[MUSIC] [SPEAKER 1] In this conversation, we speak to Laszlo Máthé, Principal Sustainability Manager for NBPOL which produces palm oil,  sugar, beef and copra, in Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. Laszlo has experience developing sustainability standards such as Forest Stewardship Council and the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. He has also worked as a lead auditor, primarily for RSPO and FSC. In Laszlo's current job, he applies sustainability standards such as the Rainforest Alliance and RSPO. Thank you for talking to us, Laszlo. I'd like to start by asking you what your vision of a sustainable food system is? [SPEAKER 2] Thank you very much for the, for the opportunity. I have to confess that I might not be able to answer that question. I'm mainly involved in the upstream production part of, I guess what you referred to as food systems. So in your introduction you mentioned palm oil, sugarcane and beef. So I work for a company which is producing these three commodities in, in Papua New Guinea. And my day-to-day work focuses on ensuring that we are compliant with all the legal, but also voluntary sustainability requirements. So that includes environmental requirements, biodiversity requirements,  health and safety and social aspects of our production. So, to give you sort of a, I guess a very general answer, obviously, we are, we are working towards reducing our environment impacts, maintaining our conservation areas, employing people and and offering a health, a safe work environment for them. And also complying with various requirements that relate to employment, so decent living wage, housing, and the additional services that comes with that. [SPEAKER 1] So that's your day to day work is focusing on those, aspects of sustainability within the production of those commodities. And where as accompany or where do you see that the, the, the barriers or the, the issues are in making that production system sustainable? [SPEAKER 2] I think probably Papua New Guinea it's a fairly unique case when it comes to, sort of, when it comes to this question. We operate in a legislative vacuum. Many of the... sort of the legislation that applies to our operations are outdated and there's very weak law enforcement in the country and also in general the, the, the agencies that are expected to, to support companies and to check the implementation of certain requirements such as, let's say an environment agency, they are very weak and often corrupt. I'm from our point of view, the voluntary requirements that we have to comply with, so specifically the RSPO and the Rainforest Alliance are probably sort of more of a driver for us to improve our practices. Now, we...as we mentioned in the introduction, we produce three commodities. We apply our systems to all three of these. Only the palm oil one is exported, so the sugar is consumed domestically and also the beef is consumed domestically. Darrant, our domestic clients are not asking for for our sustainability credentials on these two commodities. We are being asked by our European clients on palm oil. And this is what, what I see as one of the main sort of challenges when it comes to applying or when it comes to developing a sustainable agriculture in a country like PNG, is that we are applying some of these requirements, let's say for a, for a commodity like palm oil. So we protect, I'd say our buffer. So if, if a river comes through, runs through our estates, we will protect the buffer zones. But if there is next door to us, if there's a rice producer, or if there's a, let's say a beef producer, they can do whatever they want to do with the buffer. So you do need, you do need to move away from, let's say, commodity specific approach to a landscape level or national level approach. And have the sustainability or stability requirements that we have to comply with applied to all these sectors including, let's say mining or infrastructure development. [SPEAKER 1] So you've got experience obviously working in Papua New Guinea, but you've also audited and worked in production in different parts of the world. Do you think that these issues that you're talking about, so weak, weak legislation or as you say, a legislative vacuum, as well as agencies who don't have capacity to implement any legislation. Do you think that that's unique to Papua New Guinea or have you seen that in other regions? [SPEAKER 2] I think all the countries will have their own challenges. As I said, Papua New Guinea, I think it's, it's fairly unique. I wouldn't say that, you know, what we, what we, the framework that we, that we work in Papua New Guinea. You will not find that in, in, in, in other countries. It's just sort of depends on where, what development stage...countries, how well the various government institutions have been developed and funded. I remember a few years ago arguing with somebody about...forced labour in the UK context. And she was very vehement that, that forced labour and, and more modern sort of types of slavery does not happen in the UK. And I think recently in the past couple of years, we have actually seen quite a lot of research that actually shows that even in the UK we have issues with sustainability. So, so I think it sort of depends, but all countries I guess, will have their own challenges when it comes to these aspects. [SPEAKER 1] Thank you. So in this podcast series, I ask all of our interviewees to choose an object that represents their vision of a sustainable food system. What did you choose and why? [SPEAKER 2] I think I will choose a drone. And the reason why I choose a drone is because the company I work for, it's not only the biggest agricultural producer in PNG, but we are actually also the largest conservation organisation, I guess, because we have close to 20,000 hectares of conservation areas that we manage. And the management, we obviously need tools to monitor these areas. Traditionally, we have done the monitoring by physical sort of visits, which is obviously very time consuming and not very effective. So we are trying to move away and implement more effective ways to monitor these conservation areas. And obviously drones and satellites monitoring, for example, are hugely useful for, for this task. [SPEAKER 1] Umm, that's an interesting object that you've chosen. And my sense is that adopting technologies such as drones and remote sensing is quite a popular topic at the moment. Do you really think that it's appropriate in, in regions such as Papua New Guinea, are there limitations where,  you know, obviously the infrastructure is, is an issue. Or can technology like drones help to sort of deal with poor infrastructure in remote areas? [SPEAKER 2] It's definitely a useful tool. We could review and monitor sort of large areas in a relatively short periods of time, especially as you mentioned, in areas where infrastructure is poor. But it's obviously just the first step. So usually sort of the challenges that we deal with is related to growing population in the country. So PNG's population has increased significantly. And there's also significant internal migration from the highlands to the coastal areas. And often these people who move, especially due to conflicts and the lack of employment opportunities, they settle in, in areas that are not being used. So these could be our conservation areas, for example. So once we identify that there is an encroachment, we would obviously have to go in and talk to the people and understand why, what are they doing there. Check if they have any legal or customary rights to use those areas. So that's, that's the sort of the main part. So, you know, it is a useful addition or it's a useful tool, but it's certainly not going to solve, solve our issues. Also, we can use drones to, to, to monitor some of the, some of the conservation and biodiversity aspects. But a big part of our work relates to social, social impacts. And I mean, that sort of still relates people on the ground rather than drones flying around. [SPEAKER 1] So in your experience, both within the current company that you work for and with your experience previously, with a variety of sustainability standards, what are the key social issues in production that you think need to be addressed? [SPEAKER 2] So I mean, I guess we can sort of, when you talk about social issues, we can talk about social issues in the context of our employees and their dependants, their families, but also there's obviously social issues that relate to the communities that surround us. So when it comes to our employees, obvious— as I mentioned before, wages, living conditions, housing, specifically health and— health facilities and health and safety at the workplace are probably the most important ones. When it comes to the communities around us as in — our focus is in identifying and managing our both the positive and the negative impacts. In terms of the positive ones, most of our sites will have, so additionally to our own estates, will have smallholders. We have about 16,000 smallholders that we work with. So obviously whatever we do that we have a huge impact on the community. But of course, in terms of our environmental impacts, we need to be careful on how do we manage the operations to make sure that we don't have an impact on, for example, water quality, air quality, that, that are important for the surrounding communities. [SPEAKER 1] Okay, thank you.  And finally, I'd really like to know, given your experience across a variety of positions in sustainable standards, are you on the whole, optimistic about the sustainability of food systems in the next ten to fifty years? [SPEAKER 2] I think I would like to be optimistic, but if you look at the trends, the latest trends, it's quite difficult. Also, you know, there's, there's a number of... Okay, so maybe just as an example that highlights statistics related to deforestation. So 2019 has been again, another very bad year. There has been an increased deforestation in comparison to 2018. Agriculture remains the main driver, one of the main drivers behind, behind that trend. We can't, we can't ignore that fact. At the same time, you know, where, where I think... one of my sort of dilemmas lies is that if you consider a country like PNG, which is 63, above 60% of the countries is forest, primary forest. But it's also one of the least developed countries in the world. Highly dependent on imported food. I think it's difficult to, to, to defend a very strict, the adoption of a very strict conservation approach. Which would prevent communities to develop at least part of their land to produce a sustainable income or, or, or an income, you might not want to call it sustainable. [SPEAKER 1] And these,  these are communities who are among the poorest communities globally and who are suffering in terms of food insecurity, in terms of stunting, wasting, and micronutrient deficiencies and health outcomes in Papua New Guinea are fairly worrying? [SPEAKER 2] Absolutely.  So I mean, I'm not advocating obviously uncontrolled mass deforestation. But I think there needs to be a recognition, especially by west and northern stakeholders in, in, in affluent countries that we need a slightly more sophisticated approach. And just to give you a concrete example, so we work with RSPO. Obviously also as, as, as NBPOL, we have a no deforestation commitment. But that effectively means that our opportunities to expand in PNG are very, very limited because the areas are, the areas that we comply with all the sustainability requirements and our requirements are no longer there. So where does this leave the communities who would want to enter business with us? Unfortunately, we can't give them that opportunity. At the same— and, you know,  NBPOL and the other certified company, Cargill, in PNG, we have seen very limited growth in our areas recently. At the same time, there are over 15 companies expanding, palm oil companies expanding at the moment in PNG, without complying with any of the requirements that we have to do— that we have to. So — we effectively are pushing people, communities into unsustainable, an unsustainable pathway, because of the very strict requirements that we have, which obviously, you know, I'm not questioning their justification, but you know, the, the reality is that there are these spillover effects, which at the end, I'm not sure if we are really sort of helping global biodiversity and global environment. So we need to somehow, while obviously addressing deforestation and reducing deforestation, especially of the highly diverse forest is a key priority, I think we need to also consider the, you know, the needs of these very poor communities that need some sort of sustainable income. And of course, if, if, if, if ecotourism is a possibility, if non-timber forest products, for example, seeds or nuts or honey or whatever else is, is a possibility, of course, fine. But the reality is that these are not always, always there. The communities, don't necessarily know how to do these things. So what is going to happen with, you know, with them? That's, I think that's a real question. [SPEAKER 1] Okay. So and that's why, on the whole, you would have a more pessimistic outlook on sustainable food production in PNG specifically, but globally as well? [SPEAKER 2] Well, I would say, I mean, a lot of the focus is on, is on developing countries. And I get really upset when, when I listen to the European narrative, for example, about palm oil that many stakeholders here are labelled unsustainable by default. You don't have an unsustainable crop. It all depends on, on how do you produce it and the land use that was previously on, on, on the area that you're producing your palm oil. So, we need to, we need to sort of look at the production, the ways that we are producing thing all over the world. But as far as I understand, we are largely dependent on fossil fuels. Obviously, agriculture remains one of the largest users of freshwater. There's also issues around chemical use. And we have discussed deforestation. So I don't see I don't see the shifts that we would need, I think, on long term. I don't see how we are converting the companies which are non-sustainable. For example, when it comes to RSPO, for a number of years, the share of certified palm globally has been relatively the same. It's around 20, between 20 and 25%. And that means that the companies which all have, and of course, we can argue about the merits of RSPO, but the reality is that the companies who are RSPO certified are the top performers. So we have been certified. We have tried to improve our management practices. We worked on reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, dependency on chemicals, glyphosate, for example. But what about the rest of the 80%, the rest of the market? We have not been able to shift the management practices in those companies and that because we don't want to work with them. That because we know we, we sort of excluded them from, from these roundtables. We also, there's the continuous cause for boycotts in the European market. So we do need to engage somehow also with the with the remaining part of the market. And consumers obviously have a huge role because, because they can drive change within the supply chain and they can be, you know, they could ask questions about how is, how is this produced? But the interesting part of it or the hypocrisy of it if, if, if I may say so. When it comes to this, is that what we see, and I'm not necessarily talking about our clients, I'm sort of mainly talking sort of in general, of certified products. The reality is that producing a certified product costs the producers hugely more than it would cost to produce business-as-usual without the sustainability. And why I say that, for example, we have requirements to, to improve our housing standards above, let's say, legal requirements. Obviously, that costs money. And I'm not saying that we are doing all these things just because of certification. As a responsible company, I think we would be doing things anyways, but the reality is these additional limitations, the fact that we have to conserve a significant percentage of our landbank for biodiversity that costs money. And the consumers aren't always willing to, to pay the price premiums. There's some commodities, I think especially when sugar and coffee, chocolate, where consumers seem to be more willing to pay a price premium, but certainly not for, for....for let's say palm oil. So...we need to, there needs to be a recognition that cheap food comes at a cost, both in terms of environment and social. And I think if consumers in, in the developed rich countries demand higher standards justifiably, then I think there needs to be a recognition that that might require additional costs on the supply chain. [SPEAKER 1] Okay, well, thank you very much. And on that note, that call to consumers to act responsibly, I think we'll, we'll round up our discussion. Thank you very much for your time. And our listeners will be able to find out more about your work and work at the Roundtable, for sustainable palm oil, NBPOL and the Rainforest Alliance through links provided on this podcast. Thank you very much, Laszlo Máthé. [SPEAKER 2] Thank you very much.