Our world: In the palm of your hands

While in the midst of exam study, a small point my lecturer made about building a sustainable future captured my attention. I could not help but to ponder about how I live my life and how much effort I actually put into making it sustainable.

There has already been a myriad of articles, videos and so on explicitly warning us against the inexorable, dreaded outcome of global warming. Not to mention premonitions of the extinction of our favorite and not so favorite wildlife species. The drastic rate of alterations to our planet, the acts by the concerned to find new energy alternatives, and the dire need for wildlife conservation efforts clogged my mind. Yet what really struck me the most was the point about the massive impact our small choices can have. Choices like the use of palm oil. Bear with me as first I explain the impacts of palm oil to the readers who are unaware.

A huge industry has been built around the harvesting of palm oil, with global supplies ranging from body and food products to fuels for transport and power stations. It has definitely established itself as one of the world's most rapidly growing sectors in the agricultural industry, rising at a rate of about 9% each year due to the growing demand for it (European Commission 2006). This no doubt brings about major economic benefits, but unfortunately, also results in huge negative impacts to ecosystems and the environment. It affects the balance of greenhouse gases, impacts biodiversity by forest removal and fragmentation and destroys natural ecosystems and habitats.

Impacts of deforestation

Palm oil cultivation involves deforestation activities, which impact the stability of the ecosystem (Wakker 1998). These activities destroy habitats for animals such as Asian elephants, tigers and Sumatran rhinoceros, posing as major threats to their extinction. The potential negative impacts of uncontrolled palm oil expansion on biodiversity, ecosystems and the world’s climate are well recognized by several sources (Koh & Wilcove 2009; Fargione et al. 2008; Koh & Ghazoul 2008).

Peatland destruction

Palm oil production also destroys peatlands. Peatlands are lands that contain partially decayed plant matter. This type of land plays a major role in balancing the carbon cycle and acting as a carbon sink. It is also responsible for water retention, which can prevent the occurrence of floods and droughts. South East Asia is claimed to house 6% (27.1 million Hectares) of global peatlands (Hooijer et al. 2006), and Indonesia holds 22.5 million Hectares (Silvius 2006). Unfortunately, the growing production of palm oil has resulted in the destruction of a significant portion of these lands; Indonesia specifically has almost a quarter of their palm oil plantations converted from peatlands.

The Haze issue

Another consequence of Peatland destruction is the huge emissions of carbon dioxide as a green house gas. This happens when decomposing organic matter is exposed to air. Peatland fires also emit significant amounts of carbon dioxide, which contribute to the haze issue in South East Asia. The haze has been known to cause respiratory illnesses among Indonesian children (Silvius 2006).

Also, Glastra and co authors (Glastra et al. 2002) have suggested that deforestation, which involves land burning, was conducted extensively enough to cause many prolonged fires. For instance, it was suggested that the haze, which occurred in 1997 in South East Asia, was a consequence of this. (Not to mention the past and very recent haze events)

Orang Utans

Palm oil production is one of the several factors that contribute to the worrying decline of Orang Utans apart from forest logging and fires, trade and illegal hunting (Nellemann et al. 2007). These animals are dependent on forests for shelter and food. Upon degradation of their habitats, they will be forced to another location that may be rendered unsuitable. As a result, their mortality would increase, and their birth rate would decrease. Orang Utans that wander into their old habitat, which have been converted into plantations are likely to be killed in order to prevent further damage to crops. In search of food, these animals may also target immature palm trees, which would cause significant damage to crops. These events lead to human-orangutan conflict (Tan et al. 2007).

Impact on Rural communities

The palm oil industry is, however, important to support the livelihood of local farmers and is a huge source of income the support the country’s economy. For example, the government in Indonesia uses palm oil production as a key supporter of the socio-economic development in rural areas (Potter & Lee 1998; Zen et al. 2005). But the expansion of palm oil that is not controlled responsibly can also cause severe consequences for certain local communities. These negative implications can come in the form of air or water pollution (McCarthy & Zen 2010), and the influx of rat populations, all causing damage to other plantations. There is also a negative cultural impact associated with the conversion from an independent farming livelihood to one dependent on the market (Rist et al. 2010).

Taking into account the environmental and livelihood consequences of palm oil expansion, it remains almost impossible to prevent subsequent expansion in the future. If produced sustainably in a social context, palm oil can hold great potential as a vehicle for development in rural areas (Rist et al. 2010). And so, the problem is not about whether to abolish the use of palm oil, but to reduce the negative impacts of palm oil without compromising the livelihood of rural communities. The solution to this is to promote ecologically and socially sustainable palm oil production.

Therefore, I’m not just writing this article to reiterate the impacts of palm oil, but also to shed light on a fairly recent movement that I have discovered – The roundtable on sustainable palm oil (RSPO). This particular organization aims to encourage the expansion of sustainable palm oil use by collaboration with the suppliers as well as the stakeholders.

The RSPO criteria involve eight main components. This is a summary of the eight principles.

Image from RSPO 2012

Our role to play

I am sure you are now wondering what this has got to do with you - the consumers. This organization certifies the supply chains that adhere to their regulations on sustainable palm oil production. These suppliers display a distinct logo on their products to differentiate them from the other non-sustainable products. Therefore, consumers do have huge part to play in this movement. Remember that we have the power to influence the market because we have the power to control the demand. So, increase the demand for sustainable palm oil by purchasing products with the RSPO logo.

Here are some brands with the RSPO license

Apart from the logos listed above, here is a list of some brands that have integrated sustainable palm oil in their products

·      The Body Shop

·      Marks & Spencers

·      Waitrose

·      L’Occitane

·      Carrefour

·      Walmart

·      Procter & Gamble

·      Ferrero

·      Colgate- Palmolive

·      HJ Heinz

·      Johnson & Johnson

·      L’Oreal

·      SC Johnson

·      Sun products

·      Cadbury

·      Ben & Jerrys

·      ConAgra

·      Henkel

·      Kellogg’s

·      Nestle

·      Seventh Generation

·      Unilever

Look out for The RSPO logo

 

Since the global demand for palm oil has escalated and would continue to upsurge, it would be very probable for production expansion to do the same. Hence, there is a need for more research to be conducted to explore new alternatives that enable palm oil to be grown more sustainably. New schemes would also be required to steer producers towards a more sustainable method of production. And while governments, NGOs and scientists are unearthing possible alternatives and constructing feasible policies, implementing them would be challenging. The support of consumers is a key factor that would not only help to improve the livelihood of rural communities, but is essential for wildlife conservation and ultimately to protect the fragility of our planet.

Check out the RSPO website for more information: http://www.rspo.org

                                                                                     

About the author:

Elisabelle Aruldoss, aged 19, is a Singaporean in her final year of her Bachelor of Animal Science Degree at the University of Adelaide (Australia)

References:

Butler, AR 2006, ‘Why is oil palm replacing tropical rainforests? Why are biofuels fueling deforestation?’, Available at: http://news.monga- bay.com/2006/0425-oil_palm.html

European Commission 2006, ‘An EU strategy for Biofuels’, Commission of the European Communities

Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S & Hawthorne, P 2008, ‘Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt’, Science, Vol. 319, pp. 1235–1238

Glastra, R., Wakker, E & Richert, W 2002, ‘Oil palm plantation and deforestation in Indonesia. What role do Europe and Germany play?’, WWF report, Available at: http://assets.panda.org/downloads/oilpalmindonesia.pdf

Hooijer, A., Silvius, M., Wosten, H 2006, ‘Page S. PEAT–CO2: Assessment of CO2 emissions from drained peatlands in South East Asia’, Wetlands International, Available at: http://www.wetlands.org/publication.aspx?i- d=51a80e5f-4479-4200-9be0-66f1aa9f9ca9

Koh, LP & Ghazoul, J 2008, ‘Biofuels, biodiversity, and people: understanding the conflicts and finding opportunities’, Biol. Conserv., Vol. 141, pp. 2450–2460

Koh, LP & Wilcove, DS 2009, ‘Oil palm: disinformation enables deforestation’, Trends Ecol. Evol., Vol. 24, pp. 67–68

McCarthy, J & Zen, Z 2010, ‘Regulating the oil palm boom: assessing the effectiveness of environmental governance approaches to agro-industrial pollution in Indonesia’, Law and Policy, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 153–179

Nellemann, C., Miles, L., Kaltenborn, BP., Virtue, M & Ahlenius, H 2007, ‘The last stand of the orangutan – State of emergency: Illegal logging, fire and palm oil in Indonesia’s national parks’, United Nations Environment Programme, Available at: http://www.grida.no/_documents/orangu- tan/full_orangutanreport.pdf

Potter, L & Lee, J 1998, ‘Tree planting in Indonesia: trends, impacts and directions’, Occasional paper, No. 18, Centre for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia

Rist, L., Feintrenie, L & Levang P 2010, ‘The livelihood impacts of oil palm: smallholders in Indonesia’, Biodivers. Conserv., Vol. 19, pp. 1009-1024

Silvius, M 2006, ‘Tropical peatlands, CO2 emissions and climate’, Wetlands International, Available at: http://regserver.unfccc.int/seors/file_s- torage/ck94svbh1vo3lut.pdf

Tan, KT., Lee, KT & Mohamed, AR 2007, ‘Palm oil: Addressing issues and towards sustainable development’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 13, pp. 420-427

Wakker, E 1998, ‘Lipsticks from the rainforest: Palm oil, crisis and forest loss in Indonesia: the role of Germany’, WWF report, Available at: http://forests.org/archive/indomalay/oilpalm.htm

Zen, Z., Barlow, C & Gondowarsito, R 2005, ‘Oil palm in Indonesian socio-economic improvement: a review of options’, Working paper, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Why do we fight for the dolphin? What makes them different from other animals?

By Elisabelle Aruldoss -

In spite of the recent campaigns against the Resort’s World Sentosa’s use of captive dolphins in their marine exhibition, RWS is still planning to exhibit the remaining twenty-five dolphins. Three dolphins have died so far; two in 2010 and one recently. But to date, RWS has not shown any intention of releasing them and so I feel inclined to share this article which outlines why I choose to fight for the dolphins.

It has also come to my attention that many Singaporeans are unconvinced towards past articles written in relation to RWS dolphins as they feel that there is some inconsistency between the treatment of dolphins and other animals. I am sure a portion of Singaporeans are uncertain as to why many are against captive dolphins when there are captive animals in zoos and pets at home. I understand that little has been shared about the sensitivity of captive dolphins so bear with me as I first explain how intelligence plays a significant role in this argument.

There are terms used to describe the intelligence of animals such as ‘sentience’ and ‘cognition’. Animals that are sentient can exhibit emotions like fear, anxiety, stress, playfulness and sometimes empathy[1]. There are also animals that demonstrate cognition. These animals are distinguished from merely sentient beings as they have superior abilities such as the ability to solve problems, to have episodic memory, to form complex relationships or even to form a mental image of an absent object[2].

Dolphins are highly intelligent and display higher levels of cognition[3] and therefore, their emotional needs are drawn to such an extent where they can die when not given the proper requirements[4].

What makes dolphins different from the rest?

I would like to shed light on a common question that some Singaporeans ask. This question was apparent in Mr. Patrick Tan’s letter ‘RWS dolphins can be of educational value’. In his letter, he asked ‘Why cry over three dolphins when there are some birds and dogs that should not be kept in homes in Singapore? Are these not animals that should be allowed their natural freedom?’ [5]

Domestic animals

Here I will explain the vast difference. It has to be noted that dogs and birds have co-existed in our households as pets i.e. they are domesticated animals. A domesticated animal cannot be compared to a wild animal.

Despite the obvious differences in their sensitivity towards living requirements, dolphins are born in and are adapted to the wild, whereas dogs for example have evolved over the years to co-exist with humans as part of their survival. John Bradshaw has theorized that socialization with humans was an ability that was not generated as a result of the domestication of ancestor wolves, but a pre-adaptation that allowed for domestication of a few wolves to become domestic dogs[6]. Simply put, in dog evolution, co-existence with humans is seen as an adaptation, whereas this is not the case for dolphins.

Zoo animals

Captive animals in the zoo do experience negative effects as a result of captivity. But like I mentioned earlier, dolphins are highly intelligent, and exhibit higher cognition levels. Therefore, they have stricter requirements for their survival compared to animals of a lesser cognition level. I am not saying that zoo animals lead a stress-free and good quality of life. I am simply saying that the captive dolphin issue is the one in dire need of addressing as the negative impacts are not just on a stress-scale but a death-scale.

There some cases where zoos fail to provide their captive animals with the basic requirements of proper animal welfare. In those cases, thankfully there are many concerned organizations that will speak up to release them from captivity; for example ENCAP[7], BornFree[8] and WSPA[9] . We can measure how much an animal suffers by assessing lack of natural behavior expression, persistence of stereotypic behavior, physical and affective states[10]^,[11],[12]. Routine checks should be conducted in captive wildlife bodies to ensure that the animals are healthy and under good welfare. So, the high death rate of RWS dolphins clearly shows the negligence of proper animal welfare.

The difference between Zoos and RWS

Zoos are not all that bad, as they can have a greater purpose behind exhibiting captive animals for the public. Some zoos play a vital part in conservation, developing projects and action plans such as captive breeding. Besides having the expertise to conduct research vital for the conservation of wildlife and educating the public on wildlife matters[13], zoos are important financial contributors to wildlife[14]. For example, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums members have altogether contributed US $350 million per year towards wildlife conservation efforts, putting them in third place after World Wildlife Fund Global Network and Nature Conservancy[15].

Those zoos make significant contributions to wildlife conservation. Besides benefitting the wildlife conservation community, they have the proper resources, skills and expertise to to hold captive animals.

I am against dolphins in captivity not because I am fonder of them, but because these highly sensitive creatures are not as tolerant to a captive environment as dogs, other domesticated or some captive wild animals are. If any other animal was in the same position as the RWS dolphins are, I would speak up for them too.

To sum this up, I would like to urge RWS to follow Monterey Bay Aquarium’s[16] example in not having wild dolphins. Instead, they have plastic dolphins that probably give the same observational educational value as captive dolphins. The best way to learn about wild dolphins is to read about them in books or watch television documentaries, not by watching them in captive environments. There are many other Marine Park’s that have shut down their captive facilities as they understand that dolphins should not be in captivity[17]. RWS can still follow their example and let their dolphins roam freely in the ocean where they belong. I sincerely hope that the relevant readers would recognize the plight of these dolphins and start to consider their well-being.

---

[1] Silverman, J 2008, ‘Sentience and Sensation’, Lab Animal, pp. 465

[2] Vallortigara, G., Chiandetti, C., Rugani, R., Sovrano, VA & Regolin, L 2010, ‘Animal cognition’, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 882-893

[3] Marino, L 2004, ‘Dolphin cognition’, Current Biology, Vol. 14, No. 21, pp. R910 – R911

[4] Grimm, D 2011, ‘Are dolphins too smart for captivity?’, Science, Vol. 332, No. 6029, pp. 526-529

[5] http://www.todayonline.com/Voices/EDC121127-0000019/RWS-dolphins-can-be-of-educational-value

[6] Bradshaw, J 2011, ‘How wolves became dogs’, Dog sense: how the new science of dog behavior can make you a better friend to your pet, Basic Books pp. 29-66

[7] http://www.endcaptivity.org/

[8] http://www.bornfree.org.uk/

[9] http://www.wspa-international.org/

[10] Bekoff, M 1998, ‘Animal Welfare’, Encyclopedia of animal rights and animal welfare, pp. 55

[11] Bracke, MBM & Hopster, H 2006, ‘Assessing the importance of natural behaviour for animal welfare’,Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 77-89

[12] Dawkins, MS 2004, ‘Using behaviour to assess animal welfare’, Animal Welfare, Vol. 13, pp. S3-7

[13] Whitehead, M 1995, ‘Saying it with genes, species and habitats: biodiversity education and the role of zoos’, Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol. 4, pp. 664-670

[14] Tribe, A & Booth, R 2003, ‘Assessing the Role of Zoos in Wildlife Conservation’, Human Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 8, pp. 65–74

[15] Conde, DA., Flesness, N., Cholchero, F., Jones, OR & Scheuerlein, A 2011, ‘An Emerging Role of Zoos to Conserve Biodiversity’, Science, Vol. 331, pp. 1390-1391

[16] http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/

[17] http://savejapandolphins.org/blog/post/captive-facilities-closed

Original link here : http://theonlinecitizen.com/2012/12/why-do-we-fight-for-the-dolphins-what-makes-them-different-from-other-animals/#_ftn17