Annual Straw-Burning Ban Returns: What’s the Path Forward for Smallholders Incorporating Straw?
It is autumn harvest season once again, and whether crop stalks should be burnt has once more become a widely debated social issue. In October, open and uncontrolled burning of crop residue showed a rising trend across several areas in Hunan province, worsening air pollution in some districts. As a result, county governments in eight localities were summoned for formal talks by the provincial Department of Ecology and Environment.
When we saw the news, we were visiting farms in Xianyang, Shaanxi. It was late October. Standing beside the Zhengguo Canal, the flat, expansive farmland stretched as far as the eye could see. The dark brown topsoil was scattered with freshly shredded maize stalks, returned to the fields. In some plots, rows of tender green winter wheat had already begun to sprout. The autumn air was crisp, and the late sun cast long shadows. Suddenly, a wave of acrid, choking fumes hit us. A plume of black smoke was rising hundreds of metres away.
“Town officials are going to have their pay docked again,” a local farmer standing nearby remarked. “If we catch any more fires, grassroots officials could even be suspended.” He explained that this was the peak season for burning stalks. The town had cracked down hard, holding meetings round the clock and handing out red enforcement armbands to large-scale growers to help with patrols. Still, it was impossible to prevent every single breach. That night, we stayed in the village, and the acrid smell of smoke seeped through the window frames. No doubt the local officials would be enduring another sleepless night.
The difficulty smallholders face in incorporating crop residues back into the soil is a nationwide issue and represents the primary sticking point of the current open-burning ban. Even under the weight of a nationwide “no-burning” policy and round-the-clock satellite surveillance, clandestine burning of residues remains all too common across the country.
I. Why Smallholders Struggle to Return Residues to the Soil
Moreover, accelerating straw decomposition and managing pests and diseases requires additional inputs of chemicals—such as pesticides and decomposition agents—alongside extra labour, further driving up production costs for smallholders. From this, the researcher concludes that the ban on straw burning is hastening the exit of smallholders from farming.
A 2022 article in Farmers’ Daily noted: “It is predominantly smallholder farmers who are reluctant to incorporate straw, particularly in cooler climates and regions with tight cropping schedules.” An agricultural services professional working in Northeast China told us that state-owned farms implement straw return more effectively for two reasons: they proactively comply with policy mandates and possess the necessary machinery. Meanwhile, much of the online opposition to the practice stems from smallholders. He argues that the core issue in the region is simply a lack of suitable machinery for farmers to carry out straw incorporation.
“There is another complication: smallholders in the Northeast tend to harvest later in the season, by which time the ground has already frozen, ruling out straw incorporation. State farms, by contrast, harvest earlier, largely due to the crop varieties they cultivate. Some areas prefer longer-maturing varieties, which delays the harvest and consequently pushes back subsequent field operations. Furthermore, microbial inoculants used to accelerate straw breakdown are impractical in the Northeast, as the soil freezes almost immediately after tilling,” he explained.
When drafting straw incorporation policies, local authorities predominantly centre their strategies around mechanisation. Funding allocation typically follows a dual approach: subsidising equipment and prioritising large-scale operations while sidelining smaller ones.
On one hand, certain local governments concentrate on establishing demonstration projects, disbursing funds as performance bonuses. These projects invariably centre on large-scale farms formed through land consolidation, leaving smallholders entirely out of the picture.
On the other hand, subsidy mechanisms largely target supporting infrastructure, machinery, and the operators who carry out the work. In Heilongjiang, a major grain-producing province, subsidies for 2023 straw incorporation were restricted to “farm machinery operators, cooperatives, and other agricultural service providers equipped with straw incorporation monitoring devices and actively conducting operations.” To date, only a handful of regions, such as Jiangsu Province, mandate that subsidies be disbursed directly to farmers based on the actual area of land treated.
However, given the widespread difficulty in accessing appropriate machinery, smallholders who neither own equipment nor purchase mechanised services are effectively excluded from government straw incorporation subsidies. With untreated straw treated as agricultural waste, some smallholders are left with no viable alternative but to defy the burning bans and continue the practice under considerable pressure.
II. They Treat Straw as a Treasure
Yuan Yong has been promoting the practice of mulching fields with straw in Jianyang, Sichuan province, for more than two decades. When training farmers in this technique, he frequently draws on the proverb “fallen leaves return to their roots” to explain the concept. Why is forest soil so rich? It is because leaves fall continuously year after year, providing food for soil microbes and creatures such as earthworms. As these organisms break down the leaf litter, they enrich the ground with organic matter and nutrients, while also improving its aeration. Yuan uses this comparison to illustrate that straw is as vital to farmland as leaf litter is to a woodland: returning straw to the field is the cornerstone of cultivating healthy soil.
After graduating from a forestry college in 1994, Yuan returned to his hometown to work as an agricultural extension officer for the town. His daily task involved teaching local farmers how to apply chemical fertilisers, pesticides, and herbicides. Over time, however, he began to notice a troubling pattern: as pesticide use increased, pest and disease outbreaks grew more severe; and as chemical fertiliser application rose, the soil grew progressively poorer and more compacted.
Fifteen years into his career, Yuan took part in an organic rice cultivation project. This experience showed him that shifting farming practices—replacing chemical fertilisers with poultry manure and pesticides with biogas slurry—could break the vicious cycle. He realised the key lay in soil health. From that point on, Yuan dedicated himself to ecological farming, working alongside local growers to continually refine their methods. At the heart of their approach is a core technique: no-till farming combined with straw mulching.
Take the rice–rapeseed rotation commonly practised in Jianyang as an example. After sowing the rapeseed, farmers spread a layer of rice straw between the rows. This straw acts like a blanket, keeping the soil warm and moist while suppressing weed growth. Over the following six months, it gradually breaks down and darkens, eventually becoming so fine that it crumbles underfoot, causing no hindrance to planting the next season’s rice crop. Once the rapeseed is harvested, the leftover seed husks and other fine residue are spread directly over the rice paddies. The cycle then begins anew.
After just three years of mulching, the soil transforms: it becomes loose and fertile, easily crumbling in the hand, with visible soil aggregates and earthworms. The rich, earthy scent of healthy ground returns. Crop yields on these plots hold their own against conventionally grown crops reliant on synthetic inputs. In some cases, rice fields managed with straw mulching even outperform local hybrid varieties fertilised with chemicals.
The benefits of straw mulching become especially apparent during years of erratic weather: the soil beneath the mulch retains moisture, which is crucial given that drought poses the greatest threat to local agriculture. “Seasonal droughts have been a persistent problem around here for many years, and they are becoming more frequent, longer-lasting, and more damaging,” Yuan explains. When dry spells strike, while neighbouring fields suffer reduced yields, those protected by straw mulching fare significantly better.
According to Yuan, the crux of this mulching system is strict adherence to no-till practices. The straw should ideally be left on the surface as it is, rather than being shredded (with the exception of denser crops such as rice and wheat) or ploughed in. Incorporating straw directly into the soil can actually backfire, he warns. Because it does not decompose fully in the short term, buried straw can stifle root development, and in heavy applications, it may even cause “root burn” due to oxygen depletion. Tillage also carries another drawback: it disrupts soil microbial life. The very purpose of leaving straw on the surface is to feed microbes and earthworms, fostering a thriving habitat that sustains a healthy soil ecosystem. Although it may seem counterintuitive, meticulous management under a no-till regime can still deliver excellent yields. Moreover, the mulch naturally suppresses weeds, cutting down on both manual labour and herbicide application, which in turn spares the soil from chemical damage. “Once everything is in place, you can just pop off to play mahjong and it’ll all look after itself,” Yuan jokes.
III. Healthy soil is essential for breaking down straw
Yet in practice, the slow degradation of straw and the associated risks of pests and diseases remain two major practical hurdles.
Lvwo Farm has been operating in the heart of Shaanxi’s Guanzhong region for ten years as an ecological farm that avoids synthetic pesticides and fertilisers. Dahei, the farm manager, who places great emphasis on soil health, also treats straw as a vital tool for soil regeneration. He favours ploughing it back in: at wheat harvest, machinery directly chops the stalks and deep-ploughs them into the ground, where they break down in just over a month during the summer. He has also observed, however, that in neighbouring fields, straw returned to the soil years ago often remains largely intact and undecomposed.
Why is the difference so stark in seemingly similar conditions? Dahei believes the key lies in soil vitality.
Dahei explained to me that the abundance and activity of soil microorganisms are crucial for straw decomposition. The growth of aerobic microbial communities requires adequate air and moisture, which in turn depends on a well-developed soil aggregate structure. When soils become overly reliant on chemical fertilisers, the breakdown of this structure leads to compaction and hardness, depriving microbes of a viable habitat. The application of pesticides further disrupts microbial balance, making effective straw decomposition impossible. Moreover, straw that hasn’t been broken down by microbes harbours pathogens and insect eggs, inviting pest and disease outbreaks. In poorly ventilated, anaerobic conditions, the straw can even become mouldy. Even if microbial inoculants are applied to accelerate degradation, these introduced organisms often fail to thrive in degraded soil conditions, and their benefits are unlikely to persist beyond the current season.
In contrast, healthy soil features a clear, loose, and breathable aggregate structure teeming with diverse microbial communities. Straw is typically broken down quickly, further enriching soil nutrients and structure, thus creating a virtuous cycle of soil improvement.
Another reason farmers resist returning straw to the field is the fear that it will trigger a major pest outbreak.
Whether straw incorporation inevitably leads to increased pest populations is currently a matter of academic debate. Take the question of whether returning maize straw to the field exacerbates pests and diseases as an example. Research by Li Tianjiao and colleagues at the National Agricultural Technology Extension and Service Centre found that no-till straw mulching worsened maize borer damage to spring maize in Heilongjiang. Yet other studies show that in dryland maize-growing areas of Shanxi, while straw mulching helps maize borers survive the winter, it also slows seedling growth. This delayed development proves unfavourable for overwintering adults to lay eggs, ultimately reducing egg deposition. Consequently, maize borer damage rates in no-till mulched fields end up lower than in conventionally tilled fields.
Like Dahei, Yuan Yong strongly advocates for farming without pesticides or chemical fertilisers. He argues that chemical inputs damage soil microorganisms, which in turn reduces soil vitality and buffering capacity, leading to ecological imbalance. In his workshops for farmers, he consistently reiterates that the foundation of agriculture is soil health—or, more fundamentally, the health of soil life.
This underscores a key contradiction in soil rehabilitation: effectively breaking down straw requires healthy soil, yet the very soils that are compacted and depleted—and thus most in need of straw return—lack the capacity to process it. Restoring soil health demands a longer commitment to “nurturing the land,” and convincing smallholder farmers, for whom farming is a primary livelihood, to embark on this lengthy transition is far from straightforward.
IV. Adapting to Local Conditions and Individual Farmers
For the smallholders supported by Yuan Yong, or operations like Dahei’s farm, which rely entirely on ecological practices, straw delivers a range of benefits: it improves soil structure, supplies nutrients, suppresses weeds, and retains moisture to build drought resilience. Conventional smallholders, by contrast, typically purchase external inputs to address these challenges, meaning they tend to view straw as a nuisance that demands both labour and capital to manage.
How, then, can we encourage smallholders to adopt straw return? The key lies in demonstrating its comprehensive benefits and helping farmers work through the economic implications.
The Yunnan Sili Ecological Alternative Technology Centre (hereafter “the Sili Centre”) is an environmental non-governmental organisation dedicated to researching and promoting ecologically friendly agricultural technologies. Since 2014, it has been working to promote the comprehensive utilisation of crop residues across Yunnan Province.Like Yuan Yong, the Sili Centre believes that appropriate technical solutions to restore soil ecology can help smallholder farmers reduce their spending on agricultural inputs, ultimately cutting costs and boosting efficiency.
Dr Li Chunliang, project director at the Sili Centre, has visited diverse climatic, topographical, and cropping regions across Yunnan for over a decade, promoting straw incorporation to local farmers. He summarises conventional farmers’ mindset towards returning straw to the field thus: while the practice does improve soil structure, the benefits are gradual and long-term. Most farmers say the work is too labour-intensive and the results take too long. “If I have to invest my own manpower in this, I’ll need to think it over,” he explains. “Farmers simply value immediate, tangible results.”
In Yuan Yong’s view, this method suits a specific farming profile best: a household holding five or six mu of land (roughly half an acre per person), where younger family members work off-farm while the elders tend the fields. Farming is primarily for home consumption, supplemented by raising a few pigs, with any surplus produce sold locally within the village.
The Jianyang Municipal Agriculture and Rural Affairs Bureau also invites Yuan Yong to deliver lectures annually. He has noticed a growing number of smallholders adopting his methods in recent years; the approach is now established in at least four villages. Moreover, seeing the benefits, farmers across several other towns have independently begun mulching rice straw and maize stalks back into their fields. Some village collectives are actively working to secure market channels for ecologically grown produce.
For all its appeal, this no-till straw mulching system has clear limitations: incorporation into the soil remains a manual process. Given current rural labour costs, it is only viable for smallholders cultivating around 10 mu per household; larger farms simply cannot absorb the expense. Amid the widespread drain of rural labour, this model will likely require further adaptation to suit evolving socio-economic realities. Yuan Yong maintains that returning crop residues to the soil is an indispensable step towards soil conservation and sustainable agriculture. The crucial factor lies in tailoring the approach to local conditions, individual circumstances, and specific crops.
“For most smallholder crops, residues can be incorporated and mulched directly. Where planting density is high or the canopy is compact, the stalks must be chopped before mulching. For crops where labour is scarce or direct incorporation is unsuitable, the straw can be fed to livestock and the resulting manure returned to the soil, or composted first before application,” he explains.
Yet, as livestock farming becomes increasingly consolidated and industrialised, and small-scale breeders are pushed out, the traditional rural integration of crop and animal husbandry is fading. Once farmers cease to keep livestock, their incentive to utilise crop residues diminishes further.
At present, large-scale land consolidation is also dampening farmers’ enthusiasm for residue incorporation across regions. The Northeast agricultural technician quoted earlier sums up the prevailing mindset among smallholders there: with no guarantee of who will till the land next year, and the benefits of straw return only materialising over the long term, small-scale farmers are reluctant to make the upfront investment.
A 2022 report from the Science and Education Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs noted that straw incorporation still grapples with “unclear baseline data, unproven technical efficacy, and inadequate long-term support mechanisms.” On the surface, returning crop residues seems straightforward—much like fallen leaves returning to the soil. Yet effective policy implementation demands not only adaptation to local conditions but also sensitivity to individual circumstances. The crux lies in fostering livelihood models that genuinely support smallholders in adopting residue return, rather than enforcing it in ways that merely squeeze them off their land.
Fortunately, environmental stewardship and economic livelihood are not always mutually exclusive. The work of Yuan Yong and Silì offers a glimmer of hope. Resolving the practical challenges of residue incorporation and boosting farmers’ motivation to adopt it will require more frontline practitioners like them to keep forging viable pathways forward.
2 Farmers Daily Focus: With Straw No Longer Burnt on Site, Where Does It Ultimately Go?
https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_20740693
3 Li Tianjiao, Zhuo Fuyan, Chen Ranran, et al. Research Progress on the Impact of Returning Straw to Fields on Corn Diseases, Insects, and Weeds [J]. China Plant Protection, 2022, 42(1): 7. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1672-6820.2022.01.006.
4 Research from the Institute of Earth Environment and Others Reveals Returning Straw to Fields Boosts Grain Yields and Soil Carbon Storage
https://www.cas.cn/syky/202402/t20240220_5005755.shtml
5 Notice on Further Clarifying the 2023 Heilongjiang Province Subsidy Policy for the Comprehensive Utilisation of Straw
https://www.hlj.gov.cn/hlj/c107856/202402/c00_31708701.shtml
Editor: Wang Hao