Legal Regulation Of Complex Rational Use Of Natural Resources In Corps Trading

Abstract

The article introduces a new look at the issue of grain export from Russia. It has been shown that grain export is achieved by means of depletion of farmland fertility by entrepreneurs and self-potential of other natural objects, by application of the most dangerous for human health and environment chemical, biological and mechanical aids. Potential scales of damage have been introduced which Russia can suffer from grain scale in social (including ecological) and economical aspects. It has been suggested to notify entrepreneurs legally about impossibility of toxic chemicals application in grain production whose negative impact on the environment and human health have not been tested in time. The UK experience on grain export banning has been given. An attempt has been made to justify the necessity of grain export abandoning as it is. It has been suggested to spend grain off-sets on cattle and poultry breeding. It has been reflected that meat and meat by-products will provide maximal profit, fields will receive manure and long-term forage herbs which will restore its fertility. It has been suggested to introduce into Russia Federal law “About agriculture development” the following regulation: “In economic crisis when prices for grain and other agriculture products are significantly higher abroad than in Russian Federation to ban any kind of their export”. As ecological destabilization during grain production will inevitably provoke abnormality of social processes, legislation should take effective preventive measures to keep stability of the social order and not allowing the society to get into chaos.

Keywords: Agricultural landsecologyentrepreneurshipgrain productionlegislationlaw regulation

Introduction

Export grain production in Russia has been accompanied by extreme pressure of the technological process on the ecology of agricultural lands, environment on the whole, people health. Herewith total profit from grain export hardly covers financial costs for wheat harvest production and fertility restoration of depleted croplands, recovery of contaminated environment. According to many scientists problems of rational land use, land resources recovery, providing population with safe food and rural population with favorable living conditions is especially important nowadays (Turyansky, Merenkov, Dobrunova, Prostenko, & Oliva, 2018).

Problem Statement

Agricultural activity during export grain production is accompanied by contaminating with chemical, biological, and mechanical means of production agrarian ecosystems. It causes degeneration of ecosystems natural potential, including significant soil fertility depletion, impoverishing ecological basis for survival of the contemporary and future citizens in Russia. In this connection Russia legislation should take necessary legal regulations recovering constitutional rights of the present and future generations in this country to consume high-quality and affordable bread, with simultaneous preserving and improving state of agriculture lands and the environment on the whole.

Research Questions

The subject of the present study is intentionally willed social relations which are formed in the Russian state during crop production and realization.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this article is developing legal and organizational instrumentarium which would provide steady development of agriculture and guarantee implementation of consolidated rights of the present and future generations of Russia citizens in production and consumption of ecologically pure agricultural crops.

Research Methods

The following techniques of abstract thinking were applied: analysis, synthesizing, analogy, deduction, induction and abstraction as well as the following methods: historical, comparative, logical-juridical.

Findings

In the middle of 2018 the Ministry of Agriculture in Russia announced: “We estimate grain export from Russia in 2017-2018 agriculture year about 53.2 million tons” (Russian Information Agency, 2018, para. 6). As only sociably and economically safe country can export grain this report can be considered triumphant. In reality the situation with grain export is pitiful. Only small number of people – grain exporters – makes capitals without thinking about the harm they do to the present and future generations of Russian citizens.

The harm is threefold. First, grain export is possible due to depletion of farmland fertility and self potential of other natural objects, second, dangerous for people and environment in general chemical, biological and mechanical aids are used. It is possible due to the lack of proper legal regulation of many issues in rational use and conservation of farm lands. The following issues need legal regulation: suspend entrepreneurs without relevant competences and experience of work on the land from using farmlands (Active Land Code of RF allows doing it); before assigning farm lands to agricultural goods producers for utilization conduct standard inspections of soil fertility indexes comparing with the fertility of adjacent virgin lands (mould, inorganic substances, mechanical composition, biodiversity and so on) and conduct these examinations annually after harvesting. These inspections should be conducted by regional agrochemical laboratories, which should receive a part of profit for grain export; to instruct directively farm entrepreneurs about impossibility to apply especially dangerous chemicals without their proper inspection for long-time negative impact on the environment and human health; oblige farmers to restore soil fertility by introducing corresponding organic norms, correct crop rotation and introduction of other ways of landscape-ecological systems of agriculture and so on (Ibragimov & Ibragimova, 2017; Ibragimov, Ibragimova, & Aliev, 2017). The other reason for disregard for farmland fertility in Russia is under-population. In 2019 average population density in Russia was 8.57 people/кm² against that one varying from 300 to 400 in India, Philippines, Israel, Japan, Belgium and others. In China this index is 650. Among rich in land countries only Kazakhstan (6.7), Canada (3.5), Australia (2.8) and Mongolia (2.0) are behind Russia. The scientists have determined that land value and pattern of tillage utilization are mostly determined by this factor, space position of the lands, water irrigation and so on (Pappu, 2018).

Secondly, the economic situation at the global grain market makes Russian grain exporters, in order to receive maximum own profit, export Russian grain of the best quality (Russian Information Agency, 2018). In this way they again infringe upon interests of Russian people, making them contended with forage grain of lower quality. The bread made of such grain is plain, unpleasant to look at, perishable. Using flour made from grain of low quality requires different agents improving flour. Many of them are harmful for our health (Chablin, 2018). “This year we hear stunning forecasts on grain harvest, but enormous harvest is as a rule accompanied by low quality of the grain”, announced the President of the Russian Union of Flour Mills and Cereal Plants Arkadij Gurevich (as cited in Interfax, 2016).

Thirdly, according to the article in “Rossijskaya Gazeta” (Gaiva, 2019), grain export has negative ecological, economical and social impacts. As the authors of that article think agricultural products, including exporting ones will become more expensive. Consequently, Russian lawmakers must introduce into the Federal Law of Russian Federation “About agriculture development” the following regulation: “In economic crisis when prices for grain and other crops abroad are significantly higher than in Russian Federation, any kind of their export must be banned”.

In the above mentioned announcement of Gurevich it has unequivocally been stated that huge grain harvest in Russia is accompanied by low grain quality nowadays. There is a reason for that, as we have noted above, grain production is simultaneously accompanied by decrease in quality and amount of fertile lands, destructive erosion of natural potential in agricultural lands and adjacent natural objects. Mentioned above and other negative consequences of grain export must worry supreme bodies of public authorities in Russia. As President of RF V.V. Putin notices, “Exporting grain, at first, we should provide self-interests of domestic markets for forage and food facility for population. In increasing exports the problem of providing Russia – is on the foreground. It is essential. Market conditions are secondary” (Sergeev, 2016, para. 7).

We think, the politics of Great Britain in this relation is rational. In order to preserve natural potential of its farming lands, this country imports the major amount of crops, thoroughly checking its quality at the customs. Unknowingly, one of British researchers complains about agricultural policy of the country, noticing, “Relying on import, but not increase in domestic food supply, the United Kingdom risks facing food shortage” (Rethinking Prosperity: Forging Alternatives to a Culture of Consumerism, 2010, para. 14). The other British author contradicts him, “If sustainable development is focused on the future, does it mean that we lose nowadays? Not necessary. …Encouraging stable supply chains we can guarantee that the United Kingdom has enough food for long-term future” (Sustainable Development Commission, 2011, para. 4).

Triumphal reports by RF Ministry of Agriculture on grain export are nothing but a variety of harmful populism, provoking inevitable negative consequences. Soon exhaust field will turn into the desert and cease harvesting. It is difficult not to agree with Jackson (2013): “Naïve ideas that capitalism is effective enough to stabilize climate and solve the problem of resources lack have nearly failed. …Prosperity today means nothing if it undermines conditions of well-being tomorrow. And the greatest confession of the financial crisis in 2008 is tomorrow has come” (p. 106).

In the context of the said above, Russian lawmakers must accept a special legal regulation prohibiting harmful wastage of the natural potential of farmlands, and introduce into the corresponding chapters of the Criminal Code of RF and Administrative Offence Code RF regulations providing responsibility of agrarian officials and farmers for not compensating nutrient removal from soil by crops harvest.

The following variant of farmland use is considered rational. As the conducted research contradict the motto that “unexploited land rests” and allowed us to make a conclusion that in modern crisis ecological conditions, the soil must be ploughed, otherwise it will lose its fertility. Our opinion is the most rational way for Russian agriculture is to export grain processed by farm animals’ stomachs that is it is necessary to develop cattle breeding intensively. It will give the following profits: manure, after animals will be used on fields for crops recovering their fertility; meat and its by-products are more profitable than exporting grain as raw. As efficiency of farmlands depends not only on entrepreneurs’ will but also on weather, the most important way to protect farmers’ economic interests is crops insurance (Monjurul, Tofael, & Noguchi, 2018).

Conclusion

Thus, contemporary farmland use under crops can be considered as: nature-consuming, harmful, uncivilized exploitation of farmland potential and adjacent to them nature objects without the account of interests of this and future generations in Russia. Undermining natural basis of these lands while growing crops modern farmers-entrepreneurs thus undermine the grounds for the future of our country that will increase economical, social and political conflicts and even result in wars civil and foreign ones. As the result of this research we can make a conclusion that we should export not grain but meat of cattle that is it is important to develop cattle breeding.

References

1. Chablin, A. (2018). Food swindlers feed Russia on “forage bread” Bought bread is harmful for health. Law and Order, 1, 3–4. Retrieved from: https://zzackon.ru/blog/43308456518/1
2. Gaiva, E. (2019). Food package prices. Rossijskaya Gazeta, 7760, 1–2. Retrieved from: https://rg.ru/gazeta/2019/01/10.html
3. Ibragimov, K. K., & Ibragimova, D. K. (2017). Measures on stimulating rational use and farmland protection. Property legal issues, 1, 37.
4. Ibragimov, К. K., Ibragimova, F. К., & Aliev, R. Z. (2017). Correlation of rights and principles of equity in contemporary Russia. Justice and State: theory and practice, 11(155), 63.
5. Interfax. (2016). Russian flour millers announced about the bread-making wheat shortage Interfax: Economics, 337, 4. Retrieved from: https://www.interfax.ru/business/530168
6. Jackson, Т. (2013). Prosperity without growth. Moscow: AST-PRESS BOOK, 199 р.
7. Monjurul, I, Tofael, A., & Noguchi, R. (2018). Land Suitability and Insurance Premiums. Sustainability, 10(6), 23.
8. Pappu, H. (2018). Analyzing the spatial structure of the street network to understand the mobility pattern and land-use – a case of an Indian city – Mysore. Journal of land use mobility and environment, 11(2), 12.
9. Rethinking Prosperity: Forging Alternatives to a Culture of Consumerism (2010). Baha'i International Community, 416, 03 May. Retrieved from: https://www.bic.org/node/136
10. Russian Information Agency (2018). Russian grain export is greater than the Ministry of Agriculture forecasts announced experts RIA NEWS, 2 July, 221, 3. Retrieved from: https://ria.ru/20180702/1523801773.html
11. Sergeev, M. (2016). Russia is threatened by grain shortage at enormous harvest (2016). Independent Newspaper, 20314, 2–3. Retrieved from: http://www.ng.ru/economics/2016-09-28/1_food.html
12. Sustainable Development Commission (2011). What is sustainable development? Retrieved from: http://www. sd-commission.org.uk/pages/what-is-sustainable-development.html 
13. Turyansky, A. V., Merenkov, I. N., Dobrunova, A. I., Prostenko, A. N., & Oliva, L.V. (2018). State support improvement for ecological land-use in terms of transition to rural territory sustainable development. Amazonia Investiga, 7(17), 14.