This year is expected to be the hottest on record. However, at the recently concluded 29th UN Climate Change Conference, nations continued to clash over funding issues, leaving negotiations repeatedly deadlocked. The climate funding gap for agriculture is particularly vast.
When we talk about agriculture adapting to climate change, what exactly are we talking about? Liu Juan, Associate Professor at the College of Humanities and Development, China Agricultural University, has conducted long-term rural research across the country, analysing farmers’ livelihoods and issues of environmental justice through the lenses of environmental sociology and political ecology. She is also a co-author of the 2023 book Rural Revitalisation from the Farmers’ Perspective. In recent years, she has turned her attention to the intersection of climate change and rural development, seeking to explore the types of response measures farmers and villages need in the face of climate change. How can we move beyond a narrow “climate-only” approach to fundamentally enhance climate resilience in rural areas?
The following is her conversation with Foodthink.
● November 2024: Professor Liu Juan (second from left) participates in a comprehensive field survey in Yi County, Hebei, conducted by the “Agricultural Administration and Development” research team led by Professor Ye Jingzhong (sixth from right). Source: Official WeChat account of the College of Humanities and Development, China Agricultural University
I. Planting Rice on Cracked Earth
Foodthink: You have been conducting research on the front line in rural areas. Are there any stories regarding climate change that have left a strong impression on you?Liu Juan: This summer, we began a case study project on farmers’ awareness and adaptive capacity regarding climate change, focusing primarily on several case sites in Hebei and Chongqing. When we visited Chongqing, it was incredibly hot, with temperatures near 40 degrees Celsius under a scorching sun. This was followed by the prolonged periods of extreme heat and drought that Chongqing is well known for. In fact, the drought in Chongqing in 2022 was very severe, and at the time, the entire Yangtze River basin suffered from severe drought. Land transfer in Chongqing is extreme; over 90% of the land has been transferred. Only a small number of farmers still manage very small plots—land that is not very suitable for transfer and was therefore kept by the farmers themselves. Due to the drought, once the land cracked, it could no longer hold water. After the great drought of 2022, these small-scale farmers basically stopped planting rice.
Foodthink: Then who is planting the rice?Liu Juan: The village cooperatives; they are required to complete planting targets for a certain area of staple grains. During our research this year, we learned that in the spring of 2023, the cooperatives used machinery to break up the cracked soil whenever it rained slightly, in order to create a stable state where the soil had no cracks and could retain water. But a single session of tilling cannot fully repair these cracks; they have to keep a close eye on when it rains and perform the next round of mixing and repair while there is water. Otherwise, even with subsequent rain or irrigation, the land still cannot hold water. In regions dominated by mountains and hills, the cost of this entire operation is extremely high. The returns from agricultural products may not necessarily cover these costs, so so-called “coping” or “adaptation” is incredibly difficult.
● April 2024: Severe drought in Yunnan; the rice terraces in Mojiang are badly cracked. Source: Yunnan Sili Centre
II. The Need for Social Mechanisms to Address the Diverse Impacts of Climate Change
Foodthink: That sounds quite daunting. Based on your research in other parts of the country, is this situation common?Liu Juan: Climate change manifests in different directions, and its impacts take different forms across various regions. In our study, we selected three cases in a county in Hebei to observe and understand the differences in adaptation actions among different types of crop systems and agricultural producers when facing climate change. The relevant report is expected to be published next April.
This county is very close to Beijing. One of the case sites chosen is a village we visited years ago during another study. It is a very typical traditional farming community; much of the labour force has migrated for work, and those who remain in the village year-round are primarily the elderly. It has also gone through the poverty alleviation campaign. Since that study, we have stationed a postgraduate student in the village every year to help the village with various tasks while conducting research; they have all produced excellent theses.
During the “731” floods last year, one of the students was in the village and experienced the entire process—from warnings and risk mitigation to evacuation, relocation, and post-disaster reconstruction. The government subsequently made many top-down arrangements, such as requiring the village to designate and clearly mark areas for emergency evacuation. But this was clearly targeted only at floods; it hasn’t yet considered the perspective of uncertainty and the diverse risks of climate change. When we recently visited the village for research, we saw that the Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Affairs and the Water Resources Bureau had each issued disaster prevention and mitigation brochures. The covers were different colours, but the content inside was actually identical.
● River channels and bridges were severely damaged following the floods.Foodthink: Apart from the government, can other social forces participate in responding to climate change?Liu Juan: Yes, and that is one of the reasons why I focus on social organisation—not referring to specific organisational bodies, but rather wanting to discuss how we should form social mechanisms to respond to climate change. On a societal level, how exactly should we respond to climate change? Beyond schemes for dealing with flash floods or preventing dam failures, we may need more comprehensive solutions—a whole set of social mechanisms—because the impacts of climate change are not monolithic.
For example, the impact of the floods following the “731” rainstorms on this village was primarily the destruction of roads and bridges. Since crops are mainly grown on hillsides, at most a small patch of land collapsed, so the losses weren’t that great. This is unlike the plains, where the waterlogged fields are completely submerged. Conversely, in early August this year, the village experienced a windstorm. The maize hadn’t fully matured, and more than half of it was flattened. Much of the maize rotted in the fields, and it was difficult for people to even enter the plots; the losses were quite severe. Agricultural insurance actually existed a couple of years ago, but because farmers felt it was useless and found it hard to obtain compensation, almost no one participated this year.
● Maize flattened after the windstorm.In another township, we found that they grow waxy corn for export to South Korea, which is harvested earlier and was therefore completely unaffected. Of course, this may also be due to their geographical location, where the winds were not as strong and unharvested crops escaped similar damage. Interestingly, the agricultural insurance uptake rate in this township was much higher than in previous years. Every community has its own micro-environment, which influences how the local population adapts to climate change.
What role can social organisations play in helping rural areas cope with climate change? Foodthink is currently conducting a nationwide survey of NGOs. We invite you to click here to complete the “Research on the Action Paths of Rural Social Organisations in Response to Climate Change in China” questionnaire to support rural climate action.
Foodthink: These variations exist not just at the community level; on an individual level, a farmer’s production methods and livelihood patterns also determine their specific climate resilience.Liu Juan: Exactly. However, I believe that overall, whether at the level of individual farmers or entire villages, the capacity for rural areas to independently cope with climate change is very weak.
We had another postgraduate student stationed in a village for six months to study transport and infrastructure. Last year, the “731” rainstorms destroyed many of the roads and bridges in that village. Because the village had little to no collective economy, they relied primarily on post-disaster reconstruction projects from the Water Conservancy Bureau and other agencies to repair them.
We also interviewed a farm owner who runs an eco-park. In 2021, floods destroyed several greenhouses used for growing strawberries and other fruits. He raised funds to repair them in 2022, but a larger flood struck in the summer of 2023, leaving the owner too disheartened to try again. In his own words: “What if another big flood comes and washes them away again? Unless God can tell me which days it will rain and which it won’t, or at least when it will happen.” The rare snowstorms of winter 2023 also collapsed some of the park’s greenhouses, which remain unrepaired to this day. Therefore, scaling up and investing in facilities is not necessarily the ideal solution for mitigating climate risk.
● The top right of the image shows significant damage to the greenhouses that the farm owner dared not repair.Foodthink: In that case, do smallholders with fewer facility investments suffer smaller losses?Liu Juan: It’s not a simple yes or no. We feel there is no perfect solution at the farmer level; everyone simply weighs the costs against the returns. Take the traditionally farmed village I mentioned earlier: they have some newly levelled farmland on the hillsides with supporting water pipes and towers. Yet, farmers almost never use them, even during spring droughts when they cannot sow on time. If a single household opens the sluice, they don’t know when the water will actually reach their plot, and the costs of water and electricity are too high. It is more economical to simply plant later and accept a slightly lower yield.
For experienced smallholders, “leaving it to the weather” is not a passive response, but rather a strategy of “minimising input”. Sometimes they check the weather forecast and take whatever small precautions they can. But when a true disaster strikes, they may do nothing at all, because the cost of intervention is too high and the effectiveness uncertain.
Some farmers switch crops. This village has seen such shifts in the past, moving from wheat in irrigated fields to more drought-resistant crops like maize, peanuts, and sweet potatoes. But overall, this outcome is not driven by climate change alone; labour migration is also a key factor.
Many of the adjustments in planting patterns we see now are inevitably influenced by climate change, but it is not always the direct or primary driver. In our research for the book *Rural Revitalisation from the Farmers’ Perspective*, we found that farmers believe the primary constraint on agricultural production is a shortage of labour, followed by natural disasters.
● Based on research across ten villages in five provinces, the “Agricultural Politics and Development” research team from the College of Humanities and Development at China Agricultural University, to which Liu Juan belongs, published *Rural Revitalisation from the Farmers’ Perspective* (2 volumes) in 2023.
III. Labour Shortages and the Economics of Farming
Foodthink: In the context of rural hollowing out, if household income depends mainly on young people working in cities, the elderly will naturally do as little as possible. Compared to high-sounding climate adaptation measures, reducing input is more important to them.Liu Juan: Elderly residents can take it easier—sowing a few seeds, harvesting some peanuts or sweet potatoes in autumn, or planting a bit of fruit and nuts. A slower pace, without the pressure of rushed planting or harvesting, is in itself an adaptation to the current labour structure.
Foodthink: You mentioned earlier that after land transfers in Chongqing, smallholders stopped growing rice due to drought. What are they growing instead?Liu Juan: Smallholders who are still farming are often too old to use machinery to break up the soil and harrow it repeatedly—which is necessary to create the stable water-retention systems required for rice cultivation, as cooperatives do. Consequently, they often switch directly to drought-resistant crops such as maize.
● Chongqing farmers harvesting in the scorching autumn sun.Foodthink: With the mechanical operation costs for cooperatives being so high, who ultimately bears the burden?Liu Juan: The management of cooperatives or federations is actually under a great deal of pressure. Land transfer involves the payment of rent; fortunately, some villages have not adopted the transfer method, but instead use what is called land entrustment. This focuses on having someone look after the land to ensure it is cultivated and does not go to waste. Farmers with this mindset do not press too hard for rent, so the pressure on the cooperatives is relatively lower. Otherwise, when hit by extreme weather, the losses faced by a cooperative would be unimaginable.
During previous research in places like Guangxi and Yunnan, we found that the cultivation of cash crops, such as bananas and dragon fruit, often involves monoculture, which causes a certain amount of damage to the soil. Consequently, regardless of who leases the land, rent must be paid. At the time, the profits from fruit were quite high; even with typhoons and other issues, there was still a decent profit over a few years. However, for grain crops, this profit margin simply does not exist.
Foodthink: Indeed, when discussing the impact of climate change on farmers, we must consider many dimensions—not just the scale of planting, but also the type of crop, the level of policy support, and the farmers’ own livelihood models. In academia, how are these very real, concrete bottlenecks in rural development integrated into the view of climate change impacts and responses?
Liu Juan: From the perspective of domestic academia, research that combines climate change with the transformation of rural development seems to be rare for now. Studies focusing purely on agriculture have become more common in recent years. However, the countryside is undergoing a massive transformation. In the “Introduction to Rural Revitalisation” course that I teach, there is a specific chapter exploring the Chinese countryside of today (the 2020s). This is because I sometimes see students writing about the Chinese countryside as if it were still the countryside from the last century’s “From the Soil”, perhaps because such a setting and analysis have become habitual. But in reality, today’s countryside has changed profoundly.
IV. It is not just the climate that is changing, but the countryside itself
Foodthink: If you had to summarise today’s transformed countryside with a few keywords, what would they be?Liu Juan: Agriculture, the countryside, and the farmers can be seen as three different threads for understanding the transformation of agricultural administration.
For example, looking at the countryside from a human perspective, two trends are observable: ageing and a general outflow of the population. In terms of macro statistics, we used to say there were 900 million farmers in the countryside; now, the permanent resident population is less than 500 million. This is a seismic shift. Yet many studies seem to ignore such a massive transformation; we have not yet properly explored what actually happened during this process.
From the perspective of the primary actors in agricultural production: who is farming now? Who is still willing to farm? Who is capable of farming? The identity of the “farmer” has also changed significantly. What remains constant is that the people farming are the same group—they have simply grown older. But who are the people now willing to engage with the countryside? The poverty alleviation campaign was, in effect, a social engineering project that mobilised significant external forces to enter the countryside for large-scale intervention and modification.
Foodthink: A lot of money was also spent on hardware. The improvement of rural infrastructure is obvious, but we have also seen infrastructure projects with very low utility or that were simply a waste of money. During our research in Shanxi, we found an absurd phenomenon. Previously, dry toilets allowed waste to be dug out for composting. After the toilet upgrades, waste had to be pumped out for centralised treatment. Some were simply vanity projects: a toilet bowl was placed atop a dry toilet without any plumbing connected, which the farmers found impractical to use.Liu Juan: I feel the same. I have become increasingly cautious regarding interventions in rural areas. I have participated in the evaluation of several projects or case studies, involving various industrial projects and many rural construction projects. Most of the time, we find that development interventions are often driven by a well-meaning “desire for improvement.”
Especially in the last decade or so, many projects have seen huge investments in construction, but in the end, they are difficult to put into use—let alone be fully utilised for the benefit of the local people; some are simply abandoned. Learning more about this can easily lead to a feeling of illusion and meaninglessness. For example, in some remote mountainous townships, centralised sewage treatment facilities were built. But in the mountains, how do you collect sewage from scattered, individual households? Furthermore, treating sewage requires technical, personnel, and financial investment. Consequently, once built, these projects faced operational difficulties; in some places, the townships were unwilling to take over the projects once they were completed.
V. Breaking down disciplinary divides to jointly tackle climate change
Foodthink: You mentioned earlier that research combining climate change with rural transformation is particularly scarce. Why is that?Liu Juan: One possible reason is the disciplinary divide. Many people in the fields of natural science and economics study climate change, but there is a lack of attention to what is actually happening at the micro level and the social factors involved.Students and teachers in the social sciences seem reluctant to touch upon climate or environmental issues, perhaps because they feel they lack the expertise or cannot fully penetrate these fields.
Currently, the professional groups I have encountered domestically who show a certain level of interest in this are limited, mainly involving environmental sociology and political ecology. In environmental sociology, the focus on climate change still tends to lean towards purely sociological or political analysis, with environmental and climatic factors serving more as a background. Political ecology focuses more on the interaction between social structures, power relations, and environmental issues; this is still a niche, emerging field in China. Searching on CNKI, one might find some literature reviews on political ecology—mainly from Marxist scholars, as well as scholars in anthropology and geography reviewing foreign political ecology literature—but overall, empirical research results in the Chinese language are still relatively few.
Since last year, I have participated in a political ecology workshop that brought together several young researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds, with the hope of forming a new research community. Climate change and the transformation of agricultural administration are very important topics within this. We hope to make some breakthroughs in the next three to five years, including translating, introducing, and systematically reviewing political ecology schools, and refining a political ecology framework for the Chinese agricultural and rural sectors.
● The second Political Ecology Workshop, co-organised by Liu Juan, is about to take place.Foodthink: There are a vast number of papers on the impact of climate change on agriculture, but very few on how climate change affects the livelihoods of smallholder farmers. Moreover, we have found that even when research exists, it tends to prove known issues rather than provide suggestions that can guide practice.Liu Juan: Macro-level quantifiable issues are actually quite clear. What is needed now are more micro-narratives to present the complexity of the problems and to identify where the key issues lie; therefore, basic research itself is very important.
I have found that international organisations and rural social organisations do not place much emphasis on the research process during the early stages of a project, focusing instead on more visible, quantifiably assessable short-term interventions and specific activities. If someone has already conducted high-quality research and work can be carried out directly based on those results, that is perfectly acceptable. However, if it is a new intervention project, it is vital to understand the basics of the problem and determine its nature and key factors through research. This avoids a piecemeal approach of “treating the symptom rather than the cause,” and prevents formalistic training, seminars, and interventions.
Foodthink: How then should social organisations and researchers interact?Liu Juan: I believe rigorous research is essential. The combination of academic research and action-practice is necessary, and NGOs need to strengthen their cooperation with research institutions to ensure the essence of the problem is understood before interventions and actions are taken.
For instance, if the crux of the problem lies at the institutional level, we may first need to push for a solution at that level through policy consultation and communication; therefore, the key action is not necessarily direct intervention with individuals. While individual interventions might solve a few specific problems, the overall impact may be very small.
When advocacy is involved, it may be necessary to first present the problem and use the media or other channels to create public awareness before a positive overall effect can be achieved. In reality, there are indeed some organisations or projects that begin action and intervention before they have clarified the essence of the problem or the path to understanding it, which makes it far too easy to trigger new “problems.”
Foodthink: Could you give an example of a situation where policy issues need to be solved first?Liu Juan: For example, when we talk about agricultural responses to climate change and enhancing the adaptive capacity of smallholders, our research has found that enhancing the capacity of individuals or small household units has limited significance. The focus may need to shift towards the community or the socio-ecological system, which involves higher-level coordination and collaboration, as well as a great deal of granular, concrete work.
Take agricultural insurance as another example. Given that the costs of grain production are high, returns are low, and there is a widespread reluctance to grow grain, should the risk costs associated with the cultivation of major food crops be borne by the farmers? Or, put another way, what should the accountability mechanism for ensuring food security look like? If we want farmers to remain willing to farm and to actually continue doing so, do we need policy-based safeguards so that they aren’t left feeling precarious, whether in years of favourable weather or those with frequent extreme weather events?
Then there is the issue of labour. In many places now, it is the elderly who are farming; sometimes even when young people are at home, the actual farm work is done by the elderly, as they are the ones who truly care about the land. If we idealistically hope to train them to adopt more ecological farming and rearing methods, some of these measures often require greater labour input, which only makes their lives harder and the practice less sustainable. Therefore, it is not that they are unaware of the need to reduce the use of chemical fertilisers, pesticides, and herbicides, but rather a question of “whether they can”. From the perspective of intervention, what is more urgently needed are ecological farming and rearing methods that reduce labour intensity and lighten the load on the workers.
●August 2023: At the Sustainable Food Systems Media Workshop hosted by Foodthink, Liu Juan introduces her research to over 30 journalists and media professionals.
VI. What to Do and What Not to Do
Foodthink: It sounds as though smallholders who are still farming are already bearing a burden they should not have to. What external forces should do is help lighten that load, rather than adding “armour” in the name of so-called climate adaptation.Liu Juan: A few years ago, during our research in Shaanxi, we encountered similar cases. Certain local industries, including those linked to poverty alleviation, provided a large number of women with employment close to home. From the perspective of women’s economic independence, this was a positive development as they could earn a local income. However, the women themselves mostly felt exhausted. They might work 10 hours a day to earn extra money, while the male labour still had to migrate for work. Consequently, the farm work and housework still awaited them; they had to scramble to find time for everything. As a result, many women felt utterly exhausted; it was not the “good life” they had hoped for.
There were also measures encouraging the elderly to raise pigs to help them obtain industrial subsidies. The agencies promoting these projects may have failed to sufficiently consider factors such as labour input, feasibility, climate, and market risks at the time.
Foodthink: In some places, governments and NGOs have promoted integrated projects involving cattle, biogas, and composting, with the idea of not only increasing farmers’ income but also achieving climate mitigation and adaptation benefits. But when meat prices fell, these projects naturally collapsed. This serves as a reminder: if we do not analyse the position of smallholders within the regional and even global economic and political landscape, such projects may simply be short-sighted actions that neglect the fundamentals.Liu Juan: Yes, approaching the problem from the perspective of environmental and social justice may allow for a more precise entry point. The distribution of climate change impacts and adaptation costs is highly uneven across different groups and regions.
Responding to climate change requires not only the constant efforts of natural scientists but also interdisciplinary perspectives, such as political ecology, to explore the issue of climate justice at a social level. Generally speaking, relatively vulnerable groups are disproportionately bearing the direct and indirect impacts of climate change, yet their capacity for action is severely limited; there is very little they can do in terms of mitigation and adaptation within their own autonomy.
Some scholars and social organisations are working to uncover grassroots power and wisdom, but we must not romanticise local knowledge and grassroots wisdom while ignoring the characteristics of climate change itself and the inequalities within the social structure.
Foodthink: Yes, we have also found that the relationship between climate change and farmers is so complex, yet many actions only focus on a single facet. As you mentioned earlier, it is like “treating the symptoms rather than the cause”, which may ultimately trigger new problems.Liu Juan: We have not yet fully untangled the multiple, complex relationships between climate change and the agricultural sector, rural areas, farmers, or the transition in agricultural governance. This has led many interventions to be confused or even paradoxical. For instance, mitigation, adaptation, and simple disaster prevention and reduction may target different problems, actors, and attribution logics, leading to numerous dilemmas and conflicts in practice.
Foodthink: This may also be related to the overall lack of awareness regarding climate change in Chinese society.
Liu Juan: Indeed, the lack of environmental and climate education is an issue; for example, in a discussion last year, we touched upon the gap in climate change perception between urban and rural areas. We have become accustomed to a peaceful and stable working and living environment—accustomed to the convenience, comfort, and cleanliness of daily life. We rarely think about the material and social conditions that sustain all this, nor the suffering and sacrifice occurring nearby or elsewhere. Even less do we believe that environmental and climate issues are inextricably linked to every one of us. As such, it is very difficult to find a consensus for action at a social level.
Interviewee
Liu Juan
Associate Professor and PhD Supervisor at the School of Humanities and Development, China Agricultural University. Her research primarily focuses on political ecology, environmental sociology, and agricultural governance and development. She currently serves as an Associate Editor and Guest Co-Editor for the SSCI journal World Development.
▼The Harvest Celebration, opening this Friday in Guangzhou, is a rare domestic public event that brings together farmers, consumers, scholars, NGOs, and the media to jointly discuss food and agriculture. Climate change has been a recurring topic over the past few years. Click the image for event details.
Unless otherwise stated, images are provided by the interviewee
