Tree Trouble

A Compilation of Testimonies on the Negative Impact of Large-scale Monoculture Tree Plantations prepared for the sixth Conference of the Parties of the Framework Convention on Climate Change by Friends of the Earth International in cooperation with the World Rainforest Movement and FERN.

index

Monoculture Forestry
A Critique from an Ecological Perspective
Elaborated by Javier Baltodano, Coecoceiba/ Friends of the Earth-Costa Rica

The current Western concept of monocultures of tree species developed in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, triggered by the shortage of timber caused by the reduction of forest cover. From the beginning, the aim was to simplify the structure and to speed up the cycles of natural ecosystems with the objective of producing wood in as little time as possible and, technically, in the most simple manner.

In this way, monocultures of tree species have ended up as being characterized by their uniformity. The production of the greatest quantity of timber (for wood, energy or construction) in the shortest time and cheapest way possible forms their sole objective. In some cases this can involve the joint cultivation of various species, but it always involves cultivating many individual trees of the same age, and it never reaches the level of biodiversity and complexity of a natural forest (please note that every forest can be considered as natural; the adjective only serves as an emphasis).

Like other agricultural monocultures, tree plantations have undergone intensive technical development during the last decades. Currently monoculture forestry is an activity which depends upon high inputs of energy, fertilizer and pesticide inputs. Likewise, due to technological reasons, the areas established in one single operation have increased, leading to a number of cases in which plantations cover hundreds of thousands of hectares.

However, despite its clear characteristics as an agricultural crop that has little in common with forests, except for the fact that both systems include trees, there has always been a tendency to treat forests and plantations as synonyms. It is still common today to read in textbooks and policy papers, and to hear in ordinary conversation, that the establishment of monoculture tree plantations is the same as "reforestation" (Pancel, 1993). One dictionary defines reforestation as "the act of repopulating a terrain with forest species.." (Spanish Royal Academy, 1992). Etymologically, however, the word reforestation means the "reestablishment of forests".

These semantic discussions would not have any real importance for the environment if it were not for their political consequences and categorical actions. Classifying the establishment of tree plantations as reforestation has attributed all the positive associations that humanity rightly attributes to forests to this type of activity as well. It is for that reason that in the majority of countries, in all sectors, varying from schools to the highest levels of political decision-making, the establishment of tree plantations is seen as a form of reforestation and thus intrinsically good and beneficial for the environment and society. This is certainly not true in the majority of cases.

When the concept and practice of tree monocultures was exported to tropical regions this situation worsened. Basically, the tremendous biodiversity and the complexity of interactions that characterize a tropical forest make that this ecosystem differ even more from a tree monoculture than a forest in temperate zones. However, the technological package was imported in its entirety and thus the plantation of tree monocultures in the tropics is being referred to as "reforestation" with all the attributes associated to this term.

It is estimated that between 1959 and 1985 a total of almost 17 million hectares was planted in the tropics. In the eighties, the rate of establishment of tree plantations in the tropics has increased to 2 - 4 million hectares per year (Pancel, 1993). Due to mistaken concepts and policies (in many cases generated by the confusion caused by the term "reforestation"), many tree plantations were established to the detriment of original forests and/or caused negative impacts at the ecological and social level (Marchak M.P., 1999; World Rainforest Movement, 1999).

In the past two decades, the paper industry has increased its demand of raw material and monoculture tree plantations have been transferred from regions with a temperate climate to tropical regions where productivity is higher. Due to fiscal incentives and cheaper labor in impoverished tropical countries, the production costs are also considerably lower in these regions. As a consequence, social and ecological problems have intensified (Carrere, R., Lohmann, L., 1996).

Moreover, nowadays a new niche in the market threatens to give a new and substantial financial impetus to monoculture tree plantations. It concerns the so-called Clean Development Mechanism and specifically the financial incentives to establish carbon sinks mooted in the Kyoto Protocol, which are subject to approval during the Conference of the Parties of the Climate Change Convention that will take place in November 2000.

These Kyoto mechanisms are the result of a "damage control" strategy based on the claim that carbon sinks are an effective way of addressing climate change. In addition to being unproven (IIASA 2000), this claim misplaces the problem as one of how to "hide" the released carbon rather than one of how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, especially those of industrialized countries. So-called sinks serve as a smokescreen concealing the fact that the search for and implementation of real solutions to the problem of climate change are being avoided. These Kyoto mechanisms have breathed new life into the idea of tree monocultures and are likely to intensify the problems caused by this activity.

This document flags and illustrates some of the impacts monoculture tree plantations have generated on the social as well as the environmental level, with a special emphasis on impoverished Southern countries. It is expected that these impacts will intensify if financial resources that sustain the establishment of these plantations continue to grow.

First of all it should be noted that the negative impacts of monoculture tree plantations upon the social level not only include direct impacts, caused by the transformation of land tenure and the impoverishment of resources, but also indirect impacts. These are caused by the fact that the resources invested in monoculture plantations are thereby withheld from forestry production models which are better adapted to natural ecosystems and which follow the patterns elaborated through traditional knowledge, sometimes of thousands of years, of peoples and communities.

Society in its entirety has been misinformed and confused concerning the difference between a monoculture tree plantation and a forest. Misinformation and lack of knowledge have forced entire regions to accept tree plantation models developed at other latitudes. In more than a few cases they have been marked as inappropriate and aggressive by individuals and communities which have opposed these models. In other cases a large amount of resources have been wasted on models which, in the end, have not led to the expected results.

Such is the case in Costa Rica, especially in the Huetar Norte Region, where the species sown have kept on changing in accord with different fashions during most of the past 20 years, and one try after another has failed. During this period, tens of millions of dollars have been invested in monoculture plantations. Nowadays, more than 70% of these plantations are in a bad state or have not produced the expected results.

By contrast, the region has neglected, at least during the past twenty years, the natural potential of secondary regeneration. It has also lost time in getting to know its rich forest biodiversity (about 150 tree species of the forest have been exploited in this zone) and the small producer has basically been excluded from forestry activities.

False claims about the supposed similarity between forests and plantations have been spread to protect economic interests and give an "environmental" gloss to certain companies and activities. An example of this is the presentation of Gerald Freeman, one of the chief executives of Stone Container, one of the most important paper production companies in the USA, on a forestry project of his company in Costa Rica, when he referred to: "the sowing of 27 million trees which will result in a permanent tropical forest..." (van den Hombergh, H., 1999).

It is common that large tree plantation projects promote a change in land tenure, modifications in an agricultural structure based upon the small and medium-scale producer, and the displacement of communities. The displaced families have to look for new opportunities in other areas, and thus they end up cutting primary forests, or increasing urban problems in the misery zones around large cities. The Ston Forestry company’s activities in the south of Costa Rica once again provide an example: "...the desire and need to be able to produce upon their own lands formed one of the main motivations of the farmers to oppose [the forestry project of] Ston, which was taking away people’s lands with ease and for low prices." (Van den Hombergh, 1999, p.97). Despite strong opposition, this company displaced at least about 300 families from almost 14,000 hectares to sow Gmelina tree monocultures in the south of Costa Rica. Likewise, Carrere and Lohmann (1996) quote many examples which demonstrate how the aggressive expansion of monoculture forestry directly replaces communities or has direct negative effects upon vital resources like water or biodiversity, affecting the quality of life of the population.

"In a number of social contexts, large-scale industrial plantations can generate new jobs at the local level and this is one of the arguments, by the State as well as the companies, to try to convince communities to accept their projects. On average, however, plantation development results in a net loss of employment in the long term." (Morrison and Bass, 1992, cited by Carrere and Lohmann, 1996.) Thus, for example, in the places which have supposedly seen the most successful establishment of industrial tree monocultures in Chile and Brazil, some communities have been rejuvenated and modern sawmills have generally improved the quality of life of their workers. However, at the same time, a large number of farmers and indigenous peoples were "excluded" and left without land due to the establishment of new plantations. (Marchak, 1995)

In many cases contemporary forestry development projects based upon tree monocultures were developed by technicians, persons alienated from the ecological, social and cultural reality of the site. Companies arrive with their aggressive policies to achieve their economic goals without any wish to understand history, culture or even more basic issues like the state of land tenure in the region. Moreover, small-scale monoculture tree projects implanted from the outside have seldom been successful and in a number of cases they have been referred to as "...an external intervention in villages and nations." (Dargavel, Hobley and Kengen, 1985,cited by Marchak, 1995)

In Costa Rica, the development of monoculture forestry goes hand in hand with the development of tree nursery production companies, which produce millions of small trees of the desired species in an intensive manner. In 1999, of the 2 million small trees necessary to plant the approximately two thousand hectares which are normally planted in one year in the Northern Zone of the country, 1.2 million consisted of two species and were produced by only two companies (Castro E., 1999). Small and medium producers who might involve themselves in the development of nurseries of native species have been excluded. Yet their inclusion could have provided a boost to their economy, motivated them to conserve forests as gene banks, and permitted them to build capacity in the management and administration of nurseries.

On the other hand, due to the pressure of monocultures, a lot of tradition and knowledge has been lost. An example of this is the case of the traditions of the Maleku people in the north of Costa Rica. In this zone some 40,000 hectares of tree plantations have been sown in the last decades, with about 41 million trees divided among four species. Some 90% of these plantations have benefited from forestry subsidies from the State. However, not a penny was spent to help the Maleku people to recuperate the mastate (Poulsenia armata, Familia Moraceae), a tree which disappeared due to the pressure of deforestation in the zone, and which formed the basis for an industry of tapetes and crafts of this people.

In general, it is common that a reduction of the availability of fundamental natural resources for local populations accompanies large forestry projects. As will be analyzed below, extensive tree plantation monocultures diminish biodiversity, the quality of water, and the structure and fertility of the soil. The result is a negative impact upon the quality of local life.

A paradoxical case and good example of this situation has occurred in South Africa, where there are a number of communities surrounded by huge tree plantations from which fuelwood to satisfy basic energy needs is unavailable. "There is no fuelwood to cook anymore; the forestry people have burnt our forests." said a woman in the region of Natal (Carrere and Lohmann, 1996).

On the other hand, resources generated by forestry projects remain in a few hands and in more than a few cases they constitute or enrich capitalist enterprises outside the country, or outside the areas where the plantations are found. Such is the case of Indonesia, where forestry industries are being concentrated in the hands of a few influential families as they grow. (Carrere and Lohmann, 1996)

Monoculture plantations have a biological diversity which is a lot lower than that of a natural forest (Watson, 1999), and in the great majority of cases it is also much lower than the biodiversity of meadows with trees and other natural ecosystems. Monoculture tree plantations have contributed little to the conservation, study, and use of the biodiversity.

The function of plantations as a biological corridor that permits a genetic flow and interchange (for plants as well as animals) between natural forest patches which are being isolated in many regions has also not been evaluated.

On the other hand, it should be stated that reforestation programs that include mixed species and at least a percentage of tree species from reduced or threatened populations have reduced the serious threat of extinction which certain tree species all over the world face.

In many cases, tree plantations have replaced natural forest. Carrere and Lohmann (1996), present a rich compilation of examples where tree plantations have had a direct or indirect impact upon natural forests and thus upon biodiversity in general in the region. They analyze cases in South America, South Africa and Asia.

In other cases, tree plantations have affected, or have been established to the detriment of, other ecosystems of great importance for biodiversity conservation, such as tropical wetlands. In the south of Costa Rica, Ston Forestry, a subsidiary of Ston Container (one of the largest wood pulp processors) is facing judicial prosecution for causing the desiccation of wetlands (van den Hombergh, 1999)

On the other hand, large tree plantations adjacent to conservation zones can have a "border effect" upon such areas. In the Osa peninsula in Costa Rica, for example, some biologists are questioning the impact of hundreds of thousands of Gmelina fruit trees upon natural populations of parrots and guacamayos in the Corcovado National Park. If these populations increase due to a resource which may be cut at any time, they will have to look for refuge and food amongst the limited resources of the national park, thus affecting the equilibrium of its ecology.

The discussion on the impact of tree plantations upon soil resources has been very polemical and tendentious and is not yet concluded. The main argument of forestry companies is that the impact of tree plantations upon the soil is of relatively little importance if compared to the impact intensive agriculture has. However, there is evidence that fast-growing trees have an extractive effect upon soil fertility and that they tend to impoverish the soil and unbalance its structure. (World Rainforest Movement, 1999)

Moreover, some species show repressive effects on the growth of other plants through the release of certain substances. This is the case with Eucalyptus, which tends to acidify the soil, and Gmelina, which inhibits the growth of plants which are not of the same species. Other plantation practices, including preparation of the soil before planting, plantation management, and harvesting, also favor erosive processes, especially in areas with steep slopes.

Tree plantations present a physiological and morphological structure which is very different from that of a forest or other natural ecosystem. Thus, their capacity to absorb and release rainwater varies a lot according to the species and climatic conditions. It is recognized that large cypress plantations tend to stimulate evaporation and reduce the germination of seedlings. In this particular species, water is retained in the foliage, from which large quantities evaporate before they reach the soil.

Other species like Teak (Tectona grandis), with its large leaves, tend to concentrate rainwater and release it in large drops that damage the soil, promoting erosion and heavy run-off.

The Eucalyptus presents a case similar to that of conifers, it tends to reduce the flow of water into the aquifers. This species tends to dry wetlands and swamps, which are being used to control of certain plagues (mosquitoes), and to dry wetlands. (Castro, E., 1999)

One of the aspects which probably influences the regulation of the hydrological cycle the most as far as the forest is concerned is the presence of the undergrowth. This undergrowth fulfills the role of a "sponge in the shade" which retains water without evaporation, and slowly releases it to the soil. However, in a managed tree plantation the undergrowth is eliminated.

The infiltration level of rainwater is another affected factor. This depends upon the type of humus generated by the tree plantations, the level of compaction that has occurred during the preparation of the soil and the type, and the depth and biomass of the roots found in the tree plantation (World Rainforest Movement, 1999). Compared to a forest, a tree plantation tends to have a lower infiltration level, which is why it promotes erosion processes and a reduction in the aquifers recharge.

It is true that wood consists of carbon molecules, and that a plantation should fix a certain volume of CO2 during its growing stages. There is a tremendous difference, however, between a deposit of carbon in the subsoil (an oil and coal bank) and a tree plantation exposed to the atmosphere. Some of the most relevant aspects of this discussion include:

• The difference between mineral carbon accumulated in geological deposits and carbon in a plantation, which can be considered as "fragile", is that above-ground carbon can be absorbed into the atmosphere at any moment (Lohmann, L., 2000). In fact, the majority of current plantations are based upon monocultures of fast-growing softwood species and in many cases the wood of these species is used as fiber for papermaking. This type of wood, and the paper or cardboard produced from it, decomposes rapidly, releasing CO2 and other gasses which contribute to the greenhouse effect. Likewise, the wood is subject to accidental fires through which the accumulated carbon can be released.
• The establishment of plantations has direct and indirect impacts upon other areas. These impacts tend to lead to processes that release CO2 and other greenhouse gasses. The displacement of farmers and communities, for example, favors deforestation in other areas. Likewise, desiccation of wetlands and other changes in the hydrological regime lead to increased frequency and intensity of wildfires.
• The costs of presumed carbon fixation through plantations are popularly supposed to be far less than the costs of a true reduction of emissions, and this is what the interest in plantations as carbon sinks is based upon, especially the interest of business.

Primary forests, or more natural models of environmental reconstruction which make use of natural regeneration, as well as the establishment of mixed species which mimic the forest, such as Analogue Forestry Models (Analog Forestry Network 1997, Baltodano, J., 2000), are more stable and secure accumulators of CO2. At the same time, these systems fulfill other social and ecological functions. The wood produced through these systems is of a better quality and can be used for structures and furniture that lasts a longer time. The forest is kept standing, is not subjected to clearcutting and short cycles, and due to its structure, is less vulnerable to fires.

Ethically, the concept of "monoculture tree plantations as carbon sinks" embodies a major fallacy through which certain companies and governments are proposing to elude their responsibility for the future of humanity and our planet. Climate change, which is widely recognized as one of the greatest threats to life and the ecological equilibrium of our planet, is turning into a new market niche -- a market niche in which reducing the costs of capturing a metric ton of carbon has become more important than the reduction of the greenhouse effect.

Corporations and industrialized countries should reduce greenhouse gasses in a direct manner. Moreover, they should phase out the massive transport of oil and coal from underground deposits to the atmosphere.

On the other hand there is an urgent need to invest in the restoration and conservation of forest areas all over the world --forest areas which are integrated as a complement to the economies of local communities, which serve as a protection and buffer against disasters and which guarantee the conservation of biodiversity and related resources. Investment in ecological restoration should come from the industrialized world in the form of a payment of the ECOLOGICAL DEBT (and this is practically the only financial resource available) -- a debt which has accumulated through more than five centuries of unilateral exploitation and destruction of the resources that we all share and need.

The resources needed are available, and in any case, they are less than the damages which have occurred, even if one only takes into account the disasters caused by Hurricane Mitch in Central America or by the rains which hit Venezuela at the turn of the century. The resources are there; the only thing that is lacking is to leave stinginess behind and to take adequate political decisions.

Aguilar X. 1996. "Madera del bosque sin cortar árboles", en : Revista Forestal Centroamericana, No.16, año5, 1996, Catie, C.R.

Analog Forest Network, 1997. Analog Forestry Manual, Falls Book Center, New Brunswick, Canada, 18pp.

Asacode. 1995. Los agricultores de ASACODE muestran el camino: El desarrollo forestal social en San Miguel, Costa Rica. Bosques, árboles y comunidades rurales, No 19-20

Baltodano J. 1999. Reflexiones en torno al tema forestal en los distritos Cutris y Cureña, Cantón de San Carlos: Hacia una propuesta ecologista. Coecoceiba-Amigos de la Tierra, Costa Rica, San José, CR.

Baltodano J. 1998. "Experiencias en Gestión Local del Pago de Servicios Ambientales".. En : I Congreso regional de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible, Ciudad de Guatemala 17-21 Agosto 1998. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Guatemala.

Baltodano J. 2000, La plantación forestal como herramienta campesina para la reconstrucción ambiental y la incorporación del árbol como complement dentro de la economía familiar. Coecoceiba- amigos de la Tierra CR, San José, Costa Rica. 7pp )

Baltodano J., Juanes, C. Y Díaz F. 1999. Tratamiento Silvicultural y Pago de Servicios Ambientales en la Zona Norte de Costa Rica: Una contradicción poco discutida.COECOCEIBA-Amigos de la Tierra, Costa Rica, San José, Costa Rica

Carranza, C.F.; Aylward, B; Echeverría, J.; Tosi, J. Y Mejías, R. 1996. Valoración de los Servicios Ambientales de los Bosques de Costa Rica. MINAE. San José, Costa Rica

Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques 1999. Campaña Plantaciones: Plantaciones de pulpa de papel, un problema creciente. Instituto Tercer Mundo, Jacson 1136, Montevideo Uruguay, 31pp)

Carrere R. Y Lohmann L. 1996. El Papel del Sur, Plantaciones Forestales en la Estrategia Papelera Internacional . Red mexicana de acción frente al libre Comercio (RMALC) e Instituto tercer Mundo. México DF 282pp.

Castro E. 1999. Plantaciones de Monocultivos Forestales en la Zona Norte, Una Revisión Bibliográfica. Coecoceiba-Amigos de la Tierra, Costa Rica, San José, CR,57pp

Lohmann L. 2000. El Mercado del carbono: sembrando mas problemas. Documento Informativo, Campaña de Plantaciones, Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques, Montevideo Uruguay, 31 pp

Marchack M.P.,1999 Logging the globe. Mc Gill University press, Montreal, Canada 404pp

Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques 1999. Campaña Plantaciones: Plantaciones de pulpa de papel, un problema creciente. Instituto Tercer Mundo, Jacson 1136, Montevideo Uruguay, 31pp)

Pancel L. 1993. Tropical Forestry Handbook, Springel-Verlag, Berlin, Germany 809pp

Pasos, R. 1994. El último despale. Proyecto Frontera agrícola Centroamericana. San José, Costa Rica

Real Academia Española 1992. Diccionario de la Lengua Española, XX1 Edición. Editorial Espasa-Calpe.SA, Madrid, España 1513pp.

Sánchez, J.A.,1999, Experiencias en reforestación con especies nativas, con especial atención a la Región Huetar Norte de Costa Rica, Proyecto Río San Juan- Amigos de la Tierra, Miméografo, Upala, C:R.

Solís V. 1999. Algunas consideraciones en torno a las plantaciones forestales y el bosque secundario en la Zona Norte. En: Anexo 2. Memoria Seminario Taller: Situación actual y perspectivas de las plantaciones forestales y bosques secundarios en la Región Huetar Norte, Octubre 1999. Area de Conservación Arenal-Huetar Norte, MINAE.

Van den Hombergh H. 1999. Guerreros del Golfo Dulce, pag 42. DEI, Colección Universitaria, San José, Costa Rica, 339pp

Watson V., Cervantes S., Castro C., Mora L., Solís M., Porras I., Cornejo B. 1998. Abriendo espacio para una mejor actividad forestal. Políticas exitosas para bosques y gentes. Ed . San José, C.R. Centro Científico Tropical, 136 p.

Tree Plantations as Carbon Sinks: 
The Case of Ecuador
By Ricardo Buitrón C.
Acción Ecológica/Friends of the Earth-Ecuador

For decades, governmental policies in Ecuador have promoted agroindustrial monocultures for export purposes, to the detriment of native forests, páramos and mangroves, and the lives of Indigenous, Afro-Ecuadorian and farmer’s communities. Lately, the remnants of biodiversity in Ecuador have been threatened by the identification of a new source of income: the establishment of tree plantations destined to capture carbon.

The recent interest of companies and the government in the carbon emissions market is reflected in a number of headlines in national newspapers: "Capturing CO2 can be an excellent business" or "Ecuador has a gold mine in its forests" (El Comercio, 2000). At the same time, modifications in existing legal frameworks and new laws to subsidize tree plantations and to provide the timber sector with access to the resources derived from the climate change agreements are proposed. This includes the creation of various governmental institutions to be mediators in capturing these resources.

For a number of years, "joint implementation" projects have been realized in Ecuador, financed by a consortium of Dutch electricity companies in collaboration with national institutions. The evaluation of these experiences has delivered a number of remarkable results: the project has not only failed to comply with the objective to absorb carbon, but the establishment of plantations of exotic tree species in regions with high biodiversity has even contributed to increased CO2 emissions by altering the capacity of these valuable ecosystems to deliver environmental services.

Ecuador is considered to be one of the 12 megadiversity countries on the planet. The total area of the country is 26.079.600 hectares, of which 18% consist of conservation areas and 20% consist of Indigenous and Afroecuadorian territories. The rest of the country consists of areas destined for agricultural activities, or forest areas that are not included in the National Protected Areas System.

On the Coast, only 6% of the forest and less than 30% of the mangroves remains, while in Amazonia, which still has 70% forest cover, 30% has already been deforested. In the Highlands of Ecuador only remnants of forests and páramo can be found. Páramos cover approximately 5% of the total area of the country.

In recent times, an accelerated destruction of forests has occurred in the heights of the Western mountain range, in the Ecuadorian Choco region, that is, the northwestern region of the Provinces of Esmeraldas, Carchi and Imbabura. The forests in these zones are about to disappear, as has already happened with the forests in the northwest of Pichincha.

The regions that are destroyed mainly through the extraction of trees for the timber industry, by tree plantations and by the implementation of monocultures, particularly of African Palm, are precisely the ones with the greatest richness in biodiversity, primary forests and páramo. These regions, rich in native forests, consist of state forest heritage, Indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorian territories or land owned by farmers.

Deforestation rates have been higher in the lowland regions of the country: the Coast, Amazonia, and the tropical areas in the Andean region.

It is estimated that there are about 143.000 hectares of tree plantations in Ecuador, consisting of 120.000 hectares of pine and eucalyptus plantations in the highlands and 23.000 hectares of teak and pachaco on the coast. There is a proposal of Mitsubishi Paper Mills to invest 48 million dollar to plant 10.000 hectares of eucalyptus in the Esmeralda Province on the coast of Ecuador. This same company exports eucalyptus chips worth 20 million dollar from the country every year, harvested from plantations planted in the seventies as part of Integrated Rural Development projects (El Comercio, 2000).

It is estimated that between 1969 and 1991, more than 500.000 hectares of forest have been destroyed in this province, without even taking into account the destroyed mangrove forests. Currently, hardly 6% of the original forests can be found along the Ecuadorian Coast.

The regions of San Lorenzo and Eloy Alfaro, located in the northern part of the Province of Esmeraldas have been subject to an astonishing deforestation in the past years. In two years, 8,000 hectares of primary forests have been deforested in order to develop oilpalm plantations and a further10,000 hectares of eucalyptus plantations are projected. At the moment, 2,000 hectares of teak and eucalyptus are planted as part of mechanisms to offset CO2-emissions.

In these areas, companies have developed strategies to buy and rent land and other types of strategies which guarantee their access to and control over land.

The pressure upon these zones now has a new ingredient: the Esmeraldas - San Lorenzo highway project and the Coast road, which cross native forest zones and the lands of Afro-Ecuadorian communities. These roads facilitate the extraction and transport of timber, and benefit exclusively those who develop tree plantations and industrial monocultures like oilpalm monocultures.

In Ecuador, tree plantations do not contribute to the absorption of carbon. On the contrary, they cause a net increase in the release of carbon through the loss of original vegetation cover. Moreover, with the raise of temperature, the soils also release absorbed carbon and, additionally, when the timber is harvested, the carbon inevitably returns to the atmosphere.

In Ecuador, tree plantations are preferably established in the páramos. Páramos absorb more carbon than a tree plantation, as they have the capacity to store carbon in their soils, and through their algae, fungi, and in other microorganisms. In the case of PROFAFOR (a joint implementation project of Dutch electricity companies in Ecuador), it has been calculated that, in the best case, a tree plantation would be able to absorb 80 mt C/ha, while the destruction of the paramo could cause the release of more than 1000 mt C/ha. (Vidal, 1999).

Plantations of exotic species introduced in the Ecuadorian Andes, particularly pinus radiata, affect an ecosystem that is vital to the life of communities and the users of water: the páramo. The most important function of the páramos is the catchment and distribution of water, thus being the main source of supply of freshwater in the country.

In community workshops organized by Accion Ecologica in the Province of Bolivar a number of impacts of plantations with exotic species upon the fauna have been identified: the loss and reduction of beneficial insects and autochthon fauna. Meanwhile, there has been an increase of birds that shelter in the plantations but feed themselves with agricultural seeds from neighboring lands as the plantations do not provide any food for them. In the Salinas canton, where one finds massive pine plantations in a mature state, it has been reported that hydrological sources are drying up and that the availability of water is becoming more difficult every time. (Vidal, 1999). Tree plantations are also areas prone to fires and hence to the rapid release of emissions. They are also easily affected by insect outbreaks, followed by subsequent loss of vegetation.

Although there are few examples of natural regeneration in mature plantations, in the majority of cases there is no development of undergrowth. The needles of pine trees do not decompose due to the low temperature and the organisms do not accept them as food, so as these needles are not digested, they remain as dense mulch on the forest floor. The soils below pine plantations turn more acid, greasier in texture, and they contain less humidity, organic material and phosphor. (Hofstede, 1997).

Current forest policy proposals provide subsidies to medium and large-scale companies only, and will disadvantage every small-scale forestry proposal, thus provoking an accumulation of resources and lands in the hands of one sector: the timber sector.

The specific needs of the local population are not considered either. To the contrary, they cause the local population to abandon its agricultural and conservation practices. They also lead to other forests being affected by the displacement of local populations. By privileging plantations with an objective of timber production, agroforestry and herding, traditionally practiced by the communities, are restricted.

To these economic, environmental and social problems, the increase of violence has to be added, as the regions become more violent due to the necessity to call upon armed guards or the protection of the police to "protect" the plantations.

The first experimental joint implementation project that was realized in Ecuador is the project of PROFAFOR (Programa FACE de Forestacion) to establish tree plantations in the Ecuadorian Andes in order to mitigate the carbon emissions of the Netherlands. The agreement was established in 1993 with the federation of Dutch electricity companies, which created the Foundation FACE (Forest Absorbing Carbondioxide Emissions) in 1990 with the goal to plant 150.000 hectares of "forest" in the world, half of which would be planted in Ecuador.

The program in Ecuador has as its objective to plant 75.000 hectares of trees between 2.400 and 3.500 meters altitude, to absorb 35 million tons of CO2. This figure was obtained from figures on the productivity of pinus radiata available in literature in New Zealand and Australia, as no reliable data existed on the productivity of pine and eucalyptus in the altitude at which they are planted in Ecuador. Until now, 22.000 hectares have been planted in the highlands, and a process to establish teak and eucalyptus plantations on the Coast has been initiated, where they are currently planting about 2.000 hectares.

PROFAFOR does neither buy land nor trees: it only invests in one single function of the trees, their capacity to sequester carbon. It establishes contracts which determine that the lands and their trees will be controlled for a period of 100 years. These contracts are concluded with farmer's and Indigenous communities, and with private sectors and legal entities like Fundacion Natura. In the highlands, 250 USD per hectare of exotic species planted are paid (El Comercio, 1999).

PROFAFOR has been questioned about the way it has been promoting plantations, choosing exotic species like pine and eucalyptus in the highlands. From 1996 onward it has initiated the project ECOPAR to study the páramos and investigate alternatives to the plantation of exotic and native species. Despite this ongoing study, PROFAFOR continued to work with various communities and individuals in 8 provinces in the highlands, planting pine, and nowadays they can be found on the coast, in the Province of Esmeraldas, planting teak and eucalyptus.

5. The Kyoto Protocol: Plantations as Sinks

Emissions trade poses a number of injustices:

• It permits the true evasion of emissions reductions by highly polluting countries, as it is cheaper for the countries responsible for Climate Change to invest in plantations than to change technologies and reduce consumption of fossil fuels. However, the plantations do not comply with the objective to absorb CO2.
• It admits that rich countries have more rights than poor countries as far as the utilization of the resources of the planet is concerned. It does not only accept that there has been a free right to occupy the atmosphere, but now it subsequently allows the occupation of the agricultural lands and forests of Southern countries by Northern plantations.
• It establishes new pressures upon Southern countries, as they have to substitute their food production for plantations to absorb the contamination of industrialized countries. Moreover, they have to sacrifice their forests in order to have trees planted in their place.
• It transfers the responsibility of conservation to Southern countries. By selling emissions quota, the Southern countries assume responsibility for the contamination of the atmosphere.

The principal export products of the Southern countries are money and raw materials, through this way the ecological debt has been built up. The money that the Northern countries destine for emissions trading will come, as always, from this source (Acción Ecológica, 2000a).

Ecuador is preparing itself to provide incentives for tree plantations and capture resources from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) through the development of new legislation such as the law on Sustainable Forestry Development in Ecuador.

In this proposed law it is established what will be subsidized: tree plantations of native species with protection objectives will be subsidized up to 100%. Tree plantations with exotic species on forestlands with a production objective will be subsidized up to 75%, and the same plantations established on agricultural land will be subsidized up to 50%. With this subsidy private companies with commercial objectives are being subsidized to compete with agricultural activity.

Various institutions are competing as the application of environmental policies derived from the agreement on Climate Change is concerned. Functions are being duplicated and there is no agreement amongst these institutions, as they all want to be the intermediary that will succeed to capture the resources of emissions trading. Thus, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, its Chancellery, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Energy and Mines, and the National Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology are all involved in a battle concerning their direct relationship with the CDM.

In 1997, the Joint Implementation Office (JIO) was established by the Ministry of Agriculture. It was to consist of representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of the Environment, the General Secretariat of Planning, and an NGO, the Corporation for Cooperation and Development (CCD), was appointed as the coordinator. However, it did not comply with the functions required. The Ministry of Environment on its turn created the Ecuadorian Office for Clean Development (EOCD), which has not coordinated its activities with the JIO (Vidal, 1999).

The joint implementation project that was developed in Ecuador has not had the expected results. On the contrary, it has caused negative impacts upon the environment and the communities where it has been developed. It has demonstrated its inefficiency to absorb carbon, and it has a negative balance due to the emissions it has provoked.

Tree plantations of exotic species are a true threat to biodiversity, affecting páramos and native forests. They also threaten the food sovereignty of Ecuador, affecting communal areas, which provide communities with water, food and plants. Along the coast, the farmers will now have teak, balsa wood, laurel and eucalyptus instead of products like rice.

The legal frameworks, instead of protecting the environment and guaranteeing the collective rights of the population, are modified under the pressure of the IMF and the World Bank to deepen structural adjustment. This way, Ecuador is about to approve the Law for the Promotion of Investment and Civil Participation. This law promotes and permits new and serious levels of impact upon the natural patrimony of the country, overrides existing environmental legislation, and eliminates the right of Indigenous communities and farmers to decide upon projects which affect their livelihoods (Acción Ecológica, 2000b).

To prevent global warming, countries like Ecuador should keep their oil under the ground, invest in clean energy, restore the coastal mangroves, protect hydrological watersheds and conserve native forests.

Acción Ecológica 2000a "Los madereros han encontrado dos formas de enriquecimiento: La nueva ley forestal y el mecanismo de desarrollo limpio". Alerta Verde (Boletín de Acción Ecológica). No. 89, abril.

Acción Ecológica 2000b "Posición de Acción Ecológica frente a la Ley Trole 2". Alerta Verde (Boletín de Acción Ecológica). No. 95, agosto.

El Comercio 1999, "Los pinos secan el suelo y dañan el páramo". 2 de noviembre, Quito.

El Comercio 2000, "Ecuador tiene una mina en sus bosques". 25 de marzo, Quito.

El Comercio 2000, "La captura de CO2 puede ser un excelente negocio". 22 de junio Quito.

Hofstede, R, 1997, "El impacto ambiental de las plantaciones de Pinus en la sierra del Ecuador". Resultado de una investigación comparativa. Proyecto ECOPAR. Universidad de Ámsterdam, Ámsterdam.

Vidal i Oltra, V.1999, "La aplicación de políticas sobre cambio climático en el sector forestal del Ecuador". Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra.

next page