Principles Facts on Palm Oil NGO Counterpoints In The News Press Releases Reports Monthly Newsletters
Clarification of the European Commission’s Position on the Renewable Energy Directive
August 2010 – Green Papers: Issue V
The European Renewable Energy Directive has been subject to considerable
‘negotiation’ and gamesmanship. The controversies arise over the use and import of biofuels. What is becoming increasingly clear is the extent and depth of friction between competing interests upon which the Directive impacts. Earlier this year, Environmental NGOs protested that the European Commission was set to define oil palms as forests for the purposes of the Directive. Ultimately, the EC released a Communication which ‘excluded’ oil palms from the de?nition of forests. The reality is that this does not change things. The EC Communication is not binding and does not alter the de?nition of ‘forest’ in the Directive – under which oil palms could qualify. This is just one, and by no means the most important, of the problems being generated by the Directive. It has pitched the widely varying interest of environmental, farm, trade, consumer, renewable energy and transport groups, and the multitude of EC Committees which represent those interests, against each other.
Click here to read the rest of the Green Paper
Caught Red Handed: The Myths, Exaggerations and Distortions of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and Rainforest Action Network
May 2010 – Green Papers: Issue IV
Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Rainforest Action Network are urging a boycott
of use of palm oil — supposedly to protect the environment. However, if they succeed, the environment will be at bigger risk, the livelihoods of millions in Indonesia and Malaysia will be threatened and the poor in Africa and South America will remain stuck in a poverty trap. Greenpeace, FoE, RAN and other environmental non-government organisations threaten to tar the reputation of those who purchase palm oil as against the environment. This is not true. The threat is baseless. They will however act in a way which directly harms the poor. That is a fact. Almost half of Indonesia’s population—over 100 million people —live on less than 2 dollars per day. Over thirty million live below the poverty line. Millions of people in Malaysia and Indonesia rely on income from palm oil to pay their bills, feed their families, put a roof over their heads and build savings.
Click here to read the rest of the Green Paper
Greenmail
May 2010 – Green Papers: Issue III
In a carefully co-ordinated campaign, environmental groups in Europe
and North America are ‘greenmailing’ major companies in Europe and the US to suspend purchase of paper products and palm oil from Indonesian and Chinese producers. Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth in Europe, and Rainforest Action Network (RAN) in the US, have threatened to blacken the standing of luxury goods companies, major retail chains and major producers of grocery products unless they submit to Greenpeace demands. The assertions that these companies endorse serious damage to the environment by purchasing from Indonesian suppliers are spurious. Yet some of the companies — Gucci, Nestle and Unilever — have bowed to threats to damage their brand names and leading branded products. They justify this by the belief that it will preserve their carefully developed reputations as leading practitioners of corporate social responsibility (CSR). In reality, what they have done is adopt the radical Green view of how business should behave. They have broken two golden rules shareholders expect CSR to deliver: protection of core business and high ethical standards.
Click here to read the rest of the Green Paper
Collateral Damage: How the Bogus Campaign Against Palm Oil Harms the Poor
December 2009 – A study by World Growth
The world’s governments have convened in Copenhagen to determine a global
strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is every indication the issue is so thorny that no clear agreement can be reached at Copenhagen. It is likely the parties to the Copenhagen conference will try to identify the areas which can be the basis of a new global strategy and lay down a fresh mandate and program to meet it. Palm oil has been made the ‘poster child’ in this campaign to ensure that any global strategy to reduce greenhouse gases must also cease conversion of forest land to any other purpose. The campaign rests on contentions that it is detrimental to the environment. Some of which are new and rather extreme. The purpose of this report is to examine those contentions, and the leading propositions used to support them, in particular that palm oil is a major driver of change in land use, causes major emissions of greenhouse gases, and that it is the leading threat to the habitat of orang-utan.
Click here to read the entire World Growth Report
Click here to read the Executive Summary
Click here to read the Annex, Rating the Strength of NGO Claims
Palm Oil – The Sustainable Oil
September 2009 – A study by World Growth
There are all the signs that a global campaign 
exists to discredit Palm Oil. This has happened before. Demand for, and consequently production of, palm oil has increased dramatically over the past decade. Palm Oil has a number of advantages over competitor products. When new products have impact on markets, there is a natural process of adjustment. The anti-palm oil campaign has now taken on a new dimension and has been wrapped into part of a broader campaign to restrict emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) by environmental groups and Governments in Europe. Palm oil now is accused of deforestation, reduction of biodiversity, endangering wildlife and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. All of these claims are questionable or at best severely exaggerated. In the process, the vital role palm oil is and can plays in reducing poverty and raising living standards in poor countries is being pushed into the background. The aim of this report is to review the accusations against palm oil and make a reasoned assessment of its impact on sustainability and economic development.