This is why we can’t have rice things


Lim Chee Han

Malaysia has a rice self-sufficiency of 62.6%, making it a net importer and vulnerable to global market disruptions. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, April 22, 2024.

IMAGINE having “ubi kayu” instead of rice in your nasi lemak breakfast, which seemed to be what Dewan Rakyat Speaker Johari Abdul was suggesting when he said to replace the grain with tapioca until the local rice shortage problem is resolved.

The suggestion immediately drew the criticism that the government was running out of ideas to overcome the problem.

Some even joked that Malaysia had moved back in time into the dark period of the Japanese occupation, when tapioca was the often the only available staple.

The average Malaysian consumes about 80kg of rice per year, which is considered a lot, although there are countries in our region that consume even more rice than we do.

However, the difference is that some countries, such as Thailand and Vietnam, are large rice producers and exporters, with self-sufficiency levels of 196% and 124%, respectively, in 2016.

Malaysia had a rice self-sufficiency of 62.6% in 2022, making it a net importer and vulnerable to global market disruptions, such as India’s rice export restrictions last July.

The Agriculture and Food Security Ministry has urged for a 100% rice self-sufficiency to prevent supply disruptions.

While Malaysia could still import rice from other countries, the price per tonne of imported white rice rose from RM2,350 to RM3,200 when global prices spiked in September last year.

Although Bernas revised the price to RM3,000 per tonne last month, the price is still a shock, causing such a rush for cheaper local rice that supply ran out.

The effects are still being felt today as many supermarkets are limiting the amount of domestic rice each person can buy.

The habit of eating rice is not easy to break; 97% of Malaysians consume rice on a daily basis.

While rice remains the biggest source of calories for Malaysians, its share of the total calorie supply has steadily declined to 26% since the 1960s. This shows that people have other food choices, and it is not hard to imagine alternatives.

Two popular options are bread and noodles, both of which are made of flour, of which Malaysia is a net importer!

Johari was wise to point to a food source that could be grown in Malaysia, but it would be hard to persuade the people to switch to tapioca, for which there are a limited range of recipes. For the most part, Malaysians do not eat tubers as a staple like the Europeans.

Fortunately, Johari does not represent the Agriculture and Food Security Ministry. He also did not suggest a more expensive alternative such as quinoa. But he did encourage people to grow potatoes and alternative food sources on “abandoned plots of land”. He urged state governments to “open the doors” for people to do so. It is unclear what he meant by “abandoned plots of land”; would any undeveloped parcel of virgin or secondary forest land be considered “abandoned”? What about private land owned by developers whose projects have stalled?

What appears to be “abandoned land” in the eyes of the public can have serious implications for the owner, even if they are for such a good cause as tapioca farms.

It is inappropriate for Johari to encourage people to grow tapioca just because the surplus can be exported to China. Johari has diverted from the purpose of self-sufficiency into raising a cash crop.

Although the 11th Malaysia Plan does aim to increase rice self-sufficiency to 75% by next year, Johari and the government should realise that the problem goes far beyond increasing yields.

With more land being acquired for the development of industries other than for agriculture, padi farmers may be under threat and unable to expand production.

In addition, the rice production and distribution sector is heavily controlled by government agencies such as Bernas, often to the detriment of the farmers.

It was only in October that the floor price for padi was raised to RM1,300 per tonne. Before that, the price had been fixed at RM1,200 rate since 2014.

To qualify for government subsidies, padi farmers have to meet conditions relating to cultivation, sale, and distribution. They are only allowed to grow approved seeds, which they are required to purchase.

It is difficult for local padi farmers to stay profitable without government aid. Does the government really expect more to become farmers to meet its self-sufficiency targets? – April 22, 2024.

* Lim Chee Han is a founding member of Agora Society and a policy researcher. He holds a PhD in infection biology from Hannover Medical School, Germany, and an MSc in immunology and BSc in biotechnology from Imperial College London. Health and socioeconomic policies are his concerns. He believes a nation can advance significantly if policymaking and research are taken seriously.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments