4.7 Article

The response of grain production to changes in quantity and quality of cropland in Yangtze River Delta, China

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE SCIENCE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 480-489

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.6745

Keywords

grain production; cropland change; soil fertility; irrigation area; Yangtze River Delta

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41130750, 40971072]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [KZZD-EW-10-04]
  3. Nanjing Institute of Geography and Limnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences [NIGLAS2012135006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUNDCropland in Yangtze River Delta has declined drastically since economic reforms in 1978 that led to rapid economic development. Such cropland loss due to population growth has led to a decline in grain production. This study aimed at analyzing the impact of land use changes on grain production. To achieve this, the spatiotemporal dynamics of cropland during 1980-2010 were analyzed. Irrigation and soil fertility data were used as additional lines of evidence. RESULTSCropland loss had negative impacts on grain production. About 80 and 66% of grain production decreased during 1980-2005 and 2005-2010 respectively. This decline was attributed to the conversion of cropland to built-up areas. Abandoned cropland areas were mainly concentrated in regions with high irrigation capability and high soil fertility, while cropland reclamation was mainly in areas with low irrigation and soil fertility, implying that, although cropland was reclaimed, production remained low. The decline in cropland area has reinforced the chronic food insecurity in Yangtze River Delta. CONCLUSIONThis study demonstrated the response of grain production to the changes in cropland quantity and quality. It also provides scientific evidence for decision makers to protect cropland and enhance grain production. (c) 2014 Society of Chemical Industry

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available