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.

1. STEPS TOWARD GREEN
Policy Responses to the Environmental
Footprint of Commodity Agriculture in
East and Southeast Asia
September 15th, 2015

2. Outline
• Context
• Objectives and Scope
• Approach
• Major Findings
• Recommendations

3. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
2008
2011
2014
Share of Urban Population (%)
China
Indonesia
India
Malaysia
Philippines
Thailand
Vietnam
EAST AND SOUTHEAST ASIA
A Dynamic Region

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. …and 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 Côte 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. Agriculture’s 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
• Green growth/agri-
modernization strategies
• Closing regulatory gaps
• Increased media coverage
Growing Recognition of the Problems and Solutions
Practices to mitigate risks
• Farm level
• Community level
• Landscape level
• Value chain level

10. Countries have begun to pilot and apply measures to
create more awareness and change prevailing
trends…Nevertheless, a large gap generally
remains between green agriculture aspirations and
applications.

11. The Gap Between Aspirations
and Applications
• Agnostic consumers
• Hierarchy of objectives
• Conflict between environmental
and agricultural policy
• Weak administrative coordination
• Transaction costs of collective
action
• 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 ‘green agriculture’ reviews in
Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines

14. APPROACH • Framework
– Map commodities, ecosystems and
environmental risks
– Typology of roles/policy instruments
– Expectations on suitability and effectiveness
• Case Studies
– Scoping (22) and selected 6
– Diversity of problems, structure and solutions
– Literature review; interviews
• Synthesis
– 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
• Financial value
• Concentration of producers/buyers
• Strength of producer orgs
• Socio-economic status of producers
• Business commitment to CSR
• Market demand
• Maturity of sector
Green Agriculture
Capabilities

16. Mae Chaem
watershed,
Thailand
Yunnan
Province, China
Dak Lak,
Viet Nam
Ca Mau, Viet Nam
Central and West
Kalimantan, Indonesia
Mindanao,
Philippines
SIX COMMODITY
LANDSCAPES

17. MOBILIZING POLICY ACTION

18. Triggers for integrated policy action
• International market pressure
• Landscape-scale environmental catastrophes
• Threats to water important to key stakeholders
• Threats to human health of influential groups
• Social conflicts
• Operational risks for agribusinesses

19. ROLES FOR GOVERNMENT

20. 5 ROLES FOR GOVERNMENTS
1. Definer
2. Enabler
3. Funder
4. Regulator
5. Advocate

21. DEFINER
Policy Instruments
• Endorsing AGG strategies
• Designated secision-making
authority
• Inter-ministerial
coordination
• Multi-stakeholder
dialogue/action
‘Organic Coast’, Ca Mau Province, Vietnam

22. ENABLER
Policy Instruments
• Public procurement
• Institutionalize private PES
• Technical assistance
• Research for innovation
• Information systems
• Enviro action in green
growth initiatives
Mae Chem Watershed, Thailand

23. FUNDER
Policy Instruments
• Producer & organizational
subsidies
• Payments for ecosystem services
• Direct investments by public
agencies
• Bonds
• Preferential credit for private land
managers
Dak Lak, Vietnam – cost share for farmers to
transition coffee systems

24. REGULATOR
Policy Instruments
• Land use and zoning rules
• Norms for health
• Polluter penalties
• Direct regulation of practices
• Environmental monitoring
• Private standards frameworks
Kalimantan, Indonesia

25. ADVOCATE
Policy Instruments
• Raise awareness of resource
managers/users
• Public media campaigns for
citizens & investors
• Public dissemination of data
and evidence
• Mobilizing allies and advocates
Yunnan, China

26. CASE OF TEA IN YUNNAN, CHINA

27. Tea production & area, 2000-2012

28. Consequences of monoculture tea
• Soil erosion/loss of topsoil/soil hardening
• Soil degradation (changes to soil chemistry)
• Water pollution/local hydrology changes
• Local micro-climate changes
• Biodiversity loss
• Greenhouse gas emissions

29. Drivers for policy change in Yunnan
• Local protests
• Consumer health concerns
• Price premium for ‘quality tea’
• Sustainability concerns of
western/Japanese buyers
(small % demand)
• Pride in cultural heritage
Photo by ICRAF

30. Agri-Environmental Policies
Definer: Yunnan green growth policy, local ‘quality tea’
initiative; provincial bio-industry strategy
Enabler: Labeling, standards & certification (health, eco-,
‘famous’); 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: Pu’er City GIAHS desig. (“Tea Garden-Tea Culture”)

31. Outcomes
• 187,000 hectares environmentally-sensitive tea
production [Pu’er goal -90% of all tea]
• Price premium for quality tea from agroforestry
systems ( up to $730/kg leaf vs $1.60/kg for low
quality from monoculture
• Sustained high agrobiodiversity in tea (25 of 49
global species); densely inter-planted
• Biodiversity corridor supported

32. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

33. Be proactive rather than reactive

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
• 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
• supply chain actors
• national ministries & agencies
• sub-national and local
governments
• research/training instit.
• civil society
• the media

39. Thank you
For more, visit
ecoagriculture.org/easer