Despite a significant growth in palm oil production over the past few years, one of the most important challenges facing PNG’s premier oil palm project in West New Britain today is how to improve the living standard of oil palm producing families in light of growing negative impacts of population boom, high incidences of social breakdown and issues over environmental impacts.
Because of these negative impacts, unsustainable methods of production, still lurk behind current certified standards and practices. Lack of information coupled with farmers' poor levels of literacy seem to be the main setback and therefore must be improved.
For my first blog post, I introduce a major problem I find rising under the palms of West New Britain - population and demographic change.
Commercial oil palm development in Papua New Guinea dates back to 1967 when the Australian Colonial Administration introduced what was described as a major vehicle to boost Papua New Guinea’s economy. It was called the Land Settlement Scheme (LSS) program and featured a process of liberating overcrowded regions via voluntary resettlement of rural people to under-exploited areas. Large parcels of under-developed land on the northern coast of New Britain Island were alienated and subdivided into smallholdings to lease to the settlers for agricultural development.
During that same period, The World Bank recommended that commercial oil palm be established using a Nucleus Estate-Smallholder (NES) model to allow Papua New Guineans experience the benefits of individualised participation in cash cropping. The concept suited well with the LSS program hence Hoskins was established as the first NES model project. In terms of smallholder production, the oil palm industry today owes a big part of its success to these smallholder Land Settlement Schemes (LSS).
In Hoskins Oil Palm Project, Land Settlement Schemes (LSS) have been changing due to population increases in smallholder blocks. The population of the LSS blocks have more than tripled from the early 1970s to an estimated 18.44 persons per LSS block in 2010. From single household blocks, multiple household blocks have emerged and are now widespread.
For second generation migrant families, long-term residential options beyond the LSS are limited. Settlers or their children are not able to move home (their home province) either because their access rights to village resources have weakened during their long absences from the village (more than 40 years); and many of the original settlers were recruited from land-short areas where land pressures have continued to build in their absence.
Multiple household blocks are complex social and economic units unlike the first nuclear single families that first settled the schemes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. They are diverse and often the residents are under intense social and economic pressure, particularly when oil palm prices are low. Most have adopted new oil palm labour and production strategies to maintain household economic security and social stability.
Unlike oil palm farmers living on their own customary land in nearby villages where land is generally in adequate supply and can put into a range of uses, opportunities for land use change are limited in the LSSs. This is because the agricultural leases of an LSS block is over a fixed land area (the leasehold block).
Compounding their situation, oil palm prices fluctuate significantly through time depending on the world demand for palm oil. As a result of such population and economic pressures and uncertain and fluctuating oil palm incomes, LSS smallholders' living standard has dropped considerably.
In this blog post, I give a brief overview of what I observe as what may become the root cause of poverty under LSS palms. Poverty is known to be a major driver of destruction to natural ecosystems.
In my next blog post, I give an indepth view into several strategies smallholders have developed in response to such socio-economic pressures in order to avoid falling into poverty. Some of these strategies pose a threat to the surrounding ecosystem since they are adopted to maintain economic security and social stability at the expense of the natural environment.
For Eco-Justice, my ISOP farmer trainings are designed to work around these strategies so as to minimize poverty and the risks it poses to the natural environment.
Because of these negative impacts, unsustainable methods of production, still lurk behind current certified standards and practices. Lack of information coupled with farmers' poor levels of literacy seem to be the main setback and therefore must be improved.
For my first blog post, I introduce a major problem I find rising under the palms of West New Britain - population and demographic change.
Early Developments
Commercial oil palm development in Papua New Guinea dates back to 1967 when the Australian Colonial Administration introduced what was described as a major vehicle to boost Papua New Guinea’s economy. It was called the Land Settlement Scheme (LSS) program and featured a process of liberating overcrowded regions via voluntary resettlement of rural people to under-exploited areas. Large parcels of under-developed land on the northern coast of New Britain Island were alienated and subdivided into smallholdings to lease to the settlers for agricultural development.
During that same period, The World Bank recommended that commercial oil palm be established using a Nucleus Estate-Smallholder (NES) model to allow Papua New Guineans experience the benefits of individualised participation in cash cropping. The concept suited well with the LSS program hence Hoskins was established as the first NES model project. In terms of smallholder production, the oil palm industry today owes a big part of its success to these smallholder Land Settlement Schemes (LSS).
 |
| Most of these early schemes are in West New Britain Province and they are an important part of Hoskins Oil Palm Project. |
Today's Issues Arising Under LSS Palms
Population and Demographic Change
In Hoskins Oil Palm Project, Land Settlement Schemes (LSS) have been changing due to population increases in smallholder blocks. The population of the LSS blocks have more than tripled from the early 1970s to an estimated 18.44 persons per LSS block in 2010. From single household blocks, multiple household blocks have emerged and are now widespread.
For second generation migrant families, long-term residential options beyond the LSS are limited. Settlers or their children are not able to move home (their home province) either because their access rights to village resources have weakened during their long absences from the village (more than 40 years); and many of the original settlers were recruited from land-short areas where land pressures have continued to build in their absence.
Multiple household blocks are complex social and economic units unlike the first nuclear single families that first settled the schemes in the late 1960s and early 1970s. They are diverse and often the residents are under intense social and economic pressure, particularly when oil palm prices are low. Most have adopted new oil palm labour and production strategies to maintain household economic security and social stability.
 |
| One common labour and production strategy practised is rotational harvesting where each household take turns to harvest the palms on a monthly rotation basis. All harvest revenues for the month go to that allocated household while others go without income for several months until their turn. |
Compounding their situation, oil palm prices fluctuate significantly through time depending on the world demand for palm oil. As a result of such population and economic pressures and uncertain and fluctuating oil palm incomes, LSS smallholders' living standard has dropped considerably.
 |
| More than 40 years producing PNG's best export crop; How would these type of living conditions reflect such an important commodity? |
In my next blog post, I give an indepth view into several strategies smallholders have developed in response to such socio-economic pressures in order to avoid falling into poverty. Some of these strategies pose a threat to the surrounding ecosystem since they are adopted to maintain economic security and social stability at the expense of the natural environment.
For Eco-Justice, my ISOP farmer trainings are designed to work around these strategies so as to minimize poverty and the risks it poses to the natural environment.
No comments:
Post a Comment