Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T09:34:31.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Diversification of Malaysian Agriculture, 1950–80: Objectives and Achievements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

P. P. Courtenay
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When launching the Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI) in 1969, the then Deputy Prime Minister (the late Tun Abdul Razak) stressed that diversification was Malaysia's greatest need in agriculture, and a few weeks later, in an opening address to a conference on crop diversification organized by the Incorporated Society of Planters, he stated that agricultural diversification had been a national objective for some years. The steady progress towards that objective, he claimed, was “evidenced by the rapid increase in palm oil production, the expansion of acreage planted to high yielding padi varieties, recent increases in tapioca production, and current interest in sugar cane, cocoa, maize, soya beans, groundnuts”.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1984 , pp. 166 - 181
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 E. K., & Blencowe, J. W., ed., Crop Diversification in Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: Incorporated Society of Planters, 1970)Google Scholar.

2 According to Ness, G.L., Bureaucracy and Rural Development in Malaysia (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967)Google Scholar, the character of the debate over rural development was established at the opening of the new Legislative Council in 1948 by Sir Henry Gurney who promised that the Government would attend to the needs of rural people.

3 Rasper, W., “A New Strategy for Malaysia's Economic Development in the 1970's?” in Readings on Malaysian Economic Development, ed. Lim, D. (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1975)Google Scholar.

4 Lim, D., Economic Growth and Development in West Malaysia, 1947-1970 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1973)Google Scholar.

5 Fisk, E.K., “Malaysia”, in Agricultural Development in Asia, ed. Shand, R.T. (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

6 Ness, Bureaucracy and Rural Development.

7 Bahrin, Tunku Shamsul & Perera, P.D.A., FeLDA: 21 Years of Land Development (Kuala Lumpur: Federal Land Development Authority, 1977)Google Scholar.

8 E.g. Yah, Lim Chong, Economic Development of Modern Malaya (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1967)Google Scholar.

9 E.g. Barnard, R., “The Modernization of Agriculture in a Kedah Village, 1967-1978”, Review of Indonesian and Malayan Affairs 13 (1979): 46–89Google Scholar. Purcal, J.P., Rice Economy: Employment and Income in Malaysia (University Press of Hawaii, 1971)Google Scholar.

10 Federation of Malaya, Draft Development Plan (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1950)Google Scholar.

11 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The Economic Development of Malaya (Singapore: Government Printer, 1955)Google Scholar.

12 Federation of Malaya, A Plan of Development for Malaya (Kuala Lumpur: Economic Secretariat, 1956)Google Scholar.

13 Federation of Malaya, Second Five-year Plan, 1961-1965 (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1961)Google Scholar.

14 Ford Foundation Survey Team, Policies and Measures Leading toward Greater Diversification of the Agricultural Economy of the Federation of Malaya (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1963)Google Scholar.

15 Federation of Malaysia, First Malaysia Plan (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1965)Google Scholar.

16 Federation of Malaysia, Second Malaysia Plan (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1971)Google Scholar.

17 Federation of Malaysia, Third Malaysia Plan (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1976)Google Scholar.

18 Federation of Malaysia, Fourth Malaysia Plan (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1981)Google Scholar.

19 Markowitz, H., Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments, Cowles Foundation Monograph 16 (New York: Wiley, 1959)Google Scholar.

20 Quirin, G.D., “The Problem of Structural Diversification”, Malaysian Economic Review 9 (1964): 28–35Google Scholar.

21 Gupta, S.D., “Producers' Rationality and Technical Innovation in Indian Agriculture” (unpublished PH.D. thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science, 1964)Google Scholar.

22 Behrman, J. R., Supply Response in Underdeveloped Agriculture: A Case Study of Four Major Annual Crops in Thailand (Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company, 1968)Google Scholar.

23 Lim, Economic Growth and Development.

24 Deshpande, V.D., “Diversification of Agricultural Production in some South-east Asian Countries”, The Developing Economies II (1967): 371–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Morgan, T., “Economic Diversification in Less Developed Countries: a Framework for Evaluation”, Malayan Economic Review 21 (1976): 26–31Google Scholar.

26 Mudie, R.F., Raeburn, J. R., & Marsh, B., Report of the Mission of Enquiry into the Rubber Industry of Malaya (Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1954)Google Scholar.

27 Aziz, Ungku Abdul, Subdivision of Estates in Malaya 1951-1960 (Department of Economics, University of Malaya, 1962)Google Scholar.

28 Strong criticisms of the methodology and conclusions of the Aziz report were published in Ness, G.D., “Subdivision of Estates in Malaya 1951 - 1960. A Methodological Critique”, Malayan Economic Review 9 (1964): 55–62, and inGoogle ScholarQuirin, G.D., “Estate Subdivision and Economic Development: A Review Article”, Malayan Economic Review 9 (1964): 63–79Google Scholar, and refuted by Aziz, Ungku Abdul, “Subdivision of Estates in Malaya 1951-1960, Author's Reply”, Malayan Economic Review II (1966): 46–62Google Scholar, but government acted to reduce the, at least perceived, incidence of deleterious effects.

29 “It is no exaggeration to say that if the rubber industry were to be allowed to fall into irretrievable senility Malaya's present type of developing economy would collapse”, in Mudie, et al, Report of the Mission of Enquiry.

30 “The first of these objects of common policy is what is known as diversification of crops or, put more bluntly, the object of lessening Malaya's dependence on the single crop of rubber. The reason for this is not solely so that the economy of the country may be safeguarded in time of economic depression for, as has often been pointed out, when the price of one primary product falls significantly, the decline is often a general one. Even so there is at least a partial protection. Moreover there are other reasons favouring a policy of diversification. A mortal disease of the main crop, a change in use, or a change in public taste which makes it no longer profitable to produce, are various factors capable of causing great loss of revenue the effects of which are mitigated if other crops in the same country are unaffected and continue t o be produced on a considerable scale. Finally, it is not to be expected that, in a country with a wide variety of soils, one crop will be the best crop everywhere, and diversification is therefore fully justified even from the purely agricultural point of view. All these facts are of course very well know but they have not always been acted upon.” Federation of Malaya, Draft Development Plan.

31 “… if anything is to be learnt from the lessons of the past it is that, however profitable the export trade, Malaya must be prepared to sacrifice a part of it in order to be able to build up a strong and healthy agricultural system which will supply as much as possible of those types of food which the climate and soil of Malaya are best suited to produce”; Federation of Malaya, Draft Development Plan.

32 “The need to foster the development of secondary industry and improved industrial standards of organization and technique does not, of course, imply any less emphasis on the improvement and expansion of primary production and trade. These will for a longtime provide the main support of Malayan living standards, domestic markets, accumulations of capital and foreign exchange earnings. Hence, measures to promote the success of primary production and trade are of the utmost importance for the development of secondary industries as well.” International Bank, The Economic Development of Malaya.

33 Relative Changes in Rubber and Oil Palm Prices - 1960-70 (1960 = 100)

34 Joo, Koo Swee, “The Malayan Oil Palm Industry”, Kajian Ekonomi Malaysia 1 (1964): 1–13Google Scholar.

35 Courtenay, P.P. “Some Trends in the Peninsular Malaysia Plantation Sector, 1963-1973”, in Issues in Malaysian Development, ed. Jackson, J.C. & Rudner, Martin (Hong Kong: Heinemann, 1979)Google Scholar.

36 Though this may prove less a disadvantage in some areas than might have been thought since labour shortages on plantations are developing as migration to the urban areas continues.

37 Aziz, Ungku Abdul “The Causes of Poverty in Malayan Agriculture”, in Problems of the Malayan Economy, ed. Boh, Lim Tay (Singapore: Donald Moore, 1956)Google Scholar.

38 Staub, W.J. & Blase, M.G., “Induced Technological Change in Developing Agriculture: Implications for Income Distribution in Agricultural Development”, Journal of Developing Areas 8 (1974): 581–96Google Scholar.

39 Shamsul, FeLDA: 21 Years of Land Development.

40 Ness, Bureaucracy and Rural Development.

41 The so-called “cultural goals” read very oddly in the 1980s. Ness quotes Fiennes, the first chairman of FeLDA, as arguing that Malayan farmers were poorer than they needed to be because they did not do a full day's work. Only those with drive and initiative were to be selected as settlers - a negative test for such qualities being that “any applicant for land who has no savings but has a watch and a fountain pen will be a failure as a pioneer settler”, in Fiehnes, D.E.M., No Need to be Poor, A Policy Statement (Kuala Lumpur: Federal Land Development Authority, 1956)Google Scholar.

42 Kasper, “A New Strategy”.

43 Fernandez, D., Hawley, A.H., & Pridaza, S., The Population of Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: Department of Statistics, 1976)Google Scholar.

44 Mohar, Tan Sri Raja, Report on the Sugar Cane Industry in Malaysia (Colombo Plan Survey Report, 1965)Google Scholar.

45 It is perhaps relevant to note that the price of raw sugar on the free market reached stg. £105 per ton during 1963, in which year the Malaysian government set up its first committee to examine the possibility of establishing a sugar cane industry. This was over five times greater than the world price recorded less than two years earlier.

46 At Kulai (Johore), Pantai Remis (Perak), Chuping (Perlis), Bahau (Negri Sembilan), and Padang Terap (Kedah).

47 Rahman, Radzuan Abdul, “Agricultural Development Strategies Re-examined”, in Malaysia - Some Contemporary Issues in Socio-economic Development, ed. Chook, Cheong Keeet al. (Kuala Lumpur: Persatuan Ekonomi Malaysia, 1979)Google Scholar.

48 “We can't increase sugar yield: Manan”, The Star (29 12 1980)Google Scholar.

49 Though as noted in footnote 36, the labour “released” by oil paim's lower labour requirement than rubber, may, in some areas, have been absorbed by the demands of the expanding industrial sector.

50 Selvadurai, S., “Padi Farming in West Malaysia”, Bulletin V27 (Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, 1972)Google Scholar.

51 Bank Negara Malaysia, Annual Report 1981 (Kuala Lumpur, 1982)Google Scholar.

52 Seivadurai, S., “Agriculture in Peninsular Malaysia”, Bulletin 148 (Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Agriculture, 1979)Google Scholar.

53 Aziz, “The Causes of Poverty”.

54 Mellor, J.W., The New Economics of Growth (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1976)Google Scholar.

55 Lemmens, I., Mars, Je. de, and Tempelman, G. J., Padi Planting in Trengganu, Malaysia - a socioeconomic study in Pulau Musang and Nerus Irrigation Schemes (Department of Geography of Developing Countries, University of Utrecht, 1981)Google Scholar.

56 In Kelantan and Trengganu, for example, the recommended crops were tapioca, soya beans, groundnuts, green beans, ginger, chillies, other vegetables, bananas, pineapples, watermelons, and papayas. Malik, Uzir Abdul, “The Green Book Plan as a Strategy for Self-Sufficiency - a Case Study”, llmu Alam 6 (1977): 25–36Google Scholar.

57 Uzir, “The Green Book Plan”.

58 Doering, O.C., “Malaysian Rice Policy and the Muda River Irrigation Project” (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, 1973)Google Scholar.

59 Purcal, Rice Economy.

60 Uzir, “The Green Book Plan”.

61 Shamsul, FeLDA: 21 Years of Land Development. Federation of Malaysia, Fourth Malaysia Plan.

62 The capacity of the Perlis mill is 3, 500 tonnes per day.

63 Doering, “Malaysian Rice Policy”.

64 Morgan, “Economic Diversification”.

65 Peacock, F., “The Failure of Rural Development in Peninsular Malaysia”, in Issues in Malaysian Development, ed. Jackson, J.C. and Rudner, Martin (Hong Kong, Heinemann, 1979)Google Scholar. Peacock, F., “Rural Poverty and Development in West Malaysia, (1957-70)”, Journal df Developing Areas 15 (1981): 639–54Google Scholar.

66 Peacock, “Rural Poverty”.