Attempt to 'regulate' brings ridicule, confusion

AGRICULTURE

Although agricultural authorities involved in the listing of "products" derived from 13 herbal plants as "type 1 hazardous substances" have come forward to clarify that the controversial attempt was only aimed at curbing commercial types used for commercial pest and weed control, they have hardly put the public at rest.

As the authorities placed these natural products under the same "hazardous" category as explosive materials, the public could not help but wonder why on earth would they do so.

Farmers dump chillies and galangal onto the ground at parliament in protest at the listing of the spices.

The brouhaha illustrated how flawed and outdated the state authorities' handling of natural-based substances is. It also underlines a gap in understanding between locals who actually use the natural pest control substances and the authorities who have to deal with them.

The Hazardous Substances Act was implemented 17 years ago in 1992. It was aimed at "controlling" the use of toxic substances including pesticides and herbicides.

Under the act, hazardous materials are defined as substances which are either explosive, combustible, oxidized or peroxide-based, toxic, disease triggering, radioactive, stimulating genetic change, corrosive or irritative. The definition also covers any substance, chemical or otherwise, which may harm people, animals, plants, property as well as the environment.

To classify these materials, the concerned agencies have to prove their level of toxicity. Type 4 means a total ban with only a case-by-case waiver. Type 1 means producers, manufacturers, importers and exporters of the listed substance have to inform and submit details of their products to the authorities.

The whole process takes on a regulatory-control approach, with punitive considerations. Failure to comply with the law will result in penalties of up to 50,000 baht in fines and/or up to six months' jail.

According to sources involved in the substances listing, nature-based substances used in the farming sector were declared under the second category several years ago. They were either "extracts" from herbal plants or "active ingredients" from micro-organisms. Producers or those possessing them are required to register with relevant farm officials. There has been no loud protest - until the latest controversy.

An official who declined to be named said he too feels frustrated when dealing with natural-based substances.

"I think the new listing has become a hot issue largely because the plants were labelled 'hazardous substances' despite the fact that they are not dangerous. The problem, however, is we have not had any regulations that deal directly with natural-based substances. This is why we have to rely on the Act to regulate them," he said.

Farm advocates and farmers look at the issue from a totally different perspective, however. For them, these plants which they have been using in many aspects of their daily lives do not seem to need "regulating." They eat the plants, use them as herbal medicine as well as pound them up and apply as pest control in their fields. What is the use of official listing?

Witoon Lianchamroon, director of Biothai, a non-profit organisation promoting sustainable agriculture, said more and more farmers have learned to develop further uses of natural-based substances. The knowledge and process is deepening and widening, and should not be obstructed by the state.

In fact, the practice, a local way of research and development by farmers themselves, should be encouraged and promoted so that our farmers can compete with giant chemical companies. Eventually they could learn to become less dependent on expensive and hazardous chemicals.

"If the listing is really applied, it will affect farmers' agricultural practices and way of life because they do not separate things into categories the way the state does," said Mr Witoon during the first press conference against the listing last week.

Biothai has spearheaded a campaign against the listing along with its partners such as the Sustainable Agriculture Foundation.

Some farm officials have acknowledged this concern. Still, they insist they have to find one way or another to control the substances, at least to a certain extent as they are tasked with "regulating" them.

Wichar Thitiprasert, director of the Agriculture Regulations Office, which assisted the Agriculture Department in preparing the farm substances listing, said he realised herbal plants can mean various things to farmers, ranging from food, medicine and farm substances, that their uses are intermingled in real life.

However, he said, the concerned authorities are tasked with taking care of their uses. Therefore, they have no choice but to come up with a certain extent of control to ensure that farmers will not fall prey to substandard materials.

The officials tried to figure out how to make the procedure as simple as possible for farmers. That is the reason why they came up with the listing of the 13 herbal plants under the most lenient type 1 category.

Mr Wichar agreed that it would be possible to integrate local knowledge into the authority's current management of natural-based substances. A closer interaction between the agencies and farmers is required for that to happen. Among other things, an "open" space or forum for all stakeholders to help think about the issue is needed.

"What is happening is really frustrating but the fact is that farm substances today are under the Act. That is the reality of the situation and it is difficult to do anything else," Mr Wichar said.