Public concerns about transboundary haze: A comparison of Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia

Abstract: Public concerns about environmental problems create narrative structures that influence policy by allocating roles of blame, responsibility, and appropriate behavior. This paper presents an analysis of public concerns about transboundary haze resulting from forest fires in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia for crises experienced in 1997, 2005 and 2013. The source of the information is content analysis of 2231 articles from representative newspapers in each country. The study shows that newspaper reporting about haze has changed from a discussion of the potential health and economic impacts of fires resulting partly naturally from El Nino-induced droughts, toward an increasing vilification of Indonesia for not ratifying the 2002 Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution; plus criticism of Singaporean and Malaysian companies investing in palm oil plantations, and ASEAN. Attention to climate change and potential biodiversity loss linked to haze, however, remains low. The paper argues that newspaper analysis of public concerns, despite political influences on the press, offers insights into how public criticism is voiced in these countries, and how perceived responsibility for action is changing.

Figures

Figure 5: Perceived potential solutions to haze

Figure 6: Perceived connections between palm oil cultivation and haze

Figure 2: Where is blame allocated for haze?

Figure 3: Other attributed causes of haze

Table 1: Numbers of news articles analyzed

Figure 7: ASEAN as a perceived solution, with Malaysia’s growing perception

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What contributions have the authors mentioned in the paper "Public concerns about transboundary haze: a comparison of indonesia, singapore, and malaysia" ?

This paper presents an analysis of public concerns about transboundary haze resulting from forest fires in Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia for crises experienced in 1997, 2005 and 2013. The source of the information is content analysis of 2,231 articles from representative newspapers in each country. The study shows that newspaper reporting about haze has changed from a discussion of the potential health and economic impacts of fires resulting partly naturally from El Niño-induced droughts, towards an increasing vilification of Indonesia for not ratifying the 2002 Association of South East Asian Nations ( ASEAN ) Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution ; plus criticism of Singaporean and Malaysian companies investing in palm oil plantations, and ASEAN. The paper argues that newspaper analysis of public concerns, despite political influences on the press, offers insights into how public criticism is voiced in these countries, and how perceived responsibility for action is changing. Attention to climate change and potential biodiversity loss linked to haze, however, remains low. 

Q2. What percentage of articles expressing blame for haze in 1997?

In 1997, the percentage of articles expressing making criticalstatements or asserting direct responsibility for haze for Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia respectively were 28 percent, 25.9 percent, and 18.7 percent. 

Q3. What are the main reasons why citizens are seeking more complex forms of governance?

Citizens are also seeking more complex forms of governance that replace international commitments with a more confrontational and public criticism of companies investing in palm oil and unregulated plantations. 

Q4. What is the narrative that emerges from news reporting about haze in Indonesia, Singapore and?

The narrative that emerges from news reporting about haze in Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia is that the initial crisis in 1997 was perceived to be a result of poor forest management and El Niño. 

Q5. What was the reliable database to access historic newspapers?

The online-database, Factiva, is a widely-used database of international newspapers and was considered sufficient and reliable to access historic newspapers. 

Q6. What is the main conclusion of McLellan’s study?

McLellan’s study (2001: 262) also suggests that the Malaysian government engaged in a campaign of coordinated “denial” particularly targeted the British, United-States, and Australian media for alleged misrepresentation of haze in 1997 and 2000. 

Q7. What is the main reason why people blame fires?

Many fires, for example, are blamed upon companies that seek to clear land cheaply in order to establish palm oil or rubber plantations: but these companies—perhaps predictably—are keen to assert their innocence and state that burning land does not suit their commercial interests. 

Q8. What is the reason why haze is difficult to control?

Haze is therefore difficult to control because it results from a complex set of climatic and monsoonal conditions; the rise of new export crops; and a set of challenging regulatory failures involving international, national, and subnational jurisdictions. 

Q9. What is the purpose of this paper?

This paper contributes to the political analysis of the haze problem by presenting a study of public concerns about haze in Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia based upon content analysis of key newspapers in each country for the crises of 1997, 2005 and 2013. 

Q10. What is the effect of this change in reporting?

In turn, this style of reporting indicates a greater willingness to criticize governments for corruption, and less focus upon reporting that has emphasized short-term technological fixes such as wearing facemasks. 

Q11. What was the first time that haze was identified as a major problem?

The first occasion when transboundary haze was identified as a major problem was between July and October 1997, and were exacerbated by unusually long droughts connected to El Niño (Eaton and Radojovic, 2001). 

Q12. What was the main reason for the haze?

In 2013, for example, the Jakarta Post featured articles arguing that Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono should not have apologized for the haze, on the grounds that the haze was caused because Singaporean and Malaysian companies were not regulated, and because Indonesian ministers themselves were critical of this apology (Jakarta Post, 2013). 

Q13. Why was haze blamed on open burning of agricultural waste?

This trend was partly because haze was originally partly blamed on open burning of agricultural or municipal waste in Malaysian cities, but also because of a number of speeches by political leaders at this time sought to demonstrate diplomacy towards Indonesia by discussing mutual responsibility. 

Q14. What was the Indonesian minister coordinating the haze response saying?

In 2013, the Indonesian minister coordinating the haze response stated that the fires and haze were natural phenomena and not related to poor land management or lack of regulation, saying: “Singapore should not be behaving like a child and making all this noise.