中央农村工作会议系列解读⑮健全主产区利益补偿机制 夯实粮食安全根基******
作者:辛翔飞 中国农业科学院农业经济与发展研究所
2022年中央农村工作会议强调“保障粮食和重要农产品稳定安全供给始终是建设农业强国的头等大事”,“要健全种粮农民收益保障机制,健全主产区利益补偿机制”。现阶段,主产区在国家粮食安全保障中的根基性地位愈加凸显,但其区域经济社会发展尤其是粮食生产的可持续发展面临诸多困境。健全主产区利益补偿机制,对于夯实我国粮食安全根基具有重大战略意义。
我国粮食安全保障对主产区依存度显著升高
自20世纪70年代末以来,我国粮食产销区域格局发生了重大历史性变化,主要特征是:主销区粮食自给水平显著降低,产销平衡区粮食产需缺口持续加大,主产区成为我国粮食安全保障的主体支撑。以当年全国人均粮食产量为自给标准计算,1978-2021年主销区粮食自给率由93.57%降至19.91%,粮食产需缺口由297万吨增至11800万吨;产销平衡区粮食自给率由87.29%降至78.40%,粮食产需缺口由851万吨增至3200万吨;主产区粮食自给率由106.65%升至139.33%,商品粮调出数量由1280万吨增至15000万吨。主销区和产销平衡区巨大的粮食产需缺口均高度依赖于主产区的生产供给。
主产区经济社会及粮食可持续发展面临诸多困境
多年来,虽然国家不断加大对主产区发展的支持力度,但由于粮食生产对区域经济社会发展的贡献度低,主产区大多数省份仍处于“粮食大省、经济穷省”的窘况之中。较为突出的表现在:一是经济发展相对滞后。1980-2020年,主产区GDP增长204.14倍,成就显著,但明显低于主销区286.66倍和产销平衡区234.96倍的GDP增幅。二是地方财政收入增长偏慢。自1994年税收制度改革至2020年,主产区地方财政收入增长38.64倍,明显低于主销区48.49倍和产销平衡区42.20倍的地方财政收入增幅。三是地方财政支出能力偏弱。1994-2020年,主产区人均财政支出能力与主销区和产销平衡区的差距均显著扩大。1994年主产区财政人均支出水平为269.3元,比主销区和产销平衡区分别低337.0元和32.6元;2020年主产区人均财政支出增长至13477.8元,但与主销区和产销平衡区的差距分别扩大到4022.0元和2686.8元。四是粮食生产促进农民收入增长的功能弱化。改革开放后,在国家政策支持下,粮食生产发展在农民收入增长方面发挥了重要促进作用。2010年,主产区13个省份中有6个省份农民人均可支配收入高于全国平均水平。此后,受国内外粮价倒挂冲击,粮食生产的增收作用减弱。2020年,主产区中仅有山东、辽宁、江苏三个省份农民人均可支配收入高于全国平均水平,黑龙江、吉林、河北等产粮大省的农民人均可支配收入由高于全国平均水平转变为低于全国平均水平。五是人口吸引力偏弱。1980-2020年,主产区人口增长了29.01%,明显低于主销区103.20%和产销平衡区43.64%的人口增幅。尤其是进入21世纪后,随着主产区人口的大量流出,劳动能力较强的中青年人口和男性人口占比下降,劳动力较弱的老龄人口和妇女留守人口占比增加。上述方面问题的存在,均不同程度影响着主产区粮食生产可持续发展根基的稳固,亟须通过健全主产区利益补偿机制加以解决。
健全主产区利益补偿机制的思路
健全主产区利益补偿机制,应加强顶层设计,明晰政策目标,坚持贡献与补偿相匹配,加大补偿力度,完善补偿保障机制。
加强顶层设计。健全主产区利益补偿机制,涉及中央和地方、主产区和非主产区、生产和消费、市场与政府等方方面面,需坚持一体设计、统筹协调、综合推进,确保政令一致,防止顾此失彼或政策内耗。
明晰政策目标。从国家粮食安全利益、区域经济社会发展利益和区域生态利益等多维度综合评估主产区粮食生产的贡献价值,坚持贡献与补偿相匹配、补偿与粮食根基巩固相适应的原则,确立明晰的政策目标和时限,力戒将“合理补偿”“尽快实现”类政策原则虚化为政策目标。
健全中央和地方共同承担机制。现阶段,仅靠中央财政难以实现让主产区种粮不吃亏、得实惠的目标,必须建立由中央和受益地区共同负责的补偿机制。在补偿总体目标确定下,明晰划分中央财政和受益地区各方应承担的补偿责任。对于中央财政所承担部分,由国家通过健全资金保障机制,确保补偿资金足额到位。同时,对存在粮食产需缺口的地区,由国家按受益规模确定补偿标准和统一归集补偿资金,按贡献度对主产区进行补偿。
健全主产区经济发展助推机制。主产区粮食生产根基的巩固,以及其经济社会发展滞后状况的改变,既要靠利益补偿机制“输血”,也要靠其经济提速增效增强自身“造血”功能。国家应在健全主产区利益补偿机制的同时,加大力度健全主产区经济发展助推机制。一是支持主产区率先建成农业强省。鼓励主产区加强现代农业建设,进一步夯实粮食生产根基,并利用粮食等农产品生产优势,加快一二三产业融合发展,做强产业链,提升价值链,在建设农业强国中走在前列。二是支持主产区加快经济转型升级。鼓励主产区“弯道超车”,抢占新技术应用制高点,大力发展节地节水高效集约的现代制造业和服务业,形成后发优势。三是支持主产区提升现代基础设施建设水平。加大对主产区现代基础设施体系建设的支持力度,增强区域发展吸引力和竞争力。
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******
中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。
2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。
日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。
日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。
事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。
因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。
日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。
《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。
德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。
日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。
国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。
太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。
Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.
Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.
The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.
The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.
In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.
Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.
The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.
The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.
The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.
According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.
As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.
However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.
Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.
The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.
If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
(文图:赵筱尘 巫邓炎) [责编:天天中] 阅读剩余全文() ![]() 爱乐透彩票地图 |