Palm oil has undoubtedly become a victim of its own success. Ranked 10th in the world among oils and fats in 1962 with a production of only 1.3 million tonnes, it jumped to second position behind soybean oil with a recorded global production of 17.9 million tonnes in 2000. The next decade saw palm oil overtake soybean oil (35.8 million tonnes) as the most-produced vegetable oil at 45 million tonnes in 2009, and it has since retained pole position.
Palm oil’s leap to the top was followed closely by rapeseed moving from 11th to 3rd position over the same period (1962-2009). Palm oil will continue to hold its position, facilitated by the ability of the oil palm to produce five times more oil per hectare than rapeseed.
Any success story would attract the envy of competitors. Early attacks on palm oil focused on aspects of health and nutrition. These were correctly addressed by engaging world-renowned laboratories to verify evidence that, in the end, nullified false accusations centred on the nutritional properties of palm oil.
Current attacks, though, have migrated to deceptive perceptions that are not easy to address. Perceptions are based on belief and, to some extent, amount to brainwashing. Perceptions are easily created and spread in an era where social media exerts a profound and extensive influence on decisions made by even the lay consumer.
For example, oil palm is being accused of being the main driver of deforestation. The proven facts show otherwise – that the livestock industry uses 73% of the global agricultural land of 5.8 billion ha. Oil palm only occupies 0.4% of global agricultural land. These facts have been repeated on many occasions and debated by scientific groups. Yet, the negative perception toward oil palm continues to proliferate unabated.
It is obvious that deforestation has been used as a front to demonise palm oil. This is blatant sensationalism. For example, claims are registered that ‘an area equivalent to 300 football pitches is being cleared every day’ to make way for oil palm planting. This is compounded by alleged loss of biodiversity, including wildlife, through campaigns designed only to capture the public imagination and create lasting anti-palm oil sentiments among consumers. The palm oil industry must therefore come up with new ideas and concepts quickly to counter the negative perceptions being generated.
Efforts are also being revived to subject palm oil to tests of ‘sustainability’. One attempt seeks to examine the form of land use change, as a consequence of the diversion from food to non-food application of vegetable oils for use as biofuel feedstock.
Land use change is divided into direct (DLUC) and indirect (ILUC) land use change. Unlike DLUC, quantification of ILUC is rather questionable and the current prescribed models are not scientifically robust or water-tight. Given these anomalies in applying ILUC to classify sustainable and non-sustainable biofuel feedstocks, it calls into question the EU’s rapid fire move to hastily adopt ‘high’ and ‘low’ ILUC risk and apply this to palm oil, especially for fuel and renewable energy.
It is clear that palm oil is being targeted to be unfairly phased out. The Malaysian industry is not pleased and stands ready to act, and ensure that the world is not denied access to palm oil – an essential, affordable and sustainable source of oils and fat.
Datuk Dr Kalyana Sundram,
CEO, MPOC
