Looking towards a positive future on World Environment Day

It’s hard to find positivity and motivation as the world is experiencing the crisis of the pandemic. Adding to the long-acknowledged climate change crisis, as well as the emerging awareness of the crisis of biodiversity loss (which leading scientists claim is more critical than even that of climate change), it would be easy for many to feel helpless and despondent.

Working in the area of orangutan and forest conservation for over a quarter century, I’ve experienced enough disappointment, outrage, and anguish to make anyone want to throw in the towel. From helping to rescue and care for traumatised orphaned orangutans to witnessing the juggernaut of destruction associated with conventional production of timber, pulp and paper and oil palm, I find my own search for optimism challenging.

But every now and then something truly positive happens to reinvigorate my determination. Today, on World Environment Day, the United Nations Environmental Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations launch the United Nations Decade of Restoration. With the aspirational and essential goal of preventing, halting and reversing the degradation of ecosystems worldwide, the platform presents an opportunity to address the wrongs of the past and take steps in the present to ensure the future. Applying this concept to the work that my organisation, Orangutan Land Trust, does in the area of driving sustainable supply chains of palm oil is something  I’d like to see more stakeholders do.

Impacts of palm oil

The impacts of conventional palm oil over recent decades have been undeniably catastrophic for biodiversity. We cannot “undo” these impacts. What we can do is halt the actions and behaviours that today continue to wreak devastation, put in place measures to prevent it in the future, and take meaningful and scalable steps to restore what has been damaged. Adopting this position does not make one an apologist for the industry, but rather, an effective crusader for change. And there are many who share this position, including leading environmental and social NGOs engaged in the issue. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil today boasts more than 5000 members from 100 countries committed to making sustainable palm oil the norm. While an impressive number, its value is diminished by not only members whose commitments are not being fully implemented (such as buyers not sourcing 100% CSPO), but even more by those outside of membership failing to take any action to support sustainable supply chains. Take for example those brands and retailers using “Palm Oil Free” claims, not, as they would insist, to “save rainforests and orangutans,” but merely as a lucrative PR stunt. Walking away from a problem is not the same as contributing to the solution. (Especially if walking away means walking towards a graver problem as can be posed by the use of less sustainable alternative oils!)

Boycott does not work

Is it surprising that some companies jump on the “Say No to Palm Oil” bandwagon so easily, without sparing a thought for the nuance of the decision? Traditional media, social media, self-declared watchdogs and even books are awash with ill-informed and often biased representations of palm oil, many with a specific focus of attack on sustainable palm oil and the stakeholders committed to it. The motivation? It’s hard to say. It can certainly be “click-baitable” for one thing. But what is commonly lacking in all these communiques is a viable solution to address the issues. #BoycottPalmOil is not going to change the way palm oil is produced on the ground. It’s not going to encourage the necessary continuous improvement needed in certification systems like RSPO, or  in assurance and transparency. And it most certainly is not going to do anything to right the wrongs of the past. In short, such a position is entirely unhelpful.

Sustainable alternative

So what do I propose as an alternative? I propose we demand that growers producing palm oil bring to a halt the destructive practices associated with conventional production, put in place the necessary measures to prevent future negative impacts, and invest in nature-based solutions to contribute to the restoration of ecosystems. I propose we demand that traders and buyers of palm oil, including both manufacturers and retailers, immediately source only 100% CSPO via one or more of the approved Sustainable Supply Chain Options set out by the RSPO and that they invest in ecosystem restoration. I propose we demand that governments of both producer and consumer nations support and uphold these expectations for the supply chain and contribute themselves to ecosystem restoration. And finally, as consumers, all of us can play our part by supporting the companies doing the right thing and demanding those who are not bring to a halt all activities implicated in the destruction of ecosystems, put in place measures to prevent future degradation and start to put right the wrongs of the past by helping to restore ecosystems for our shared future.

For the first time in history, a regulatory mechanism will be introduced for the promotion of sustainability through trade preferences. In a public referendum in March, voters in Switzerland ratified the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) between EFTA states (Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland)  and Indonesia. As palm oil was at the heart of this referendum, we asked Stefan Kausch from the Swiss Palm Oil Network to share his view on these developments in his country.

Green light to the free trade deal with Indonesia

It’s rare that people get to decide about a free trade deal. Swiss voters did so in March 2021. A small majority of 51.6% of the voters agreed on a free trade deal with Indonesia. This close decision is surprising. Only few other countries benefit as much from global trade and an extensive network of 32 trade agreements.

The reasons for this result are manifold. But first a brief look back: At the end of 2018, Switzerland together with Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein (EFTA states) signed a free trade deal with Indonesia. Under the terms agreed, eventually 98% of Swiss exports to the island nation would be exempt from customs duty. In return, among other commodities, Indonesia would be able to export 10,000 tonnes of certified palm oil annually (and up to 12,500 tonnes at the end of five years) at reduced tariffs. 

In reaction to this, a civil society and farmers’ alliance, initiated by the organic winegrower Willy Cretegny from Geneva, launched a referendum against the free trade agreement. The opponents argued that the ecological and social impact of palm oil production in Indonesia are disastrous and that certification systems such as RSPO can’t do anything about it. On 22 June 2020, the referendum committee submitted 61,719 signatures against the Federal Decree for the economic partnership between the EFTA States and Indonesia.

Corona’s influence

The vote took place on 7 March 2021. The voter participation was above average. This effect has been observed since Corona has determined everyday life. The population is politicised by the pandemic and Corona has an augmented influence on the voters’ decisions. Criticism is easier to mobilise and the confidence in the Federal Council is diminished by the crisis as longer as the dispute over the pandemic strategy is taking place. This trend played into the opponents’ cards. Even more because a high voter participation favours progressive-left cities.

Green is in

The green wave continues to have an effect. The population votes greener, more women and young people go to the polls. Votes on environmental and human rights issues benefit from this drift, while economic issues have a hard time. Without the fact that imported palm oil will have to meet environmental standards, the deal would most definitely have failed. Swiss voters all over the country want ecology and human rights to be given more weight in cooperation with other countries. On the other hand there is a growing scepticism towards international trade and globalization. Particularly, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, market scepticism is widespread and sustainability has a high priority.

Negative image of palm oil

What was foreseeable: the debate revolved more around palm oil and less about trade. In the public opinion palm oil has become synonymous with deforestation and the decimation of wildlife like the Orangutan. It seems that it is firmly cemented in people’s mind that anything to do with palm oil is bad. In addition the opponents had their deep doubts about the credibility and control mechanism of sustainable palm oil certificates. One of the main arguments used by the referendum committee for rejecting the “nefarious” free trade deal is that the sustainability criteria for palm oil imports are a mere fig leaf.

No free trade without sustainability

To summarize we can say that this narrow ‘Yes’ to the free trade agreement with Indonesia came about both thanks to and despite environmental aspects. Despite all the prophecies of doom, the result of the vote is path breaking. For the first time, sustainability preferences are anchored in a free trade agreement. Besides this, it is unique that certification systems such as RSPO or ISCC are playing an important role in a regulation implementing the agreement. Therefore the agreement between the EFTA states and Indonesia could serve as a model for other trade agreements, such as the one between the EU and Indonesia. For Switzerland the result of the vote means “no new free trade agreements without sustainability”. Swiss President and economics minister Guy Parmelin already hinted that similar clauses could be included in deals under discussion such as that with the Mercosur region (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay), where the clearing of forests for soy and beef production won’t go unnoticed.

A ban would not improve sustainability, neither from environmental nor from socioeconomic perspectives. But improved sustainability policies are definitely required.

Global demand for palm oil has been increasing tremendously over the last few decades, and so has its production. Palm oil is made from the fruits of the oil palm, a crop that only grows well in tropical environments. Nowadays, Indonesia and Malaysia are the biggest palm oil producers and exporters worldwide (Fig. 1). The European Union (EU) is one of the major importing regions. Seventy percent of the global palm oil is used for food, either directly as vegetable oil or as an ingredient in a large number of processed food items ranging from chocolate spread to frozen pizza. The other 30% is used in non-food industries, including biofuels and cosmetics.

Fig. 1: Global oil palm area harvested (1961-2017). Source: Qaim et al. (2020)

Bad reputation

However, in spite of its widespread use, palm oil has a bad reputation. Many primarily associate palm oil production with tropical deforestation, climate change, loss of habitat for orangutans and other endangered species, and the displacement of local communities to make space for the large oil palm plantations of multinational companies. Against this background, it is often claimed that palm oil should be banned, in order to avoid all these negative outcomes. Several large food-processing companies have switched to other vegetable oils and successfully use a “without palm oil” label as a marketing tool, targeting sustainability-conscious consumers. Even countries and regions, such as the EU, have considered palm oil import restrictions and bans on sustainability grounds.

But would banning palm oil really improve global sustainability? The answer is a clear “no”, neither from an environmental perspective nor from a socioeconomic one.

Environmental footprint

Let me explain, starting with the environmental perspective. It is true that the expansion of palm oil plantations has contributed to tropical deforestation. Globally, about half of the current oil palm area was developed at the expense of forests, which has led to significant biodiversity loss and carbon emissions. But banning palm oil would mean that the demand for vegetable oil would have to be met through a higher production of other oil crops, such as soybean, sunflower, or rapeseed. This would require much more land, as oil palm produces 3-4 times more vegetable oil per hectare than any of these other crops. Hence, replacing palm oil with other vegetable oils would lead to even higher losses of forest and other natural habitats.

Conversion of natural land to agricultural land is the main threat to biodiversity, especially in tropical regions, and also accounts for 50% of all the greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. That’s why additional land-use change must be avoided to the extent possible. But even when ignoring yield differences and simply comparing environmental effects per hectare of land, oil palm as a plantation crop is featuring more favorably than annual oil crops in terms of carbon sequestration, fertilizer use efficiency, and field biodiversity. In other words, replacing palm oil with other vegetable oils would not decrease but rather increase the environmental and climate footprint of production.

One may argue that – instead of replacing palm oil – reducing overall demand for vegetable oil could also be an option. This is very true. Reducing the vegetable oil quantities needed through more conscious consumption, decreasing waste, and avoiding the use of inefficient biofuels is definitely important to foster sustainability. Nevertheless, the global quantities needed will continue to rise, mainly driven by population and income growth in Africa and Asia. Against this background, choosing those crops and production technologies that can help to meet the rising demand in the least-environmentally destructive way should have high priority from a broader sustainability perspective, which always needs to consider environmental, social, and economic objectives.

Poverty and socioeconomic development

Let me now elaborate more on the socioeconomic perspective. There are indeed well-documented cases where local communities in Papua or Borneo lost their traditional land rights or were displaced by expanding palm oil plantations. These are unacceptable incidents, but they are not representative of the broader effects of oil palm on the local population. In Indonesia and Malaysia, over 40% of the total palm oil land is managed not by large companies but by small family farms with average landholdings of less than five hectares. Our own research in Sumatra, one of the hotspots of Indonesia’s recent oil palm boom, shows that these smallholder farmers benefit significantly from cultivating this crop.

Oil palm is more profitable than alternative crops, such as rice, cassava, rubber, or vegetables. Hence cultivating oil palm contributes to income gains and thus improvements in nutrition, health, and child education. Our longer-term data from Sumatra show that oil palm cultivation has raised farm household living standards by 15-20%, even after controlling for confounding factors. Non-farm households have benefited too, as the oil palm boom has improved employment opportunities, wage rates, and rural infrastructure. The rapid growth in the palm oil industry has halved the poverty rates in Sumatra and many other parts of Indonesia and Malaysia (Fig. 2). Banning palm oil would thwart these positive socioeconomic developments, potentially threatening the livelihoods of millions of local farm and non-farm households. In Africa, even more than 70% of the palm oil is produced by smallholder farms.

Fig. 2: Oil palm cultivation and poverty among rural farm and non-farm households in Sumatra, Indonesia.  Source: Qaim et al. (2020)

Sustainability policies needed

However, my conclusion that banning palm oil would not improve sustainability does not mean that everything is good. It isn’t. There are several areas where improved policies must be implemented to increase sustainability in the palm oil sector:

1. Traditional land property rights of local communities must be strengthened, and forest protection areas must be clearly defined and strictly enforced.
2. More research is needed to further increase palm oil yields per hectare, as higher yields mean lower land requirements to satisfy the rising demand. High yields combined with effective nature conservation policies can help to preserve much of the remaining tropical rainforest. High yields should be achieved through improved genetics and better agronomic practices rather than large quantities of agrochemicals.
3. Small farms need particular attention. Smallholder oil palm cultivation can contribute to positive social developments, but proper support is important to overcome technical and financial constraints. On average, palm oil yields are much lower on small farms than on large company plantations. These yield gaps could be reduced through better training and better access to credit and technologies.
4. The landscape design must be optimized. Large-scale monoculture plantations are associated with low biodiversity and ecosystem functions. But mosaic landscapes, where smaller oil palm plots are intermingled with forest patches and other natural landscape elements, can help to preserve many of the important ecosystem functions, often without large reductions in palm oil output.
5. Sustainability certification can play an important role in kickstarting desirable environmental and social trends. The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is an international certification initiative that has recently gained significant market share. A few national initiatives also exist. One challenge for certification schemes is to clearly define strict sustainability criteria and enforce them at scale, especially in a smallholder context. Here, further improvements are still required.

Further reading:

For further details, readers are referred to a recent review article by Matin Qaim and co-authors on the environmental, economic, and social consequences of palm oil production.

Interesting Webinar

23 November 2020 we organised a free webinar with Dr Matin Qaim. Click on the image to listen to the recordings.

I am often asked by colleagues, friends and students whether buying palm oil free products will help save the rainforest. Honestly, the question makes me sad. Not just because I have to tell them ‘no,’ but also because the question is based on a simplified perspective on palm oil production. The caricature they are left with is based on public campaigning that paints palm oil as something fundamentally bad for the rainforest and it does not help them to make properly informed decisions. The truth is that even though a lot of bad practices can be associated with palm oil production, at present much of the world’s palm oil is produced by operators who are leading the way on social and environmental practices, and producing palm oil without deforestation. 

So then, what should I tell the people who ask me for a way to save the rainforests from the effects of badly produced palm oil? Well, there are three things they can do right away:

1. Buy products that contain Sustainable Palm Oil!

First and foremost, if you want a sustainable alternative to palm oil, there is already one available: sustainably-produced palm oil. 

Although there are a lot of people who don’t know this, palm oil can be and is often produced sustainably. In fact, sustainably produced palm oil is not only ‘not bad for the environment,’ it can actually contribute to a healthy ecosystem and even help save the rainforests. Let me explain.

Palm oil, out of all edible oilseed crops, is by far the highest yielding. It yields 6 to 10 times higher than other vegetable oil crops.  It provides 35% of the world’s vegetable oil using only 10% of vegetable oil crop land globally. 

When sustainably produced, palm oil can actively be good for the environment, and the life that inhabits it. For example a team from the HUTAN Orang-utan Research Unit has discovered that orangutans in many areas of the Kinabatangan floodplain in Malaysian Borneo use oil palm plantations to move between forest fragments. They also use these plantations to nest, and even as a source of food. Progressive growers and conservation experts work together to ensure connectivity between fragments and that the animals are not disturbed. See this article to learn more.

Also, for farmers across the world palm is a robust, reliable crop. For farmers living in poverty the production of palm oil can be a great support. Palm oil can be harvested every two weeks, providing a steady income that can be used by farmers to cover all types of essential costs, including school fees and medical expenses. This means that palm oil contributes not just to farmers and their families today, but is also an important part of securing rural communities.  

2. Don’t just switch to ‘palm oil free’ products! 

You may think that finding products with sustainable palm oil is difficult. Maybe you can just buy products without palm oil instead. These are easy to find. They come with a big label proclaiming that they are: Produced without Palm Oil. At first glance this may seem like a great alternative. However there is a crucial flaw in this approach. That flaw is that replacing palm oil does not necessarily mean a or more ethically produced product. 

The thing is, all products have an environmental impact. As consumers we need to start intelligently navigating these issues. By replacing palm oil with alternatives, we are missing the opportunity to take responsibility for bad palm oil practices, helping to address them and ensure a more sustainable supply. Instead, by buying a ‘palm oil replacement’ we could end up contributing to other negative environmental impacts. This is because all agricultural production has an impact on the environment, something as true for palm oil and most other crops. So rather than replacing palm oil, we should be looking at how we can separate the wheat from the chaff in the products we already use. To prevent illegal logging we don’t stop using wood in favour of plastic. Instead we make sure the wood is certified, and comes from a plantation. With palm oil it’s no different. There is a world of difference between unsustainable and sustainable palm oil.  

Right now 86 % of palm oil used in Europe for consumer products is RSPO certified, meaning that the vast majority of palm oil products produced and sold in European supermarkets are already geared towards sustainability. Let’s help these companies in their effort to do better! By buying products with sustainable palm oil we can further support companies to invest in, buy and use sustainable palm oil. However, if tomorrow the demand for sustainable products would fall, so too would the impetus for continuing this important trend, as would the desire to see further transformation of the sector. 

So , don’t buy alternatives, instead buy responsibly. For a good overview of how companies producing your brands are performing check out the WWF scorecard. 

3. Support sustainable palm oil initiatives

So outside of consumer choice, how can you make a difference to the rainforests through palm oil? For a more active approach, you can support the initiatives that help expand sustainable palm oil practices.

Sustainable palm oil requires farmers to be equipped with the know-how and tools to take the environment into account. About 40% of the global palm yield is produced by smallholder farmers. Across the palm oil supply chain, millions of smallholder farmers, due to a myriad of factors, fail to reach their full potential. Some of the barriers they have run into in the recent years include: a lack of access to the proper technology and resources; insufficient capacity to make use of the economies of scale; and the lack of financial or temporal space to take part in certification systems.  As such, smallholders are often unable to produce a living income for themselves and their families. This can be compounded by price drops of palm oil on the global market, deepening their dependence on cheaper, less sustainable methods of production. Needless to say, these issues don’t make reaching the sustainability standards of programmes such as the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil any easier. However, with the right programmes to support them, these smallholders can become a part of the solution.

This year, Solidaridad and IDH started implementing a new programme geared specifically at smallholder farmers, the National Initiatives for Sustainable and Climate Smart Oil Palm Smallholders, or NI-SCOPS. The programme was developed together with four important palm oil producing countries -Indonesia, Malaysia, Ghana and Nigeria- in partnership with the Dutch government. Within the NI-SCOPS programme these countries have committed to addressing their palm oil supply chains and tackling the negative impacts. The NI-SCOPS programme supports the farmers directly by helping them increase productivity through adoption of best management practices. It helps them by showcasing and encouraging important innovations in the field. Crucially, it also empowers them to build resilience to the impact of climate change, while still moving towards lower greenhouse gas emissions through more efficient land use. 

You can learn more about this programme on the Solidaridad website or at the website of IDH.

Conclusion: Saving the rainforests

Will buying sustainable palm oil be enough to save the rainforests? Of course not. The issues affecting the conservation of this vital ecosystem are widespread and involve a lot more products than palm oil. Yet, sustainable palm oil can make a valuable contribution. 

Instead of big statements on replacing palm oil, it is better to start asking the right questions: What is wrong with palm oil? And how can we contribute to fixing it? With the right questions and the right answers we can help save the rainforests from bad palm oil practices. 

Marieke Leegwater, Programme Manager Sustainable Palm Oil Choice/Solidaridad

Palm oil is has become highly controversial in recent years. While many advocate a total ban on this crop, an increasing number of  conservation organisations are committed to support the move to 100% sustainable palm oil. Why do they choose for sustainable palm oil? Emma Payne from Bristol Zoological Society explains to us why this is key to the conservation of wildlife and natural habitats:

As part of our commitment to ‘saving wildlife together’ at Bristol Zoological Society we are dedicated to promoting a world where all palm oil is 100% sustainably produced.

Bristol Zoological Society is a registered education and environmental charity, which runs and manages Bristol Zoo Gardens and Wild Place Project, as well as conservation projects in 10 countries around the world.

Palm oil is the most widely used vegetable oil in the world with approximately 60 million tonnes produced each year, but when produced unsustainably it has negative consequences on the environment and biodiversity.

Over the past few years, we have been spearheading a campaign to encourage people to choose products containing sustainable palm oil, and to encourage organisations to take responsibility for sustainable sourcing and correct labelling of palm oil products.

Why stick with palm oil?

There is large controversy surrounding palm oil production, led by high-profile organisations and hard-hitting advertising campaigns. These promote a total ban on palm oil, but this is not the best solution.

Replacement vegetable oil crops have a far lower yield, so more land would be needed to produce the same amount of vegetable oil. Palm produces up to ten times more oil per hectare than any other crop in the world, so it can be produced using far fewer plants, and therefore less land.

We believe something can be done about the use of palm oil without destroying livelihoods or using even more land for crops – by supporting sustainable production.

Consumer behaviour

Part of our work involves encouraging consumers to choose products which contain sustainable palm oil. This begins with informing people about the benefits of sustainable palm oil, using our platform at Bristol Zoo Gardens and beyond.

At the Zoo, we have featured exciting interactive displays within animal exhibits, which explain the palm oil issue to a new generation of future conservationists. Last year, this included showcasing a hamper filled with sustainable palm oil products in our shop, promoting sustainable brands and encouraging visitors to think about their purchases. At Christmas, we donated 10 of these hampers to a local Bristol foodbank, both raising awareness and giving back to our community.

To further help consumers make positive choices, we are campaigning for mandatory labelling of sustainable palm oil in UK supermarket products. Close to home, we have been working with local businesses in Bristol and helping them develop sustainable palm oil position statements and undertake audits of their supply chains. This is something we are also committed to at both Wild Place Project and Bristol Zoo Gardens, also working closely with our concessions partners, as part of our five-year plan.

Protecting Endangered Species

Unsustainable palm oil plantations can have a devastating impact on a wide range of animal and plant species. Our conservation projects include the protection and breeding of Endangered and Critically Endangered species that are threatened by loss of habitat.

The Goodfellow’s tree kangaroo is one species which has become endangered due to deforestation in their native Papua New Guinea, including logging and non-sustainable palm oil plantations. At Bristol Zoo Gardens, we are part of the European breeding programme for this species and have a breeding pair.

This year we welcomed our first joey, in an exciting boost for the programme – it was one of only two tree kangaroo joeys to have been bred successfully in captivity in the UK in the past year. It was particularly important as the joey’s dad, Mian, joined us from Perth in Australia, so he and the youngster bring new genes for the programme.

Saving Wildlife Together

Bristol Zoological Society, which operates Bristol Zoo Gardens and Wild Place Project, is a conservation and education charity and relies on the generous support of the public not only to fund its important work at Wild Place Project and Bristol Zoo, but also its vital conservation and research projects spanning five continents.

Our diverse conservation projects include:

• Working with the University of Bristol to develop new drone technology, allowing us to track the Critically Endangered Kordofan giraffe in Cameroon
• At our Ankarafa field station, we are working to secure the future of Madagascar’s people and their threatened wildlife, protecting threatened lemurs, supporting reforestation, fire control and protection, and the provision of schools and drinking water.
• Breeding and reintroducing Endangered white-clawed crayfish in south-west England, a species which has suffered a 70% decline in the past 50 years

Further to this, we have programmes protecting species such as the Endangered African penguin, and the Critically Endangered Desertas wolf spider, lemur leaf frog, Livingstone’s fruit bat and western lowland gorilla.

Click here to find out more about our commitment to sustainable palm oil.

Curious about how other zoos are driving change in the palm oil industry? Find out more here.

With the world’s attention focused on the global pandemic of the coronavirus, it may seem an unusual time for me to write an article about palm oil. “What’s the connection?” you may ask. The most widely proposed theory regarding the source of the coronavirus is that it most likely came from wildlife traded in so-called “wet markets” in China and spilled over to humans. It would not be the first time that zoonotic transmission of pathogens (when diseases emerge in non-human animals and are passed onto humans) led to massive outbreaks around the world. In fact, it is believed that more than half of all human pathogens are believed to be zoonotic.

In this article I’d like to share my perspective on the role of the palm oil industry in the emergence of pandemics, how conventional production is still a threat, and how sustainable palm oil truly is the only way forward.

Coronavirus and Deforestation
Scientists have been researching what it is that brings humans in contact with non-human animals resulting in diseases like Covid-19. It is more than simply a case of hunting and selling of wildlife. Overwhelmingly, the evidence points to disturbance of ecosystems. Researchers from IPBES recently reported that, “Rampant deforestation, uncontrolled expansion of agriculture, intensive farming, mining and infrastructure development, as well as the exploitation of wild species have created a ‘perfect storm’ for the spill-over of diseases from wildlife to people.” As human densities increase, more encroachment on natural habitat by people as well as domesticated animals results in more frequent contact with wildlife that may be carrying pathogens. Furthermore, the assault on biodiverse ecosystems can influence how many viruses exist in the wild and how they behave. When species at the top of the food chain disappear, the result is a proliferation of those species lower down the food chain (such as bats and rats) which tend to carry more pathogens. The disruption of habitat also means that these species, with their diseases, may be forced to go elsewhere included areas populated by people.

Looking at the history
The clearing of forest for oil palm in the past has resulted in deadly transmission of disease. The Environmental Investigation Agency mentions three notable examples:

• When Indonesia burned much of its forest for palm oil plantations in the 1990s, bats harbouring the Nipah virus flew to Malaysian farms to feed on fruit trees. The disease jumped from bats to people via pigs – and had a human mortality rate of up to 74 per cent.
• The clearing of forests for palm oil plantations in West Africa also led to spill-over of the Lassa virus, which triggers a haemorrhagic fever like Ebola in humans and can kill 30 per cent of the infected.
• A recent study directly linked an increase in forest clearance for palm oil production in Malaysian Borneo to an increase in malaria.

Working towards a solution
It’s no secret that the conventional production of palm oil is responsible for massive deforestation in areas of immense biodiversity. In the past two decades, millions of hectares of forest have been cleared for this crop. The impact on wildlife, ecosystem services, the climate and on people cannot be ignored. Acknowledgment of these issues led NGOs and progressive companies in the palm oil supply chain to form the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil in 2004, with a view to defining how to cultivate palm oil sustainably. Today, the comprehensive, but voluntary, RSPO standard delivers on civil society and market demands for No Deforestation, No Peat Conversion and No Exploitation (NDPE).

Yet only 20% of global production of palm oil is currently certified sustainable by the RSPO. Many large companies have pledged to halt deforestation in their supply chains, including palm oil, soy, timber and pulp, through initiatives like the Consumer Goods Forum but have failed to deliver on these pledges. There is simply no excuse for manufacturers and retailers to source anything less than 100% certified sustainable palm oil through one or more of the four supply chain options offered by the RSPO. Unless companies sourcing palm oil make the distinction and choose exclusively sustainable palm oil, there will be little incentive for oil palm growers to become (or remain) certified as sustainable. And until they do, they can be seen as complicit in jeopardising millions of lives of people around the world through their failure to remove deforestation and biodiversity loss from their supply chains.

Responsibility
Covid-19 and other recent pandemics are the result of careless human activity, often in the pursuit of economic growth at any cost. This should be a wake-up call that we simply cannot continue “business-as-usual,” and we must take the responsibility to make the right choices moving forward. We must demand sustainable agricultural production and development, including oil palm, that protects both people and forests.

Michelle Desilets, Conservationist and Executive Director Orangutan Land Trust

Millions of people around the world have seen the footage of the lone wild orangutan in an apocalyptic landscape of destroyed forest desperately trying to fight off a bulldozer; it has become symbolic of the catastrophic devastation wrought upon rainforests and wildlife by the palm oil industry. 

So, it comes as no surprise that caring people around the world who have become aware of the situation are outraged, and want to play no part in the destruction. And it is also not surprising that the first reaction is to want to stop consuming palm oil. Some brands and retailers have seen an opportunity to cash in on this conviction, by telling consumers that “Saving orangutans is as easy as just saying no to palm oil.” Oh, how I wish it WERE that easy.

But it is not.

Habitat
Orangutans live only on the islands of Sumatra and Borneo in Indonesia and Malaysia. The conditions which make the habitat ideal for orangutans are the same conditions which make the region ideal for the cultivation of oil palm: a tropical climate with plenty of rain. And it just so happens that these two countries account for more than 85% of the global production of palm oil. As a result, outside of protected areas, orangutan habitat has been hugely fragmented by the expansion of oil palm. How are we to save the orangutan given these circumstances?

Science
To address complex issues successfully, it is important that research and science play a part. The organisation I direct, Orangutan Land Trust, is assisted by a formidable Scientific Advisory Board made up of some of the leading experts in orangutan and wildlife conservation, peatland protection, forestry, sustainability and more. These experts help us determine the best strategies for saving orangutans and their rainforest habitat. Understanding precisely where orangutans and oil palm overlap and how orangutans behave and adapt to these fragmented landscapes is critical to developing sustainable and impactful solutions.

Resilient landscapes
The work of Borneo Futures, with lead scientists Dr Erik Meijaard and Dr Marc Ancrenaz, has provided great insight. In a report commissioned for the PONGO Alliance (Palm Oil and NGO Alliance, which brings together some of the largest oil palm companies, NGOs and experts), they discovered that 10,000 orangutans live in areas allocated for industrial oil palm in Borneo alone. It was clear that the strategy of trying to remove orangutans from oil palm landscapes was not tenable. The fact is, orangutans are found in vast numbers in these landscapes, and so we must find a way to develop resilient landscapes for both people and wildlife.

Developing solutions
Dr Ancrenaz’s research in the highly fragmented Kinabatangan landscape in Sabah showed that orangutans can and do move across oil palm estates and although they cannot survive exclusively on the fruit of the oil palm or the shoots of young palms, they can manage if they can find safe patches of forest along the way with a variety of food sources. Research has shown that orangutans can do well in selectively logged, secondary forests as well. Basically, as Dr Ancrenaz describes it, large terrestrial species like orangutans and elephants that find themselves in these landscapes need 3 things to survive: sufficient food resources, space to move and find mates, and to not be killed.

Safe havens
Where does sustainable palm oil fit in? To begin with, under RSPO, growers are not permitted to clear forests or develop on peatlands. Orangutans thrive in peatland swamp forests. Growers are also required to conserve or enhance areas of High Conservation Value (which includes the presence of rare, threatened or endangered species like the orangutan.) Additionally, growers are responsible for ensuring that rare, threatened or endangered species not be captured, harmed or killed. PONGO Alliance is a platform that demonstrates that growers can, in fact, create safe havens with abundant food sources and forest corridors to improve connectivity for species like the orangutan.

A boycott is no solution
Palm oil is here to stay. The demand for all edible oil crops continues to rise, and palm oil, the highest yielding of these crops, is both versatile and ubiquitous. If a blanket boycott of palm oil which fails to distinguish between conventional and sustainable palm oil did take hold and result in lowered production of palm oil, then other lower-yielding crops would take its place. In places like the tropics, replacing oil palm with these other crops would only multiply the risk to the remaining rainforests and the biodiversity within them.

How to contribute
When consumers demand sustainable palm oil, they send a message to brands and retailers that they expect that the products they buy do not contribute to deforestation and biodiversity loss. And when these brands and retailers follow through with committing to sourcing only sustainable palm oil, they contribute to the survival of the orangutan.

Make sustainable palm oil the norm
I have helped rescue orangutans from oil palm plantations, nursed them back to health or sadly sometimes watched them die. I have seen the forests I love in Kalimantan bulldozed and burned for oil palm. I’ve met local people whose lives have been made unliveable due to land-grabbing and destruction of their forest larder. So it is with the greatest of conviction and a lot of investigation behind me that I stand by my position that if we are to save the orangutans and their forest habitat, and address the catastrophic impacts associated with conventional palm oil production, we MUST do all we can to make sustainable palm oil the norm.

That’s why we encourage all brands and retailers using palm oil to source 100% Certified Sustainable Palm Oil today, and become part of the solution.

Michelle Desilets, Conservationist and Executive Director Orangutan Land Trust