This document summarizes the findings of a study on reducing the environmental footprint of commodity agriculture in East and Southeast Asia. It identifies major drivers of environmental degradation, such as monoculture farming. It also examines policy responses across six commodity landscapes in the region. The study recommends that governments take a strategic, integrated approach using the roles of definer, enabler, funder, regulator and advocate. It suggests combining value chain and spatial initiatives, aligning agriculture and environment policies, and strengthening organizational capacity and knowledge systems.
4. East and Southeast Asia:
A Dynamic Region
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000 GDP per capita (constant 2005 US$)
1990
2014
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Poverty headcount ratio at $1.25 a day (PPP) (% of
population)
China Indonesia Philippines Thailand Vietnam
5. With Dynamic Agro-Food Sectors
Country 2000-2014
China 3.7
Vietnam 3.7
Indonesia 3.6
Malaysia 3.2
Philippines 2.7
Thailand 2.6
0.0
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Cereals Production (tons) Per Capita 1990-2013
China
Indonesia
Malaysia
Philippines
Thailand
Viet Nam
Average Annual Agriculture
Growth Rates
6. โฆand Expanding Food and Agricultural Exports
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
BillionsUSD
Viet Nam
Thailand
Philippines
Malaysia
Indonesia
China
7. Rank Rice Palm Oil Tea Coffee Cocoa Cassava Rubber Crustaceans Garlic Onion
1st India Indonesia Sri Lanka Brazil Cรดte d'Ivoire Thailand Thailand India China Netherlands
2nd
Thailand Malaysia Kenya Viet Nam Ghana Viet Nam Belgium Ecuador Spain India
3rd
Viet Nam Netherlands China Colombia Netherlands Cambodia Viet Nam Canada Argentina China
4th Pakistan
Papua New
Guinea
India Germany Malaysia Indonesia Guatemala China Netherlands Egypt
5th USA Guatemala Argentina Switzerland Indonesia Lao PDR Malaysia Viet Nam Malaysia Mexico
Among the Global Leaders in Agri-Food Commodity Exports
8. Agricultureโs Heavy Enviro Footprint
Air and water pollution
Biodiversity and habitat loss
Water scarcity/salinity
Deforestation
Soil degradation
Natural resource depletion
Greenhouse gas emissions
Deforestation for palm oil in Indonesia
Maize on unsuitable land in Thailand Deforestation in China
9. National Level
โข Green growth/agri-
modernization strategies
โข Closing regulatory gaps
โข Increased media coverage
Growing Recognition of the Problems and Solutions
Practices to mitigate risks
โข Farm level
โข Community level
โข Landscape level
โข Value chain level
10. Countries have begun to pilot and apply measures to
create more awareness and change prevailing
trendsโฆNevertheless, a large gap generally
remains between green agriculture aspirations and
applications.
11. The Gap Between Aspirations
and Applications
โข Agnostic consumers
โข Hierarchy of objectives
โข Conflict between environmental
and agricultural policy
โข Weak administrative coordination
โข Transaction costs of collective
action
โข Gaps in knowledge, capacity
and/or finance
12. OBJECTIVES
Inform public policy on effective measures
which governments can take to reduce the
environmental footprint of commercial
agriculture
13. SCOPE
Three Components
1. Steps Toward Green: synthesis based on (6) commodity landscape case
studies in the region
2. Shades of Green: compilation of international experiences involving
public-private collaboration
3. Aspirations to Applications: country level โgreen agricultureโ reviews in
Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines
14. APPROACH โข Framework
โ Map commodities, ecosystems and
environmental risks
โ Typology of roles/policy instruments
โ Expectations on suitability and effectiveness
โข Case Studies
โ Scoping (22) and selected 6
โ Diversity of problems, structure and solutions
โ Literature review; interviews
โข Synthesis
โ Cross-cutting observations, lessons and
recommendation
15. Factors conditioning the choice of policy instrument
Exogenous factors
Endogenous factors
Competencies
Economic
conditions
Socio-Political
Conditions
Product
characteristics
Agro-ecological
conditions
Industry Structure & Characteristics
โข Financial value
โข Concentration of producers/buyers
โข Strength of producer orgs
โข Socio-economic status of producers
โข Business commitment to CSR
โข Market demand
โข Maturity of sector
Green Agriculture
Capabilities
18. Triggers for integrated policy action
โข International market pressure
โข Landscape-scale environmental catastrophes
โข Threats to water important to key stakeholders
โข Threats to human health of influential groups
โข Social conflicts
โข Operational risks for agribusinesses
22. ENABLER
Policy Instruments
โข Public procurement
โข Institutionalize private PES
โข Technical assistance
โข Research for innovation
โข Information systems
โข Enviro action in green
growth initiatives
Mae Chem Watershed, Thailand
23. FUNDER
Policy Instruments
โข Producer & organizational
subsidies
โข Payments for ecosystem services
โข Direct investments by public
agencies
โข Bonds
โข Preferential credit for private land
managers
Dak Lak, Vietnam โ cost share for farmers to
transition coffee systems
24. REGULATOR
Policy Instruments
โข Land use and zoning rules
โข Norms for health
โข Polluter penalties
โข Direct regulation of practices
โข Environmental monitoring
โข Private standards frameworks
Kalimantan, Indonesia
25. ADVOCATE
Policy Instruments
โข Raise awareness of resource
managers/users
โข Public media campaigns for
citizens & investors
โข Public dissemination of data
and evidence
โข Mobilizing allies and advocates
Yunnan, China
28. Consequences of monoculture tea
โข Soil erosion/loss of topsoil/soil hardening
โข Soil degradation (changes to soil chemistry)
โข Water pollution/local hydrology changes
โข Local micro-climate changes
โข Biodiversity loss
โข Greenhouse gas emissions
29. Drivers for policy change in Yunnan
โข Local protests
โข Consumer health concerns
โข Price premium for โquality teaโ
โข Sustainability concerns of
western/Japanese buyers
(small % demand)
โข Pride in cultural heritage
Photo by ICRAF
30. Agri-Environmental Policies
Definer: Yunnan green growth policy, local โquality teaโ
initiative; provincial bio-industry strategy
Enabler: Labeling, standards & certification (health, eco-,
โfamousโ); farmer training; science centers, encourage NGOs
Funder: PES; watershed and land management programs;
subsidize producers for reforestation;
Regulator: land use zoning; monitoring for health labels
Advocate: Puโer City GIAHS desig. (โTea Garden-Tea Cultureโ)
31. Outcomes
โข 187,000 hectares environmentally-sensitive tea
production [Puโer goal -90% of all tea]
โข Price premium for quality tea from agroforestry
systems ( up to $730/kg leaf vs $1.60/kg for low
quality from monoculture
โข Sustained high agrobiodiversity in tea (25 of 49
global species); densely inter-planted
โข Biodiversity corridor supported
34. Align ag and environment policies
Recommendations
Align sector and sub-sector policies and programs
Promote diversified land use and market development
Target and coordinate policy instruments spatially
Devise alternative revenue strategies for local government
35. Choose government roles more strategically
โข Using the D-E-F-R-A
framework, explicitly
examine which roles
are needed and will
have the biggest
impacts.
Recommendations
Develop a hierarchy of action across policy
roles
Draw on a complementary mix of policy
instruments
Use different tools for large growers and
smallholder producers
Clarify the respective roles of local and
national policy
Take a learning approach
36. Combine value chain and spatial approaches,
engaging all stakeholders
Recommendations
Reconceive certification as a tool, not a strategy
Build local, regional and national coalitions
Promote integrated landscape initiatives
Partner with the private sector around shared risks
Build on technical and policy innovations piloted by civil
society
37. Strengthen organizational capacity, data and
knowledge systems
Recommendations
Develop robust public sector agro-
environment data systems
Share information widely among
stakeholders
Improve capacity to administer and
implement agro-environment policies
and programs
Consider
โข supply chain actors
โข national ministries & agencies
โข sub-national and local
governments
โข research/training instit.
โข civil society
โข the media