Characteristics of Agricultural and Livestock Products Trade Flows between China and the “Belt and Road” Initiative Region: From the Perspective of Biocapacity

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764X.2019.06.003

Abstract

Abstract:

In the context of global ecological overload, international trade has become one of the most important ways to make up for the ecological deficit. This study takes the “Belt and Road” Initiative as the study area to analyze the biocapacity and ecological footprint characteristics between China and other countries along the “Belt and Road” Initiative. Trade flow characteristics were explored from the perspective of biocapacity. The import and export of virtual land was used to assess the effect of trade on compensating for the resource gaps in crop and grazing land. The main results show that: 1) In 2005-2014, the majority of “Belt and Road” countries were experiencing increasing degrees of overload. In China, cropland takes up the largest proportion of biocapacity, while the ecological footprint is dominated by the carbon footprint. 2) The trade flow of agricultural and livestock products in the mainland of China shows a trend of increasing imports and decreasing exports, which increases dependence on specific regions. 3) In 2005-2014, China’s trade in cereals and oil crops along the “Belt and Road” Initiative were generally net imports, and the share of cereals traded along the “Belt and Road” Initiative is increasing gradually, but that of oil crops decreased rapidly. 4) The import trade has alleviated ecological deficit, as the selected products compensated for 1.03 times of the cropland deficit and 0.65 times of the grazing land deficit in China. This study is helpful to understand the relationship between the land use and trade deeply, and provide decision-making references for reducing ecological deficits, optimizing land resource allocation, and promoting win-win cooperation among China and other countries in the “Belt and Road” Initiative.

Key words: biocapacity, ecological footprint, ecological deficit, the “Belt and Road” Initiative region;, trade flows, China

JIN Mingming, XU Zengrang. Characteristics of Agricultural and Livestock Products Trade Flows between China and the “Belt and Road” Initiative Region: From the Perspective of Biocapacity[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2019, 10(6): 584-597.

Figures/Tables 16

References 26

1	Bicknell B, Ball R J, Cullen R , et al. 1998. New methodology for the ecological footprint with an application to the New Zealand economy. Ecological Economics, 27(2):149-160. DOI URL
2	Dong S K, Zhu X X, Liu S L , et al. 2013. Crisis of pastoralism associated with global changes and coupled human-natural systems for sustainable pastoralism worldwide. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 35(4):1-6. (in Chinese)
3	Fan B M . 2002. Study on History of Forestry Policy of China since Qing Dynasty. PhD diss., Beijing Forestry University. ( in Chinese)
4	Guo T B . 2017. Study on Dilemma and Way out of China’s Soybean Production. PhD diss, Jilin Agricultural University. ( in Chinese)
5	Han C X, Chen Y Y, Liu H G . 2018. Characteristics and development trend of China’s agricultural products trade. Agricultural Outlook, 14(6):83-89.
6	Li D L, Liu J H, Hao L G , et al. 2018. Analysis of water-food-energy safety in Africa area of “Belt and Road”. Water Resources Protection, 34(4):22-28.
7	Li F J, Dong S C, Yuan L N , et al. 2016. Study on agriculture patterns and strategy of the “Belt and Road”. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 31(6):678-688.
8	Li Y M . 2018. Food security issues and sino-foreign cooperation opportunities along the “Belt and Road”. World Agriculture, (6):29-36.
9	Liu Q J . 2017. Analysis of resources along the “Belt and Road”. Review of Economic Research, 15:70-104.
10	Liu Y, Luo Q Y, Ma L Y , et al. 2018. Analysis on the trade situation and reasonable import scale of China’s agricultural products. Engineering Sciences, 20(5):128-134.
11	Niccolucci V, Tiezzi E, Pulselli F M , et al. 2012. Biocapacity vs ecological footprint of world regions: A geopolitical interpretation. Ecological Indicators, 5(16):23-30.
12	Qiang W L, Liu A M, Cheng S K , et al. 2013. Quantification of virtual land resources in China’s crop trade. Journal of Natural Resources, 28(8):1289-1297. DOI URL
	( in Chinese) DOI URL
13	Sun Z L, Li X D . 2015. Current situation and prospects of grain production along the “Belt and Road”. World Agriculture, (12): 253, 251-258.
14	Wackernagel M, William E R . 1996. Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on the Earth. New Society Publishers, 1(3):171-174. DOI URL PMID
15	Wang B, Zhu Y C . 2017. The prospect research about agricultural cooperation between China and countries along the silk road economic belt—based on the angle of complementary advantages and cooperative path. China Business and Market, 31(11):103-111. (in Chinese)
16	Wang Y F, Feng R X, Guo T B . 2015. Benefit analysis of virtual land import of main agricultural products in China. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics, (4):26-35. DOI URL PMID
17	Wang Z H, Wu Y Q . 2017. Study on strengthening agricultural trade cooperation with countries and regions along the “Belt and Road”. China Development, 17(4):38-44. (in Chinese)
18	Weber K T, Shannon H . 2011. Desertification and livestock grazing: The roles of sedentarization, mobility and rest. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice, 1(19):1-11. DOI URL
19	Wei H, Wu J . 2017. The status quo and solutions about China’s imports from countries along the “Belt and Road”. People’s Forum Academic Frontier, 9:67-73.
20	William E R . 1992. Ecological footprint and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out. Environment and Urbanization, 6(2):121-130.
21	Wu L J, Xie S H . 2016. International trade of agricultural product under the background of “One Belt and One Road”. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 44(2):266-268. (in Chinese) DOI URL PMID
22	Wu Y, Gao S, Gao Y K , et al. 2018. Evaluation of import dependency risk for livestock products in china based on food security. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 27(10):171-182.
23	Yan Z Q, Yan Z X, Hu B Q , et al. 2007. Theoretical discussion on virtual land, virtual land strategy and regional land resources optimal allocation management. Guangxi Social Sciences, (10):70-74. (in Chinese)
24	Yu H L, Zhang Z . 2018. Potential, risk and countermeasure in foreign agriculture cooperation under the “Belt and Road” initiative. On Economic Problems,(2): 108-112,122.
25	Zhang C X, Wang Y K . 2018. Risk analysis and evasion measures for the rapid increase of China’s grain imports. Statistics and Management, (6):120-124.
26	Zhang Y H . 2018. Differentiation and analysis of several basic problems of grain security in China. Issues in Agricultural Economy, (5):27-33.

Agricultural products						Livestock products
Cereals	Roots and Tubers	Pulses	Oil crops	Vegetables	Fruits	Meat
Barley	Potatoes	Beans, Dry	Soybeans	Cabbages and other brassicas	Apples	Cattle
Maize	Sweet potatoes	Broad beans, Horse beans, Dry		Cucumbers and gherkins	Bananas	Sheep
Rice		Peas, Dry		Tomatoes	Grapes	Goat
Sorghum					Oranges	Chicken
Wheat					Pears	Pig
Wheat					Tangerines Mandarins Clementines Satsumas	Pig

Agricultural products						Livestock products
Cereals	Roots and Tubers	Pulses	Oil crops	Vegetables	Fruits	Meat
Barley	Potatoes	Beans, Dry	Soybeans	Cabbages and other brassicas	Apples	Cattle
Maize	Sweet potatoes	Broad beans, Horse beans, Dry		Cucumbers and gherkins	Bananas	Sheep
Rice		Peas, Dry		Tomatoes	Grapes	Goat
Sorghum					Oranges	Chicken
Wheat					Pears	Pig
Wheat					Tangerines Mandarins Clementines Satsumas	Pig

Type	Carrying capacity characteristics	Countries	Resources and socioeconomic development characteristics
A	Ecological reserve countries with high biocapacity and large ecological footprint	Northeast Asia and some eastern European countries	Except for Mongolia, the Human Development Index (HDI) is relatively high. The land types are mainly forest and cropland
B	Ecological deficit countries with low biocapacity and large ecological footprint	Gulf countries, such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates	The HDI is relatively high. These countries have barren land, but abundant oil reserves. The national income leads world incomes. These extremely important locations provide transportation hubs for Asia, Africa, and Europe
C	Ecological deficit countries with low biocapacity and relatively small ecological footprint	China and some west Asian countries, such as Israel, Lebanon, and Iran	The HDI is of a medium or high level. These countries are generally emerging economies or have mineral resources extraction as their pillar industry
D	Low biocapacity and small ecological footprint countries, mostly experiencing ecological deficit	Most of south, southeast, central, and West Asia, north Africa, and some eastern European countries	Most “Belt and Road” countries with lower HDI fall into this category, generally with emerging economies or least-developed countries with a low resource background and a low level of economic development
E	Biocapacity and ecological footprint slightly above the global averages	Most eastern European countries	The HDI is relatively high. These countries have rich mineral resources and a developed industrial level. After the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, these countries entered a difficult period of economic and political transition.

Type	Carrying capacity characteristics	Countries	Resources and socioeconomic development characteristics
A	Ecological reserve countries with high biocapacity and large ecological footprint	Northeast Asia and some eastern European countries	Except for Mongolia, the Human Development Index (HDI) is relatively high. The land types are mainly forest and cropland
B	Ecological deficit countries with low biocapacity and large ecological footprint	Gulf countries, such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates	The HDI is relatively high. These countries have barren land, but abundant oil reserves. The national income leads world incomes. These extremely important locations provide transportation hubs for Asia, Africa, and Europe
C	Ecological deficit countries with low biocapacity and relatively small ecological footprint	China and some west Asian countries, such as Israel, Lebanon, and Iran	The HDI is of a medium or high level. These countries are generally emerging economies or have mineral resources extraction as their pillar industry
D	Low biocapacity and small ecological footprint countries, mostly experiencing ecological deficit	Most of south, southeast, central, and West Asia, north Africa, and some eastern European countries	Most “Belt and Road” countries with lower HDI fall into this category, generally with emerging economies or least-developed countries with a low resource background and a low level of economic development
E	Biocapacity and ecological footprint slightly above the global averages	Most eastern European countries	The HDI is relatively high. These countries have rich mineral resources and a developed industrial level. After the drastic changes in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, these countries entered a difficult period of economic and political transition.

Categories	Trade characteristics for the “Belt and Road” countries	Global trade characteristics
Cereals	Since 2008, net imports account for an increase in the global share, increasing from 5.7% in 2008 to 32.6% in 2016	The net import volume of global trade since 2008 has increased rapidly
Fruits	Net imports were observed in 2014 and 2015, while the remaining years were net exports. The slowly increasing net exports trade with “Belt and Road” countries comprises 80% of the global share	From 2010 to 2013, global trade gradually changed from net exports to net imports
Oil crops	Always net imports. While the change in net import volume was small, the share of trade fell from 16.0% in 2005 to 5.5% in 2016	Always net imports. The volume increased rapidly
Pulses	Always net exports	Global trade has changed from net exports to net imports since 2013
Roots and tubers	Always net exports. The proportion is generally between 80% and 90%, with a downward trend	Always net exports
Vegetables	Always net exports. The net export volume is gradually increasing, comprising between 45% and 60% of trade	Always net exports. The net export volume is increasing gradually
Meat	Always net exports, but the export volume is not large	Always net imports. The net import volume is increasing