{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016574585635359115, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013812154696132596, 'mean_word_length': 5.708333333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF RICE FERTILISER SUBSIDY MANAGEMENT TO ATTAIN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS: MALAYSIA’S PERSPECTIVE

This study identifies the regulations concerning fertilisers produced for the development of paddy and the rice industry. It looks into the issue of mismanagement of the government’s fertiliser subsidy scheme from the legal perspective. It also focuses on the roles played by manufacturers, distributors, sellers, service providers and farmers when dealing with fertiliser, and whether such dealings are parallel to the law. The mismanagement of the rice fertiliser subsidy puts the country’s financial security at risk and preventing farmers from successfully achieving food sovereignty through the increase in productivity of rice yields as well as increase in income for paddy farmers’ survival. There are several regulations governing fertiliser subsidy and its management such as the Control of Paddy and Rice Act 1994, Plant Quarantine Act 1976, Pesticide Act 1974, Malaysian Quarantine and Inspection Services Act 2011 and Environmental Quality Act 1974. However, most mismanagement cases involve big commercial farms, which are associated with the fertiliser industry rather than the subsidy for fertiliser in the government rice sector. The cases involved graft, fraud, bribery and smuggling of fertiliser. This paper also reviews the roles of Farmers Association and Farmers Board in regulating fertiliser subsidy.