This paper, on rural restructuring in China, focuses on the ability of agricultural heritage systems to adapt to modernizing conditions in the rural economy. Since 2002, when FAO initiated the protection of Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS), the value of agricultural heritage has been widely acknowledged, as has the importance and urgency to protect the systems in which they are embedded. However, such complex systems have not been fully assessed for their contribution to food security, ecosystem services and cultural preservation, as well as their ability to adapt to the demands of modernization. In fact, they have not been effectively evaluated as whole systems, largely because we have not yet devised satisfactory ways of studying complex systems, nor have we been able to assess them fully for their multi-faceted contributions to sustainability. This paper accepts the premise that such systems are sustainable in that they have survived as agro-ecosystems for many hundreds of years, having endured the predations of droughts, famines, plagues, floods and wars. This ability to sustain a rich diversity of biological and human systems is considered, in the theory of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS), to be a form of resilience, meaning that these systems have either formed a new normal or returned to the old normal after a period of environmental or social stress. In effect, ancient agricultural heritage systems can be seen to represent what has been traditional and normal in China, but which today are faced with the overwhelming forces of modernization. Taking three examples from Qingtian County in Southern China, where physical and political conditions are consistent, the paper shows how similar rice-fish systems adapt differently and sustain themselves in the face of modernization, and particularly to the loss of youth and labor to urbanisation. One system self-adjusts by using remittances from abroad to sustain the system: an example of self-organization. In another township, the pursuit of tourism is the main form of adaptation to large losses of working population and marginal incomes. To maintain the landscape as a key attraction for tourists, this community has re-assembled abandoned rice terraces and is farming them as a collective enterprise under the auspices of a co-operative: an example of land and labor restructuring that has become common as the dominant form of agrarian change in China. In a third example, the local rice-fish system is being strengthened by modern farming technology and scientific techniques: an example of technological adaptation. The discussion explores the three responses as evidence of sustainable practice involving local restructuring, continued ingenuity, and the creative support of local governments in the face of the homogenizing demands of modernization.

Drawing on interviews with China’s seed governance authorities, agricultural research institutes and seed companies, this paper aims at better understanding the transition of China’s seed governance systems by looking into the revisions of China’s Seed Law since 1949. With the latest dramatic transformation of China’s domestic seed market, and the strong presence of Chinese agribusiness in the global seed market, a closer examination of China’s laws and regulations on the domestic seed industry is not only justified, but much needed. Counteracting the prevailing positive assessment on these new changes from the government and the seed companies, in this paper, I show that China’s seed governance is moving from a precautionary system that resembles the European path to a system featuring self-governance with strengthened legal means that shares more similarities with the US path. Such a system transition will lead to the rising power of China’s large agribusiness companies globally, in contrast with increasingly weakened seed governance and a more problematic future for seed sovereignty.

In post-socialist China, the village’s collective management over community farmland, forestry, and other resources has been greatly undermined since China’s reform and opening up in the early 1980s. The subsequent rural-urban migration has further dismantled rural communities. Efforts have been made to revitalise the countryside, yet little success has been achieved. This paper closely examines one community reconstruction case that experienced two development stages: village committee-led internal development based on collective management of community resources, and tourism development externally subsidised by the government. Unsuccessful as it is, the case shows the vital role of collective resource management in comparison to external subsidies and investment in community reconstruction. It also suggests that a strong community leadership can initiate the process of community reconstruction, but a lack of mobilisation and participation of community members creates underlying issues that threaten its sustainability.

Drawing on fieldwork in two remote mountainous villages in northern and southwestern China, this paper examines women’s (re)engagement with seed keeping practices and agroecological production with the support of social organizations. We foreground the dilemma between caring for sons and caring for seeds faced by so-called ‘left-behind’ women in translocal households. Women’s care work for seeds sustains local agrobiodiversity and contributes to their family’s access to healthy food. Often overlooked, however, is the joy and meaning that these middle-aged and elderly women derive from working with the land and seeds, collaborating with other community members, and building new connections through agroecological networks. As primary caretakers, women in translocal households are also expected to make compromises to meet family care demands moving between urban and rural locations. Drawing on feminist political economy and ecology, we argue that the devaluation and naturalization of women’s care work for both people and the environment have long normalized and legitimized the compromises these women make. We therefore caution social organizations and local governments that recognize and promote women’s care work for seeds to avoid romanticizing women’s sacrifices and reproducing the naturalization of women’s roles and labor in seed conservation.