-
Excessive paper consumption: The impacts of injustice
In
the world of today, many millions of people’s level of consumption
does not even cover their basic needs. In plain language, these
are millions of people – mostly children – suffering from hunger
and misery. On the other hand, there are also millions of people
– although much fewer – who consume too much, without this meaning
that their basic needs – as human beings – are thus satisfied.
The
result of this situation is not only an unjust world – which of
course it is – but a world that is moving straight towards environmental
disaster. Not precisely because of those who consume too little,
but because of those who consume in excess. Although this
is applicable to practically any product – from oil to shrimps
– the consumption of paper and paperboard serves to exemplify
the problem.
The
annual per capita world consumption of paper and paperboard amounted
to 52 kilos in 2004 (1). As with all averages, this hides the
disproportion between the big consumers and the small ones.
In fact, citizens of the so-called “developed” countries consumed
an average of 175 kilos per person, while those from the so-called
“developing countries” consumed a scant 20 kilos. These
averages also conceal the fact that in some countries of the North
consumption is well above the average -such as in the cases of
Finland (334 kgs), the United States (312) and Japan (250)- as
well as the fact that a supposedly “low” consumption of 20 kilos
may be perfectly adequate to cover basic needs for paper.
The
issue at stake is that this excessive consumption generates serious
negative impacts on the life of millions of people in the South.
Paper and paperboard are made from pulp, and timber is needed
to produce it. Increasingly pulp comes from enormous monoculture
plantations, particularly pine, eucalyptus and acacia trees.
These
monoculture tree plantations are established in regions fulfilling
various conditions: rapid tree growth, access to vast areas of
cheap and fertile land, low labour costs, availability of State
subsidies and support, and scant environmental monitoring.
Basically: the South.
The
result is the same country after country: land falling into the
hands of large and foreign corporate landowners, concentration
of power, eviction of the rural population, net loss of jobs on
a local level, depletion of soil and water resources, loss of
biodiversity. Despite the promises of “development” accompanying
plantations, the impacts only worsen as the area under plantation
grows. This is easy to see in countries with millions of hectares
of plantations such as South Africa, Brazil, Chile and Indonesia.
The
problem becomes even more serious when mills producing pulp for
export are established near the plantation areas with the consequent
social and environmental impacts. Aracruz and Veracel in Brasil,
Arauco in Chile and Argentina, Sappi and Mondi in South Africa
and Swaziland, Advance Agro in Thailand, Asia Pulp and Paper in
Indonesia are well-known examples of the serious negative impacts
of this industry.
And
all for what purpose? So that the paper industry can have abundant
and cheap pulp to continue expanding its markets and increasing
its profits with the permanent invention of new “needs.”
The
result – in particular in the North but increasingly replicated
in the South – is the imposition of an excessive consumption of
paper. Examples are abundant. An astonishing number of paper and
cardboard throw away items such as drinking cups, plates, trays,
napkins and even tablecloths are replacing – on a massive level-
similar lasting articles. It is now usual when you purchase something
- a toy, a watch, a pair of shoes – for it to come wrapped in
paper, in a cardboard box and handed over to the buyer in a paper
bag. People’s homes are invaded every morning by non-requested
correspondence consisting of advertisements printed on paper.
Finally, everyone is forced to consume a daily dose of paper and
paperboard that no-one ever asked for or wished to consume.
The
issue therefore goes beyond the responsibility of the individual
consumer and is framed in the wider context of the consumer society.
Therefore, simply putting the blame on the individual cannot solve
it; it is an issue that must be addressed at the level of society
as a whole.
At
this stage the societies of the North must understand that their
life style – in which consumption occupies an exaggerated position
– is affecting the possibilities for subsistence of people with
the same rights in other parts of the world. They must also understand
that this excessive consumption is leading the planet towards
environmental disaster, which is already evident in climate change,
water depletion and pollution and loss of biodiversity, among
others.
The
excessive and unnecessary use of paper and cardboard is only one
example of many others but it may serve to trigger off the necessary
debate – particularly in the North – regarding the limits that
should be placed on consumption and identify mechanisms to bring
this about. The wise words of Gandhi “There is enough in the world
for everybody's need, but not enough for anybody's greed"
may serve to illuminate such a debate.
(1)
World Resources Institute.- Resource Consumption: Paper and paperboard
consumption per capita
http://earthtrends.wri.org/searchable_db/index.php?theme=9&variable_I
D=573&action=select_countries
index
COMMUNITIES
AND FORESTS
- Papua
New Guinea: Large-scale Logging and Human Rights Abuses
PNG’s
social, political and economic histories have been moulded by
its tropical forests. Covering 60 per cent of the PNG land mass
and largely impenetrable, the forests have limited trade, defined
customary laws and delineated life and culture. When the world
thinks of PNG, they see its forests.
Now,
the logging of these incomparable life systems is corroding PNG’s
society and politics, with only trivial economic benefit, and
with alarming flow-on effects in the region.
The
PNG logging industry is dominated by a handful of Malaysian companies,
the largest of which is Rimbanan Hijau. It is an industry that
is synonymous with political corruption, police racketeering and
the brutal repression of workers, women and those who question
its ways. Its operations routinely destroy the food sources, water
supplies and cultural property of those same communities. They
provide a breeding ground for arms smuggling, corruption and violence
across the country. In return, the industry generates no lasting
economic benefit to forest communities, considerable long-term
cost and a modest 5 per cent contribution to the national budget.
This
record is a far cry from fulfilling PNG’s Fourth National Goal
– set upon its independence in 1975 – that its “natural resources
and environment … be conserved and used for the collective benefit
of us all, and be replenished for the benefit of future generations”.
The
logging industry wields influence in PNG through political donations,
public sponsorship, lobbying and media ownership. Or, companies
simply ‘buy’ the rights to logging areas outright. Government
ministers interfere with logging projects on their behalf. The
industry’s leverage over the PNG government extends well beyond
forestry. One company – Rimbunan Hijau, controlled by billionaire
Malaysian Hiew King Tiong – has interests in the finance sector,
the media, information technology, property, retailing, commercial
printing, travel and shipping. These interests span beyond PNG.
The Tiong family holds media assets in China, Malaysia, Cambodia,
Hong Kong, Papua New Guinea, Canada and the US, as well as a radio
station in New Zealand. In Australia, Tiong investments include
the Harbourside shopping complex at Darling Harbour in Sydney,
and companies that account for 10 per cent of Australia’s mango
crop.
The
reform of the PNG logging industry is a distant prospect without
concerted international action. Within PNG, corruption has stifled
the will to uphold existing laws against the interests of logging
companies. Where legal action has been taken, those involved have
been attacked, physically and commercially.
In
PNG, the capacity and political will to uphold legal and human
rights is being undermined, not least by the logging industry
itself. Disturbing instances of human rights abuse include:
-
Denial of due process in appropriating property. The process by
which the PNG Government buys timber rights from landowning communities
and then issues ‘extraction’ licenses to logging companies is
seriously flawed and amounts to the illegal appropriation of forest
lands by loggers.
-
Arbitrary detention and physical brutality
by police against landowners. Attempts to restrain this appropriation
are being dealt with brutally, sometimes by police ‘moonlighting’
for logging companies. The documented atrocities include the bashing
of villagers taking legal action, incarceration without charge,
the torching of homes and crops, the shooting of domestic animals
with M16s, and men forced at gun point to commit homosexual acts
with each other.
-
Intimidation and abuse of women. Women
suffer the next round of this violence. Community ‘big men’ handle
dealings with logging companies, and some regard logging royalties
as ‘free money’ to be spent on alcohol and weapons. Sexual abuse
by logging employees is documented, as are marriages of convenience
between expatriate employees and local women.
-
Contamination of food and water sources.
Far from the promised benefits, logging is denying people their
right to an adequate standard of living. Sediment from cleared
forest and roads is polluting rivers, as are chemicals used to
kill timber pests and preserve felled logs. Fish, crayfish, wild
pigs, cassowaries, tree kangaroos and birdlife – all food staples
for local communities – have left logged areas.
-
The destruction of cultural sites,
artefacts and grave sites. Compensation for such acts of desecration
is rarely forthcoming. These acts deny the rights of communities
to use their own land for cultural and spiritual purposes.
-
Unjust working conditions. The appalling
labour conditions in many logging camps are again exposed. In
Gulf Province, workers have died and been buried on the job rather
than the company going to the expense of returning their bodies
home. Timber industry workers have not been paid, have lived in
overcrowded and unsanitary conditions, worked 7am to 7pm and,
with company transport the only option, have been held at their
work area beyond their willingness to stay.
Human
rights abuses have flourished thanks to the physical isolation
of the logging communities, and the corruption and inadequate
resources of PNG’s government. These same conditions have allowed
international trafficking in guns, timber, and people. Regional
security, not just PNG governance, is being undermined.
In
PNG, it is local people who are most skilled in sustainable forest
management. Yet these skills are locked out of the forestry process,
contrary to PNG’s National Goals and Directive Principles.
An
immediate moratorium must be placed on the granting and renewal
of all logging permits. The current model is not working.
Excerpted
from: "Bulldozing Progress: Human Rights Abuses and Corruption
in Papua New Guinea's Large-scale Logging Industry", by The
Centre for Environmental Law and Community Rights and The Australian
Conservation Foundation, 2006,
http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_ACF-CELCOR_full.pdf
index
-
Colombia: The Bari people in defense of
their territory
The
Bari people, a minority belonging to the Arawak family known as
the Children of the Forest, inhabit the Catatumbo Basin in the
north of the Department of Santander. The Motilon Bari have a
language known as Bari-ara and their own internal and external
political and social organization. Their supreme authority is
the Autonomous Council of Chiefs, comprising 23 Caciques (Chiefs)
from the 23 communities of the Motilon indigenous people. Their
economy is geared towards self-sufficiency and therefore the defence
of their territory implies the defence of the natural assets that
are at the base of their existence.
Over the years, the Motilón Bari have suffered a constant loss
of territory to powerful trade interests that have sought to profit
from the wealth it contains. Their integrity was threatened once
again when in May 2005 the Ministry of the Environment authorized
ECOPETROL operations (see WRM Bulletin No. 106), in spite of the
many deficiencies appearing in the Environmental Impact Assessment
submitted initially.
However,
violation of the Bari People’s human rights does not cease there.
To the military presence on their territory supporting this mega-project
and affecting this people’s freedom of circulation and the holding
of cultural and subsistence activities, is now added their concern
over the central government’s intention to spray toxic chemicals
in the area and even in places such as natural parks. This
will affect the Bari territory, contaminating sources of water,
subsistence crops and the animal species on which the Bari feed,
finally affecting community members’ health.
Faced
by this situation, the Autonomous Council of Bari Chiefs, the
Colombian Association of Motilon Bari Communities “Asocbari”,
will hold an open meeting on 12 October at Tibu in the north of
Santander, under the slogan “We will pronounce ourselves in defense
of our territory”, with the aim of:
1. Convening
State authorities and institutions to obtain their commitment
to solve the Bari Indigenous People’s problems and to demand explanations
on the decisions they are taking that violate the Indigenous People’s
rights.
2.
Giving visibility to the serious violation of the Bari Indigenous
People’s rights, by ignoring our presence at Socbacaira, our ancestral
territory where the oil prospecting and exploitation project is
being carried out (Alamo Well I).
3.
Submitting to the authorities, institutions and Colombian State
the following requests:
-
Recognition of the presence of the Bari People on their
ancestral territories
-
Suspension of the implementation
of the Alamo I project for oil prospecting and exploitation
-
Cancellation of Environmental Licence 0624 of 15 May 2005
to undertake prospecting of the Alamo I well, due to the irregular
way it was granted, inter alia, certification by the Ministry
of the Interior Division for Ethnic Groups that no indigenous
communities existed at Socbacayra, known as Alamo I by ECOPETROL
-
That the Colombian State, Military Forces, ECOPETROL and
civilian and military and security bodies fulfil their constitutional
obligation to protect and guarantee the rights of the indigenous
peoples, that they cease violating these rights and take the necessary
steps to prevent this occurring in the future.
Call
by Asocbari, e-mail:
puebloindigenabari@yahoo.es and
Corporación Colectivo de Abogados Luis Carlos Pérez, e-mail:
paraquehayajusticia@yahoo.es,
www.colectivodeabogadoslcp.org
index
- Commemorating the Mangrove
Action Day on July 26th
In
2000, July 26th was first chosen as a day for the mangroves based
on its great significance for the movement in Latin America led
by Red Manglar (Mangrove Network). July 26th commemorates that
day in 1998 when a Greenpeace activist from Micronesia, Hayhow
Daniel Nanoto, died of a heart attack while involved in a massive
protest action led by FUNDECOL and Greenpeace International. During
this action the local community of Muisne joined the NGOs in dismantling
an illegally built
shrimp pond in an attempt to restore this damaged zone back to
its former state as a mangrove forest. Since Hayhow's death, FUNDECOL
and others have commemorated this day as a day to remember and
to take renewed action to Save the Mangroves!
In
2003, MAP (Mangrove Action Project) and Red Manglar joined forces
to encourage fisherfolk from around the world to join them on
Mangrove Action Day to form cooperative flotillas to protest the
destructive expansion of shrimp farming in their areas. This call
to action got positive responses from Bangladesh, India, Malaysia,
Ecuador, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Honduras, Nigeria, Senegal,
Kenya, Europe and the USA.
Since
then, every July 26th has become an annual global commemorative
day for the mangroves. This year's theme is entitled "Mangroves,
Our Natural Heritage". According to the Latin American Red
Manglar based in Ecuador, “Mangroves are our heritage, our source
of life, our livelihood, our place of work, our warehouse and
our home”.
However,
from Mexico to Peru, there are daily news of pollution, deforestation
and devastation of mangrove ecosystems promoted by hydroelectric,
tourism and shrimp aquaculture mega-projects. The contamination
of estuaries, dredging of their channels, civil engineering works
planned in detriment of these ecosystems and the indiscriminate
felling of the forests are a constant.
Red
Manglar warns that “In those countries where the loss of protective
barriers to confront natural phenomena was caused by the indiscriminate
felling of mangroves, not even floods, tropical hurricanes and
cyclones have been able to decrease the destructive spirit of
industrial tourism, incapable of turning their eyes towards what
happened in Asia just a year and one-half ago, when the terrible
tsunami devastated magnificent tourist facilities and, of course,
entire towns.”
In
Bangladesh, on the Mangrove Action Day the Institute for Environment
and Development Studies organized a discussion meeting. The speakers
warned that destruction of mangrove forests would worsen increasing
sufferings of the world's poorest people in the coastal areas,
slashing their resilient power in the face of cyclones, tidal
bores and tsunami. They said that “the destruction of mangrove
forests exposes our ecosystems. Lessons from our experience of
most recent Asian tsunami taught that mangrove forests protected
Bangladesh and Indian South Eastern coast from the onslaught of
the devastating Tsunami. Mangrove forests like the Sunderbans
support life on earth and mangroves need protection and conservation
more so because of ever increasing propensities of threatening
tsunami, cyclones and sea-level rises.”
Also
the Centre for Coastal Environmental Conservation (CCEC), from
Bangladesh, has undertaken a programme on the protection of southwest
coastal ecosystems of Bangladesh particularly at polder 30 Batiaghata
Upazilla (sub district) by forming a 51 member Mangrove Protection
Society (MPS). They are planning to address the activity in polder
32 of Dacope, adjacent to Sundarban, the UNESCO declared World
Heritage site
In
India, COPDANET! held Art, Drawing and Painting competitions for
school children emphasising Mangrove Action Day which was celebrated
on a grand scale with rally, public meeting and prize distribution
by senior Forest Officials.
As
for Africa, the local NGO “Congo Nature Conservation” commemorated
the international day receiving messages and phone calls to support
the mangroves sustainable management program of Congo threatened
by town planning, marine pollution by oil, bad fishing techniques,
etc.
As
MAP says, “Momentum is building globally to assume responsibility
for the defense, conservation and recuperation of this severely
threatened ecosystem, as it is a heritage of our nations and territory
of traditional indigenous communities”.
Article
based on information sent by Alfredo Quarto, Mangrove Action Project
(MAP), e-mail: ,
http://www.earthisland.org/map/map.html
index
- Cultural links to the forest: The web
of health
Many
cultural systems are intimately interconnected with forested environments,
whether the people live within the forest or on the forest fringe
(including city dwellers and researchers studying culture). Forest
based cultures have evolved within the forest environment, and
their survival requires that that environment be sustained.
Cultural
links to the forest include subsistence, income generation, medicinal
plants, gender roles, knowledge and symbolic systems, and spiritual
links. Fundamentally, this kind of intertwining between culture
and forests creates important elements in the meaning of people’s
lives. Without the forest, such people can be set adrift. As the
forest is destroyed, the related aspects of their culture are
adversely affected. This in turn leads to both mental health problems
and loss of forest-related knowledge systems. The effects are
even more likely when forest loss is unplanned, uncontrolled,
and/or initiated externally —leading to feelings of disempowerment,
inferiority and impotence among local people.
People’s
mental health has been closely tied to the idea of cultural integrity:
They live and die within a particular cultural and ecological
context, and they derive meaning in their lives —a central component
of human well being (and therefore, health)— from these contexts.
When such contexts change —whether through accelerated rates of
deforestation or exposure to alien cultures or other forces— people
tend to suffer adverse emotional and stress-related physical effects.
Mental
illness can destroy both motivation and capacity to manage remaining
resources effectively. Loss of environmental knowledge can have
a similar effect. A vicious downward cycle ensues, further adversely
affecting the environment.
[There
are a] variety of approaches to health and illness among forest
peoples. Such cultural differences can explain forest dwellers’
sometimes-negative responses to medical and public health approaches
based on assumptions of the universality of human health care
preferences, needs and beliefs. Trying to cure illnesses without
understanding local interpretations of causation often results
in ineffective treatment, lack of follow-through by patients,
and misuse of medications. Attempts to address hunger may be ineffective
if local concepts of hunger are not understood; a common error
is providing culturally unacceptable foods. Maintaining human
health requires attention to the holistic nature of culture and
the interconnections among forest peoples, their cultures, and
their forests.
The
centrality of the forest-people-health links is clear, particularly
among hunter- gatherers and many swidden farming groups. Other
important issues include the degree to which health beliefs and
practices are integrated with other parts of cultural systems
(their embeddedness), the differing theoretical orientations and
philosophical assumptions about health and health care, and the
variety of approaches to health and illness that exist in the
world’s forests. Maintaining human health requires attention to
the holistic nature of culture and the interconnections between
forest peoples, their cultures and their forests. On a more global
scale, protection of cultural diversity can serve as an insurance
policy against overreliance on western cultural models.
Effective
communication with forest peoples requires understanding of their
world views and openness to learning about their perceptions.
Indigenous knowledge about foods and medicines varies in its wider
applicability and should be assessed but is likely to include
useful elements for health and forest professionals. Wider recognition
of useful indigenous knowledge can contribute to the self-confidence
of forest peoples, with positive implications for mental health.
Rigidly
adhering to a western-based view of health may in fact do more
harm than good. The overuse and misuse of antibiotics is perhaps
the best-known example, but others include the marginalization
(or even criminalization) of traditional practitioners, which
reduces access to any kind of health care; the promotion of western
vegetables when more nutritious local vegetables are readily available;
and the unwillingness of formal medical practitioners to acknowledge
traditionally defined mental illnesses, resulting in the hiding
of such occurrences. New medicines and their uses may be interpreted
differently and used inappropriately unless providers construct
a bridge to local views about health, illness and treatment. As
many authors have suggested, participatory approaches to health
care may be necessary to improve health among forest (and other)
peoples.
Excerpted
from: “Forests and human health: assessing the evidence”, Carol
J. Pierce Colfer, Douglas Sheil, Misa Kishi, Center for International
Forestry Research (CIFOR), 2006, CIFOR Occasional Paper; No. 45,
http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-45.pdf
index
COMMUNITIES
AND TREE MONOCULTURES
- Brazil: Pataxó,
eucalyptus and the sustainability of Veracel Celulose
The
case of Veracel Celulose is useful – as are so many others – in
revealing the falseness of business discourse on “sustainability.”
Veracel is a modern company, owned in equal parts by the Swedish-Finnish
Stora Enso and the Norwegian-Brazilian Aracruz Celulose. Veracel
is the owner of 164.000 hectares of land, 78,000 of which have
been planted with eucalyptus trees in the State of Bahia, where
last year its gigantic pulp mill started operating, with an annual
production of 900,000 tons of pulp for export.
In
its web-page Veracel states that “Respect for the environment,
the generation of employment and income, the fostering of a better
quality of life for the population and providing returns to shareholders,
following the principles of sustainability, are some of the project's
commitments.”
We
do not have the slightest doubt that the company is seriously
committed to “providing returns to shareholders.” However, their
commitment regarding “Respect for the environment, the generation
of employment and income, the fostering of a better quality of
life for the population” has been shown, under all lights, to
be false.
In
fact regarding the environment, this company has been found guilty
of destroying areas of native Atlantic forest with chains, tractors
and large-scale fires (see WRM Bulletin Nº 102). That is, their
responsibility as to environmental conservation comes under questioning.
Regarding
the generation of jobs, it has been amply demonstrated that eucalyptus
plantations are the worst option possible. In the cases of Aracruz
and Veracel this has been documented in a recent research available
at http://www.wrm.org.uy/countries/Brazil/fase.html
Regarding
social issues, “the fostering of a better quality of life for
the population” is obviously not in line with the appropriation
of land belonging to indigenous peoples. However, the fact is
that the company continues to invade the traditional territories
of the Pataxo indigenous people, as affirmed by the indigenous
people themselves in the Final Document of the Fourth Assembly
of the Pataxo Front for Resistance and Struggle, held in August
2005. There, the Pataxo people stated that “This company [Veracel]
is damaging our environment, co-opting our leaders with the promise
of distributing benefits with the clear objective of dividing
us and continuing with the invasion of our territory.” Co-opting
leaders as a mechanism for division is antagonistic with the statement
– also taken from Veracel’s web page that it “bases its relationships
on transparency and ethics”.
Going
even further, this year in the Final Document of the Fifth Assembly
of the Pataxo Front for Resistance and Struggle, the indigenous
peoples and organizations supporting them, demanded the “End of
eucalyptus plantations on our lands under the domination of Veracel
Celulose, which continues to cause damage to our environment.”
That
is to say, this company which affirms that it is committed to
principles of sustainability continues to retain in its power
lands belonging to the Pataxo people and to plant them with eucalyptus
trees and is being accused of continued aggression to the environment.
Perhaps the word “sustainability” should be redefined to adapt
it to Veracel’s practices as, in its most accepted meaning, the
use they are making of it is clearly a deception.
Article
based on the Final Document of the Fifth Assembly of the Pataxo
Front for Resistance and Struggle and on Veracel’s web-page:
http://www.veracel.com.br/en/
index
- Chile: The people of Mehuin
again oppose the Celco pulp company
The
coastal village of Mehuin is located in the Northeastern zone
of the Province of Valdivia, on the borders of the ninth and tenth
regions of Chile. It is a small bay, fed by the river Lingue,
and surrounded by the mountains of the coastal cordillera. It
has a population of approximately 1,700 people, but co-inhabits
with 13 communities comprising some 3,000 Mapuche-Lafkenche indigenous
peoples who come down to the village to sell their products and
to get supplies. Some very well defined sectors also exist
in Mehuin, with their own cultural characteristics. One of these
is that of the artisan fisher-folk who inhabit the sector of the
village known as “la Caleta”, near the Lingue River, where most
of the daily life of the village takes place.
Some
10 years ago, the Chilean Pulp Company, Celco S.A. began to carry
out some secret studies with the idea of installing a mill and
building a pipeline to take 900 litres per second of liquid industrial
effluents to the bay. The project was approved
in May 1996 and the environmental resolution granted Celco
the possibility of choosing between two alternatives for its effluents:
dumping them in the river and installing a more modern system
or, dumping them in the sea some 35 kilometres away.
For
the company, the cheapest alternative was to dump its effluents
in the sea, but there they came across opposition to the project
from the community of Mehuin. Right from the start the people
of Mehuin opposed the implementation of the necessary studies,
convinced that they would only ensure the approval and implementation
of the project and consequently pollute the sea. A campaign was
organized to reject the use of the sea as a dump for polluting
chemicals, known as NO TO THE PIPELINE.
Faced
by this opposition, Celco reacted with the same arguments that
had been used in other conflicts in the country. The first thing
was to impose the project as something already decided by the
authorities and to try to frighten the community by telling them
that opposition was a crime. Abuse of power and authoritarianism
were used as strong and valid tools by the company. The second
step was to convince people of the benefits of the project, discrediting
any argument or group opposing it, particularly environmental
groups that were accused of being terrorists and manipulators.
The third step was to offer money, an easy task for a project
investing US$ 1,400 million. A new school was offered, working
implements to the fisher-folk, even a wharf to cover the pipeline
as it entered the sea. The company also offered money for some
of the leaders if the conflict was ended. Furthermore, Celco relied
on the power of some of the media aligned with the company and
the Valdivian local newspaper became the strongest defender of
the project.
The
government attempted to impose the project as a decision taken
by technical teams and any opposition by the community had to
be made in the framework of existing legislation. For the government,
what was important was to reaffirm its policy of economic growth
and this meant supporting all private investments and the forestry/pulp
model was part of this process.
Celco
attempted entry by land and by sea into Mehuín in order to carry
out the studies, but found an organized community that had managed
to make a major part of public opinion aware of the issue. The
Government’s action was laid open to the country and part of the
international community, which looked on with concern at what
was going on in the environmental and indigenous conflicts and
that was able to witness the strong repression carried out in
some Mapuche areas. Faced with imminent defeat, the company and
the Government negotiated a way out of the conflict: to approve
the project with the initial alternative proposed in the first
project, that of discharging effluents into the River Cruces using
a more modern treatment that would ensure minimal pollution.
However,
shortly after the pulp mill started its activities, the Valdivians
started smelling dreadful odours, which led to a series of complaints.
Worse still, a silent threat descended down the River Cruces.
It was a chemical mixture comprising heavy metals, sulphates and
organochloride compounds, fed daily by one million litres of liquid
industrial waste, flooding the waters of the Carlos Anwandter
Nature Sanctuary (30 kilometres down river from the pulp mill),
causing the death and migration of thousands of black-necked swans.
The
environmental crisis was brought to the attention of thousands
of inhabitants of the province and of the country. After months
of mobilisations, the then President of Chile, Ricardo Lagos,
suggested the “solution” to the crisis: dumping the effluents
from Celco into the sea.
Once
again, – having won the first hand over the country’s most powerful
economic group and over the idea of national development which,
in a simplistic way, considers that the country’s growth requires
the sacrifice of a few, although this may imply the death of some
of the country’s small ecosystems – the inhabitants of Mehuin
are ready for resistance. Their objective is still that of avoiding
pollution of their waters and thus saving their sole source of
subsistence. They are convinced that the submission of an Environmental
Impact Assessment by a large economic corporation such as Celco,
is enough to achieve its approval, and therefore they are prepared
to prevent it being implemented in their area. The principle
of prevention and the possibility of reversing a decision taken
by the authorities using mechanisms of citizen participation are
nil. Historically, only 4 per cent of the projects submitted to
that management instrument have been rejected and of those approved,
only 25 % are submitted to very minor control. It is therefore
not overbold to conclude that Environmental Impact Assessments
only contain declarations of intention that in most cases will
not be fulfilled.
It
is in this context that the community of Mehuín awoke on 17 August
with the siren set off by the observers on the hills, announcing
the arrival of the vessels to the place where Celco was to start
its studies. Two tugs hired by the company
arrived in the proximity of Punta Chanchán, escorted by the patrol
vessels “Chiloé” and “Antofagasta” of the Chilean Navy and a warship,
with over one hundred marines on board and among them, some hooded
men and zodiac boats, ready for action.
Twenty
minutes later the fisher-folk’s boats had arrived at the site
to face this threat. Thirty more launches from Queule, at the
south of the Ninth Region also arrived, opposing the pipeline.
The public agents shot at the fisher-folk’s boats on several occasions,
all of which has been duly recorded on film. In the afternoon,
following the staunch opposition of the fisher-folk, the two tugboats
retreated to the north and the Navy ships returned to Corral and
Valdivia.
The
president of the Mehuin Fisher-folk’s Association, Joaquín Vargas,
stated that they were defending the source of employment of over
400 families who were making a living from fishing. “We are defending
the right to work in a pollution-free environment. As is set out
in the Constitution, the State is responsible for safeguarding
the heritage of all the Chilean people.”
According
to Vargas, the environmental impact assessment does not involve
any guarantees for the fisher-folk as the State always ends up
by approving it. “Where pulp mills are in operation with
Environmental Impact Assessments, the results are there for all
to see. Nearby we can see this in Valdivia in the Cruces River.
There, there used to be swans that could fly, we fisher-folk do
not have wings to fly.”
Article
based on information from:“El conflicto de Mehuín”, José Araya
Cornejo,
http://www.wri-irg.org/nonviolence/nvse23-es.htm; and information
sent by Vladimir Riesco Bahamondes, Acción por los Cisnes, e-mail:
riesco@surnet.cl and by
Lucio Cuenca, Observatorio Latinoamericano de Conflictos Ambientales,
e-mail: “Segundo intento de la empresa por iniciar estudios en
la zona. Con presencia de buque de guerra y marinos encapuchados
Celco no pudo iniciar estudio para ducto al mar”, Eliab Viguera,
OLCA.
(Video
in: http://www.mehuin-celco.blogspot.com/)
index
- Chile:
The Ñielol forest – witness to lies on forests and plantations
The
Ñielol hill located near
the city of Temuco in Chile’s Ninth Region, is a faithful witness
to the numerous lies circulating both in this region and in many
others in the country as well as in other countries, regarding
forests and plantations.
The
first lie refers to the fact that the intention is to confuse
people by speaking of forests when in fact it is monoculture tree
plantations that are involved. The forestry companies, the most
interested parties in this confusion, use various expressions:
forests, planted forests, artificial forests, production forests.
However, the difference between forests and plantations is evident
to any person who, after visiting the region’s monoculture pine
and eucalyptus plantations, reaches the Ñielol forest.
On
observing its beauty and biodiversity, one is able to confirm
the fact that this is a forest. Numerous species of native trees
can be found such as Quillays, Oaks, Coihues, Lumas, Temus, Nirres,
Lleuques, Raulís, Cinnamons, Maiténs, Hualas, Hualos, Olivillos,
Peumos, Boldo and Copihue (the national flower), which in turn
harbour an infinity of other plant species and animals.
At
the entry to the Ñielol forest we find further proof of the major
difference between a forest and a plantation. A notice indicates
that fire hazards in this forest are low. Generally the
notices near plantations announce the contrary: High fire risks.
The reason for this difference is that forests by generating water
are able to store humidity from the ecosystem and therefore tend
to eliminate the possibility of fires. On the other hand,
plantations, that are well known for their capacity to deplete
water resources and dry up soils, increase the possibility of
fires and this has been demonstrated on numerous occasions.
The
Ñielol forest is also a testimonial for the inhabitants of Temuco
and for all those who visit it (at least for those who can pay
the entry fee), of all the wealth that is no longer at community
disposal, despite the fact that it is precisely the communities
that have known how to use it, preserving it for future generations.
Forestry
companies usually affirm that it is they with their plantations
that alleviate existing pressure on forests. Nothing is further
from the truth. The local people affirm that it is not true
that the plantations have lessened deforestation; on the contrary,
deforestation has been stepped up. One of the reasons is that
the timber from the plantations is expensive and inaccessible
for domestic use; firewood supplies are made at the expense of
the scant forest areas that have not yet been destroyed by the
forestation companies to install their plantations.
This
means that the plantation companies are not only directly responsible
for past deforestation but that they are also responsible for
present deforestation. In fact, the local people say that when
the companies are “cleaning the forest” to replace it with plantations,
they do it quickly and with heavy machinery. They are able to
make hundreds of hectares of forest disappear in a short while.
One person affirmed that he had seen this happen in the commune
of Cunco, near to Temuco. This is not an exception, it has taken
place and been denounced since 2003 by various organizations.
Most of the complaints in this region are made against the Forestal
Millalemu Company. It is therefore hard to believe that this company
has been certified by FSC and nominated as a candidate to a prize
by the Regional Advisory Council of the National Environmental
Commission, CONAMA.
For their part, various social
organizations from different regions of the country gathered on
28 July in the city of Temuco. Aware of the fact that the Chilean
forestry model is being promoted in many other Latin American
countries and in the rest of the world as an example of development,
in an open letter they describe the negative impacts caused by
monoculture tree plantations to the communities in their territory:
“Our rich forests, where
our communities obtained food and where they lived for hundreds
of years, have been replaced in their great majority by monoculture
tree plantations that do not provide benefits to the communities.
Monoculture tree plantations
have affected the water level of our rivers and streams and have
led to a reduction in tree species and in associated flora and fauna.
They have also caused other environmental damage, such as erosion
and soil degradation, the appearance of pests and diseases and brought
health problems to communities from the use of poisons to counteract
them. Research on transgenic trees already being carried out in
these regions will only worsen negative environmental impacts.
Monoculture
tree plantations have not increased sources of employment. Nor
have they improved the standard of living of the neighbouring
communities as promised by the promoters for decades, but have
increasingly impoverished them, generating high risk slave labour,
increasing labour instability and rural to urban migration.
The two most forested regions of the country have the highest
poverty rates.
Most
of the community lands have fallen into the hands of large transnational
corporations and powerful economic groups that have benefited
from Decree Law 701 subsidising tree plantations, promulgated
in October 1974, a year after the installation of the military
dictatorship and still in force today. To this subsidy were
added special credits for plantations and the elimination of taxes
both on land and on plantations. The total liberation of
the market for forestry products further promoted the expansion
of these projects as it eliminated quotas, duties and standards
that established minimum requirements for exports of such products.
For some years now the companies have achieved new strategies
so that State bodies have even more public funds available to
involve small farmers in tree plantations. Furthermore, the population
permanently subsidises the companies, as the State must take on
economic costs related to highways, roads and bridges, social
costs related to health deterioration, more excluded communities
and increased delinquency and the socioeconomic costs derived
from the elimination of native forests, changes in traditional
land use and food deficiencies.
The installation of pulp mills
in our territory has generated greater socio-cultural, environmental
and economic problems in the communities where they have been
installed.
The Chilean forestry model has
also left a trail of hundreds of people arrested, prosecuted and
sentenced, dozens of people injured, thousands of people mobilized,
seeking to recover their encroached on territories – in their great
majority the Mapuche people – and attempting to curb monoculture
tree plantations and installation of pulp mills.”
At the top of the Ñielol a big
poster transcribes two poems by Selva Saavedra. In one of them called
“Ex-trees”, already in the last century the Chilean poet asked,
“Logging … until when?” It is a very good question. We should add
“Tree monocultures … until when?”
By Ana Filippini,
World Rainforest Movement (WRM), e-mail:
anafili@wrm.org.uy.
You can see this article in Spanish with
photos at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Chile/Nielol.pdf
index
- Uruguay:
The Botnia pulp mill project intends to profit from climate change
The Finnish
company Oy Metsä-Botnia Ab (Botnia’s trade name) established in
1973, is the second largest pulp producer in Europe. It has four
subsidiary companies, two of which are located in Uruguay: Compañia
Forestal Oriental S.A. (FOSA), that has eucalyptus plantations;
and Botnia S.A. established in 2003 to implement the project to
install a pulp mill producing one million tons per year.
The installation of the mega-mill – involving all the facilities
and related chemical factories, plus the plantations supplying
eucalyptus – are, not only for Botnia but for Finland as a country,
the largest private industrial undertaking abroad in its history.
For the company, this guarantees the availability of large amounts
of cheap, short fibre pulp, obtained from timber from its vast
eucalyptus plantations. The generous Uruguayan soil ensures rapid
growth and enables the trees to be cut 7 or 8 years after plantation.
The company found very advantageous conditions in Uruguay: cheap
land and labour, plentiful direct and indirect subsidies for the
establishment of eucalyptus plantations, enormous benefits ensured
with the concession of a free trade zone – exempting it from taxation
– and the unlimited and totally free use of much fresh water required
to grow eucalyptus trees and process pulp. To this is added the
fact that the Uruguayan state ensures upkeep of the necessary
highway facilities to transport timber to the mill at no expense
to the company.
The prospects for Botnia making a profit in Uruguay are therefore
most auspicious, although its presence in the region is very controversial
as reported in WRM bulletins 75, 83, 91, 94, 95, 100, 102 and
103, which show that actions against its installation go back
to 2003.
However,
the company’s imagination to increase its profitability would
seem to be unlimited. The most recent news is the submission
of a project to take advantage of the mechanism set up in the
framework of the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Convention
on Climate Change for the reduction of greenhouse effect gases,
known as the “clean development mechanism” (CDM). As we
have already discussed in 2000 (see WRM Bulletin 37), this instrument
authorises those who pollute to “compensate” their releases by
investing in countries of the South, in projects supposedly reducing
the release of greenhouse effect gases.
.
The fact is that Botnia presented
its CDM project this month at the Faculty of Engineering of the
University of the Republic of Uruguay through two consultant firms:
the Uruguayan Carbosur and the Finnish Poyry. It is important
to note the presence of Poyry (previously known as Jaakko Poyry),
as this consulting firm has played an essential role in the promotion
of fast growing monoculture tree plantations and of pulp mills
all over the world. Of course, in every case they have recommended
the use of Finnish technology and advisory services.
Botnia’s
CDM project is based on a rationale that is more complicated than
usual in projects of this type. The company will generate electricity
by burning black liquor from the timber pulping process. This
electricity will be used in its production process and will generate
an excess of 32 MW of electricity that Botnia will sell to the
public electric network (the State owned UTE). According
to Botnia, emissions from burning black liquor will be nil as
they involve “renewable biomass material” (eucalyptus plantations).
They affirm that “combustion of black liquor does not produce
the release of greenhouse effect gases because it is part of a
cycle implying its restitution due to new biomass growth” (of
the eucalyptus trees). So how does the CDM fit into this? Again
according to Botnia, “with this process the release of greenhouse
effect gases through substitution of electricity generation from
fossil fuel [by UTE] will be reduced by generation from renewable
biomass” [by Botnia].
If this project is accepted
by the CDM, Botnia will obtain additional profits from the sale
of “carbon credits” on the “carbon market” where many polluting
states and companies are eager to “compensate” their polluting
activities with these bonds that enable them to continue business
as usual. For Botnia it is a thoroughly good business: it sells
its excess electricity while at the same time selling carbon credits.
However, even within the CDM rationale, many questions still remain,
in particular those referring to the so-called “additionality
factor.” In fact, to avoid carbon credits being granted to projects
that would have been carried out anyway, the Convention on Climate
Change establishes rules to ensure project “additionality.”
To take advantage
of the system it is essential for the project to demonstrate that
the mitigation of greenhouse effect gases achieved is due to the
implementation of the project and that such mitigation would not
take place without it. However, if the project is considered
as a whole (from logging the trees to pulp exportation), what
is most probable is that – as will be seen further on – total
releases of greenhouse effect gases by Botnia will be higher than
those that would have occurred in the country without its presence.
Another aspect taken into account to assess the “additionality
factor” is whether the project requires, in order to be commercially
viable, the allocation of carbon credits. In the case of Botnia,
this is clearly not the case as the project submitted for approval
of the pulp mill already included burning black liquor for power
generation and not only was it economically viable but, in the
words of Metsä-Botnia’s CEO Erkki Varis, “I
expect the factory to be very competitive, with estimated production
costs of about half of those of modern Finnish pulp factories.”
(Helsingin Sanomat, 8 March 2005)
Furthermore, Botnia affirms that the decrease in emissions will
not be made at the mill but by the State electricity company,
stating that “future demand for electricity in Uruguay will have
to be satisfied by increasing generation from fossil fuels (oil
and natural gas), which release greenhouse effect gases.”
Why is it so sure that the 32 MW of electricity that UTE is to
purchase from Botnia would have necessarily been generated from
fossil fuels, when UTE has three hydroelectric dams of its own
in operation and another one shared with Argentina? It also has
the possibility of developing other energy sources such as wind
energy, bio-fuels or solar energy.
Furthermore, the calculation
made by Botnia regarding emissions is totally simplistic. In fact,
Botnia maintains that releases from burning black liquor will
be nil because it “compensates” for them by growing eucalyptus
plantations. However, even assuming this was true, it “forgets”
to mention the releases generated by the project as a whole.
On the one hand, it omits
to mention the considerable emissions arising from the construction
of the factory. On the other hand, it
also forgets to mention releases resulting
from project operation as a whole. That is to say, the emissions
from the factories producing chemicals associated to pulp production;
the consumption of fuel by forestry machinery; timber transportation
by trucks to the factory – a major operation (calculations involve
one truck every 2.5 minutes, 24 hours per day every day of the
year); port movements; and fuel consumption by ships taking pulp
to paper factories in Finland and China, etc.
Summing up, what is
needed, in first place, is to establish the greenhouse effect
gas releases base line before starting the mill’s construction.
This would allow a serious examination of the net balance of greenhouse
effect gas releases resulting from the installation and operation
of the Botnia factory. If this were to be done, the result
would surely be – on the level of Uruguay – that the release of
such gases has substantially increased, which is precisely what
the Convention on Climate Change is trying to avoid.
However, in this fictitious
scenario, where pollution is transformed into a merchandise and
carbon release into current accounts, the fact that the web of
life does not operate in this way is totally left out. In
theory, releases could be considered as “nil” and “compensated”
by growing eucalyptus trees, but in practice they will be released
every day by the chimneys. The effects of pollution will be suffered
by ecosystems and people – Uruguayans and Argentines – who live
close to the gigantic Botnia factory, which will not only release
carbon dioxide but also many other chemicals such as sulphurs
and even dioxins, potentially affecting the health of the neighbouring
inhabitants.
In spite of this,
this perverse mechanism “greenwashes” these projects, activities
and undertakings in Third World countries, condemning them to
continue dependant on an unjust world order where inequality is
rising, natural goods are exploited unlimitedly and where poverty
and social exclusion are of less importance than market needs.
In this context, even climate change itself, one of the planet’s
most serious environmental problems, ends up by giving rise to
yet another business – carbon trade – from which Botnia now intends
to profit.
In
Uruguay, Botnia’s CDM project is another step forwards in strengthening
the interests that want to place the country – in the words of
the well-known Uruguayan writer, Eduardo Galeano – “in the purest
Colonial tradition: vast artificial plantations that they call
forests, converted into pulp in an industrial process that dumps
chemical waste into rivers and makes the air impossible to breath.”
index
- Indonesia:
From oil palm plantations, with repression…
Extensive
cultivation of oil palm and the resulting oil extraction have
always been linked to repression. Plantation cultivation was originally
established by colonial regimes. The rapid expansion of plantations
in Asia following the Second World War was encouraged in connection
with forest clearing and was used as a weapon in combating Malay
rebels.
The
growth of plantations has not been accompanied by increased rights
for palm-oil workers. The job continues to be hard and dangerous.
Production techniques have hardly changed over the past 150 years.
The wooden hook used to harvest the fruit has been replaced in
some plantations by a sharper metal alloy hook. And now
abundant amounts of toxic herbicides are applied by unprotected
workers spraying from leaking backpack containers. Accidents are
common and life expectancy is short. Unions are very often brutally
repressed.
To
dismantle a newly-formed trade union, Musim Mas – the world’s
largest palm oil refinery, based in Sumatra, Indonesia – fired
over 1,000 trade union members in retaliation for a strike. The
company evicted workers from their homes and their children from
their schools and also arranged for the arrest and prosecution
of 6 union leaders. These six young men are presently serving
prison terms ranging from 14 months to 2 years for the “crime”
of attempting to exercise their collective rights as workers.
The
International Union of Food workers (IUF) had been consolidating
world trade union support for a considerable group of these workers
who had been resisting the company’s efforts to make them hand
in written resignation of their rights and their trade union membership
by accepting compensation for their dismissal. This phase of the
struggle came to an end when on 7 June the trade union reported
that some 200 workers – who had been resisting – accepted financial
compensation for the loss of their jobs. In exchange they were
pressured to drop all legal claims against the company: meaning
that the collective dismissals cannot be contested through an
appeals process. Compensation amounts to some 123 dollars
per worker, the equivalent of 6 weeks wages. The six prisoners
were also obliged to renounce their right to appeal against their
absurd criminal convictions which have been denounced by Amnesty
International and other human rights organizations for criminalizing
trade union activities. Hunger is a powerful weapon in the
hands of a strong and ruthless corporation.
The
company praised the “mutual agreement” by announcing that “This
matter was resolved in accordance with Indonesian labour laws
and in compliance with all the country’s regulations. We are committed
to proactively engaging our stakeholders, both in Indonesia and
abroad, to promote a sustainable oil palm industry.”
The
Government, under accusations at United Nations ILO for serial
violations of international Conventions on trade union rights,
praised an agreement, which “will contribute towards more positive
industrial relations in the palm oil industry.”
The
situation in Indonesia can be summed up in one sentence: one thousand
workers were fired from their jobs and evicted from their homes,
a union was dismantled and 6 union workers are in prison, but
compliance with national law was achieved by paying out 123 dollars
and extracting a “peace agreement” from the prisoners, in which
they renounce their rights.
IUF
affiliates around the world responded to our appeals with messages
to the company and the government and generous financial support
(now going to assist the families of the imprisoned trade unionists).
The fact that our campaign is beginning to gain ground is shown
by the company’s newfound willingness to meet with an organization
that they had previously refused to recognize and tried to destroy.
In a number of key companies, unions linked to the food processing
industry called on their managements to examine their palm oil
sources and in particular, their relations with Musim Mas. In
one case IUF intervention succeeded in bringing one transnational
retailer to temporarily suspend its use of Musim Mas as a producer
of its brand products. The FNV in the Netherlands exhorted the
Government to cease financial support to the Roundtable on Sustainable
Palm Oil (RSPO), the industry’s “socially responsible” public
relations mechanism, which includes “multiple interested parties,”
among them Musim Mass as an Executive Board member, together with
the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) and Oxfam. Public scrutiny
of social conditions underlying palm oil production continues
and will not be easily suppressed.
The
campaign was working and lessons learnt should not be forgotten,
for palm oil continues to grow as a sector built on brutal exploitation.
Musim Mas is hardly unique among palm oil producers in its eagerness
to crush rights in the search for profits. The use of palm
oil as a biofuel means that its price is now linked to the rising
cost of fossil fuels, inciting even more greed. It is being encouraged
as an alternative to banana-trees in Latin America and promoted
as a healthy alternative (which it is not) to trans-fats in processed
foods. The plantation areas are wildly expanding, posing
a threat to the environment and to workers.
IUF
no longer has an industrial dispute with Musim Mas. However, an
even greater problem still exists with the company and with the
lawlessness and barbarism of the sector as a whole. The
World Bank, through its private sector funding agency, the International
Finance Corporation (IFC), is increasing its support to expand
oil palm cultivation. The RSPO, through its privileged relationship
with the World Bank provides it with a “sustainable” cover to
fund the kind of social destruction that Musim Mas inflicted on
those who produce its profits.
Trade
unions in food processing should continue to question their companies’
sources of palm oil and other inputs derived from indefensible
practices. Supporters of justice for oil palm workers should look
closer at how NGOs risk – even in good faith – fronting for companies
such as Musim Mas. WWF and Oxfam, while playing their roles on
the RSPO Executive Board, need to make a careful analysis of their
own positions relating to palm oil workers’ rights. The
Dutch unions are right: government support for the RSPO and the
NGO palm oil activities, while taking us further from urgently
required solutions, is a scandal that must be stopped. The
RSPO should also be challenged and asked to explain Syngenta’s
participation in the Roundtable. Syngenta manufactures paraquat,
the most toxic herbicide on the planet. Paraquat is responsible
for the death of tens of thousands of rural workers every year
and is liberally applied on oil palm plantations. The Musim
Mas union endeavoured to negotiate a safer application of toxic
chemicals and was crushed. The company, whose product kills palm
oil workers, has now applied for membership in the RSPO with full
voting rights.
Public
relations will not bring sustainability to an industry based on
the suppression of human rights. The
