SunStar Davao Editorial: Surviving the aerial spray ban
Today’s SunStar Davao Editorial debunks the argument of the Philippine Banana Growers and Exporters Association (PBGEA) that the Ban on Aerial Spraying will have “dire economic effects”.
Rather than antagonizing the PBGEA, the editorial offers a straightforward counter-argument:
But the ban, if it is sustained by the Court of Appeals, will not cause the demise of the banana industry. It may, however, mean higher cost of production should the plantations be forced to use more manpower for the manual application of the chemicals by way of hand-carried sprayers, or the reduction in areas planted to banana due to the cutting down of banana stalks to allow more space for use by motorized chemical sprayers. Any such loss may be compensated through an increase in the price of bananas if such increase proves tenable.
The counter-argument may be quite simplistic. But it is not entirely wrong. The PBGEA might find it hard and difficult to adjust to manual application of pesticides and other chemicals. But this does not necessarily mean lesser profit. In the long run, they will, I hope, realize that the environmental, health, and social ramifications of what they have given up far exceed the economic costs.
The editorial closes with the expression of the confidence on the ability of the local banana industry to withstand this “economic” setback:
Be that as it may, the corporate banana industry is here to stay, notwithstanding the aerial spray ban that in the end will turn out to be a minor irritant that corporate geniuses will eventually overcome.
6 Responses to “SunStar Davao Editorial: Surviving the aerial spray ban”
Leave a Reply
28 years old from Davao City, blogging since 2004. :)
Loading ...
[...] Original post by Maria [...]
I would also expect that “corporate geniuses” will also compute how much more it would cost to remain in Davao City as against other places in the world, profit being the main determinant.
I do not disagree with the ban, I only wish that the situation was managed better. Investors have a cowardly commodity called “money.” If the “climate” cannot ensure profits, “money” runs away. If we truly want investments to provide jobs for our growing population, let us think more clearly and act accordingly. The Philippines is already rated as a difficult place to invest in, too much risk. Why add more?
The national papers have picked up the story of the 11 year old from Ma-a who committed suicide because of poverty.
Those people who cheer their victory in getting a ban on the spray, keep cheering.
Yes, let us “regulate” all businesses out of this city so we can get into the national news again!
A sad, sad day indeed.
We are working towards having that TRO lifted! YES!!! Join us!!!
http://peoplevsprofit.wordpress.com
Your blog is interesting!
Keep up the good work!
Good day! It’s sad to know that many people support the banning of aerial spray. My husband and I are “small time” banana farmers and I would like you to hear our side. This is quite long, i hope readers on this site will take time to read.
1. The Banana Industry in Mindanao does not only include multinational corporations. There are also small scale farmers like us who depend our livelihood by selling bananas for export.
2. There are hundreds of thousands Filipinos who are either directly or indirectly dependent on this industry, including those who work in fabrication, packaging, plastic and shipping.
3. The fungicide used in aerial spraying has low dermal toxicity (85% water, 14% banana oil and only 1% of fungicide chemical), and the chances of people ingesting or even getting exposed to the fungicide is low since aerial spraying is guided by global positioning system.
4. Considering that we are one of the biggest banana exporters in the world, the operations are done carefully and with the best quality as possible.
Supporters claiming that aerial spraying is the leading cause of death and illness in communities near plantations.
–If this is true, where are your medical evidences?
There was one study conducted by the University of the Philippines in Camocaan, Hagonoy, Davao del Sur alleging that aerial spraying is a grave threat to health. But the study has been declared as inconclusive in a peer review by another team from the UP and the World Health Organization.
According to CBCP News website, Bishop Broderick Pabillo said, and I quote “We are against it and these companies because what they are doing is inhuman. They are more concerned on their business than the public welfare,”
–We are not big companies, we are small scale farmers, who have 3, others have less than one hectare of land to tend.
Banning of aerial spray for us “small time” farmers, means, we will not be able to pay our land amortizations, put food on the table, and be good providers to our children. Now, you judge us, are we immoral? are we inhuman?