IUCN analysis of palm oil a good guide for certification schemes
The IUCN has released a new analysis on palm oil and its sustainability factors. The analysis which was compiled by the newly formed IUCN Oil Palm Task Force stated its objectives for the analysis as:
1. Conduct a situation analysis to provide a more
comprehensive understanding of the reality of oil palm
sustainability, and what could be done to improve it;
and
2. Act as an authoritative advisory body on oil palm
and how this relates to global sustainability objectives,
and an intermediary between the oil palm industry, the
IUCN network and the other stakeholders in oil palm discussions.
As a situation analysis that looks at the implications of biodiversity conservation from palm oil expansions, the views shared by the analysis should be noteworthy to the various certification schemes available for palm oil. This is especially so for national schemes like the ISPO and MSPO or the planned jurisdictional schemes for Nigeria, Colombia and Ecuador where socio and economic factors weigh more heavily than environmental ones. The IUCN analysis is clear that its consideration of what constitutes “sustainability” for palm oil is limited as to “biological conservation we generally seek to conserve and sustain some or all aspects of a regional biota.”
Preservation of species in flora and fauna must factor into any definition of sustainable palm oil that seeks to be globally accepted. However, any attempt to define sustainable palm oil must place socio and economic needs on the same level as conservation.
Record forest loss in 2017 to non-palm oil industries
Despite all the pledges by multinational brands to “no-deforestation” palm oil, new data from Global Forest Watch show 2017 as one of the highest recorded losses of forest cover since they started monitoring forest coverage in 2001.It is noteworthy that the rate of forest loss in Indonesia has decreased while Malaysia did not get a mention in the top regions for forest loss. These two countries combined make up 85% of global palm oil supply and you would think that their palm oil industries would have been right up there with forest loss but they are not.
The real time loss of forests globally has shown that this narrow focus on preventing deforestation by palm oil is a distraction from the fact that a well planned palm oil industry that is a part of a complete plan for development in rainforest rich countries will save biota more efficiently than simply looking at whether palm oil plantations displaced forests.
If we look at Colombia as an example, the sudden increase in deforestation has been attributed to beef, logging and cocaine. Could legal palm oil plantations in Colombia reduce the loss of forests? The Colombian association for palm oil producers, Fedepalma, thinks so. The Colombian industry has an enviable claim that no forests have been lost to their current production level and that the country has millions more degraded lands to expand its industry.
In Uganda, the Minister for Agriculture reported a surprising unintended consequence of palm oil farming as it seeks to reduce its dependence on imported vegetable oils. Not only are the forests being spared from illegal charcoal production but the jobless fishermen are now able to find new sources of income from palm oil farming.
There is obviously a large information gap between developing palm oil as an industry and its ability to reduce deforestation. Producer countries like Malaysia which has one of the most mature palm oil industries have shown that palm oil need not be a threat to the extinction of wildlife species. Their industry is a working model for the various suggestions from the IUCN analysis which provides conlusive evidence that for conservation to work, the socio-economic needs of local peoples must weigh just as heavily as the survival of orangutans.
The IUCN has released a new analysis on palm oil and its sustainability factors. The analysis which was compiled by the newly formed IUCN Oil Palm Task Force stated its objectives for the analysis as:
1. Conduct a situation analysis to provide a more
comprehensive understanding of the reality of oil palm
sustainability, and what could be done to improve it;
and
2. Act as an authoritative advisory body on oil palm
and how this relates to global sustainability objectives,
and an intermediary between the oil palm industry, the
IUCN network and the other stakeholders in oil palm discussions.
As a situation analysis that looks at the implications of biodiversity conservation from palm oil expansions, the views shared by the analysis should be noteworthy to the various certification schemes available for palm oil. This is especially so for national schemes like the ISPO and MSPO or the planned jurisdictional schemes for Nigeria, Colombia and Ecuador where socio and economic factors weigh more heavily than environmental ones. The IUCN analysis is clear that its consideration of what constitutes “sustainability” for palm oil is limited as to “biological conservation we generally seek to conserve and sustain some or all aspects of a regional biota.”
Preservation of species in flora and fauna must factor into any definition of sustainable palm oil that seeks to be globally accepted. However, any attempt to define sustainable palm oil must place socio and economic needs on the same level as conservation.
Record forest loss in 2017 to non-palm oil industries
Despite all the pledges by multinational brands to “no-deforestation” palm oil, new data from Global Forest Watch show 2017 as one of the highest recorded losses of forest cover since they started monitoring forest coverage in 2001.It is noteworthy that the rate of forest loss in Indonesia has decreased while Malaysia did not get a mention in the top regions for forest loss. These two countries combined make up 85% of global palm oil supply and you would think that their palm oil industries would have been right up there with forest loss but they are not.
The real time loss of forests globally has shown that this narrow focus on preventing deforestation by palm oil is a distraction from the fact that a well planned palm oil industry that is a part of a complete plan for development in rainforest rich countries will save biota more efficiently than simply looking at whether palm oil plantations displaced forests.
If we look at Colombia as an example, the sudden increase in deforestation has been attributed to beef, logging and cocaine. Could legal palm oil plantations in Colombia reduce the loss of forests? The Colombian association for palm oil producers, Fedepalma, thinks so. The Colombian industry has an enviable claim that no forests have been lost to their current production level and that the country has millions more degraded lands to expand its industry.
In Uganda, the Minister for Agriculture reported a surprising unintended consequence of palm oil farming as it seeks to reduce its dependence on imported vegetable oils. Not only are the forests being spared from illegal charcoal production but the jobless fishermen are now able to find new sources of income from palm oil farming.
There is obviously a large information gap between developing palm oil as an industry and its ability to reduce deforestation. Producer countries like Malaysia which has one of the most mature palm oil industries have shown that palm oil need not be a threat to the extinction of wildlife species. Their industry is a working model for the various suggestions from the IUCN analysis which provides conlusive evidence that for conservation to work, the socio-economic needs of local peoples must weigh just as heavily as the survival of orangutans.