Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday May 21 2020, @10:35PM   Printer-friendly
from the greasing-the-palms? dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Palm oil is often associated with tropical deforestation above all else. However, this is only one side of the story, as agricultural scientists from the University of Göttingen and the IPB University Bogor (Indonesia) show in a new study.

[...] For the study, the researchers evaluated results from over 30 years of research on the environmental, economic and social consequences of oil palm cultivation in Africa, Asia and Latin America. They combined the results from the international literature with their own data from Indonesia, which they have been collecting since 2012 as part of an interdisciplinary German-Indonesian Collaborative Research Centre (CRC 990). Indonesia is the largest palm oil producer and exporter in the world. A large proportion of the palm oil produced in Indonesia is exported to Europe and the U.S., where it is used by the food, fuel and cosmetics industries.

The research data show that the expansion of oil palm in some regions of the world—especially Indonesia and Malaysia—contributes significantly to tropical deforestation and the loss of biodiversity. Clearing forestland also leads to substantial carbon emissions and other environmental problems. "However, banning palm oil production and trade would not be a sustainable solution," says Professor Matin Qaim, agricultural economist at the University of Göttingen and first author of the study. "The reason is that oil palm produces three times more oil per hectare than soybean, rapeseed, or sunflower. This means that if palm oil was replaced with alternative vegetable oils, much more land would be needed for cultivation, with additional loss of forests and other natural habitats."

Banning palm oil would also have negative economic and social consequences in the producing countries. "It is often assumed that oil palm is only grown on large industrial plantations," says Qaim. "In reality, however, around half of the world's palm oil is produced by smallholder farmers. Our data show that oil palm cultivation increases profits and incomes in the small farm sector, in addition to raising wages and creating additional employment for rural laborers. Although there are incidences of conflicts over land, overall the oil palm boom has significantly reduced rural poverty in Indonesia and other producing countries."

Journal Reference:
Matin Qaim, et al. Environmental, Economic, and Social Consequences of the Oil Palm Boom [open], (DOI: 10.1146/annurev-resource-110119-024922)

Previously:
(2018-12-18) Indonesia: A Country That Became "Crazy Rich"
(2018-12-01) Palm Oil was Supposed to Help Save the Planet. Instead it Unleashed a Catastrophe.
(2017-03-15) A Makeover for the World's Most Hated Crop


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Friday May 22 2020, @02:04AM (3 children)

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Friday May 22 2020, @02:04AM (#997685)

    When entire ecosystems are exchanged for plantations, that has gone about 100x too far.

    Also, once the very poor soil has been exhausted after a few years, the land is left with no cover, and the rains wash what ever is left into the seas.

    Palm oil is a disaster, but Professor Matin Qaim is an agricultural economist so he doesn't care about that, he's all about maximising the farmer's short-term profits, because that is all economists think about.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday May 22 2020, @03:15AM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday May 22 2020, @03:15AM (#997702)

    Re-purposing any land that has had a stable ecosystem on it for 1000+ years with something different is very likely to end poorly. Short term exploitation of the resources, slash and burn gives you a few fertile years, but if all your farm is doing is maximal extraction... you're gonna need a reliable source of phosphates, and weed killer, and pesticides.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2020, @06:45AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 22 2020, @06:45AM (#997747)

    You're right about poor soils and erosion.

    You're completely wrong about agricultural economics. A large part of it is looking at the long term effects and stabilising versus destabilising factors, including ecological.

    But I do admit that your misconceptions are popular. Lots of people misunderstand what various branches of economics are about.

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday May 23 2020, @03:29AM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday May 23 2020, @03:29AM (#998058)

      Define long term. Do the economics look at a sustainable solution in perpetuity? Do the economists even know how that plays out when the oil-palms age out, or become diseased/blighted due to their monoculture, etc.?

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]