The WFC brings
together a large number of people –mostly linked to the
forestry profession and the forestry industry- from all over
the world, to discuss many issues related to what they understand
as “forestry”. According to its organizers, “The
Congress has advisory rather than executive functions and participants
attend in their personal capacity. The implementation of recommendations
is a matter solely for those to whom they are addressed in light
of their own particular circumstances - governments, international
organizations, scientific bodies and forest owners, among others.”
If its role
is only advisory and participants attend in their personal capacity:
why should anyone be concerned about this Congress?
The first answer
to that question is that this is a very influential arena and
that whatever comes from it will have a strong probability of
being accepted and implemented by governments.
When looking
at the seven main themes that will be addressed by the WFC,
one might easily conclude that there is nothing to be worried
about. The themes are:
1) Forests
and biodiversity; 2) producing for development; 3) forests in
the service of people; 4) caring for our forests; 5) development
opportunities; 6) organizing forest development and 7) people
and forests in harmony
The organizers
explain that those themes “have been divided into sub-themes
that include most of the issues related to forests and the products
and services they provide.”
It is these
sub-themes that begin to raise alarm bells. There we learn that
within the theme “producing for development” there
is a whole section on “planted forests”. One can
also see that under “organizing forest development”
there is a sub-theme called “forest terminology”.
When both sub-themes
are put together –planted forests and forest terminology-
the conclusion is that the WFC will help to strengthen plantation
companies by continuing to provide their tree plantations with
“scientific” credibility and that the “forest
terminology” will serve to maintain the current corporate-friendly
definition that classifies them as “planted forests”.
The issue of
“planted forests” is one of our main areas of concern,
because those so-called “forests” –in fact
monoculture tree plantations- are heavily impacting on local
peoples’ livelihoods and environments all over the world.
This is the reason why many people in Buenos Aires will try
to influence the WFC on this issue, under the banners of “plantations
are not forests” and “Stop tree monocultures”.
Under the same
apparently innocuous theme of “producing for development”,
there is another extremely worrying issue under the sub-theme
“Maintenance and increase of productive capacity of forests”.
That issue is: “Genetic improvement including genetic
modification”.
That is a matter
of serious concern from two angles. On the one hand, because
genetic modification of tree species is one of the major threats
to forests, particularly through pollen contamination. On the
other hand, because the use of genetically modified trees in
commercial plantations would exacerbate all of the impacts of
current industrial tree monocultures. Essentially, trees that
grow more rapidly will exhaust water supplies more rapidly;
there will be greater destruction of biodiversity in the biological
deserts of trees genetically modified to be resistant to insects
and to not produce flowers, fruits or seeds; the soil will be
destroyed at a faster pace by the increased extraction of biomass.
There is yet
another matter of concern within “producing for development”,
which is the sub-theme “Forests and energy”, under
which we find “Industrial biofuels” and “Energy
forests”. One of the most recent threats to local communities
is the use of forests and the establishment of large scale tree
monocultures for the production of a type of liquid fuel called
cellulosic ethanol.
Under the theme
“forests in the service of people” we find the sub-theme
“Forests and climate change”, which appears to be
mostly geared to support a forest and plantation-related carbon
market, that would do nothing to prevent climate change and
much against local peoples and their environments.
Another concern
within the same theme is “Valuation of environmental services
and benefit sharing”, which would aim at commodifying
nature through the “Valuation and payment for environmental
services” and could result in the loss of rights and livelihoods
of local communities.
Those are some
the issues of concern that we think need to be brought to the
attention of the public in general and WFC participants in particular.
Concern
about some speakers
As illustrated
above, some of our most worrying issues of concern are related
to the theme “producing for development”. Our reasons
for concern are further strengthened by the three main speakers
chosen by the WFC organizers to open up this issue.
One of them
is Elizabeth de Carvalhaes, Executive President of the Brazilian
Pulp and Paper Association (Bracelpa) since September 2007.
According to the brief description provided the WFC, “Her
main objectives are to communicate the good practices of the
pulp and paper companies in the national and international areas,
strengthen the sector’s image in the international sphere,
and to debate with the public authorities and the National Congress
themes of concern to the industry.”
It is important
to stress that some of the most destructive eucalyptus plantations
in Brazil are owned by the pulp and paper industry she represents.
Many of those plantations are being strongly opposed by local
communities and peasant organizations in Brazil. WRM has over
many years been compiling detailed information on the impacts
of those plantations on people –as well as on their differentiated
impacts on women- and the environment as well as documenting
the struggles against them. We very much doubt that Ms de Carvalhaes
will refer to those impacts and struggles in her presentation.
Another main
speaker on the theme “producing for development”
is Emmanuel Ze Meka, Executive Director of the International
Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) since November 2007. He
is an active promoter of industrial tree plantations and his
organization will launch a recent report on industrial plantations
in the tropics at the World Forestry Congress. He states that
“the development of forest plantations in the tropics,
can help create employment particularly in rural areas, generate
revenues, contribute to ‘green’ energy and combat
climate change”, thus reinforcing some of our concerns
about the WFC.
His knowledge
on the issue of tree plantations appears to be incredibly poor.
In a recent interview he stated that within “the forest
plantation industry” in Latin America and the Caribbean
“Brazil is taking the lead, followed to a lesser extent
by Venezuela, Peru and Cuba.” Had he studied the issue,
he would know that the two most important plantation countries
in the region are Brazil and Chile, followed by Argentina and
Uruguay, with smaller planted areas in Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela.
In the cases of Peru and Cuba, large-scale tree plantations
are almost non-existent. In the case of his native continent
–Africa- he fails to mention the two more important plantation
countries -South Africa and Swaziland- while lamenting that
“an unfavourable investment climate has significantly
undermined the potential for forest plantation development.”
The third speaker
is David Carter, who “is looking forward to the opportunity
to engage with and speak to a crosssection of forestry stakeholders
at the World Forestry Congress about how New Zealand has and
is using forestry, including plantation forestry, to contribute
to New Zealand’s development.”
It is important
to stress that the New Zealand forestry industry depends almost
entirely on tree plantations –mostly pines- which occupy
almost 1.8 million hectares. As Minister of Forestry in his
country, Mr Carter’s role at the WFC will be to provide
as much support as possible to tree plantations.
Not
everything or everyone in the same bag
It is of course
necessary to emphasize that the above comments and concerns
are not aimed at questioning the WFC as a whole and even less
at a large number of participants that will provide very useful
inputs on means of protecting forests and forest-related communities.
It is even
possible that the positive themes and sub-themes may outnumber
those that we are concerned about. Just to mention a few, we
believe that many positive outcomes may come from the following:
1.3 Restoration
and rehabilitation of forest ecosystems
- Reforestation with native species.
- Restoration experiences and models, biodiversity recovery.
- Landscape restoration.
2.3 Agroforestry
systems
- Agroforestry and silvopastoral systems.
- Relations between its components. Economic, ecological, political,
social and cultural influences.
- Management systems and use.
4.2 Invasive
species, pests and diseases
- Exotic species and invasion
- Integrated pest management
- Economic impact of pests
- Invasions, health and climate change
7.2 Indigenous
people, communities and institutions
- Traditional knowledge, social, cultural and spiritual values
- Territorial rights of indigenous people. National and international
standards
- Natural resources management models
7.5 Gender
and forestry
- Gender mainstreaming in forestry
- Forest policy and gender
- Data resources and information on gender
Unfortunately,
the above cannot “neutralize” the negative outcomes
in other areas, particularly on the issues related to “planted
forests”.
We therefore
call on those WFC participants that agree with some or all the
points stated above to raise their concerns at the Congress
itself and to ensure that the Congress does not endorse them.
At the same
time, we call on peasant, indigenous, environmental and social
organizations to make their voices heard by the WFC against
the spread of monocultures tree plantations, genetically engineered
trees, cellulosic ethanol, the carbon market and the commodification
of nature.
