The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) ii The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) This booklet is the overview of The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution in East Asia: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines. The PDF of the final, full-length book, once published, will be available at https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ and print copies can be ordered at http://Amazon.com. Please use the final version of the book for citation, reproduction, and adaptation purposes. © 2017 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: +1-202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org Some rights reserved This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution Please cite the work as follows: Cassou, E., S. Jaffee, and J. Ru, J. 2017. The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview). Washington, DC: World Bank. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO. Translations If you create a translation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This translation was not created by The World Bank and should not be considered an official World Bank translation. The World Bank shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation. Adaptations If you create an adaptation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by The World Bank. Views and opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by The World Bank. Third-party content The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content contained within the work. The World Bank therefore does not warrant that the use of any third-party-owned individual component or part contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of those third parties. The risk of claims resulting from such infringement rests solely with you. If you wish to re-use a component of the work, it is your responsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that re-use and to obtain permission from the copyright owner. Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables, figures, or images. All queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to the Publishing and Knowledge Division, The World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover art: © keantian / Shutterstock. Further permission is required for reuse. Cover design: LOQUATIO iii Contents Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Boxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv About the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Pollution from farms has started to stain the region’s agricultural success story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Adverse effects of agricultural pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Farming as a source of pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Structural and policy drivers of farm pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 A range of priorities are clear, and technical and policy solutions are available to address these . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Public sector responses to date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Strategic directions for effective pollution prevention and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 From looming crisis to opportunity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Figures Figure 1. Agricultural pollution is multifaceted and complex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Figure 2. Prevalence of food inadequacy in selected countries, 1990–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Figure 3. Trends in cereal production, yield, and harvested area in China, Vietnam, and the Philippines, 1961–2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Figure 4. Domestic food supply of all animal products, 2000–2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Figure 5. Eutrophication visible from the sky: aerial view of China’s Lake Taihu and Yangtze River . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Figure 6. The majority of China’s monitored groundwater sources are unfit for drinking water supply or bathing (and getting worse), 2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Figure 7. Ammonia emissions from agricultural and other sources in China, 1982–2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Figure 8. Breakdown of agricultural GHG emissions in China and the rest of East Asia, 2014 estimates . . . . . . . . 5 Figure 9. Increases in Vietnam’s reported agricultural GHG emissions, 1994–2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Figure 10. Green tides along the Coast of Qingdao, China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 11. Fertilizer use per hectare of arable and permanent cropland in selected countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 12. Pesticide use per hectare of arable and permanent cropland in selected countries, 2014 or latest year available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 13. The spread of plastic mulch in China, 1991, 2001, and 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 14. Impacts of diet on human and ecosystem health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Boxes Box 1. Study Road Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x Box 2. Examples of public sector instruments that can be used to address agricultural pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Box 3. A four-pronged strategy for effective agricultural pollution prevention and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 iv The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Acknowledgments This synthesis report was written as part of a regional Romeo Upperman; Patrick White; Sara Marjani-Zadeh study on agricultural pollution undertaken by the World and Thierry Facon (FAO); Ge Backus; and authors of the Bank Agriculture and Environment and Natural Re- country study reports: sources Global Practices between June 2015 and June 2017. ➤➤ From China: Shangbin Gao, Quanhui Wang, The study was made possible with funding from the Dahai Guan, Weifeng Zhang, Yuan Li, Zuliang Shi, AusAid-EAP Infrastructure for Growth Trust Fund, and Changrong Yan, Keqiang Zhang, Zhengguo Cui, the collaboration of several government agencies includ- Xuehai Ju, Fusuo Zhang, Mingliang Guo, Run Zhao, ing the Philippines Department of Agriculture, China’s Aocheng Cao, Canbin Ouyang, Keming Qu, Yuhang Rural Energy and Environment Agency within the Min- Shao, and Qingbo Qu. istry of Agriculture, and Vietnam’s Ministry of Agricul- ture and Rural Development, and the Food and Agri- ➤➤ From the Philippines: Damasa B. Magcale- culture Organization (FAO). The effort was managed by Macandog, Maria Lourdes A. Cuvin-Aralar, Arsenio Jiang Ru, Steven Jaffee, and Emilie Cassou, with Wendao D. Calub, Ronaldo B. Saludes, Roehlano Briones, Cao (China), Maria-Theresa Quinones (the Philippines), Arnold R. Salvacion, Erick Voltaire P. Tabing, and Binh Thang Cao (Vietnam). It involved teams of ex- Patricia Mae J. Paraiso, Carl H. Ricafort, Iana perts in the study’s focus countries, as well as multiple Mariene A. Silapan, Sarena Grace L. Quiñones, and international experts. Several consultative workshops Rizza V. Estadola. were held during the study period, in Beijing, Guang- zhou, Hanoi, and Manila to identify questions of key ➤➤ From Vietnam: Tin Hong Nguyen, Tung Xuan Dinh, concern, to identify and validate evidence, and to share Cong Van Nguyen, and Dai Nghia Tran. findings. The study was reviewed by the Chief Econo- mist of the World Bank’s East Asia and Pacific Region. The team would like to thank Sudhir Shetty, Iain Shuker, Nathan Belete, Erick Fernandes, Katelijn Van den Berg, The report was written by Emilie Cassou, together with Yewande Aramide Awe, Bekele Debele, Paavo Eliste, Steven M. Jaffee and Jiang Ru, with inputs from the many Garo Batmanian, Lilanie Olarte Magdamo, Vickram people who prepared or contributed to the various papers Cuttaree, Frauke Jungbluth, Madhu Raghunath, Jennifer on which this report is partly based. They include Binh Drost, and James F. Loomis for their valuable guidance Thang Cao and Pierre Gerber (World Bank); Crystal throughout the process. About the Authors Emilie Cassou is a sustainable food systems specialist tural risk management, and trade and standards com- working with both the Agriculture and the Environ- pliance. He has had extensive field experience in South- ment and Natural Resources Global Practices at the east Asia and Africa. He has a BA from the University World Bank. She has managed and contributed to var- of Pennsylvania and a DPhil in agricultural economics ious studies, multistake- holder processes, and projects from Oxford University. relating to agroenvironmental and climate policy, food system performance, and behavioral change in the con- Jiang Ru is a senior environmental specialist with the text of dietary transition. She has degrees from Brown World Bank’s Environment and Natural Resources Glob- University, Sciences Po, the Friedman School of Nutri- al Practice. Since 2007, he has led the preparation and tion Science and Policy at Tufts University, and Colum- implementation of a number of pollution management bia University’s School of International and Public Af- investments in East Asia, South Asia, and Latin Ameri- fairs. ca. His research has focused on environmental nongov- ernmental organizations, environmental management, Steven M. Jaffee is a lead agricultural economist with and sustain- able agricultural development. He has a BA the World Bank’s Agriculture Global Practice. His re- from Nanjing University, an MS in ecology from Beijing search, policy, and investment project work over more University, and a PhD in environmental management than two decades at the World Bank has spanned many from Stanford University. themes, including food security, food safety, agricul- v Abstract In emerging East Asia, agricultural output has expand- pollution is often undetected and unmeasured. When ed dramatically over recent decades, primarily as a re- assessments do occur, these tend to take place within sult of successful efforts to stimulate yield growth. This technical silos, such that the different ecological and achievement has increased the availability of food and socioeconomic risks are seldom considered as a whole, raw materials in the region, drastically diminished hun- while some escape study entirely. However, when agri- ger, and more generally provided solid ground for eco- cultural pollution is considered in its entirety, both the nomic development. The intensification and expansion significance of its impacts and the relative neglect of of agriculture that have made this possible, however, these become clear. have also led to serious pollution problems that have ad- In fact, growing recognition that a pollute now, treat versely affected human and ecosystem health, and the later approach is unsustainable—from both a human productivity of agriculture itself. In East Asia, the region health and agroindustry perspective—has led public that currently owes the largest proportion of deaths to and private sector actors to seek solutions to this prob- a polluted environment (Prüss-Üstün et al. 2016), agri- lem. Yet public intervention has tended to be more re- culture is often portrayed as a victim of industrial and active than preventive and often inadequate in scale. In urban pollution, and this is indeed the case. Yet agricul- some instances, the implementation of sound pollution ture is itself taking a growing toll on economic resources control programs has also been confronted with incen- and sometimes becoming a victim of its own success. tive structures that do not rank environmental outcomes In parts of China, Vietnam, and the Philippines—the prominently. Significant potential does exist, however, focus of this study—this pattern of highly productive to lessen the footprint of farms through existing techni- yet highly polluting agriculture has been unfolding cal solutions, and with adequate and well-crafted gov- with consequences that remain poorly understood. With ernment support, its realization is well within reach. large numbers of pollutants and sources, agricultural Abbreviations FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (of the UN) FAOSTAT Food and Agriculture Organization Corporate Statistical Database GDP gross domestic product GHG greenhouse gas HIV human immunodeficiency virus IPM Integrated Pest Management ISSM Integrated Soil-Crop System Management MEP Ministry of Environmental Protection MtCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change vi The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) vii Introduction E merging East Asia is morphing into an ag- and the Philippines—this study (see Road Map in box ricultural powerhouse that is maturing and 1) contributes to a more comprehensive and cross-cut- largely rising up to the task of feeding swelling ting understanding of the nature and magnitude of urban populations in the region and beyond. agricultural pollution problems that are progressing In this context, agriculture is often portrayed at different rates in the region. Agricultural pollu- as a victim of industrial and urban pollution, tion, in the context of this study, is limited to pollution3 and this is indeed the case. However, agriculture is also caused by or derived from crop and animal farming taking an alarming and generally growing toll on nation- activities. It does not include processing, manufactur- al resources of all kinds, and this, in the region that owes ing, transportation, or other activities. Although they the largest proportion of deaths to the environment.1 The are a serious concern, pollution issues affecting but not first national survey of pollution that China released in caused by farming practices are considered beyond the 2010 was eye-opening in that it revealed that, as of 2007, scope of this study. By design, the study only explores agricultural activities were the country’s leading source this topic within the bounds allowed by existing litera- of surface water pollution with respect to organic pollut- ture, and highlights critical data and evidence gaps. The ants and nutrients.2 Agriculture is potentially becoming study also sheds light on some of the recurring drivers a victim of its own success. Growing recognition that a of agricultural pollution, and touches on ways in which pollute now, treat later approach is unsustainable—from the public sector is intervening—with varying degrees the perspective of both human health or agroindustry—is of success—to steer the sector onto a path to greener leading public and private sector actors to try to remedy growth. Because the region is in flux, the study set out to this situation. The present study rose out of the work that specifically examine how the structural transformation the World Bank Group is doing with national govern- of the agricultural sector and evolving nature of agricul- ments to correct course. These efforts have made evident tural production may be shaping agricultural pollution, the need for a more systematic understanding of agricul- but also what this carries in terms of opportunities. tural pollution realities in the region to better underpin Few studies address the sweeping topic of agricul- and guide interventions. tural pollution, in part for reasons that the limitations With a focus on three countries—China, Vietnam, of the present report confirm: the topic is in many 1 In 2012, nearly one in four deaths worldwide (23 percent) was related to an unhealthy environment (Prüss-Üstün et al. 2016). That proportion was highest in Southeast Asia, at 28 percent, and in non-OECD Western Pacific countries, at 29 percent. 2 Issued by China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), National Bureau of Statistics, and Ministry of Agriculture in 2010, the First National Pollution Source Survey Bulletin revealed that, in 2007, crop, livestock, and aquatic farming contributed 44 percent of chemical oxygen demand, 57 percent of nitrogen (N) discharges, and 67 percent of phosphorus (P) discharges. Among agricultural sources, crop production accounted for 59 percent and 38 percent of N and P releases, and livestock pro- duction accounted for 38 percent and 56 percent of N and P discharges, respectively. Livestock production also accounted for 96 percent of chemical oxygen demand. The releases of nitrogen and phosphorus are linked to excessive or inappropriate crop fertilization and the discharge of untreated livestock wastes. 3 Pollution is commonly defined as the presence in the environment of an agent that is potentially damaging to either the en- vironment or human health. Pollutants include chemicals, organisms, biological materials, and energy in its various forms (for example, noise, radiation, heat) (Briggs 2003). viii The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Figure 1. Agricultural pollution is multifaceted and complex Agriculture generates many pollutants that take on different forms as they travel through soil, water, and air, and enter the food chain. These pollution risks involve long, complex causal chains involving multiple sources, forms, and outcomes of pollution. In addition, these manifest themselves at different time scales and levels of severity. DRIVERS Economic incentives Behavioral factors Administrative and Contextual or structural (market failures) (socio-psychological in uences) policy factors dimensions • Technology availability and cost • Risk and other preference • Laws and regulations • Demographics (technical or physical constraints; factors (risk aversion, present • Institutional culture and • Geography and ecology opportunity costs of alternative bias, preference for conformity, capacity (including nancial • Macroeconomics technologies or practices) loss aversion, etc.) and human resources needed • Externalities • Sociocultural factors and for enforcement) • Principal-agent problem mental models (concepts, • Transaction/hidden costs social identities, worldviews, • Information asymmetries narratives) • Economy of scale constraints • Contextual elements that • Market power activate mental models, shape • Coordination failure preferences, and in uence (in the presence of strategic decision making complementarity and institutional weakness) PHYSICAL SOCIOECONOMIC AND FARM-LEVEL ACTIVITIES IMPACTS OTHER IMPACTS Animals Feces and wastewater management Human health Air (livestock and aquaculture) Feeding and other management Wildlife health and biodiversity Land Fertilizer Ecosystem services Pesticides Agriculture and agribusiness Water Crops Burning Recreational and other industries Food Plastics Aesthetic and quality of life AIR SOIL WATER • Particulates • Sediment • Volatile organic • Nutrients compounds • Pathogens • Greenhouse • Toxics gases (methane, • Salts nitrous oxide, • Plastics carbon dioxide) • Antibiotics • Toxics • Hormones • Ammonia • Heavy metals • Hydrogen sul de • Invasive species FOOD • Health-threatening chemicals • Pathogens Sources of photos: Air: © D_D / Shutterstock.com; soil: © Andrey_Kuzmin / Shutterstock.com; water: © yanugkelid / Shutterstock.com; strawberries: © TimUR / Shutterstock.com. Further permission required for reuse. Note: Under socioeconomic and other impacts, wildlife/biodiversity includes flora and fauna; ecosystem services include climate stability / climate change. ix ways too vast and disparate to aggregate. To delve into as well as their relative neglect—both in terms of mea- this topic is to understand that agricultural pollution is suring and mitigating them—become clear. This study both plural in nature, and spatially diffuse. In a water will have met its primary objective if it helps policy context, much of agricultural pollution comes from non- makers in the region see the seriousness of the problem point sources, in contrast to forms of pollution that can and the need to embrace environmental considerations be traced to a specific point in space (compare pollution in agricultural development strategies and action plans carried by runoff from multitudes of points in a land- as an agricultural development priority. The main pur- scape to that ejected by a spigot or smokestack). Agricul- pose of the study is not to offer specific solutions, but to tural pollution derives from a range of activities—from lay out areas deserving of greater policy attention, pub- the choice and use of inputs to the siting of activities and lic resources, and further inquiry. The design of specific disposal of wastes—and involves a vast set of pollut- intervention strategies calls for more in-depth analysis ants, including nutrients, toxic substances, pathogens, of pollution drivers and the shortcomings of existing in- antibiotics, particulates, metals, odors, greenhouse gas- terventions in a given context and geography, and hence es (GHGs), and sediment. These pollutants have a range a return to a narrower scope of inquiry. of physical impacts—on soil, water, ambient air, the cli- In this data-hungry space, the present effort should mate, food quality, and ecosystem dynamics—and an be regarded as a gateway study. If policy makers are even broader array of socioeconomic impacts relating to respond to this study’s call to action, they will need notably to human health, wildlife, biodiversity, climate more comprehensive evidence and data to enable them to change, agronomy, agribusiness, trade, and other indus- assess and prioritize the challenges that they use scarce try and ecosystem outcomes (see Figure 1). resources to address. The study offers guidance by high- The disparate and diffuse nature of agricultural lighting some of the farming systems, physical spaces, pollution, and its technical complexity, have made it and pollution issues that represent key concerns in the difficult for national policy makers to focus on the region and three focus countries. By reviewing the evi- issue. As noted, agriculture engenders a broad array dence, it sheds light on what is and is not known about of pollutants from a multitude and hard-to-pinpoint agricultural pollution problems—their nature, magni- sources. For that reason, among others, many agricul- tude, drivers, and impacts. The study should be regard- tural pollutants go undetected and unmeasured. When ed less as an endpoint than as a starting point, however, assessments do occur, they tend to be carried out with- as country-specific data and evidence limitations have in technical silos: the study of agricultural pollution is prevented the study from drawing some of the basic em- typically the domain of scientists, engineers, and lo- pirical conclusions it set out to reach. For example, only cal authorities, many endowed with limited resources limited insights are currently available on the efficacy or or traction. Furthermore, the multiplicity of indicators cost-effectiveness of multiple technical, fiscal, and market used to capture and convey the extent of pollution and interventions that have been deployed to influence farm- the severity of its health and other effects is both a sign ing practices in the region to date. A central and action- and perpetuator of this field’s fragmentation.4 These as- able finding of this study, in this respect, is the need for pects are not conducive to seeing agricultural pollution cohesive, systematic, and decision-oriented measurement as a unified phenomenon, or to comparing its different systems that allow national and subnational policy mak- pieces. For all these reasons, decision makers and the ers to assess the value of intervention, and to allocate re- public lack evidence and tools to understand the relative sources to that purpose judiciously. magnitude and severity of agricultural pollution prob- lems, including their socioeconomic impacts. This limits the ability of decision makers to prioritize and advocate for interventions in general, or by pollutant, agricultural system, hazard, or geography. The point of addressing agricultural pollution as a whole, then, is to present the range and breadth of the challenges posed by environmentally damaging farm- ing practices. When the question of agricultural pollu- tion is considered in its entirety, both the significance (breadth, magnitude, and concentration) of its impacts, 4 Agricultural pollution—or conventional pollution more generally for that matter—is not endowed with the equivalent of the CO2-equivalent metric. The embrace of this indicator of global warming potential by scientific, policy, advocacy, and finance communities has allowed all kinds of actors and decision makers, across sectors, to assess, compare, talk about, and act on climate pollution with an ease that would not be possible if every climate pollutant and its complex causal pathways were measured, studied, and discussed. The lack of convergence around a restrained and accessible set of such indicators in the field of pollution reflects and perpetuates the perception of the field’s complexity. The result is that agricultural pollution is seldom thought of as a unified phenomenon, or at its full scale, and the very breadth of its ramifications helps obscure that fact, and the broad significance of the problem. x The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Box 1. Study Road Map This “study” constitutes the totality of an effort that has generated multiple written outputs:  ynthesis report. The synthesis report, • S drivers of pollution, and on current public in the Netherlands, which has among the The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution, sector responses (China: Gao et al. 2017; most intensive livestock sectors in the world of which this booklet is a summary, is Vietnam: Cassou et al. 2017; Dinh 2017; (Backus 2017). based in part on the working papers Nguyen, C. V., 2017; Nguyen, T. H., 2017; Working paper on aquaculture pollution •  and other reports described in this box. the Philippines: Calub, Saludes, and Tabing with a focus on the region and the While it focuses primarily on the three 2016; Cuvin-Aralar, Ricafort, and Salvacion three study countries and with multiple study countries—China, Vietnam, and the 2016; Magcale-Macandog, Briones, et al. international examples of effective Philippines—it also seeks to draw lessons 2016; Magcale-Macandog, Paraiso, et al. aquaculture management (White 2017). for emerging East Asia as a whole, where 2016). This paper was written with the support of possible. • Knowledge Notes. A series of six notes the Food and Agriculture Organization of National studies of agricultural pollution •  examines agricultural pollution issues the United Nations. in the three study countries. Each country (nonregion-specific), their significance Review of the international literature •  study includes a summary report and and drivers, and possible public sector on agricultural pollution. This literature more in-depth reports on crops, livestock, responses. The notes cover fertilizers, review and its references (Crystal Romeo and aquaculture pollution. They provide pesticides, agricultural burning, livestock Upperman) offer general background on more comprehensive accounts of existing waste, aquaculture, and agricultural plastics major agricultural pollution issues, globally evidence on the nature and magnitude of (Cassou 2017). and in the region. agricultural pollution problems, including • Working paper on livestock waste on hotspots and worrisome trends, on the management approaches and practices 1 Overview Pollution from farms has started Figure 2. Prevalence of food inadequacy in selected countries, to stain the region’s agricultural 1990–2016 success story Percent, 3-year average Agricultural intensification and growth have provided a solid footing for East Asia’s development 80% Myanmar Vietnam over the past three to five decades, but the region 70 Lao Thailand now has an expanding pollution footprint to address. Cambodia Mongolia Regional agriculture has largely succeeded—despite sig- 60 Philippines nificant intraregional disparities—at feeding some of the China Indonesia 50 world’s fastest-developing societies and providing a solid Malaysia Korea, Rep foundation for the region’s economic growth. Across much 40 of the region, agricultural output has expanded somewhat rapidly, even as the share of agriculture in GDP has fall- 30 en with these economies’ structural transformation. For 20 example, from 1990 to 2016, real agricultural value added grew at an annual average rate of 3.9 percent in China and 10 3.6 percent in Vietnam (it grew at only 2.2 percent in the Philippines). While serious nutritional challenges remain, 19 –92 19 –93 19 –94 19 –95 19 –96 19 –97 19 –98 19 –99 19 –00 20 –01 20 –02 20 –03 20 –04 20 –05 20 –06 20 –07 20 –08 20 –09 20 –10 20 –11 20 –12 20 –13 20 –14 20 –15 6 –1 agricultural output expansion has contributed to plum- 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 19 meting rates of hunger (see Figure 2). Since 1990, the prev- Source: Based on FAOSTAT data. alence of food inadequacy has more than halved in China Note: Food inadequacy captures the proportion of a population at risk of not and decreased by nearly 70 percent in Vietnam. covering the food requirements associated with “normal” physical activity.1 This achievement has rested centrally on the region’s ability to multiply its production of grains despite be- ing land-constrained, and hence, on agricultural inten- proximately 25 years). The expansion of agricultural sification.1 In the space of about 50 years, for example, output has also enabled several countries in the region China’s grain output increased fivefold—a doubling on to become major exporters of a broad range of agricul- a per capita basis—even though land devoted to farming tural commodities. remained remarkably stable (see Figure 3). Greater use of The breadth and severity of pollution problems to inputs, irrigation, and mechanization have played major which agricultural development has given rise, how- parts in multiplying cereal output by helping to improve ever, may challenge the sector’s ability to remain a yields, and often by allowing producers to grow more positive force in the development of emerging East crops per year on a given plot of farmland. Asian economies. In China, for example, the nutrient Regional agriculture has also proven responsive to cycle imbalance that the country now faces as relates rapid changes in people’s food preferences and bud- to nitrogen, in large part due to agricultural intensifica- gets, especially to surging demand for animal prod- tion, has been deemed by scientists to be “extreme and ucts (see Figure 4). Animal production has kept up by unprecedented globally” (Cui et al. 2013, 4). And though expanding in space, but also by industrializing. The it is pervasive insofar as it affects air, water, and soils, enormous expansion of aquaculture has rested on both nitrogen is but one agricultural pollutant among many. phenomena. Between 1990 and 2014, China’s aquacul- While agricultural pollution has progressed at differ- ture output increased from less than 10 million tons to ent rates across this vast region, it has become a concern nearly 60 million tons. Over that same period, Vietnam’s in every country where farming has taken an intensive aquaculture output rose from less than 200,000 tons to turn—indeed, even where very small farms continue to nearly 3.5 million tons (a 1,650 percent increase in ap- dominate. In that light, the rapid pace of farm industri- 1 Agricultural intensification generally refers to a process in which inputs of capital or labor are increased in order to raise productivity per land area or livestock unit (FAO Term Portal, http://www.fao.org/faoterm/en/). In East Asia, it has rested on irrigation; high-yielding crop varieties; power tools; and synthetic pesticides, nitrogen, and other fertilizers. 2 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) alization and concentration, together with the continued in China, and offer a cautionary example to countries importance of small yet intensive household farm oper- where farming is also intensifying and industrializ- ations, means that farm pollution could grow far more ing. China’s first national pollution survey found that, in severe in the years ahead—even though the relationship 2007, agriculture was the leading source of surface water between these phenomena is far from linear and varies by quality impairment by nutrients and organic pollutants subsector, farming context, and form of pollution. (China MEP 2010). Consistent with this, agriculture has been the leading cause of eutrophication2 in the Yellow Adverse effects of and South China Seas and in several of China’s major freshwater lakes (see Figure 5) (Strokal et al. 2014; Le et agricultural pollution al. 2010). Agricultural pollution is also evident in Vietnam Intensive farming operations are a major and and the Philippines, though it has tended to be less well often underrecognized source of water, soil, and air documented, more localized, and on average less severe. pollution in certain parts of East Asia. In Vietnam, for example, although monitored surface wa- The polluting effects of agriculture on the environment ters are broadly considered safe for humans and aquatic have been the most pronounced and best documented life by Mekong River Commission standards, measures Figure 3. Trends in cereal production, yield, and harvested area in China, Vietnam, and the Philippines, 1961–2013 Index, 1961 = 100 China Vietnam Philippines 600 600 500 500 500 400 400 400 300 300 300 200 200 200 100 100 100 20 0 20 0 20 3 20 6 20 9 20 6 20 9 20 0 20 3 20 3 20 6 09 19 4 19 5 19 8 19 2 19 1 19 8 20 7 19 5 19 1 20 7 19 4 19 4 19 2 19 4 19 5 19 8 19 3 19 9 12 19 4 19 2 19 1 20 7 19 4 73 19 9 12 19 0 19 0 19 3 19 9 12 19 0 19 7 19 6 19 7 19 6 19 1 67 19 6 19 1 19 1 6 0 6 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 7 0 6 9 0 9 7 9 9 7 9 9 7 7 7 8 9 8 8 7 9 9 8 7 7 8 8 6 8 8 8 6 6 19 20 19 19 19 19 Area harvested Yield Production Source: Based on FAOSTAT data. Figure 4. Domestic food supply of all animal products, 2000–2011 Index, 2000 = 100 250 Vietnam Indonesia China Cambodia 200 Brazil Philippines World Malaysia Korea, Rep. 150 United States EU Thailand Japan 100 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Source: Based on FAOSTAT Food Balance Sheets. Note: Domestic food supply = production + imports - exports + changes in stocks (decrease or increase). 2 Eutrophication refers to the degradation of a body of water (oxygen depletion and reduced sunlight penetration) resulting from an excessive richness of nutrients stimulating dense plant growth. 3 Figure 5. Eutrophication visible Figure 6. The majority of China’s from the sky: aerial view of China’s monitored groundwater sources are unfit Lake Taihu and Yangtze River for drinking water supply or bathing (and getting worse), 2015 9.1% 18.8% Yangtze River Excellent Good 25.0% Satisfactory Bad Very bad 4.6% 42.5% Lake Taihu Source: China MEP 2016a. Note: The quality of groundwater has been deteriorating over recent years. Surface water quality has, however, improved in recent years, by MEP standards. In 2001, for instance, 70 percent of monitored rivers’ water failed to Source: Provided by the SeaWiFS Project, NASA/ meet drinking or bathing water standards compared to Goddard Space Flight Center and ORBIMAGE (NASA 28 percent in 2015. Earth Observatory 1998, http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/ view.php?id=52738). Note: Along with sewage and industrial waste, agricultural point and nonpoint sources are major causes to meet drinking or bathing water standards (see of nutrient pollution in China’s major freshwater lakes, Figure 6) (China MEP 2016a). In the 2000s, agricultur- and in some cases the leading ones (Le et al. 2010). al nonpoint sources4 became the primary polluter of the Miyun Reservoir, Beijing’s most important source of drinking water, after industrial pollution controls also indicate that certain surface waters are “dramatically were implemented (Wang et al. 2003 in Zhou et al. degraded” near intensively populated and farmed areas 2010). In Vietnam, livestock farms are reported to be (MRC 2014; Chea et al. 2016). In the Philippines, livestock seriously detracting from the safety of drinking water and other farms have been the largest contributors of or- supplies to Ho Chi Minh City,5 and this is also likely ganic matter pollution in the monitored waterbodies of to be the case for Hanoi and Manila given the inten- the Philippines3 (EMB 2014). sity of livestock production in their peri-urban areas. As a result, changing farming patterns and practices Pesticides used in rice fields and on other crops have represent a growing concern for human, animal, and been shown to compromise the safety of groundwater ecosystem health; climate stability; and farm productiv- extracted from wells and other drinking water sourc- ity and agroindustry competitiveness. Though evidence es in Vietnam (Nguyen C. G. D. et al. 2015). Health linking intensive farming practices to these is incomplete, risks from water contamination with the remnants of impacts can be inferred from the levels of pollution ob- pesticides, fertilizers, drugs, and other compounds served together with well-understood impact pathways. related to farming include acute poisoning, irrita- Human health. From a health perspective, drinking tions, cancers, brain tumors, birth defects, infertility, water contamination is a key concern in all three coun- other disruptions of the endocrine system, cognitive tries, as are the development of drug-resistant microbes, impairment, and other neurodevelopmental effects food contamination, and poor air quality. To illustrate: (Mostafalou and Abdollahi 2013; WHO 2016; WHO 2017; Naidenko, Cox, and Bruzelius 2012). ➤➤ Drinking water contamination. In China, agricul- ➤➤ Food safety. Many East Asian consumers worry ture bears substantial responsibility for the fact that about the safety of the foods and beverages they in 2015, over 61 percent of monitored groundwater consume. One reason for concern is that certain sources and nearly 28 percent of monitored rivers agricultural pollutants regularly find their way were found to be unfit for human contact, and that into food. Another is that farming practices have over 30 percent of major lakes and reservoirs failed caused soils to acidify, which has likely accelerated 3 In the Philippines and Vietnam, water quality measurements generally remain sparse and incomplete, and do not tell the full story on agriculture’s physical impacts on the environment, or on human and animal health. 4 Nonpoint source pollution, unlike pollution from industrial and sewage treatment plants, comes from many diffuse sources. As runoff moves across the land, it picks up and carries away pollutants, depositing them into bodies of water. 5 According to the city’s environmental protection department, as reported in the press (www.haisontq.com/tin-tuc-su-kien/ tin-tuc/613-nuoc-thai-tu-chan-nuoi-lam-o-nhiem-song.html). 4 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) emissions (see Figure 7)—were recently shown to be Figure 7. Ammonia emissions from agricultural and other detracting from urban air quality in Chinese cities sources in China, 1982–2012 (Gu et al. 2014; Liu et al. 2013). The open burning of Gigagrams of ammonia field residues has also been tied to an abundance of 12,000 100% fine particulate matter in certain cities on a seasonal basis (Zhang and Cao 2015). Meanwhile, bad odors 10,000 98 rising from livestock farms detract from the well- being of nearby communities. ➤➤ Pesticide poisoning. In Vietnam and the 8,000 96 Philippines, farmers and their families are sometimes directly exposed to the pesticides 6,000 94 they apply due to a lack of protective gear, or to methods such as broadcast spraying that expose rural communities (Dasgupta et al. 2007; Nguyen 4,000 92 2016; Macandog et al. 2016). This is on top of chronic exposure to pesticides in water and food. 2,000 90 Wildlife health and biodiversity. For wildlife and eco- systems on the front lines of exposure, the health effects 1982 1992 2002 2012 of agricultural pollutants can be even more severe than Livestock manure Synthetic fertilizer Other ag Non-ag Ag as % of total for people. Mass fish kills are a common occurrence in Source: Based on Kang et al. 2016. aquaculture operations in the Philippines, with over 300 incidents recorded between 2005 and 2014 (Cuvin-Aralar et al. 2016). In China, some 30 percent of monitored sur- the uptake of heavy metal pollution from industry face waters are polluted to an extent that has been as- and other sources by food crops, creating a human sociated with biodiversity losses elsewhere. Pollinator health hazard and leading to the rejection of these disappearance, such as has seemingly occurred in fruit- crops by markets. In a context of heightened concern tree-growing parts of Western China, along with record- over food safety, the contamination of China’s soils ed instances of fish kills, illustrate how agricultural pol- with pesticides, heavy metals, and other chemical lution is threatening the survival of critical populations compounds is seen as one of the major pollution or species on which humans depend. problems the country faces. ➤➤ Drug resistance. While regional studies are sparse, Climate stability. As the primary emitter of nitrous ox- drug-resistant microbes have started emerging. This ide and methane, and a source of other long-lived and is likely connected to the systematic use of antibiotics short-lived climate pollutants, regional agriculture is sig- and antimicrobial agents that can be observed in nificantly contributing to both long-term and short-term the pig, chicken, and aquaculture operations of all climate warming. China is by far the dominant emitter three countries, including by the majority of small of agricultural greenhouse gas emissions in the region— producers. In China, an estimated 52 percent of in part due to its size—and livestock rearing was the all antibiotics in the country were administered to largest source of these, followed by synthetic fertilizer animals in 2013 (Zhang et al. 2015). Concern about the use. Meanwhile, farming activities—especially rice irri- effects of antibiotic resistance on a global scale led the gation and livestock production—are the second-largest United Nations, in 2016, to declare it a crisis, a status source of greenhouse gas emissions in Vietnam and the previously used for HIV and Ebola. Philippines (see Figure 8) (based on WRI CAIT 2016 and ➤➤ Air quality. The severity of air pollution in China FAOSTAT 2014 data). In Vietnam, manure management is well-known, as are its effects on the burden and fertilizer were the fastest-growing sources of green- of disease; around 78 percent of monitored house gas emissions between 1994 and 2010 (see Figure municipalities failed to meet air quality standards in 9) (based on UNFCCC data). Agriculture’s contributions 2015 (China MEP 2016b). And though agriculture’s to fine particulate matter or its formation—especially contributions to this are not well measured, livestock black carbon (BC)—and to ground-level ozone (O3) are production, open burning, and agrochemicals have also potential contributors to near-term warming.6 been implicated. Ammonia releases from agricultural sources—which are the main sources of ammonia Farm productivity and agroindustry competitiveness. 6 Other pollutants emitted at the same time as BC during combustion—especially during the combustion of biomass (as opposed to diesel fuel, for instance)—can, in some circumstances, have a cooling effect that can outweigh the short-run warming effect of BC emissions. That said, the net long-term effect of biomass burning is to warm the climate, notably due to the production of methane, with its longer atmospheric lifespan. Furthermore, burning emissions have an unambiguous, short-run warming effect when they occur or drift over snow- and ice-covered (that is, highly reflective) areas of the planet (see Cassou et al. 2015). 5 Figure 8. Breakdown of agricultural GHG emissions in China and Figure 9. Increases in Vietnam’s reported the rest of East Asia, 2014 estimates agricultural GHG emissions, 1994–2010 Percentage 500% 6% 7% 16% 18% 400 East Asia China except China 56% 54% 300 22% 21% 200 Livestock 100 Synthetic fertilizer Rice cultivation Other Source: Based on FAOSTAT data. Note: Nitrous oxide and methane. Livestock emissions include those from Manure Ag soils Rice Enteric Field burning of management cultivation fermentation ag residues enteric fermentation and manure management. Other emissions include those from crop residue and soil management (nonburning), and burning. Indirect Source: Based on emissions data reported to the UNFCCC agricultural emissions from land-use conversion and lifecycle activities are not (https://unfccc.int/files/ghg_data/ghg_data_unfccc/ghg_ shown here. profiles/application/pdf/vnm_ghg_profile.pdf). The business of agriculture, much like wildlife, is on the to a narrower set of farm-level practices. front lines when it comes to bearing the brunt of envi- These farming practices relate to the management of ronmental pollution—not only of industrial and urban both inputs and outputs in crop and animal agriculture, but also of agricultural origin. Soil fertility and crop including the examples below. yields are at risk when fertilizer losses, field burning, Poor livestock waste management. The dumping of and the use of plastic ground covers, irrigation, and oth- untreated manure and feces-laden waste and wastewater er farming activities result in soil acidification, salini- from livestock and aquaculture operations into the envi- zation, warming, and other disturbances. In southern ronment is a rampant, often uncontrolled, and expanding China, where a full 65 percent of agricultural soils have problem, as is its improper storage. For example, an esti- become severely acidified, fertilizer use has been both a mated 36 percent of animal waste generated in Vietnam is cause and response to soil acidification, fueling a vicious directly dumped into the environment without treatment cycle of degradation (Zhang, Ma et al. 2013). Food safe- (Dinh 2017), and up to 80 percent of animal waste was dis- ty concerns also have commercial consequences. The posed of in this manner in some parts of the Philippines discovery of excessive levels of veterinary drugs, pesti- (Catelo, Narrod, and Tiongco 2008). cides, and other contaminants in food products destined Improper use of feed, drugs, other growth enhancers, for demanding markets are leading to trade rejections and other chemicals in aquaculture and livestock breed- worth tens of millions of dollars. The loss of pollination ing. Reliance on feeds and supplements is a key feature and biological control services has already likely sad- of industrial animal agriculture on both large and small dled farmers with heavy labor and pesticide costs, no- scales, and gives rise to pollution in several ways. Aqua- tably in China’s fruit-growing regions. And drug resis- culture operations lose most of the feed (or fertilizer) they tance in confined livestock and aquaculture operations add to their waters, and nutrient pollution has become may open new pathways for pandemics that would ad- particularly problematic in the open systems that have versely affect these industries. Other sectors potentially come to dominate the subsector, as these entail the release affected by agricultural pollution include the real estate, rather than the recycling of excess nutrients. Furthermore, tourism, and utility industries (see Figure 10). the prophylactic and growth-enhancing use of drugs, hor- The limited evidence available suggests that the eco- mones, and heavy metals is now a standard practice in the nomic costs of farm pollution are high. One research livestock and aquaculture industries in the three studied team, for instance, estimated that China’s excessive emis- countries, despite being dominated by smallholders. For sions of nitrogen, related to the production of staple food, example, over 45 antibiotics are widely used in Vietnam- cost the country 1.4 percent of annual GDP—close to ese livestock and aquaculture production (Dương and US$49 billion—during 2001–2010 (Xia et al. 2016). Nguyễn 2015; Kim et al. 2013; Nguyen, T. Q. et al. 2015; Tu et al. 2006). In the Philippines, reproductive hormones Farming as a source of pollution have been used for years in many different forms of aqua- culture (Cuvin-Aralar, Ricafort, and Salvacion 2016). Aqua- A wide range of pollution hazards are directly owed culture operations are also treated with large numbers of 6 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) potentially harmful chemicals including persistent, toxic rice, and wheat residues are systematically burned for compounds (Nguyen, T. H. et al. 2015; Tu et al. 2006). the sake of expedience and labor savings. Time and la- Excessive or improper fertilizer and pesticide use. bor scarcity, the lack of market channels for straw and The region now features some of the heaviest fertilizer husks, and certain agronomic beliefs are among the fac- users globally, both in absolute terms and per unit of land tors thought to contribute to this practice. (see Figure 11). The majority of these fertilizers are not tak- en up by the targeted plants but instead disperse through Structural and policy drivers of the air, soil, and water. In China’s intensive grain-produc- ing areas, there is potential for cutting nitrogen applica- farm pollution tions by 30 to 60 percent without harming yields (Chen Several of the pollution problems that the three et al. 2014; Ju et al. 2009; Wu Liang 2014; Zhang, Ma et al. countries are facing have been magnified by 2013); and similar “triple win” opportunities for yields, patterns of structural development, some specific incomes, and the environment have been identified in to the region. relation to the use of fertilizer (and water) to grow cof- Demographic growth and a societal focus on output and fee in Vietnam’s Central Highlands (Amarasinghe et al. yield growth, shaped in part by policy, have favored de- 2015; Technoserve 2013). Pesticide use has also soared in velopment approaches that regard the environment as China and parts of Vietnam (see Figure 12). Highly toxic a resource for exploitation. Direct and indirect fertilizer pesticides remain in use, and nonnegligible volumes of subsidies (such as those in Indonesia, Vietnam, and Chi- counterfeit and obsolete pesticides are thought to be in na—China’s are slated for reform—and, formerly, in the circulation in both countries, though China, the region’s Philippines), preferential input loans, extension messag- largest pesticides user, has made strides on both counts. es, and product advertising have helped cement a wide- Use and improper disposal of plastics. Another spread belief among farmers that applying more fertilizer emerging concern is the use and improper disposal of always results in higher yields. This has contributed to agricultural plastics, many after only a single growing the overuse of fertilizer. Specialization in crop agricul- season. This is a particular concern in China, where the ture, the simplification of agroecosystems, and the move use of plastic film “mulch” has transformed and enabled to monoculture—favored by investment in irrigation the expansion of vegetable and cotton production in the infrastructure and extension messages, and sometimes country’s cold and arid regions. In China, the area un- inflexible land-use policies—have accelerated farms’ loss der plastic films grew more than 150-fold between 1982 of natural predators and fertility, increased their suscep- and 2014, when it reached over 18.14 million hectares, tibility to pests and disease, and driven a greater reliance or roughly half the area of the Netherlands ; in tonnage on synthetic chemicals to address these. The expansion of terms, the use of plastic films grew 200-fold over this irrigated agriculture, a centerpiece of public investment period (see Figure 13) (Yan 2015; China Rural Statistical in agriculture in several countries, has also unwittingly Yearbook 2015). The use and disposal of plastics is associ- contributed to agrochemical runoff, soil salinization, and ated with many concerns relating namely to soil fertility, rice-related greenhouse gas emissions. food safety and health, and the protection of wildlife. The sector’s high degree of responsiveness to the Open burning. In many parts of the region, maize, emerging demands of urbanizing populations has re- sulted in a more polluting mix of products and practic- Figure 10. Green tides along the Coast of Qingdao, China es, and a greater proximity of populations to agricultur- al sources of pollution. The rise of animal agriculture, including the surge in confined pig and fish farms, in re- sponse to the growth in demand for animal products, has led to increased pollution. The clustering of agricultural activities and their increasing juxtaposition with dense population centers has increased human exposure to the sector’s ever concentrating set of pollutants. Chinese ag- riculture’s response to rising demand for fruit and veg- etables in a water-scarce environment has most recently driven plastic, nutrient, and pesticide pollution concerns. Pollution has, so far, been a major downside of the rapid intensification and expansion of production. In a region bent on leap-frogging as a development strategy, the uptake of pesticides and other chemicals in farming has happened so fast that it has sometimes outpaced awareness of their dangers on the part of both farmers Source: © Dongyan Liu. Further permission required for reuse. Note: Since 2007, vast algal blooms (covering nearly 29,000 square kilometers in and regulators, the latter’s capacity to regulate them, 2013) have blanketed the Yellow Sea, bringing annual green tides to China’s coast. and the adoption of safe handling techniques. Importing A green tide is seen engulfing an Olympic stadium in 2008. aquaculture species bred for intensive farming has been 7 a quick way to develop a high-output seafood industry— yet one that has increased the risk of genetic contamina- Figure 11. Fertilizer use per hectare of arable and permanent tion, disease, and biodiversity loss. Further, some of East cropland in selected countries Asia’s aquaculture activities have developed around po- Nutrients (kilograms of nitrogen, phosphate, and potash) tentially invasive species, which can represent a threat to 500 the health and survival of native species. Limited space for agriculture and the continued dominance of small farm size has challenged the capac- 400 ity of producers and regulators to moderate pollution. Limited space for farming has detracted from sound en- 300 vironmental management in some cases. In animal farm- ing, for example, cramped conditions have dissuaded producers from devoting space to waste treatment facili- 200 ties, especially in light of limited opportunities for market reward and the weak enforcement of waste management regulations. The small size (and limited capacity and re- 100 sources) of most livestock and aquaculture operations, taken individually, has also possibly dissuaded regula- tors from imposing more stringent waste management re- China Korea, Rep. Japan Malaysia Vietnam EU Thailand World United Indonesia Philippines quirements or even just scrutiny over these, even though States 2002 2008 2014 they generate vast amounts of pollution aggregately. Meanwhile, farmers with limited land are increasingly Source: Based on FAOSTAT data. having to seek off-farm income opportunities to make Note: Large discrepancies have been noted in Chinese fertilizer use reported by different sources. In 2013, the Food and Agricultural Organization ends meet, and this sometimes leaves them with insuffi- estimated the consumption of synthetic fertilizer at close to 40 million tons, cient time for judicious farm management practices. whereas China’s National Bureau of Statistics estimated its use at close to 60 However, where consolidation is occurring and in- million tons. dustrial farms are emerging, the pollution situation is not always improving. The large, industrial operations that are in fact emerging in the livestock and aquaculture sectors, especially in China and Vietnam, have a mixed Figure 12. Pesticide use per hectare of arable and permanent record in terms of cleaning up the industry through the cropland in selected countries, 2014 or latest year available use of more sophisticated waste management techniques. Kilograms of active ingredients per ha Similarly, croplands that have become dominated by 25 large players are not always the most exemplary, perhaps because with market dominance and economic strength come political influence and regulatory capture. 20 A range of priorities are clear, and 15 technical and policy solutions are available to address these 10 United States (2007) A range of pollution priorities are clear, and a broad Brazil (2013) Vietnam (2005) array of technical solutions are within reach if Philippines (2005) Costa Rica (2011) government makes full use of its policy toolbox to China (2012) Israel (2010) Netherlands 5 Korea, Rep. Thailand Colombia support these. Malaysia Mexico France Japan Egypt Chile Though imperfect, evidence supports several priority areas in which more and better public sector interven- Source: Based on FAOSTAT data for 2012 or latest year available. tion is needed. As noted, there are profound data and Note: Light blue bars indicate countries in the East Asia region. The China knowledge gaps related to agricultural pollution and Rural Statistical Yearbook estimates the average application rate for 2013 at its effects on the region. Nonetheless, there is enough 10.95 kilograms (kg) per hectare (ha). evidence to point to specific farming patterns that are contributing to the region’s worsening pollution, and to define priorities. while refraining from stimulating the industry’s ex- Priorities would differ among countries but, overall, pansion, in recognition of its net detrimental effects attention needs to be given to, among other things: on human health even under favorable production circumstances (factoring in zoonosis and food safety 1. Improving the livestock industry’s waste manage - risks, environmental pollution, and diet-related ment practices and environmental performance, chronic disease), its fundamental resource inefficien- 8 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Figure 13. The spread of plastic mulch in China, 1991, 2001, and 2011 Panel A Panel B Panel C 1991 2001 2011 Heilongjiang Heilongjiang Heilongjiang Jilin Jilin Jilin Xinjiang Liaoning Xinjiang Liaoning Xinjiang Liaoning gol Beijing gol Beijing gol Beijing Nei Mon Nei Mon Nei Mon Hebei Tianjin Hebei Tianjin Hebei Tianjin Ningxia Ningxia Ningxia Shanxi Shandong Shanxi Shandong Shanxi Shandong Qinghai Qinghai Qinghai Gansu Gansu Gansu Xizang Henan Jiangsu Xizang Henan Jiangsu Xizang Henan Jiangsu Shaanxi Shaanxi Shaanxi Anhui Shanghai Anhui Shanghai Anhui Shanghai Hubei Hubei Hubei ing ing ing Sichuan Zhejiang Sichuan Zhejiang Sichuan Zhejiang ngq ngq ngq Cho Cho Cho Kg per ha Hunan Jiangxi Kg per ha Hunan Jiangxi Kg per ha Hunan Jiangxi Guizhou Fujian Guizhou Fujian Guizhou Fujian >13 (0) >13 (3) >13 (9) Yunnan Guangdong Taiwan Yunnan Guangdong Taiwan Yunnan Guangdong Taiwan 11 to 13 (0) Guangxi 11 to 13 (0) Guangxi 11 to 13 (2) Guangxi 9 to 11 (0) Hong Kong, SAR 9 to 11 (1) Hong Kong, SAR 9 to 11 (2) Hong Kong, SAR Macao, SAR Macao, SAR Macao, SAR 7 to 9 (1) 7 to 9 (5) 7 to 9 (7) Hainan Hainan Hainan 5 to 7 (0) 5 to 7 (9) 5 to 7 (5) 3 to 5 (6) 3 to 5 (6) 3 to 5 (3) 0 to 3 (23) 0 to 3 (6) IBRD 42928 | JULY 2017 0 to 3 (2) Source: China Rural Statistical Yearbook 1992, 2002, 2012. Note: Red, orange, and yellow shading correspond to the most intensive use of agricultural plastics (in kilograms per hectare). cy, and contributions to climate change. footprint. In various parts of the region, for example, nu- 2. Drastically cutting back on the prophylactic, veter- trient management tools, including ones that bypass soil inary use of antibiotics, the commercial benefits of testing, have proven effective at reducing fertilizer use which may be far overshadowed by the costs of drug along with waste and imbalances. Soil testing kits and resistance. laboratories, formula and slow-release fertilizer, smaller 3. Bringing farmed, aqua-ecosystems into balance, or redesigned chemical containers, fertilizer deep-place- including through the embrace of improved inputs ment technologies, and micro-irrigation can also improve and various kinds of closed-loop systems. fertilizer dosing and reduce waste. Although integrated 4. Reducing fertilizer losses from cereal and specialty pest management (IPM) has faced challenges scaling up— crop farming that are contaminating surface wa- namely due to small farm size—it has empowered some ters, harming soil fertility, reducing air quality, and farmers to reduce the use of pesticides, especially the most contributing to climate change; in many cases this toxic ones, by using the most toxic ones as a last resort, and will save farmers and government money without favoring reliance on prevention and biological controls. harming yields. Simple protective gear, if worn, can reduce farm worker 5. Professionalizing the use of pesticides, while pro- exposure when chemical spraying is deemed necessary. moting prevention and low-toxicity control agents, Improvements in animal housing and sanitation can so as to minimize the use (and preserve the effec- sometimes achieve similar benefits to prophylactic drug- tiveness) of toxic substances and abandon the use of use in livestock rearing. Manure volatilization can be con- banned substances, which, when undetected, harm tained by covered storage facilities and manure-injection people, and when detected, harm trade. technologies, and other forms of feces pollution can be 6. Reducing and repurposing the organic byproducts attenuated through the selection of different breeds and of farming, including manure and crop residues, to improvements in feeding, cleaning, water management, derive value from these and put an end to the open water treatment, and other practices. Better quality or burning and harmful disposal of these as wastes. biodegradable plastics can help reduce plastic debris from 7. Commercializing more environmentally benign accumulating in soils, as can the development of special- plastics and related waste management systems, as ized waste collection and recycling services and, in some well as alternative technologies, especially for use cases, the use of agro-ecological mulching techniques. in cold, dry, and other conditions in which plastics Improved water management regimes including alternate have revolutionized farming. wetting and drying, rice cultivars, and fertilization tech- 8. Diffusing rice cultivation techniques that reduce niques that utilize rice straw and avert burning, can cut climate-warming greenhouse gas emissions from greenhouse gas emissions form irrigated rice while saving paddies, while saving water and maintaining or water and enhancing yields. The examples are many. improving yields. In many cases, however, farmers need public sector Furthermore, a wide range of technical solutions are support to adopt technologies and practices that make available to act on these priorities, guiding farming prac- mitigation a possibility, at least in the near term. In tices in directions that will lessen their environmental some cases, public sector intervention may only be need- 9 ed initially to overcome the hurdles of switching. There agricultural pollution are also underway as its effects are instances in which farmers stand to privately bene- are being felt ever more widely. fit from pollution mitigation—saving on agrochemical Still, government interventions remain largely re- costs, gaining access to premiums and markets reserved active and experimental. In the Philippines, where ag- for products of higher reputation and quality, or over ricultural pollution is less severe overall, or rather more time, protecting natural resource and agro-ecosystem localized, the government has put in place fewer agricul- productivity (land fertility, clean water, pollination, nat- ture-specific laws and programs. In all three countries, ural pest predation, and so forth). In China, for example, meanwhile, laws to prevent and control pollution have nitrogen use was cut by roughly 4 to 14 percent in maize, often been ignored, and incentive programs have yet to rice, and wheat system field trials while boosting yields be mainstreamed. In Vietnam, for example, this applies by 18 to 35 percent, thanks to a knowledge-intensive ap- to both laws and incentive programs intended to improve proach to farming known as integrated soil-crop system the management of livestock waste. And various success- management, or ISSM (Chen et al. 2014). In Vietnam, the ful incentive and demonstration programs have yet to sur- piloting of “1 Must and 5 Reductions” has shown that mount the challenges of sustainability and scale-up. This, it could save Mekong Delta farmers an estimated 18 to for example, will be the next step for Vietnam’s “1 Must 25 percent of their production costs per hectare of crop and 5 Reductions” approach, now that it has demonstrated without harming yields (Nguyen, T. H. et al. 2015).7 that rice, incomes, and the environment can benefit when Governments have a wide range of policy instru- farmers manage inputs and resources more judiciously. ments at their disposal to promote greener farming Most recently, China and Vietnam have started to practices (see Box 2). Many are already being used in embrace more balanced agricultural policies that not the region, sometimes on an experimental scale. Typi- only place greater emphasis on environmental sustain- cally, governments will need to develop multipronged ability, but also link it to emerging and long-standing programs that use combinations of these instruments, priorities of agricultural policy such as food quality, including “sticks” and “carrots,” to send clear signals to competitiveness, yield performance, and food security. farmers and facilitate effective responses. This is espe- In fact, judging from the Sustainable Agricultural Devel- cially the case where smallholders dominate, and com- opment Plan it adopted in 2015, China may now be turning mand-and-control regulations will mostly be too costly a corner in starting to address the issue more strategically, to enforce. In parts of the sector that have become more with greater attention to prevention and to taking suc- consolidated (for instance, for large livestock facilities), cessful approaches to scale. This approach has not hereto- command-and-control regulation may be appropriate. fore been the norm in China, Vietnam, or the Philippines, Yet experience shows that additional measures are need- however, and socializing this way of thinking to see it ed to motivate industry to comply and improve program through will likely be challenging. This points to the need cost-effectiveness. A combination of interventions, se- not only for efforts on the legal, technical, and economic quenced smartly, can be the key to achieving results. fronts, but also for institutional reforms encompassing the incentives, culture, and priorities of regulators. Adequate Public sector responses to date public sector funding, as well as market participation, will also help mobilize and sustain the resources needed Many promising policies and programs are in place for such things as monitoring, enforcement, and various but their enforcement and influence often fall short forms of subsidy for sustainable agriculture. of expectations. Recognizing the above challenges and opportunities, Strategic directions for effective governments in the region have started reacting. In China, and to a growing extent in Vietnam, the harmful pollution prevention and control side effects of agricultural intensification and growth Curbing agricultural pollution will require the have come to light and started to drive policy chang- public sector to direct adequate resources toward es. China has gone the furthest down this path as the priorities, compel and motivate farmers, costs of rampant pollution have turned the matter into shape the sector’s structure and growth trajectory, a simmering public concern. Within the region, China back innovation and learning. has probably established the most extensive cadre of ag- Four strategic directions are proposed for the public riculture sector-specific laws, regulations, and incentive sector to more effectively pursue agricultural pollution programs to monitor, prevent, and control pollution. In prevention and control, and achieve results, drawing on Vietnam, many government efforts to limit and control a range of policy instruments. 7 Developed by the International Rice Research Institute in collaboration with the An Giang Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, “1 Must and 5 Reductions,” or 1M5R, calls for farmers to use certified seeds (the “1 must”), while reducing the use of four production inputs (seed, water, pesticides, and chemical fertilizers) and postharvest losses (the “5 reductions”). This estimate is based on the piloting of the 1M5R package in the Mekong Delta’s Kien Giang and An Giang provinces through 9 cropping seasons during 2012–2014. The study finds that 1M5R could potentially save farmers US$1.4 billion per year, assum- ing 4 million hectares of double-cropped rice. 10 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Box 2. Examples of public sector instruments that can be used to address agricultural pollution Rules linked to farm licensing, Incentives or disincentives Research, surveillance, operation, and input use tied to improved farming practices and information • Zoning rules including restrictions on and agroindustry services • Research programs on precision and livestock rearing within a certain radius • Fines or loss of benefits for cellular agriculture, and other potential of sensitive areas such as residential noncompliance with mandates breakthrough solutions and water source protection areas, • Preferential credit or grants for straw • Grants for research on non-invasive and on farming crops on sloped and residue management or manure aquaculture species, recyclable or ecologically sensitive land injection machinery biodegradable plastics and alternative • Livestock farm size restrictions • Subsidies for formula fertilizer, fertilizer materials and processes, alternative expressed in terms of animal or deep placement products, or soil therapeutics, plant-proteins, economic manure limitations testing kits impacts of pollution • Specifications for animal housing, • Payments for adopting practices that • Satellite surveillance of burning and waste storage, waste treatment reduce farm runoff other relevant activity facilities, or proximity to cropland • Public procurement requirement • Monitoring of more pollutants in more • Requirements that farms draw that food purchases meet given places, with a focus on hotspots freshwater from sources downstream certification standards • Training of scientists and technical of them • Fast-track licensing for operations experts to strengthen extension and • Mandatory reporting requirements for meeting high environmental pollution-monitoring capacity waste and wastewater discharges management standards • Information and behavior change • Bans on the marketing and use • Loans to enterprises offering input campaigns promoting better farming of certain pesticides, antibiotics, application and soil testing services, practices and diets hormones, and other chemicals and improved drugs, inputs, and gear • Green certification standard • Limitations on the open burning of • Grants for demonstration farms and development agricultural residues (volumes, timing) farmer-led movements modeling and • Dietary guidelines bridging health and • Standards for the treatment and supporting best practices environmental perspectives discharge of wastewaters • Grants to enterprises increasing access • Branding efforts to raise the profile of an to and the appeal of plant-based or ecological farming region or product, in low-footprint foods public-private partnership First: Break silos to mobilize and align more systematic data collection and evidence will help resources with priorities this exercise, enough is already known to take steps in this direction. This process of integration is needed to remove What: Harmonize and coordinate policy across policy conflicts that might exist among these policy areas, and to silos, levels of government, and geographic boundaries ensure that adequate resources are directed toward farm to breathe life into an agricultural pollution agenda. pollution priorities. This means that the measurement of agricultural performance needs a rethink. In turn, this re- Why: To draw attention to the question of agricultural framing will lead to a redeployment of public agricultural pollution and help it become a better-defined policy spending. Public investment in research may be rebalanced objective, a higher priority of ministries, and one with to focus more on protecting resources, building agro-eco- more resources directed to it. system resilience, and optimizing nutrition with respect to environmental impacts. Conversely, public investments bi- How: Bridge jurisdictional boundaries. ased toward heavily input-reliant, single-species farming At the highest, strategic level: harmonize agricultural, ➤ systems and technologies may have lower returns than environmental, and health policy goals, strategies, previously thought once their performance is assessed, and resources, removing conflicts that might exist with a less strict focus on yield, output, or protein-ener- among them. gy. Health and environmental policy efforts will also be At more operational levels: coordinate efforts across ➤ strengthened by bringing agriculture more fully into their levels of government, sectors, and geopolitical fold and devoting more resources to farming. At more boundaries. operational levels, efforts will also benefit from breaking silos and being coordinated across levels of government, At the highest, strategic level, tackling agricultural pol- sectors, and geopolitical boundaries. This will help efforts lution calls for harmonizing agricultural, environmental, become a better match for agricultural pollution, recogniz- and health policy, and for setting top priorities. While ing its disregard for jurisdictional boundaries. 11 Second: Combine instruments to compel, worst effects of pollution and keep abatement options motivate, and enable farmers to green their open. farming practices Why: To avoid structural developments and path What: Develop mixed-instrument programs to compel, dependencies that will overwhelm technical solutions, motivate, and enable farmers to adopt less polluting outpace innovation, reduce technical abatement farming practices. options, or make it cost-prohibitive to abate—in short, limiting choices. Why: To achieve results in terms of pollution abatement across all kinds of farms, acknowledging the limitations How: Seek to directly and indirectly influence structural of command-and-control approaches that rely on top- aspects of the farm sector that have a major bearing on down surveillance and enforcement. pollution. ➤Proactively weigh trade-offs implied by different How: Strive to bring different players into the fold by sector development trajectories, including by using combinations of instruments. strengthening the evidence base, broadly involving ➤C ombine “sticks,” “carrots,” and behavioral stakeholders in decision making, and again, involving interventions to compel and motivate farmers in all different levels of government in policy making. their diversity. ➤ Seek to orient consumption patterns. ➤Make supportive investments in physical infrastructure, public services, data, and science to To “get ahead” of pollution—to control and prevent it ef- enable farm-level change and overcome constraints. fectively—the public sector needs to guide the sector to develop differently. While existing technical solutions Multipronged governmental programs that send clear and capacity for innovation carry vast potential for abate- signals yet offer farmers a range of choices are needed. ment, these run the risk of being overwhelmed, depend- Specifically, combinations of “sticks,” “carrots,” and be- ing on how the sector develops structurally, making de- havioral interventions are needed to compel and moti- sired levels of abatement cost-prohibitive or unattainable vate farmers in all their diversity, given the limitations in the longer run. Illustratively, if the livestock industry of top-down surveillance and enforcement to change the grows to overtake a large share of the economy-wide behavior of millions of small (and larger) farms. While greenhouse gas emission “budget” for future years, as stronger enforcement of mandates is broadly needed, certain studies have found to be a possibility under cer- expectations need to be aligned with farmers’ capacity, tain global consumption scenarios, then it is probable and flexible, market-based mechanisms and economic that abatement solutions, and certainly cost-effective incentives are sometimes appropriate to bring farms of ones, will fall short of abatement needs.8 The agricultur- differing sizes and capacities under one compliance re- al sector must be guided to develop more sustainably. In gime. In some instances, removing or modifying unhelp- general, examining and weighing trade-offs implied by ful incentives, even if they act indirectly on pollution, structural trends will be central to determining preferred may prove to be more impactful and cost-effective than trajectories. This points to the need for strengthening the instituting new incentive programs that target pollution evidence base along this theme, broadly involving stake- directly. In parallel, supportive investments in physi- holders in decision making, and again, involving differ- cal infrastructure, public services, data, and science are ent levels of government in policy making. needed to overcome constraints to farm-level change. For Meanwhile, efforts to influence the sector’s structural example, certain investments in information technology trajectory are not confined to influencing the farm sector can be game-changing when it comes to monitoring, and directly. Influencing consumption patterns, particularly, specialized waste collection and management services can be a powerful and indispensable point of entry going would give farmers more options when it comes to dis- forward. Changes in consumer product and diet choices, posing of plastic waste. as shaped by political, economic, and cultural forces, can play a determinant role in directing how the sector and Third: Influence levers of structural change its pollution footprint develop. In particular, the promo- including consumption to keep pollution in check tion of plant-centric diets can have a significant impact on the sector’s development trajectory and environmen- What: Anticipate and influence the sector’s structural tal footprint, as well as on nutritional health outcomes trajectory, intervening from farm to table, to avoid the (see Figure 14) (Nijdam, Rood, and Westhoek 2012; de 8 On its current trajectory, agriculture could, by midcentury, consume roughly 70 percent of the budget for all greenhouse gas emissions consistent with a +2°C increase in global temperature (Searchinger et al. 2013). Unless unprecedented advances in technology occur, studies have found that relative climate stability may only be achievable “with a high probability” if the agricultural sector rallies to curb the production of dairy and ruminant meat—the consumption of and emissions from which are rising with particular rapidity in the region (Hedenus, Wirsenius, and Johansson 2014; Searchinger et al. 2013; Bajželj et al. 2014; Bailey, Antony, and Laura 2014). 12 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Figure 14. Impacts of diet on human and ecosystem health Farming impacts on ecosystem Environmental pollution impacts of health (and services) farming on human health • Soil health (nutrient cycling) • Ambient air pollution (cardiovascular, • Fresh water (irrigation, household, respiratory diseases) industrial uses) • Drinking and bathing water contamination • Wildlife health (pollination, soil fertility) (cancers, endocrine disruption, poisoning) • Biodiversity (genetic resources) • Antibiotic resistance (infectious diseases) • Climate stability (multiple) • Zoonosis (infectious diseases) • Pristine landscapes (bu ers, • Climate change (vector-borne and other waste treatment, habitat, diseases, natural disaster–related trauma recreation, tourism) and other) Food choice impacts on human Food contamination impacts of healtha farming on human health • Heart disease • Fecal and other pathogens (infectious • Diabetes disease) • High blood pressure • Endocrine-disrupting pesticides, • Stroke plastics, hormones (developmental, • Osteoporosis reproductive, neurological, • Cancers (colon, breast, kidney, liver, cardiovascular, metabolic, immune uterine, other) e ects) • Neurodegenerative disease • Toxic pesticides, contaminants • Mood (poisoning, other chronic e ects) Note: *Some of the foods that have the greatest environmental health impacts can also be detrimental to nutritional health. Also see Potter 2017. hh = household. Vries and de Boer 2010; Machovina, Feeley, and Ripple Why: To better set priorities, improve public 2015; Galloway and Cowling 2002; Gonzalez, Frostell, and intervention iteratively, and stay ahead of the pollution Carlsson-Kanyama 2011; Peters et al. 2016; Katz and Mell- challenge both technically and in matters of policy. er 2014; Tuso et al. 2013; Ornish 2009; Stehfest et al. 2009). Consumer sensitization may be effective if paired with How: Invest in data, research, innovation, and measures to enhance the availability and appeal of more entrepreneurship. benign food products and, hence, consumer choice. ➤Invest in agricultural pollution monitoring, and in The promotion of plant-centric diets can have a sig- research on the physical and socioeconomic impacts nificant impact on the sector’s development trajectory of agricultural pollution and the effectiveness of and footprint. The choices that product standards allow technical and policy instruments. consumers to make tend to relate to production process- ➤Stimulate innovation and entrepreneurship so that es (attributes of food that are not detectable to the sens- abatement solutions can keep up with change, and es), and less so to dietary ones, though there can be some their pursuit can become a value-addition and job- overlap. Yet dietary choices—especially choices of what creation opportunity. foods to eat and not to eat—aggregated across society, have tremendous environmental consequences. Knowledge and knowledge economy investments—in data, research, innovation, and entrepreneurship—are Fourth: Learn and innovate to stay a few steps needed to better set priorities, improve public interven- ahead of the pollution challenge tion iteratively, and stay ahead of the pollution challenge both technically and in matters of policy. What: Invest in data, research, innovation, and entrepre- Box 3 summarizes the four main elements of an ef- neurship to intervene more effectively over time. fective agricultural pollution prevention and control strategy. 13 From looming crisis to opportunity particular, can position agriculture to thrive as a busi- Looking ahead, tackling East Asia’s agricultural ness and evolve competitively by being at the service of pollution challenge is not only within reach, but also a human and ecosystem health, and domestic market op- business and leadership opportunity. Doing more to portunities. Building domestically oriented capacity to avoid pollution and its worst effects is within reach. control and prevent agricultural pollution specifically has the potential to help national food industries remain Rapid change in the region bodes well for its ability to competitive domestically. Mitigating agricultural pol- redirect farming—and the broader food sector—to a lution can also help lessen what is often one of the root path of more durable, self-serving growth. East Asia’s causes of social inequity. East Asia is in a historic position agricultural performance over the past 50 to 60 years to show the world how dietary transition can be decou- also reflects its inclination for innovation, its willingness pled from the rise of chronic disease, and tackling agri- to embrace new technology, and its capacity for trans- cultural pollution can be the region’s point of entry onto formation. Moreover, the strength, plurality, and dyna- this unblazed trail. This may be possible through the mism of regional food cultures can help provide the im- embrace of “double-dividend” policies that favor both di- petus needed to green food production and propel these etary and environmental health simultaneously. Finally, food cultures into the 21st century. mitigating agricultural pollution, and enabling sustain- Furthermore, like every crisis, agricultural pollu- able food systems and diets to emerge more generally, tion can be treated as an opportunity. While farming promise to provide significant business opportunities. may be at risk in parts of the region, far more is at stake than farming. Furthermore, as the next sections high- light, policy actions that will enable the public sector to act on agricultural pollution more decisively may have benefits that are felt more broadly. The public sector, in Box 3. A four-pronged strategy for effective agricultural pollution prevention and control 1. Break policy, geographic, and other silos to mobilize 3. Influence levers of structural change including diets and and align resources with priorities broader consumer behavior to keep pollution in check •  Establish strategic priorities that reflect a deeper integration Proactively weigh trade-offs implied by different sector •  of agricultural, environmental, and health policy, and the development trajectories by, among other things, best available evidence on agricultural pollution impacts. generating more evidence, engaging multiple stakeholders •  Develop new performance indicators, institutional incentives, in planning and policy making (including through and budgets that align with strategic priorities. In particular, stakeholder consultations and “landscape approaches”), and root out and redirect conflicting uses of resources; developing policies and programs at multiple government better leverage, or “green,” resources already devoted to levels and spatial scales. agriculture, environment, and health objectives; and use Indirectly shape consumer preferences and behavior, and •  evaluation to make more efficient use of all resources. enable consumers to have a greater influence on production Establish processes to update policy on the basis of new patterns and the sector’s trajectory. evidence, guarding against capture and biases. •  In deploying resources, mobilize stakeholders across levels 4. Learn and innovate by investing in pollution monitoring, of government, geographic boundaries, and disciplines to research, and entrepreneurship to stay a few steps ahead tackle environmental challenges that are not bound by such of the pollution challenge and use resources effectively jurisdictions. Generate better evidence on agricultural pollution to solidify •  the case for making agricultural pollution a policy priority 2. Combine carrots, sticks, and behavioral interventions, and on the basis of which to direct resources for greatest while investing in supportive infrastructure, to compel, near-term and long-term impact. motivate, and enable farmers to green their farming Evaluate technical and policy interventions and feed •  practices evidence into policy making to help improve public (and •  Strive to bring different players into the fold by, among private) spending iteratively. other things, sending clear signals while offering choices, Support knowledge and innovation systems more broadly to •  matching demands on producers with their capacities, enhance the technical and policy toolbox at the public and and using a variety of instruments in ways that are mutually private sectors’ disposal over time. Such investments can reinforcing. help reduce the toolbox’s costs, widen its application, achieve deeper abatement, and even turn the pollution abatement challenge into a value-addition and job-creation opportunity. 14 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) References Adhya, T. K., B. Linquist, T. Searchinger, R. Wassmann, and X. Yan. 2014. “Wetting and Drying: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Saving Water from Rice Production.” Working Paper 8 of “Creating a Sustainable Food Future.” World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. http://www.wri.org/sites/default/ files/wetting-drying-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-saving-water-rice-production.pdf. Amarasinghe, U. A., C. T. Hoanh, D. D’haeze, and T. Q. Hung. 2015. “Toward Sustainable Coffee Production in Vietnam: More Coffee with Less Water.” Agricultural Systems 136: 96–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. agsy.2015.02.008. Backus, G. B. C. 2017. “Manure Management: An Overview and Assessment of Policy Instruments in the Netherlands.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Bailey, R., F. Antony, and W. Laura. 2014. “Livestock—Climate Change’s Forgotten Sector.” Chatham House, London. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/field/field_ document/20141203LivestockClimateChangeForgottenSectorBaileyFroggattWellesleyFinal.pdf. Bajželj, B., K. S. Richards, J. M. Allwood, P. Smith, J. S. Dennis, E. Curmi, and C. A. Gilligan. 2014. “Importance of Food-Demand Management for Climate Mitigation.” Nature Climate Change 4 (10): 924–929. doi:10.1038/ NCLIMATE2353. Briggs, D. 2003. “Environmental Pollution and the Global Burden of Disease.” British Medical Bulletin 68 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1093/bmb/ldg019. Calub, A. D., R. B. Saludes, and E. V. P. Tabing. 2016. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in the Philippines: The Livestock Sector.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Cassou, E. 2017. “Agricultural Pollution.” Knowledge Notes Series: “Livestock Wastes,” “Aquaculture,” “Fertilizer,” “Pesticides,” “Residue Burning,” “Plastics.” World Bank, Washington, DC. Cassou, E., D. N. Tran, T. X. Dinh, T. H. Nguyen, C. V. Nguyen, B. T. Cao, S. Jaffee, et al. 2017. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in Vietnam: Summary Report.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Catelo, M. A. O., C. A. Narrod, and M. M. Tiongco. 2008. Structural Changes in the Philippine Pig Industry and Their Environmental Implications. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Chea, R., G. Grenouillet, and S. Lek. 2016. “Evidence of Water Quality Degradation in Lower Mekong Basin Revealed by Self-Organizing Map.” PloS One 11 (1): e0145527. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0145527. Chen, X., Z. Cui, M. Fan, P. Vitousek, M. Zhao, W. Ma, Z. Wang, W. Zhang, X. Yan, J. Yang, and X. Deng. 2014. “Producing More Grain with Lower Environmental Costs.” Nature 514 (7523): 486–489. doi:10.1038/ nature13609. China Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), National Bureau of Statistics and Ministry of Agriculture. 2010. “First National Pollution Source Survey Bulletin.” Beijing. China Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP). 2016a. 2015 State of Environment Report. Beijing: Ministry of Environmental Protection. ———. 2016b. China Environmental Status Report 2015. Beijing: Ministry of Environmental Protection. Cui, S., Y. Shi, P. M. Groffman, W. H. Schlesinger, and Y. G. Zhu. 2013. “Centennial-Scale Analysis of the Creation and Fate of Reactive Nitrogen in China (1910–2010).” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110 (6): 2052–2057. doi:10.1073/pnas.1221638110. Cuvin-Aralar, M. L. A., C. H. Ricafort, and A. Salvacion. 2016. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in the Philippines: The Fisheries Sector.” Prepared for the World Bank, Washington, DC. 15 Dasgupta, S., C. Meisner, D. Wheeler, K. Xuyen, and N. T. Lam. 2007. “Pesticide Poisoning of Farm Workers – Implications of Blood Test Results from Vietnam.” International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 210 (2): 121–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2006.08.006. Dinh, T. X. 2017. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in Vietnam: The Livestock Sector.” Prepared for the World Bank, Washington, DC. Dương, T. T., and Nguyễn V. L. 2015. “Tình hình sử dụng kháng sinh trong chăn nuôi lợn thịt, gà thịt ở một số trại chăn nuôi trên địa bàn tỉnh Bắc Giang.” Tạp chí Khoa học và Phát triển 13 (5): 717–722. EMB (Environmental Management Bureau of the Philippines). 2014. National Water Quality Status Report 2006–2013. Quezon City: Department of Environment and Natural Resources. http://water.emb.gov.ph/wp-content/ uploads/2016/06/NWQSR2006-2013.pdf. Gao, S., Q. Wang, D. Guan, W. F. Zhang, Y. Li, Z. Shi, C. Yan, et al. 2017. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in China.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Gu, B., M. A. Sutton, S. X. Chang, Y. Ge, and J. Chang. 2014. “Agricultural Ammonia Emissions Contribute to China’s Urban Air Pollution.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12 (5): 265–266. doi:10.1890/14.WB.007. Gulis, G., M. Czompolyova, and J. R. Cerhan. 2002. “An Ecologic Study of Nitrate in Municipal Drinking Water and Cancer Incidence in Trnava District, Slovakia.” Environmental Research 88 (3): 182–187. https://doi.org/10.1006/ enrs.2002.4331. Hedenus, F., S. Wirsenius, and D. J. Johansson. 2014. “The Importance of Reduced Meat and Dairy Consumption for Meeting Stringent Climate Change Targets.” Climatic Change 124 (1–2): 79–91. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1104- 5. Ju, X. T., G. X. Xing, X. P. Chen, S. L. Zhang, L. J. Zhang, X. J. Liu, Z. L. Cui, B. Yin, P. Christie, Z. L. Zhu, and F. S. Zhang. 2009. “Reducing Environmental Risk by Improving N Management in Intensive Chinese Agricultural Systems.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (9): 3041–3046. doi:10.1073/ pnas.0813417106. Kim, D. P., C. Saegerman, C. Douny, T. V. Dinh, B. H. Xuan, B. D. Vu, N. P. Hong, and M. L. Scippo. 2013. “First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam.” Food and Public Health 3 (5): 247–256. doi:10.5923/j.fph.20130305.03. Le, C., Y. Zha, Y. Li, D. Sun, H. Lu, and B. Yin. 2010. “Eutrophication of Lake Waters in China: Cost, Causes, and Control.” Environmental Management 45 (4): 662–668. doi:10.1007/s00267-010-9440-3. Liu, G., Z. Liu, F. Chen, Z. Zhang, B. Gu, and M. Smoak. 2013. “Response of the Cladoceran Community to Eutrophication, Fish Introductions and Degradation of the Macrophyte Vegetation in Lake Dianchi, a Large, Shallow Plateau Lake in Southwestern China.” Limnology 14: 159–166. doi:10.1007/s10201-012-0391-7. Magcale-Macandog, D. B., P. M. J. Paraiso, A. R. Salvacion, R. V. Estadola, S. G. L. Quinones, I. M. A. Silapan, and R. M. Briones. 2016. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in the Philippines: The Crops Sector.” Prepared for the World Bank, Washington, DC. Magcale-Macandog, D. B., R. M. Briones, A. D. Calub, R. B. Saludes, M. L. A. Cuvin-Aralar, A. R. Salvacion, E. V. P. Tabing, P. M. J. Paraiso, C. H. Ricafort, I. M. A. Silapan, S. G. L. Quinones, R. V. Estadola. 2016. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in the Philippines: Summary Report.” Prepared for the World Bank, Washington, DC. MRC (Mekong River Commission). 2014. “2014 Lower Mekong Regional Water Quality Monitoring Report.” MRC Technical Paper No. 60, Mekong River Commission, Vientiane. 16 The Challenge of Agricultural Pollution: Evidence from China, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Overview) Mostafalou, S., and M. Abdollahi. 2013. “Pesticides and Human Chronic Diseases: Evidences, Mechanisms, and Perspectives.” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 268 (2): 157–177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2013.01.025. Naidenko, O., C. Cox, and N. Bruzelius. 2012. “Troubled Waters: Farm Pollution Threatens Drinking Water.” Environmental Working Group, Washington, DC. http://static.ewg.org/reports/2012/troubled_waters/ troubled_waters.pdf?_ga=1.212208084.1322552116.1490303150. Nguyen, Chau Giang Dang, Z. Sebesvari, W. Amelung, and F. G. Renaud. 2015. “Pesticide Pollution of Multiple Drinking Water Sources in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam: Evidence from Two Provinces.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22 (12): 9042–9058. doi:10.1007/s11356-014-4034-x. Nguyen, C. V. 2017. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in Vietnam: The Aquaculture Sector.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Nguyen, T. H. 201 7. “An Overview of Agricultural Pollution in Vietnam: The Crops Sector.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. Nguyen, T. H., T. H. Tran, M. D. Chau, and V. S. Nguyen. 2015. “Monitoring and Evaluating of the Application of Low Carbon Rice Production Technologies 1M6Rs and its Impacts in Kien Giang and Giang Provinces. Workshop Proceedings.” Vietnam Low Carbon Rice Project (VLCRP), Project-End Dissemination and Regional Policy Dialogue Workshop, Kien Giang, April 15, 119–136. Nguyễn, T. Q. T., T. M. Phú, H. S. Ni, S. Quennery, D. T. Thanh Hương, T. P. Nguyễn, P. Kestemont, and M.-L. Scippo. 2015. “Situation of Chemicals Used in Rice-Fish, Stripped Pangasius Cultured in Pond and Red Tilapia Cultured in Cage in Mekong Delta.” Can Tho University Journal of Science Special issue in Aquaculture 2: 278–283 (in Vietnamese). Nguyen, T. T. 2016. “Pesticide Use in Rice Farming and its Impacts on Climbing Perch (Anabas testudineus) in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam.” Doctoral thesis. Stockholm University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physical Geography. Faculty of Fishery, Nong Lam University, Vietnam. https://su.diva-portal.org/smash/ get/diva2:917234/FULLTEXT01.pdf. Prüss-Üstün, A., J. Wolf, J. Corvalan, R. Bos, and M. Neira. 2016. “Preventing Disease Through Healthy Environments: A Global Assessment of the Burden of Disease from Environmental Risks.” Prepared for the World Health Organization, Geneva. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204585/1/9789241565196_eng. pdf. Searchinger, T., C. Hanson, J. Ranganathan, B. Lipinski, R. Waite, R. Winterbottom, A. Dinshaw, and R. Heimlich. 2013. Creating a Sustainable Food Future: Interim Findings. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. https:// www.wri.org/sites/default/files/wri13_report_4c_wrr_online.pdf. Strokal, M., H. Yang, Y. Zhang, C. Kroeze, L. Li, S. Luan, H. Wang, S. Yang, and Y. Zhang. 2014. “Increasing Eutrophication in the Coastal Seas of China from 1970 to 2050.” Marine Pollution Bulletin 85 (1): 123–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.06.011. Technoserve. 2013. “A Business Case for Sustainable Coffee Production – Vietnam: An Industry Study by TechnoServe for the Sustainable Coffee Program.” Report prepared for IDH, the Sustainable Trade Initiative, Hanoi. Thu, T. N., L. B. T. Phuong, T. M. Van, and S. N. Hong, 2016. “Effect of Water Regimes and Organic Matter Strategies on Mitigating Green House Gas Emission from Rice Cultivation and Co-benefits in Agriculture in Vietnam.” International Journal of Environmental Science and Development 7 (2): 85. http://www.ijesd.org/ vol7/746-A0048.pdf. Tú, H. T., T. P. Nguyễn, F. Silvestre, C. Douny, C. T. Tảo, G. Maghuin-Rogister, and P. Kestemont. 2006. “Investigation on the Use of Drugs and Chemicals in Shrimp Farming and the Kinetics of Enrofloxacin and Furazolidone in Black Tiger Shrimp (Penaeus monodon).” Scientific Journal of Can Tho University 1: 70–78 (in Vietnamese). Wang, X. Y., F. Guo, X. G. Cai, and Q. J. Hu. 2003. “Non-Point Source Pollution Loading of Miyun Reservoir, Beijing.” Urban Environment & Urban Ecology 16 (1): 31–33. 17 White, P. 2017. “Aquaculture Pollution: An Overview of Issues with a Focus on China, Vietnam, and the Philippines.” Paper prepared for World Bank, Washington, DC. WHO (World Health Organization). 2016. “Nitrate and Nitrite in Drinking-Water: Background Document for Development of WHO Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality.” WHO/FWC/WSH/16.52. World Health Organization, Geneva. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/nitrate-nitrite- background-jan17.pdf?ua=1. ———. 2017. “Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality: fourth edition incorporating the first addendum. ” World Health Organization, Geneva. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/:/1/9789241549950-eng.pdf?ua=1. WRI (World Resources Institute) CAIT. 2016. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool: WRI’s Climate Data Explorer. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. http://cait2.wri.org. Wu, L. 2014. Study on Agricultural Nitrogen Fertilizer Demand and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Potential Based on Total Quantity Control in China. Beijing: China Agricultural University. [武良, 2014. 基于总量控制的中国农业氮 肥需求及温室气体减排潜力研究. 中国农业大学.] Xia, L., C. Ti, B. Li, Y. Xia, and X. Yan. 2016. “Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Reactive Nitrogen Releases during the Life-Cycles of Staple Food Production in China and Their Mitigation Potential.” Science of the Total Environment 556: 116–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.204. Yan, C. R. 2015. Prevention and Control of Mulching and Residual Pollution in China [M]. Beijing: Science Press. [严昌 荣， 2015. 中国地膜覆盖及残留污染防控[M]. 北京： 科学出版社， 2015]. Zhang, Q. Q., G. G. Ying, C. G. Pan, Y. S. Liu, and J. L. Zhao. 2015. “Comprehensive Evaluation of Antibiotics Emission and Fate in the River Basins of China: Source Analysis, Multimedia Modeling, and Linkage to Bacterial Resistance.” Environmental Science & Technology 49 (11): 6772–6782. doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b00729. Zhang, W. F., L. Ma, G. Q. Huang, L. Wu, X. P. Chen, F. S. Zhang. 2013. “The Development and Contribution of Nitrogenous Fertilizer in China and Challenges Faced by the Country.” Scientia Agricultura Sinica 46: 3161– 3171. [张卫峰, 马林, 黄高强, 武良, 陈新平, 张福锁, 2013. 中国氮肥发展 , 贡献和挑战. 中国农业科学 46: 3161–3171.]. Zhang, Y. L., and F. Cao. 2015. “Fine Particulate Matter (PM2. 5) in China at a City Level.” Scientific Reports 5: 14884. doi:10.1038/srep14884. Zhang, Y., X. Liu, B. Qin, K. Shi, J. Deng, and Y. Zhou. 2016. “Aquatic Vegetation in Response to Increased Eutrophication and Degraded Light Climate in Eastern Lake Taihu: Implications for Lake Ecological Restoration.” Scientific Reports 6: 23867. doi:10.1038/srep23867. Zhou, Y., H. Yang, H. J. Mosler, and K. C. Abbaspour. 2010. “Factors Affecting Farmers’ Decisions on Fertilizer Use: A Case Study for the Chaobai Watershed in Northern China.” Journal of Sustainable Development 4 (1): 80–102. http://www.consiliencejournal.org/index.php/consilience/article/viewFile/44/43.