Devotion

Stoppable

During the past few weeks Thailand has been in the throes of drafting  a law to regulate the growing of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). 

Apparently there was a need to regulate the introduction of these as in the past GMO's have been introduced with little or no regard to the then non-existent government regulations.

The Bangkok Post describes the problem (Dec. 13):

'Two decades since the introduction of genetically modified organisms in Thailand, the country is still in a battle over the legalisation of such crops, as activists and farmers protest against draft legislation that would introduce a regulatory framework to allow for domestic GMO cultivation. 
But even without the new regulations, GM crops are already being grown across the country. Some experts point to government carelessness for allowing it to happen, while others say it is simply proof that the march of GM produce is unstoppable'.

It's a very interesting article which exemplifies the conundrum. With farmers growing papaya for export but unable to export to Europe as the EU refuses consignments with GMO grown contamination.

'Thailand currently has no laws controlling the research and study of GM crops. Recent laboratory tests of papaya samples confirmed that GM papaya had spread throughout many provinces across the country'.

As said there is no legislation on GMO other than that forbidding importation of seeds for all agricultural crops with the exception of soy beans intended for industrial use.  The new legislation would change this allowing imports and growing of GMO's while dictating the circumstances.
Naturally not everybody is happy:

'Visit Limlurcha, president of the Thai Food Processors’ Association, said the new biosafety legislation may have a severe effect on food exporters, as inspections will likely be extended to other products. “It will show that we accept GMO production, and it will be harder to differentiate GM from non-GM crops,” he said. “The government is sending a mixed message if they try to move forward with the bill, and at the same time promote organic crops'.”  

The Nation (Dec. 9) writes on the growing opposition in the run up to passing the new law:

'Consumer rights and organic farming advocates will rally at Government House today - and in 43 other provinces - to protest against the Biological Safety Bill, which will allow use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for commercial purposes.

...

He [Biothai official Kwanchai Muanying] said farmers were concerned most about the fact that the bill has no measures to prevent contamination.

...

Foundation for Consumers director Saree Aongsomwang wrote on Facebook that she and network members would certainly attend the symbolic protest at Government House against the bill, which she said had many weak points. They included allowing GMO plant production for commercial purposes and no punishment for biotech businesses whose products turn out to be environmentally harmful'.

A day later the Nation (Dec. 10) reports on farmers protesting the new proposed GMO legislation.  And consumers. And the (seed) industry?

'Taweesak Pulam, managing director of Thai Seed Research Co.,Ltd. , also voiced concern that GMO plants might affect exports to Europe and the US. He also said he was worried that multinational firms could monopolise local agriculture industries, and ordinary farming could become 2.5 times as expensive'.

Well, that's at least 1 player opposed ...

Then on the 16th the surprising news from the Nation: 

'These contrasting reactions came after Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha said yesterday Cabinet had agreed to withdraw the biological safety bill - the 'GMO bill' - from the drafting procedure. He said that even though there had been long debate on the bill since 1997, there was no use considering it further. 

...

Pornsilp Patchrintanakul, adviser to the Board of Trade and president of the Thai Feed Mill Association, said Thailand should have a GMO law to regulate and enhance the management of GMO plant production, as many GMO plants were already grown in the country, while there was nothing in place to regulate the import of GMO products.
"Thailand needs to look at why this law is necessary rather than say 'no' to it, because it would not lead to an influx of GMO products or plants. The NGOs were afraid, as many GMO products were already sold and grown in the country, such as papaya," he said'.

And then there are losers ..., (sections of?) the business sector are upset (Nation, Dec. 19):

'The agricultural business sector and academics have demanded that the government provide a proper explanation to society about its decision this week to shelve the biological safety bill'.

To be continued.

Facts and figures

Back on topic: the latest figures from Cambodia's rice production have been released (Phnom Penh Post, Dec. 8): 

'Cambodia’s total rice production this year will exceed 9.2 million tonnes, according preliminary estimates of rice harvested in 24 provinces and compiled by the Ministry of Agriculture'.

The Phnom Penh Post (Dec. 9) notes how not everything is going well when presenting facts and figures:

'New government estimates on this year’s rice production and forecasts for next year’s crop may be overly optimistic, industry experts say, factoring in the impact of a drought that damaged crops and is expected to carry over into the next dry season harvest.

The Ministry of Agriculture estimated that total rice production during this year’s wet season would top 7.17 million tonnes, edging up less than 1 per cent over last year’s harvest, while the coming dry season would see a 6 per cent drop in year-on-year production to 2.05 million tonnes'.

The Khmer Times has an article (Dec. 7) which emphasizes the need for production costs for Cambodian rice to drop. This as competition for exports is increasing (think Burma, think buyers market). 

As always it's a lot of of gibberish with government officials hoping production costs will go down, quality will go up as will selling prices. 

However, production costs in Cambodia at farm level are similar to the neighbours, it's post-harvest costs and government requirements that are hurting the sector.

Meanwhile there's a slight panic in the quest to export rice to China. From the Khmer Times (Dec. 13) :

'Hean Vanhan, a deputy general director at the ministry, said China had asked Cambodia to evaluate rice exporters to determine whether they adhered to hygiene laws in China because officials in the world’s second largest economy did not trust all of the 71 rice exporters registered with the Ministry of Commerce'.

The end of the rut?

While on the pricing at the start of the month, oryza.com (Dec. 1) quoting Thai sources suggests Thai export prices to lift if the dry conditions in the region and in particular Indonesia  remain.
Similarly Bloomberg mentions (Nov. 27) that due to expectations of lower harvests elsewhere, hoarding on a low level is starting to take place.

However whatever this might be the case, the prediction of rising prices seems to contradict UN's FAO's newest price overview (source) showing prices continuing to be flat. 

Spirits

Fancy winning the rights to buy rotten rice: Thailand has found some winners. Bangkok Post (Dec. 1). No names were published in the article ...

The Bangkok Post notes (Dec. 5) that the government are close to sealing a deal for 1 million tonnes with China: 

'The government is expected to sign a deal soon to sell an additional 1 million tonnes of rice to China'. 

The move comes after that country signed rice and rubber purchase deals with Thailand on Thursday as part of a Thai-Sino railway development agreement. Trains for rice?

The Thai government is in a confident mood so notes the Bangkok Post (Dec. 15)

'Commerce Minister Apiradi Tantraporn said Thailand already exported 9.29 million tonnes worth 148 billion baht as of last Tuesday. The ministry set a target to ship 10 million tonnes this year worth $5.1 billion, but the minister yesterday said actual shipments might reach 10 million tonnes but with a value of $4.85 billion'.

The government view for rice farmers. The Nation (Dec. 15):

'The rice industry must negotiate several risk factors that are pressuring farmers to speed up the development of rice breeds to strengthen the sector in the face of intense competition, especially from other Asian countries, the government says'.

An interesting article from the Nation (Dec. 7) which explores farming and poverty:

'Many rice farmers are facing the old problems of indebtedness and loss of farm owner-|ship despite short-term gains from the former government's rice-pledging scheme, accord-ing to research by a non-government organisation.

Pongtip Samranjit, executive director of Local Action Links, a non-profit think tank researching government policies and farmers' problems, said farmers' quality of life has plunged following the end of the rice-pledging scheme.

Increased indebtedness has led to the loss of farm ownership. Pongtip cited statistics collected by the organisation over the past 10 years that the number of farmers who hold less than six rai have increased, while those having to rent farmland have also risen in the past few years.

Pongtip said past and present government rice price intervention programmes, including the last rice-pledging scheme, offered farmers quick benefits as money would directly go to their pockets. But these were temporary, and never tackled the roots of farmers' problems, namely accumulated debts and loss of farmland'.

As rice  farmers are nearly always price takers, there's little scope that this perpetual movement detrimental to all those farmers will ever change. 
A farmer is always required to pre-finance his or her harvest and only under exceptional circumstances can he / she earn a major percentage of that harvest. 
Ergo, to improve their circumstances or their sustainability, the rural population will seek income elders thereby ensuring that economies of scale can improve while others may retain limited amounts of land for their own sustenance.
Whatever policy the government will develop rent-seeking will undercut whatever the benefits could be directly for farmers.

Slightly odd news. Tuoitrenews.vn has an article on ghost rice (Dec. 8). It describes a variety of rice which loses it's grains very easily. To prevent the rice from free fall, so to say, harvesting takes place at night using blinds and a canoe. And particularly Japan is interested in this rice:

'Dozens of Japanese researchers have visited Vietnam to collect samples of ‘ghost rice’ since 2006, with two of the researchers awarded doctorates based on their theses on the grain.

The Japanese Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology have cooperated with the Mekong Delta Rice Institute in Vietnam for research into ‘ghost rice.’

Japan has no ‘ghost rice,’ and their scientists have been very enthusiastic about studying the wild rice, said Professor and Doctor Nguyen Thi Lang from the Mekong Delta Rice Institute.

Some research groups have visited Vietnam two or three times a year for their study.

“In an email, Japanese researchers showed me that the DNA of the ‘ghost rice’ in Vietnam is quite different from other species of ‘ghost rice’ in the world,” Prof. Lang said.

“And they are very happy about this discovery.”

The study of the genes of Vietnamese ‘ghost rice’ is to prepare for future climate change since the rice variety can adapt well to the natural environment, the academic explained'.

The same source has more on this variety of rice.