Nature has no bank account

On ecosystem services and the moral gap

Patching up the economy by adding on ecosystem services does not make the economy sustainable but it makes it more efficient: you can more efficiently destroy nature. This is a “patch it up” approach. We should not look at ecological systems through the lens of economics. We need some institutions and moral social pressure to consume less rather than more. It may take this generation to consume less; especially the rich people of this generation. All the prices set by the ecosystem services approach is income to somebody. But nature has no bank account.

Source: Norgaard, Richard B. 2013. Ecological Economics and Energy Economics in Historical Context, Spring 2013, Lecture 17: Ecosystem Services - Neoliberal economic thinking invades conservation, biology and ecology. University of California, Berkeley: Unversity of California.

Richard Norgaard, professor of energy and resources; http://blogs.berkeley.edu/author/rnorgaard/
.................
 
Separate, but related is this... Occupy was right: capitalism has failed the world
One of the slogans of the 2011 Occupy protests was 'capitalism isn't working'. Now, in an epic, groundbreaking new book, French economist Thomas Piketty explains why they're right; http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/13/occupy-right-capitalism-failed-world-french-economist-thomas-piketty

............................
Interesting that neo-liberal hegemony says we should now seriously tackle the energy sector!

IPCC climate change report: averting catastrophe is eminently affordable; http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/13/averting-climate-change-catastrophe-is-affordable-says-ipcc-report-un; Landmark UN analysis concludes global roll-out of clean energy would shave only a tiny fraction off economic growth... The new IPCC report warns that carbon emissions have soared in the last decade and are now growing at almost double the previous rate. But its comprehensive ­analysis found rapid action can still limit global warming to 2C, the internationally agreed safe limit, if low-carbon energy triples or quadruples by 2050... “It is actually affordable to do it and people are not going to have to sacrifice their aspirations about improved standards of living,” said Professor Jim Skea, an energy expert at Imperial College London and co-chair of the IPCC report team. “It is not a hair shirt change of lifestyle at all that is being envisaged and there is space for poorer countries to develop too,” Skea told the Guardian.... Nonetheless, to avoid the worst impacts of climate change at the lowest cost, the report envisages an energy revolution ending centuries of dominance by fossil fuels – which will require significant political and commercial change. On Thursday, Archbishop Desmond Tutu called for an anti-apartheid style campaign against ­fossil fuel companies, which he blames for the “injustice” of climate change... Biofuels, used in cars or power stations, could play a “critical role” in cutting emissions, the IPCC found, but it said the negative effects of some biofuels on food prices and wildlife remained unresolved... Kaisa Kosonen, at Greenpeace International, said: “Renewable energy is unstoppable. It’s becoming bigger, better and cheaper every day. Dirty energy industries are sure to put up a fight but it’s only a question of time before public pressure and economics dictate that they either change or go out of business...

Khaw family in Thailand

Discovering some grand distant and past relatives. Had the first inkling on some past sugar barons on Province Wellesley; http://khoryuleng.blogspot.com/2014/03/early-c19th-sugar-cultivation-in.html and then mentioned it to some friends in academia. See below.

7 April 2014: I checked with Michael Montesano, expert on Thailand. A remarkable coincidence. He is working on a book project that addresses the place of the Khaw family in Thai historiography. They are linked to the Wellesley sugar barons and also to the current Thai finance minister, Kittiratt Na-Ranong.

6 April 2014: I was chatting with Tony Milner about this little history snippet, and he thought of a famous Khaw family in that part of the world. Are they related? Here's some links courtesy of Tony:

• Cambridge Journals Online - Journal of Southeast Asian Studies - Abstract - The Khaw Group: Chinese Business in Early Twentieth-century Penang; http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=A42D1158CEA2E6A7B6693B25685EDFCF.journals?fromPage=online&aid=4441212
• http://penangmonthly.com/khaw-sim-bee-and-the-na-ranong-family-a-shared-history-of-malaysia-penang-and-southern-thailand/
• http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/483673
• http://books.google.com.au/books?id=xrrsESoNpfAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Profit, Power & Politics: Malaysia palm oil in the global and local political-economy (drafting in final stage)

Just to get myself more focused for the next two weeks of heavy duty work on book drafting, I've put together the new working title and chapter plan. This will be based on my work and contacts (mostly non-attributed interviews & public info only) as a research consultant in the palm oil industry in SE Asia. This will include material written up in Khor Reports' Palm Oil e-newsletter and blog. This book draft has been sponsored by ISEAS where I was Visiting Research Fellow for 2013. 

 

Rumours on China investment in Kuantan Port

Thanks to reader sending alert on rumour in social media. Question on China investment in Kuantan Port?

 

This reads: "behind the scenes story: Chinese investors decide to cancel Kuantan Industrial Park investment plans." Underneath is the caption of an old picture showing PM Najib and CPPCC committee chairman Jia Qinglin viewing the Kuantan park model (and no useful info on sources...). 

Political Economy of Felda and GE13

I recently submitted to Kajian Malaysia the final paper. Was aided by my research associate Vasiliki Mavroeidi.  

 

 



 

THE POLITICAL TUSSLE OVER FELDA LAND SCHEMES – UMNO STRENGTHENS ITS MALAY RURAL FORTRESS IN GE13

 

Khor Yu Leng
Segi Enam Advisors Pte Ltd, Singapore
Email: khorreports[at]gmail.com

 

Abstract
This paper is about the political economy of FELDA and its important place in the electoral politics of the 13th General Election held on 5 May 2013. In a heavily contested election, the ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional has held on to power by winning by a 22-seat majority, despite its worst performance with the loss of the national popular vote and questions about irregularities.  However, the hope of Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition coalition, to make inroads in BN’s proverbial FELDA “fortress” vote bank was disappointed. Instead, there were swings toward BN. Winning FELDA areas is important to building up its rural base, in order to win enough seats to govern. In the midst of urban rejection, UMNO has retained stronger control in key rural areas, turfing out and keeping out the opposition coalition from its FELDA stronghold, with Mazlan Aliman of PAS reporting on the difficulties of reaching FELDA women voters and in allaying rural voter fears about DAP Chinese rule. In FELDA settlement areas the ruling coalition is seen to have preferential access by way of its links with FELDA’s administration. The windfall from the FELDA Global public listing seems to have been an important boon. However, there are interesting regional differences, notably between Pahang and Johore. Here, the parallels between oil palm replanting economic decision-making and voting behaviour of FELDA settlers is intriguing. Efforts to lure the FELDA youth vote seems to have been flummoxed with so-called money politics, including the offer of new lands for homes for younger voters. At the same time, UMNO-BN may want to repeat its FELDA electoral success by performing IPO “encores” to generate financial bonuses with two other key land development agencies – FELCRA and RISDA. Combined with FELDA, these three agencies may have control and influence of up to 19% of Malaysia’s voters.

Keywords: FELDA, palm oil, rural development, political economy, electoral politics

Heterodox view on free trade

Thanks to Vasiliki to pointing out work of Professor Ha-Joon Chang.

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/ha-joon-chang-23-things-capitalism-review/#.UzTd6GfNtLM: He points out that Britain, the first country to industrialise, as well as the US, Germany and Japan, all became leading industrial powers by various forms of protectionism—only to adopt and preach free trade when they were confident that their carefully nurtured industries could prevail over foreign competition. “Most of the rich countries did not use such policies when they were developing countries themselves, while these policies have slowed down growth and increased income inequality in the developing countries in the last three decades. Few countries have become rich through free-trade, free-market policies and few ever will.”... The idea that small entrepreneurs are the source of modern economic growth is another neoliberal myth of the 1990s that Chang rebuts. Poor countries have far more self-employed people than rich ones. “The collective ability to build and manage effective organizations and institutions is now far more important than the drives or even the talents of a nation’s individual members in determining its prosperity.”.... Chang hopes to return a field dominated until recently by the narrow schools of New Classicism and New -Keynesianism to its origins in historically informed and context-sensitive “political economy.” But that may be too much to hope for. The great depression of the 1930s was far more severe than the great recession of the present is likely to be, and yet the pre-Keynesian economics that failed both to anticipate and to ameliorate that depression not only survived the 1930s but -triumphed in the universities and policies of the last quarter of the 20th century. While the guild of academic economists may continue to ignore maverick economic thinkers like Chang, the future of the world economy may depend on whether the rest of us pay attention....

http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/ha-joon-chang-protectionism-free-trade/#.UzTd4WfNtLM: Moreover, the “1930s: never again” story assumes that protectionism is always bad. But this is not true either. Unlike in finance, where things can be speedily re-arranged, the real economy takes time to adjust. Producers must build new factories, and invest in new technologies. Workers must acquire new skills and find new jobs. When big adjustments are needed, temporary protectionism helps to create the breathing space for companies and workers to reinvent themselves.... There are other good reasons to consider limited measures to protect domestic economies. Textbook trade theory says that making countries more and more specialised is an unquestionable good. But this isn’t always true. Britain, for instance, probably over-specialised in finance over the last few decades, while neglecting manufacturing. The international division of labour should be balanced against the need for a broadly based economy, capable of protecting countries and their people against shocks to a particular industry. Voters in advanced countries, meanwhile, might well be willing to swap a little more job stability for slightly more expensive goods in their shops..... Such mild protectionism can be explicitly time limited. Indeed, evidence after the 1970s oil shocks shows that countries like Japan and Sweden that had specific and time-bound protectionism bounced back more quickly than others, like the US, where measures were hidden but more pervasive. The danger today is that we will pretend to believe in free trade, while practising protectionism by other names—just recall Peter Mandelson’s £2.5bn auto industry rescue: “not a bailout,” he said, but a “greening” initiative.... The reality is that free trade has never worked very well, especially for developing countries, but it is going to malfunction even more in the coming years. Rather than trying to nurse this ailing sacred cow back to health, we should slaughter it—and concentrate our energy on designing a new system of international trade that pragmatically mixes free trade and protectionism....

Khor Reports talk on palm oil industry of Indonesia and Malaysia

I am giving a talk to a group of senior executives from Europe. Outline of talk is shown in photo above. Morning of 27 March 2014, Penang.