Could you elaborate on CICM’s role as the custodian of the Responsible Care initiative in Malaysia? How has the application of Responsible Care evolved in the country?

Responsible Care is guided by the Responsible Care Leadership Group of the International Council of Chemical Associations (RCLG, ICCA). As a member of RCLG, ICCA since 1999, CICM reports back on the progress made by the signatories in Malaysia, as well as learning and sharing best practices through regional platforms at both the ASEAN level (like the ASEAN Chemical Industries Council) and APAC level (Asia Pacific Responsible Care Organization). Since being launched in 1994 with 32 signatories, Responsible Care now has 150 chemical companies pledging their commitment in the country. By 1999, CICM had developed the six Codes of Management Practices covering the entire life cycle of chemicals – from process safety to community awareness, emergency response, distribution safety, environmental protection, employee health and safety, security and product stewardship. Beyond developing the ruling guidelines, we also developed mechanisms to recognize the merits of Responsible Care implementation by our Responsible Care signatories through our annual Responsible Care Awards.

Moving forward, we have identified three major future focus areas that CICM has embarked on: The first is to get more SMEs on board. 90% of the chemical companies in Malaysia are SMEs. With the publication of the Guidelines on Responsible Care Management System (RCMS) Implementation for Enterprises in 2022 and the establishment of the RCMS Implementation Programme for SMEs, we hope to provide further support to SMEs for better HSE standards which will help to support their business continuity and expansion. Secondly, we are looking into the establishment of third-party verification of Responsible Care implementation. And thirdly, we want to see Responsible Care continuing to foster sustainable development practices, as the foundation of the chemical industry’s commitment to ESG.

How do you think Malaysia could differentiate itself on a global scale as a hub for chemicals and petrochemicals?

Malaysia is at the center of APAC’s growth. Malaysia’s natural gas, crude oil, and palm oil resources enable further value addition in the petrochemical and oleochemical value chains. Other advantages that Malaysia brings are good infrastructure, stable politics, and pro-business regulations. Investors in Malaysia will find a well-developed chemical segment, built on the back of fruitful JVs and partnerships between local players and MNCs. These factors combined make Malaysia attractive.

At the same time, we must let go of comparisons between different Southeast Asian countries and look at the region from a point of view of connectivity, of sharing the market and the profits. To differentiate itself, Malaysia must identify, capture, and harness the unique value it offers. For example, Petronas’ main differentiator is its raw materials. Equally with palm oil producers, many of which are now upgrading themselves to further enhance their value, especially in the areas of ESG. Malaysian players must ready themselves for the barriers created by Europe on ESG criteria. From a chemical point of view, we must look at our own value, not what others want us to do.

The chemical industry remains one of the priority sectors of the government; as outlined in policies such as the 12th Malaysia Plan, National Investment Aspirations (NIA) & New Investment Policy, as well as in the upcoming Chemical Industry Roadmap 2030. With the Malaysian Government’s continued supporting policies, I encourage the investment community to pay serious attention to Malaysia’s potential.

How could Malaysia capitalize on opportunities deriving from the trend of nearshoring or onshoring?

Malaysia has been a hotspot for nearshoring for many years, providing an excellent manufacturing hub for key players in the electronics industry, for example. Malaysia could attract more nearshoring investments in the petrochemical space as the availability of raw materials in the carbon chain derivatives, but also facilities for utilities, waste management, or storage, grow. Malaysia is not a large market; therefore, it must position itself as a hybrid between Singapore, with its strong competencies in finance, Thailand, with its complementary competencies in food technology, and even Indonesia, which shares the same dominant religion with us. Each country I mentioned has developed a chemical hub, wanting to capitalize on its domestic raw materials, but we can focus our efforts on finding ways to collaborate rather than compete against each other.