Letter to the Editor: Walking The Talk on Sustainability The Only Way

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

WALKING THE TALK ON SUSTAINABILITY THE ONLY WAY

Primary Industries Minister Teresa Kok’s call to manufacturers to add a “Love MY Palm Oil” label to local palm oil products and for Malaysians to consume more palm oil (13 March 2019) is no solution to the European Union’s proposed ban on palm oil biodiesel linked to deforestation.

The Minister’s argument that 40% of Malaysians in the palm oil industry are smallholders is also unlikely to move European parliamentarians.

The issue is not that the European countries are unaware that the ban would disrupt the economy of the country and livelihood of smallholders. The European Union and its member states are proposing the ban precisely because they know economic pressure is the only way they can get palm oil producer nations to stop deforestation and prioritise environmental protection. Diplomatic persuasion has not worked, and voluntary consumer action takes too long to bear results. The proposed ban is their last resort in trying to influence environmental policies in palm oil producing countries.

It is not disputed that palm oil is cheaper and more resource-efficient than other vegetable oils. Alternative vegetable oil crops such as rapeseed and soy may use up to 10 times more land than oil palm. However, merely pointing out that other vegetable oil crops are just as damaging and destructive as oil palm, and alleging victimisation and protectionism on the part of European nations is hardly going to influence European nations’ and consumers’ perception of Malaysian palm oil. We can only remove the stigma of deforestation by actually ending deforestation, not by pointing out that deforestation also occurs elsewhere. 

The appropriate response to the proposed ban is to take transparent, credible, and measurable steps to reduce deforestation and other environmental and human rights impacts of palm oil.

The problem with both the Roundtable For Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) certification systems is that the international scientific and environmental communities do not endorse either certification as being trustworthy.

The main criticism against the MSPO is that the organisation playing a vital role in its formulation and moderation is the Malaysian Palm Oil Board (MPOB), which clearly is invested in oil palm cultivation and expansion, thus giving rise to allegations of conflict of interest and lack of independence and impartiality.

As for the RSPO, only in late 2018 did it adopt new standards prohibiting the clearing of any type of forest for oil palm cultivation. Previous standards did not protect peatlands or landscapes with High Carbon Stock. Reports exist to support the claim of malpractice and corruption by RSPO auditors.  Considering that the RSPO, which is the world’s only global palm oil certification system, is unable to achieve what it is set up to do – namely, ensure sustainability, human rights, labour standards, environmental protection and respect for the law – it is highly doubtful that the international community would perceive the MSPO as having higher standards of transparency and effectiveness in protecting the environment, indigenous communities, and wildlife than the RSPO. In fact, the findings of environmental organisations confirm that MSPO scores even lower than RSPO on safeguards pertaining to the fair treatment of smallholders, protection of indigenous communities and access to remedies. How is the MSPO labelling expected to inspire consumer confidence when its standards are even lower than that of the RSPO?

Malaysia should instead adopt the independently verified standards that are being trialled by producers in the Palm Oil Innovation Group (POIG), a collection of NGOs including Greenpeace and progressive producers that aim to provide independently verified, responsibly produced palm oil. These standards use the RSPO as a basis, but establish additional requirements on palm oil producers including to assess and protect peatland and forested areas in their concessions.

The call to clean up the Malaysian palm oil industry is not a form of bullying or green protectionism or an attempt to undermine and destroy the Malaysian economy. Environmental organisations and indigenous communities should not be harassed and ignored in our attempts to highlight the environmental harms linked to oil palm cultivation. Environmental organisations are not calling for a halt on economic growth or the loss of employment opportunities, but the proper management of natural resources and protection of forests, wildlife, labour rights and indigenous rights. Malaysia has to recognise that there is a problem, not merely that of image or marketing, and rise up to be part of the solution.

Satellite data does not lie, and reveals that logging and deforestation continue to take place wherever there is oil palm cultivation and expansion. Between 2001 and 2017 alone, Malaysia has lost 7.29 million hectares of tree cover to oil palm cultivation. Even local media does not shy away from reporting on wildlife deaths, including those of charismatic species such as tigers and elephants, linked to oil palm cultivation. And as recently as today (20 March 2019), news reports have surfaced of conflicts between indigenous communities in Sarawak and an oil palm company that was issued a permit to carry out logging next to the Mulu National Park.

Until there is clear, solid and reliable evidence to support our claims of environmental sustainability and protection of human rights, no amount of labelling and marketing can alter how the international community perceives the Malaysian palm oil industry.

Instead of issuing ultimatums and threats to European nations and trying to increase the domestic consumption of palm oil, Malaysia needs to prove to the world that oil palm can be grown and produced responsibly and make a genuine contribution to the Malaysian population and environment. A willingness to acknowledge the need to improve and to make sincere and genuine efforts to protect the environment, wildlife and human rights is a better indication of patriotism than merely a willingness to consume more locally-produced palm oil.

WONG EE LYNN

MALAYSIAN NATURE SOCIETY, 

SELANGOR BRANCH

Oil Palm,The RSPO and Sustainability: The Way Forward

PENCINTA ALAM JUNE 2018

GREEN LIVING COLUMN

OIL PALM, THE RSPO AND SUSTAINABILITY: THE WAY FORWARD

By Wong Ee Lynn

(gl.mnselangor@yahoo.com)

 

In the April and May 2018 Green Living columns, we had a brief overview of the environmental issues surrounding monoculture crops, the problems with oil palm cultivation and the reason why the European Parliament proposed a ban on palm oil biodiesel. Palm oil, along with other agricultural commodities such as soy, coffee, cocoa, rapeseed oil and other vegetable oils, has been blamed for causing environmental destruction, deforestation and human rights violations to its workers and rural and indigenous communities. This has led consumers and NGOs to pressure palm oil companies to clean up their act. Some environmental organisations, activists and consumer groups have called for bans on palm oil products, while some countries have laws that require manufacturers to clearly label palm oil as an ingredient in food and consumer products.

 

Today we explore a few questions related to whether oil palm cultivation can be made sustainable, and what we can do as consumers and activists.

 

 

Q: IS THERE SUCH A THING AS SUSTAINABLE PALM OIL?

 

Boycotting palm oil presents challenges. Considering that palm oil is cheaper and more resource-efficient than other vegetable oils (i.e. alternative vegetable oil crops may use up to 10 times more land. Source: spott.org) and the fact that the palm oil industry employs about 6 million people worldwide, boycotting palm oil may result in loss of jobs and income, palm oil producers selling to markets which don’t value the environment, and a lack of incentive for palm oil producers to find more sustainable ways to produce palm oil.

 

Sustainable palm oil is produced by companies that promise No Deforestation, No Peat Development and No Exploitation (‘NDPE’). These policies are usually applicable across the company’s supply chains, including third party suppliers and smallholders. They require farmers to stop burning land to clear it, assess land for high carbon stock and high conservation value before developing new plantations, and obtain land use permission from communities using a process known as ‘Free, Prior and Informed Consent’. Companies with NDPE policies in effect include Musim Mas, Golden-Agri Resources, Wilmar International, Cargill and Asian Agri. (Source: eco-business.com).

 

These requirements are reflected in the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil’s certification system.

 

Q: WHAT IS THE RSPO AND ITS CRITERIA FOR CERTIFICATION?

 

The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) was established in 2004 to promote the production and use of sustainable palm oil. It is estimated that 40% of the world’s palm oil producers are members of the RSPO. Sustainable palm oil is defined by the 8 principles and criteria against which oil palm plantations are certified. RSPO’s 8 principles are:

(i)                 Commitment to transparency;

(ii)               Compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

(iii)             Commitment to long-term economic and financial viability;

(iv)             Use of appropriate best practices by growers and millers;

(v)               Environmental responsibility and conservation of natural resources and biodiversity;

(vi)             Responsible consideration of employees as well as individuals and communities affected by growers and mills;

(vii)           Responsible development of new plantations; and

(viii)         Commitment to continuous improvement in key areas of activity.

 

RSPO’s criteria are reviewed every 5 years via public consultation, followed by member agreement on a consensus basis for any changes or additions. (Source: greenpalm.org)

 

There are 4 types of Certified Sustainable Palm Oil (CSPO), namely:

(i)                 Identity Preserved (IP): The end user can trace the unit of palm oil to a single RSPO-certified supply base (i.e. single plantation).

(ii)               Segregated (SG): Palm fruit from multiple certified plantations are combined at the mill. The resulting CSPO is kept physically separate through the supply chain, but cannot be traced back to a single plantation.

(iii)             Mass Balanced (MB): The mill takes in palm fruit from certified and non-certified plantations and processes it together. The resulting oil is not physically linked to sustainable plantations, but the miller keeps track of how much sustainable palm oil it is producing and selling.

(iv)             Book & Claim (B&C): Manufacturers do not have to buy CSPO, but can pay for ‘RSPO Credits’ in an online marketplace to claim sustainability credentials. The funds from these sales support farmers to implement sustainable farming practices.

 

CSPO currently makes up approximately 21% of the world’s total palm oil supply.

 

Q: BUT WAIT! WHAT IS THIS I HEAR ABOUT CRITICISMS OF THE RSPO AND ITS CERTIFICATION SYSTEM?

 

Environmental organisations and investors have routinely criticised RSPO for failing to provide a credible assurance that CSPO is truly sustainable. Its current principles and criteria do not require companies to stop expanding onto peatlands or to stop clearing forest as per the High Carbon Stock approach. The auditors that verify company compliance to RSPO standards have also been accused of malpractice and corruption.

 

Activists have also criticised the speed and effectiveness with which RSPO investigates and resolves complaints made against its members. Some complaints have taken years to resolve, while other companies have allegedly been let off the hook too easily. The UK and Washington DC-based non-profit organisation, Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), released a 2015 report on malpractices by RSPO auditors, which included failure to spot violations and even abetting companies with cover-ups. The report suggested that RSPO-certified consumer products could be “tainted with human trafficking, rights abuses and the destruction of biodiversity.”

 

The RSPO is also making very little progress when it comes to ethics traceability in the world’s palm oil supply chain. In its 2016 report, RSPO admitted that the problem of child labour in palm oil plantations makes it “clearer that much work needs to be done.” (Source: triplepundit.com)

 

EIA and another non-profit organisation, Grassroots, found that monitoring of the RSPO system is not carried out by RSPO or its auditors, but by NGOs and communities. Many complaints of violations of RSPO’s principles and criteria, including some that were confirmed by the RSPO’s Complaints Panel, exposed an unfortunate truth: The world’s only global palm oil certification system – meant to ensure sustainability, human rights, labour standards, respect for the law and environmental protection in the sector – fails to achieve what it was set up to do. (Source: theecologist.org)

 

 

Q: IF THE WORLD’S ONLY CERTIFICATION BODY IS NOT CREDIBLE, WHAT CAN I DO AS A CONSUMER?

 

(i)                 Lack of awareness is a major issue. Make a conscious effort to learn about the exact ingredients of the products you purchase. Europe is leading the way with the introduction of mandatory labelling of products containing vegetable oils.

(ii)               WWF International stated in 2014 that Asian markets, being the biggest consumers of palm oil products, could drive and shape the industry. What you buy, and what you demand from manufacturers and producers, will force brands to act. Businesses will have to buckle to consumer pressure to be more transparent and responsible.

(iii)             Greenpeace International advises that the RSPO standards are not strong enough to prevent deforestation, and advises companies to seek certification with the Charter of the Palm Oil Innovation Group. Look out for these other certification bodies and groups and read about the companies and manufacturers whose products you most frequently purchase. Responsible sourcing will boost a brand.

(iv)             Use your voice. Write to big companies, especially the biggest snack food and processed food companies, to voice your concern about deforestation and human rights violations. Sign petitions to big corporations and the government, and use these petitions to help educate others and raise awareness about why you make the choices you do.  

(v)               Reducing your consumption of processed foods not only means reducing your dependence on palm oil and other vegetable oils, but also plastic packaging and the fuel miles your food had to travel to get to you. Think about whether it is important for you to have that packet of crisps or bar of chocolate right now, if there is the option of having a banana or corn on the cob instead.

(vi)             Learn about new technologies that are cleaning up the palm oil industry and which companies are investing in these technologies. It is not all bad news. In 2017, the Malaysian Palm Oil Board (MPOB) and Orion Genomics developed a cheap plastic device with which subsistence farmers could punch samples from the leaves of their young palm plants. The samples are mailed to a laboratory which carries out molecular testing and informs the farmers which plants are viable, and which plants are a bad investment. This would help farmers reliably boost yields and reduce the motivation to spread oil palm plantations into forested areas, as less land would be needed to generate the same yield. (Source: bigthink.com) Products and technologies such as these which improve quality over quantity can ultimately reduce the need to keep opening up new lands for new plantings.

 

 

 

 

 

What's the problem with monoculture crops?

PENCINTA ALAM APRIL 2018

GREEN LIVING COLUMN

WHAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH MONOCULTURE CROPS?

Compiled and edited by Wong Ee Lynn

 

European lawmakers recently approved a plan to meet climate goals, which includes a ban on the use of palm oil, including palm oil from Malaysia, in motor fuels from 2021.

 

This move has a significant negative impact on Malaysia’s economy because from the 2 million tonnes of palm oil Malaysia exports to Europe, over 30% is used for biodiesel.

 

The reason for this proposed ban is because large areas of tropical forests, wildlife habitats and other ecosystems with high conservation value have been cleared to make room for oil palm plantations.

 

One of the reasons why conventional oil palm cultivation is so destructive to rainforests, wildlife populations and the climate is because it is a monoculture crop. Although this is not the only reason oil palm is environmentally problematic, there are certainly many environmental problems associated with monoculture, i.e. the growing of only one type of crop in a given area at the same time.

 

Oil palm isn’t the only monoculture crop. Modern commercial agriculture often seeks to increase yield – and so profits – by cultivating a single type of plant. The farmer only needs to provide for the needs of a single species in order to grow a successful crop, and this means increased savings and hence increased profits for the farmer. Corn, barley, wheat, soybean and similar crops are mostly cultivated as monoculture crops as well.

 

Monoculture agriculture may be more efficient and inexpensive for farmer, but it has significant negative impacts on the environment, some of which are identified below:

 

Eliminates Biological Controls

In a monoculture system, there is no range of insect species in a location to ensure that a single population does not get too large and damage too many plants. There are no varieties of plant that naturally provide nutrients to the soil, such as nitrogen-fixing legumes, or ground cover crops that can be slashed and left to improve the nutrient content of the topsoil, or a variety of plants with different root depths to reduce erosion. There are fewer species of microorganism and bacteria on the soil as there are fewer nutrients available for them to survive on.

 

More Synthetic Material Use

A diverse ecosystem provides natural checks-and-balances to keep the soil and plants healthy. A monoculture production has to use large quantities of synthetic herbicides, insecticides, bactericides and fertilizers to replicate some of these ways nature uses to protect crops.

 

Changing Organism Resistance

Nature is adaptable, and this means organisms are evolving resistance to these artificial insecticides and herbicides. Of course, the farmers want to continue to protect their crops, so new inorganic methods are continually being developed to kill pests, fungus and weeds. More and more chemicals are being applied to monoculture crops and, in turn, adversely affecting natural ecosystems and human health.

 

 

Soil Degradation

In monoculture plantations, ground cover crops are eliminated, meaning there is no natural protection for the soil from erosion by wind and rain. Degraded soil becomes unusable for agriculture after a few years. In some countries, forests are then cleared to provide new agricultural land, starting the damaging cycle all over again.

 

Water Use

With no ground cover plants to help improve moisture retention in the soil, and the tendency for land planted with a monoculture to lack topsoil, which serves to increase rain runoff, modern monoculture agriculture requires huge amounts of water to irrigate the crops. This means water is being pumped from lakes, rivers and reservoirs at great rates, depleting this natural resource and affecting those aquatic ecosystems. This is on top of the pollution of water sources by agricultural chemicals.

 

Fossil Fuels

Due to their scale, harvesting of crops in monoculture farms is generally performed by machines. Large amounts of fossil fuels are required to sort, pack and transport the crops.

 

In combination with the chemical fertilisers and pesticides, the industrialised mode of food production is a major contributor to climate change. It is also an incredibly inefficient way of using energy to produce food, taking an estimated 10 calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce just a single calorie of food energy.

 

 

Q: I’m Not a Farmer, So What Can I Do?

 

For starters, you can try:

·        Reading your labels and buying fewer or no products originating from monoculture crops. This will often mean buying organic cocoa and coffee grown in bird-friendly plantations (these plantations have a diversity of trees and plants to provide bird and wildlife habitats), buying organic products that are certified sustainable, and buying fewer or no processed food items such as instant noodles and biscuits, as these often contain vegetable oil from crops grown on monoculture farms.

·        Eating less or no meat so the demand for grain crops (mostly corn and soy) for animal feed will decrease and the need for monoculture will decrease as well. More than 60% of crops, particularly soy and corn, is used to feed animals, not people. It would take less land, water and soil to grow enough crops for human consumption, than to grow crops as animal feed so that the animals can in turn be consumed by humans.

·        Buying from farms that are known to practice crop rotation, or which grow a variety of crops.

·        Purchasing locally-grown produce, especially from small organic farms, edible gardens, cooperatives and indigenous communities, instead of crops from big agricultural companies.

·        Growing your own vegetables and herbs, which is good for your health and finances as well as the environment!

 

(Environmental issues specific to conventional oil palm cultivation will be discussed in the May 2018 Green Living Column.)

 

 

A Beginner's Guide To A Plant-Based Diet

PENCINTA ALAM JAN 2016
GREEN LIVING COLUMN
A BEGINNER'S GUIDE TO A PLANT-BASED DIET

By Wong Ee Lynn
(wongeelynn@yahoo.com / gl.mnselangor@yahoo.com)

Former California Governor and movie star Arnold Schwarzenegger recently made waves in the news when he urged people to try to go meat-free once or twice a week for the sake of the environment. Recognising that many people would find it challenging to go fully vegetarian, he wisely pointed out that "People will buy in to stop eating meat one or two days a week - you have to start slowly. It's a very big challenge but it doesn't mean it shouldn't be done."

The factory farming industry has a very large carbon footprint. Producing 1kg of meat protein is calculated to take between 3 and 10kg of vegetable protein.

Emissions from farming, forestry and fisheries have nearly doubled over the past 50 years and may increase by another 30% by 2050, according to the United Nations.

Most of the emissions from meat farming come from belching livestock and nitrogen fertilisers.

People go vegetarian and vegan for many reasons -- religious, health, environmental and ethical -- and all these reasons are commendable. Whether you are a full-time vegan or vegetarian or someone trying to reduce his or her meat intake, all efforts to eat fewer animal products should be encouraged and applauded. No effort is too small or negligible. We may not volunteer for environmental organisations, clean up oceans, plant trees, or save endangered wildlife every day, BUT we do eat every day, and therefore even small changes to our diet will make a large difference over time.

Here are ways to gradually reduce your intake of meat and animal products and transition to a plant-based diet, tried and tested by the vegetarian subcommittee members of the Green Living Special Interest Group:

1. Identify good reasons for going vegetarian or reducing meat consumption. If  your goal is to impress somebody you like or just to reduce enough weight for a special occasion, you might not stick with the goal for long. To remind yourself of your reasons and goals, it may be helpful to visit websites such as Mercy for Animals (http://www.mercyforanimals.org/), Humane Society International (http://hsi.org/), and One Green Planet (http://www.onegreenplanet.org/) or watch documentaries such as Earthlings to educate, empower and motivate yourself. Be forewarned, though, that the graphic images in some of these documentaries can evoke strong emotions.

2. Start small. Meatless Monday is an easy, painless way to start. Increase it to two days a week, and then increase it until you can be a Weekday Vegetarian. When you are ready, transition into a full time vegetarian and finally, into a vegan.

3. Start by eating lower on the food chain. "First, four legs, then two legs, then no legs" is a good way to start. What it means is that you start by eliminating beef, mutton, pork and venison from your diet, and once you are able to do this, move on to eliminating poultry, and finally, eliminate seafood, fish, eggs and dairy from your diet.

4. Mark 'cheat days', for example, parties and holiday dinners, into your calendar so that you will not feel deprived if you are accustomed to enjoying meat. Make a conscious effort to go vegetarian on all the other days leading up to the 'cheat days'. Allowing yourself 'cheat days' makes the transition easier. Over time, you will find that your body no longer craves meat or animal products and you can go without 'cheat days'. Don't feel guilty about relapses or occasional cravings. You need to feel positive, confident and joyful about the decision you are making to eat less meat for the environment and animals, and guilt and negativity are unproductive. If you do relapse, just get back into the groove of meatless meals as soon as you can.

5. Keep healthy, satisfying vegetarian snacks and ready-to-eat meals at home and at work so that you will not be tempted to relapse. Many people believe that vegetarian foods are not filling or nutritious, because they tend to choose processed food filled with carbohydrates and sodium or sugar, or fruits and vegetables without a protein component to fill an empty belly. Have a variety of sweet and savoury snacks at hand, for example, nuts, hummus, high-fibre crackers, roast soybeans, air-dried noodles, vegetable soup stock, frozen vegetables, fresh and dried fruit, carrot and celery sticks, and peanut butter and other spreads. 

6. Prepare vegetarian food to bring to parties and gatherings so that you will have something meatless to eat. It is also a good way to introduce others to vegetarian food. Chances are, there will be at least one other vegetarian there. Don't be afraid to make the same dish for every gathering if it very popular the first time around.

7. Identify good sources of vegetarian protein, calcium and iron that do not involve supplements, powdered shakes, and mock meat. Reduce the consumption of processed foods and mock meat, as the latter is filled with sodium and empty calories. Hummus, chickpeas and edamame beans are rich in protein. Kale, alfalfa, spinach, broccoli, beetroot and kailan are rich in calcium and iron. Find something you like and don't be afraid to eat it often, as it is preferable to making something you hate and having to throw the leftovers out.

8. Eat a wide variety of fruits and vegetables to get your minimum of five-a-day. Use sauces, dressings and other hacks to train yourself to like fruits and vegetables you would not usually eat. Grind or chop up vegetables to add to pasta sauce or soup. Blend beetroot or kale with chickpeas to make delicious and addictive hummus spreads. Add vegetables to smoothies and disguise their flavour with lots of fruits (e.g. carrots with oranges, beetroot with strawberries). I have also found that hardly anyone would turn down a colourful and vitamin-laden salad if you chop everything up finely and dress the salad with sesame dressing for an Oriental-style salad, or with salsa and corn chips for a Southwestern taco salad. 

9. Visit websites such as Happy Cow (www.happycow.net/) or download apps such as Kindmeal.my (http://www.kindmeal.my/) to make the search for vegetarian and vegetarian-friendly restaurants easier. Set yourself goals such as to try a new restaurant or a new food each week.

10. Visit websites such as Vegan Richa (www.veganricha.com/) and One Green Planet (http://www.onegreenplanet.org/) for easy vegetarian and vegan recipes. Don't be afraid to try new foods and recipes, and at the same time, don't be afraid to keep repeating a handful of recipes that you do like. Keep a few staples in your pantry and stock your refrigerator so that you do not run out of fresh produce and vegetarian ingredients.

11. If you are just starting out as a vegetarian and want to try a meatless meal, go for vegan versions of your favourite meals, e.g. lasagna, pizza or curry. This will increase the chances of you liking the vegan version, and there will always be a go-to dish you can rely on when faced with a menu full of things you are uncertain about.

12. Don't expect substitutes to taste like meat. They usually don't. Mushrooms will taste like mushrooms and chickpeas will taste like chickpeas. If you expect any different, you might develop the impression that a particular meatless dish tastes 'weird', 'fake' or 'inferior to meat'.

13. People often claim that vegetarian meals are unhealthy and expensive. They are not. Going vegetarian isn't unhealthy -- eating mock meat and processed food is. Vegetables and fruits aren't more expensive than meat, even if you are buying mostly organic -- but eating out in restaurants all the time or buying imported and processed foods (especially substitutes such as vegan cheese and almond milk) can be! Make wise choices according to your budget and nutritional needs.

14. Make your meals attractive so that you will look forward to eating them. A bento box filled with colourful sliced vegetables and neat sandwiches is easy and inexpensive to prepare and pack, and fun and convenient to eat.
 

15. Find other ways to green your meals. Buy local, seasonal and organic whenever possible. Choose products with the least plastic and packaging. Go for fresh or frozen instead of processed foods. Choose products with no vegetable oils that are linked to deforestation and environmental destruction.

16. Be a joyful vegetarian. Prepare and eat meals that make you feel good. Don't isolate your friends who are not vegetarian. Don't preach or brag about your choice to go vegetarian or shame others for what they choose to eat. Join friends for meals out and parties, but choose the vegetarian option or bring a dish you can eat, so that you will not feel left out. Most restaurants have at least a few vegetarian options, or are happy to customise a dish for you. Be positive and optimistic, for many others like you are also making a conscious effort to consume sustainably, responsibly and compassionately!

The Challenges Ahead: Safe & Sustainable Vegetable Farming

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

THE CHALLENGES AHEAD: SAFE & SUSTAINABLE VEGETABLE FARMING

(Image reproduced from The Star, 13 Dec 2012, without permission but in accordance with the principles of fair use)

Once every few years, the media will report of rampant land clearing, water pollution, use of banned pesticides and environmental degradation in the Cameron Highlands as a result of intensive agricultural activity (Cameron Highlands in terrible shape due to land clearing and water pollution, The Star, Dec 11 2012).

This draws attention to the challenges of reconciling food security with environmental integrity. In their research paper published in 2009, Drs. CJ Barrow, Chan Ngai Weng and Tarmiji Masron had pointed out that the expansion and intensification of farming in the Cameron Highlands had seriously polluted streams and groundwater with sediment, manure-enriched runoff, agrichemicals and sewage. The same report found that large numbers of vegetable growers were reported to be using banned pesticides imported from Thailand and other countries, as illegal agrichemicals are seen by the farmers to be cheaper and more effective. In addition, the preference for uncomposted chicken manure over chemical fertilisers by the vegetable farmers of Cameron Highlands has resulted in an increase of pathogens, veterinary pharmaceuticals and faecal pollution in streams, groundwater and produce.

It is acknowledged that stronger enforcement is necessary to monitor illegal land-clearing activities and mitigate environmental damage caused by the vegetable farmers in Cameron Highlands (Uphill task to ensure farmers do what’s right, the Star, Dec 11 2012). Yet there is so much more that consumers, retailers and policymakers could do to improve environmental quality and food health and safety standards.

In the aforementioned 2009 research paper, it was averred that media and legislation have had “less effect” in reducing agrichemical use than supermarket checks of produce. Supermarkets and major food retailers have a high level of influence and control over food quality and safety. Major retailers are therefore urged to ensure that their vegetable supply comes from farms which reach accepted health and safety standards and is checked for pesticide use and residues. Certification schemes such as the “Assured Produce” scheme practiced in the United Kingdom would help promote safer and more environmentally responsible methods of vegetable farming among major vegetable farms in Malaysia. Supermarkets should prohibit the use of banned pesticides by vegetable farms that supply produce to them, and make public the results of their own microbial and pesticide residue testing in a way that is accessible to the average consumer to enable consumers to make informed choices, bearing in mind that not everyone has the advantage or leverage of choosing organic over conventional produce.

Vegetable farms should be given incentives (such as accreditation) for employing responsible practices, such as drip irrigation to conserve water use and crop rotation to improve soil quality, and for meeting best management practices for pesticide storage and use. All manure used should be properly composted and incorporated into soil to prevent microbial contamination. To minimise pest damage, farmers could be educated on methods such as constructing protective barriers, encouraging biological pest control, choosing pest-resistant crop varieties and the use of “trap crops” to lure pests away from main crops. Regulations must be implemented to minimise pesticide drift to other crops and off-site areas and to halt pesticide applications during rainy and windy seasons.

Measures taken by the authorities apart from enforcement measures against farmers could include creating sediment traps to capture contaminated runoffs before they flow into streams, perhaps by way of constructing reed or water hyacinth beds. Buffer zones should be demarcated around sensitive zones. All potential sources of contamination should be identified and eliminated, or at least managed.

Food security and safety are public policy issues, and sound public policy decisions require an understanding of long-term social, environmental as well as economic consequences. Rising environmental literacy, changing consumer preferences, legislation and enforcement are all powerful forces that have the potential to create advances in agriculture that do not compromise human or environmental safety.

  

WONG EE LYNN

COORDINATOR, GREEN LIVING SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP

MALAYSIAN NATURE SOCIETY (MNS)