I stumbled on this article "The Truth About Coconut Palm Sugar: The Other Side of the Story!" (a cached copy is here.)but sadly, and despite its claims, it only shows the author's side of the truth in relation to their business and completely neglect's the farmer's side of the truth. It only reinforces the lessons of the famous legend of "The Blind Men and the Elephant."
My primary objective in writing this is to present a contrarian view to the author's many unsubstantiated claims and leave you to decide what the essential truth really is. Second, I wish to correct the speculations he made with regard to coconuts and the industry (in the Philippines), in general. Finally, I hope to allay the fear and uncertainties he expressed in that bleak scenario of the future he projects.
Claim: "When the sap used to make coconut palm sugar is collected from the coconut palm tree, from the flower bud that will eventually form a coconut, that tree can no longer produce coconuts "
Fact: A coconut tree will continue to produce nuts, even if it's tapped for sap.
While it is true that harvesting sap will prevent a spadix from turning into a nut. What the author didn't mention is that a palm tree can grow multiple spadices at the same time. Therefore a farmer has the option to tap one for sap and leave another to mature into nuts (or drupes, if you want to be scientifically correct.) There's even is a method called "Sequential Coconut Toddy and Nut Production (SCTNP)" where the lower half of a single spadix is harvested for sap, and the remaining half allowed to mature into nuts.
It is not a permanent process that will cause irreversible loss of the tree's ability to produce drupes in the future.
The logical next question the farmer will pose for himself is: "why would I rather tap the tree for sap than allow the nuts to grow?". Why, indeed! The rest of the article will tell you why.
Claim: "There is a reason why the coconut sugar is so nutritious. It feeds the coconut flower that grows into a wonderful coconut"
Fact: Coco palm sugar is nutricious is because of how it is made.
Coco palm sugar is nutritious because of its processing, or more accurately the MINIMAL processing (it's simple dehydration - under controlled conditions, of course) it undergoes allowing it to retain the natural vitamins, minerals and micro-nutrients found in its original state, . For all intents and purposes, table sugar from cane would have better nutritional value had it not undergone the chemical refining process that strips it off of all its nutrients.
The nectar is not food for the coconut blossoms. It is the plant's biological mechanism to attract insect pollinators (i.e. bees, wasps, ants, etc.). Scientists estimates that only 30-40% of nutlets set are carried to full-term, most abort within 3 months of being pollinated.
Claim: "coconut palms that were formerly producing coconuts that were used in the production of coconut oil or desiccated coconut are now being converted to coconut sugar production"
(Note: Coming from the IT industry, that statement reeks of FUD, but I digress.)
According to official statistics, there were 341.3 million fruit-bearing coconuts across the country as of 2009, each producing an average 45 nuts per tree per year, or 15.656 billion nuts in all. There are 3.4 million hectares planted with coconut all over the Philippines.
The current of high prices has nothing to do with coconut sugar production. The real reason for the current state of prices of coconut oils is due to the erratic weather and the drought experienced in 2009, made worse by La Niña and El Niño weather disturbances that resulted in yields that are significantly lower than earlier projections.
2011 will remain a challenging year because low yields caused by droughts could extend up to two years after its occurrence. Philippine domestic consumption of coconut oils is on the uptake because of the bio-fuels law (Republic Act 9367) enacted in 2007 that mandates the use of gasoline with a blend of five (5) percent bio-ethanol since 2009 which will be increased to ten (10) percent this year.
Sadly, the author's premise (as indicated by the general tone of the article) that coconut palm sugar is causing low production and driving high prices of coconut oil is completely wrong.
Putting aside the issues of climate change and food versus fuel for a moment, another significant issue the industry faces are low yields from existing farms which are averaging annual yield per hectare of less than half of the 8,000 nuts per hectare per year under well-managed conditions. In optimal conditions, 13,00 nuts/ha/year is achievable with the right coconut variety!
Of course, farmers do know why yields are low. You can't expect farms to maintain bountiful harvests several years after you keep taking nutrients out of the soil and not replacing it. You need inputs, whether natural or inorganic is irrelevant at the moment. Unfortunately, inputs are not cheap or easily available, and copra returns are low. The article hits the problem right on, high returns is what attracts some farmers to coco palm sugar production - because all this time, they have been unable to realize the promised profits from their copra crops - so why would the writer begrudge the farmers of that?
Now, imagine if copra prices reflect its real cost. Where prices need not be so low if copra was not the farmers only choice. Profitable copra prices (for farmers, not only for brokers and agents) would mean extra money that can be spent on inputs which in turn will lead to much improved farm yields. With the proper application of inputs, and the proper management of farms, doubling or trebling the current average of 1 ton/ha./year is a very reasonable goal. Theoretically, even if 50% of current plantations switch to sugar production (which I personally don't think is feasible anyway), then it's still possible to maintain, even exceed, current copra outputs. It goes without saying that improved incomes will lead to reducing the high poverty incidence in this sector of our society.
Ideally, a farmer's business decision on whether to go for nut production and/or sap production is based on how he can get the most benefit out of existing resources. Coconuts are the Philippines' top agricultural export product that brings in more than 900 million USD per year but do you know that 90% of its 3.5 million farmers and workers of the coconut industry live BELOW the national poverty line?
A typical coconut smallholder farmer works a 2 hectare farm, which might be his own, or is a tenant of. The following table shows typical monthly yield per hectare*, farmgate value for the production of the following in a one hectare farm (100 trees):
| Commodity | Yield | Farmgate Price (USD) | Notes | |
| VCNO | 26.15 l | 6.9, gallons | 69.73 | Virgin coconut oil |
| CNO | 51 l | 193.29, gallons | n.a. | CNO is not produce at the farm level. Copra is its raw component. |
| Copra | 96 kg | 211.2 lb. | 74.66 | 12-month old mature nuts sold as copra. |
| Foodnut | 400 nuts | 109.09 | 12-month old mature nuts, sold for consumption (i.e. coconut milk). | |
| Buko | 400 nuts | 90.91 | 8-month old nuts as foodnut. | |
| Sap | 2,730 liters | 720.3 gallons | 327.41 | for alcoholic beverages - lambanog (distilled spirit from coconut wine) or tuba (coconut wine) production |
| Sap | 2,730 liters | 720.3 gallons | 736.67 | for syrup/sugar production**. |
*Typical values for un-managed farms. Higher yields for farms managed under good agronomic practices.
** The price range (0.80-1.14 USD per gallon) reflects the skilled labor required for quality sap meant for sugar/syrup production.
Given above, what do you suppose is a farmer's motivation for choosing one over the other? Coconut sugaring is a disruptive business for those whose business model is to pay peanuts for cheap labor.
Realistically, coco palm sugar production will likely remain in the artisanal realms. While it is true the capital requirement to start a backyard production is close to nil (there's no special equipment necessary) it is laborious, energy intensive, and economies of scale are impossible to achieve with today's conventional technologies. A single tapper can only harvest from 20-25 trees per day, therefore you need 4-5 skilled tappers for every hectare. Contrary to popular thinking, tapping is a skill that is in short supply - at least, for now.
Because of these issues, the cost of production whether you're operating a 2-hectare farm or a 20-hectare plantation remain relatively the same. As it stands today, it is not a very attractive proposition for investors. Therefore, the growth of coco palm sugar, despite its potential for high returns remains under threat. Just like the lambanog industry, this sector will have to overcome many present challenges or it won't be able to sustain its growth. When those challenges are met, the the coconut industry will have no choice but to diversify and adopt - and there's plenty of room for improvement for that.
Claim: "many of the nutrient claims are unfounded" (referring to coco palm sugar)
Fact: Findings were made by a national scientific agency (i.e. Department of Science and Technology/Food Nutrition and Research Institute) using internationally recognized protocols instituted by the University of Sydney (for GI testing).
What are the author's qualifications to dispute the findings of a national scientific agency such as the Philippine Food and Nutrition Research Institute (PNFRI)? Is the author an academic or a scientist who is in a position to scientifically contest the validity of Glycemic Index (GI) effect studies by the University of Sydney that is accepted worldwide as a reliable, physiological-based food classification system? How much weight does writer's opinion carry against the expert opinion of Food and Agricultral Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) committee endorsement of the GI method made as early as 1997?
The statement itself is too vague to be of any value, and the motivation is questionable. It's akin to the opinion "the world is flat" held by many when evidence of a spherical world was presented by men of science. These scientific organizations are staffed by professionals whose reputations are staked on each study and research they make available, and reviewed by peers around the world.
However, I will yield on one point: the present studies published and publicly available are specific to coco palms (cocos nucifera) and not to other palm sugars made from other palm trees (notably, the following: Aren (Arenga saccharifera, A. Pinnata) that is popular in Indonesia, Palmyra (Borassus flabellifer) of Cambodia, Fishtail palm (Caryota urens) for sugaring in Sri Lanka, Myanmar and India.).
To claim that the health studies made on cocos nucifera can apply to other palms is absurd! The sad fact is that "palm sugar" is a generic term that is easily abused to ride on the popularity of sweeteners made from cocos nucifera. The bandwagon effect and the lack of reliable sources of information, and the ease of plying falsehood on the Internet exacerbates the situation.
I'd like to believe that I'm a reasonable person. I believe in observable, measurable and reasonable evidence that can be confirmed by other independent observers - much like how reputable scientists works. If other palm sugars producers can present any such proof that can be independently verified, then I would be just as pleased to see them make those claims. In the absence of those, I revert to my simple epicurean pleasure of simply enjoying the uniqueness of each palm sugar rather than go into a pointless discourse of purported claims. It's not likely that debate would resolve how the world will end several million years from now, would it? Moderate consumption always go a long way. The findings made by PNFRI on coco palm sugar, and the GI studies of the University of Sydney still stands.
Conclusion
Following the great American capitalist tradition, why don't we simply let the market forces resolve the production and prices equilibrium now that a viable competition is present? If there is a demand for a valued product and prices should indicate that, then I don't see why farmers wouldn't exert the effort to improve productivity at present acreage, and finally seeing them get a fair share of the wealth that is supposedly being generated by the copra industry.
Reading the article again, and considering all the points raised, I am left to conclude that the writer prefers the status quo of keeping the farmers poor. The author opposes providing "living wages" that would allow the farmers and their families to live decently. This, of course, is under the guise of keeping products affordable. The status quo is preferred so the great masses can enjoy their healthy, cheap and unethical coconut products produced by ungrateful farmers who should be thankful for the prices they're getting from their coconut farms.
You can now place yourself in the shoes of the farmer and answer the very same question the author posed in the article, "Is coconut sugar worth giving up the[se] other valued products that come from the coconut?" Now, you tell me.
Statistics used in this article were taken from publicly available data from the following sources:
http://www.bas.da.gov.ph - Philippine Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
http://www.bas.da.gov.ph - Philippine Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
http://www.pca.gov.ph
- Philippine Coconut Authority
- Philippine Coconut Authority
http://www.nso.gov.ph
- Philippine National Statistics Office
- Philippine National Statistics Office
http://www.fao.org
- Food and Agriculture Organization
- Food and Agriculture Organization
http://comtrade.un.org
- United Nations International Trade Statistics website
- United Nations International Trade Statistics website
http://moc.go.th
- Thailand Ministry of Commerce
- Thailand Ministry of Commerce
Image copyright owned by their respective owners.
