My 2-cent thoughts on the above topic.
Diversity, as it sounds, means "richness" just like the bio-D in our flora and fauna. But, our plural mix of ethnics, has not earned its richness, in fact appears as an incurable boil every now and then, depending on the health of our economy, and most important of all, the twists of the political game played by our political masters.
Has any one asked oneself, how come after half century of independence, none of us Malaysians are able to speak the languages of our ethnic counterparts (with the exception of Malay language), when we could have easily mastered them at a very little cost.
It's hard to believe that after staying together in one house for 50 years, the Chinese and Hindi/Tamil languages sound strange to the Malay ears.The tonation of these languages may sound familiar, but most Malays don't have a clue what they meant.This is a sad lost, even using the disguise of nasionalism.
Language is a window into the heart of the culture and civilisation of an ethnic.These languages (Chinese and Hindi/Tamil) are as old as their history much before the rennaisance or modern industrialisation. They are the institutional memories of each culture embedded in the vocabularies and semantics.Yet, we deny our kids of these rich languages when they are there at our door every day.
The role of languages in breaking down prejudice cannot be underrated.Why certain behavioual pattern is prevalent in an ethnic group can be explained if we understood their culture.Biases, misunderstanding and most of all ignorance can be minimised while acceptance and appreciation promotes integration naturally.This can be done by introducing these languages at school with ease and minimal cost as children are fast learners. Inculcating inter-racial understanding at the young age is the best investment towards racial integration in Malaysia.
Diversity in ethnicities/culture and languages is our unique asset to spread our wings to the east and west of the globe. Each of the languages has its own market. In total, they command a sizeable market - worth more than the English-speaking market at least in terms of the number of the population. But most of all, it opens our hearts and minds to our neigbours with minimal prejudice. Open up those windows.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Friday, December 4, 2009
Turning a New Leaf for Malaysian Agriculture Policy: Goods from the Food Balance of Trade Plan Experience
The National Agricultural Policy III (NAP III, 1998-2010) soon expires, next year. Turning a new leaf for the agriculture sector in the current landscape, is indeed a formidable task. Malaysia has had three NAPs since 1992, but the sector has not delivered much with the exception of few sectors such as palm oil and selected food commodities. While one may claim the “pull” of the industries was largely responsible for the slow growth of the sector, but it is the “policy” that steered the direction of the resources and hence the overall performance.
NAP III has been hailed as the most comprehensive agricultural policy Malaysia has ever invented (compared to NAPs I and II). Its vision and strategies were progressive, detail and have all the ingredients of a good policy document. Under the Ninth Malaysia Plan, the sector was a given a new lease of emphasis with bigger investment and focus. What then causes the gap between the desired and actual achievement?
NAP III: Good policy, so-so results…
If the policy is good, but the achievement has been dismal, the gap lies between the targets and the achievement rates and the causes are in the middle, i.e., delivery of the “development packages”. The importance of the “delivery” is well recognised as it is one of the major strategic thrusts of the agriculture policy in the Ninth Malaysia Plan. But how the “delivery” should be implemented, monitored and hence continuous improvement methods required, were not identified. This could be a good cue for lessons in the next NAP; i.e., the need for stringent project monitoring and reinventing.
The targets may appear good, but it may be over/ under targeted, unrealistic, made with the wrong premise and not supported with sound empirical analyses. A reasonable target may hit the achievement rates with minimum variances . Has this been the case of NAP III? No analysis has been made on the sectoral basis as data is limited and unreliable.
BoT plan: Good foresight but bad estimates…..
However, one case is clear is the food balance of trade plan (a.k.a. BoT Plan) which was muted in 2001 appears to have these symptoms, good foresight, correct vision but overestimated targets, limited resource allocation and underperformed development packages. The original target of achieving RM1.2 bn of food surplus in 2010 is in shark contrast of the reality, a whooping of RM10bn deficit in 2008. The achieved results are in opposite sign of the target.
Analysis of the BoT Plan carried out by the Institut Kajian Dasar Pertanian dan Makanan reaffirms the above contention. That is, the plan was far-sighted in its vision to foresee the need to be competitive in food but the rest (targets, strategies, required investments and projects) were commendable in figures, but not translatable to reality due to gaps in “what is” and “what should be” and “what could have been”.
The plan was comprehensive covering 1,802 commodities at their 9 SITC digit levels and specific programmes and their costs were estimated carefully to steer the sectors towards the targets which are either surpluses or deficits (widening and narrowing) depending on the assumptions made about a particular industry.
The study indicates that the wrongs of the plan lie not in its vision but it’s in the methodology of calculation and premises of the assumptions. The targets were overestimated, beyond the capability of the sectors. The resources allotted to the sector were not delivered in the right amount, time and kind.
Surpluses/deficits are consequences…not “real” industries.
However, the major critique of the plan is that the chosen core focus of the plan, i.e., achieving surpluses in the balance of trade, which are the “consequences” of the net exports/imports. Surpluses/deficits are mere figures, being the differences of exports and imports. The real industries are the export and import sectors and not the balance of trade. If the plan had focused on the export and import sectors, it would have produced different results. The BoT Plan is one example where a good policy turns bad because of wrong focus and assumptions.
Nevertheless the study indicates lots of potentials in the Malaysian food sector. The 2008 food crisis opened up the truth about food situation in the world. That is, as mentioned by many renowned international agencies, when come to food, the fundamentals are always good particularly on the demand side. With economic growth, population and income increase, the demand for food will be in on the rising curves.
In the long term, demand for food may outstrip supply….
It is on the supply side, the picture is likely to be gloomy with threats of climate change, resource depletion (land water) and most startling of all, years of neglect and underinvestment in agriculture in developing countries (including Malaysia). In the long term, food demand may outstrip supply. Hence, the BoT plan was correct in anticipating the importance of food in the future.
It is true that Malaysia does not have the economic advantage in food production, but to generalize it for all food items is a fallacy. The study shows that Malaysia has achieved growth in a number of food industries such as high value vegetables, fish based products, poultry meats, cocoa-based products and processed food. These industries require supports from the government in order to grow.
There are goods come out from the BoT Plan experience for the next agriculture policy. At least, the mistakes will not be repeated and policy targets must be based on empirical studies to minimise errors and variances.
However, there are bigger issues at hand. The crisis in 2008 was apocalyptic as it revealed the factors that lead to the slow growth of growth in food and agriculture in the developing countries and most important of all, the future challenges. Under investment in agriculture should not be viewed lightly as in Malaysia, its impacts are showing such as slow growth, limited innovation, low productivity, failure to capitalize the country’s richness in biodiversity and downstream sector has not moved very much. After the 1960s’ Green Revolution, no new cycle of technological revolution reinvented. Sustainability issue has been addressed adequately in NAP III but need to be revamped in the light of new developments such as diversion of food for fuel or energy purposes, the damaging effects of FST (fertilizer and seed technology) on soil, climate change and the growing emphasis on food safety, traceability and ethics in food production.
Nature is the formidable and unpredictable force in the supply equation…
The instability in world agriculture is here to stay as nature is the formidable and unpredictable force in the supply equation while food demand will never stop increasing. Hence, food security is a necessity in a growing uncertainty of the world food supply. Risk management is also required to hedge the small producers and poor consumers against adverse market situation.
The other equally important themes that the new agriculture policy has to take into account are: generation of new technology, extension services for technology transfer, input management, incentives for agriculture, investment and institutional structure. Besides, it pays to do empirical analysis to align the “what is” and “what should be” and to ensure with conviction what are and not needed for a sector. In an era where information and knowledge rule, a good data base for Malaysian agriculture is long overdue to help decision makers to make decision with maximum impact.
(An excerpt from the editorial of OPTIONS (Jan.09) www.ikdpm.upm.edu.my)
NAP III has been hailed as the most comprehensive agricultural policy Malaysia has ever invented (compared to NAPs I and II). Its vision and strategies were progressive, detail and have all the ingredients of a good policy document. Under the Ninth Malaysia Plan, the sector was a given a new lease of emphasis with bigger investment and focus. What then causes the gap between the desired and actual achievement?
NAP III: Good policy, so-so results…
If the policy is good, but the achievement has been dismal, the gap lies between the targets and the achievement rates and the causes are in the middle, i.e., delivery of the “development packages”. The importance of the “delivery” is well recognised as it is one of the major strategic thrusts of the agriculture policy in the Ninth Malaysia Plan. But how the “delivery” should be implemented, monitored and hence continuous improvement methods required, were not identified. This could be a good cue for lessons in the next NAP; i.e., the need for stringent project monitoring and reinventing.
The targets may appear good, but it may be over/ under targeted, unrealistic, made with the wrong premise and not supported with sound empirical analyses. A reasonable target may hit the achievement rates with minimum variances . Has this been the case of NAP III? No analysis has been made on the sectoral basis as data is limited and unreliable.
BoT plan: Good foresight but bad estimates…..
However, one case is clear is the food balance of trade plan (a.k.a. BoT Plan) which was muted in 2001 appears to have these symptoms, good foresight, correct vision but overestimated targets, limited resource allocation and underperformed development packages. The original target of achieving RM1.2 bn of food surplus in 2010 is in shark contrast of the reality, a whooping of RM10bn deficit in 2008. The achieved results are in opposite sign of the target.
Analysis of the BoT Plan carried out by the Institut Kajian Dasar Pertanian dan Makanan reaffirms the above contention. That is, the plan was far-sighted in its vision to foresee the need to be competitive in food but the rest (targets, strategies, required investments and projects) were commendable in figures, but not translatable to reality due to gaps in “what is” and “what should be” and “what could have been”.
The plan was comprehensive covering 1,802 commodities at their 9 SITC digit levels and specific programmes and their costs were estimated carefully to steer the sectors towards the targets which are either surpluses or deficits (widening and narrowing) depending on the assumptions made about a particular industry.
The study indicates that the wrongs of the plan lie not in its vision but it’s in the methodology of calculation and premises of the assumptions. The targets were overestimated, beyond the capability of the sectors. The resources allotted to the sector were not delivered in the right amount, time and kind.
Surpluses/deficits are consequences…not “real” industries.
However, the major critique of the plan is that the chosen core focus of the plan, i.e., achieving surpluses in the balance of trade, which are the “consequences” of the net exports/imports. Surpluses/deficits are mere figures, being the differences of exports and imports. The real industries are the export and import sectors and not the balance of trade. If the plan had focused on the export and import sectors, it would have produced different results. The BoT Plan is one example where a good policy turns bad because of wrong focus and assumptions.
Nevertheless the study indicates lots of potentials in the Malaysian food sector. The 2008 food crisis opened up the truth about food situation in the world. That is, as mentioned by many renowned international agencies, when come to food, the fundamentals are always good particularly on the demand side. With economic growth, population and income increase, the demand for food will be in on the rising curves.
In the long term, demand for food may outstrip supply….
It is on the supply side, the picture is likely to be gloomy with threats of climate change, resource depletion (land water) and most startling of all, years of neglect and underinvestment in agriculture in developing countries (including Malaysia). In the long term, food demand may outstrip supply. Hence, the BoT plan was correct in anticipating the importance of food in the future.
It is true that Malaysia does not have the economic advantage in food production, but to generalize it for all food items is a fallacy. The study shows that Malaysia has achieved growth in a number of food industries such as high value vegetables, fish based products, poultry meats, cocoa-based products and processed food. These industries require supports from the government in order to grow.
There are goods come out from the BoT Plan experience for the next agriculture policy. At least, the mistakes will not be repeated and policy targets must be based on empirical studies to minimise errors and variances.
However, there are bigger issues at hand. The crisis in 2008 was apocalyptic as it revealed the factors that lead to the slow growth of growth in food and agriculture in the developing countries and most important of all, the future challenges. Under investment in agriculture should not be viewed lightly as in Malaysia, its impacts are showing such as slow growth, limited innovation, low productivity, failure to capitalize the country’s richness in biodiversity and downstream sector has not moved very much. After the 1960s’ Green Revolution, no new cycle of technological revolution reinvented. Sustainability issue has been addressed adequately in NAP III but need to be revamped in the light of new developments such as diversion of food for fuel or energy purposes, the damaging effects of FST (fertilizer and seed technology) on soil, climate change and the growing emphasis on food safety, traceability and ethics in food production.
Nature is the formidable and unpredictable force in the supply equation…
The instability in world agriculture is here to stay as nature is the formidable and unpredictable force in the supply equation while food demand will never stop increasing. Hence, food security is a necessity in a growing uncertainty of the world food supply. Risk management is also required to hedge the small producers and poor consumers against adverse market situation.
The other equally important themes that the new agriculture policy has to take into account are: generation of new technology, extension services for technology transfer, input management, incentives for agriculture, investment and institutional structure. Besides, it pays to do empirical analysis to align the “what is” and “what should be” and to ensure with conviction what are and not needed for a sector. In an era where information and knowledge rule, a good data base for Malaysian agriculture is long overdue to help decision makers to make decision with maximum impact.
(An excerpt from the editorial of OPTIONS (Jan.09) www.ikdpm.upm.edu.my)
Pantun kasih untuk sang pencinta
Lydia Iryani, anakanda rakan karib saya menjejaki alam rumah tangga baru-baru ini. Maka saya hadiahkan beberapa pantun kasih kepadanya.
Kepada Emmy Farha dan Erwan yang mendirikan rumah tangga (pada 12 Dis. 2009), pantun ini juga untuk anda berdua.
Kepada sang pencinta yang ingin terus mimpi dalam lamunan, hayati ungkapan pembayang-pemaksud ini.
Rumah kecil tiang seribu;
Rumah besar tiang sebatang;
Kecil-kecil ditimang ibu;
Kala besar ditimang gelombang...
Entahlah ayah entahlah ibu;
Tempat bermanja tempat bergantung;
Kalahlah hati kalahlah kalbu;
Demi cinta laut kuharung.
Gelombang alun dari samudra;
Ombak datang bersama badai;
Hidup dilamun cinta gelora;
Membina harapan tanpa berandai.
Jika takut ombak melanda;
Jangan berumah di tepi pantai;
Jika tidak kerana cinta;
Masakan berani membina mahligai.
Malam indah malam berawan;
Bintang berkelip menyeri bulan;
Kasih ku bawa bekal jalanan;
Mencari erti kehidupan.
Apa dikesal hujan mendatang;
Sungai masih mengalir ke laut;
Apa kisah cela orang;
Hati kami sudah berpaut.
Ditiup bayu kami terlena;
Mimpi indah penuh di dada;
Cinta abadi kami bina;
Dengan restu ayah bonda.
Bila ombak bertemu pantai;
Bayu mendayu angin menyapa;
Bila cinta sudah sampai;
Malam siang hampir terlupa.
Malam siang hampir terlupa;
Senja tetap berganti pagi;
Kami hanya insan biasa;
Mohon restu cinta kami.
Tapi, pantun ini merumus segalanya ===>
Bayu pantai mendayu selasih;
Mainan rindu anak nelayan;
Betapa tinggi ombak kasih;
Tinggilah lagi badai kehidupan...
Kepada Emmy Farha dan Erwan yang mendirikan rumah tangga (pada 12 Dis. 2009), pantun ini juga untuk anda berdua.
Kepada sang pencinta yang ingin terus mimpi dalam lamunan, hayati ungkapan pembayang-pemaksud ini.
Rumah kecil tiang seribu;
Rumah besar tiang sebatang;
Kecil-kecil ditimang ibu;
Kala besar ditimang gelombang...
Entahlah ayah entahlah ibu;
Tempat bermanja tempat bergantung;
Kalahlah hati kalahlah kalbu;
Demi cinta laut kuharung.
Gelombang alun dari samudra;
Ombak datang bersama badai;
Hidup dilamun cinta gelora;
Membina harapan tanpa berandai.
Jika takut ombak melanda;
Jangan berumah di tepi pantai;
Jika tidak kerana cinta;
Masakan berani membina mahligai.
Malam indah malam berawan;
Bintang berkelip menyeri bulan;
Kasih ku bawa bekal jalanan;
Mencari erti kehidupan.
Apa dikesal hujan mendatang;
Sungai masih mengalir ke laut;
Apa kisah cela orang;
Hati kami sudah berpaut.
Ditiup bayu kami terlena;
Mimpi indah penuh di dada;
Cinta abadi kami bina;
Dengan restu ayah bonda.
Bila ombak bertemu pantai;
Bayu mendayu angin menyapa;
Bila cinta sudah sampai;
Malam siang hampir terlupa.
Malam siang hampir terlupa;
Senja tetap berganti pagi;
Kami hanya insan biasa;
Mohon restu cinta kami.
Tapi, pantun ini merumus segalanya ===>
Bayu pantai mendayu selasih;
Mainan rindu anak nelayan;
Betapa tinggi ombak kasih;
Tinggilah lagi badai kehidupan...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
