COMMENT: Getting out of palm oil
|
|
By Juhana Rossi
Palm oil production is as important for Malaysia, if not more important, than the position of the forest industry was for Finland a short time ago.
Each nation seeks prosperity by taking advantage of its natural resources, so it would be churlish for Finns to say that what is right for Finland is not right for Malaysia.
Nevertheless, it is not easy to absolve the palm oil business of all sin. States have their differences, and that is the case with forests as well.
Malaysia's civic society and its legal system are not as strong as in Finland. Therefore, Chinese companies are able to ruthlessly do what they want to in the forests of Borneo, which belong to the indigenous population, under Malaysian law. An inner circle of powerful people gives its blessing to this, and gets a share of the profit, which Chinese companies get from tree felling and production of palm oil.
Forests in Malaysia are more vulnerable than in Finland. Finnish commercial forests differ much less from the preceding natural forest than palm oil plantations do from untouched rain forest. When a tropical rain forest is felled, its flora and fauna are destroyed completely. At the same time, large amounts of carbon dioxide are released, which accelerate climate change.
How does the Finnish Neste Oil, which produces bio-diesel fuel from Malaysian palm oil, fit in to this pattern? Neste Oil buys its oil from the IOI Group. IOI operates only on old plantations. It does not cut down old forests, and does not banish indigenous inhabitants out of the way of the oil palm plantations. It treats its workers well and bears social responsibility.
So, it is business which follows the principles of sustainable development.
Or perhaps not. It is not the fault of Neste Oil or IOI, but they are part of the palm oil business - a business that is being pushed onto the road of destruction by the worldwide enthusiasm for biological fuels, which has proven to be a mistake, after the first few steps.
The OECD countries need to immediately establish much tougher criteria for biological fuels. One would be to ban the use of significant food crops as raw material for fuel. The criteria would take effect in 2013.
Biofuel companies would have been given clear rules and time. Product development and competition would be given a chance to do their jobs.
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 3.2.2008
More on this subject:
 The two faces of tropical palm oil
JUHANA ROSSI / Helsingin Sanomat
juhana.rossi@hs.fi
|
|
