LETTER | Transboundary haze pollution continues to pose a major regional environmental issue in Southeast Asia member countries like Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia, and to a lesser extent, Southern Thailand.
Previous data and satellite images of peatland fires, illegal logging and deforestation induced by land cleaning efforts in rural and agricultural areas of Kalimantan, Sumatra and Riau by local and international agribusinesses, remain the main cause of haze in this region.
At its worst, when environmental conditions such as El Niño delay the onset of the rainy season, burnings and smoke due to peatland fires and land cleaning activities continue to intensify.
Besides the grave threats to human health, especially to those suffering chronic health conditions and the vulnerable, exposure to haze pollution harms living resources, fragile ecosystems and property, leading to violations of the fundamental human rights to life and health and considerable financial loss to the governments.
According to Greenpeace, around 110,000 deaths occur annually from pollution-related illnesses, stemming from haze.
For instance, this wicked crisis in 2015 wrought the Indonesian government between U$16 billion (RM75.7 billion) to US$28 billion (RM132.5 billion) in losses, redirecting air traffic and causing other similar repercussions.
Schools had to be closed and a state of emergency was declared in many areas as a result of haze.
In 2019, US$5.2 billion (RM24.6 billion) in damages and economic losses were reported, reflecting a 0.5 percent of Indonesia’s gross domestic product (GDP).
The recent unhealthy air quality recorded in parts of Peninsular Malaysia and western Sarawak since Friday last week, where the Department of Environment (DOE) reported nine areas in Malaysia with unhealthy Air Pollutant Index (API) readings of between 101 and 200, leaves much to be desired.
According to the Asean Specialised Meteorological Centre (ASMC), based on surveillance from the NOAA-20 satellite, some 241 and 145 hotspots were detected in Sumatra on Sept 27 and 28.
However, the Indonesian government, through its Environment and Forestry Ministry (KLHK), has denied the allegations, with Environment Minister, Siti Nurbaya Bakar, saying Jakarta had not detected any travelling haze from Indonesia to neighbouring countries.
Global goals such as the sustainable development goals (SDGs), particularly SDG3 on healthy lives and wellbeing, SDG11 (sustainable cities), SDG12 (responsible consumption and production), SDG13 (climate change), SDG15 (protection, restoration and promotion of sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems) and SDG16 (providing access to justice), should be adopted by the affected Asean member states in galvanising support and guiding actions at the Asean level.
These goals should provide a framework for shared action for people, planet and prosperity by all countries and all stakeholders who should act in collaborative partnership.
What is Asean doing?
Having a good disaster risk management (DRM) plan and well-coordinated efforts and commitment among related disaster management agencies at all levels and local stakeholders, will potentially lead to disaster risk reductions, enhance preparedness and responses and reduce the level of damage to assets and avert loss of lives.
Solutions to the annual toxic haze have been discussed among Asean member states for decades. The severe haze in 1997 and 1998 accelerated this process and led to the signing of the Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (ATHP) in 2002 by member states in Kuala Lumpur.
The ATHP, which was the first regional proposal in the world, aimed at mitigating and preventing haze pollution through concentrated nationwide efforts and increased regional and worldwide cooperation.
Its implementation requires, among others, that each member state enact appropriate domestic legislation.
Though Malaysia was the first country to have ratified the ATHP in 2002, until today, it has yet to enact its domestic Transboundary Haze Pollution Act.
Indonesia, on the other hand, only ratified ATHP in September 2014. The ratification came with mixed reactions. For some, it is a positive gesture despite the delay while for others, it is a blot on a non-enforceable agreement.
Until today, transboundary haze still recurs and there is no sign of any permanent solution in sight.
Weak mechanisms in settling disputes and non-compliance are further compounded by the agreement's obligatory provisions that do not specify any legitimate sanctions for non-compliance nor Asean constituted as an operative enforcement organisation.
Corruption and insubstantial implementation in managing the haze need to be addressed without any more delay for the peace and safety of all in the region.
Asean should reassess how to apply the principle of non-intrusion and resilient reaction to be adopted. Malaysia and other affected member countries should work together harmoniously to resolve this problem, understanding the shocking economic and public health damage the haze has already caused and will continue to cause.
Although the ATHP lacks enforceable mandatory provisions, it remains a strong instrument for regional collaboration to control transboundary pollution.
The reduction of transboundary haze should be a subject matter for joint efforts of legal reform, political will and administrative coordination.
Given that transboundary haze pollution requires cross-sectoral coordination, the impetus and commitment to develop a regional strategy must emanate from the highest level of both the government and the non-governmental sector as failure to do so will negatively affect millions of people with substantial damages to the economy, biodiversity and human health.
Shared prosperity as envisioned in the SDGs will not be achieved unless practical policy actions and strategies, coupled with shared commitment and concerted efforts from member states, are seriously taken into consideration to tackle this wicked problem, once and for all.
Writer is a research analyst at Institut Masa Depan Malaysia.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
