Chapter One

Contents

[Science Plan Home]

Introduction

There is much interest in the rapid economic, social and environmental changes sweeping across Southeast Asia. The region’s unique biophysical and socio-economic features provide a setting for studying human driving forces of change and their environmental consequences.

From a socio-economic standpoint, most of Southeast Asian countries have had, for about two decades leading up to the mid-1997 region-wide recession, some of the world’s highest growth rates in Gross National Product and population. Over the next couple of decades the region’s consumption rates are expected to increase further with both rapid industrialisation and urbanisation. Fossil fuel use is predicted to increase sharply in the foreseeable future and this, together with the ongoing modifications to coastal areas and tropical rainforests, make the Southeast Asia region a ‘hot spot’ from both sustainable development and global change perspectives. Both perspectives are inherently linked, through regional environmental change, and their analyses need to be addressed as a set of integrated biophysical and socio-economic issues; the human and biophysical systems interact in a system that feeds back on itself (Figure 1.1).

Figure 1.1

Conceptual framework for an integrated study of global change and sustainable development emphasising that the driving forces, impacts and response strategies are part of a system that feeds back on itself.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

History and Human Driving Forces

From the protohistoric period to the present, changes in Southeast Asia have been the consequences of external forces interacting with internal dynamics. Situated between the distinct cultural and political entities of India and China, the region has been profoundly influenced by both, as well as farther entities like Arabia, at varying levels depending on time and geographical location, and then developed distinct civilisations of its own (e.g. SarDesai 1997, Osborne 1997).

Geography is a decisive factor in the region’s exposure to external driving forces (see Figure 1.2). Archeological records show that the peninsular mainland and archipelagos that comprise Southeast Asia have been major trade routes for at least two millennia and facilitated the spread of different ethnic groups and religions into and throughout the region. Ethnic, religious, political and social diversity remain very important institutional features today.

Trade, wars, and mass migrations, or their combinations, have always had a strong impact on regional trends, the dynamics of which have been both internally driven and a response to external intrusions. Large parts of Southeast Asia used to be parts of a loose confederation of trading empires. Nations along an ancient trade route, either maritime or overland, still share many vestiges of past associations. Oftentimes the relationships also show traditional rivalries. Indeed, records indicate that regional groups at some time invaded each other, and even political entities outside the region. The fortunes of major ethnic groups wax and wane, but those of less numerous groups saw only a steady decline. Interestingly, there were indications that early wars were fought for additional populations in the same way as present ones are fought for territories.

The advent of western colonial powers had an uneven effect in the region. Some nations or kingdoms experienced limited disruption. Other nations were profoundly influenced, socially, politically and economically. Colonialism directed the region’s natural resources, especially timber and oil, towards trade in commodities profitable to the colonial power, but with little industrial development ( Brookfield 1993). By the end of the colonial rule commercial resource exploitation was the central economic activity in the region often with the development and support of local elites (Bryant 1998).

Although changes in land-use practices have occurred throughout two millennia, the changes in land use to facilitate cash cropping constituted a pivotal environmental development in Southeast Asian history, as the percentage of agricultural land used for cash crops increased in proportion to that used for subsistence.  In addition, transport infrastructure was established throughout the region, as well as outside, to facilitate the export of cash crops and other commodities.
The expansion of rice, rubber and oil palm plantations, illustrate this transformation well.  In peninsular Malaysia there were no rubber plantations before 1880, yet by the beginning of the 1970’s rubber plantations accounted for 65 percent of all cultivated land (e.g. Osborne 1997). Large areas were also planted, in the early years by imported labor, in Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia.  Expansion of rice cultivation began in earnest in the mid-nineteenth century with the development of exported-oriented production in the major deltas, including the Mekong (Vietnam), Chaophrya (Thailand) and Irrawaddy (Myanmar) (Osborne 1997). Large-scale changes in land use were also in part driven by political considerations, as states sought to expand their territories through development of forested lands by peasants (e.g. De Koninck 1996).

Of course production of food to support growing populations has been a fundamental driver of agricultural expansion and intensification.  Some figures for three countries illustrate just how rapidly populations in the region have grown.  In the 1800’s the populations of Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand were approximately 8.5, 6 and 1.7 million respectively (cited in Osborne 1997). By 1960 these figures were 96.7, 27.9 and 27.0 million.   The United Nations medium variant projections for 2010 are 229, 86.6 and 75.6 million.

Figure 1.2
Map of the Southeast Asia region. Like the global average, this region is three-fourths water and one-fourth land, but with its archipelagic nature it has one third of the world’s total coastline.

During the 1950s and 60s the US cold war policy facilitated investment and export of goods from the non-communist nations in the region (Yahuda 1996) supporting the early growth of industry. Today, the US remains a major bilateral trading partner with the countries in the region, the importance of which is matched only by Japan (see page 45). Japan depends on East Asia for 40% of its trade and more than 20% of its investment. Conversely, East Asia relies on Japan for only 20% of its trade, but about 20% of investment and 60% of development aid (Vatikiotis & Hiebert 1998).

Although the ASEAN1  nations largely succeeded in pushing aside their colonial pasts, the long wars in Indochina and subsequent neglect by the international community continued to have a major impact on the development of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (e.g. Bourdet 1996; Lizee 1996; Womack 1996).
Basic socio-economic and environmental indicators show the wide variation among nations within the region (Table 1.1). Singapore ranks among the world’s wealthiest nations, while Laos and Cambodia among the poorest.  The basic indicators for Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia, in particular show a strong economic surge since 1965. Overall, the region maintained industrial growth rates of over 5% per annum, until the 1997-98 recession.

 Table 1.1
Basic indicators of socio-economic and environmental change of selected countries in Southeast Asia (ASEAN 1997; ESCAP 1998; Engelman 1998).  N/a indicates comparable data not available.

1 The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was established in 8 August 1967 by five countries: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.  Brunei Darussalam joined in 1984, Vietnam in 1995, and Laos and Myanmar in 1997.  Cambodia was also expected to join in 1997 but political conflict in that country has delayed entry into ASEAN.  The ASEAN nations came together with three main objectives: to promote the economic, social and cultural development of the region through cooperative programmes; to safeguard the political and economic stability of the region; and to serve as a forum for the resolution of intra-regional differences (ASEAN 1998).

During 1997 the ASEAN region was affected by a major financial crisis that started with banking failures in Thailand due to property investors faulting on loan repayments and was followed by massive currency de-valuations in regional currencies, and falls in regional stock markets.  At the time of writing this recession is still in full swing and its long-term impacts on the driving forces of environmental change remain a matter of speculation. Most commentators, however, expect that the region will recover high rates of economic growth in a couple of years, but go through major institutional and political changes in the process.  One of the most likely outcomes may be changes in the pattern of governance, already becoming clear, as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) takes charge of macroeconomic policies in the region.  From the point of view of understanding the human drivers of change, this recession represents a remarkable opportunity to unravel some of the relationships between economic growth and power as drivers of regional environmental change.
Economic growth led by rapid growth in the industrial sector, complemented by booming foregin trade and investment, has, together with urbanisation and exploitation of natural resources, profoundly transformed the physical landscape (Kummer & Turner 1994), lifestyles (e.g. Rae 1998) and well-being of people, and the social institutions of Southeast Asia in just a couple of decades (Wasson 1997).

The successful pursuit of economic growth in the region, although perceived and justified as the key to alleviating poverty in the region, has not come without environmental and social costs. The growing marginalisation of rural populations despite the excellent economic performance of nations as a whole is an emerging social issue (e.g. Dayley 1997). Deforestation resulting in water erosion and soil degradation, coastal zone eutrophication, and pollution from land-based activities, especially the region’s mega-cities are key environmental issues (e.g. ASEAN 1997; Dixon 1990). The widespread and repeated emergence of these issues strongly suggests that current patterns of development in Southeast Asia are not sustainable.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

Regional and Global Environmental Change

The current suite of processes driving change in the region – urbanisation, industrialisation, expansion and intensification of agriculture, globalisation of trade and investment – are more profound than those that have occurred in the past and are impacting on more than just the immediate local environment.  Regional environmental effects, such as pollution of the coastal seas, deforestation, loss of soil fertility and trans-boundary air pollution, are becoming of increasing concern to Southeast Asian institutions. There is also concern about the impacts of human activities on biodiversity, on the land cover in general, and on the abiotic environment of atmosphere and climate.

In terms of ecosystems, the rapid population increase and the subsequent drive for increased primary (food, fiber, etc.) production in Southeast Asia manifest themselves in environmental modifications, from the coastal zones to the forests. The objective of these environmental modifications is usually to increase primary production through intensive labor and fertilizer inputs, at the expense of natural ecosystems.  Some examples of these production practices are the conversion of mangrove swamps to aquaculture, and the clearing of forests for agricultural or agro-forestry purposes. The goals are usually met in the short term, but other aspects of economic and social valuation are often overlooked with this development strategy, in particular, the losses of biodiversity and off-site impacts that accompany conversion of natural landscapes to intensively managed systems.

Human domination of the Earth’s ecosystems is already substantial: more nitrogen is fixed by humanity than all natural terrestrial sources combined; more than half of accessible freshwater has been put to use; a quarter of bird species have been driven to extinction; carbon dioxide concentrations have risen by 30% since the beginning of the industrial revolution (Vitousek et al. 1997; Walker & Steffen 1997). There is also growing consensus that the atmospheric changes will result in climate change. Although developed countries of the Northern Hemisphere have been largely responsible up to now for global environmental degradation, there is growing concern about the global impacts of increasing contribution from Asia as a result of its rapid patterns of development. Viewed from the perspective of the Southeast Asia, future development of the region will have to take place under the context and constraints of a changing global environment and a global political arena increasingly concerned about global change (Smith 1994).

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

Biophysical Responses

Of importance to the region are the implications of such changes to sustainable development of marine, coastal and terrestrial resources. Key questions include: How do changes to coastal ecosystems and to catchment areas inland affect the long-term productivity of the coastal zones?  How do the frequency and patterns of resource exploitation affect biodiversity, and what are the resultant consequences for ecosystem functioning? There is no doubt that the Southeast Asian environment is changing at an accelerating rate, and these changes need to be monitored and analyzed so that people and institutions can devise appropriate management strategies to maintain both production and environmental amenities.

From the global change perspective, the Southeast Asian humid tropics are a high priority region for research because of the significant impact of ongoing land-use changes, climate variability and change on biogeochemical cycles, particularly the global carbon, nutrient and water cycles, and their consequences for further global change.  The impact occurs in two phases: (i) the initial modification of the land and coastal zones, the techniques of which determine the short term alterations to biogeochemical cycles, and (ii) the type and intensity of subsequent land use, which determine the longer term effects.

In addition to biogeochemistry, the conversion and intensification sequence impacts on other important, related ecosystem processes.  These include the biotic control of water, gas and energy exchanges between the surface and the atmosphere, and the composition, structure and productivity of the land and coastal zones after modification. A crucial aspect of biogeochemical cycling is the transport of dissolved and suspended materials from upland areas through coastal zones to the sea.

Fluvial sediment flux from Southeast Asia and Oceania accounts for 70% of the world flux although they account for only 15% of the land area draining into oceans (Milliman 1990).  The problem has long been recognised by ASEAN featuring in every environmental plan since the 1981 Manila declaration on the environment (IDGC 1998). It also features prominently in the United Nations Environment Programme (1995) action plan for the protection of the marine environment from land-based activities.  The problem, however, remains.

Coastal zones are very important in the context of Southeast Asia because rapid industrialisation and urbanization take place along the coasts, and protein from marine fisheries makes up a significant percentage of the region’s total protein consumption. Changes in the hydrological and nutrient cycles will manifest their effects in the coastal zones, and with the enclosed nature of regional seas, the impacts to the continental shelves are likely to be very significant. Also, the seas of Southeast Asia are parts of the Pacific warm pool which affects the tradewinds and monsoons, and generates typhoons and hot towers which are very efficient transport mechanisms for greenhouse gases and aerosols which significantly affect global atmospheric chemistry. The role of extreme events (tropical storms, droughts and floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, etc.) is also very important here considering their relatively high frequency of occurrence and the area’s high population density.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

Sustainable Development Strategies

The key issues of large-scale sustainability in the Southeast Asia region are the (1) the pollution of regional seas from land-based activities, (2) transboundary atmospheric pollution, (3) land degradation and abandonment, (4) deforestation and the loss of biodiversity, and (5) declining water quality and availability.

An indication of the growing concern of regional institutions in Southeast Asia for the need for more sustainable development trajectories (Box 1.1) is the number and scope of recent regional environmental agreements and action plans.  A good example is the comprehensive 1985 ASEAN Agreement on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.  This covers, for example, development planning, the sustainable use of species, conservation of genetic diversity, endangered species, forest resources, soil, water, air and processes of environmental degradation and pollution.  As of 1995, however, only three countries had at the national level ratified the agreement after signing (ASEAN 1997), so it still has not come into force.  In part this initiative has been superseded by activities under Agenda 21, now also an integral part of ASEAN’s 1994-1998 Strategic Plan of Action on the Environment (ASEAN 1994).

Within the region there is already substantial variation among countries in their current and likely future development trajectories with variable consequences for the exploitation of renewable resources within state boundaries or from elsewhere (Dixon 1990).  Indonesia, for example, has continued to depend strongly on renewable resources with a smaller, higher value industrial or service sector.  Malaysia, and to a lesser extent Thailand, on the other hand, have vigorously pursued industrialisation, with the result that pressures for direct exploitation of local resources may decline, but labour shortages for some agricultural activities may develop and problems of pollution are likely to grow (Dixon 1990).
At the national level sustainable development and global change are becoming parts of normal rhetoric, but real progress has been limited.  In part, this is because the kind of integrated, regional and cross-sectorial knowledge needed to evaluate development strategies has not been available or transparent.

There is thus an urgent need to better understand the interactions between the human and environment systems (Figure 1.1), in particular:
1. How the multitude of  human driving forces interact to produce large-scale regional environmental changes;
2. How biogeochemical and hydrological cycles respond to changes in land use and land cover, and what the implications of these and other land-based activities are for regional marine ecosystems, the atmosphere and the Earth’s system;
3. The options available to respond to current environmental change and modify the driving forces of the future, so that individual nations and the entire region can move more quickly towards development trajectories that are more sustainable, ecologically, economically and socially.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

Integrated Regional Studies

The issue of rapid regional environmental change and its causes and consequences in Southeast Asia offers a good opportunity for the Southeast Asian Regional Committee for START (SARCS) to develop an Integrated Study of the human driving forces and implications of environmental change. The thrust of the Study is ‘living with global change’ in a sustainable way, and looking at the close interconnection between sustainable (and unsustainable) development and global change feedbacks (Figure 1.1). The focus will, therefore, be on large-scale environmental changes that are likely to be of importance for the entire region or the Earth’s system. This includes both small-scale changes that occur widely and frequently, and thus collectively have an impact, as well as changes in large- scale systems, for example, the Asian monsoon.  Conversely, unique and small-scale environmental changes, for example, as a result of specific pollution problems in one city, would not fall within the scope of this study.

The Integrated Study will be based on a coordinated set of experimental, observational and modelling studies involving various ongoing and planned regional research programmes.

Plans for a similar effort in the Amazon Basin are complete and work has begun (LBA 1996). The Amazon study will provide a valuable comparison for the Southeast Asian work. There are significant biogeophysical and socio-economic differences between the Amazon and the Southeast Asian regions, which, from sustainable development and global change perspectives, provide the motivation for a separate integrated research effort in each area. Population densities, economic growth rates, industrialization strategies, role in the global economy and the rates and driving forces of forest exploitation all differ widely between Southeast Asia and Amazonia. In addition, the relative roles of external forcing (monsoon, ENSO), maritime ‘buffering’, topography and land cover in determining local and regional weather and climate patterns differ widely between the two regions. There is a marked difference in land use, with inundated cultivation practice predominant in Southeast Asia (e.g. rice) and aerated agriculture in Amazonia (relative areal dominance of pasture). Similarly, the Southeast Asian region exhibits a wider variety of drainage typologies relating to the complex underlying geology, and may require approaches to scale up quantitative and qualitative, in- and outside channel hydrology that are different from those that will be developed in Amazonia.

The Integrated Southeast Asian Study will therefore focus on its own regional characteristics and then build a body of knowledge and understanding that is complementary to the one in Amazonia. Together, these two studies will bring a significantly improved understanding of the interplay between human dimensions of global change in the humid tropics and their environmental consequences, both regional and global.  In the context of international research collaboration, the Study will also contribute to the set of IGBP Terrestrial Transects (see Koch et al. 1995) and the IGBP-wide synthesis (Steffen 1998). Comparisons with the planned transect study of land-use and -cover change and its effects in the tropical Miombo woodlands of Africa  (Desanker et al. 1997), in particular, should provide broader insights into the social and biophysical sustainability of alternative natural resource management systems under global change.

SARCS will start with a substantial track record in coordinating global change research in the Southeast Asia region and a formidable base of experience within the region upon which to build such a study (see Chapter 4). This experience will be critical base upon which to build the networks and coordination structures needed to implement the Integrated Study.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]

The rest of this document describes in detail the Science Plan for a SARCS Integrated Study of the “Human Driving Forces of Environmental Change in Southeast Asia and the Implications for Sustainable Development”.  The next Chapter describes the overall goals and design of the Integrated Study.  Chapter Three then proceeds, step-by-step, to outline the rationale, objectives and possible implementation strategy for each of the components or Core Themes of the Integrated Study.  This is the heart of the Science Plan.  Chapter 4 then briefly summarises the potential contribution of the various international global change research programmes to the study and Chapter 5 ends with suggestions on the next steps needed to implement the Integrated Study.

[ Contents | Science Plan Home ]