Ten years ago, a drive through Northeast Thailand would mean bumpy
roads, few cars, and gorgeous views of rice patties into the horizon.
That same trip today gives a different view - dense rubber tree
plantations.
For years Northeast Thailand has been the poorest region, and focused
primarily on rice farming. In the South rubber plantations were already
common place. The difference between the two regions was that rubber
plantations were profitable in the South, but did not make sense in the
Northeast. This changed when carbon programs were introduced in the
area. It has now became profitable to convert agricultural land to
rubber tree plantations because the carbon stored in the trees will
receive payments.
International agricultural is already skewed towards developed
countries because of the existing subsidies and capital. Adding in the
carbon credits as a further incentive to not cultivate land exacerbates
the problem. While carbon credits seem like a good source of income
initially, the land owners are subject to volatile credit markets, lack
of choices, and their participation in the program reduces the supply of food internationally.
This is a specific problem for rice production because Thailand is the largest exporter of rice in the world! This means that the supply of rice is going to drop significantly,
affecting both rice consumption and prices internationally. If carbon
credits become very profitable and lucrative, this trend could transfer
to other countries lowering the supply of food even more.
Ultimately, there are two ways to consider a carbon program - a micro
view and a macro view. The micro view looks at the decisions made by the
businesses purchasing the permits and the farmers selling them.
Businesses would never purchase the permits unless mandated by the
government, but farmers are more than willing to sell the permits as
long as the price is right. It is essentially a transfer of revenue from
one country to the other. The macro view tells another story - most
scientists believe that climate change is occurring and that steps must
be taken to mitigate it. For this end, carbon credits serve their
purpose by acting as a sink for carbon removing greenhouse gasses from
the atmosphere. However, no one has looked at the potential damage that
may be caused by the reduced amount of food production in the world.
Hunger is already a world problem, and enacting economic policy to
reduce food production will not help.
This type of policy will have the same effect that ethanol production
had on the corn market years ago. In this scenario the increased demand
for ethanol increased the price of corn substantially. This increase in
price made it impossible for poor Mexican families to obtain their
primary food source. This problem could be corrected by simply removing a
subsidy and reducing demand for corn. The problem with carbon credits
is the decision to invest in long term rubber tree plantations cannot be
reversed as quickly as a subsidy. We may see rising food prices well
into the future.