Burning practices are common in the cultivation of many crops such as rice, maize and sugarcane. The crops are burned to clear fields and prepare for new planting cyles, leading to seasonal spike in PM2.5 levels. The elevated levels of PM2.5 have severe health implications, including respiratory ailments and higher mortality rates (Samoli et al., 2005; Ostro et al., 2006; Brunekreef & Holgate, 2002). Despite these risks, many farmers persist with burning sugarcane due to labor shortages and a lack of adequate cutting machinery, making this method the most feasible and economical option (Sangla & Suppadit, 2005). This article focuses on sugarcane burning, which is a critical environmental challenge in Thailand, particularly during the peak harvesting season from December to April. Sugarcane farmers used burning method for its efficiency in facilitating the harvest. However, the practice emits significant quantities of PM2.5 particles, thereby worsening air quality during harvest season (Nualyai, 2018).
To address these issues, the Thai government has introduced policies to curb sugarcane burning. Starting from 2020/2021 production year, the subsidy of THB120 (US$3.67)[1] per ton for fresh, unburned sugarcane (Research and Markets, 2023) was implemented along with imposing a penalty of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane (Boonyakunakorn, et al., 2021). Additional policies include legal measures to limit the amount of burned sugarcane processed by sugar production factories, government support for agricultural machinery, and collaborative management initiatives between sugar mills and farmers to establish no-burn zones and promote the harvesting of fresh sugarcane (Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Ministry of Industry, 2024).
This article aims to suggest enhanced policy recommendations based on comprehensive survey and interview data to encourage the adoption of sustainable sugarcane harvesting technologies. The article will outline strategic initiatives to support the policies, such as infrastructure improvements and collaborative roles among stakeholders. The goal is to develop a robust policy framework that boosts financial incentives, tackles practical challenges, and promotes the adoption of cleaner harvesting technologies. These recommendations aim to significantly reduce sugarcane burning, lower PM2.5 emissions, and advance a more sustainable and health-conscious sugarcane industry in Thailand.
Thailand's sugarcane production has seen significant fluctuations over the years, with varying degrees of burning practices impacting the environment and air quality. Analyzing data from the 2013/14 to 2022/23 prodcution years (Figure 1.), we can observe important trends in both production and burning ratios. During the 2013/14 prodcution year, Thailand harvested 103.67 million tons of sugarcane from 1.61 million hectares, with a burning ratio of 63.42%. This high burning ratio highlighted the prevalent practice of burning sugarcane to facilitate easier harvesting. Over the subsequent years, the area under cultivation and total production generally increased, peaking in the 2017/18 prodcution year with 134.93 million tons from 1.85 million hectares. Despite this increase in production, the burning ratio also rose to 66.28%, indicating that burning remained a widespread method for sugarcane harvesting. A notable shift occurred in the 2020/21 season, where the burning ratio significantly dropped to 26.42%. This decline was accompanied by a decrease in total production to 66.66 million tons from 1.74 million hectares. The reduction in burning can be attributed to the intensified government policies and initiatives aimed at reducing air pollution and promoting fresh sugarcane harvesting. By the 2022/23 production season, the burning ratio had slightly increased again to 32.78%, but remained substantially lower than earlier years. Total production for this period was 93.89 million tons from 1.82 million hectares, showing a recovery in production while maintaining a lower reliance on burning practices.
In the 2018/2019 prodcution year, the Thai government introduced stricter measures to combat sugarcane burning. These measures were part of a broader effort to improve air quality and included providing subsidies for fresh sugarcane and imposing penalties for burned sugarcane. The measures required sugar mills to limit the purchase of burned sugarcane, initially capping it at 30% of their daily intake, with plans to reduce this limit further to 20% in the 2020/21 season and 5% in the 2021/22 season. This policy aimed to encourage the harvesting of fresh sugarcane and reduce the environmental impact of burning practices. These policies appear to have had a significant impact, as evidenced by the sharp decrease in the burning ratio from 61.11% in 2018/19 to 49.65% in 2019/20, and further down to 26.42% in 2020/21. This suggests that the financial incentives and penalties were effective in reducing the incidence of sugarcane burning. However, the slight increase in the burning ratio to 27.27% in 2021/22 and 32.78% in 2022/23 indicates that while the policies were effective, there is still room for improvement to sustain long-term reductions in burning practices.
Thailand's sugarcane cultivation is concentrated in several key regions, each with distinct geographical characteristics that influence sugarcane production. In 2023/24 production year (Table 1), the top two provinces for sugarcane production in each major region are Nakhon Sawan and Kamphaeng Phet in the northern region, Udon Thani and Khon Kaen in the northeastern region, Kanchanaburi and Lopburi in the central region, and Sa Kaeo and Chonburi in the eastern region. In Nakhon Sawan, sugarcane production reached 7.41 million tons from 0.13 million hectares, averaging 58.73 tons per hectare, covering 13.1% of the province's area. Kamphaeng Phet produced 7.09 million tons from 0.13 million hectares, with an average yield of 57.18 tons per hectare, representing 14.4% of its area. Udon Thani produced 7.93 million tons from 0.12 million hectares, with an average yield of 67.06 tons per hectare, covering 10.1% of the area. Khon Kaen produced 7.00 million tons from 0.11 million hectares, yielding 67.18 tons per hectare, representing 9.6% of the province. In Kanchanaburi, 7.14 million tons were produced from 0.12 million hectares, averaging 60.82 tons per hectare and covering 6.0% of the area. Lopburi produced 6.38 million tons from 0.11 million hectares, with a yield of 58.73 tons per hectare, representing 17.5% of its area. Sa Kaeo produced 4.41 million tons from 0.07 million hectares, with an average yield of 60.58 tons per hectare, covering 10.1% of the province. Lastly, Chonburi produced 1.36 million tons from 0.02 million hectares, averaging 60.01 tons per hectare, representing 4.9% of the province's area.
Udon Thani and Khon Kaen exhibit the highest yields per hectare at 67.06 and 67.18 tons respectively, indicating more efficient sugarcane production practices in these provinces. Conversely, Kamphaeng Phet and Nakhon Sawan, while producing similar total tonnage, show relatively lower yields per hectare, suggesting potential for yield improvement. Chonburi, despite having the smallest cultivation area, maintains a competitive yield, highlighting efficient use of its agricultural land. This comparison underscores the varying efficiencies and potential for optimization in sugarcane production across different provinces in Thailand.
There is a strong correlation between areas of high sugarcane production and the occurrence of hotspots, which are indicative of burning activities. According to data from the Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA) (2024), regions with extensive sugarcane cultivation often show a higher number of hotspots, particularly during the harvesting season. For example, GISTDA recorded over 5,000 hotspots in Nakhon Sawan and over 4,800 in Kamphaeng Phet during the peak burning period in the 2023/24 production year. Additional data show that other key sugarcane-producing provinces also had significant numbers of hotspots: Udon Thani, Khon Kaen, Kanchanaburi, Lopburi, Sa Kaeo, and Chonburi reported high numbers of hotspots, reflecting widespread burning practices associated with sugarcane harvesting. For instance, Kanchanaburi alone recorded 577 hotspots, highlighting the significant burning activity in the area.
The high number of hotspots in these regions underscores the environmental impact of sugarcane burning, contributing to severe air quality issues due to the release of PM2.5 particles. Addressing this link between sugarcane production and hotspots is crucial for reducing PM2.5 emissions and improving air quality in Thailand.
Figure 2. illustrates a spatial relationship between sugarcane cultivation areas and active fire hotspots. The yellow regions represent areas dedicated to sugarcane farming, while the red dots, sourced from NASA's FIRMS (Fire Information for Resource Management System), indicate active fire hotspots during the period from December 16 to 31, 2023, when sugar factories commence purchasing sugarcane from farmers, and the beginning of sugarcane harvesting. The concentration of red dots around the yellow cultivation areas suggests a correlation between sugarcane farming and the occurrence of fires (Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA), 2024; NASA's FIRMS, 2024).
POLICIES TO ADDRESS SUGARCANE BURNING IN THAILAND
In the past, the government has continuously implemented measures to address the issue of burned sugarcane. The proactive policy to tackle this problem was introduced in 2016, including support for loans to purchase sugarcane harvesters to enhance harvesting efficiency and a deduction of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane. However, these policies had minimal impact, with the proportion of burned sugarcane remaining around 65% of the total harvested sugarcane.
Efforts to address the issue resurfaced in 2019 with expanded measures, such as Phase 2 of the sugarcane harvester loan program (2019-2024), financial support for fresh sugarcane harvesting, and a regulation limiting burned sugarcane to no more than 50% of total purchases by sugar mills. Specific measures include legal measures, support for agricultural machinery, incentives for fresh sugarcane harvesting, and cooperative management measures.
Legal measures
The government set aggressive targets to reduce sugarcane burning. In the 2019/2020 season, mills were restricted to processing no more than 30% burned sugarcane daily. This limit was decreased to 20% in the 2020/2021 season and further reduced to 0-5% in the 2021/2022 season.
Support for agricultural machinery
The government supported the use of agricultural machinery, such as sugarcane leaf strippers and harvesters, through various programs:
- A comprehensive loan promotion program (2019-2024) with a budget of THB6 billion (US$180 million) for purchasing new and used harvesters, offering low-interest loans with an 8-year repayment term at 2% interest.
- Measures to support domestic sugarcane harvester manufacturers.
- Asset-to-capital conversion measures, allowing farmers to register their machinery as collateral for loans.
Incentives for fresh sugarcane harvesting
Financial incentives were provided to encourage fresh sugarcane harvesting, including (Nualyai, 2018):
- Returning the THB30 (US$0.92) per ton deduction for burned sugarcane to farmers harvesting high-quality fresh sugarcane. The rate was increased from THB20 (US$0.61) per ton in 2016 which had been used since 1986 (Boonyakunakorn, et al., 2021).
- Providing a subsidy of THB120 (US$3.67) per ton for high-quality fresh sugarcane, with a budget of THB6.065 billion (US$185 million) for the 2023/2024 season.
The program was managed by the Ministry of Industry and the funds were disbursed through the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC).
For the next harvesting year 2024/2025, the Ministry of Industry has mandated even stricter measures, such as reducing the number of collection points for burned sugarcane and significantly increasing penalties to up to THB90 to 120 (US$2.75 to 3.67) per ton, to further discourage burning and support fresh sugarcane production (Bangkokbiznews, 2024).
Cooperative management measures
The government sought cooperation to establish burn-free zones in five model provinces (Kanchanaburi, Ratchaburi, Chaiyaphum, Loei, and Uttaradit) for the 2019/2020 season. The provinces were selected based on their high incidence of burning, geographic diversity, and willingness of local stakeholders to participate in the project. These pilot provinces were chosen to establish burn-free zones and implement targeted measures to reduce sugarcane burning within a 5-kilometer radius of communities and a 10-kilometer radius of sugar mills. The success and learnings from these initial efforts are intended to inform the expansion of the initiative to other regions in the future (Thai PBS World, 2023).
The Phase 2 measures significantly reduced burned sugarcane from 61% in 2019 to 27% in 2022. This success was driven by continuous efforts, public awareness, and financial support for fresh sugarcane harvesting. Despite the successes, several challenges remain. Policies may not be effective for small farmers due to high costs of land preparation and machinery, as these farmers often lack the funds to purchase expensive harvesters or face difficulties hiring harvesting services. The fine of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane is too low to deter burning, making it more convenient for farmers to burn and pay the fine. Additionally, the loan program for harvesters has not fully incentivized farmers, with significant unused funds reflecting the limited uptake of the scheme. Labor shortages further exacerbate the problem, as workers prefer harvesting burned sugarcane due to ease and better income. Fresh sugarcane harvesting is more labor-intensive and less appealing to workers.
To build on these efforts and address the ongoing challenges, it is crucial to develop more effective strategies that consider the specific needs and limitations of small farmers, as well as the labor dynamics within the industry. By refining existing policies and introducing new initiatives, the government can further reduce sugarcane burning and promote sustainable practices. The next section will propose targeted recommendations and strategic initiatives designed to enhance the effectiveness of these measures, ensuring that they provide practical support to all stakeholders involved in the sugarcane industry.
POLICY SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section presents the policy suggestions and recommendation based on the study by Faktong et al. (2023), proposing practical solutions for reducing sugarcane burning and PM 2.5 emissions. The study combines quantitative and qualitative approaches to evaluate Thailand's current subsidy and penalty policies for sugarcane farming. The study collected data from survey and focus group discussion with farmers and local sugarcane institute officers.
Field data from eight sample provinces reveal that while most areas are suitable for cultivation, regions like Sa Kaeo and Phetchabun face challenges with rocky terrains. Larger areas, such as Suphanburi and Nakhon Sawan, have enough harvesters, whereas regions with gravel or sandy soils, like Sa Kaeo and Chonburi, lack adequate machinery, leading to reliance on manual labor.
Focus group discussions highlighted the effectiveness of financial incentives for fresh cane harvesting, although delays in subsidy disbursements hinder reinvestment in the next planting cycle. Additionally, the penalty for burned cane has not been a strong deterrent for some farmers. Certain regions, such as Kamphaeng Phet, have successfully reduced burned cane, while others, like Chonburi and Phetchabun, still report high proportions due to unsuitable harvesting conditions.
Adverse weather conditions also force some areas to resort to burning. These challenges highlight the need for comprehensive policy recommendations to promote fresh cane harvesting. The following section will present detailed policy suggestions, including goals, strategic plans, primary outcomes, and stakeholder roles to achieve the government's objectives.
From the above information, Fakthong, et al. (2023) proposes the outline of practical solutions to reduce burning in sugarcane preharvesting. Table 2 presents detailed policy suggestions, including goals, strategic plans, primary outcomes, and stakeholder roles to achieve the government's objectives. The proposed policy solutions to mitigate sugarcane burning in Thailand involve a multifaceted approach focusing on improving financial incentives, setting realistic zero-burn targets, and enhancing support for sugarcane harvesters. Key measures include increasing the subsidy for fresh sugarcane from THB120 to 150 (US$3.67 to 4.58) per ton and raising the penalty for burned sugarcane from THB30 to 50 (US$0.92 to 1.53) per ton to better incentivize fresh cane harvesting. Additionally, establishing tailored zero-burn targets based on the suitability of planting areas, with the aim to achieve no burned cane by 2030 or 2035, is crucial.
Other practical solutions include implementing a tiered penalty and subsidy system to account for different volumes of cane, promoting sugarcane harvester loans to address equipment shortages, investing in large harvesters and alternative technologies to reduce pre-harvest burning, and easing foreign labor policies to facilitate access to workers during the harvesting season. These strategies, supported by stakeholder collaboration, are expected to significantly reduce burning practices, improve air quality, and promote sustainable sugarcane production in Thailand.
Table 2. Suggested sugarcane burning mitigation policies for Thailand.
|
Policy
|
Goal
|
Findings
|
Proposed changes
|
Strategic plans
|
Expected outcomes
|
Stakeholders
|
|
1.Improvement of Subsidy and Penalty Policies (Fresh vs. Burned Sugarcane)
|
Improve subsidy and penalty rates to incentivize fresh cane harvesting
|
Current subsidy of THB120/ton for fresh cane and penalty of THB30 /ton for burned cane are somewhat effective
|
Increase subsidy to THB150/ton for fresh cane and penalty to THB50 /ton for burned cane
|
Announce new rates at least three months before harvesting; Ensure timely payments to farmers
|
Over 90% fresh cane delivered to factories, Annual increase of 2% in fresh cane delivery
|
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Budget Bureau, Industrial factories, Farmers
|
|
2.Setting a Zero Burn Target Based on Suitability of Planting Areas
|
Establish realistic zero burn targets tailored to different planting areas
|
Some areas unsuitable for harvester use due to terrain and conditions, requiring varying adaptation times
|
Different timelines for areas with and without harvester readiness, aiming for no burned cane by 2030 or 2035
|
Conduct readiness surveys and gather feedback; Designate planting areas, develop promotional and penalty measures; Collaborate on efficient harvesting schedules
|
Area-specific zero burn targets; Sustainable collaboration among stakeholders
|
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Cane and Sugar Industry Associations, Farmers
|
|
3.Gradual Penalties and Subsidies for Fresh Cane Harvesting
|
Implement a tiered penalty and subsidy system to incentivize fresh cane harvesting
|
Fixed rates may distort decisions, reducing effectiveness
|
Introduce tiered penalties and subsidies based on cane volume
|
Compare fixed vs. tiered systems; Set rules for the tiered system
|
Survey results on harvesting behavior; Sustainable tiered penalty and subsidy system
|
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Budget Bureau, Cane and Sugar Industry Associations, Farmers
|
|
4.Proactive Promotion of Sugarcane Harvester Loans
|
Increase harvester loan uptake, particularly in areas with shortages
|
Some areas lack sufficient harvesters, and loan uptake is low
|
Enhance loan terms and provide special subsidies for land preparation
|
Survey demand and availability; Introduce better loan terms and special subsidies; Connect harvester buyers with factories
|
Reduced harvester shortages; Increased fresh cane harvesting
|
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, Sugar factories
|
|
5.Investment in Large Harvesters or Alternative Technologies
|
Enhance access to large harvesters or alternative technologies to reduce pre-harvest burning
|
Lack of workers and harvesters leads to pre-harvest burning
|
Government investment in large harvesters and alternative technologies
|
Invest based on service demand; Support large harvester usage through pricing and education
|
Sufficient large harvesters; Increased cane yield from large harvesters
|
Government, Farmers, Sugar factories
|
|
6.Easing Foreign Labor Policies During Harvesting Season
|
Facilitate the use of foreign labor during the fresh cane harvesting season
|
Farmers face issues of accessing foreign workers due to legal restrictions
|
Implement short-term work visas and streamline foreign labor management
|
Negotiate labor agreements, announce harvesting periods in advance; Create online tracking systems for foreign labor
|
Managed foreign labor system; Enhanced fresh cane harvesting
|
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Immigration Bureau, Cane farmer associations, Farmers
|
Source: Summarized by authors from Fakthong, et al., (2023)
CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
This article has presented an analysis of existing data and studies to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of current policies and propose directions for future policy improvements to mitigate sugarcane burning in Thailand. The findings indicate that while financial incentives and penalties have had a positive impact, additional measures are necessary to sustain long-term reductions in burning practices. Key recommendations include enhancing subsidies for fresh sugarcane and increasing penalties for burned sugarcane, establishing area-specific zero-burn targets, and promoting the adoption of advanced harvesting technologies.
Fakthong et al. (2023) endorse these proposed policies but also highlights key constraints and potential drawbacks associated with their implementation based on interview data. Firstly, the effectiveness of financial incentives for fresh cane harvesting can be hindered by delays in subsidy disbursement, which prevent farmers from reinvesting promptly in the next planting cycle. Additionally, the current penalty for burned cane may not be a strong enough deterrent for some farmers, particularly in areas where burning is still a prevalent practice due to unsuitable harvesting conditions.
Moreover, the establishment of area-specific zero-burn targets may face challenges due to varying levels of readiness and suitability for using mechanical harvesters across different regions. For instance, regions with rocky or sandy soils, such as Sa Kaeo and Chonburi, may struggle to meet these targets without significant infrastructural and technological support.
Promoting the adoption of advanced harvesting technologies also requires addressing the high costs and availability of such equipment. Small-scale farmers may find it difficult to afford these technologies without substantial financial assistance and support from the government and related stakeholders.
In conclusion, while the proposed policies offer a promising direction for reducing PM2.5 emissions and promoting a sustainable sugarcane industry in Thailand, the policy makers should be careful about sugarcane farmer’s heterogeneity and diversity. Implementing these strategies effectively will require a comprehensive approach that includes timely financial support, targeted technological investments, and collaborative efforts among all stakeholders to address the unique challenges faced by different regions and farmer groups.
REFERENCES
Bangkokbiznews. (2024). Pimpattra orders OCSB to strictly control burned sugarcane, considering increasing penalties by 90-120 THAI BAHT. Retrieved February 23, 2024, from Bangkokbiznews (In Thai).
Brunekreef, B., & Holgate, S. T. (2002). Air pollution and health. The lancet, 360(9341), 1233-1242.
Boonyakunakorn, P., Lerkamnouychoke, T., Nualyai, P., Pruekrudee, S., Srikongpetch, K., & Wangwanichaphan, S. (2021). Methods to Unlock Constraints and Increase Motivation to Solve the Sustainable Sugarcane Burning Problem. Focused and Quick (FAQ), 188, 1-12.
Fakthong, T., Tanasritunyakul, A., Punjatewakupt, P., & Prasertsri, L. (2023). A Study of Sugarcane Burning Behavior and Willingness to Pay for Adopting Less Carbon-Emitted Harvester Technology as A Preventive Measure of PM 2.5 Emissions in Thailand. National Research Council of Thailand, Fiscal Year 2022.
Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA). (2024). Ecoplant. Retrieved May 31, 2024, from https://ecoplant.gistda.or.th/
Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA). (2024). Spatial data analysis on sugarcane burning hotspots. Retrieved May 7, 2024, from GISTDA
Nation Thailand. (2023). The prime minister has ordered yet another crackdown on sources of air pollution after satellite images showed more than 1,000 hotspot fires burning in Thailand on Saturday. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from Nation Thailand
NASA's Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS). (2024). Retrieved May 31, 2024, from https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov
Nualyai, P. (2018). Why do we burn sugarcane? Bank of Thailand. Retrieved February 17, 2023, from BOT.
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Ministry of Industry. (2024). Report on the Situation of Sugarcane Cultivation. Retrieved May 7, 2024, from OCSB. (In Thai)
Ostro, B., Broadwin, R., Green, S., Feng, W. Y., & Lipsett, M. (2006). Fine particulate air pollution and mortality in nine California countries: results from CALFINE. Environmental health perspectives, 114(1), 29-33.
Research and Markets. (2023). Thailand sugar market - Forecasts from 2023 to 2028. Research and Markets. Retrieved May 15, 2024, from https://www.researchandmarkets.com
Sangla, L., & Suppadit, T. (2005). The impacts of sugarcane leaf burning and solving methods. Journal of Environmental Management, 2(1), 85-102.
Samoli, E., Analitis, A., Touloumi, G., Schwartz, J., Anderson, H. R., Sunyer, J., Bisanti, L., Zmirou, D., Vonk, J. M., Pekkanen, J., Goodman, P., Paldy, A., Schindler, C., & Katsouyanni, K. (2005). Estimating the exposure-response relationships between particulate matter and mortality within the APHEA multicity project. Environmental health perspectives, 113(1), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7387
Thai PBS World. (2023). Industry Ministry seeks help to curb illegal sugarcane burning. Retrieved May 15, 2024, from https://www.thaipbsworld.com
[1] Through out this article, we convert Thai Baht to US$ with the average exchange rate from 2020 to 2023, 32.73 Thai Baht = 1 US$.
Policy Practices to Mitigate Sugarcane Burning in Thailand
ABSTRACT
This article explores Thailand's policies aimed at mitigating sugarcane burning, a major environmental concern. Despite efforts like subsidies for fresh sugarcane and penalties for burned sugarcane, burning practices persist due to labor shortages and technological limitations. Key recommendations include increasing subsidies and penalties, setting realistic zero-burn targets, and implementing tiered financial incentives. These strategic initiatives are intended to reduce PM2.5 emissions, improve air quality, and ensure a more sustainable sugarcane industry in Thailand.
Keywords: Thailand, sugarcane burning, policies, PM2.5 emissions, sustainability
INTRODUCTION
Burning practices are common in the cultivation of many crops such as rice, maize and sugarcane. The crops are burned to clear fields and prepare for new planting cyles, leading to seasonal spike in PM2.5 levels. The elevated levels of PM2.5 have severe health implications, including respiratory ailments and higher mortality rates (Samoli et al., 2005; Ostro et al., 2006; Brunekreef & Holgate, 2002). Despite these risks, many farmers persist with burning sugarcane due to labor shortages and a lack of adequate cutting machinery, making this method the most feasible and economical option (Sangla & Suppadit, 2005). This article focuses on sugarcane burning, which is a critical environmental challenge in Thailand, particularly during the peak harvesting season from December to April. Sugarcane farmers used burning method for its efficiency in facilitating the harvest. However, the practice emits significant quantities of PM2.5 particles, thereby worsening air quality during harvest season (Nualyai, 2018).
To address these issues, the Thai government has introduced policies to curb sugarcane burning. Starting from 2020/2021 production year, the subsidy of THB120 (US$3.67)[1] per ton for fresh, unburned sugarcane (Research and Markets, 2023) was implemented along with imposing a penalty of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane (Boonyakunakorn, et al., 2021). Additional policies include legal measures to limit the amount of burned sugarcane processed by sugar production factories, government support for agricultural machinery, and collaborative management initiatives between sugar mills and farmers to establish no-burn zones and promote the harvesting of fresh sugarcane (Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Ministry of Industry, 2024).
This article aims to suggest enhanced policy recommendations based on comprehensive survey and interview data to encourage the adoption of sustainable sugarcane harvesting technologies. The article will outline strategic initiatives to support the policies, such as infrastructure improvements and collaborative roles among stakeholders. The goal is to develop a robust policy framework that boosts financial incentives, tackles practical challenges, and promotes the adoption of cleaner harvesting technologies. These recommendations aim to significantly reduce sugarcane burning, lower PM2.5 emissions, and advance a more sustainable and health-conscious sugarcane industry in Thailand.
SUGARCANE PRODUCTION AND BURNING SITUATIONS IN THAILAND
Thailand's sugarcane production has seen significant fluctuations over the years, with varying degrees of burning practices impacting the environment and air quality. Analyzing data from the 2013/14 to 2022/23 prodcution years (Figure 1.), we can observe important trends in both production and burning ratios. During the 2013/14 prodcution year, Thailand harvested 103.67 million tons of sugarcane from 1.61 million hectares, with a burning ratio of 63.42%. This high burning ratio highlighted the prevalent practice of burning sugarcane to facilitate easier harvesting. Over the subsequent years, the area under cultivation and total production generally increased, peaking in the 2017/18 prodcution year with 134.93 million tons from 1.85 million hectares. Despite this increase in production, the burning ratio also rose to 66.28%, indicating that burning remained a widespread method for sugarcane harvesting. A notable shift occurred in the 2020/21 season, where the burning ratio significantly dropped to 26.42%. This decline was accompanied by a decrease in total production to 66.66 million tons from 1.74 million hectares. The reduction in burning can be attributed to the intensified government policies and initiatives aimed at reducing air pollution and promoting fresh sugarcane harvesting. By the 2022/23 production season, the burning ratio had slightly increased again to 32.78%, but remained substantially lower than earlier years. Total production for this period was 93.89 million tons from 1.82 million hectares, showing a recovery in production while maintaining a lower reliance on burning practices.
In the 2018/2019 prodcution year, the Thai government introduced stricter measures to combat sugarcane burning. These measures were part of a broader effort to improve air quality and included providing subsidies for fresh sugarcane and imposing penalties for burned sugarcane. The measures required sugar mills to limit the purchase of burned sugarcane, initially capping it at 30% of their daily intake, with plans to reduce this limit further to 20% in the 2020/21 season and 5% in the 2021/22 season. This policy aimed to encourage the harvesting of fresh sugarcane and reduce the environmental impact of burning practices. These policies appear to have had a significant impact, as evidenced by the sharp decrease in the burning ratio from 61.11% in 2018/19 to 49.65% in 2019/20, and further down to 26.42% in 2020/21. This suggests that the financial incentives and penalties were effective in reducing the incidence of sugarcane burning. However, the slight increase in the burning ratio to 27.27% in 2021/22 and 32.78% in 2022/23 indicates that while the policies were effective, there is still room for improvement to sustain long-term reductions in burning practices.
Thailand's sugarcane cultivation is concentrated in several key regions, each with distinct geographical characteristics that influence sugarcane production. In 2023/24 production year (Table 1), the top two provinces for sugarcane production in each major region are Nakhon Sawan and Kamphaeng Phet in the northern region, Udon Thani and Khon Kaen in the northeastern region, Kanchanaburi and Lopburi in the central region, and Sa Kaeo and Chonburi in the eastern region. In Nakhon Sawan, sugarcane production reached 7.41 million tons from 0.13 million hectares, averaging 58.73 tons per hectare, covering 13.1% of the province's area. Kamphaeng Phet produced 7.09 million tons from 0.13 million hectares, with an average yield of 57.18 tons per hectare, representing 14.4% of its area. Udon Thani produced 7.93 million tons from 0.12 million hectares, with an average yield of 67.06 tons per hectare, covering 10.1% of the area. Khon Kaen produced 7.00 million tons from 0.11 million hectares, yielding 67.18 tons per hectare, representing 9.6% of the province. In Kanchanaburi, 7.14 million tons were produced from 0.12 million hectares, averaging 60.82 tons per hectare and covering 6.0% of the area. Lopburi produced 6.38 million tons from 0.11 million hectares, with a yield of 58.73 tons per hectare, representing 17.5% of its area. Sa Kaeo produced 4.41 million tons from 0.07 million hectares, with an average yield of 60.58 tons per hectare, covering 10.1% of the province. Lastly, Chonburi produced 1.36 million tons from 0.02 million hectares, averaging 60.01 tons per hectare, representing 4.9% of the province's area.
Udon Thani and Khon Kaen exhibit the highest yields per hectare at 67.06 and 67.18 tons respectively, indicating more efficient sugarcane production practices in these provinces. Conversely, Kamphaeng Phet and Nakhon Sawan, while producing similar total tonnage, show relatively lower yields per hectare, suggesting potential for yield improvement. Chonburi, despite having the smallest cultivation area, maintains a competitive yield, highlighting efficient use of its agricultural land. This comparison underscores the varying efficiencies and potential for optimization in sugarcane production across different provinces in Thailand.
There is a strong correlation between areas of high sugarcane production and the occurrence of hotspots, which are indicative of burning activities. According to data from the Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA) (2024), regions with extensive sugarcane cultivation often show a higher number of hotspots, particularly during the harvesting season. For example, GISTDA recorded over 5,000 hotspots in Nakhon Sawan and over 4,800 in Kamphaeng Phet during the peak burning period in the 2023/24 production year. Additional data show that other key sugarcane-producing provinces also had significant numbers of hotspots: Udon Thani, Khon Kaen, Kanchanaburi, Lopburi, Sa Kaeo, and Chonburi reported high numbers of hotspots, reflecting widespread burning practices associated with sugarcane harvesting. For instance, Kanchanaburi alone recorded 577 hotspots, highlighting the significant burning activity in the area.
The high number of hotspots in these regions underscores the environmental impact of sugarcane burning, contributing to severe air quality issues due to the release of PM2.5 particles. Addressing this link between sugarcane production and hotspots is crucial for reducing PM2.5 emissions and improving air quality in Thailand.
Figure 2. illustrates a spatial relationship between sugarcane cultivation areas and active fire hotspots. The yellow regions represent areas dedicated to sugarcane farming, while the red dots, sourced from NASA's FIRMS (Fire Information for Resource Management System), indicate active fire hotspots during the period from December 16 to 31, 2023, when sugar factories commence purchasing sugarcane from farmers, and the beginning of sugarcane harvesting. The concentration of red dots around the yellow cultivation areas suggests a correlation between sugarcane farming and the occurrence of fires (Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA), 2024; NASA's FIRMS, 2024).
POLICIES TO ADDRESS SUGARCANE BURNING IN THAILAND
In the past, the government has continuously implemented measures to address the issue of burned sugarcane. The proactive policy to tackle this problem was introduced in 2016, including support for loans to purchase sugarcane harvesters to enhance harvesting efficiency and a deduction of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane. However, these policies had minimal impact, with the proportion of burned sugarcane remaining around 65% of the total harvested sugarcane.
Efforts to address the issue resurfaced in 2019 with expanded measures, such as Phase 2 of the sugarcane harvester loan program (2019-2024), financial support for fresh sugarcane harvesting, and a regulation limiting burned sugarcane to no more than 50% of total purchases by sugar mills. Specific measures include legal measures, support for agricultural machinery, incentives for fresh sugarcane harvesting, and cooperative management measures.
Legal measures
The government set aggressive targets to reduce sugarcane burning. In the 2019/2020 season, mills were restricted to processing no more than 30% burned sugarcane daily. This limit was decreased to 20% in the 2020/2021 season and further reduced to 0-5% in the 2021/2022 season.
Support for agricultural machinery
The government supported the use of agricultural machinery, such as sugarcane leaf strippers and harvesters, through various programs:
- A comprehensive loan promotion program (2019-2024) with a budget of THB6 billion (US$180 million) for purchasing new and used harvesters, offering low-interest loans with an 8-year repayment term at 2% interest.
- Measures to support domestic sugarcane harvester manufacturers.
- Asset-to-capital conversion measures, allowing farmers to register their machinery as collateral for loans.
Incentives for fresh sugarcane harvesting
Financial incentives were provided to encourage fresh sugarcane harvesting, including (Nualyai, 2018):
- Returning the THB30 (US$0.92) per ton deduction for burned sugarcane to farmers harvesting high-quality fresh sugarcane. The rate was increased from THB20 (US$0.61) per ton in 2016 which had been used since 1986 (Boonyakunakorn, et al., 2021).
- Providing a subsidy of THB120 (US$3.67) per ton for high-quality fresh sugarcane, with a budget of THB6.065 billion (US$185 million) for the 2023/2024 season.
The program was managed by the Ministry of Industry and the funds were disbursed through the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC).
For the next harvesting year 2024/2025, the Ministry of Industry has mandated even stricter measures, such as reducing the number of collection points for burned sugarcane and significantly increasing penalties to up to THB90 to 120 (US$2.75 to 3.67) per ton, to further discourage burning and support fresh sugarcane production (Bangkokbiznews, 2024).
Cooperative management measures
The government sought cooperation to establish burn-free zones in five model provinces (Kanchanaburi, Ratchaburi, Chaiyaphum, Loei, and Uttaradit) for the 2019/2020 season. The provinces were selected based on their high incidence of burning, geographic diversity, and willingness of local stakeholders to participate in the project. These pilot provinces were chosen to establish burn-free zones and implement targeted measures to reduce sugarcane burning within a 5-kilometer radius of communities and a 10-kilometer radius of sugar mills. The success and learnings from these initial efforts are intended to inform the expansion of the initiative to other regions in the future (Thai PBS World, 2023).
The Phase 2 measures significantly reduced burned sugarcane from 61% in 2019 to 27% in 2022. This success was driven by continuous efforts, public awareness, and financial support for fresh sugarcane harvesting. Despite the successes, several challenges remain. Policies may not be effective for small farmers due to high costs of land preparation and machinery, as these farmers often lack the funds to purchase expensive harvesters or face difficulties hiring harvesting services. The fine of THB30 (US$0.92) per ton for burned sugarcane is too low to deter burning, making it more convenient for farmers to burn and pay the fine. Additionally, the loan program for harvesters has not fully incentivized farmers, with significant unused funds reflecting the limited uptake of the scheme. Labor shortages further exacerbate the problem, as workers prefer harvesting burned sugarcane due to ease and better income. Fresh sugarcane harvesting is more labor-intensive and less appealing to workers.
To build on these efforts and address the ongoing challenges, it is crucial to develop more effective strategies that consider the specific needs and limitations of small farmers, as well as the labor dynamics within the industry. By refining existing policies and introducing new initiatives, the government can further reduce sugarcane burning and promote sustainable practices. The next section will propose targeted recommendations and strategic initiatives designed to enhance the effectiveness of these measures, ensuring that they provide practical support to all stakeholders involved in the sugarcane industry.
POLICY SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section presents the policy suggestions and recommendation based on the study by Faktong et al. (2023), proposing practical solutions for reducing sugarcane burning and PM 2.5 emissions. The study combines quantitative and qualitative approaches to evaluate Thailand's current subsidy and penalty policies for sugarcane farming. The study collected data from survey and focus group discussion with farmers and local sugarcane institute officers.
Field data from eight sample provinces reveal that while most areas are suitable for cultivation, regions like Sa Kaeo and Phetchabun face challenges with rocky terrains. Larger areas, such as Suphanburi and Nakhon Sawan, have enough harvesters, whereas regions with gravel or sandy soils, like Sa Kaeo and Chonburi, lack adequate machinery, leading to reliance on manual labor.
Focus group discussions highlighted the effectiveness of financial incentives for fresh cane harvesting, although delays in subsidy disbursements hinder reinvestment in the next planting cycle. Additionally, the penalty for burned cane has not been a strong deterrent for some farmers. Certain regions, such as Kamphaeng Phet, have successfully reduced burned cane, while others, like Chonburi and Phetchabun, still report high proportions due to unsuitable harvesting conditions.
Adverse weather conditions also force some areas to resort to burning. These challenges highlight the need for comprehensive policy recommendations to promote fresh cane harvesting. The following section will present detailed policy suggestions, including goals, strategic plans, primary outcomes, and stakeholder roles to achieve the government's objectives.
From the above information, Fakthong, et al. (2023) proposes the outline of practical solutions to reduce burning in sugarcane preharvesting. Table 2 presents detailed policy suggestions, including goals, strategic plans, primary outcomes, and stakeholder roles to achieve the government's objectives. The proposed policy solutions to mitigate sugarcane burning in Thailand involve a multifaceted approach focusing on improving financial incentives, setting realistic zero-burn targets, and enhancing support for sugarcane harvesters. Key measures include increasing the subsidy for fresh sugarcane from THB120 to 150 (US$3.67 to 4.58) per ton and raising the penalty for burned sugarcane from THB30 to 50 (US$0.92 to 1.53) per ton to better incentivize fresh cane harvesting. Additionally, establishing tailored zero-burn targets based on the suitability of planting areas, with the aim to achieve no burned cane by 2030 or 2035, is crucial.
Other practical solutions include implementing a tiered penalty and subsidy system to account for different volumes of cane, promoting sugarcane harvester loans to address equipment shortages, investing in large harvesters and alternative technologies to reduce pre-harvest burning, and easing foreign labor policies to facilitate access to workers during the harvesting season. These strategies, supported by stakeholder collaboration, are expected to significantly reduce burning practices, improve air quality, and promote sustainable sugarcane production in Thailand.
Table 2. Suggested sugarcane burning mitigation policies for Thailand.
Policy
Goal
Findings
Proposed changes
Strategic plans
Expected outcomes
Stakeholders
1.Improvement of Subsidy and Penalty Policies (Fresh vs. Burned Sugarcane)
Improve subsidy and penalty rates to incentivize fresh cane harvesting
Current subsidy of THB120/ton for fresh cane and penalty of THB30 /ton for burned cane are somewhat effective
Increase subsidy to THB150/ton for fresh cane and penalty to THB50 /ton for burned cane
Announce new rates at least three months before harvesting; Ensure timely payments to farmers
Over 90% fresh cane delivered to factories, Annual increase of 2% in fresh cane delivery
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Budget Bureau, Industrial factories, Farmers
2.Setting a Zero Burn Target Based on Suitability of Planting Areas
Establish realistic zero burn targets tailored to different planting areas
Some areas unsuitable for harvester use due to terrain and conditions, requiring varying adaptation times
Different timelines for areas with and without harvester readiness, aiming for no burned cane by 2030 or 2035
Conduct readiness surveys and gather feedback; Designate planting areas, develop promotional and penalty measures; Collaborate on efficient harvesting schedules
Area-specific zero burn targets; Sustainable collaboration among stakeholders
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Cane and Sugar Industry Associations, Farmers
3.Gradual Penalties and Subsidies for Fresh Cane Harvesting
Implement a tiered penalty and subsidy system to incentivize fresh cane harvesting
Fixed rates may distort decisions, reducing effectiveness
Introduce tiered penalties and subsidies based on cane volume
Compare fixed vs. tiered systems; Set rules for the tiered system
Survey results on harvesting behavior; Sustainable tiered penalty and subsidy system
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Budget Bureau, Cane and Sugar Industry Associations, Farmers
4.Proactive Promotion of Sugarcane Harvester Loans
Increase harvester loan uptake, particularly in areas with shortages
Some areas lack sufficient harvesters, and loan uptake is low
Enhance loan terms and provide special subsidies for land preparation
Survey demand and availability; Introduce better loan terms and special subsidies; Connect harvester buyers with factories
Reduced harvester shortages; Increased fresh cane harvesting
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives, Sugar factories
5.Investment in Large Harvesters or Alternative Technologies
Enhance access to large harvesters or alternative technologies to reduce pre-harvest burning
Lack of workers and harvesters leads to pre-harvest burning
Government investment in large harvesters and alternative technologies
Invest based on service demand; Support large harvester usage through pricing and education
Sufficient large harvesters; Increased cane yield from large harvesters
Government, Farmers, Sugar factories
6.Easing Foreign Labor Policies During Harvesting Season
Facilitate the use of foreign labor during the fresh cane harvesting season
Farmers face issues of accessing foreign workers due to legal restrictions
Implement short-term work visas and streamline foreign labor management
Negotiate labor agreements, announce harvesting periods in advance; Create online tracking systems for foreign labor
Managed foreign labor system; Enhanced fresh cane harvesting
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Immigration Bureau, Cane farmer associations, Farmers
Source: Summarized by authors from Fakthong, et al., (2023)
CONCLUSION AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
This article has presented an analysis of existing data and studies to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of current policies and propose directions for future policy improvements to mitigate sugarcane burning in Thailand. The findings indicate that while financial incentives and penalties have had a positive impact, additional measures are necessary to sustain long-term reductions in burning practices. Key recommendations include enhancing subsidies for fresh sugarcane and increasing penalties for burned sugarcane, establishing area-specific zero-burn targets, and promoting the adoption of advanced harvesting technologies.
Fakthong et al. (2023) endorse these proposed policies but also highlights key constraints and potential drawbacks associated with their implementation based on interview data. Firstly, the effectiveness of financial incentives for fresh cane harvesting can be hindered by delays in subsidy disbursement, which prevent farmers from reinvesting promptly in the next planting cycle. Additionally, the current penalty for burned cane may not be a strong enough deterrent for some farmers, particularly in areas where burning is still a prevalent practice due to unsuitable harvesting conditions.
Moreover, the establishment of area-specific zero-burn targets may face challenges due to varying levels of readiness and suitability for using mechanical harvesters across different regions. For instance, regions with rocky or sandy soils, such as Sa Kaeo and Chonburi, may struggle to meet these targets without significant infrastructural and technological support.
Promoting the adoption of advanced harvesting technologies also requires addressing the high costs and availability of such equipment. Small-scale farmers may find it difficult to afford these technologies without substantial financial assistance and support from the government and related stakeholders.
In conclusion, while the proposed policies offer a promising direction for reducing PM2.5 emissions and promoting a sustainable sugarcane industry in Thailand, the policy makers should be careful about sugarcane farmer’s heterogeneity and diversity. Implementing these strategies effectively will require a comprehensive approach that includes timely financial support, targeted technological investments, and collaborative efforts among all stakeholders to address the unique challenges faced by different regions and farmer groups.
REFERENCES
Bangkokbiznews. (2024). Pimpattra orders OCSB to strictly control burned sugarcane, considering increasing penalties by 90-120 THAI BAHT. Retrieved February 23, 2024, from Bangkokbiznews (In Thai).
Brunekreef, B., & Holgate, S. T. (2002). Air pollution and health. The lancet, 360(9341), 1233-1242.
Boonyakunakorn, P., Lerkamnouychoke, T., Nualyai, P., Pruekrudee, S., Srikongpetch, K., & Wangwanichaphan, S. (2021). Methods to Unlock Constraints and Increase Motivation to Solve the Sustainable Sugarcane Burning Problem. Focused and Quick (FAQ), 188, 1-12.
Fakthong, T., Tanasritunyakul, A., Punjatewakupt, P., & Prasertsri, L. (2023). A Study of Sugarcane Burning Behavior and Willingness to Pay for Adopting Less Carbon-Emitted Harvester Technology as A Preventive Measure of PM 2.5 Emissions in Thailand. National Research Council of Thailand, Fiscal Year 2022.
Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA). (2024). Ecoplant. Retrieved May 31, 2024, from https://ecoplant.gistda.or.th/
Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA). (2024). Spatial data analysis on sugarcane burning hotspots. Retrieved May 7, 2024, from GISTDA
Nation Thailand. (2023). The prime minister has ordered yet another crackdown on sources of air pollution after satellite images showed more than 1,000 hotspot fires burning in Thailand on Saturday. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from Nation Thailand
NASA's Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS). (2024). Retrieved May 31, 2024, from https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov
Nualyai, P. (2018). Why do we burn sugarcane? Bank of Thailand. Retrieved February 17, 2023, from BOT.
Office of the Cane and Sugar Board, Ministry of Industry. (2024). Report on the Situation of Sugarcane Cultivation. Retrieved May 7, 2024, from OCSB. (In Thai)
Ostro, B., Broadwin, R., Green, S., Feng, W. Y., & Lipsett, M. (2006). Fine particulate air pollution and mortality in nine California countries: results from CALFINE. Environmental health perspectives, 114(1), 29-33.
Research and Markets. (2023). Thailand sugar market - Forecasts from 2023 to 2028. Research and Markets. Retrieved May 15, 2024, from https://www.researchandmarkets.com
Sangla, L., & Suppadit, T. (2005). The impacts of sugarcane leaf burning and solving methods. Journal of Environmental Management, 2(1), 85-102.
Samoli, E., Analitis, A., Touloumi, G., Schwartz, J., Anderson, H. R., Sunyer, J., Bisanti, L., Zmirou, D., Vonk, J. M., Pekkanen, J., Goodman, P., Paldy, A., Schindler, C., & Katsouyanni, K. (2005). Estimating the exposure-response relationships between particulate matter and mortality within the APHEA multicity project. Environmental health perspectives, 113(1), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7387
Thai PBS World. (2023). Industry Ministry seeks help to curb illegal sugarcane burning. Retrieved May 15, 2024, from https://www.thaipbsworld.com
[1] Through out this article, we convert Thai Baht to US$ with the average exchange rate from 2020 to 2023, 32.73 Thai Baht = 1 US$.