Palm oil: Fact needs to be separated from fiction
I refer to the malaysiakini report A palm oil charm offensive in Europe .
I have been following the Malaysian palm oil controversy for some time. Despite my best efforts to obtain a clearer picture on this issue from the Internet, I find that most of the information is unreliable and in conflict with one another.
For example, The Guardian claims that within 15 years 98 percent of the rainforests of Indonesia and Malaysia will be gone. Friends of the Earth claims that between 1985 and 2000, the development of oil palm plantations was responsible for an estimated 87 percent of deforestation in Malaysia.
A UN report highlights the growing threat posed by palm oil harvesting, noting that large areas of Indonesian and Malaysian forest have been cleared to make way for plantations.
The reply from the Malaysian Palm Oil Council states that: 'Over the last 50 years, oil palm expansion in Malaysia has used land mainly converted from former rubber, cocoa and coconut cultivation, and no rainforest land has been used since 1990. Less than 20 percent of Malaysia is used for agriculture, with more than 60 percent dedicated to permanent rainforests - a proportion that has not changed for the last ten years, and is governed by national law'.
- As a layperson, I find it difficult to separate the facts from fiction. I have many questions. For example:
With the current ongoing efforts by Malaysian officials to dispel palm oil 'myths' in Europe, I hope to see a wide ranging discussion involving our bio-diversity, protection of the rainforests and the timber and palm oil industry. Perhaps even a roundtable discussion with ministry officials, the Malaysian Nature Society and the WWF?
