Peasants, agriculture and the rural in China today              Zhang Kai

 


      The questions of peasants, agriculture and the rural in China today have aggravated to a point of crisis though official economic figures seemed to fare well. In 2000, the state revenue had rapidly increased, with the rate of increase being three times that of economic growth, and Premier Zhu Rongji reported that the per capita net income of the rural population was 2,253 yuan, a real increase of 2.1% over the preceding year. He also reported that the average annual increase in the last five years was 4.7%. However, there appear to be many discrepancies with reports by experts and researchers, as well as the fact that there has been a drop in the cultivated area, output and prices.

      According to the statistics announced by the State Statistics Bureau, grain output for 2000 decreased by 9% as compared to 1999. The direct factor for this was a 5.3% decrease in the cultivated area. 2000 was the first year since 1949 when the cultivated area was smallest, dropping to below the warning level of 110 million hectares. The Statistics Bureau estimated that there would be a further decrease in 2001 of 1.7% of the cultivated land, which means cultivated land will drop to 107 million hectares.

      The main reason for the severe reduction of farmland is because peasants find farming unprofitable under the many heavy tariffs. Farmland has been abandoned. The Wen Wei Po in Hong Kong reported on February 19 that even in some key farming areas in the Dongting Lake area, which has traditionally been endowed with fertile land and good harvests, large areas of good land have been abandoned in recent years. In Nan County, up to September 2000, only 50% of land has been re-contracted by peasants. In some villages, over 70% of farmland has been abandoned. Peasants pointed out directly that they did so in order to avoid having to shoulder heavy agricultural and rural tariffs.

      These problems have drawn the concern of many experts in the PRC. Below are excerpts taken from an essay written by the scholar Lu Xueyi, entitled Finding a way out of the urban-rural segregation, and two policies for one country.[1] He said, the purchasing power of rural residents had been on the decrease for several years despite good harvests since 1996. After the winter of 1996, peasants had experienced difficulties in selling grain and cotton, and after the summer of 1999, in selling almost all major agricultural products. The per capita income from growing grain had dropped by over 300 yuan in 1999 as compared to 1996. In 1996, per capita income of peasants from growing cotton was 68.07 yuan, but it dropped to 36.68 yuan in 1999. Yet, income from grain and cotton made up the major income of agricultural products, especially in central and western regions. Within three years from 1997 to 1999, the prices of grain and cotton had dropped by 30-40%.

      During the same period, rural industries were also experiencing difficulties, and about 40% were in a state of production stagnation or semi-stagnation. At the same time, peasants working in urban areas were being laid off as restrictions were imposed on the employment of rural workers to ease the unemployment of the urban folk. In 1995, it was estimated that rural workers amounted to 80 million, and in 1999, it was estimated at 60 million. If on average a rural workers net annual income in the cities was 2,000 yuan, it meant a decrease of 60 billion yuan of cash income for the countryside in a year.

      Another scholar Wen Tiejun, when answering questions from the journalists in an article Resolving the three rural issues by integrated reform, pointed out that the problem of inflation of rural organizations had been prevalent. He said that in the early 1980s, a township would pay the wages of 8 cadres. By mid 80s, the establishment increased to about 30 people. Now, the usual number was 300. In some advanced regions, the towns would have an establishment of 800-1000. But in recent years, the rural economy ran badly, more rural industries had gone bankrupt, and the townships and villages were burdened with heavy debts. According to a survey of the Ministry of Agriculture in 1997 on ten provinces, the average debt of a township was 4 million yuan, and a village 200,000 yuan. Now, some townships had a heavy debt of 40 million yuan. This meant much of the brunt would be borne by peasants, and usury would be flagrant.

      This is the reason for the continued exploitation of peasants despite repeated orders and decrees from the central government on alleviating the burdens on peasants.

      The poverty in the countryside may be seen in the deterioration of rural education. Outbreaks of protests have taken place by parents and pupils against the heavy fees. For example, on February 11, 2001, in Xiantao Town, Chaoyang County, Guangdong Province, about 800 primary school pupils took to the street, attacked the government building, and burnt the furniture and files in a protest against the levying of supplementary fees in education.[2]

      A tragedy which broke out in Fanglin Village, Wanzai County, Jiangxi Province reveals the plight in the rural scene. An explosion took place in a primary school in the village on March 6, 2001, reportedly killing 41 teachers and pupils, and injuring 27. Wen Wei Po reported that the school had the pupils work on fireworks in order to earn money for the school. 50 kilograms of saltpeter was reported to be stored in the school, material for making the fireworks. According to Sing Tao Daily News, a person from the management of a fireworks factory said that it was a prevalent practice for rural schools or households to be producing fireworks or firecrackers in violation of safety regulations. With annual income from farming amounting to only about 1,000 yuan, the income from working on fireworks would be 5-6 yuan a day. On the day of explosion in the Fanglin school, two classes of primary three pupils were working on the fuse of the fireworks. It was mandatory for pupils to do such work, or else they would have to pay a penalty of 2 yuan a day. The government later denied that the primary school was engaged in the processing work of fireworks, and attributed the incident to the sabotage of a lunatic Li Chuicai. However, some German journalists interviewed Lis former classmates who said that Li was a worker responsible for transporting the saltpeter and fireworks between the factory and the school. He also died in the explosion.[3]

      There has been more voicing of dissent and criticism of the policies on peasants, agriculture and the rural, and some come from within the government and the Party. However, some of those that have made their criticisms have encountered revenge and blows. One example is Li Changping, a township party secretary who petitioned the central government on these issues, but due to his outspokenness, he was forced to resign in September 2000, after which he found a job in Shenzhen. Yet, his popularity can be seen in his being elected by about 30,000 votes on the internet and letters by the Nanfang Zhoumo Newspaper as the Man of the Year, as hope and conscience of China. His case indicates the public opinion against bureaucratic control and privileges, and in sympathy for the plight of the peasants.

 

March 20, 2001



[1] See Dushu, No.5 of 2000.0

[2] Apple Daily April 14, 2001.

[3] See Apple Daily March 10, 2001.