该翻译文件出自联合国粮农组织（FAO）出版的《THE STATE  OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2000》一书。受以前单位一领导委托，特于2004年翻译了此书中的几个章节。现录于此， 让有兴趣的人员可以对世界农业概况和发展历程有一些了解，同时， 希望借此提醒人们要重视农业。

   为了便于有兴趣的人员进一步学习，我将翻译文本所对应的英文也贴于博文的后面。此翻译将分多篇博文发表。

————————————————————————————————————————

如果你想与过去不同，那就研究历史吧！

                ——Baruch Spinza

引言

本章综述了过去半个世纪中世界粮食及农业和粮食安全情况的演变，旨在为未来提供政策支持信息。

我们对五十年的粮食与农业情况只能进行粗线条的描绘，这五十年不仅时间跨度很大，而且是一个多事之秋——历史上还没有哪一段时期有如此广泛而快速的变化，这些变化肯定也使农业受到深刻的影响。粮食和农业技术及农业制度经历了巨大的变革，农业社会和农村社会也同样经历了巨大的变革。不同地区、不同国家和不同种族的人们都经历过各种粮食安全情况，某些地区的进步是巨大的，而有些地区的情况却令人失望。和50年前相比，当今世界整体来讲是富裕而和平的，但是，即使在富裕的社会里也还有上千万的人民受到饥饿和各种疾病的困扰。当然，并非当今社会才有这种贫富悬殊。科技进步和资源利用的进步使饥饿更容易避免，因此也更难忍受。

在本年度专门的章节中，我们围绕这个领域将选择五个主题进行讨论。第一节是根据《粮食与农业状况》中报道的内容总结了对过去历史的回顾；第二节阐述了农业现代化的过程及农业现代化对农民和农村发展不均衡的影响；第三节主要阐述大宗粮食生产和粮食与营养安全之间的相互关系；第四节分析了农业生产力，农业资源和农业生产的范围及其收益；第五节讨论了政治体制和机构机制在减少贫困和降低粮食不安全性方面所起的作用；最后一节总结了过去五十年中的主要教训。总的来说，我们希望本次综述能够对农业所面临的问题有更进一步的了解，从而做出更大的行动，使我们的世界从此与过去不同——让饥饿成为历史。

            粮食与农业50年

本节主要从历史的角度对过去影响粮食和农业的主要事件和趋势进行总结。主要是依据1947年开始出版的年刊《粮食与农业状况》进行阐述，这些期刊记录了过去半个世纪在农业和农村发展及粮食安全方面所取得的主要成就和一些失败教训。每一期都有反复出现的主题和一直受到人们关注的问题，但也有使当今的世界农业与过去半个多世纪完全不同的大的变革。经济环境和政治环境都经历了深刻的变化，技术有了很大的进步。

本节试图追踪自1957年以来联合国粮食农业组织（FAO）在《粮食与农业状况》中报道的变化。某些事件事后看来是非常重要的，但在当时的报道中却被忽略了或者总结得不完整或不准确，在本次回顾中将增加一些内容使其更加完善。报道的覆盖面是有选择性的，FAO有很多鲜为人知的活动，我们只筛选了一些FAO起重要作用的事件。

我们希望本次回顾是有意义的，不仅可作为对过去历史事件的回顾，也可以作为我们对过去反思的材料。反思我们究竟在实现世界粮食安全和促进农业及农村经济发展方面做了多少工作；同时也可以使我们从了解过去的经历中学到了什么，还有什么要做，什么行动对进一步改进工作可能最有用。

半个世纪前的状况

毁灭与重建，粮食短缺。

在地理位置上财富与粮食供应的集中。

亚洲——关注的焦点

第二次世界大战对农业有着深远的影响。据《粮食与农业状况》早期的报道，二战末期世界人均农业生产比战前降低5～15%。但是全球冲突对粮食生产的影响有巨大的地域差异。

欧洲、苏联、亚洲大部分地区和太平洋及非洲北部大部分地区的农业皆因战争的破坏而受到巨大的影响。战争结束后，这些地区的农业生产急剧下滑，同时财政又无力支付粮食进口的费用，从而导致粮食极端短缺，1946年和1947年在苏联、北非和远东大部分地区的一系列干旱使问题更加严峻。水产养殖业的短缺也十分严重，主要是受捕捞设施不足的影响。以前世界有五分之四的水产品主要在受战争影响的地区生产。林业受战争的影响也非常大，包括苏联西部和远东一些国家在内的中欧和东欧森林和林业受到的直接影响极为严重。世界很多地区由于战争的进行和煤炭贸易中断导致森林大量砍伐用作燃料，从而导致森林破坏。另外，还与林业疏于管理有关。

与此形成鲜明对照的是，一些大的粮食生产国如加拿大、美国、澳大利亚、阿根廷的粮食供应充足，粮食供应未受战争冲突的影响，和第一次世界大战一样，这些国家充当着为盟军提供粮食的角色，而且进行种种努力刺激粮食生产。事实上，北美洲的农业生产在战争期间得到扩大而且十分繁荣；和战前相比，这个地区的农业生产增长了三分之一，禾谷类粮食净出口从1938年的500万吨增长到1946-48年的年平均1750万吨，同期欧洲的粮食年净进口量从950万吨增加到1400万吨。在发展中国家中，亚洲和非洲从粮食剩余变成粮食不足，亚洲表现尤其明显。1934—1938年到1946年期间粮食的变化趋势为+2.2～-3.7个百分点。拉美国家和加勒比地区及非洲、近东、大洋洲受到战争的间接影响——生产必需品短缺，进口货物供应不足或出口市场不足，而战争对该地区的农业生产能力相对没有影响。

1948年出版的《粮食与农业状况》（可能主要是回顾20世纪30年代经济萧条所引起的农业过剩）在综述区域间的不同表现时，提醒要谨防世界某些地区粮食供应过剩而其他地区则极端不足的矛盾的存在。表达了对粮食过剩的国家的粮食生产会超出粮食不足的国家的进口能力的观点——这是由于很多国家外汇十分短缺。同时还强调，当满足重建的需求以后，对农业尤其是林产品的需求将萎缩，人工合成材料将代替多种农业原材料。有些经济学家提倡采取措施减少供应，而FAO则提倡采取行动，促进需求，这是由于有些工业化国家的人民的营养都降到极低的水平。

发展中国家和地区

《粮食与农业状况》早期所揭示的区域平衡与现在的状况不同。区域回顾关注的主要是亚洲的问题，而对其它地区的篇幅相对较少。过去认为非洲是经济最不发达的地区，但其社会发展和福利改善只是时间问题(附1)。但经过一段时期的对比发展以后，以前认为的“非洲充满希望——亚洲会经历波折”的观点刚好颠倒过来。

附1  1948年的《粮食与农业状况》对非洲农业发展前景的看法

从发达国家的角度来看，非洲是一个具有巨大的生产潜力而相对较“空”的大陆，是一个软通货地区，和欧洲货物交换的可能性很大。二十世纪上半叶，非洲在某种程度上确实象美国19世纪后半叶的“西部”，但是，由于眼光短浅，对非洲殖民统治地区的作用和其未来发展的看法都反映了那个时候的传统观念。尽管已经意识到非洲营养不足的问题，但是非洲并不是粮食安全性关注的焦点。而总是把非洲各国充足的粮食供应当作理所当然的事，因为这个大陆从人口而言是一个“空”大陆，在1920到1950年间人口只略有增加，而且拥有丰富的农业资源。

本刊的头几期在回顾发展中国家的农业状况时错误地估计了非洲的人口和自然资源的限制因素的份量。这说明该报道对事实的无知而不是忽略事实。该报道反复强调缺乏对非洲的农业状况和其发展前景的巨大不确定性进行评估的信息。1948年的报道中陈述道，“……非洲是文献记载最不完善的大陆，只有政府对每一片领土的相关事实进行更多的确认后，才能对农业和粮食状况有一些局部的概念”。该报道呼吁,建立非洲现状的信息收集和分析改良系统是有效的政策行动的先决条件，这是本刊在过去几年不断重复的主题。

在这个报告中，亚洲的问题被描绘成不可克服的。该地区拥有全世界近一半的人口，但只拥有全球五分之一的土地，而其经济在很大程度上仍然依赖于农业。另外，该地区大多数国家的农业生产力仍然很低。例如，印度每公顷土地所收获的粮食估计平均比全部发展中国家的平均水平低20%，印度、印度尼西亚、中国每个劳动力所生产的粮食显著地低于发展中国家的平均水平。南亚的农业结构表现为土地广泛利用和人口与耕地的比例高。该地区不仅农业生产力低，而且几乎四分之三的劳动力困在有限的粮食生产中，人均每日摄取的热量不足2000千卡，大多数人靠小型农场生活，消耗了他们所生产的大多数农产品而且其膳食的主要来源也是他们所生产的农产品。

战争使亚洲国家农业生产中长期存在的问题进一步尖锐化，粮食行业因战争、政治动荡和人口迁移而受到巨大的损失。战争期间人均获取的热量下降，只有缅甸、泰国、印度、越南、老挝、柬埔寨几大水稻生产国例外。印度、巴基斯坦、日本、菲律宾人所获取的能量下降到1700千卡/日。东南亚的渔业因捕捞船只和人力资源的不足而遭受巨大的损失。和其传统的粮食过剩状况相反，战后该地区成为粮食的净进口国。这种转变对世界粮食具有重大的影响，从而提出了一个至今仍然在争论的问题，人口密集的亚洲国家的粮食需求是不是会超过其国内生产能力从而造成全球粮食市场的供应紧张。

战后的拉美国家出现了另外一幅场景。战争期间和战争结束以后，二十世纪20年代和30年代的大多数年份中，该地区的经济快速增长，这种增长比其它发展中国家表现得更为明显。其它发展中国家采用了工业增长和通过进口替代的形式的经济发展战略。1934—1938年和1947年间工业产出几乎翻了一翻，而农业生产只扩大了20%。工业化还从城区大规模扩张，大多数生产活动皆在这些地方进行，这是随后几十年中随处可见的现象。

但是，1950年时，农业仍是该地区经济的主导产业，占其国内生产总值（GDP）的五分之一，吸纳近一半的劳动力。高就业率和实际收入的快速增加使对粮食的需求更为强烈，尤其是在城市。二十世纪四十年代人口的年增长率为2.7%，是全世界增长最快的地区。尽管由于对农业的政策偏见，农业仍然表现良好，粮食生产基本能够满足日益增长的需求。虽然有些国家日益依赖于粮食进口，但该地区仍为粮食和农产品的净出口地区。农业生产能力提高和收入增加转变为膳食水平的提高。1947年该地区人均获得的食物估计为每日2400千卡 (二战前为2200千卡)，相对地高于其它地区发展中国家的水平。但是，这些国家的分配也不均衡。

二战时期是非洲很多国家的经济增长期，对农产品和矿物质的需求旺盛,很多国家都扩大了经济活动和农业生产。据报道，其人均收入水平比战前高得多。由于需求的增长，非洲的基本粮食生产增加，其中尤其突出的是棉花、剑麻、烟草，其增长速度比其它农作物快。高收入水平（主要在城市）加剧了对食品的需求，其中很多粮食需要从国外进口，而这又加剧了这些国家的财政困难。尽管粮食生产的表基本令人满意，对粮食需求日益增长，但是总体膳食水平仍然很低。估计1947年非洲每人每日能量摄入为1500—2000千卡，其它大多数国家为2000—2300千卡。

过去认为，近东虽然是一个落后地区，但正经历着最快的经济变革。1948年出版的《粮食与农业状况》中写道：“最近，这个地区才从长期的被遗忘中崛起，人们很快便意识到近东是世界贸易的交汇处和世界交通的通道……大量的石油的发掘，输油管道跨越往日神秘的沙漠，新港口、新城镇不断涌现。现代土耳其与30年前奥特曼时期的土耳其迥然不同，这个地区其它国家的情形也大抵如此。”报道最后得出结论：“在下一个年代，这种经济变革会造就何种形式的农业尚难以评价。”事实上，这个地区的农业体系仍然受环境和传统的引导。现在，水是其主要问题，这个地区只有4%的土地面积用于耕种。种植制度的特征表现为古老的农艺措施和农业结构。养殖业和作物种植分离，主要是由游牧民从事牲畜养殖工作；其中，羊、骆驼、马是重要的家畜，而对肉牛养殖几乎一无所知。

在这种背景下，战争时期基本上是近东农业的发展期，这在禾谷类作物、肉类和其它动物产品方面尤其明显，这些农牧产品几乎取代了棉花等经济作物，用以满足该地区盟军的粮食需要。但是国内消费者并没有从这种粮食生产方式中得到好处，已有的数据（主要是有关埃及和土耳其的）表明，1947—1948年和1934—1938年的水平相比较，人均摄取的热量、蛋白质和脂肪显著减少。1947/48年土耳其人的日均热量摄入量为2050千卡，埃及为2390千卡，而该地区战前的摄入量为2500千卡。

渔业和林业

最早几期《粮食与农业状况》只将渔业和林业作为参考，当时普遍是认为海域属于每一个人，它们富含无数捕捞不尽的鱼类。在1946年FAO会议上有如下陈述：“世界的钓鱼场装满各种各样的鱼类。捕鱼权是一种国际资源，在不发达国家尤其如此，就只等收获者去取。”对林业也同样如此。早期出版的几期确实提到过森林保护和林业长期发展的重要性，但其关注的焦点是林产品的生产。森林保护问题在二十世纪七十年代才提出来，是在有些国家的民众开始担心热带雨林的破坏，森林大火的爆发和林木的枯死的背景下提出来的。

WORLD FOOD AND AGRICULTURE: LESSONS FROM THE PAST 50 YEARS

  If you want the present to be different from the past, study the past.

                                              Baruch Spinoza

INTRODUCTION

This review covers changes in the world food, agricultural and food security situation over the past half-century, with a view to deriving policy messages for the years to come.

Fifty years of world food and agriculture make up a canvas that can only be painted with a broad brush. It is not only a long period but also an extraordinarily eventful one - indeed, no other 50-year period in history has seen such wide-ranging and rapid changes in humanity. These changes have not left agriculture untouched. Food and agricultural techniques and systems have undergone major transformations, as have agricultural and rural societies. Different food security situations have also evolved across regions, countries and groups of people. Progress has been spectacular in some areas, disappointing in others. The world today appears overall to be a rich and peaceful place compared with what it was 50 years ago. Yet, millions of people, even in rich societies, are still bowed down by the suffering imposed on them by hunger and related diseases. Such contrasts are certainly not specific to the contemporary world, but advances in technology and resources have made hunger more avoidable and, therefore, more intolerable today.

The past 50 years have seen a revolution in agricultural practices and production and a consequent transformation of rural societies.

From this wide field of research, five themes have been chosen for discussion in this year's special chapter. The first section presents a retrospective overview, largely drawn from the stock of historical and institutional memory contained in past issues of The State of Food and Agriculture; the second describes the process of agricultural modernization and its asymmetric effects on farmers and rural societies; the third focuses on the interrelated issues of staple food production and food and nutrition security; the fourth analyses agricultural productivity, its sources, scope and benefits; and the fifth discusses the role that political and institutional mechanisms can play in reducing or - as has often been the case - perpetuating poverty and food insecurity. A final section summarizes some of the main lessons of the past half-century, as they emerge from the various sections of this review. Overall, it is hoped that the review will contribute both to a greater understanding of the problems faced and to greater commitment towards, in Spinoza's words, "making the present different" - that is, making hunger a thing of the past.

  Half a century of food and agriculture
This is a historical overview of the main events and trends affecting food and agriculture over the past 50 years. It draws primarily on the annual series of The State of Food and Agriculture, which was first published in 1947. These past publications record more than half a century of achievements as well as failures in agricultural and rural development and food security. They show recurring themes and concerns but also major transformations that make world agriculture today very different from that of half a century ago. The economic and political environments have changed profoundly, technologies have progressed enormously and policy perceptions and priorities have evolved.

This section attempts to trace the changes as reported by FAO in The State of Food and Agriculture, particularly - since 1957 - in the special chapters on selected topics. Some events that, in hindsight, appear to be important, but have either been overlooked or reviewed in an incomplete or inaccurate way in contemporary issues of the report, have been inserted or supplemented by additional information in the present review. This is necessarily selective in its coverage, and FAO's many activities and initiatives that are widely publicized in other documents have not been included, except for selected important events in which the Organization has played a prominent role.

It is hoped that this retrospective overview will be of interest, not only as a reminder of past events, but also as material for reflection on how far we have come towards achieving world food security and promoting agricultural and rural development. It should also prompt us to consider how much remains to be done and, judging from past experience, what action is most likely to contribute to further improvements.

THE SITUATION HALF A CENTURY AGO

Devastation and reconstruction, Food shortages
Geographic concentration of wealth and food supply
Asia - the focus of concerns

The Second World War had a profound affect on world agriculture. According to early issues of The State of Food and Agriculture, world agricultural production at the end of the war was 5 percent - 15 percent in per caput terms - below pre-war levels. However, the impacts of the global conflict differed widely across regions.

Agriculture suffered massive war devastation throughout Europe, in the USSR, in large areas of Asia and the Pacific and in North Africa. Sharp falls in agricultural production in those regions,1 coupled with a widespread inability to finance food imports, resulted in acute food shortages even when hostilities ceased. These problems were compounded by a series of droughts during 1946 and 1947 in the USSR, North Africa and large areas of the Far East. Shortages were also acute in the fisheries sector, which was affected by the loss and requisition of fishing craft and equipment. Four fifths of world fish supplies had formerly been produced in the areas affected by the war. In forestry too, the impact of the war was severe. Direct damage to forests and forest industries was most serious in Central and Eastern Europe, including the western part of the USSR, and in some countries of the Far East. The war effort, combined with the cessation of coal trade, led to overcutting for fuel and to forest destruction in many parts of the world. In addition, there was generally less concern for forest management.

In sharp contrast, food supplies were abundant in a number of large producer countries that had been relatively spared by the conflict - Canada, the United States, Australia and Argentina. As in the First World War, those countries took on the role of food suppliers for their allies and made a special effort to stimulate output. In fact, especially for North America's agriculture, the war years were a period of expansion and prosperity. Agricultural production in this region increased by one third compared with pre-war levels, and net cereal exports rose from about 5 million tonnes in 1938 to an annual average of 17.5 million tonnes in 1946-48. Europe's net annual cereal imports rose from 9.5 million to 14 million tonnes during the same period. Among the developing country regions, both Asia and Africa turned from having a surplus to a deficit in cereals, with the shift being especially pronounced in the case of Asia (which registered a drop from +2.2 to -3.7 million tonnes between 1934-38 and 1946). Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, the Near East and Oceania only suffered from the indirect effects of the war (with shortages of production requisites, or loss of import supplies or export markets), and the war had relatively little effect on their agricultural performances at the regional level.

In reviewing such diverse regional performances, already in 1948 The State of Food and Agriculture (probably recalling the depression-induced agricultural surpluses of the 1930s) warned against the paradoxical existence of burdensome excess food supplies in some parts of the world while there were acute scarcities elsewhere. It expressed the fear that food production in countries with a surplus might exceed the import capacity of food-deficit countries - many of which were acutely short of foreign exchange - and that the excess capacity of large producers and exporters could become structural in nature. It also noted that demand, particularly for forestry products, would shrink when reconstruction needs were met, and that synthetics would displace several agricultural raw materials. In contrast with some economists who advocated measures to reduce supply, FAO advocated action to raise demand, given the very low nutrition levels to which the populations of even some industrialized countries had fallen.

Excess food supplies in some parts of the world coexisted with acute scarcities in others. An increase in demand was needed to improve nutrition levels.

Developing country regions

Early issues of The State of Food and Agriculture reveal a balance of regional concerns profoundly different from the situation today. The regional reviews devoted much attention to the problems of Asia, with relatively less coverage of other regions. Africa, in particular, was recognized as the least economically advanced region, but one for which economic and social development and improved welfare were just a matter of time (see Box 11). This perception of "African hope-Asian drama" was reversed only after an extended period of contrasting development experiences in the two regions.

For Asia, the report depicted problems of an almost unsurmountable nature. This region had about half of the world's population but only one fifth of the earth's land, yet its economy was still dependent on agriculture to a great extent. Furthermore, agricultural productivity in much of the region was very low. For instance, cereal production per hectare of harvested land in India was estimated to be, on average, 20 percent below that of developing countries as a whole; and cereal production per worker in India, Indonesia and China was significantly lower than the average for developing countries. Agricultural structures in South Asia presented a grim combination of extensive land use and a high person-land ratio. Not only was agricultural productivity low but almost three quarters of the labour force was tied up in the production of a meagre diet. Calorie intake was barely 2 000 kcal per caput/day and most people lived on small farms, producing most of what they ate and eating most of what they produced.

The war brought these long-term problems of Asia into sharper relief. The food sector suffered considerably from war, political instability and displacements of people. Per caput calorie intake declined during the war in all but three large rice-producing countries: Burma (Myanmar), Siam (Thailand) and Indochina (Viet Nam, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Cambodia). In India and Pakistan, Japan and the Philippines, it fell to around 1 700 kcal/day. The great fishing industries of Southeast Asia suffered heavy loss of fishing vessels and human resources. The region emerged in the postwar period as a net importer of food, a reversal of its traditional food surplus situation. This shift was perceived to be of great significance to world food trade and raised the question, still debated today in the case of China, of the extent to which food demand in densely populated countries in Asia would exceed their domestic production capacity and cause tightness in world
food markets.

A very different picture emerged in postwar Latin America. Throughout and after the war, the region continued the rapid economic expansion recorded during much of the 1920s and 1930s. Such expansion was achieved more markedly than in other developing country regions through development strategies based on industrial growth and import substitution, which engendered considerable growth in industrial activity. Between 1934-38 and 1947 industrial output almost doubled, while agricultural production expanded by only 20 percent. Industrialization also contributed to a massive expansion of urban centres where most of the manufacturing activity was located, a phenomenon that would be amplified in the following decades.


Box 11

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS AS SEEN IN THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 1948

"From the standpoint of the highly developed regions, Africa appears as a comparatively empty continent with large potentialities of production - a soft-currency area with possibilities of a much greater exchange of goods with Europe. Indeed, in the last half of the twentieth century, Africa may in some cases be to Europe what
`the West' was to the United States in the latter half of the nineteenth century". However short in foresight, this vision of the role and future of African colonial territories reflected the conventional view of the time. Despite recognized nutritional shortcomings, Africa was not a focus of concern from a food security standpoint. Rather, adequate domestic food supplies were taken for granted in a demographically "empty" continent, where population was growing at moderate rates (1.3 percent yearly between 1920 and 1950), and with rich agricultural resources which constituted the region's area of specialization.
The fact that early issues of The State of Food and Agriculture may have misjudged the gravity of Africa's human and natural resource constraints is also suggested by the comparatively light treatment of this region in the publication's developing country reviews. Ignorance of facts, rather than neglect, probably explained this shortcoming. The report repeatedly emphasized the lack of information available to allow an adequate assessment of Africa's agricultural situation and the great uncertainty surrounding its development prospects. The 1948 report states that "... it is the least well-documented continent, and until more work has been done by governments in ascertaining the facts in each territory, only a very fragmentary idea of the food and agriculture situation is possible". This appeal for improved systems of collection and analysis of information on the African situation as a prerequisite for efficient policy action was to become a recurring theme of the publication over the years.


Nevertheless, agriculture still dominated the region's economy, contributing about one fifth of total GDP and employing close to half of the labour force in 1950. A high level of employment and rapid increases in real incomes created a strong demand for food, especially in the cities. Indeed, yearly rates of population growth in the late 1940s were in the order of 2.7 percent, the highest of all regions, and per caput GDP growth was 2 to 3 percent. Despite the policy bias against agriculture, caused by the industrialization drive (partly compensated by direct public support in various forms), the sector performed remarkably well, with food production generally coping with expanding demand. The region also remained a net exporter of food and agricultural products, although several countries became increasingly dependent on food imports. Satisfactory agricultural performances and expanding incomes translated into improved diets. Regional food intakes, estimated to be about 2 400 kcal per caput/day in 1947 (up from 2 200 before the war), were relatively high in relation to those of other developing country regions. Levels were, however, uneven among countries (Argentina 3 100 kcal, Peru 1 900 kcal) and income groups.

The war years had generally been years of economic progress for much of Africa. Demand was strong for many of its agricultural commodities and minerals. Many territories were able to expand economic activity and agricultural production. Average income levels were reported to be significantly higher than before the war. Basic food production in Africa increased in response to strengthened demand but, in contrast with other regions, the production of industrial crops - notably cotton, sisal and tobacco - increased faster than that of food crops. Higher income levels, chiefly in the cities, intensified the demand for foodstuffs, many of which had to be imported, and this created growing financial difficulties for several countries. However, despite generally satisfactory food production performances and increasing effective demand, dietary standards remained low. The 1947 estimates pointed to per caput calorie intakes of 1 500 to 2 000 kcal/day in North Africa (significantly below pre-war levels, especially in Algeria and Morocco); and 2 000 to 2 300 in most other countries.

The Near East was depicted as a backward region that was undergoing, however, the most rapid economic transformation. The State of Food and Agriculture 1948 notes: "Only [recently] did this region emerge from a long period in which distances and time were reckoned on the speed of the dromedary caravan. Suddenly the Near East found itself a crossroad of world trade and traffic.... Mineral oil is now available in increasing quantities. Oil pipelines cross the once mysterious deserts. New ports, new towns, new activities are growing continually. Modern Turkey is vastly different from the Ottoman Turkey of 30 years ago, and this is also true [to a] degree of all other countries of the region." The report concludes: "It is difficult to appraise what sort of agriculture may come out [of] this economic transformation during the next generation." In fact, the region's agricultural systems were still dominated by environment and tradition. Water was, as it is now, a predominant concern. Only 4 percent of the land area was under cultivation. Farming systems were characterized by age-old practices and structures. Animal husbandry was divorced from crop farming and monopolized by nomads. Sheep, goats, camels and horses were the most important livestock, with beef cattle farming almost unknown.

Against this background, the war period had been generally one of expansion for agriculture in the Near East. This was true in particular for cereals, meat and other animal products, which generally supplanted cash crops such as cotton in order to satisfy the food demand of the allied forces present in the region. Domestic consumers did not appear to have benefited from this emphasis on food production, however, as available data (mainly concerning Egypt and Turkey) suggest a significant decline in per caput calorie, protein and fat intakes in 1947/48 in relation to levels in the period 1934-1938, especially in Turkey. Average daily intakes in 1947/48 were about 2 050 kcal per caput in Turkey and 2 390 in Egypt, down from about 2 500 prior to the war in both countries.

Fisheries and forestry
The fisheries and forestry sectors were the object of only passing reference in early issues of The State of Food and Agriculture. It was then an accepted fact that the high seas belonged to everybody and that they contained inexhaustible stocks of fish. The FAO Conference in 1946 stated: "The fishing grounds of the world are teeming with fish of all kinds. Fisheries are an international resource. In underdeveloped areas, especially, the harvest awaits the reaper." A similar consideration applied to forestry. Early issues of this publication did mention the importance of conservation and long-term development of forests, but the focus of their attention was on the production of forest products. Conservation issues would only come to the fore decades later - in the 1970s - when the public in some countries began to worry about the destruction of tropical forests, forest fires and forest dieback.