-
International Day Against Monoculture
Tree Plantations
In 2004, the Brazilian Network campaigning
against the spread of tree plantations came up with the idea of
instituting an International Day Against Monoculture Tree Plantations
on 21 September, which is National Tree Day in that country. The
idea was supported by organizations from all over the world, who
since then carry out a number of special activities on this day.
It is important to stress that this
is certainly not a day aimed at opposing tree planting in general,
but an activity focusing on one type of plantation in particular:
large scale tree monocultures.
The need for such opposition is increasingly
clear. While governments and many international institutions continue
promoting what they term as “forest plantations” or “planted forests”,
local communities continue to oppose what they describe as “green
deserts”, “green cancer”, “selfish trees”, “planted soldiers”,
or “dead forests”.
Such differences in wording reflect
the gap between those who promote these plantations as something
positive –forests- and those who oppose them because of their
negative social and environmental impacts, described under the
above terms.
Knowledge gained during the past decades,
of the fact that plantations are established at the expense of
local peoples’ livelihoods and environment, has now reached such
a level of certainty that it can no longer be ignored. In country
after country, monoculture tree plantations have resulted in net
loss of employment, forced or “voluntary” evictions, appropriation
of large areas of land by national and transnational corporations,
depletion and pollution of water resources, biodiversity loss,
soil impoverishment, destruction of local ecosystems –forests
or grasslands- and in many cases in human rights abuses including
repression, imprisonment and even death.
Increasing consumer awareness on the
impacts of the production of wood-related products –ranging from
paper to furniture- led to the creation of certification systems,
whereby consumers would be able to receive assurances that their
purchases were not resulting in impacts on forests and forest-dependent
peoples.
Those certification systems were promoted
by different national, regional and international actors and led
to the creation of a number of labels: Canadian Standards Association
Standard (CSA), Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), Programme for
the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC), Sustainable
Forestry Initiative (SFI), The Australian Forestry Standard (AFS),
Sistema Brazileiro de Certificação Florestal (CERFLOR), Certificación
Forestal en Chile (CERTFOR), Malaysian Timber Certification Council
(MTCC).
However, all of them failed to see what
was obvious to local communities living in the vicinity of plantations:
that large scale tree monocultures are intrinsically uncertifiable.
Over the past years, WRM has concentrated
its critique on the certification of plantations by the FSC. This
may have led to the wrong impression that the other labels were
better. If this has been the case, we apologise. The only reason
for concentrating on the FSC was because the participation of
social and environmental NGOs provided this system with some credibility.
The other labels –promoted by governments and corporations- simply
have no credibility at all (see articles below on PEFC, CERFLOR
and CERTFOR).
However, having better or worse certification
schemes is not the issue. What is needed is not certification
but legislation –and compliance with it. The situation is so serious
that it cannot be left in the hands of voluntary schemes and consultants
to decide whether plantations deserve a label or not: their impacts
are such that none of them do.
Legislation must ensure, in the first
place, that governments immediately cease to provide plantation
companies with any type of subsidies or support.
Secondly, governments must ban further
plantations in areas where there is evidence of their negative
social and environmental impacts.
Third, governments must carry out independent
and participatory research to evaluate the impacts of existing
plantations and compensate local peoples for the damages suffered,
including devolution of land in cases where it was taken away
from them.
Fourth, governments must apply the precautionary
principle and prevent the implementation of plantations which
might have social and environmental impacts.
The above are only some of the many
actions that governments must implement to begin to redress the
problems created by their plantation-promotion policies. People
from each country or region should decide which ones are applicable
and which others need to be added.
September 21st could be a celebration
to living organisms that most people see as environmental symbols
–trees- but the way in which they are being used for generating
profits to some, makes it a necessity to commemorate this third
International Day Against Monoculture Tree Plantations. We hope
that the need for this Day will no longer be necessary in the
very near future.
