Young people see farming work as a dead end

Although the farming sector is essential in ensuring our food security and helping to keep the environment green, it’s becoming less attractive to the younger generation. This is mainly due to the lower income that people can expect to earn from farming, in addition to the hardships of the job.

This challenge needs to be addressed if countries want to maintain their farming sectors and enjoy the independence of being able to provide food for their citizens. In addition, a strong agricultural sector is an effective way to help develop rural areas. The alternative is that rural people will continue to migrate to the cities if they see no future in farming their forebears’ land. Governments, however, are doing little to promote the agricultural sector, because they tend to gauge economic success by high industrial growth rates and rapid urban development.

Farmers are not to be blamed for wanting to leave their land in increasing numbers. Many have been adversely affected by the ongoing fluctuations in commodity prices. Apart from the unpredictable forces of nature, human interference has unfortunately played a key part in destabilising commodity prices. 

Much of the problem has been caused by the government’s policies. Farm prices should have been liberalised so they reflect actual demand in the market. The prices of produce should naturally continue to rise in line with greater demand resulting from population growth. However, governments – Thailand’s included – seemingly cannot resist interfering with natural price adjustments through market-distorting policies or quota-control systems, as is evident in the case of sugar. In addition, inconsistent and unpredictable subsidy policies have encouraged some farmers to shift to new commodities, only to find that they are contributing to an oversupply. We’ve seen this recently in the case of shallots.

Protective policies adopted by other countries also play a part in depressing crop prices. While many countries are moving toward industrial and service liberalisation, they tend to leave the process of agricultural liberalisation behind. This is almost always due to political reasons. Moreover, few farmers are aware of their right to protect unique crop strains. Investors and foreign producers have stolen intellectual-property rights arising from indigenous crop strains. This could be avoided if farmers were better aware of how to protect their rights.

Governments and responsible agencies should be working harder to help farmers prosper by providing both proper infrastructure and knowledge. Only this kind of investment can make farmers feel proud and want to continue working their land. 

The majority of farmers in Asia are smallholders, and they need proper assistance so they can thrive on the small amounts of property they have. They should be able to add value to their produce through, for instance, organic farming. The government should cover the larger investments, such as irrigation systems.

If they cannot make the land work for them, small farmers will be tempted to sell their property to big investors, then migrate to cities to find menial jobs, the returns on which cannot provide them with a sustainable livelihood. This is not to mention the fact that, over time, rural migrants to the cities tend to lose their entrepreneurial spirit and are no longer able to take part in the development of their communities. 

The farming sector has proved to be a welfare provider for many countries during difficult times. When demand in the US for imported goods declined as a result of the financial crisis in 2008, many Chinese workers were forced back to rural areas after they lost their factory jobs. During our own fiscal crisis in 1997, thousands of Thais were left unemployed when their factories fell on hard times, but they were able to survive that difficult period by going back to their villages to live with their families – who had remained in the agricultural sector.