Can Synthetic Palm Oil Help Save the World’s Tropical Forests?
'Numerous start-ups are creating synthetic palm oil in the lab, hoping to slow the loss of tropical forests to oil palm cultivation. But palm oil is the most widely used vegetable oil and producing a synthetic version on a large scale remains a daunting challenge.'
The question was posted by the Yale School of Environment in an article by James Dinneen.
The answer to the question from those in the know, is an emphatic no. Synthetic palm oil will not save the world’s tropical forests.
To his credit, the author dove deep into the various issues and raised questions on the feasibility of producing a palm oil substitute at a scale large enough to neutralize palm oil driven deforestation in tropical countries.
Where the article falls short is its failure to answer the question it posed:
How will an emergent biotech industry in the Global North impact palm oil-based livelihoods in the Global South?
This is a crucial question that must be answered as it contains a clear warning to investors who may fall victim to the glorified sales pitches of companies like C16 Biosciences or Xylome.
The point that investors must be made aware of, is that palm oil with its abundant harvests maybe a favored crop in the tropics but it is not by any means, the sole cause of deforestation in the tropics.
The actual facts on palm oil and tropical forests is that its abundant yield has been the saving grace for tropical forests.
How is this so? Let’s say for a moment that the biotech industry in the Global North succeeds in producing a synthetic palm oil that has a far less impact on the global environment. This would drive a few hundred thousand families who have relied on palm oil to seek alternate survival by any means necessary.
Data from thirty years ago, prior to the palm oil expansion boom will show a steady rate of deforestation in Southeast Asia even in countries that produce little palm oil. Data from the last ten years will further show that forest loss is tapering off in Indonesia and Malaysia as the palm oil industries manage to reach poor communities.
Expansion of palm oil industry leads to reduced deforestation in tropics
Indonesia as the biggest producer of palm oil is a prime example of this. As the country developed in the past twenty years, there has been a notable decrease in deforestation as development needs were being met. The credit for this reduction in forest loss can be attributed directly to palm oil cultivation.
There are two main reasons for this:
One could multiply the land footprint of a palm oil smallholder a thousand times to see the environmental impact of industrial operations where plantation areas are in the tens of thousands of hectares. These have been portrayed as ‘bad for the planet’ as the critics failed to understand the simple dynamics of what would have happened if some crop other than palm oil, was planted in the same region.
Activists that proclaim their love for tropical forests and orangutans need to be thankful that Indonesia and Malaysia chose palm oil over crops that demand much more land to produce the same dollar benefits to local communities.
While the palm oil industry in Indonesia has been able to contribute much to its development, the needs of the country remain dire.
Recent data from the World Food Programme shows that 19.4 million Indonesians are unable to meet their dietary requirements with 37.2% of children stunted as a result.
The World Bank's latest report on Indonesia indicates that:
Hunger, poverty, stunted growth of children due to malnutrition are issues that need to be acknowledged before anyone should suggest that boycotting palm oil or replacing palm oil with laboratory experiments can save tropical forests.
The bottom-line is that palm oil is a favored go-to crop to bring development into forest rich but economically poor countries as it has the highest capacity to fund development with the least acreage of land use.
This is clearly a fact that the founders of C16 Biosciences and Xylome do not understand but their investors should. With so little understanding of what causes deforestation in tropical countries and so many questions that these companies have left unanswered, selling successful lab experiments as a solution to saving tropical forests by displacing palm oil is ethically wrong.
Then again, one should accept that biotech proponents will also do whatever is necessary to make a better living for themselves.
Published January 2022. CSPO Watch
The question was posted by the Yale School of Environment in an article by James Dinneen.
The answer to the question from those in the know, is an emphatic no. Synthetic palm oil will not save the world’s tropical forests.
To his credit, the author dove deep into the various issues and raised questions on the feasibility of producing a palm oil substitute at a scale large enough to neutralize palm oil driven deforestation in tropical countries.
Where the article falls short is its failure to answer the question it posed:
How will an emergent biotech industry in the Global North impact palm oil-based livelihoods in the Global South?
This is a crucial question that must be answered as it contains a clear warning to investors who may fall victim to the glorified sales pitches of companies like C16 Biosciences or Xylome.
The point that investors must be made aware of, is that palm oil with its abundant harvests maybe a favored crop in the tropics but it is not by any means, the sole cause of deforestation in the tropics.
The actual facts on palm oil and tropical forests is that its abundant yield has been the saving grace for tropical forests.
How is this so? Let’s say for a moment that the biotech industry in the Global North succeeds in producing a synthetic palm oil that has a far less impact on the global environment. This would drive a few hundred thousand families who have relied on palm oil to seek alternate survival by any means necessary.
Data from thirty years ago, prior to the palm oil expansion boom will show a steady rate of deforestation in Southeast Asia even in countries that produce little palm oil. Data from the last ten years will further show that forest loss is tapering off in Indonesia and Malaysia as the palm oil industries manage to reach poor communities.
Expansion of palm oil industry leads to reduced deforestation in tropics
Indonesia as the biggest producer of palm oil is a prime example of this. As the country developed in the past twenty years, there has been a notable decrease in deforestation as development needs were being met. The credit for this reduction in forest loss can be attributed directly to palm oil cultivation.
There are two main reasons for this:
- As a perennial crop similar to rubber, another major contributor to deforestation in the tropics, the constant fruiting of the oil palm tree was able to produce a higher income for farmers based on the same farm size.
- This removed causes of deforestation like the traditional practice of Swidden agriculture where forests were cleared to create new areas for farms for annual crops like rice.
One could multiply the land footprint of a palm oil smallholder a thousand times to see the environmental impact of industrial operations where plantation areas are in the tens of thousands of hectares. These have been portrayed as ‘bad for the planet’ as the critics failed to understand the simple dynamics of what would have happened if some crop other than palm oil, was planted in the same region.
Activists that proclaim their love for tropical forests and orangutans need to be thankful that Indonesia and Malaysia chose palm oil over crops that demand much more land to produce the same dollar benefits to local communities.
While the palm oil industry in Indonesia has been able to contribute much to its development, the needs of the country remain dire.
Recent data from the World Food Programme shows that 19.4 million Indonesians are unable to meet their dietary requirements with 37.2% of children stunted as a result.
The World Bank's latest report on Indonesia indicates that:
- Indonesia has made enormous gains in poverty reduction, cutting the poverty rate by more than half since 1999, to just under 10 percent in 2020.
- Indonesia achieved a notable success in reducing its stunting rate from 37 percent in 2013 to under 28 percent in 2019. However, more work remains to be done to ensure strong and productive human capital development.
Hunger, poverty, stunted growth of children due to malnutrition are issues that need to be acknowledged before anyone should suggest that boycotting palm oil or replacing palm oil with laboratory experiments can save tropical forests.
The bottom-line is that palm oil is a favored go-to crop to bring development into forest rich but economically poor countries as it has the highest capacity to fund development with the least acreage of land use.
This is clearly a fact that the founders of C16 Biosciences and Xylome do not understand but their investors should. With so little understanding of what causes deforestation in tropical countries and so many questions that these companies have left unanswered, selling successful lab experiments as a solution to saving tropical forests by displacing palm oil is ethically wrong.
Then again, one should accept that biotech proponents will also do whatever is necessary to make a better living for themselves.
Published January 2022. CSPO Watch