Gurdev Singh Khush: masterminding a new rice revolution
Interview by Ethirajan Anbarasan
Gurdev Singh Khush
Farming on the edge of the city in Yunnan Province (China), below.
In many Asian countries, urbanization and industrialization are steadily encroaching
on cropland. China has introduced laws to stop agricultural land from being converted
to use by industry and housing.
I am sure that if all farmers switched over to
organic farming, current food production would be reduced by half, triggering a food
crisis. In my view, organic farming is not a viable alternative but a recipe for
disaster
The
world’s top ten rice-producing countries (thousands of tonnes)
|
The man behind the miracle Dr Gurdev Singh Khush may not be a household name. But his
rice varieties are. In the last 32 years, he and his team at the International Rice
Research Institute (IRRI) in Manila, have introduced over 300 new grain varieties,
including IR8, IR36, IR64 and IR72, which triggered the Green Revolution in Asia
in the 1960s. Today, IRRI rice varieties and their progenies are planted in over
70 per cent of the world’s rice-fields. E.A.
• IRRI Website www.cgiar.org/irri |
An architect of the
Green Revolution* is now trying to bring about a “Green Green Revolution*” to avert
a food crisis in the coming decades
Experts have warned of a possible food crisis
in Asia in the coming decades due to population growth combined with lowered rates
of food production. Is there a possibility of famine surfacing again in some Asian
countries?
The Asian region will definitely face food shortage some time in the future if
present trends continue. In most Asian countries, where the staple food is rice,
population growth has not yet stabilized and the demand for food is increasing. According
to UN estimates, by 2020 the world population will have swollen to around 8 billion
people, 5 billion of whom will be rice consumers. We estimate that the world’s rice
harvest must increase from the present 560 million tonnes to 840 million tonnes per
year to meet the demand. All this has to come from existing agricultural land, as
no more cropland is available in many countries. While increasing food production,
the Asian countries should also think about active population control programmes.
How fast is food growth increasing to meet the demand?
Unfortunately food production is not keeping pace with population growth. Between
1960 and 1990, global food production was increasing at a rate of 2.8 per cent per
year while population grew at a rate of between 2.1 and 2.2 per cent. So there was
not much of a problem. However, the situation changed in the 1990s. Now population
is increasing at the rate of 1.8 per cent whereas food production is growing at a
rate of 1.5 per cent per year. Investment in irrigation has virtually ceased and
good land is being lost to industrialization. If present trends continue, it will
not be possible to meet future demand for food.
To what extent can new technologies help to boost yields? Where is rice research
heading?
We now have rice varieties which have a yield potential of about 10 tonnes per
hectare. However, the present average yield of irrigated rice in Asia is around 5
tonnes per hectare under best management. To increase the average output to 8 tonnes,
we have to fine-tune the production system and invest more in irrigation and in educating
farmers about new technologies. We are confident that by early in the next century,
new seed varieties with a yield potential of 12 to 12.5 tonnes per hectare will be
available.
The future of rice research will be oriented more towards eco-friendly agriculture.
Rice breeders worldwide are now developing new rice plants which are drought-resistant
and pest-resistant, and have the inbuilt capacity to outgrow weeds. In the next 30
to 50 years, temperature-sensitive rice plants will also be needed with tolerance
to higher temperatures because of global warming.
What is the next step for the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI)?
At the IRRI, our next aim is to bring about a “Green Green Revolution” to produce
more rice from less land and water, and without chemical pesticides or herbicides.
For this we have developed a new plant type, called “Super Rice”, which is in the
experimental stages. This new plant, a product of conventional breeding methods,
will have an entirely different architecture from that of our earlier seed varieties.
In IR8, the first high-yielding rice variety, half of the plant’s weight is grain
and half is straw, whereas the new Super Rice plant is 60 per cent grain and 40 per
cent straw. This new variety will have increased photosynthetic capacity, directing
more energy into grain production and less into foliage. An early prototype of this
new plant was developed a few years ago and now we are working to improve the grain
quality and to incorporate genes that will give the seed variety disease and pest
resistance so that farmers won’t have to use pesticides. For the first time, we have
“borrowed” the gene that gives maize its stem strength and introduced it into the
new plant. This will enable the plant to carry more grains, increasing the yield
by at least 25 per cent compared to existing varieties. We hope to release it to
Asian farmers by early next century.
When you started your career at the IRRI 32 years ago, the primary aim was to develop
high-yielding rice varieties to prevent a food crisis. That led to the Green Revolution.
Then came eco-friendly agriculture and now efforts are being made to develop genetically
modified seeds. How would you describe this transition?
Asia witnessed acute food shortages in the 1960s and it was urgent to step up
food production. This was achieved by developing high-yielding rice varieties like
IR-8, IR-36 and IR-64 at the IRRI which matured in 110 days compared to the 180 days
required for traditional varieties. This transformation, better known as the Green
Revolution, helped to double rice production in Asia between 1967 and 1992, averting
famine in many countries. In some countries like Indonesia, rice production trebled.
However, it was realized during the process that indiscriminate use of pesticides
and fertilizers caused environmental damage. So the emphasis shifted towards sustainable
agriculture. Farmers were encouraged to use organic manure, compost and bio-fertilizers.
Subsequently new seed varieties, genetically resistant to certain insect pests, were
also developed, minimizing the use of hazardous pesticides.
On the social side, we realized that the new seed varieties were more successful
in irrigated areas with good water resources. The impact of new technology was minimal
in uplands and rain-fed areas, where most of the poor farmers lived. Our next challenge
is to develop drought-resistant rice varieties to help those farmers living in unfavourable
environments.
As a prominent actor in the Green Revolution how would you react to criticism that
excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides resulted in soil degradation?
I think most of this criticism is unjustified. We were about to witness famine
in Asia in the 1960s and the priority was to increase food production. So mineral
fertilizers and pesticides were used to boost productivity. But there is no evidence
or data to show that soil degradation occurred because of the Green Revolution process.
It could have happened because of improper use of agricultural lands. Excessive use
of fertilizers and pesticides and no proper drainage systems in fields during heavy
rains or floods also contributed to soil degradation. Now we actively promote Integrated
Pest Management, encouraging farmers to rationalize pesticide use.
There are a lot of misconceptions about the use of mineral fertilizers. Our research
findings have proved that rice plants definitely need balanced nutrients to produce
more grain. Whether these nutrients come from mineral fertilizers or organic manure
does not matter. Look at the farmers in the U.S. and other developed countries who
continue to use fertilizers and harvest higher yields. If there were problems in
using mineral fertilizers, they would be the first ones to raise the alarm.
If fertilizers are not harmful why are some farmers opting for organic farming?
Some farmers go for organic farming, without using mineral fertilizers or pesticides,
because it is lucrative and there is a demand for organic food in Western countries.
But their production level is half of what they used to harvest before by using fertilizers.
I am sure that if all farmers switched over to organic farming, current food production
would be reduced by half, triggering a food crisis. In my view, organic farming is
not a viable alternative but a recipe for disaster.
Some say that many traditional rice varieties have disappeared as a result of the
introduction of IRRI’s new varieties, resulting in loss of genetic diversity. What
is your response to this view?
It is natural for farmers to switch over to new varieties providing higher yields.
As a consequence, the number of varieties in farmers’ fields goes down. In the U.S.,
for example, farmers were growing over 50 varieties of soya bean 30 years ago but
now they cultivate only five or six new high-yielding varieties. How can you stop
farmers from using a new variety which gives them higher yields? It is not true that
traditional seed varieties have been lost forever. We collect those varieties and
save them in our germplasm bank at the IRRI. So far, about 85,000 traditional rice
varieties have been collected from many parts of Asia, which were grown before the
Green Revolution. Similarly countries like Indonesia, India and China also have their
own seed collection centres. These will be used for generations to come when we want
to develop new seed varieties.
I disagree with the view that the genetic potential of those traditional varieties
is lost completely. When a new variety is developed, rice breeders incorporate genes
from 30 to 40 different traditional varieties and incorporate them into the new seed.
Take the case of IR-64, a very popular variety among Asian farmers. It has genes
taken from at least 44 different parents. We cannot develop modern varieties without
traditional varieties.
According to a UN report, global fresh water supplies are barely half of what they
were 20 years ago and the shortage
is likely to increase in the coming years. How can farmers cope with the water shortage?
This is going to be another major problem in future. Rice is a high water-consuming
crop but we find farmers using more water than is actually required. On average,
farmers use 5,000 litres of water to produce one kilogram of rice. It is not essential
to use so much water. Now there are technologies available to produce one kilo of
rice with as little as 1,500 to 2,000 litres of water. Unfortunately many farmers
are not aware of these new trends and do not have access to the new technologies.
There is a misconception among farmers that they need to maintain a few inches of
water above ground level in rice fields throughout the growing period. We have shown
that it is enough to keep the soil saturated with water. A new initiative needs to
be launched by rice-producing countries to educate rice farmers about water management.
There is a strong demand to produce more rice to solve the food problem. However,
some environmental groups complain that methane gas, which emerges out of rice fields,
contributes to the greenhouse effect. How can this problem be solved?
It is true that methane emission occurs in rice fields but the problem has been
exaggerated. Statistics show that only 15 per cent of global methane emission originates
from paddy fields. The remaining 85 per cent comes from industrial activities worldwide.
So we should first try to reduce methane emissions from industry by introducing alternative
eco-friendly technologies. But you cannot stop rice production. Rice will continue
to be grown because it is the food of humanity. At the IRRI we are also working on
ways to minimize or eliminate methane emissions from rice fields.
Many Asian countries talk about land reform designed to even out the distribution
of farmland among farmers and labourers. Unfortunately, in many countries land reform
has not become a reality for socio-political reasons. Do you believe that the present
unequal distribution of land has any relevance to food production?
Equal land distribution among farmers is highly relevant because it not only
reflects on food production but also on socio-economic conditions. Look at the Indian
experience. In states like West Bengal and Punjab, land reforms were carried out
in the 1960s and 1970s and food production in those regions has increased as a result.
On the contrary, in the eastern state of Bihar most of the land is owned by a handful
of landlords. This unequal land distribution is the main reason for the clashes between
landowners and labourers there for the last 50 years. Bihar’s average food production
is also very low compared to other states. In the Philippines, land reforms were
introduced in the early 1970s and since then rice lands have been owned by rice producers,
not by landlords. Japan also undertook land reforms after the Second World War and
food production has increased steadily since then.
Reports have shown that cultivable areas in Asia are decreasing gradually due to
rapid urbanization and industrialization. What repercussions will this have in the
next 25 years?
In many Asian countries, productive agricultural land is situated close to cities
and towns. When the cities expand these lands become the first victims. In China,
for example, agricultural land is disappearing rapidly to meet the demands of industrial
and housing projects. In the 1970s, the area under rice cultivation in China was
over 35 million hectares. By 1990 the figure had dropped to 31 million hectares.
China doesn’t have additional land which can be converted to agricultural purposes.
The Chinese government is aware of this problem and has introduced strict laws to
prevent agricultural land from being converted to industrial and housing purposes.
In Indonesia, particularly in Java, 60,000 hectares of rice land are lost every year
because of increasing demand for houses and factories, and in the Philippines, they
lose around 10,000 hectares of rice fields for the same reasons. We should remember
that rice fields being consumed by urban growth cannot simply be replaced by clearing
more forests. Countries such as the Philippines don’t have much forest left. To partly
compensate, Asian countries should try to bring more areas under irrigation. Again
that requires a lot of investment.
Scientists say that the arrival of monsoon rains has been either delayed or advanced
due to global climate change, affecting farming communities in many Asian countries.
What could the consequences be if the pattern continues?
It will be very destructive for agriculture if this change in the weather pattern,
known as the La Niña effect, strikes again this year. In Southeast Asia last
year, the monsoon was delayed by four months whereas it rained heavily during the
harvest season so that rice crops were destroyed. As a result, rice farmers have
suffered heavy losses in the last two years. Rice production in the Philippines and
Indonesia has gone into sharp decline following the La Niña effect. I hope
this continues to be a rare phenomenon, which occurs once every 10 years or more.
If it happens every year then it will have a devastating effect on rice cultivation.
Has the Asian financial crisis had an impact on rice production?
The Asian financial crisis primarily affected South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia
and Malaysia. In South Korea and Malaysia, the agricultural sector was unaffected,
and rice production in those countries has been normal for the last two years. Thailand
managed to withstand the crisis mainly because of its strength in rice cultivation.
Many Thais who were working in factories moved back to rice fields following the
economic crisis. As a result, the area under rice cultivation increased and Thailand
was able to produce more rice than in the previous years. The Thai government has
realized that rice cultivation is the country’s backbone, and is paying more attention
to agriculture now.
In Indonesia, the economic crisis has had an adverse impact. In the aftermath of
the crisis, the cash-strapped Indonesian government stopped giving subsidies for
fertilizers and fertilizer prices shot up. Many rice farmers had to abandon their
crops because they simply could not afford to buy fertilizers at the new rates. Economic
crisis, along with La Niña, hit rice output in Indonesia last year, reducing
rice stocks to their lowest level in the last decade. Indonesia was a rice exporter
until a few years ago but now imports three million tonnes a year.
What about China?
Many experts have predicted that China is likely to face a major food shortage
in the next century. The population is still increasing at the rate of 1.1 per cent.
It is estimated that the population growth rate will stabilize only after touching
the 1.6 billion mark compared to the present 1.2 billion. That means another 400
million to 500 million more people to feed. Only 11 per cent of the total land area
in China is suited to agriculture. The rest consists of mountains and deserts. So
China will become the largest importer of food grains 30 years from now.
* Gurdev S. Khush is Principal Plant Breeder and Head of the Division of Plant Breeding, Genetics and Biochemistry at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) based at Manila (the Philippines).