All food systems will continue to be affected by disasters and extreme climate events. Triggered by recent food crises around the world and climate change concerns,some governments have been trying to develop more rob...All food systems will continue to be affected by disasters and extreme climate events. Triggered by recent food crises around the world and climate change concerns,some governments have been trying to develop more robust and resilient food systems. One of the oldest options for many governments is to stockpile emergency food reserves for the purpose of food security and disaster preparedness. In the aftermath of the world food price crises in2007–2008 and 2011, some governments in Asia have been maintaining emergency food reserves to ensure greater supply and price stability. Disasters and extreme climate events help governments to justify emergency food reserves. This research examined emergency food reserve policies in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia.Emergency food reserves emerged as a practice where the shared objectives of development, disaster risk reduction,and climate change adaptation have been demonstrated by governments. The findings suggest that most governments maintain the strong view that adequate emergency food reserves can buffer national food price shocks and shocks from disasters and climate change, and soften disruptions in trade due to export bans during times of disasters and climate emergencies.Under global climate change scenarios, food security is at risk and volatile(Porter et al. 2014). The expected increase in climate extremes has generated anticipatory actions from governments, including a new push for EFR policy adoption. Triggered by recent disasters and climate change concerns, some governments have been trying to develop more robust and resilient food systems(Fan and Brzeska 2014; Porter et al. 2014). For many countries in Asia, this means the renewed adoption of EFR. Unfortunately, we argue that this is not well understood in climate change adaptation studies as well as contemporary disaster studies.The Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN)first initiated a Food Security Reserve Agreement in 1979,with the purpose of meeting emergency requirements(ASEAN 1979). Policymakers have been aware of the susceptibility of the region to natural hazards and the possibility of food shortages. But it took 30 years, until soon after the world food crisis in 2007–2008(Hadley and Fan 2010), for the association plus three additional East Asian nations(China, Japan, South Korea) to establish the ASEAN Plus Three Emergency Rice Reserve(APTERR)in 2009, as a mechanism to address potential food shortages in the region in the light of climate and market uncertainties. The final formal agreement was signed in October 2011 in Jakarta(APTERR 2017).The Association of Southeast Asian Nations also established the ASEAN Food Security Information System(AFSIS) that functions as a central information repository for five commodities—rice, maize, soybeans, sugar, and cassava. AFSIS not only monitors and analyzes production,import, export, inventory stock, price, food security ratio,and self-sufficiency ratio for these commodities but also provides data on losses from both floods and droughts in every member state(Lassa et al. 2016). In theory, AFSIS serves as an early warning mechanism for ASEAN to trigger the activation of APTERR's response mechanism(Saengbangka 2014, personal interview; AFSIS 2017).This article argues that EFR can function as a means of disaster risk reduction, including climate change adaptation, and aims to understand why governments in Asia are readopting emergency food reserves as national policies,with a focus on Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia.We also explore how disasters and climate change strengthen or weaken government narratives in support of emergency food reserves.展开更多
This article indentifies the carbon governance landscape after a complex and large-scale disaster by identifying the formation of new strategic groups and the utilization of resources policies. The article highlights ...This article indentifies the carbon governance landscape after a complex and large-scale disaster by identifying the formation of new strategic groups and the utilization of resources policies. The article highlights the post-disaster context of land use, land-use change, and forestry(LULUCF). In particular it examines the power issue surrounding carbon management in Aceh Province, Indonesia, after the Indian Ocean tsunami(IOT) 2004. The author proposes a new institutional framework, namely the Strategic Framework for Sustainability Analysis(SFSA). The SFSA uses a series of strategic group analyses, combined with strategic resources identification and strategic policy to analyze LULUCF problems. The strategic groups in LULUCF are those that hold the decision-making power to discourage/encourage sustainability of local natural resources. Each group is assumed to reposition itself strategically in order to gain more control over resources. The IOT 2004 has led Aceh to exercise its own sustainability policies, which are set through many initiatives such as a moratorium on logging, a sustainable palm oil policy, livelihood-based carbon conservation projects, and green development policies, including disaster risk reduction.展开更多
基金supported and funded by the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) Singapore during 2013–2015
文摘All food systems will continue to be affected by disasters and extreme climate events. Triggered by recent food crises around the world and climate change concerns,some governments have been trying to develop more robust and resilient food systems. One of the oldest options for many governments is to stockpile emergency food reserves for the purpose of food security and disaster preparedness. In the aftermath of the world food price crises in2007–2008 and 2011, some governments in Asia have been maintaining emergency food reserves to ensure greater supply and price stability. Disasters and extreme climate events help governments to justify emergency food reserves. This research examined emergency food reserve policies in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia.Emergency food reserves emerged as a practice where the shared objectives of development, disaster risk reduction,and climate change adaptation have been demonstrated by governments. The findings suggest that most governments maintain the strong view that adequate emergency food reserves can buffer national food price shocks and shocks from disasters and climate change, and soften disruptions in trade due to export bans during times of disasters and climate emergencies.Under global climate change scenarios, food security is at risk and volatile(Porter et al. 2014). The expected increase in climate extremes has generated anticipatory actions from governments, including a new push for EFR policy adoption. Triggered by recent disasters and climate change concerns, some governments have been trying to develop more robust and resilient food systems(Fan and Brzeska 2014; Porter et al. 2014). For many countries in Asia, this means the renewed adoption of EFR. Unfortunately, we argue that this is not well understood in climate change adaptation studies as well as contemporary disaster studies.The Association of Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN)first initiated a Food Security Reserve Agreement in 1979,with the purpose of meeting emergency requirements(ASEAN 1979). Policymakers have been aware of the susceptibility of the region to natural hazards and the possibility of food shortages. But it took 30 years, until soon after the world food crisis in 2007–2008(Hadley and Fan 2010), for the association plus three additional East Asian nations(China, Japan, South Korea) to establish the ASEAN Plus Three Emergency Rice Reserve(APTERR)in 2009, as a mechanism to address potential food shortages in the region in the light of climate and market uncertainties. The final formal agreement was signed in October 2011 in Jakarta(APTERR 2017).The Association of Southeast Asian Nations also established the ASEAN Food Security Information System(AFSIS) that functions as a central information repository for five commodities—rice, maize, soybeans, sugar, and cassava. AFSIS not only monitors and analyzes production,import, export, inventory stock, price, food security ratio,and self-sufficiency ratio for these commodities but also provides data on losses from both floods and droughts in every member state(Lassa et al. 2016). In theory, AFSIS serves as an early warning mechanism for ASEAN to trigger the activation of APTERR's response mechanism(Saengbangka 2014, personal interview; AFSIS 2017).This article argues that EFR can function as a means of disaster risk reduction, including climate change adaptation, and aims to understand why governments in Asia are readopting emergency food reserves as national policies,with a focus on Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia.We also explore how disasters and climate change strengthen or weaken government narratives in support of emergency food reserves.
文摘This article indentifies the carbon governance landscape after a complex and large-scale disaster by identifying the formation of new strategic groups and the utilization of resources policies. The article highlights the post-disaster context of land use, land-use change, and forestry(LULUCF). In particular it examines the power issue surrounding carbon management in Aceh Province, Indonesia, after the Indian Ocean tsunami(IOT) 2004. The author proposes a new institutional framework, namely the Strategic Framework for Sustainability Analysis(SFSA). The SFSA uses a series of strategic group analyses, combined with strategic resources identification and strategic policy to analyze LULUCF problems. The strategic groups in LULUCF are those that hold the decision-making power to discourage/encourage sustainability of local natural resources. Each group is assumed to reposition itself strategically in order to gain more control over resources. The IOT 2004 has led Aceh to exercise its own sustainability policies, which are set through many initiatives such as a moratorium on logging, a sustainable palm oil policy, livelihood-based carbon conservation projects, and green development policies, including disaster risk reduction.
