| Literature DB >> 35681316 |
Xiang Wang1, Wenli Qiang1, Shuwen Niu1, Anna Growe2, Simin Yan2, Nan Tian1.
Abstract
The transformation of dietary structure brought about by economic development in populous countries is expected to trigger an increase in grain demand, which will put enormous pressure on the grain supply in these nations and even globally. We simulated nine demand scenarios for 2020-2050 based on China's dataset for 15 kinds of grains from 1961-2018. The results show that the maximum difference between the predicted grain demand is 323.8 Mt, equal to the total grain consumption of approximately 600 million Chinese people in one year. To capture which demand scenarios will be met when grain productivity gradually improves within reasonable ranges, we present three projections from the production side. In particular, Projection 1 (P1), which maintains productivity at the current level, only fulfills the projected demand for Scenarios 1-LL, 2-LM, 4-ML, and 7-HL and falls short of the maximum value (Scenario 9-HH) by 117 Mt, which requires an additional 250,000 ha of arable land resources to fill the gap. After raising the preset value of grain yield, the productivity of Projection 2 in turn satisfies the demand scenario 5-MM. When both set variables (grain yields and arable area) increase simultaneously, the output of Projection 3 increases by 15.3% over P1. However, it still lags behind the demand of 68 million tons in Scenario 9-HH, thus implying uncertainty in China's vision of meeting the goal of 95% grain self-sufficiency. Rather than pursuing a single outcome, we discuss multiple possibilities for China's future grain balance and emphasize the adjusting and compensating role of grain trade and storage in the whole system. Ultimately, this paper calls for a better understanding of the supply-demand gap therein and its future trends to support national grain security as well as global sustainable food policies.Entities:
Keywords: China; demand scenarios; food security; gap; population peak; production projections
Year: 2022 PMID: 35681316 PMCID: PMC9180600 DOI: 10.3390/foods11111566
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Research methodology.
Figure 2The analysis framework of grain demand scenarios and production projection.
Comparison with the results of existing studies.
| Scenario | Method | References | Result | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low | Dietary balance estimation | Tang et al. [ | 386 | −3 |
| Xin et al. [ | 386 | −3 | ||
| Medium | Historical trend extrapolation | Feng et al. [ | 450 | −67 |
| Lin et al. [ | 470 | −47 | ||
| High | International Experience Study | Xin et al. [ | 517 | 0 |
| Huang et al. [ | 531 | 14 |
Figure 3Scenarios of per capita grain demand (a) and population size (b) during 2020–2050.
Figure 4Scenario simulation of 9-grain demand (a) during 2020–2050 and comparison of 9 scenarios in 2050 (b).
Figure 5Ranges in grain production yield (a) and arable land area (b) during 1961–2018.
Figure 6Projection of 3-grain production during 2020–2050.
Figure 7The gaps of demand scenarios and production projection in 2050. If demand is greater than production, the gap is positive and denoted in red. Conversely, if demand is less than production, the gap is negative, indicated in blue.
9 Scenario simulation values for grain demand and production in 2050.
| Indicator | Scenario Analysis | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario1 | Scenario2 | Scenario3 | Scenario4 | Scenario5 | Scenario6 | Scenario7 | Scenario8 | Scenario9 | ||
| Demand | Population size (billion people) | 1.29 | 1.29 | 1.29 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.51 | 1.51 | 1.51 |
| Grain per capita demand (kg/capita/year) | 389 | 517 | 546 | 389 | 517 | 546 | 389 | 517 | 546 | |
| Total grain demand (million tons) | 503.2 | 668.8 | 706.3 | 545.5 | 725.0 | 765.7 | 589.2 | 783.1 | 827.0 | |
| Production | Projection 1 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 | 709.6 |
| Projection 2 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | 738.7 | |
| Projection 3 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | 759.0 | |
| Balance | The gap with current production (Mt) | 154.8 | −10.8 | −48.3 | 112.5 | −67.0 | −107.7 | 68.8 | −125.1 | −169.0 |
| The gap with production projection 1 (Mt) | 205.8 | 40.2 | 2.7 | 163.5 | −16.0 | −56.7 | 119.8 | −74.1 | −118.0 | |
| The gap with production projection 2 (Mt) | 234.8 | 69.2 | 31.7 | 192.5 | 13.0 | −27.7 | 148.8 | −45.1 | −89.0 | |
| The gap with production projection 3 (Mt) | 255.8 | 90.2 | 52.7 | 213.5 | 34.0 | −6.7 | 169.8 | −24.1 | −68.0 | |
| The average gap (Mt) | 232.1 | 66.5 | 29.0 | 189.8 | 10.3 | −30.4 | 146.1 | −47.8 | −91.7 | |
| The gap to fill by grain imports | - | - | - | 30% | 50% | 100% | ||||