So really what is sustainability? Is the palm oil industry sustainable?

Over the years people have expressed differing views to what they feel sustainable development is. In turn, this has led to the emergence of a wide variety of contrasting definitions.

Therefore, for the purpose of this post, the definition below will be used. I have chosen this definition as it seems to be the most widely used and highly regarded.

"Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."

— from the World Commission on Environment and Development’s
(the Brundtland Commission) report Our Common Future

With this in mind I would like to review an article written by Basiron (2007) entitled 'Palm oil production through sustainable plantations'. Contrary to many blog entries I have made, the article concludes that the palm oil industry is very much a sustainable industry. The article is focused around analysing sustainability against the universally accepted criteria of benefitting the 3 Ps:- Profit, People and Planet that was established at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, along with the recognition of the right to develop land in developing countries. Although in hindsight developed countries, can appreciate the damage of extensive cultivation and industrialisation, however I think it is unfair to not allow developing nations to progress economically and socially.  


Comparisons are made throughout with other agricultural crops, ultimately displaying palm oil to be far superior in terms of long term sustainability.


Profit:
In terms of profit, Basiron (2007) brings to light that due to the plant physiology and extensive research and development oil palm needs a smaller area of land to yield a target quantity of oil. He supports this claim using the following example:

• To produce 31.8% of global oils and fats, palm oil plantations occupy 9.2 million hectares of agricultural land.
• To obtain a similar output from soybean cultivation would require 92.5 million hectares!!!

The example clearly illustrates the high yield of palm oil, that I have mentioned in a previous post of 3.68 tonnes/ha/year. Additionally Basiron (2007) states that with further research and development through intensive breeding, future yields are set to double.

In terms of the 3Ps criteria with the evidence provided, palm oil is certainly sustainable on the profit front, however I feel that this blog has already displayed this. I believe that although the figures, across the board, not just in this article, display how profitable the industry is, is it actually sustainable because of it. I say no. If the profits do not feed down to the plantation workers and middlemen and executives reap the benefits and do not reinvest, I would claim that it is not sustainable.

This nicely brings us on to the next of the 3Ps...

People:

The article states that palm oil has contributed to uplifting the quality of life of people, mainly through landless Malaysian farmers participating in schemes managed by the Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA). The schemes consolidate smallholdings into an estate of an economic size and provide management and infrastructural support.

As this blog has previously touched upon, this can be the case, with some villages gaining funding and support to develop infrastructure such as roads and schools. In spite of this, previous academic literature, in addition to news articles I have read, have highlighted many of the failings of the palm oil industry in terms of aiding communities and truly alleviating poverty. (If you can't remember the examples of this I provided check out the table I posted on the 27th October, as well as the news article posted on the 9th December!! ) 


Although Basiron (2007) displays the industry to be sustainable in regard to benefitting the people, I wouldn't agree and believe that there is much room for improvement in this area, with more support from governments, FELDA, RSPO and other NGOs


Planet:


Through the statistic obtained through a personal communication with K.W. Chan, shown below Basiron (2007) determines that oil palms contribute back to the planet and therefore is a sustainable crop.

• It is estimated that the crop emits eight to ten times more oxygen and absorbs up to ten times more carbon dioxide per hectare per year compared to annual crops grown in temperate latitudes.

However I believe this is viewing the issue with tunnel vision and does not consider the wider environmental issues palm oil plantations have caused. It completely ignores the advantage of maintaining primary forest in terms of carbon dioxide emissions and global biodiversity, nor does it deviated between establishing plantations on different types of land e.g. degraded land, drained peatland. As was highlighted in my literature review of Fargione et al. (2008), the environmental impact of establishing a plantation is highly dependant on the type of land that is being developed.

With this said I do think Basiron (2007) paper does raise some important issues that display that some areas of the industry are sustainable and does meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Although I feel that many areas are severely lacking in their current level of sustainability. Despite this, I do believe that some of the fundamentals are already in place, that over time will aid the industry in becoming completely sustainable.

Taking into account all the literature I have posted on this blog, how do you interrupt the palm oil industry's ability to develop sustainably??