : Polity Press, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references and index.Identifiers: LCCN 2016016764| ISBN 9780745688039 (hardback : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780745688046 (pbk.)Subjects: LCSH: Grain trade--Political aspects. | Agriculture and state. | Agriculture and politics. | Food supply--Political aspects. | Geopolitics.Classification: LCC HD9030.5 .W555 2016 | DDC 338.1/731--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016016764
The publisher has used its best endeavors to ensure that the URLs for external websites referred to in this book are correct and active at the time of going to press. However, the publisher has no responsibility for the websites and can make no guarantee that a site will remain live or that the content is or will remain appropriate.
Every effort has been made to trace all copyright holders, but if any have been inadvertently overlooked the publisher will be pleased to include any necessary credits in any subsequent reprint or edition.
For further information on Polity, visit our website: politybooks.com.
For my mother and father,
Kathleen and David Winders
To whom I do not say “Thank You” enough.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to a number of people who helped me along the way to completing this project. Many people helped me work out the ideas in this book through numerous discussions and exchanges. A few of my colleagues at Georgia Tech regularly talk with me about this project, offering support and feedback: Dan Amsterdam, Doug Flamming, and Steve Usselman. As always, Rick Rubinson was an important source of insight, suggestions, and encouragement. Elizabeth Ransom helped to get me writing in the early stages of my work on this book. I presented Chapter 4 about the connection between grains and world hunger at the Rural Sociological Society annual meeting in 2015 and got important feedback and support from JoAnne Jaffee, Phil Howard, Doug Constance and Alex McIntosh, among others. Also in 2015, I presented Chapter 3 about grains and economic conflicts at the American Sociological Association annual meeting, and I am particularly grateful for the feedback and encouragement that I received there from Ray Jussaume and Kathleen Schwartzman. At Polity Press, I appreciate the guidance and patience that Louise Knight and Nekane Tanaka Galdos showed me as I worked on this book. I am also grateful for the valuable and insightful comments and suggestions given by two anonymous reviewers. And I appreciate the work that Clare Ansell, Susan Beer, and Jane Fricker did in editing the manuscript.
Finally, I owe a deep debt of gratitude to Amy D’Unger, who bore the brunt of my focus on grains and need to share my ideas and new findings. She read and edited the entire manuscript, encouraged me as I worked on this book, and graciously covered for me around the house when work on this book consumed most of my time. Samuel and Violet understood when I needed some extra time or a bit more quiet to get just a little more writing done. It gives me joy and inspiration to see Sam working so hard on his own writing.
In the end, the responsibility for any errors or omissions belongs solely to me.
CHAPTER ONEGrains for Food, Grains for Feed
The average supermarket has tens of thousands of items, including fresh fruits and vegetables, bakery items, dairy products, meats, and a wide array of processed foods such as crackers, cookies, condiments, boxed dinners, cereals, sodas, frozen foods, and alcohol. There are so many choices. Behind this diversity of products, however, are grains: barley, buckwheat, maize (corn), millet, oats, quinoa, rice, rye, sorghum, and wheat among others.1 However, just three grains can be found in almost every grocery store aisle: maize, rice, and wheat. Maize pervades supermarket shelves under a variety of names: corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, corn starch, decyl glucoside, dextrin, dextrose, ferrous gluconate, lactic acid, maltodextrin, xantham gum, and zein among many others. Wheat can be found in thousands of grocery store items in the form of gluten or starch. Likewise, rice takes the form of rice milk and flour, and different forms of rice can be found in a variety of foods, from baby food to beer. Grains in these and other forms permeate most of the processed foods found in supermarkets. Grains are also fed to animals – particularly, cows, chickens, and pigs – that are slaughtered for meat. In short, grains are ubiquitous in supermarkets, belying the apparent variety of foods, which in some fashion are often either grains entirely or contain grains. Even the typical fast food meal in the US – a burger, French fries, and a soda – has far more grains in it than might be apparent at first: grains are in the bun, obviously, but they are also very likely to be in the burger, soda, and ketchup, as well as the oil used to make the French fries. Put simply, grains are everywhere.2
Despite the pervasiveness of grains, we do not often think about their deep, underlying political implications, nor do we generally consider why some grains are more predominant than others. Instead, we tend to reflect on whether the amount and types of grains we eat are healthy for us. Maize is often, but not always, the focal point of such discussions. The various forms of maize that appear in foods, especially corn syrup, are argued to be important contributors to health issues, such as obesity. Some popular diets have centered on “low carb” (i.e., “low grains”) foods or even urged avoiding grains altogether. Many processed food labels now tout products as “gluten-free” for customers looking to avoid the protein in wheat, barley, and rye. Other public discussions of grains center on issues related to technology, such as genetically modified grains. Rarely do we move beyond these largely individual concerns, primarily about our health, to reflect on the more complex political and economic implications of grains.
Considering the geopolitics of grains is important, though, because people throughout the world consume grains as a central component of their diets. Grains are, therefore, an important factor in political stability, economic well-being, and even cultural heritage and traditions across the globe. Since grains are a central component of most people’s diets, one fundamental issue concerning grains is food security: having enough access to grains to provide an adequately nutritious diet. When access to grains decreases, for example because of rising prices, social and political stability can be undermined as people may begin to question or even challenge their political and economic institutions, which have not provided adequate food. Grain production is so widespread that millions of people engage in it as farmers, which means that grains not only provide food but also serve as an important basis for income as well as economic and social status around the world. And finally, grains and their production permeate life and culture around the world, including through music, art, poetry, holiday celebrations, rituals, and even language. For example, the cultivation of rice plays an important role in Japanese origin myths, and many Mexican cities hold festivals every year to celebrate maize. As the production of or access to grains is disrupted, a nation’s social, economic, and political stability can also be undermined. Understanding the geopolitics of grains is, therefore, critically important.3
The same three grains that are most prevalent in the supermarket – maize, rice, and wheat – are also the grains of greatest political and economic importance across the globe today. One or some combination of these grains forms the basis of diets in every region of the world. Table 1.1 shows annual world grain production for several grains and conveys clearly the importance of maize, rice, and wheat to global food supply. In 2015, world maize production was 967 million metric tons (MMT), rice was 470 MMT, and wheat was 735 MMT. That same year, the total world production of barley, millet, oats, rye, and sorghum together was 277 MMT. This means that the production of all other grains combined totaled only 59 percent of rice production, 38 percent of wheat production, and a mere 29 percent of maize production. Put another way, of the eight grains considered in Table 1.1, maize, rice, and wheat account for almost 90 percent of world grain production. In considering the geopolitics of grains, then, we must focus to a greater extent on the influence of these three grains.4
Table 1.1 Annual World Production of Grains (in million metric tons).
Source: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA, “PS&D Online Database,” available at http://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/.
Table 1.1 also shows the recent trends in production, further demonstrating the importance of these grains. Maize production has shown the greatest increase over the past 25 years, doubling from 481 MMT in 1990 to 967 MMT in 2015. While rice and wheat did not match maize’s increase over this period, they nonetheless showed substantial growth in production: rice increased by 34 percent and wheat increased by 25 percent. None of the other grains matched this. World production of barley, oats, and rye decreased over this same 25-year period by a combined 75 MMT, or about 29 percent across these three grains. World millet production remained roughly unchanged. World sorghum production increased by 28 percent, but its total increase in production was only 15 MMT, which pales in comparison to the increases of more than 100 MMT for maize, rice, and wheat. Finally, it is also noteworthy that maize, rice, and wheat accounted for 81 percent of world grain production in 1990, but by 2015 these three grains accounted for almost 90 percent of world production. Thus, maize, rice, and wheat dominate world grain production, and this dominance has grown over the past 25 years.
These trends raise two important questions. First, why are maize, rice, and wheat so predominant among world grains? Second, why did the production of these three grains increase so substantially over the past 25 years? We will return to each of these questions, particularly the second one, as they go to the heart of issues examined throughout this book: shifts in the global food system, economic competition and conflicts between grains, world hunger, the use of biotechnology in grain production, and access to land. But for now, our focus is the influence these three grains have on societies.
The distant and recent histories of maize, rice, and wheat reveal their importance not only in terms of feeding populations but also in their political, economic, and social influence. Each of these grains has shaped in various ways the political struggles and economic development of many nations. For example, the land tenure systems (i.e., the ways that landownership is organized) that have arisen around grain production have been linked to the economic and political structures found in societies. Some land tenure systems have been more favorable to the rise of political democracy, while other land tenure systems have inhibited democratic developments and contributed to dictatorships. Sharp reductions in people’s access to these grains – which, again, are the basis of most diets around the world – can contribute to food riots and political instability. Economic competition between producers of different grains – or producers of the same grain in different countries – has led to trade wars and increased political tensions. Finally, large companies dominate the grain trade, seed industry, and processing of these grains. This market dominance often translates into significant influence over political institutions and the production and dietary trends in countries around the globe, as well as the exploitation of labor. Through these and other ways, these three grains have shaped the political, economic, and social histories of nations around the world.5
The social and political influence of these grains is evident in recent global food crises. World grain prices reached historic heights in 2008, with wheat more than 200 percent higher and rice more than 250 percent higher than 2004–5 levels. The price of maize saw similar though less dramatic increases as well, as did prices for meat and dairy products, for which maize is the main source of feed. This rise in prices made food less accessible for millions of people and world hunger increased. As food prices rose and the threat of hunger spread, more than 30 countries were struck by mass protests and riots. These protests contributed to political instability in a number of countries. In Mexico, tens of thousands of people joined “tortilla protests” in response to the sharp increase in maize prices. In Haiti, the prime minister was removed after a week of food riots in April 2008. Later in 2010, rising grain prices again played a role in protests in Tunisia and Algeria, which then spread across the Middle East as the Arab Spring shook the region. High food prices, particularly for grains, fueled food riots and general protests across the globe that ultimately contributed to violent confrontations and even to changes in political regimes. Grains have the power to transform societies.6
Even outside of periods of crisis and change, the political economic influence of grains is apparent. For example, wheat farmers in the US and Europe, rice farmers in Japan and South Korea, and other grain farmers around the world have exerted significant influence over their respective nations’ trade and other national policies. Organizations representing maize farmers in the US were strong advocates of expanding trade with Mexico, China, and Cuba in the 1990s and 2000s. Rice farmers in Japan were important advocates of protectionism in the mid-twentieth century. Grain farmers in a variety of nations have influenced a whole range of policies from fiscal and banking policies to labor and social welfare policies.
Grain companies also have a long history of exerting political and economic influence. For many decades, for example, four companies have dominated the global trade in grains: Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Bunge, Cargill, and Louis Dreyfus. These four agricultural trading firms are referred to as the “ABCDs,” and their histories reach back to the 1800s or early 1900s with roots in North America and Europe – ADM and Cargill in the US, Bunge in the Netherlands, and Louis Dreyfus in France. Table 1.2 shows the size and geographic reach of these companies. The economic activities of these companies are widespread as well, as Jennifer Clapp has noted: “They buy and sell grain as well as a host of other agricultural and non-agricultural commodities, while they also undertake a range of activities from finance to production to processing and distribution.”7 The ABCDs control about 70 percent of the global grain market, though they face growing competition from new companies in Asia, including Noble Group, Olam, and Wilmar, which are three Singapore-listed agribusinesses; Cofco in China; and Glencore Xtrata in Switzerland. Global agrifood companies like these and the ABCDs have used their economic power to shape the rules of the global food system, thereby influencing trends in the production, consumption, and trade of grains across the globe.
Table 1.2 The ABCDs of the Global Grain Trade in 2013.
Sources: Murphy, Sophia, Burch, David, and Clapp, Jennifer (2012), Cereal Secrets: The World’s Largest Grain Traders and Global Agriculture, Oxford: Oxfam Research Reports; Clapp, Jennifer (2015), “ABCD and Beyond: From Grain Merchants to Agricultural Value Chain Managers,” Canadian Food Studies 2(2): 126–35.
Why are these grains so dominant and ubiquitous? What political conflicts and economic processes underlie this dominance? Who controls the world’s supply of grains? And, how important are the differences between grains? Many attempts to answer such questions focus on production levels, technology, or the role of large-scale agrifood corporations. Whether trying to explain the contours of the global food system, the eruption of economic conflicts in grain markets, world hunger, the use of biotechnology in grain production, or access to land, the focus is often on production levels, technology, or agrifood corporations. These foci are important to answering these questions, but such explanations also miss the fundamental role that differences between grains can play in such issues.
This book traces the political and economic influence of grains and their role in geopolitical conflicts. In doing so, it examines how competition and conflicts between different kinds of grains shape the global food system, the emergence of conflicts in grain markets, trends in world hunger, the use of biotechnology in grain production, and access to land. The market positions and political contexts of different grains intimately shape the economic interests and policy preferences of producers – as well as agrifood corporations. Such differences frequently lead producers of one grain to advocate political policies opposed by producers of other grains. For example, the world wheat market is much more competitive than the market for maize, which is dominated by the US. These divergent market structures have led to different policy preferences for US wheat and maize producers regarding export subsidies, national regulation, and liberalization. Emphasizing such potential divisions brings a new focus to the geopolitics of grains.
Differences in Grains
Despite sharing important similarities, maize, rice, and wheat diverge in a number of important ways, including how they are consumed, where they are grown, and how they are traded. These differences can lead to political and economic conflicts that are, at root, fights over divergent policy preferences that occasionally erupt into violence. Given the importance of such divisions between grains, then, understanding the sources of divisions is imperative. Though there are many potential sources of divisions, three stand out as being particularly consequential: differences in how grains are used, where grains are produced and traded, and the policy preferences connected to grains. Each of these sources of divisions among grains has an important influence on the broader political and economic context.
How We Use Grains
Maize, rice, and wheat differ in a number of ways, but the most important difference is, perhaps, in how they are used. People use these grains in overlapping ways, as food, livestock feed, and even as energy sources. Nevertheless, some grains are almost exclusively consumed directly by people, while other grains are used primarily for feed for livestock. Rice and wheat are food grains that serve as the dietary foundation for most societies and feed most of the world’s population. The world production of rice and wheat in 2015 was a significant increase over 1990 (see Table 1.1). Together, rice and wheat are the staple food for most of the people in the world. Even this commonality, though, can be a source of division between grains as rice and wheat producers sometimes find themselves in competition for markets.
World maize production has surpassed all other grains every year since 1998, and it is used in a greater variety of ways than are rice and wheat. Some maize is used in foods in obvious ways, such as cornmeal. Much of the maize produced in the world, however, is used as a central ingredient in a large variety of processed foods. As already noted, maize can be found in such processed foods as bread, coffee creamer, crackers, ketchup, syrup, salad dressing, ice cream, and many, many more. But maize is also consumed as a central dietary grain, much like rice and wheat, in diets in Latin America and elsewhere. While some maize is consumed directly, much of the maize produced in the world is used for livestock feed. The other grains regularly used for feed include barley, oats, and sorghum. Maize is the primary feed grain in the US, where it accounts for more than 90 percent of total feed grain production and use.
In addition to maize, soybeans are also a primary ingredient in livestock feed. Although soybeans are a legume or oilseed rather than a grain, per se, I discuss soybeans with maize as feed grains in this book for several reasons. First, in many regions where farmers grow maize, soybeans are a rotation crop. Therefore, maize and soybeans share much in the way of production, particularly in where they are produced. Second, a large percentage of world maize and soybean production is used in livestock feed; that is, these two crops are the primary components of animal feed. Third, the division between grains used for food and grains used for feed is perhaps the most important split among grains. Thus, it is no small point that maize and soybeans are the two main components in feed. According to the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, 60 billion chickens, 1.4 billion pigs, and almost 300 million cows were slaughtered for meat in 2013. Such an expansive livestock industry requires immense amounts of feed. In this sense, we consume grains indirectly through eating animals that have been fed a diet based primarily on maize and soybeans. Consequently, I refer to both maize and soybeans as “feed grains.”
Since soybeans will be an important part of the discussion of feed grains in this book, a little more information about soy is useful. First, world soybean production puts it near maize, rice, and wheat. In 2015, world soybean production reached 319 MMT. While that is substantially lower than world maize or wheat production, it is closer to world rice production than it is to other grains, such as barley. Additionally, world soybean production has expanded dramatically over the past 25 years, increasing from 104 MMT in 1990 to 174 MMT in 2000, and then to 319 MMT in 2015. That is an increase of 70 percent from 1990 to 2000, and then 83 percent from 2000 to 2015. From 1990 to 2015, as Figure 1.1 shows, the number of soybean hectares harvested increased from 50 million to 120 million. Second, as with maize, soybeans are used in a wide variety of processed foods. Soy also appears in diets as a central source of protein as a bean, tofu, and soymilk, among many other products. Nevertheless, and again like maize, most of the world soybean production goes into animal feed. Each year, approximately 85 percent of world soybean production is processed (“crushed”) into soybean meal and oil. More than 90 percent of soybean meal is used in livestock feed. Therefore, as with maize, there is a clear connection between soybeans and the meat industry.8
Figure 1.1. World Production for Maize, Rice, Soybeans, and Wheat, 1960–2015.
Source: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA, “PS&D Online Database.”
In recent years, maize has also been increasingly used in yet another way: as a biofuel. Many observers have pointed to the increased use of maize as a biofuel as playing a central role in the global food crisis of 2008. For now, however, the important point is how the uses of maize and soybeans are more varied than for rice or wheat. While maize and soybeans are the primary feed grains in the world, rice and wheat are the primary food grains. This is not to discount the extent to which people consume maize and soybeans directly, for example as an ingredient in processed foods. But the extent to which the grains are used as food versus feed is of paramount importance. As we will see, these distinctions are telling and have important consequences.
The Geography of Grains
In addition to differences in how we use them, these grains also differ regarding where they are produced. It is important to see where different grains are produced, and how that geography of production fits with the distribution of power in the interstate system. The core of the world economy includes nations that hold economic and political dominance. Producers in those nations have a greater ability to protect their interests in the world economy. By contrast, nations outside of the core – in the semi-periphery and especially in the periphery of the world economy – wield substantially less international political and economic influence. Where nations fall in this international hierarchy indicates their international influence. Consequently, the geography of grain production and trade matters tremendously.9
In considering the global production of grains, we can see distinct patterns emerge in terms of grain production and, especially, grain exports. In 2015, most of the world’s wheat was produced in China, the European Union (EU), India, Russia, and the US, which combined to account for 67 percent of world wheat production that year. The world’s top rice producers in 2015 were Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam, which together accounted for 73 percent of the world’s rice production that year. Brazil, China, the EU, and the US accounted for 73 percent of world maize production in 2015. Not evident in the top four maize producers, though, is a clear link to the Americas: the US is the leading producer of maize, and the US, Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico produced 49 percent of the world’s maize in 2015. The world’s top soybean producers were Argentina, Brazil, and the US, which together accounted for 83 percent of production in 2015. While China is an important producer of three grains (maize, rice, and wheat), geographic patterns in grain production still emerge. Rice production is anchored in Asia, maize and soybean production is anchored in the US and Latin America, and wheat production is anchored in Europe and North America. This is a central part of the geopolitics of grains.
Another aspect of the geopolitics of grains is the international grain trade, or how grains circulate around the globe. In contrast to world grain production, China is not a major exporter of any of these three major grains. In fact, China was the biggest importer of rice and soybeans in 2015, and it also had substantial maize and wheat imports. In 2015, the US, Brazil, Ukraine, and Argentina were the biggest exporters of maize, together accounting for 86 percent of world exports. Argentina, Brazil, and the US accounted for 88 percent of world exports of soybeans. The major rice exporters were India, Thailand, Vietnam, Pakistan, and the US, which together accounted for 81 percent of world exports. And finally, the major wheat exporters were the US, the EU, Canada, Australia, Russia, and Ukraine, which accounted for 81 percent of world exports that year. With grain exports, then, we can see distinct geographic regions even more clearly. As with world production, maize and soybean exports tend to originate from North and South America, rice exports tend to emerge from Asia, and wheat exports emerge from North America and Europe. The US is the common exporter for each of the grains, and it is the dominant exporter of maize.
We can also look at the percent exported of total production of each grain. Different portions of world production for these grains were exported in 2015: 41 percent of soybeans, 22 percent of wheat, 12 percent of maize, and 9 percent of rice. Farmers who grow crops for export may develop different, and competing, economic interests relative to farmers who do not rely on export markets. Additionally, the world wheat market is more competitive than are the markets for maize or rice. In 2015, while the top four wheat-exporting countries accounted for only 57 percent of world exports, the other grain markets were less competitive: for maize, four exporting countries accounted for 85 percent of world exports; for rice, four exporting countries accounted for 73 percent of world exports; and for soybeans, three countries accounted for 88 percent of world exports. Such differences in the level of competition in markets can also lead to different economic interests and policy preferences. For example, in very competitive markets, producers may seek protection from international competition, such as subsidies or tariffs. Such policy preferences may put those producers at odds with others who face little international competition.
Let’s return for a moment to the central division of food grains and feed grains, and see how feed grains, in particular, fit into the geography of production and trade. The US and Brazil are the primary producers and exporters of soybeans and maize, and these two countries dominate the export markets for these commodities. In 2015, the US and Brazil together accounted for 59 percent of world maize exports and 78 percent of world soybean exports. The one difference between maize and soybeans is the percent of world production exported – 12 percent for maize, and 41 percent for soybeans. While China is also a leading producer of both maize and soybeans, it exports neither. In fact, China was by far the world’s biggest importer of soybeans in 2015, importing 85 MMT. The EU was a distant second, importing 13 MMT of soybeans. This geography of production and trade for soybeans reaffirms the connection to maize as a central component of feed grain. Discussing maize and soybeans as feed grains makes sense not only because of their common usage, but also because they are similar in their geography of production and trade.
Whereas feed grains are produced and exported primarily by the US and Brazil, food grains have more competitive world markets with more countries exporting rice and wheat. These differences – how the grains are used, where they are produced, and who exports them – are important. Even today, in an age when the political and economic power of agrifood corporations has increased, such differences still matter: the ABCDs, based in North America and Europe, face increased competition from corporations based in Asia. In fact, these differences provide the basis for fundamental disagreements between producers and traders of different grains. These differences have driven some of the most important political and economic currents in world history over the past several centuries.
Divisions Between Grains and National Policies
Conflicting interests between grains often derive from or lead to struggles over national policies, particularly agricultural policy. At a basic level, agricultural policy might be thought of as being on a continuum of policies oriented toward national regulation at one end and policies oriented toward the market at the other end. For much of the twentieth century, most countries had agricultural policies that reflected the US policy of supply management. This policy included a number of regulations and supports by national governments, usually centering on three programs: price supports, production controls, and export subsidies. After explaining these programs a bit further, we will take a brief look at how divisions between grains contributed to and were caused by supply management policy.
Price supports offer farmers a guaranteed minimum price for particular commodities, effectively regulating market prices in agriculture. Price supports are generally calculated based on volume. For example, rice farmers might receive a guaranteed price for each metric ton. Therefore, a farmer producing 750 MT of rice would receive a greater subsidy from price supports than a farmer who produced 300 MT. Nevertheless, the point of price supports is to increase farm income and stabilize markets in a relatively direct way. More recently, some nations have begun to support farm income more directly with farm subsidies that do not work through or affect the level of prices. When a particular commodity is covered by price supports, it can influence whether farmers grow the grain at all and how much they grow. That is, price supports can shape farmers’ economic interests.
Production controls regulate the amount of particular commodities that farmers could produce. Sometimes, production controls take the form of acreage allotments, limiting the amount of land that can be used in producing a particular crop. Other times, marketing agreements limit farmers on how much of a commodity they can bring to market. Whether in the form of acreage allotments, marketing agreements, or other forms, production controls aim to regulate and stabilize production by reducing instances of overproduction and surplus.
