Stifled

The Guardian (Oct. 26) has an extensive article on the recently published Golden Rice: The Imperiled Birth of a GMO Superfood by Ed Regis:

'Stifling international regulations have been blamed for delaying the approval of a food that could have helped save millions of lives this century. The claim is made in a new investigation of the controversy surrounding the development of Golden Rice by a team of international scientists.
Golden Rice is a form of normal white rice that has been genetically modified to provide vitamin A to counter blindness and other diseases in children in the developing world. It was developed two decades ago but is still struggling to gain approval in most nations.
“Golden Rice has not been made available to those for whom it was intended in the 20 years since it was created,” states the science writer Ed Regis. “Had it been allowed to grow in these nations, millions of lives would not have been lost to malnutrition, and millions of children would not have gone blind.”
...
“The effects of withholding, delaying or retarding Golden Rice development through overcautious regulation has imposed unconscionable costs in terms of years of sight and lives lost,” Regis concludes.

It looks like a great article in PR and up til now, the publication has received very little critique. It is also totally uncharacteristic of what Guardian normally publishes. Is their more balance?
Especially the claim that millions of lives have not been saved seems to be an exaggeration. Blaming others for the delay seems to bypass the central question. Why is big business so interested in pushing this (as the blame is placed with governments and NGO's)? Not self interest?

In Foreign Policy (Oct. 17), author Ed Regis discusses his own publication and emphasizes:

'This was Golden Rice, the fruit of nine years of research, experimentation, and development. The “gold” was in fact beta carotene, a substance that is converted into vitamin A in the human body. Conventional rice plants already contained beta carotene, but only in their leaves and stems, not in the kernels. Golden Rice also carries the substance in the part of the plant that people eat. This small change made Golden Rice into a miracle of nutrition: The rice could combat vitamin A deficiency in areas of the world where the condition is endemic and could, thereby, “save a million kids a year.”

A review (Oct. 3) from eea - John Hopkins University (the publisher):

'It is also true that Greenpeace had criticized and denounced Golden Rice, mocked and ridiculed it as an unrealistic, impractical, and even a dangerous foodstuff. Over the years since the prototype version was announced, Greenpeace had issued a practically endless stream of press releases, position papers, and miscellaneous other statements about Golden Rice that were filled with factual inaccuracies, distortions, and wild exaggerations of the truth. I learned, however, that none of these diatribes had done anything to stop, slow down, or interfere with the process of Golden Rice research and development, which proceeded at its own steady, albeit deliberate, pace.
Nor was Greenpeace guilty of mass murder or “crimes against humanity.” For even if their accusations against Golden Rice had the effect of retarding its development (which in fact they hadn’t), those accusations were not intended to cause harm, much less death, whereas murder is above all an intentional act'. 

This blog has highlighted much of the what was wrong with Golden Rice:
August 2018 citing GRAIN:

'Aside from its low content, the beta-carotene in Golden Rice also shows degradation. A study in 2017 shows that Golden Rice retains 60% of its original beta-carotene levels after 3 weeks of storage and just 13% after 10 weeks. A researcher notes that after 75 days, one has to eat as much as 32 kgs of cooked Golden Rice just to get the same amount of beta-carotene in a single carrot'.

December 2018 citing GRAIN:

'While these pro-GR groups keep tagging the Golden Rice detractors as ‘vandals’, they also continue to take for granted the realities of hunger that these farmers and the Asian peoples are experiencing on a daily basis. Our countries are blessed with bountiful resources to feed our population, but poverty and social inequalities stop people from procuring safe and nutritious food. Golden Rice will never solve VAD [vitamin A deficiency] and will only strengthen the status quo, benefiting only those interested in controlling our nations’ agricultural sector.

The real crime against humanity is committed by the pro-Golden Rice camp by peddling a GM product that is not tested nor proven to be safe. In fact, this can turn into a situation where the ‘medicine’ is worse than the illness it intends to cure.

Golden Rice is a techno-fix to malnutrition and a corporate ploy to control our agriculture. It is not needed by Asian people nor the world. Indeed, the solution to hunger and malnutrition lies in comprehensive approaches that ensure people have access to diverse sources of nutrition. Securing small farmers’ control over resources such as seed, appropriate technologies, water and land is the real key to improving food production and eradicating hunger and malnutrition'.

May 2017 citing GRAIN:

'A recent study made by scientist in India showed that the derived lines of Golden Rice produced phenotypic abnormality and poor agronomic performance making it unfit for commercial cultivation'.

December 2016:

'Looking at how Nobel prize winners were drawn into declaring their support for genetically modified organisms the oneworld (Nov. 7) article's author comes to some revealing disclosures. 

Though this saga has been highlighted earlier on this site, let's start with part of the article's intro:

'In June this year it hit the newspaper headlines. More than a hundred Nobel laureates call upon Greenpeace to immediately cease their resistance to genetic modification (GM). In specific the environmental organization was blasted for it's campaign against so-called “Golden Rice”, a genetically engineered rice variety 
...
Regulatory barriers for GM-technology should therefore be eased, the letter urges, and calls on “governments of the world“ to make this happen'.

The article reveals 

• That Greenpeace does not "frustrate" the work of IRRI on Golden Rice,
• that Greenpeace were not allowed to defend themselves at a press conference in Washington D.C., being refused entry by a representative of a PR firm who was formerly head of Monsanto's corporate communication,
• the same person also provided public affairs guidance to the Nobel winners,
• the same representative is a fixer between industry and scientists which seek to discredit organic food industry,
• with this in mind there is apparently a target list of well-known / influential GMO doubters,
• that the leader of Nobel Laureates efforts in this cause has a private stake in allowing wider acceptance of GMO's'. 

And we could look further back: November 2014 , May 2014, January 2014 and  October 2013. Just a few postings on the subject. 

More info from Stop Golden Rice Network. 
So there's enough to suggest a more balanced view is required.

Kind
Let's look more at the kingdom's rice issues.

Phnom Penh Post (Oct. 30) takes a look ahead:

'The Cambodia Rice Federation (CRF) has committed to raising the Kingdom’s rice exports to one million tonnes by 2022, its president Song Saran said on Wednesday. 
The comment was made at the Strategic Plan 2020-2023 Consultation Workshop, which was attended by CRF members, ministry representatives, government agencies and international stakeholders.In an effort to attain its goal, the CRF will export 35 per cent of its rice to the Chinese market, 30 per cent each to Europe and Asean countries, and five per cent to other markets said, Saran. 
Of that, luxury fragrant rice will account for 30 per cent of its exports, regular fragrant rice 40 per cent and regular rice 30 per cent, he said'.

Phnom Penh Post (Nov. 5) currently:

'The price of premier jasmine paddy is showing signs of stability as post-monsoon harvest season begins, insiders have said.
The harvest season of Phka Romduol – a variety of Cambodian premium rice – began about a week ago in some provinces such as Pursat, Prey Veng, Svay Rieng and Battambang, and will end late next month or in early January.
Cambodia Rice Federation (CRF) vice-president Chan Sokheang on Tuesday said the price of Phka Romduol is currently between 1,100 and 1,200 riel ($0.27 and $0.30) per kilogramme – a slight increase from last year.To promote rice exports, the CRF has urged all its members to stock up on Phka Romduol paddy, he said, adding that “this kind of paddy is in high demand on the international market”. 
Milled Phka Romduol rice sold on the international market may fetch $880-$900 per tonne, Sokheang said'.

Other marketing aspects. The Phnom Penh Post (Oct. 31):

'Cambodia is campaigning to boost its luxury fragrant rice exports to China, the world’s largest market, said Cambodia Rice Federation (CRF) vice-president Chan Sokheang on Thursday. 
Sokheang told The Post on Thursday that the CRF plans to achieve the quota that China provided Cambodia – 400,000 tonnes of rice per annum. 
The CRF has committed to exporting one million tonnes of rice globally by 2022, with 35 per cent to the Chinese market, of which 30 per cent is luxury fragrant rice, 40 per cent regular fragrant rice and 30 per cent regular rice. 

Sokheang said the federation’s campaign aims to boost fragrant rice exports to China and make up for a decline in exports to Europe'.

Khmer Times (Nov. 15) has more on China: 

'China imported 40 percent more rice from Cambodia from January to October this year over the same period last year, according to government data'.

Award
Across the eastern border, Vietnam is celebrating. Vientnamnews (Nov. 13):

'Việt Nam’s organic rice from Sóc Trăng ST24 was crowned the best in the world at The Rice Trader (TRT) World Rice Conference 2019 in Manila, the Philippines, on Tuesday. 
This is the first time Vietnamese rice has been awarded this title'.

Cambodia has won this a couple of times in the past, it exemplifies how also the Vietnamese are seeking to up their product.
Much to chagrin of Thailand. Bangkok Post (Nov. 18):

'Rice traders are calling on the Ministry of Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives to prioritise the development and improvement of rice varieties after Thailand's signature jasmine rice, Thai Hom Mali, failed to win the World's Best Rice award for a second year.
Vietnam's ST24 rice won this year's award, while Cambodia's premium fragrant rice, Malys Angkor, won the honours in 2018.
Chookiat Ophaswongse, honorary president of Thai Rice Exporters Association, said missing the award twice in a row indicates that their rivals have been continuously working on developing their product'.

Of course for every upside there's a downside. This from Thailand's the Nation (Nov. 5):

'Thai rice is in trouble, with the price of 5 per cent Broken White Rice and sticky rice being very low, Thai Rice Mills Association president Kriangsak Tapananon said. New jasmine rice in the beginning of the season will be earmarked for export, and the old rice will be consumed in Thailand, he added.
...
“In the highly competitive global market, our competitors have chosen to offer lower prices to attract buyers,” he said.
“To tackle this, we need to maybe recheck the whole rice export system,” Kriangsak said. “However, to do this by looking back at the market tendency, quantity, and price direction, the main problem is inevitably the production cost”.
Kriangsak said that to deal with the current market situation, the quantity of rice per rai should be increased to meet market demand, while new markets should be found for all kinds of rice.
It is also questionable whether the government’s policy of providing support only to the production sector including rice farmers is sufficient enough to help the entire rice trading system'.

The Nation (Oct. 23) looks at the overall market prospects for Thai produce:

'Rice exports are expected to reach between 8 million and 8.1 million tonnes this year, falling short of the target of 9 million tonnes, Thai Rice Exporters Association honorary president Chookiat Ophaswongse said this week.
That would make rice exports in 2019 lower than last year by 3.5 million tonnes.
Rice exports during the first nine months totalled 5.9 million tonnes, a reflection of the fierce competition from other countries'.

And then there's this. Nation (Nov. 5):

'Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Chalermchai Sreeon has ordered the Department of Agriculture, the Rice Department and the Department of Agriculture Extension to look for a way to control an outbreak of rice blast disease scourging northeastern provinces.
The article mentions acreages of more than 50,000 ha affected'.

The Nation (Oct. 31) looks at market prospects in the Philippines for Thai rice:

'Keerati Rushchano, an inspector-general at the Commerce Ministry and acting director-general of its Department of Foreign Trade, said this week the Philippines had suspended implementation of an import protection measure that would have adversely affected Thai rice.
...
Thailand exported 543,344 tonnes to the Philippines in the first nine months of 2019, down 297,812 tonnes or 61.65 per cent year-on-year'.

Coconuts (Nov. 12) looks with more detail at the Filipino market for rice (imports?):

'The Philippines is the world’s number one importer of rice, surpassing even China, according to a new report released by the United States’ Department of Agriculture. The USDA-Foreign Agricultural Services (USDA-FAS) report, released on Nov. 8, shows that 3.1 million metric tons of rice were imported by the Philippines this year, compared to China’s 2.5 million metric tons. 
... 
In March this year, the government implemented the Rice Tarrification Law, or Republic Act 11203. The law removed import restrictions, leading to a greater amount of rice bought from overseas flooding the market. This move, according to experts, prompted local rice prices to plunge to PHP38 (US$0.75) per kilogram as of the end of September, 17 percent lower than last year’s price of PHP46 (US$0.90) per kilogram. However, prices failed to hit the government’s promised low of PHP27 (US$0.5o). 
The Philippines is also a major grower of rice, producing some 20 million tons a year, raising questions as to the impact of imports on prices for local growers. 
... 
As of October, the country’s national rice inventory was at 2.28 million metric tons, with some 1.9 million metric tons coming from imports, according to the Bureau of Customs. The share of imports is 43.4 percent higher than the previous year’s record of 1.59 million metric tons, according to the Philippine Daily Inquirer'.

Vientiane Times (Nov. 14) has a look at the people's prospects for rice production:

'The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry yesterday defended its decision to lower the rice production target for 2019, saying it was unavoidable because of the severe flooding that had occurred this year and last.
At the same time, water shortages are currently affecting the north of Laos'.

Pha Khao Lao (Nov. 11) adds:

'Vientiane is continuing to expand irrigation systems with the goal of planting rice on an additional 555 hectares this dry season'.

Bust
Let's look at other crops.

Phnom Penh Post (Nov. 3) cites research that reflects positively on cassave vis-a-vis rice:

'The government and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) have called on farmers to grow cassava as a national policy on cassava production nears finalisation.
A UNDP study on Friday found that investing in cassava can result in higher yields than investing in rice, rice production, livestock, food and beverages, and tourism sectors. Direct revenue growth from the cassava sector is estimated to be about $130 million over 10 years.Speaking at the launch of the report, UNDP project manager Leang Reathmana said there is a growing demand for cassava from world markets – especially China – and the government and the private sector need to invest more in cassava'.

Rubber seems less positive. The Phnom Penh Post (Nov. 17):

'Rubber growers and exporters have expressed concern that prices will continue to fall as Thailand seeks to boost its natural rubber exports, industry insider Men Sopheak said.
In March, the International Tripartite Rubber Council (ITRC), which comprises Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, agreed to reduce rubber exports by about 240,000 tonnes from late in May to late September to buoy local prices, Reuters reported last week.
The three Southeast Asian neighbours, which produce 70 per cent of the world’s natural rubber, ended up slashing exports by 441,648 tonnes during the period.
Thai Minister of Commerce Jurin Laksanawisit told a conference of reporters and rubber growers on Wednesday that Thailand will boost natural rubber exports to increase incomes for the latter following implementation of the four-month curb agreement, Reuters reported'.

Khmer Times (Oct. 28) on cashew:

'Top Planning Japan Co., Ltd last week announced its intention to build a plant in Cambodia to process cashew nuts'.

On a side note there's this. New Mandala (Nov. 1) has an extensive article on Southeast Asia's love of boom to bust cycles in it's agricultural development:

'The transformative capacity of crop booms across Southeast Asia is alarming. Tree-based boom crops alone (e.g. rubber, oil palm, eucalyptus) are estimated to constitute 18% of the landscape in mainland Southeast Asia, a majority of which replaced forest land (Hurni and Fox 2018). The images presented above attest to the monumental landscape changes brought about by crop booms. What follows are extensive environmental problems including deforestation, land degradation, loss of biodiversity, as well as pollution and health risks from agri-chemicals and plastics. In northern Laos and Myanmar, for example, plastics used to protect young watermelon seedlings are burned after harvest, while plastic bags that insulate young banana branches in the winter months are later ploughed into the soil. In both cases, there is no attention to the long-term environmental consequences.
Boom crops also bring irrevocable economic and social changes. The cassava boom in Cambodia, for example, has brought new levels of cash income to some participating households, but contributes to the rising cost of land, food and other consumables. In boom regions, some households gain the capacity to build new houses, send children to school, or invest in agricultural and transport equipment, while others lose out and may enter vicious cycles of household debt and land loss. Thus, smallholder crop booms often exacerbate existing inequalities or create new economic differentiations.
...
... states and development aid organisations often approach booms with optimism, viewing them as potential engines for locally driven development and economic growth. When ‘booms go bust’ due to ecological collapse or market failure, those involved often look for the next crop boom opportunity instead of engaging in long-term planning of more sustainable modes of agricultural production. This level of complexity and the lack of visible, responsible actors makes it difficult to research as well as address the socio-environmental impacts of crop booms'.

Phnom Penh Post (Oct. 29) has additional info on business enabling:

'The Ministry of Commerce has intensified its decentralisation policy and shifted its responsibility for issuing certificates of origin (COs) to provincial commerce departments, it said on Monday.
To promote the Kingdom’s agricultural exports, the ministry announced a pilot launch from November 1 in three border provinces – Takeo, Kampot and Koh Kong. 
In 2017, the ministry authorised the Battambang and Pailin provincial departments of Commerce to issue COs to exporters.
... 
Hun Lak, a director at Longmate Agriculture Co Ltd which is a yellow banana planter and exporter, said provincial CO issuance will facilitate his exports.He said his company exported nearly 120,000 tonnes of yellow bananas to China, Vietnam and Japan in the first nine months of this year.
Longmate Agriculture has invested $32 million in yellow banana cultivation on more than 1,000ha in Kampot’s northwestern Chhouk district. The company is currently implementing the first phase of the project on 400ha'.

Further afield. Vietnamnews (Oct. 30) on coffee:

'As coffee exports dropped in both volume and turnover in the first nine months of this year, the Ministry of Industry and Trade said improving product quality and brand development are key for coffee export growth. 
Coffee exports reached 1.26 million tonnes, valued at US$2.17 billion, down 12.5 per cent ​​in volume and 20.9 per cent in value compared to the same period last year. 
To get Vietnamese coffee into foreign distribution systems, the Ministry of Industry and Trade said it would implement the scheme to help Vietnamese enterprises participate in overseas distribution networks by 2020, aiming to bring Vietnamese coffee directly into foreign markets'.

Thailand's Nation (Nov. 4) on pineapples:

'The Agricultural Research and Development Centre in Phetchaburi province has successfully created a new pineapple breed named “Petchaburi’s Pineapple 2” after 34 years of improvement by evaluating, selecting, comparing, and testing various breeds of pineapple, Department of Agriculture deputy director-general Surmsuk Salakpetch said'.

Suspect
Then let's finish with where we started. Controversy. 
In previous posts I've touched on the subject of the status of paraquat and glyphosate use in the region. As stated, Thailand is in the throes of deciding where to head to.
The Nation (Oct. 19) notes how farmers representatives are raising the stacks of the issue:

'Millions of sugarcane farmers and some academics have voiced opposition to the ban on farm chemicals paraquat and glyphosate, saying the discontinuation of these substances can cost the sugar industry as much as Bt570 billion.
...
The National Hazardous Substances Committee is scheduled to meet on October 27 to decide on whether the use of three toxic farming chemicals -- paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos – should be banned.
The panel set up by the government had proposed to end the use of the three chemicals from December 1, as they are considered to be harmful to people’s health and cause soil contamination'.

But it doesn't seem to help. Nation (Oct. 22):

'Twenty-six members of the Hazardous Substance Committee have reached a verdict to approve a planned ban on three toxic pesticides – Paraquat, Chlorpyrifos and Glyphosate – which are widely used in agriculture, Deputy Prime Minister and Public Health Minister Anutin Charnvirakul posted on his personal Facebook page on Tuesday'.

The discussion also reached Cambodia. The Phnom Penh Post (Oct. 24):

'Thailand edged closer on Tuesday to banning glyphosate and two other controversial pesticides despite protests from farmers in a multibillion-dollar agriculture industry aiming to be the “kitchen of the world”.
The agriculture sector employs 40 per cent of Thailand’s population, and the Southeast Asian country is one of the world’s leading rice and sugar exporters.It is also one of the biggest consumers of pesticides that are currently being banned or phased out in other parts of the globe because of links to a variety of illnesses.Thailand’s National Hazardous Substances Committee voted to ban glyphosate and chemicals paraquat and chlorpyrifos, officials said.
 ...
Vietnam banned all herbicides containing glyphosate soon after the Roundup cases in the US, but the decision was swiftly denounced by the US Secretary of Agriculture, who said it would impact global agricultural production. 
Thailand’s health minister, who has argued that the pesticides put lives at risk, praised Tuesday’s move as “heroic” on his Facebook page, as several dozen farmers protested, citing a rise in production costs. 
“If we don’t have the chemicals to eradicate the weeds, we will have to use more labourers,” said Charat Narunchron of a farmers association in Chanthaburi province, who called the ban “unfair”.Thailand’s Pesticide Alert Network – which has long advocated for the ban – thanked the government, but said it needs to help farmers adjust to other methods'.

The Bangkok Post (Oct. 26) highlights that prices of the to be banned chemicals are going down. 

Even the US is weighing in, not objectively. The Nation (Oct. 25):

'The US has urged Thailand to take scientific evidence into account and weigh the consequences of a ban on the use of glyphosate, a weed-control chemical.
Replying to questions from The Nation on Thailand’s plan to ban three farm chemicals -- paraquat, chlorpyrifos and glyphosate -- US Embassy spokesperson Jillian Bonnardeaux said: “We are aware that letters from the US Department of Agriculture to Royal Thai Government officials are currently circulating in the media in Thailand,” clarifying about news reports that the US government had sent letters to the Thai government urging a review of the ban on glyphosate used to control weeds.
“The United States would expect Thailand, as it would all of our trading partners, to base regulatory measures on scientific evidence and take into account international standards. Should the ban be implemented in Thailand, it will severely impact Thailand’s imports of agricultural commodities such as soybeans and wheat. The ban would negatively impact both Thai farmers and trading partners,” she noted'.

Note, Bangkok Post (Oct. 26):

'Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha on Friday said officials would be assigned to clearly explain Thailand’s position to the US embassy about an official document submitted to the Thai government objecting to the country’s policy of banning three toxic farm chemicals'.

Bangkok Post (Oct. 27):

'US President Donald Trump's decision to suspend $1.3 billion (39.2 billion baht) in trade preferences for Thailand under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) has raised suspicion it is in retaliation for Thailand's ban on the use of herbicide glyphosate'.

And more pressure. Nation (Oct. 26):

'A farmers’ body will appeal to the Central Administrative Court on Monday (October 28) to issue an injunction on the ban of toxic agricultural chemicals – paraquat, chlorpyrifos and glyphosate – which was approved by the unanimous vote of Hazardous Substance Committee on Tuesday.
Sukan Sangwanna, secretary-general of Federation of Safe Agriculture (FSA), said on Saturday that the FSA and representatives of farmers who grow six economic crops including sugarcane, tapioca, oil palm, rubber, corn, and fruits will approach the court seeking a stay.
...
Sukan added that he will submit a letter to Hazardous Substance Committee to question the possible double standard practice of Thailand still importing fruits and vegetables from countries that allow paraquat and glyphosate, including China, Japan and the US. “If we ban these substances in Thailand, we should stop importing products from these countries too, or else domestic products won’t be able to compete due to increased costs.”
Statistics from Department of Agriculture reveal that currently Thailand still has stocks of these three chemicals of nearly 30,000 tonnes, whereas the cost to safely eliminate them is estimated at Bt3 billion'.

But ... The Nation (Oct. 31):

'Agriculture and Cooperatives Minister Chalermchai Sri-on has ordered the ministry’s permanent secretary and subsidiary agencies to speed their search for biochemical and microbial pesticides as substitutes for the newly banned toxic chemicals paraquat, chlorpyrifos and glyphosate'.

Rice farmers are unaffected? Bangkok Post (Nov. 9):

'Rice exporters have thrown their full support behind the ban on three toxic farm chemicals, saying importer countries have tightened their order of crops based on food safety.

Charoen Laothamatas, president of the Thai Rice Exporters Association, said the group agrees with the government's decision to ban paraquat, glyphosate and chlorpyrifos, and has asked farmers to adjust by reducing the use of chemicals.

"Many rice buyers have tightened their measures to protect consumers," Mr Charoen said. "If Thai farmers ignore the ban or do not reduce chemical use, rice exports will be affected."

He said global rice consumption is shifting towards chemical-free products'.

And now the tears. Nation (Nov. 13):

'Dr Kitti Chunhawong, president of Thailand Society of Sugarcane Technologists (TSSCT) insisted on Tuesday (November 12) that the banning of 3 agrochemical substances namely Paraquat, Chlorpyrifos and Glyphosate by the Hazardous Substance Committee, which came into effect last month, will severely affect the sugar industry'.

To be continued ...