Authors
David Lobell
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Global warming is likely already taking a toll on world wheat and corn production, according to a new study led by Stanford University researchers. But the United States, Canada and northern Mexico have largely escaped the trend.

"It appears as if farmers in North America got a pass on the first round of global warming," said David Lobell, an assistant professor of environmental Earth system science and center fellow at the Program on Food Security and the Environment at Stanford University. "That was surprising, given how fast we see weather has been changing in agricultural areas around the world as a whole."

Lobell and his colleagues examined temperature and precipitation records since 1980 for major crop-growing countries in the places and times of year when crops are grown. They then used crop models to estimate what worldwide crop yields would have been had temperature and precipitation had typical fluctuations around 1980 levels.

The researchers found that global wheat production was 5.5 percent lower than it would have been had the climate remained stable, and global corn production was lower by almost 4 percent. Global rice and soybean production were not significantly affected.

The United States, which is the world's largest producer of soybeans and corn, accounting for roughly 40 percent of global production, experienced a very slight cooling trend and no significant production impacts.

Outside of North America, most major producing countries were found to have experienced some decline in wheat and corn (or maize) yields related to the rise in global temperature. "Yields in most countries are still going up, but not as fast as we estimate they would be without climate trends," Lobell said.

Lobell is the lead author of the paper, Climate Trends and Global Crop Production Since 1980, published May 5 online in Science Express.

Russia, India and France suffered the greatest drops in wheat production relative to what might have been with no global warming. The largest comparative losses in corn production were seen in China and Brazil.

Total worldwide relative losses of the two crops equal the annual production of corn in Mexico and wheat in France. Together, the four crops in the study constitute approximately 75 percent of the calories that humans worldwide consume, directly or indirectly through livestock, according to research cited in the study.

"Given the relatively small temperature trends in the U.S. Corn Belt, it shouldn't be surprising if complacency or even skepticism about global warming has set in, but this study suggests that would be misguided," Lobell said.

Since 1950, the average global temperature has increased at a rate of roughly 0.13 degrees Celsius per decade. But over the next two to three decades average global temperature is expected to rise approximately 50 percent faster than that, according to the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. With that rate of temperature change, it is unlikely that the crop-growing regions of the United States will continue to escape the rising temperatures, Lobell said.

"The climate science is still unclear about why summers in the Corn Belt haven't been warming. But most explanations suggest that warming in the future is just as likely there as elsewhere in the world," Lobell said.

"In other words, farmers in the Corn Belt seem to have been lucky so far."

This is the first study to come up with a global estimate for the past 30 years of what has been happening, Lobell said.

To develop their estimates, the researchers used publicly available global data sets from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and from the University of Delaware, University of Wisconsin, and McGill University.

The researchers also estimated the economic effects of the changes in crop yield using models of commodity markets.

"We found that since 1980, the effects of climate change on crop yields have caused an increase of approximately 20 percent in global market prices," said Wolfram Schlenker, an economist at Columbia University and a coauthor of the paper in Science.

He said if the beneficial effects of higher carbon dioxide levels on crop growth are factored into the calculation, the increase drops down to 5 percent.

"Five percent sounds small until you realize that at current prices world production of these four crops are together worth nearly $1 trillion per year," Schlenker said. "So a price increase of 5 percent implies roughly $50 billion per year more spent on food."

Rising commodity prices have so far benefited American farmers, Lobell and Schlenker said, because they haven't suffered the relative declines in crop yield that the rest of the world has been experiencing.

"It will be interesting to see what happens over the next decade in North America," Lobell said. "But to me the key message is not necessarily the specifics of each country. I think the real take-home message is that climate change is not just about the future, but that it is affecting agriculture now. Accordingly, efforts to adapt agriculture such as by developing more heat- and drought-tolerant crops will have big payoffs, even today. "

Justin Costa-Roberts, an undergraduate student at Stanford, is also a coauthor of the Science paper. David Lobell is a researcher in Stanford's Program on Food Security and the Environment, a joint program of Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Schlenker is an assistant professor at the School of International and Public Affairs and at the Department of Economics at Columbia.

The work was supported by a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation.

 

All News button
1
-

This talk presents the prolonged deadly encounter between the Germans and Soviets in World War II as a clash between two different interpretive templates.  In engaging the Soviet enemy, Nazi German leaders and soldiers employed visual frames of analysis, centering on physiognomy and racial makeup.  As they fought back, the Soviets assessed the German invaders through a palpably textual register, focusing on their psychology and political consciousness.  The talk shows how these templates worked in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union and how they collided in the course of the war.

Talk Synopsis:

In this seminar Jochen Hellbeck explains the German-Soviet war as having been a battle of "images against words," a term that reflects both a clash of wartime ideologies and the different choices of media used to express these ideologies. Germany, Hellbeck explains, relied heavily on visual media, using videos and photos as propaganda, while the Soviets used written materials to inspire their soldiers and citizens and to demoralize Germans. Hellbeck focuses on the battle of Stalingrad, which involved a long standoff and extended exposure between the two sides.

The Germans used multimedia, as well as strong visual imagery in written materials, to portray the battle as a conquest of an inferior race and a vast landscape available for the taking. A compilation of German soldiers' reports from the Eastern front in July 1941, and the 1942 war diary of a German journalist  embedded with troops in Stalingrad, use descriptive imagery to paint Soviets as mute and beastly and Germans as war heroes full of vitality.  Letters from German officials employed vivid language of the landscape, with repeated references to art as representations of German culture and greatness. Wartime photography by German soldiers, many of whom were amateur photographers, was common. The German use of visual media is exemplified by "Soviet Paradise," a 1942 short film made to discredit the Soviet Union's campaign of print propaganda. The film, which employed sophisticated cinematography techniques and very little commentary, was made into an exhibit in Berlin during the summer of 1942 and was visited by 1 million people.

In contrast, the Soviets did not come close to the amount of investment the Germans made in wartime multimedia.   Soviet soldiers were forbidden from keeping photos, and only officers could occasionally take them, in the rare event they had access to cameras. Instead, Hellbeck finds ample written records of the Soviet wartime experience. The Soviet military leadership commissioned a war history and invested heavily in the work of Soviet writers and historians, rather than photographers or film crews, to document events on the front lines.

Hellbeck’s presentation also includes analysis of the war records of prominent military personnel on both sides, as well as a review of the sources he used in his research, and his perceptions of how the Germans and Soviets interpreted each other’s wartime records. The next step in Hellbeck's research project will involve comparing techniques used in German and Soviet news film chronicles.

A discussion period following the talk addressed such questions as: did Germans and Soviets employ the same strategies in their military engagements with other countries? Why is there so much portrayal of Soviet POWS in Germany, and so little of German POWs in the Soviet Union? How was the defeat at Stalingrad represented by the Germans and by the Soviets? How did the strategies resonant with the respective sides?

 

About the Speaker:

Jochen Hellbeck is Associate Professor in the Department of History at Rutgers University.  He is the author of Revolution On My Mind: Writing a Diary under Stalin (Harvard, 2006), and is currently writing a book about the clash and the entanglements of Germans and Soviets in the battle of Stalingrad.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Jochen Hellbeck Associate Professor, History Speaker Rutgers University
Seminars
Paragraphs

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine had the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal on its territory.  When Ukrainian-Russian negotiations on removing these weapons from Ukraine appeared to break down in September 1993, the U.S. government engaged in a trilateral process with Ukraine and Russia.  The result was the Trilateral Statement, signed in January 1994, under which Ukraine agreed to transfer the nuclear warheads to Russia for elimination.  In return, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, Russia and Britain; compensation for the economic value of the highly-enriched uranium in the warheads (which could be blended down and converted into fuel for nuclear reactors); and assistance from the United States in dismantling the missiles, missile silos, bombers and nuclear infrastructure on its territory.  Steven Pifer recounts the history of this unique negotiation and describes the key lessons learned.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Brookings Institution
Authors
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On April 11, the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) hosted an event to celebrate the release of Francis Fukuyama's latest book, The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution. The occasion drew an audience of over 100 faculty, students, and members of the community, who were eager to hear Fukuyama introduce the first volume of this "magnum opus," which traces the history of the development of political institutions through the eighteenth century. Fukuyama was joined by two Stanford faculty members to provide commentary on the book; Ian Morris, Professor of Classics and History, and Barry Weingast, Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institute.



The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution
Francis Fukuyama
Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 2011
608 pages

Fukuyama is the Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute and in residence at CDDRL since July 2011, coming to Stanford from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). CDDRL Director, Larry Diamond opened the event by commenting on how CDDRL is the ideal intellectual home for the Origins of Political Order, which examines democracy, development, and the rule of law from an evolutionary perspective. Diamond discussed the richness and breadth of Fukuyama's scholarship, which is not confined to one region or discipline but is truly global and interdisciplinary in nature, underpinning the philosophy and approach of CDDRL's research agenda.

Fukuyama provided the audience with an overview of how he conceived of writing such a sweeping account of political development, which began when his former teacher and mentor, the late Samuel Huntington asked him to write the forward to a new version of the 1968 classic, Political Order in Changing Societies. It occurred to him that there was little scholarship available that focused on where institutions first originated and how they evolved throughout human history. Fukuyama stressed the practical importance of this empirical question and its application to the present day, as Arab states struggle to create viable political institutions in the wake of revolution. 

Fukuyama described modern political order as consisting of three characteristics that are the foundational analysis of his book--the state, rule of law, and accountability. In discussing the evolution of the state, Fukuyama characterized it as the "long term historical struggle against a family."

Examining history through an anthropological lens, Fukuyama described early societies as orderly, with specific rules based on biologically grounded mechanisms, favoritism towards kin, and reciprocal altruism. Cooperation among relatives and friends is something that "every human society defaults to in the absence of institutions that provide different incentives," said Fukuyama.

These early social orders evolved into modern states once patrimonialism was replaced by a more impersonal form of politics, and citizens were no longer favored based on their ties to the ruler. Fukuyama traces the first modern state to ancient China during the time of the Qin dynasty in the third century BC, which created an impersonal, rational, and centralized bureaucracy that diverged from the patrimonial systems of the past. Similarly, in the Muslim world a system of military slavery was adopted by the Ottoman empire to break young men's allegiance to their family and generate loyalty to the Sultan.  

While state institutions were constructed in the Arab, Hindu, and Chinese worlds, underneath these systems, Fukuyama stressed, are strong kinship groups that continued to influence the formation of the modern state. By contrast, he claimed, "Europe is the only world civilization that gets beyond kinship on a social but not a political level."

Examining the development of rule of law, Fukuyama described it as, "an outgrowth of religious law administered by a hierarchy residing outside the state that puts limits on the executive." In order to institutionalize law, a cadre of legal specialists were trained and law was made coherent through codification.

Something that I find striking about the rise of democracy or accountable government in Europe is how accidental and contingent it is.
- Francis Fukuyama

Fukuyama discussed how the sequence in the development of institutions can often be an accident of history that will ultimately determine its type of governance. "Something that I find striking about the rise of democracy or accountable government in Europe is how accidental and contingent it is," Fukuyama continued, "you would not have democratic institutions in the west were it not for the survival of certain feudal institutions into the modern period."

European monarchical authority was limited by feudal institutions called estates, parliaments, sovereign courts, and the like, consisting of the upper nobility, gentry, and bourgeoisie, which served as a balance of power against the central state. Fukuyama argued that this ultimately led to constitutional governance in England, but not in France, Spain, Russia, or Hungary, were parliaments were weak and divided.

Stanford historian and classicist Ian Morris, author of Why the West Rules for Now, lent an historical account of Fukuyama's book, commenting on the breadth of the scholarship and soundness of his historical judgment, which he views as a rarity in academia. On the whole Morris agreed with Fukuyama's argument, particularly the way he stressed the evolutionary basis of social and political change.

However, he disagreed with a specific detail of Fukuyama's analysis, where he classified the Qin dynasty as the first modern state. Instead, Morris views the Qin as part of a broader package of shifts occurring during the 1st millennium BCE, from China to the Mediterranean basin where patrimonial states evolved toward more "high-end type states," which separate political power from kinship networks.

On a deeper level, Morris believes there are more similarities than differences in patterns of human development. The biggest divergences did not occur until the last 500 years when according to Morris, "geographical forces have driven the rule of law, accountable government, and all that's happened since the French Revolution."

Barry Weingast, Professor of Political Science at Stanford and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, provided a theoretical examination of The Origins of Political Order, discussing the important gap Fukuyama's book fills in defining political development since Huntington's seminal 1968 piece.

Weingast highlighted two areas of the book--the role of ideas and the issue of violence. According to Weingast, the role of ideas is a causal feature of Fukuyama's analysis but he does include ancient Greece and Rome, telling the story of republics and how ideas defined their political development. Weingast discusses the dilemma that lies at the heart of governance from the time of the Romans to the early American republic, which is characterized as a 2,000-year struggle of how to scale-up into larger societies, capable of defending themselves from other larger societies.

Examining the concept of violence, Weingast argues that Fukuyama does not give enough attention to the theoretical element of violence and challenges the way he conceptualizes it through Max Weber's definition of a modern state, which "has a monopoly on the legitimate uses of violence."

The debut of Fukuyama's treatise on political development left everyone in the room with a fresh perspective on where modern institutions evolved from to more fully understand their characteristics and complexities today. We look forward to the second volume of this book, which will bring the story up to the present day.

Hero Image
fukuyama book 4x6 2
All News button
1

From Conversations with History- Institute of International Studies, University of California at Berkeley

Conversations host Harry Kreisler welcomes Siegfried S. Hecker, former Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, for a discussion of scientists, the national laboratories, and the threat posed by nuclear weapons. Hecker traces his career in material sciences, describes the evolution of his intellectual focus, and recalls his leadership of Los Alamos. He then traces the changes in the international security environment in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union discussing the response of the U.S. and the weapons laboratories to the momentous events that created a qualitatively different set of security challenges. Hecker then analyzes the threats posed by terrorist organizations, the dangers of nuclear proliferation, and the challenges for U.S. policy in assessing the motivation and capabilities of Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the political and technical dimensions of the international security landscape.

 

CISAC
Stanford University
Encina Hall, C220
Stanford, CA 94305-6165

(650) 725-6468 (650) 723-0089
0
Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Emeritus
Research Professor, Management Science and Engineering, Emeritus
hecker2.jpg PhD

Siegfried S. Hecker is a professor emeritus (research) in the Department of Management Science and Engineering and a senior fellow emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI). He was co-director of CISAC from 2007-2012. From 1986 to 1997, Dr. Hecker served as the fifth Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Dr. Hecker is an internationally recognized expert in plutonium science, global threat reduction, and nuclear security.

Dr. Hecker’s current research interests include nuclear nonproliferation and arms control, nuclear weapons policy, nuclear security, the safe and secure expansion of nuclear energy, and plutonium science. At the end of the Cold War, he has fostered cooperation with the Russian nuclear laboratories to secure and safeguard the vast stockpile of ex-Soviet fissile materials. In June 2016, the Los Alamos Historical Society published two volumes edited by Dr. Hecker. The works, titled Doomed to Cooperate, document the history of Russian-U.S. laboratory-to-laboratory cooperation since 1992.

Dr. Hecker’s research projects at CISAC focus on cooperation with young and senior nuclear professionals in Russia and China to reduce the risks of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism worldwide, to avoid a return to a nuclear arms race, and to promote the safe and secure global expansion of nuclear power. He also continues to assess the technical and political challenges of nuclear North Korea and the nuclear aspirations of Iran.

Dr. Hecker joined Los Alamos National Laboratory as graduate research assistant and postdoctoral fellow before returning as technical staff member following a tenure at General Motors Research. He led the laboratory's Materials Science and Technology Division and Center for Materials Science before serving as laboratory director from 1986 through 1997, and senior fellow until July 2005.

Among his professional distinctions, Dr. Hecker is a member of the National Academy of Engineering; foreign member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; fellow of the TMS, or Minerals, Metallurgy and Materials Society; fellow of the American Society for Metals; fellow of the American Physical Society, honorary member of the American Ceramics Society; and fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

His achievements have been recognized with the Presidential Enrico Fermi Award, the 2020 Building Bridges Award from the Pacific Century Institute, the 2018 National Engineering Award from the American Association of Engineering Societies, the 2017 American Nuclear Society Eisenhower Medal, the American Physical Society’s Leo Szilard Prize, the American Nuclear Society's Seaborg Medal, the Department of Energy's E.O. Lawrence Award, the Los Alamos National Laboratory Medal, among other awards including the Alumni Association Gold Medal and the Undergraduate Distinguished Alumni Award from Case Western Reserve University, where he earned his bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees in metallurgy.

Date Label
Siegfried S. Hecker Co-Director of CISAC and Professor (Research), Department of Management Science and Engineering; FSI Senior Fellow Speaker
Seminars

The Europe Center
Encina Hall, 2nd Floor
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6165
The Europe Center
Encina Hall, 2nd Floor
616 Serra Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6165

0
Anna Lindh Fellow (Spring 2011)
Doctoral Candidate, Political Science, Humboldt University of Berlin
Picture_Daniel_Schatz.png

Daniel Schatz is a Visiting Anna Lindh Researcher at the Europe Center and a Doctoral Candidate in Political Science at the Humboldt University of Berlin.

Schatz’s doctoral dissertation, “The Politics of Foreign Policy Change: An Analysis of Sweden’s Middle East Policy 1996-2006” examines the dynamics of foreign policy change by analyzing changes in Sweden’s foreign policy towards Israel and the Palestinians. His main research interests are international relations, foreign policy analysis, foreign policy change, European and Scandinavian politics, the Middle East and the Arab-Israeli Conflict.

Prior to joining Stanford University, Schatz’s professional appointments include positions at the European Parliament, the UN Headquarters, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, the World Jewish Congress Headquarters and the Canadian Embassy in Stockholm. He was nominated as a Candidate for Sweden's Parliament in 2006 and 2010.

Schatz is an editorial page contributor in Svenska Dagbladet, one of Sweden’s largest dailies. His articles and opinion pieces on contemporary international affairs appear regularly in European and international newspapers. He graduated with a Masters Degree in Political Science and European Studies from the University of Lund and has completed studies in International Relations the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and New York University. He speaks Swedish, English, Polish, German, Russian, Hebrew and Yiddish.

Department of History
Building 200, Room 11
Stanford, CA 94305-2024

(650) 725-5560 (650) 725-0597
0
Daniel E. Koshland Professor in Jewish Culture and History
Professor of History
Zipperstein_Web.jpg PhD

Steven J. Zipperstein is the Daniel E. Koshland Professor in Jewish Culture and History at Stanford University. He has also taught at universities in Russia, Poland, France, and Israel; for six years he taught Jewish history at Oxford University. From 1991-2007, he was Director of the Taube Center for Jewish Studies at Stanford. Zipperstein is the author and editor of nine books including The Jews of Odessa: A Cultural History (1986, winner of the Smilen Prize for the Outstanding book in Jewish history); Elusive Prophet: Ahad Ha’am and the Origins of Zionism (1993, winner of the National Jewish Book Award); Imagining Russian Jewry (1999); and Rosenfeld’s Lives: Fame, Oblivion, and the Furies of Writing (2008, shortlisted for the National Jewish Book Award in Biography, Autobiography and Memoir).  His work has been translated into Russian, Hebrew, and French. Zipperstein’s latest book, Pogrom:  Kishinev and the Tilt of History, published by Liveright/W. W. Norton in 2018, has been widely reviewed in newspapers and magazines in the United States and England including The New York Times, New York Review of Books, The New Yorker, The New Statesman, Literary Review, and the San Francisco Chronicle. The Economist, Ha-Aretz, San Francisco Chronicle and Mosaic Magazine have named it one of the best books of the year.  It was a finalist for the National Jewish Book Award (History) and Mark Lynton award for the best non-fiction book of 2018. 

He has been awarded the Leviant Prize of the Modern Language Association, the Judah Magnes Gold Medal of the American Friends of the Hebrew University, and the Koret Prize for Outstanding Contributions to the American Jewish community.  He has held fellowships at the Radcliffe Institute at Harvard University, the Institute for Advanced Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Yitzhak Rabin Institute in Tel Aviv, and has twice been a Visiting Professor at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes Sciences Sociales.  In spring 2014, he was the first Jacob Kronhill Scholar at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, in New York. At Stanford, and earlier at Oxford and UCLA, he has supervised the dissertation work of more than thirty students now teaching at universities and colleges in the United States, Canada, and elsewhere.  He has delivered keynote addresses and endowed lectures at several dozen universities in the United States and abroad including the Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Central European University, Budapest; Emory; UCLA; University of Wisconsin, Madison; Vanderbilt, and the National Yiddish Book Center. 

Zipperstein’s articles have appeared in The New York Times Sunday Book Review, the Washington Post, The New Republic, the Jewish Review of Books, Chronicle of Higher Education and in many scholarly journals.  He was an editor of Jewish Social Studies for twenty years, and the book series Stanford Studies in Jewish History and Culture for a quarter of a century.  He is immediate past Chair of the Academic Council of the Center for Jewish History, in New York. Together with Anita Shapira, he is series editor of the Yale University Press/Leon Black Foundation Jewish Lives volumes that were named in 2015 the best books of the year by the National Jewish Book Council -- the first time a book series has won this prize. Some forty-five Jewish Lives books have already appeared, and Zipperstein is currently at work on a biography of Philip Roth for the series.  He and his wife Susan Berrin live in Berkeley.  

Affiliated faculty at The Europe Center

Department of Art and Art History

(650) 723-0513
0
Osgood Hooker Professor of Fine Arts
pavle.jpeg

Pavle Levi is Osgood Hooker Professor of Fine Arts in the Art Department's Film and Media Studies Program. He is the author of several books, most recently, Jolted Images: Unbound Analytic (2018). He is the recipient of the 2011 Gores Award for Excellence in Teaching.

Affiliated faculty at The Europe Center
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On the eve of the Lunar New Year, Beijing is bright and bustling. Keeping a promise made to a friend 2000 km away, a reporter walks along Zhongguancun Boulevard in search of a medicine called the "baota lozenge." However, more than twenty-some pharmacies of all sizes have all given the same answer: this once familiar anthelmintic drug has been off the counters of pharmacies for over 10 years!

In Sichuan and Guizhou, some 2000 km away, the final report from the Chinese Academy of Sciences Rural Policy Research Center and the Rural Education Action Project (REAP) on the current infection status of intestinal worms in children is fresh off the press. In the more than twenty years since the baota lozenge came off the market, prevention efforts against soil-borne worm infections in rural children have weakened and these parasitic infections traditionally affecting rural children have re-emerged!

According to results from a survey of 6 randomly selected nationally designated poor counties and 95 villages, in which 817 three to five year-old preschool-aged children and 890 eight to ten-year old school-aged children in Sichuan and Guizhou were screened for intestinal worms, REAP found that infection rates for intestinal worms (Ascaris, hookworm and whipworm) reached 22%: 21% for preschool-aged children and 23% for school-aged children.

In a country like China that has been experiencing an economic boom for the past 30 years, why do poor rural children today still have such a high infection rate of intestinal worms?

Delisting the baota lozenge and its effects on children's health

Among 817 three to five year-old preschool-aged children and 890 eight to ten-year old school-aged children randomly selected from 6 poor counties, the overall intestinal worm infection rate was high at 22%, mainly with Ascaris. Of the infected children, ~80% had roundworms, and 15% had multiple infections. This result overturns the presumption that intestinal worms infection decreases when standard of living increases.

A WHO report in 1999 explained that in tropical and subtropical regions, the loss from soil-borne parasitic diseases and schistosomiasis accounts for over 40% of the total disease burden. Those affected are mainly children; the diseases increase the risk of malnutrition, anemia, stunting, impaired cognition, and other diseases.   

Actually, even before this report was published, China had already prioritized prevention of soil-borne parasitic diseases and schistosomiasis in public health measures. In the 50 years from the founding of new China to the early 1990s, the Chinese government had been devoted to increasing awareness of parasitic worm infections and systematic use of anti-parasite drugs as part of its prevention efforts to drastically reduce intestinal worm infection rates in children. However, in the last 20 years, not only have intestinal worms not been considered a priority in national infectious disease control, but the baota lozenge used consecutively for 10 years has also retreated from the market.

With the baota lozenge off the market and intestinal worm prevention at a low, what is the current health status of the vast number of rural children?

With this question in mind, CCAP and REAP's team, with the help of the Chinese CDC's Parasitic Diseases Control and Prevention Institute, conducted a field work investigation from April 2010 to June 2010 in Sichuan and Guizhou.

To ensure representativeness and the scientific nature of the survey, 6 nationally designated poor counties were randomly selected across the two provinces. After sampling areas were confirmed, the townships in each county were divided into 42 groups according to per capita net income and 12 townships were randomly selected from each group. Four sample townships were selected from each sample county. In every sample township, 2 sample schools were randomly selected; in every sample school, 2 sample villages served by the school were randomly selected; in each sample village, 11 eight to ten-year olds were selected for parasitic worm infection screening. At the same time, in every village, using child vaccination records (provided by township health center), the research team acquired the name list of all three to five-year old children in the two sample villages within that township. Eleven three to five-year old preschool-aged children were randomly selected from each sample village for screening for intestinal worms.

In this way, with collaborations with international parasitic worm expert consultants and recommendations from the Chinese CDC Parasitic Disease Control and Prevention Institute, 46 schools, 95 villages served by the schools, and a total of 1707 children were randomly selected to form the sample. Of these, 817 were three to five years old and considered preschool-aged and 890 were eight to ten years old and considered school-aged.

The investigation and screening of children for parasitic worms consisted of three main parts: anthropomorphic measures, basic socioeconomic information and children's fecal samples. A team of nurses from Xi'an Jiaotong University was responsible for measuring children's height and weight; REAP team members collected information on sample children's age, gender, parental education levels, hygiene and family characteristics, as well as whether children had received anthelmintics in the past year and a half. Chinese CDC Parasitic Disease Control and Prevention Institute analyzed fecal samples.    

Over the course of a few months of data analysis, results indicate: sample areas have high infection rates of intestinal worms, but discrepancies exist across different age groups, areas and types of parasitic worm infection. Twenty-one percent of preschool-aged and 23% of school-aged children in sample areas were infected with Ascaris, hookworm or whipworm or a combination thereof. Infection rates meet WHO's criteria for mass treatment. In one province, 34% of preschool-aged and 40% of school-aged children have one or more of the three types of worms. In the other province, although infection rates are lower among preschool and school-aged children, they are still 10% and 7%, respectively. Among the types of worm infection, Ascaris is most severe, with infection rates reaching 17%, followed by whipworm (7%), pinworm (5%), and hookworm (4%).

At the same time, regional differences are quite distinct. In one of the provinces, 7 villages out of 48 sample villages and 2 schools out of the 23 sample schools had prevalence rates above 20%. About half of the sample villages and schools suggest evidence of parasitic worm infection. In the other province, one quarter of the sample villages and one third of the sample schools had infection rates above 50%. Evidently, intestinal worms prevention is an important public health concern that needs to be emphasized by local disease control centers.

Besides high infection rates of parasitic worms, the intensity of infection should not be ignored. Among preschool-aged children in the two sample areas, each gram of fecal matter contains 23,568 and 17,064 roundworm eggs, respectively. According to WHO standards, this level of roundworm infection is considered a "moderate" infection level. Hookworm and whipworm infection intensities are lower; only hookworm infection among school-aged children in Sichuan reached "moderate intensity," while other infection levels could be considered "low intensity".

 What causes parasitic worm infection in these children?

The investigation shows that infection in preschool-aged children correlates with maternal education and family health conditions, while infection in school-aged children correlates with school health education and hygiene conditions. Of particular importance is that even though eliminating worms costs only 4 RMB per person per year, prevention efforts have not been included in local medical services in less accessible rural areas with high infection rates.

In the third grade class of Longshan elementary school in Machang township, Pingba county, Anshun city, Guizhou province, one question continues to haunt head teacher Li: "Why does our class have students calling in sick and missing school every day?"

On the surface, Teacher Li's third grade class is no different from schools in other rural areas in China. The students are typical rural schoolchildren filled with curiosity, who have bright eyes, dirty hands, and colorful backpacks.

However, if you pay close attention, you will notice they are very different from same-aged children in other areas. These students are mostly on the small side, and look one to two years younger than their actual age. At recess, there is none of the typical pent-up energy kids usually have after sitting in a classroom all morning. No excited children chasing one another, no shouts from the hubbub of play, no lively rhythm of skipping rope. It is as if a blanket of weariness has descended on these children.  

The culprit is no other than intestinal worms. According to the introduction provided by researchers Drs. Xiaobing Wang and Chengfang Liu, Longshan elementary school has one of the highest infection rates of all sampled schools, reaching 70%. One of the two sample villages covered by Longshan elementary schools had parasitic worm infection rates as high as 80%.

What effect does parasitic worm infection have on children's growth and development? REAP's results indicate that worms lead to anemia in 22.7% of the rural school-aged children, and delayed physical development in 30%, which is a 400% higher risk than non-infected children. Compared with non-infected children, affected children have below-average weights, shorter stature, weaker body constitution, and general underdevelopment, just to name a few characteristics.

The project research team, Chinese CDC Parasitic Disease Control and Prevention Institute's Guofei Wang and Xibei University's Professor Yaojiang Shi believe that worms not only cause discomfort and nausea, but also lead to significant learning (memory) and cognitive impairments.

Renfu Luo, an assistant researcher at CCAP, believes that the underlying reason is that high infection rates have long been neglected, and so have caused low school attendance rates and limited attention spans, which ultimately lead to infected children falling behind their healthy counterparts.

In fact, according to the WHO's parasitic worms prevention guidelines, for schools like Longshan elementary school that are rural and inaccessible, two mass administrations of albendazole or mebendazole (both available on the market) are needed per year. However, the reality is, even though the medicine costs only 4 RMB per person per year for kids from Longshan elementary school and other nearby rural villages, the public health infrastructure required to combat the disease has not been incorporated into the scope of medical services.

If the Longshan elementary school sample is an example of the typical conditions in western villages, what are the implications on a larger scale? CCAP researcher Linxiu Zhang believes that in the long run, if parasitic worm infections in children continue to be neglected in national infectious disease control, the future efficiency and productivity of the rural labor force will be affected. From an education perspective, and in light of an increasingly competitive skill-based socioeconomic environment, intestinal worms may very well be the primary driver for perpetuating the vicious intergenerational cycle of poverty.

From the 6 sample counties investigated over the course of 3 months, the researchers were able to see with their own eyes the health situation of Longshan elementary school and other sample schools. The researchers could not resist asking, how did these kids become infected with intestinal worms? Living in more or less the same environment, why do some kids become infected while others escape that fate?

After repeated comparison and analysis of the data, researchers found that these poor rural village children's infection rates are correlated with mother's education level, children's unsanitary hygiene habits (such as not washing hands before meals and after bathroom use), and family health conditions (such as access to potable, clean water, toilet sanitation, and livestock/poultry breeding habits). At the same time, children's habit of wearing split pants for convenient urination/defecation also exacerbates the risk for worm infection. Because mothers are usually responsible for their children's eating and health habits at home, mothers with lower education levels often lack knowledge about health and nutrition improvement and intestinal worm disease severity. Thus, the higher the mother's education level, the lower the child's chance of infection. Interestingly though, father's education level has no visible effect on the child's risk of infection.

For school-aged children, the main reason for intestinal worm infection is that poor rural village schools lack safe drinking water services and facilities. In these sample schools, researchers found that the schools' water quality is a far cry from the national standards for safe, potable water. However, because these schools cannot provide boiled water, many students have no choice but to drink unprocessed, unboiled water.

Drinking unboiled water is a main cause for infection in children. According to calculations made by the research team, consuming unboiled water increases infection by 11%, while washing hands before meals can decrease infection by about 4.6%.

Poor school sanitation conditions are also a main driver for infection. Research findings indicate that two-thirds of the sampled schools did not have sinks for washing hands; even though a few schools have constructed sinks, because there is no running water or soap, they are really just for display. Also, none of the sampled school treated their bathroom waste using appropriate and safe chemical methods, which not only affects sanitation in and around the school, but also facilitates parasitic worm cross-infection.

Insufficient knowledge or poor public health measures?

Prevention of intestinal worm infection for poor, rural village children is unstructured, unsystematic, and combined with school sanitation and health education deficiencies, has triggered high infection rates in remote rural areas. However, the primary reason for this phenomenon is the lack of basic public health measures in rural settings.

The analysis of the data begs the following question: Why, in the midst of rapid economic progress, are there still elevated levels of infection among children in certain regions? We know from China's past successes in infectious disease control that basic public health services are all that is needed to effectively prevent parasitic worm infection. And cheap, effective, safe, and reliable anthelmintics are easily acquirable. Yet high levels of infection persist. Why?

As early as 1960, many international experts in global development praised China for its ability, despite its developing status and low average income, to effectively provide public health services for rural citizens and children. Turning back to that page in long forgotten history, China was actually able to prevent parasitic worm disease at impressive proportions in a short span of 50 years. The success can be attributed to strong adherence to prevention and the hard work of medical and public health personnel.

Data indicate that in the 1970s, the parasitic worm infection rate among China's children reached about 80%. The 1990 seminal nation-wide human parasites survey found that overall parasitic prevalence remained high at 63%, with the intestinal worm infection rate at 59%. Even though China's population infected with Ascaris, whipworm and hookworm at that time reached 140 million people, due to administration of anthelmintics in rural villages combined with health education and waste management as part of a concerted prevention effort, the parasitic infection rate ultimately plummeted at the beginning of this century. Soil-borne worm infection rates decreased to about 20%. 

This was an accomplishment during a time of massive prevention and treatment by the infectious disease control unit. This period marked a golden era for public health measures in rural villages. Almost everyone over 35 years of age born in rural areas can still vividly remember the many "barefoot" and village doctors who performed regular check-ups for various villages, treated common diseases for free, and educated people about basic disease prevention and health practices. One of the most commonly seen services was providing free "baota" lozenges or albendazole to children, in the form of a pink or blue, mildly sweet anthelmintic pill.

However, this "free lunch" period did not last long. After conducting field work studies on the sample villages, researchers discovered that entering into the 1980s, with decreasing investment in rural public health and medical services, the rural health system sustained by "barefoot" doctors crumbled, and villagers have since rarely enjoyed basic public health protection. With severe financial shortages and lack of coordination, education and public health collaboration efforts also descended into stagnation. School-aged children's health surveillance and vaccination measures reached a nearly historic low. In recent years, the Chinese government has begun to redirect attention to rural public health. However, the prolonged 20-year disappearance of basic rural public health services from the national radar has initiated the revival of many once eliminated diseases in these areas. Some villages actually exist in zones of concentrated outbreaks.

With an impressive record of success just twenty years ago, why is the prevention of parasitic worms in children still so difficult in an economically blossoming and increasingly health conscious society? Is it due to insufficient monetary funding, gaps in knowledge, or some other reason?

Researchers believe that even with the disappearance of the high quality and inexpensive "baota" lozenge, other drug treatments for parasitic worm infections in children exist today, requiring just two administrations per year and a low cost of less than 4 RMB. However, the critical problem is that health and education administration in various areas currently lack substantive, effective coordination in their anthelmintic efforts. Small investments that maximize benefit to many people's livelihoods are slow to be made.

According to field interviews, when the "baota" lozenge retreated from center stage, local health and education departments debated about who should take responsibility for children's health, and teachers and principals also shunned the problem. In discussions with some teachers from sampled schools, researchers found that teachers scratched their heads over poor parental care in addressing the issue. Despite all schools establishing relevant health education curricula, due to limited manpower and financial resources, most schools do not have full-time health education teachers and do not distribute unified teaching materials to students, so the curriculum can hardly be implemented.

Actually though, cross-department cooperation has occurred in the past. At the end of the last century, the Ministries of Health and Education used to collaborate on formulating and implementing effective anthelmintic interventions for children through stratified school-based efforts that provided anthelmintics for free to children in severe infection areas. At that time, treatment of parasitic worms in children was highly successful.

However, the reality is that in the sampled areas, a relatively large portion of medical institutions lack funding support and the necessary facilities. Thus, they have no capacity to freely provide parasitic worm prevention services to children, resulting in 55% of sampled rural children being infected with intestinal worms. These children have never been administered any anthelmintics, and even for those who have been treated, they did not undergo any examination of the distribution of intestinal worm infection beforehand. Parents often solely look for changes to their children's appetite or compare their children's weight with that of other same-aged peers. They rarely seek medical help or follow a doctor's advice, and many freely allow their kids to take the medications on their own. Due to limited knowledge about parasitic worm infections and prevention, parents never followed-up to make sure the medication worked and are unclear about reinfection risks. The vast majority of parents wrongly assume that using anthelmintics just once will prevent infection in the long run.

By investigating children who have used anthelmintics in the past 18 months (47% of the sample), researchers found that even after treatment, intestinal worms reinfection rates in children remained at a high 20%. In one sampled province, intestinal worms reinfection rates in children were at a startling 33% after treatment. These results indicate that across sampled areas, one-third of preventive medication efforts produced no effect. What is needed is integration into rural public health services system with long-term follow-up, surveillance, and medical intervention when appropriate.

An indisputable reality is that the worm burden reduction is different from other types of infectious disease control because specialized equipment and knowledge are needed for detection of intestinal worm infection in children, and the disease often strikes poor, remote rural areas. Thus, even though rural public health services have received more attention today, it remains difficult to attract the focus of relevant departments.

Recommendations from experts in multiple fields: Increase the level of parasitic worm prevention and improve health facilities in poor rural schools

The situation of intestinal worm infection is one parameter by which to measure the economic development and social civilization level of a country. However, some poor areas in China today still have high rates of infection, which is inconsistent with the rapid socioeconomic development in the country, sounding a loud warning bell for the Ministries of Health and Education. 

International research indicates that for every 1 RMB spent on health education, 6 RMB is saved in medical treatment fees. For the reemergence of intestinal worms affecting children in some rural areas, are there other better solutions?

Renfu Luo, an assistant researcher at CCAP, suggests that the pressing matter at the moment is to mobilize parasitic worms prevention efforts in poor rural areas, renew inclusion of such efforts in the government's infectious disease control focus, develop and implement a long-term health education curriculum in schools that covers parasitic worm prevention, as well as launch health promotion campaigns in rural communities. With this foundation, the government needs to organize relevant experts to go deep into the vast number of poverty-stricken villages. Talks, newspapers, bulletins, and slogans, among other methods that address intestinal worms prevention; disseminating information on individual and public health; motivating schools, children, and families; urging poor rural communities to change unsanitary habits and thereby eliminate or reduce external factors affecting health are among the basic interventions that can lower the infection rates in impoverished children.

Yaojiang Shi, Director of the Xibei (Northwest) Research Center for Economic and Social Development and Professor of Xibei University, believes that the education administrative departments must intensify improvements to public health and drinking water facilities in poor rural schools while simultaneously nurturing and teaching children about good health habits. On the supply side, schools should provide students with safe drinking water and improve toilets and hand-washing areas; these improvements in external conditions can facilitate decreases in parasitic worm infection rates.

CCAP deputy director Linxiu Zhang recommends that the central government should augment investment efforts to manage environmental sanitation in poor rural villages, improve water source environmental protection and water quality, promote context-specific domestic pollution control, strengthen livestock pollution measures, reduce livestock waste, recycle, and process waste through non-hazardous treatment. At the same time, the government should consider including parasitic worm prevention services in the Rural Cooperative Medical System in poverty-stricken areas, allowing children to truly enjoy the benefits of national public health services for intestinal worms detection and treatment, experience effective decreases in infection rates, and develop healthily to reach their potential. (Article correspondent: Jin Ke)

 

Relevant background information

 

The past and present of the "baota" lozenge

 

"Baota" lozenge targets a common type of parasitic worm, the intestinal roundworm. At the beginning of the liberation period, roundworm infection was prevalent throughout China's cities and countryside.

As part of the former Soviet Union's aid projects in China, China imported wormseed seeds to test plant from the Soviet Union. The 20 g of seeds (can imagine the value of the seeds) imported were divided into 4 portions and under the protection of public security personnel, were transported to 4 state-owned farms in cities given the task of test planting: Hohhot, Datong, Xian and Weifang. Only one trial in Weifang announced success. In order to keep the information secret, Weifang publicized the successful test plant as "Pyrethrum No. 1" to the outside.

This roundworm-specific anthelmintic is derived from wormseed in the Chenopodiaceae family of herbs. It was initially administered in pure tablet form, but in order to expedite administration to children, a certain proportion of sugar was added, and the medicine was transformed into a light yellow and pink cone-shaped pill that resembled a pagoda ("baota"). People thus named this medication the "baota" lozenge.

The anthelmintic encountered many hardships including the Great Leap Forward, which through mistaken industrial techniques led to 3500 kg of raw materials going to waste. Then, the rebels from the "Ten Years of Turmoil" took the promising manufacturing of wormseed medication and left it in a terrible mess. In 1979, the Ministry of Health and State Food and Drug Administration promoted universal administration of "baota" lozenge. But in September 1982, all dosage forms and raw materials were eliminated. By the early 1990s, "baota" lozenge had disappeared from China.

 

The dangers of a few important types of intestinal worms

 

Intestinal worms mainly infect children, and due to competition with the host for nutrients, often lead to malnutrition and anemia in infected children, compromised physical and cognitive development, and even death from complications.

Ascaris larvae migration can lead to larvae-induced pneumonia and allergic reactions, while adult roundworms residing in the small intestine can destroy gastrointestinal function, generating abdominal pain, loss of appetite, nausea, diarrhea or constipation and even severe complications such as intestinal obstruction, biliary duct ascariasis, and appendicitis.

Hookworm resides in the duodenum and small intestine, sucking up nutrients and blood in children, leading to anemia, poor appetite, nausea and vomiting, pale nails and facial complexion, dizziness, feebleness, shortness of breath, palpitation etc. Chronic infection can affect children's growth and development and severe infection can cause anemia-induced congestive heart failure.  

Whipworm resides in children's cecum and appendix and consumes tissue fluid and blood for sustenance. Infected individuals can experience appetite loss, nausea, vomiting, bloody stool and other symptoms.

Pinworm's unique feature is that it stimulates itchy sensations in the anus and genitals at night, affecting sleep with associated symptoms of poor appetite, emaciation, irritability, night terror etc and can induce ectopic complications such as appendicitis.  

 

Hero Image
dirty kid
All News button
1
Subscribe to Russia