中国农业发展三大模式——行政、放任与合作的利与弊

The Three Models of China’s Agricultural Development——Strengths and Weaknesses of the Administrative,Laissez Faire,and Co-ops Approaches

本文论证,中国的'旧农业'——谷物生产——今天主要运作于一个行政模式之下,而'新农业'——高值蔬菜、水果、肉—禽—鱼和蛋奶——则主要运作于一个放任的市场模式之下。在国际市场竞争和粮食价格相对低廉的压力下,前者起到保护中国谷物生产和'粮食安全'的作用,但也显示倾向过度依赖指令性手段和无视农民意愿的弱点。后者则成功地凭借市场收益激发了小农的创新性,但经常受到市场价格波动的冲击以及商业资本的榨取。作为第三种模式的'专业合作社',则主要试图模仿美国的纯经济性合作社模式,无视中国村庄,不符合中国实际。本文提倡,中国应该模仿'东亚模式'的半政府性综合农协,扎根于村庄社区,由此往上延伸到乡(镇)、县(市)、省、中央各级政府。它们主要为小农提供'纵向一体化'的产品加工和销售服务、技术咨询与服务、信贷服务、组织农资供销、组织社区活动,并参与国家政治来维护小农利益,一如日、韩及台湾地区历史经验中,在其人均GDP以及工农业所占相对比例大致相当于如今中国的那段时期。

This article demonstrates how the'old agriculture'of grain production operates today mainly by an administrative model,while the'new agriculture'of high value-added products(high-end vegetables,fruits,meatpoultry-fish and eggs-milk)operates mainly by a laissez-faire market model.The former serves to protect low-value agricultural products from violent market price swings and international competition to ensure China’s'grain security,'but is prone to a commandist approach that can disregard peasant interests and wishes.The latter has stimulated peasant initiatives through market incentives,but suffers from violent price fluctuations and merchant extractions.The third model,'specialty co-ops,'has thus far been guided by a mistaken model of trying to imitate U.S.co-ops,which are purely economic entities,to the disregard of Chinese village communities.This article urges the adoption of an'East Asian'model of semi-governmental,integrated co-ops based on peasant communities(villages),extending from there up through the governmental hierarchy of townships,counties,provinces,and the central levels.Such co-ops provide'vertical integration'(processing and marketing)services for small-peasant agricultural products,offter technical assistance,organize the purchase and supply of agricultural inputs,extend credit services,engage in community activities,and see to peasant socialpolitical interests,as was done so successfully in Japan-Korea-Taiwan,most especially during the period when their per capita GDP and relative proportions of industry and agriculture stood at levels roughly comparable to China’s today.