What is the right path forward for agriculture?

(Baonghean) - In the last few years, a recurring question has been raised for agriculture in Nghe An in particular: What path should agriculture take to continue developing? And how should it achieve that?

Logically speaking, the highest-level specialized state management agency, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, has yet to issue any official document; however, in practice, they have implemented several policies such as land consolidation, infrastructure development (roads, electricity, irrigation), and the construction of rural markets: "New rural areas must have markets and utilize scientific and technological advancements in production; organize linkages between the 'four stakeholders' (farmers, businesses, scientists, and the government); connect raw material production with processing to create value-added product chains; and encourage businesses to invest in rural agriculture"...

What can we say about the results of those policies so far? We would like to offer the following opinion:

- Land consolidation only eliminates the fragmentation of land plots for each household, but it does not eliminate the fragmentation of the entire agricultural sector.

- Rural roads have been paved and widened, creating very favorable conditions for transportation in both agricultural production and trade. Electricity has almost completely covered most communes, providing energy for processing and developing industries in rural areas; this is a very commendable achievement.

- Regarding irrigation, while irrigation capacity has increased, the approach remains fundamentally outdated. Irrigation for industrial crops, fruit trees, and vegetables has yielded very few results, particularly lacking a fundamental approach to high-tech irrigation methods such as sprinkler irrigation, drip irrigation, and bottom-up irrigation. Consequently, during drought years, these areas suffer greatly.

- Rural markets are almost ubiquitous in the communes; however, they can only meet the needs of small-scale production and consumption, not the demands of large-scale production.

- The "four-party" linkage model has yielded good results, but it remains a model rather than a widespread practice.
- Linking production with processing always creates problems in the relationship between raw material producers and processing businesses. The interests of the two sides are always in conflict, but there is no fundamental solution to address this.

- Applying scientific and technological advancements to production helps individual farmers produce more efficiently with different crops and livestock, but it has not yet created a breakthrough in technology that is widespread.

- Calls for domestic and foreign businesses to invest in agriculture have yielded little result. Businesses want to invest but face many obstacles, especially regarding land, mechanisms, policies, and laws, so they are forced to "give up" and switch to other investment directions.
- Finally, building a high-tech agricultural sector seems unlikely to be feasible. High technology in agriculture encompasses everything from seed creation and selection, soil preparation, irrigation, fertilization, harvesting, post-harvest preservation, and processing… Only when all these aspects are fully developed and reach that level will the development have the capacity to compete in domestic, regional, and international markets, and only then will it be sustainable...

Here, we would like to state our own viewpoint: If we want to continue developing sustainably, agriculture in Nghe An province, in particular, must follow the path of linkage, by consciously organizing that linkage. And, before going into specifics about the "path of linkage," we would like to affirm the following two points:

Firstly, economic leadership, economic direction, and economic management that do not begin with economic interests are completely meaningless. The previous Contract Farming System (Khoán 10) and Directive 100 addressed the fundamental economic interests of individual farming households, thus creating motivation from each household to promote agricultural development.

Secondly, the motivation derived from the economic interests of individual farmers is no longer sufficient to develop agriculture to the level it deserves. Therefore, a new impetus must be created; and that new impetus is none other than the path of linkage and the way linkages are organized.

So what exactly is the path to collaboration and the process of proactively organizing collaboration? We would like to present our own perspective on this issue:

1. First and foremost, individual farmers must cooperate in some form. Only when officials, associations, cooperatives, etc., have established this cooperation can they eliminate the fragmented and small-scale nature of hundreds of thousands or even millions of farmers, creating large-scale collective enterprises. This cooperation will pave the way and "clear the way" for businesses to invest in agriculture (including production, processing, and product consumption); it will enable investment in agricultural and rural infrastructure, create a "market" for science and technology, organize cooperation among farmers, and provide the necessary conditions for implementing the "four-party" linkage. In this "four-party" linkage, the number of farmers will no longer be in the hundreds of thousands or millions, but will be 100 times smaller. Each farmer association (or unit) will represent the rights, interests, and responsibilities of dozens or hundreds of farmers in signing economic contracts with businesses, agencies, scientists, and government bodies.

2. The linkage of farmers to move towards large-scale commodity production is an economic necessity; whether we like it or not, it will inevitably happen. The only difference is whether it happens spontaneously or through conscious organization. If this process is left to happen spontaneously, the linkage will be slow. Conversely, if it is a conscious process, the organized linkage will shorten the time required.

3. Speaking of spontaneously organizing linkages, first and foremost, it requires the leadership role and responsibility of the Party as the comprehensive and ruling power, followed by the "midwife" role and responsibility of the State combined with the enlightenment of farmers after a period of reflection on their fields; along with the involvement of businesses, entrepreneurs, agencies, scientists, and some relevant political organizations.

4. Linking farmers together to create an economic organizational basis for the "four-party" linkage. The "four-party" linkage is an economic linkage and therefore must have two foundations: benefits and legal basis. Farmers only participate in linkage organizations (associations, new-style clubs, etc.). When within a linkage organization, they gain greater and more secure benefits. The "four-party" linkage must harmonize the interests of each party. Finally, the economic linkage contracts must be guaranteed by strict and rigorous legal regulations.

5. The process of consciously organizing associations is also a qualitative transformation for the peasant class. Vietnamese farmers, and Nghe An farmers in particular, will transform from small-scale producers to modern farmers. Vietnamese rural areas – specifically Nghe An – will evolve from traditional villages to modern rural areas. The ongoing construction of new rural areas can only be considered complete when agricultural production reaches the level of large-scale commodity production and achieves a high-tech agricultural standard.

In answer to the question of what path Nghe An's agriculture should take, and how to achieve it, the most general answer is: it must follow a scientific and revolutionary path; and simultaneously, it must be done in a scientific and revolutionary way! Because, ultimately, transforming the current small-scale agriculture into large-scale commodity production based on high technology is truly a major revolution with a genuine scientific foundation.

Truong Cong Anh