OUR
VIEWPOINT
-
Biofuels: A potentially positive solution turned into a serious
threat to the South
No
one in their right mind can accuse President George W. Bush of
overly concerning himself with climate change. In this respect,
his curriculum is spotless and both his unreserved support to
the oil industry and his oil wars have implied significant inputs
to global warming. And if any doubts were left, his persistent
refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol has made him the undisputed
leader of those making the largest contribution to the destruction
of Planet Earth’s climate.
For
this reason his recent interest in biofuels is most astonishing.
In fact, during his recent visit to various Latin American countries
(Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico) this was the
clearest point on the agenda of a trip that was defined by some
media as “ethanol diplomacy.” What is more, before starting
his trip he visited the installations of a company associated
with ethanol production where he made reference to “technologies
that will enable us to convert wood chips into fuels that are
running automobiles.”
Bush’s
sudden attentiveness to an issue seemingly so distant from his
interests and concerns serves to better understand the reasons
behind the fact that so many Northern governments and agencies
are promoting the development of biofuels in so many Southern
countries.
Contrary
to other Northern government representatives, Bush does not even
try to present himself as being “green.” The reasons he puts forth
are basically strategic and economic ones. He affirms that the
promotion of biofuels is “a very important national goal, to become
less dependent on oil from overseas, thereby ensuring that our
national security interests are better intact and our economic
security interests are better intact”. Regarding economic reasons
he states that “It makes sense to be able to -- as the price of
hydrocarbons goes up- … that there be alternative sources of energy
coming to the market as quickly as possible.”
Most
probably the governments of most of the countries of the North
– and particularly the European ones – have come to the same conclusions,
making us doubt the “greenness” of their intentions.
From
the viewpoint of many governments of the South, biofuels are simply
perceived as a new product to be exported, as an “opportunity.”
This, added to the manifold support they are receiving from cooperation
agencies and multilateral organizations, has given rise to the
adoption of policies and concrete measures for their promotion
in dozens of countries, without considering the possible social,
political, economic and environmental consequences.
In
contrast, grassroots organizations in the South see biofuels as
a serious threat to subsistence. In fact, government plans imply
that millions of hectares of land that today produce food, are
going to be given over to the production of fuel to feed automobiles.
Crops such as maize, soybean, sugarcane, oil palm and many others
are going to be converted into ethanol or biodiesel. In
the words of Bush himself, wood-chips will be converted into ethanol,
implying the threat of even more monoculture fast growing tree
plantations to feed cars. All this will be done to the detriment
of lands producing food and of forests.
In
this context, the recent meeting held in Mali on food sovereignty
with the participation of delegates from over 80 countries, clearly
declared itself against “the ‘Green Deserts’ of industrial bio-fuel
monocultures and other plantations.” (see
1). The women meeting there also supported this position
in their declaration on food sovereignty, emphasizing that “Monocultures,
including those dedicated to agrofuels … have a harmful effect
on the environment and on human health…” (see
2)
In
a different context, the Peoples’ Permanent Tribunal (formerly
the Russell Tribunal), at its recent meeting in Cacarica, Colombia
included serious accusations against companies producing palm
oil in its declaration. Among other things, it accused them (and
the Colombian Government) of having planted oil palm on “the collective
territories of Afro-Colombian communities, an operation that was
possible thanks to the commission and impunity of over 113 crimes
of Lese Humanity, 13 forced displacements, 15 cases of torture,
17 arbitrary arrests, 19 ransacking of settlements, 14 para-military
style raids, aggressions on the humanitarian zone, 4 murders or
extra-judicial executions and the so-called ‘demobilization’ which
has enabled the development of further death threats and control
over the population.” (see 3)
Of
course this would not have overly concerned the Colombian and
US Presidents when they recently met, as both have been – and
continue to be – partners in the massacre taking place in Colombia
under the name of the “Colombia Plan.” The final result will be
positive for them: the production of bio-diesel from oil palm.
However, it is fitting that the future consumers of this fuel
reflect on the evidence of a women who told the Tribunal that
“oil palms are fertilized by the blood of our brothers and sisters,
friends and family members,” adding that “we have nowhere to work
as the territory is covered by oil palm trees.”
This
is the true face concealed behind the so-called “biofuels” in
the South. Bio means life. However, the cultivation of these fuels
means death. Death of entire communities; death of cultures; death
of people; death of nature. Be these oil palm or eucalyptus plantations,
be these sugarcane or transgenic soybean monoculture plantations,
be they promoted by “progressive” or “conservative” governments.
Death.
What
could have been a positive solution (replacing fossil fuels by
fuels from biomass) has become, by the grace of certain Northern
interests, one of the most serious threats to the survival of
millions of people in the South. For biofuels to become a positive
solution the approach must change completely. It must change from
production for a global market to production for local supply,
from monoculture plantations to diversity, from monopoly to decentralization,
from socially and environmentally destructive to respect for people
and nature. This is not in the minds of the companies, but it
is possible to find it in the minds of people, both in the South
and in the North. We appeal to them all to protect life and to
help stop this process which – under an “ecological” mantle –
is a synonym of death.
(1)
The full declaration is available at:
index
COMMUNITIES
AND FORESTS
-
Brazil: MST peasants occupy a shrimp farm
The
problem of the loss of territories by peasants and indigenous
peoples in favour of industrial projects has several aspects in
Brazil and the Landless Peasant’s Movement (MST) has been struggling
to counteract this process.
We
have reported on the successive occupations of land covered with
vast monoculture eucalyptus plantations for pulp production –
one of such occupations recently involved the women of Via Campesina/MST
on the occasion of International Woman’s Day.
Mangroves
are also affected by depredatory projects. Shrimp farming is an
extractive business that implies mangrove destruction. On
21 January this year in response to the situation and to protest
against the slowness of the agrarian reform in the state, approximately
150 families associated with MST invaded the Qualibras shrimp
farm located in Itapipoca, the coastal region of the State of
Ceara.
With
this occupation, MST was denouncing yet another act of violence
by agro-business in the country: that of the Qualibras group destroying
the mangroves in the region. According to Brazilian law
this is a serious environmental crime because of the importance
of mangroves, among other things, in the marine food chain. The
Brazilian Terramar Institute denounced that the shrimp farms are
violating Ceara laws as they are building nurseries in permanent
protection areas. “An assessment made by the Brazilian Institute
for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) found
that 75 percent of the shrimp farms in Ceara are located in permanent
preservation areas, violating the state laws.”
In
the mangroves big business finds great profitability thanks to
low production costs, an abundant and close water supply and tide
movements that help to keep down the cost of pumping water into
the tanks.
In
spite of the environmental importance of mangroves and of the
legislation, shrimp farming companies continue to expand their
business: between 2003 and 2004, the area of shrimp farms in Brazil
rose from 14,824 to 16,598 hectares with a total of close on 1,000
farms throughout the country, compared to the 20 that existed
in the eighties.
While
this agro-business advances over the mangroves in the northeast
of the country, the workers are getting organized. The families
that took part in the occupation are camping in the coastal region
of the state, struggling to be given land and granted deeds. There
are a total of 1,700 families spread out in 25 camps, and many
of them have been waiting for over five years for the promised
agrarian reform. In 2006, the goal of the National Institute
for Settlement and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) was to settle 2,000
families in the State, but only 206 have received lands.
The indigenous group “Tremembes” also took part in the occupation,
demanding demarcation of lands in the indigenous zone of Buritis
in Itapipoca.
Gunmen
hired by the company surrounded the camp on the night of 23 January,
in an attempt to intimidate the men, women and children. Finally
and to avoid a conflict placing the safety of their families at
risk, the landless peasants abandoned the occupation the following
morning.
"We
left with the intention of returning again in the event that INCRA
does not definitively resolve the problems of the agrarian reform,”
affirmed a representative of the landless movement.
Article
based on information from: “Brasil: MST ocupa fazenda devastadora
de mangues no Ceará”, Igor Felippe Santos, http://www.biodiversidadla.org/content/view/full/29831;
“MST ocupa fazenda de criação de camarão”, Carlos Henrique Camelo,
OPovo online, http://www.opovo.com.br/opovo/ceara/664429.html;
“MST sai de fazenda com ameaças de jagunços no Ceará”, CUT, http://www.cut.org.br/publique/cgi/cgilua.exe/sys/start.htm?infoid=7314&sid=22
index
-
Cameroon: When women mobilise to protect
the moabi
Southern
Cameroon is red and green. Green like the forest of the Congo
basin that breathes and has a heartbeat and that offers its inhabitants
the biotic resources necessary to subsist; and red like the dusty
roads where trucks run, transporting the bodies of forest giants
that will be turned into furniture, flooring, doors, etc. Along
Cameroon’s open veins flows its vital element to the port of Douala,
where the vampire from the North comes to quench its thirst…
Voices
of women reach us from the forest. In Southeast Cameroon women
are organizing to improve their living conditions and to preserve
a mythical tree, the moabi (Baillonella toxisperma). This forest
giant from the basin of the Congo River is being industrially
exploited at a pace that is hard to determine but that is affecting
local peoples and in particular, women.
For
the peoples of Southern Cameroon, the moabi is of considerable
importance. Traditionally the “Sacred Tree,” dead ancestors were
placed sitting at the foot of the tree or in a hole in its trunk;
thus the moabi incarnated the power of the dead person. As the
“Pharmaceutical Tree” its bark, its leaves and roots served to
make over fifty traditional drugs used among other things for
menstrual pains, vaginal infections and after childbirth. As the
“Nutritional Tree” its edible fruits reduce women’s work when
it bears fruit, the seeds produce a good quality oil that is under
the control of women from the time of gathering to the time to
take it to market, representing one of the main sources of income
in the areas where it grows.
Industrial
exploitation of the forest started in Cameroon at the beginning
of the twentieth century, during German colonization in the coastal
region, to spread later to the whole country at the pace the railway
was built. And, although some industrialists cannot find an explanation
to the dwindling of maobis, it may be seen
that the distribution of these species is inversely
proportional to the historic presence of forest exploitation.
In fact, maobi trading is lucrative as it is a very good quality
timber for carpentry and fetches a high price on the international
market. It is really a luxury product that finds its place in
yachts or estates, as decks, windows, panelling, etc. Maobi parquet
was used to cover the floors of the Paris Champs Elysées Theatre.
In
Cameroon, the international timber trade is exclusively in the
hands of foreign companies, mainly French, Italian, Lebanese and
more recently, Chinese. However, the moabi market continues to
be very “Franco-French”: according to official statistics, between
2000 and 2005, 45 percent of the volume of moabi was produced
by French companies and 71 % of the production was sold in France
(24% in Belgium). It is thus obvious that the moabi trade
is in perfect coincidence with the trade ties with the old metropolis.
Since
the eighties, many villages are in dispute with the forest exploitation
companies surrounding the Dja reserve, a region that is rich in
moabis. The villagers have sent numerous letters to the relevant
authorities, claiming their right to use the forest and asking
for moabis to be protected. They have taken various measures,
such as organizing meetings with the industrialist, marking the
moabis to point out their right to use them and blocking the entry
of heavy machinery until the army intervened… but none of these
measures really achieved its objective. At Bedoumo, the
army violently repressed a strike aimed at blocking the entry
of the logging companies. The villagers were obliged to pick up
the cinders of the fires they had light along the road to warm
them from the cold night air with their bare hands, they were
beaten and tortured and as a result some pregnant women had miscarriages.
Confrontations of this type mobilize the entire community, although
in general it is the men who appear at the forefront, as supposedly
they are the ones who have contact, both oral and written, with
the authorities.
However,
the two conflicts specifically related with the moabi tree that
made the villagers physically confront the companies were either
promoted by women or led by women. In Bapilé, the Italian
company FIPCAM opened up a road (during a feast day when the villagers
had gone to a neighbouring village) through the space reserved
for the community forest and destroyed a cemetery. The following
day, on hearing the noise made by the lumberjacks and discovering
that various moabis in flower had been felled, five village women
went to the forest to try to convince the workers to give up their
logging, with no success. The following days, the whole
community mobilized to block the road and the machinery, struggles
and strikes went on for a month, and finally they achieved the
protection of some of the remaining trees and recognition of the
damage caused (300 moabis had been felled). Although compensation
has not yet been payed.
In
the village of Zieng-Ognoul, Pallisco, a French industrialist
opened up a road in the space reserved for the community forest.
When the villagers heard the noise, Mrs Koko Sol marched to the
forest with various villagers, mainly women, and threatened to
set fire to the machinery if the loggers did not stop their work.
As a result, the loggers were expelled and a large number of moabis
were preserved; unfortunately eleven had already been felled.
In
some cases conflicts arise between men and women in the villages.
In the first place because the men work in the logging companies
and are responsible for making inventories of timber species.
In the second, because some of them sell moabis from their land
to clandestine sawmills. A woman from Ebimimbang affirmed that
“the men are guilty because they are in contact with the industrialists
and are well aware that the moabi is very important to the women.”
The
scarcity of moabis causes particular prejudice to women who must
find other options for food; receive less income and do without
medicinal ingredients or medicines for the specific treatment
of female genital diseases. This situation is added to the masculine
domination that they must endure in their societies.
Faced
with this situation, Mrs Rufine Adjowa decided to establish an
NGO known as CADEFE. Its objective is to improve the living conditions
of women by protecting the moabi. The idea is to gather village
women in small groups or even cooperatives to develop the sale
of moabi oil. The peasant women can thus obtain substantial income
that enables them to pay their children’s schooling and medical
attention or to purchase the oil and soap they need without having
to ask their husbands for money.
Because
of their exclusion, all these women make up a social group able
to promote changes in relations of power and to propose effective
solutions for sustainable and equitable management of forest ecosystems.
By
Sandra Veuthey, based on the author’s field observations.
E-mail: sandra.veuthey@campus.uab.cat
index
-
Ecuador: The Awa People and their territory
between political interests and economic pressure
The
Ministry of the Environment is placing Ecuador’s indigenous territories
in danger. Under a new term, that of “co-management” it intends
to hand over our ancestral territories and their natural resources
to logging, oil palm and mining companies.
On
12 January 2007 the Minister of the Environment, Ana Albán modified
the granting of Awa territory and set up a co-management regime
between the indigenous Awa and Afro-Ecuadorian communities for
the Parish of Ricaurte-Tululbí, Canton of San
Lorenzo, Province of Esmeraldas. This resolution affects five
Awa communities: Guadualito, Mataje, Balsareño, Pambilar and La
Unión, involving 771 inhabitants and a territory of some 17,493
hectares.
We
Awa are an ancestral indigenous nation from the Northwest of Ecuador
and the Southwest of Colombia. We have a unique culture
and our own language “Awa pìt”. We have 22 legally established
Awa centres (communities) in Ecuador. They are all organized in
the Federation of Awa Centres of Ecuador (FCAE), which is legally
recognized by the Ecuadorian State. FCAE and its 22 centres have
been granted a total of some 115,336 hectares of community land
(under different kinds of deeds), located in the Provinces of
Esmeraldas, Carchi and Imbabura.
We
need our land for our livelihood and our survival. We are not
going to abandon our homes and communities nor are we going to
retreat a single step. If our ancestral lands are invaded, there
will be confrontations. We will defend our land to the utmost,
even if it involves losing our lives. We certainly do not
want to reach any extreme or use any violence, but we hold the
Minister Ana Alban directly responsible for anything that may
occur in this case.
We
are protected by our legitimate rights, guaranteed by the Ecuadorian
Constitution and by international treaties such as the International
Labour Organization’s Convention 169, signed by the Ecuadorian
State.
In
April 2006 the Ecuadorian Negro Association (ASONE) sent a letter
to the former president Alfredo Palacios in which it demanded
the derogation, using false information and ill intentioned accusations,
of the granting of 99,337 hectares of our Awa territory made by
the Ministry of the Environment on 2 March 2006.
It
is sufficient to visit our land to see who lives there and grows
their crops there. ASONE says we are Colombian and drug traffickers,
but the truth is that we are one of the 14 indigenous nationalities
officially recognized in Ecuador. We were all born here, we have
Ecuadorian identity cards and all our communities are legally
established. There are no coca plantations on Awa territory.
We
have always lived peacefully on our lands and no one has claimed
ancestral rights over them. On 2 March 2006, after 30 years of
struggle, the Minister of the Environment Ana Alban finally granted
us 99,337 hectares of our ancestral lands. This grant was the
result of painstaking public, administrative and field work over
a period of three years. Each metre of our property lines has
been checked in the field.
Furthermore,
these same lands were demarcated as “Traditional Settlement of
the Awa Indigenous Community Area” by the Ministry of Agriculture
in 1988 and our ancestral possession was demarcated and recognized
as an “Awa Ethnic Reserve” corresponding to 101,000 hectares by
INEFAN, the predecessor to the Ministry of the Environment in
1995. Our lands’ property lines have never been moved.
Land
traffickers from San Francisco and San Lorenzo are behind this
complaint, ghost organizations such as the “Citizen Front for
the Defence of Ancestral Territories” together with the former
deputy, Rafael Erazo from Esmeraldas. They want to sell
our natural resources and lands to logging, oil palm and mining
companies. They are concealed behind ASONE to make it look like
an ethnic conflict, but this is not the case. We have no problems
with Afro-Ecuadorian communities. For centuries we have been living
side by side with them as good neighbours, each on his own land.
We have mutual respect for our cultures and our lands.
In
March there was a first invasion by Guido Rodríguez, a well-known
logging intermediary in the area, who works for Plywood Ecuatoriana
and CODESA, belonging to the Alvarez Barba Group. With his personnel
he invaded the forest belonging to the Awá Balsareño centre to
open up strips in the forest. The community evicted him, as we
had already done in 2005 when he came to the territory with high-clearance
tractors to cut down our forest and turn it into plywood boards.
In
another Awa centre, the Rio Tigre centre in the Province of Carchi,
Tulcán canton, the situation is even worse. In 2002, the National
Institute for Agrarian Development (INDA), the State institution
responsible for granting lands, legally granted 6,024 hectares
of communal ancestral lands to the Awa Rio Tigre Centre. But in
December last year, INDA resolved to revert the land grant to
the State, accepting the demand made by two farming associations
from Ibarra, the “Asociación de Trabajadores Autónomos San Vicente”
and the “Asociación de Desarrollo Comunitario Vista Hermosa del
Río Tigre” which are claiming some 4,000 hectares of forest in
Awa territory.
These
associations also speculate with land: they want to take over
our land and forests to do business. They have never lived there
or worked the land. Their partner is a corporation
(Egocreanet – Ecuador), and they want to allocate them some 500
hectares of these lands.
Today
our territory is the last large remnant in the whole Ecuadorian
coast of tropical rainforest. We have always defended our lands
and have preserved our forests. We are living in harmony with
the environment, benefiting from it without destroying it. As
there is no land left for new oil palm plantations they want to
take over our Awa territory.
We
will not allow them to evict our communities to sell our territory
to logging and oil palm companies. We are organized and ready
to implement any necessary action. We have our own Community
Forest Management Sub-programme and a Centre for Stocking and
Transforming Timber in San Lorenzo. We take advantage of
small quantities of timber using traditional methods of low environmental
impact.
If
there is this interest in recovering ancestral lands in the area
of San Lorenzo, the authorities should recover the tens of thousands
of hectares of lands that were taken from Afro-Ecuadorian communities
by oil palm companies. These companies have felled some 40,000
hectares of forests in the Canton of San Lorenzo since 1999 to
establish industrial oil palm plantations.
The
consequences are most serious. The Choco forests, with their high
rate of biodiversity have disappeared for ever. The animals that
were hunted and the fish in the rivers have gone. The Afro-Ecuadorian
communities have practically no land, food or sources of employment.
The rivers have been poisoned with insecticides and fertilizers
from the palm plantations. It is a green agro-industrial desert.
In
this context the complicity of the Ecuadorian State should also
be pointed out in the occupation of ancestral lands and in the
felling of forests in the Canton of San Lorenzo. On 8 August
2002, the former president, Gustavo Noboa signed decree 2961,
designating for agricultural use a polygon of approximately 60,000
hectares of community lands in the Canton of San Lorenzo, including
part of Awa territory and 5,000 hectares of the State’s Forestry
Heritage.
This
decree was jointly prepared by the Ministries of the Environment,
Agriculture and Foreign Affairs and oil palm companies. The aim
of the decree has been to legitimize the land that the oil palm
companies acquired illegally, to increase their area and legalize
the felling of forests that has been going on for years without
permits or environmental impact assessments, or consideration
for local communities.
FCAE
demands that the Ecuadorian Government:
•
Respects and definitively ensures land title deeds for Awa territory
•
Prosecutes all invasion, extraction of timber by third parties,
etc. on Awa territory
•
Recognizes the Awa indigenous authority over its territory (circumscription)
At
the same time we are asking for support and endorsement from all
organizations in defence of our land.
By
Olindo Nastacuaz, President of the Federation of Awa Centres of
Ecuador (FCAE), e-mail: fedawa@federacionawa.org,
www.federacionawa.org
index
- India:
Indigenous movement in Jharkhand challenge plans for industrial
development that threatens to destroy Adivasi forests, farmlands
and way of life
Like
State governments in many other parts of India, the government
of Jharkhand State is planning large-scale industrial expansion
across the entire region in the name of “development” and “poverty
reduction”. To the dismay and disillusionment of mass movements
in Jharkhand, newly elected government officials plan to uphold
agreements struck by the previous State government with leading
steel and mining companies. In return for 169198 Crore Rupees
(c. US$3.8 billion) of investment, these agreements promise companies
massive land acquisition, which will deforest no less than 57,000
hectares of forest and displace 9,615 families, many of them located
in legally protected Scheduled Areas set aside for indigenous
Adivasi peoples in the State.
In
Ranchi District, for example, the UK-based company Arcelor Mittal
plans to take over tribal land and forests in Karra Block to develop
a huge steel plant with backing from the State government. The
whole plan has been developed without consultation and without
the prior consent of the affected Adivasi people – in direct violation
of legal protections for indigenous peoples, including the 5th
Schedule, the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act (1908) and the Samata Judgement.
In
the last two years indigenous and mass social movements in Jharkhand,
have mobilised to challenge these official plans for massive industrial
development across the State. Peoples’ movements are categorically
saying ‘no’ to industry-related displacement and they reject interference
in their local affairs and decision-making by company “community
liaison officers” or political party activists and politicians.
In
Karra Block, the Adivasi people have started a campaign to save
their traditional lands and forest and have formed a campaign
organisation called Ottehasa Horo Sangathan (Organization of People
of the Earth). Udikel village is one of the 144 communities threatened
with displacement where the people have organised themselves to
oppose top-down development.
Nandi
Pahan, leader of Udikel Panchayat, affirms that his community
will never exchange their forests and fields for industrial development:
"Everything
is here on our traditional land: our homes, our fields, our forests,
our burial grounds and ceremonial sites. This land is sacred for
us. This is where we hold our Baha (flower feast) festival and
other ceremonies. The forest has our special sarna
'prayer places'. So, our land is
part of our way of life. We will not give up our land. If we surrender
our lands: what will we eat? Where will go to plant our crops?"
He
is backed up by other leaders of the community:
"The
forest is of great importance to us. We gather fruits like karanj
from the forest and medicines. We collect minor forest produce
for sale. We have our orchards where we grow mangoes and tamarind.
We use the forest to get construction materials for our houses
and to make tools, including our agricultural implements. How
can a factory replace all this? It is our culture and our livelihood.
We cannot and will not give up this land."
[Devar Pahan, Udikel Village]
In
Seraikella Karshwan District mining and steel companies have put
pressure on Adivasi villages to give up their traditional lands
and forests for “development”. No less than 39 villages in 4 Panchayats
in the District report that Company agents have visited them in
recent years to try to persuade them to give up their forests
for mining. Dalbhanga Panchayat, for example, has been under
constant pressure to open its lands up to limestone mining and
has only stopped harassment by company agents following a massive
protest rally against the proposed mine. In Rugudi Panchayat,
Magila L Phonta Ltd has applied for a permit to mine gold that
would affect Ramdih and Mutugarha villages.
Here
too, villagers have opposed these plans and rejected approaches
from company agents, partly by organising numerous rallies in
2005 and 2006 to protest against unwanted mining development on
their lands.
"We
do not want to surrender our land and customary rights to anybody
– whether it is the government or private companies. Our land
and our forest are the source of life for our communities. For
us, the forest and the land is everything! We will never allow
companies or the State to take them away from us!"
[Mangal Singh, Batani village, Torandih Panchayat]
“If
the mining companies come this place will become like Kolapani
Island (remote and lonely): it will be like hell. It will become
a miserable place. All the greenery will be gone and our land
will be lost. Our health will be damaged and our medicinal plants
will be destroyed. The company may promise to replace our forest,
but these will be poisonous trees that will suck the water from
our land. Those trees (eucalyptus) are no use to anyone here.
Not to humans and not to animals. This is why we will not give
up our rights.” [Ghopal Singh Munda, Siyadia
village, Rugudi Panchayat, Buchei Block, Bakas Mundari Khuntkatti
and General Secretary of Samiti Rakshe Evam Vikas]
For
more information on threats to forests and indigenous and mass
movement opposition to mining and industrial development in Jharkhand,
contact Sanjay Bosu Mullick of Jharkhand Save the Forest Movement,
email: rch_sanjay@sanchart.in,
and Tom Griffiths, Forest Peoples Programme,
email: tom@forestpeoples.org.
See also a more detailed article with pictures at http://www.forestpeoples.org/documents/asia_pacific/india_jharkhand_feb07_eng.pdf
index
-
Nigeria: Women of Idheze shut down Agip’s
oil facilities
We
had already shared (see WRM's bulletin Nº 111) what the ‘Operation
Climate Change’ -- launched on January 1, 1999 -- did in the Niger
Delta: activists shut down oil flow stations and gas flares. In
response, many houses were destroyed, people were killed and women
were raped. However, the struggle continued and mainly women started
a joint campaign to protect life by putting a stop to the depredations
of Big Oil. They won a fight: in January 2006 Nigerian courts
ordered Shell to stop the flaring of natural gas in Ogoniland.
Now,
they have gone for more. Women of Idheze community in Isoko South
Local Council of Delta State have again shut down oil facilities
of the Nigeria Agip Oil Company (NAOC) alleging failure to pay
compensation for damages caused by chemical/waste fluid of the
firm flushed into the community.
Recently,
chemical/waste from the rig site was discharged into the swamp
of Idheze leading to the death and destruction of aquatic life.
Many dead aquatic animals were still afloat in the ponds during
the following days.
The
women had early in December 2006 seized oil facilities belonging
to Agip, owing to the failure of the company to implement an earlier
agreement signed with the community on their entrance into their
land.
They
revealed that a spill led to the death of seven adults and three
children and also destroyed economic trees and crops in 1982.
The
women carried placards, barricaded the main entrance of the company's
facilities and turned back all workers. Some of the placards bore
inscriptions such as: "We are tired of the inhuman treatment
of NAOC", "We will continue to disrupt your activities
until you meet our demands", "Pay compensation for the
chemical/waste fluid you have used to pollute our land."
The
women came to the premises with their utensils and food items,
including bags of rice, yams, garri as well as canopies with which
they erected makeshift tents. They vowed not to vacate the yard
until their demands were met.
According
to them, after all that the community suffered as a result of
the spill, Agip has refused to heed the advice of the inspectorate
body of the Nigeria National Petroleum Company (NNPC) which ordered
Agip to compensate the community.
Leader
of the protesters, Mrs. Mercy Okunwa, who spoke on behalf of the
community's President-General, Joel Ogbru, accused the company
of insensitivity to the plight of the locals as well as reneging
on agreement reached with the community in Port Harcourt last
December.
She
said the non-challant attitude of NAOC to the issues of their
community, led to a protest by the community on December 19, 2006
to register their "vexation but until now none of the promises
made by NAOC when they invited the community people has been implemented".
She
disclosed that many of the servicing companies operating in the
rigs were "carrying out the job with the knowledge of Agip
but detrimental to the community because none of them pays royalty
to the community."
They
accused servicing firms such as SERIC, IMPEANTI, and KCA Deutage
for flouting outrightly, agreements reached with the community,
saying that Agip conspired with some of the servicing firms to
rob the community of their entitlements. She lamented that contracts
that should have been given to the indigenes were executed by
outsiders.
"We
are peace-loving people and knowing that Agip has been deceiving
us, we wouldn't want anything that will be detrimental this time
to our people and so until the company's management responds to
our demand, we will not vacate the premises," the aggrieved
women declared.
Article
based on: “Women protesters shut oil facility as toxic waste ravages
community”, Chido Okafor, Warri, sent by Oilwatch, e-mail: info@oilwatch.org
index
COMMUNITIES AND TREE
MONOCULTURES
-
Brazil: An overview of monoculture eucalyptus plantations
Monoculture
eucalyptus plantations are advancing over vast areas of the country,
occupying traditional peoples’ territories, displacing them, evicting
people from rural areas, thus contributing to the creation of
poverty belts, with the context of violence and criminality these
necessarily imply. And as if this were
not enough, they also have their quota of bloodshed.
At
9 o’clock on the evening of 26 February 2007, in the North of
Minas Gerais, an armed guard of the V&M FLORESTAL Company
– a company that has planted thousands of hectares of eucalyptus
in the area – cravenly murdered Antonio Joaquim dos Santos, a
32 year-old farmer and extractivist, who was married and had four
children. Joaquim and his daughter Eudisleia were on their way
home after gathering firewood for domestic use. Two of V&M’s
armed guards, Claudinei and Joãozinho de Carmina, grabbed Antonio
Joaquim, tied him up, hit him and then fired two shots into his
mouth, all in front of his daughter. This happened in a eucalyptus
plantation certified by FSC, which supposedly guarantees management
aimed at “maintaining or enhancing the long-term social and economic
well being of forest workers and local communities.” According
to community members, Antonio Joaquim was gathering firewood from
his brother’s property, from where he was taken by the guards
who dragged him to the V&M area.
Last
year, the Canabra community complained internationally, telling
of their troubles and their lack of alternatives as a result of
the deforestation of the “cerrados” caused by the V&M Company.
This company had cut off the community’s access to firewood and
native fruit, in addition to drying up the Canabra River. V&M’s
response was to increase their pressure on the community which
has been living in terror since then, threatened by armed guards
who have taken over the farmers’ carts and implements,
have employed verbal and physical violence against the community
members and have even put pressure on children bringing home small
bundles of firewood on their bikes on their way back from school.
Various
social organizations -- Rede Alerta Contra
o Deserto Verde (Alert Against the Green Desert
Network), CAA NM ( Centre
for Alternative Agriculture/Minas Gerais),
CPT (Pastoral Land Commission of
Minas Gerais State),
Fórum Regional de Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Norte de Minas
(Regional Forum of Sustainable Development in Northern Minas State),
MST (Landless Peasents Movement), ASA Minas
Gerais denounced the murder and sought action with official authorities
and human rights organizations, demanding immediate and
determined intervention against the company’s excesses.
They also filed complaints with FSC Brazil and FSC International,
asking them to immediately withdraw the Green Label granted to
V&M. Coincidentally, the company anticipated affairs
and on 15 March communicated its “decision to voluntarily withdraw
from FSC after 8 years of very close relationship.” The reason
put forth by the company was that it did not agree with the way
in which the certifying body (SGS) had carried out its audit.
In
the meanwhile, the pulp industry attacks on other fronts. Stora
Enso is acquiring land on the west frontier of the State of Rio
Grande do Sul. Although it is being cautious - it has declared
that “Although we are in a continual process of acquiring land,
the possibility of investing in the Stora Enso factory has not
yet been decided,” the Swedish-Finnish company’s initial project
foresaw the establishment of eucalyptus plantations covering an
area of 100 thousand hectares. In order to achieve its objective
it is putting pressure on INCRA – the body conducting the process
and giving a technical opinion – for it to give a favourable assessment.
It is also trying to get the National Congress to change Federal
Law 6634/79 – which prevents foreign companies from owning land
in frontier areas – to reduce from 150 km to 50 km the distance
from the frontier line considered to be frontier zone.
Officially,
the company alleges to have 45 thousand hectares in the region,
but 2005 data from an official body (FEPAM) indicates this figure
as being 60 thousand hectares and other sources affirm that they
own as much as 150.000. Regardless of the amount, it is not possible
to register it as public opinion was never explained where the
land is located.
There
are other pulp industry interests advancing in Rio Grande do Sul.
The Brazilian industrial company "Votorantim Celulose e Papel"
submitted a proposal to the government and to the State of Rio
Grande do Sul, to build a new pulp mill near the Laguna Merin.
This undertaking, which has the blessing of the governor of the
Sate, implies an investment of some US$ 1,800 million. Although
the decision concerning the construction of the pulp mill, to
be known as Três Lagoas, producing close on one million tons per
year when finished in 2010, will be taken in the coming months,
the Brazilian government has stated its satisfaction with the
installation of the pulp mill.
It
has been decided in the State of Rio de Janeiro to review an environmental
law, preventing investment in the pulp sector in the region. Presently
a new bill is under discussion on commercial tree plantations,
which will imply a green light for 14 municipalities in the North
and Northeast of the State to become eucalyptus producing areas
for pulp, paper and timber companies. For a long time now,
large companies in these sectors had stated their interest in
investing in the State of Rio. However, a law existed (drawn up
by the then state deputy, Carlos Minc, now secretary for the Environment)
demanding a compensation that made the projects unviable. In fact,
the provisions of Law 4.063/2003 stipulate that for each hundred
hectares of commercial plantations, as compensation 30 hectares
must be reforested with native species. The proposal of
the municipal environmental secretaries (including Minc), is to
submit a new bill to the Legislative Assembly, reducing the compensation
from 30 to 10 hectares for the North and Northeast areas of the
State.
Large
scale eucalyptus plantations for export, even when becoming legal
will never be morally right. It is immoral to allocate fertile
land for this purpose when the people are hungry, when the indigenous
peoples, first and eternal owners of these lands are standing
on the sides of the roads without their land having been demarcated,
when the territories of Afro-Brazilian communities are not legally
recognized, when the numbers of landless people are increasing,
when there are no conservation units or incentives to production
implying nature protection.
As
a sample of an alternative model that operates and gives people
solutions, last year the Santa María de Ibicui Settlement, established
on 6,600 hectares where each family unit possesses half a hectare,
produced 80,000 litres of milk per month in addition to maize,
watermelon and cassava plantations in smallholdings. The 220 families
settled there amount to some 900 – 1,000 people. The adults have
employment and generate income for the municipality.
There
are alternatives, there are other possible models. What has to
be built up is the will to try them. The Brazilian people who
resist and build have this will.
Article
based on information from: a communiqué by the Alert against the
Green Desert Network of 27/02/2007, transmitting the news of the
murder of Antonio Joaquim dos Santos, sent by FASE, e-mail: geise.fase@terra.com.br;
“O tirano projeto da celulose no Rio Grande do Sul - reflexões
a partir do Seminário em Manoel Viana”, by Ana Paula Fagundes,
e-mail: sorriam@hotmail.com,
complete version at
http://www.wrm.org.uy/countries/Brazil.html#info; “Proyectan
construir nueva planta de celulosa en Brasil”, newspaper La República,
Uruguay, February 2007; “Stora Enso prevê uma área de 100 mil
hectares para plantar eucaliptos no RS”, 2/3/2007,
“Eucalipto no Norte do Rio de Janeiro”, Clipping Service, and
“Conjuntura do monocultivo de eucalipto no Rio Grande do Sul e
a luta dos movimentos sociais”, by J.H. Hoffmann and Lino De David,
all three sent by Joao Pedro Stedile, MST,
e-mail: sgeral@mst.org.br
index
-
Cambodia: Indigenous Jarai take out legal
case to reclaim their land
Loss
of land and loss of access to natural resources is fuelling a
livelihood and economic crisis among Cambodia's rural communities.
"People are being dispossessed from their lands by those
with political power and money," writes Shalmali Guttal in
a recent report for Focus on the Global South.*
Loss
of land translates into "hunger, cash-poverty, poor health
and destitution for rural communities", notes Guttal. When
indigenous communities lose their land, their livelihoods, culture
and tradition are also destroyed. "The loss of traditional/local
territories among indigenous communities results in extremely
severe consequences including sickness, destitution and even death."
By
2004, private companies had taken control of 2.7 million hectares
of land under concession contracts. Included in this figure are
"economic land concessions", used for industrial plantations,
mining and oil exploration, fishing and tourism. In many cases
concessions are established on villagers' land. Resistance is
met by bribes to village leaders, often followed by displays of
violence from the police, military or private armed security guards.
Some
of the most blatant land grabbing has taken place in Ratanakiri
Province in north-east Cambodia. The indigenous Jarai villages
of Kong Yu and Kong Thom in O'Yadao district provide a snapshot
of what is happening throughout the country.
In
the last three years, the Jarai have seen their land bulldozed
to make way for a 500 hectare rubber plantation. A sign on a gate
to the plantation at Kong Yu village reads, "No entry without
authorisation".
The
concession is owned by Keat Kolney, the sister of the Cambodian
Finance Minister, Keat Chhon. Keat Kolney's husband is Chhan Saphan,
the Secretary of State for the Ministry of Land Management. Local
authorities forced the deal through using threats, deception and
fraud. Some Commune Council members have admitted publicly to
accepting bribes to ensure that the land transaction goes through.
In
early 2004, when commune officials first asked them to sell their
land, villagers refused. Officials then returned with a story
that Prime Minister Hun Sen needed the land for disabled soldiers
and that the villagers had no rights to the land. The villagers,
who were unsure of their rights and reluctant to create problems
with the prime minister or the army, agreed to hand over 50 hectares
of land.
In
August 2004, officials held a party for the villagers, plying
them with pork, beer and two large jars of rice wine. Once the
party was well under way, officials collected villagers' thumb
prints in red ink. A week later, together with Keat Kolney, officials
distributed presents to villagers including sarongs and money.
Villagers were asked to thumbprint documents that they didn't
understand.
"They
told us if we did not agree with the land sale or accept the money
they would take it anyway without pay or [even] one grain of salt,"
Sayo Tem, a Jarai villager, told the Phnom Penh Post.
By
the time the bulldozers started clearing their land and forest,
villagers realised that they had been tricked. The land had been
transferred to Keat Kolney, not to disabled soldiers and the area
was 500 hectares, ten times the area previously discussed. Kong
Yu villagers filed a complaint with the local administrative offices.
In
February 2006, 200 villagers gathered at the local commune office
to ask for information about the company clearing their land and
to voice their concerns. Officials accused villagers of causing
social unrest and military police threatened to arrest villagers
if any further demonstrations took place.
On
23 January 2007, the Community Legal Education Center and Legal
Aid of Cambodia filed a lawsuit at the request of villagers to
attempt to regain possession of their land.
In
Sam Ath, a representative of Keat Kolney, argues that the thumb
prints show that the transaction is legal. "Provincial authorities
hold up our plantation as an example for newer investors,"
he told the Cambodia Daily.
In
fact, Cambodian contract law requires contracts to be signed freely,
among informed parties without fraud, deception or duress. The
Land Law includes protection for indigenous land, including recognition
of collective ownership. Management of land, including transfer
of rights, must be free of official interference. Accepting bribes,
to which several officials have admitted, is also illegal.
"Ratanakiri
is in crisis now," says Ngy San, the deputy director of NGO
Forum. "Land grabbing is out of control and it is devastating
indigenous lives. Kong Yu is emblematic of the worst of these
cases. It pits the interests of the rich and powerful against
the needs of the poor. How this case is handled by the courts
will be a litmus test for land disputes all across Cambodia."
CLEC
is asking for letters in support of the Kong Yu and Kong Thom
villagers to Prime Minister Hun Sen and to Ambassadors in Cambodia.
Sample letters are available here: http://www.wrm.org.uy/cambodia/letters.htm
*
Shalmali Guttal (2006) "Land and Natural Resource Alienation
in Cambodia", Focus on the Global South. http://www.focusweb.org/land-and-natural-resource-alienation-in-cambodia-17.html
By
Chris Lang, e-mail: http://chrislang.org
www.chrislang.blogspot.com
index
-
Cameroon: The tough reality in oil palm
plantations
Last
December I was travelling with three friends (a Cameroonian and
a Swiss couple) along the public route that crosses the oil palm
plantations belonging to Socapalm (Société Camerounaise des Palmeraies)
in the Kribi region. On reaching the control post installed by
the company – that we had crossed earlier on – we were stopped
by a private security guard who demanded our identity documents.
On asking him why he wanted them he informed us that Socapalm
“secret agents” aware of our visit had ordered him to do so. He
added that he had been told to take us to the company’s information
office. Of course we did not hand over our documents nor did we
accept to be taken to the information office because the company
has no legal right to demand this. However, the story serves
to illustrate the power of the company and the police-type control
it exercises over the inhabitants of the area.
In
spite of its name, Socapalm is not a “Cameroonian society,” but
belongs to the powerful French Bolloré group which also owns another
large oil palm plantation in the Kribi region (the Ferme Suisse).
Together these plantations cover 31,000 hectares.
In
last month’s bulletin we published an article on the serious social
and environmental impacts of a rubber plantation in the same Kribi
region (belonging to the Hevecam Company). What is interesting
is that the present article is almost identical to the previous
one, the only difference being the name of the companies.
In
fact, the indigenous Bagyeli (“pygmy”) people who live around
the palm plantations told us practically the same story as the
Bagyeli affected by the rubber plantations. Socapalm evicted them
from their homes, promising them modern housing. The palms were
planted, grew, gave fruit, were harvested, but the company has
not built a single house.
Now
these Bagyeli people are surrounded by plantations and banned
from entering them. If they do so, the guards who catch them chase
them out with whips. They are forced to live in a flood area where
mosquitoes and associated diseases are abundant.
As
to their livelihood, they are hardly able to survive. The company
does not employ them and if it does, it pays them a lot less than
the other workers. The only animals left in the plantation for
the Bagyeli to hunt are rats. Only some hunting is possible in
the surroundings of the plantation and further away in the mountain
area.
All
this is a consequence of the destruction of the tropical forest
by the company to convert it to palm plantations. Previously the
Bagyeli (expert hunters and gatherers), found all they needed
in the forest (meat, fruit, etc.). Now they do not even have clean
water as it is polluted by chemical fertilizers and sediment from
erosion. Regarding health, problems related to poor nourishment,
polluted water and the unhealthy place where these people live
are becoming more serious as they no longer have the plants they
used for their traditional medicines. The hospital belongs to
Socapalm and as they are not on the company’s payrol, they have
to pay if they are hospitalized.
Regarding
the situation of the company workers, it is no different from
that of the Havecam plantation workers. They also live in crowded
housing belonging to the company, they also work for outsourced
employers, they also have problems with their eyesight due to
the lack of protection from the dust falling from the bunches
of fruit, they also apply agrochemicals without the necessary
protective clothing, they also have problems with drinking water
and sanitation.
Regarding
labour organization, the workers told us that there was no independent
trade union and it is unlikely that one can be organized. In 1992
there was a strike in demand of better working conditions and
an increase in the “miserable salary” they earn. The result was
that the strike leaders were imprisoned and made redundant.
At
a time when oil palm plantations are being promoted to supply
fuel to the countries of the North, the consumers in these countries
should realise that in no way can this fuel be considered “green.”
Its true colour comes from a combination of social exploitation,
violation of human rights and environmental destruction.
By
Ricardo Carrere, based on information gathered during a trip to
the region in December 2006 with researchers Sandra Veuthey and
Julien-Francois Gerber. The author thanks the Centre pour l'Environnement
et le Développement (CED) for the support received that made this
trip possible.
index
-
Colombia: Irish-Dutch pulp company accused
of serious social and environmental crimes
The
Peoples’ Permanent Tribunal – Colombian Chapter met on 26 and
27 February 2007 in Lower Atrato to bring to trial transnational
companies focusing on the issue of biodiversity and exploitation
of natural resources in Colombia. The participating communities
and social organizations – including environmental organizations
– accused Smurfit Kapa Carton de Colombia “of violating human,
environmental, social and cultural rights. More specifically:
the destruction of tropical rainforests, Andean forests and other
ecosystems and destroying the communities’ social weave, traditional
and cultural means of production, eliminating and contaminating
water resources; influencing government policy-making in the country
and putting pressure on State officials to favour the multinational’s
interests; concealing information regarding the company and manipulating
mass media both on a regional and national level; using false
postulates and untrue information and advertising to justify its
activities and conceal the impacts generated; accusing and criminalizing
with inaccurate arguments those denouncing the company’s improper
conduct.”
During
the more than fifty years that they have been on Colombian territory,
the company has destroyed a considerable part of the tropical
rainforest area in Lower Calima in the Department of Valle del
Cauca (the biogeographical Choco region) and the Andean forest,
high stubble and other ecosystems in the coffee-hub departments.
It has introduced plantations in the territory of indigenous communities
living in the Departments of Cauca and Caldas and has planted
trees on land previously used for farming which boosted the economies
of the populations living in the Departments of Cauca, Valle del
Cauca, Risaralda, Quindío, Tolima and Antioquia.
As
proof of the accusations made against Smurfit Kapa Cartón de Colombia,
a book written by Joe Broderick “El Imperio de cartón – Impacto
de una multinacional papelera en Colombia” (The Cardboard Empire
– The Impact of a Pulp and Paper Multinational in Colombia) was
submitted by the plaintiffs. This book sets out the results of
investigation financed by the Bio-Pacific (Ministry of the Environment)
UNDP project, GEF/92/G31. The author underscores the fact that
when he was living in Dublin in 1993, he learnt that 70% of Smurfit’s
profits are obtained in Venezuela, Mexico and Colombia.
The
damages caused by clear-cutting in the transitional zones between
very humid tropical rainforests and tropical rainforests in the
Pacific region of low hills to the south of the San Juan River
and the River Calina, in the biogeographical Choco region are
fully documented and the impacts on Afro-descendent communities
and on ethnic Embera and Waunama indigenous communities are stressed.
In
areas of forestry exploitation the Afro-descendent and indigenous
communities have suffered cultural changes because of the presence
of logging companies associated with Smurfit Kapa. A homogenizing
and hegemonic lifestyle has been imposed on them, generating a
loss of knowledge and values, creating insecurity, involving the
loss of territory for traditional communities settled in the region.
With clear-cutting the Waunama community witnessed the disappearance
of many trees whose timber was of traditional importance for building
canoes, trunks and other utensils as well as other plant species
appreciated for their value as food, medicine or for ritual purposes.
With extractive logging activities and habitat destruction, much
of the wildlife has disappeared and many fish are no longer to
be found in the rivers.
In
1978, Smurfit Kapa Carton de Colombia purchased land from the
large landowners and planted pine trees in smallholdings located
in the municipalities of Buenos Aires (Cauca) which the Paez communities
had been claiming since the sixties as their ancestral territory.
The indigenous people endeavoured to recover their territory by
occupying this land and other plots; the communities wanted to
avoid more land being purchased and to stop the encroachment of
Smurfit in the Cauca, as they thought the company was disrespectful
towards nature and the local flora. They had seen
what had happened in Balsa (Cauca) where a one thousand hectare
smallholding was planted with eucalyptus trees, preceded by the
destruction of native trees and the indigenous people were evicted
by the National Army and some leaders were sued and imprisoned.
There were also some cases of indigenous leaders being murdered,
such as the murder in 1985 of the indigenous leader Luciono Labio
and his wife.
In
1989, the Paez and Smurfit Carton de Colombia signed the so-called
Jamundi agreement, engaging themselves to maintain the status
quo until reaching a definitive agreement regarding the establishment
of an indigenous reserve for the Paez Paila community. The indigenous
community continued planting foodstuffs in the smallholdings under
dispute and the company deployed its enormous power and well-known
influence over the regional and national authorities and evicted
the community. In this context the Paez denounced the connivance
existing between Smurfit and some Departmental and municipal officials
in the Cauca where they had participated in evicting the people
from their recovered smallholdings without the relevant legal
procedure.
Smurfit
Carton de Colombia apparently suspended its activities in the
Paila region in 1990, but in 1991 it set up the Agroforestal el
Naya S.A. company, thereby avoiding the danger of their pine trees
falling into the hands of the indigenous people (either by expropriation
or appropriation) and also ensured its continuity in the area
and the right to continue timber exploitation without the expense
and responsibility involved in landholding and labour requirements
for timber extraction. Thus, Smurfit is apparently out, but it
receives the timber and everything is handled by its Agroforestal
partners.
The
murders of indigenous leaders continued during 1992. Miguel Labio
Quiguanas was arrested by National Army soldiers while travelling
on a bus with other indigenous people; later his body was found,
dressed in uniform.
Penetration
of coniferous plantations in the west of the Department of Cauca
by Smurfit Carton de Colombia, has occurred in parallel with the
systematic denial of collective rights linked to legal appropriation
of territories and has encouraged – on driving the mass of peasants,
indigenous and Afro-descendent people towards the distant region
of Naya to grow coca – events as painful in the history of the
country and the world as the horrendous Naya massacre undertaken
by paramilitary troops in April 2001 which, according to the community,
left some 100 dead (or 70 dead, according to the Attorney General
of the Nation).
At
the beginning of the nineties, Smurfit Carton de Colombia launched
an aggressive strategy, purchasing land to install pine plantations
in high areas where water sources spring from, and relict primary
Upper Andean forest is to be found. The communities of Alsacia,
Agua Blanca and la Esperanza and the Paula Indigenous Reserve,
which were more energetic in their demands for land recovery and
deeds, were craftily misled by Carton de Colombia and divided.
In view of this situation, many families from the area decided
to occupy land in the Naya region, located on the Pacific slope,
where initially they established farming systems. However, because
of the excessive distance and absolute abandon by the State, they
have been obliged to change to the plantation of illegal crops.
In
April 2001, one of the most violent massacres in Colombian history
took place, where a still unknown number of peasants, indigenous
and Afro-descendent people were torn apart, sawn up, thrown down
cliffs by para-military groups.
Today
pines are still being planted, dominating the landscape and substituting
the primary forest. The communities of the Upper Naya have not
received the deeds for their territory and the locality of Timba
suffers from a notorious water shortage. The Upper Naya communities
consider that among the major projects threatening the integrity
of the territory and the life of the communities is Carton de
Colombia’s demolishing progress under cover of its mask as Agroforestal
Naya S.A., and now with para-military presence in the region.
Summary
based on article produced by Herney Patiño, Grupos Ecológicos
del Risaralda, e-mail: herpa@uniweb.net.co.
The complete article is available -in Spanish-
at
http://www.wrm.org.uy/countries/Colombia/Smurfit_Kapa.html
index
-
Swaziland: FSC credibility hits all time
low with certification of Sappi
Sappi's
plantations in Swaziland are the epitome of what is wrong with
industrial tree plantations. More than fifty years of living with
plantations has done less than nothing to develop the country's
people. Species-rich grasslands were destroyed and people moved
to make way for the plantations, when they were established as
a British “aid” project in the 1950s. The plantations are monocultures
of pine trees, exotic to Swaziland. Every year, Sappi clearcuts
a total of 3,000 hectares of its plantations, leaving vast scars
on the landscape. When the clearcuts are replanted, the trees
suck up water, drying up streams and reducing flow in rivers.
Sappi's plantations and nurseries can only be managed through
the use of chemical pesticides.
In
July 2006, Sappi's plantations in Swaziland were given the FSC
'green' label following an assesment by the Soil Association's
Woodmark. Founded in 1946, a major part of the Soil Association's
work has been "to promote organic agriculture as a sustainable
alternative to intensive farming methods." But with its certification
of Sappi's plantations in Swaziland, Woodmark is promoting intensive,
non-organic monocultures, exactly what the Soil Association was
set up to challenge.
During
the assessment of Sappi's plantations in May 2006, Woodmark found
that Sappi's replanting procedures did not comply with national
regulations requiring a 30 metre wide strip along streams. In
one place trees had been planted too close to a stream. In another,
a stream was channelled across a road instead of under it. "Due
to the planting of pine trees since 1989 . . . the natural flow
of water in the streams was severely depleted," a farmer
neighbouring one of Sappi's plantations told Woodmark. "Devastating
fires" have damaged Sappi's plantations over the past seven
years.
Woodmark's
inspectors visited a logging area, where more than 40 hectares
was being clearcut. They found that there was no first aid provision,
no designated area for equipment and provisions, no drinking water
provided for workers and no fire fighting equipment. There were
no records of training for workers and no training schedules for
2006. For a work force of 120, the contractor had only two first
aiders. And both of their certificates had expired.
Oil
was leaking from a storage area owned by one of the contractors.
The construction of the oil separator pit did not comply with
Sappi's requirements. A chemical store operator was not trained
in health and safety issues handling toxic chemicals. Not all
contractors had written safe work procedures including risks and
hazards associated with the various tasks.
To
address these breaches of FSC's standards, Woodmark issued a series
of corrective action requests which Sappi has to meet before Woodmark's
next visit to Swaziland in July 2007.
But
the most shocking part of Woodmark's report of the Sappi assessment
is the revelation that Sappi uses pesticides which are prohibited
in FSC-certified operations.
In
November 2005, during a pre-assessment of Sappi's operations in
Swaziland Woodmark found that Sappi was using two pesticides which
are banned under FSC's 2002 Pesticide Policy. Woodmark issued
a corrective action request that Sappi ensures that "pesticides
with the active ingredient benomyl and imazapyr are not used".
Sappi stopped using imazapyr, but continued to use benomyl.
Benomyl
is a fungicide which is selectively toxic to micro-organisams
and invertebrates. Sappi acknowledges that it is "very toxic
to fish and earthworms". The company uses benomyl against
Fusarium circinatum, a fungus which causes pitch canker in pines.
In December 2005, FSC issued a new Pesticide Policy. Benomyl is
listed in both the 2002 and 2005 Pesticide Policies as a "highly
hazardous" pesticide.
FSC's
2005 Pesticides Policy states that "The use of any pesticide
containing an active ingredient included on the current FSC list
of 'highly hazardous' pesticides shall constitute a major non-compliance"
with FSC's standards "and shall therefore be prohibited unless
a temporary derogation [or partial waiving of the rules] for use
in the applicable territory has previously been approved by the
FSC Board of Directors."
Woodmark
decided not just to bend the rules but to throw them away. Rather
than waiting to see whether or not FSC would approve the use of
benomyl in Swaziland, Woodmark issued the certificate to Sappi
arguing that "A derogation request for the use of Benomil
has been submitted." By March 2007, FSC had still not approved
the derogation request for Benomyl, but Sappi's Swaziland certificate
remains in place.
Woodmark
has certified Sappi's monocultures partly on the basis of hoped
for future improvements but also on the basis of hoped for future
weakening of FSC's Pesticides Policy. By issuing the certificate
and allowing it to remain in place, Woodmark is undermining the
credibility of both FSC and the Soil Association.
By
Chris Lang, email: http://chrislang.org,
www.chrislang.blogspot.com
index
AGROFUELS
-
Treethanol: A remedy worse than the
malady
Ethanol
is a biofuel usually made from maize (corn) or sugar cane, which
is being enthusiastically promoted as an alternative fuel which
can be blended into ordinary petrol or burned directly in special
"flex-fuel" engines.
Now,
in the present agro-fuel rush, the idea of using trees for the
production of ethanol is being put forward as a better solution.
According to its promoters, "Treethanol" has the potential
to be much more energy efficient than other crops like maize or
sugar cane. The energy balance (the ratio of the energy yielded
by a given amount of ethanol to the energy needed to produce it)
for ethanol made from maize is estimated by the US energy department
at 1.3; in other words, the ethanol yields 30% more energy than
was needed to produce it. For ethanol made from sugar cane in
Brazil, the energy balance is 8.3, according to the International
Energy Agency. But for ethanol made from trees, which contain
a lot of cellulose, the energy balance is said to be as high as
16, at least in theory. In practice, producing such "cellulosic"
ethanol is much more difficult and expensive than producing it
from other crops. But corporation researchers are racing to develop
ways to chip, ferment, distil and refine wood quickly and cheaply.
Interest
in cellulosic ethanol is growing as the drawbacks of making ethanol
from maize and sugar become apparent. Both are important food
crops, and as ethanol production is stepped up around the world,
greater demand is driving up the prices of everything from animal
feed to cola and biscuits. The price of corn rose by 70% between
September 2006 and January 2007 to reach its highest level in
a decade. Mexico's president, Felipe Calderón, even capped the
price of corn tortillas in January as US’s fast-growing ethanol
industry caused prices to rocket.
So
in come the trees. The promoters of tree-ethanol argue that trees
grow all year round and contain far more carbohydrates (the chemical
precursors of ethanol) than food crops do. Ethanol is the result
of the fermentation of sugars, which is why it can be so simply
and efficiently made from sugar cane. Making ethanol from maize
is a bit more complicated: the kernels are ground into flour and
mixed with water, and enzymes are added to break the carbohydrates
from the maize down into sugars, which can then be fermented into
ethanol. Making ethanol from cellulosic feedstocks is harder still,
however, since it involves breaking down the tough, winding chains
of cellulose and hemicellulose from the walls of plant cells to
liberate the sugars. This can be done using a cocktail of five
or six enzymes. Although such enzymes exist, they are expensive.
However,
tree-ethanol enthusiasts see that there is much money to be gained
and are actively trying to find solutions. In the first place,
they are searching for cheaper and more efficient enzymes. Two
large producers of industrial enzymes -- Genencor, a US firm,
and Novozymes, from Denmark -- are working to reduce the cost
of cellulase enzymes, which can break down cellulose, to below
$0.10 per gallon of ethanol. For its part, Diversa is developing
enzymes capable of breaking down hemicellulose. One approach is
to “tweak the structure” of existing enzymes (meaning genetic
manipulation of enzymes) to try to make them more efficient. Another
approach is "bio-prospecting" (meaning bio-piracy),
which implies looking for natural enzymes in unusual places, such
as in the stomachs of wood-eating termites.
To
make the business even more profitable and matters worse, a second
–and probably complementary- “solution” is to create new trees.
A team led by Vincent Chiang, a biologist at North Carolina State
University, is investigating the production of ethanol from genetically
modified trees, with funding from the US Department of Agriculture.
They
will try to get faster growing trees containing less lignin and
more cellulose so they would both grow faster and also produce
more ethanol. Some transgenic trees of this kind are being tested
in the US. Dr Chiang and his team are also looking at ways to
modulate the genes that determine the structure of a tree's sugar-containing
hemicelluloses in order to make the breakdown and fermentation
processes more efficient.
What
those high-tech researchers are not even considering –as usual-
are the environmental and social costs that the resulting expansion
of large-scale –and genetically modified- fuel tree plantations
would have: substitution of food crops by fuel crops –in a world
where millions are malnourished- , displacement and impoverishment
of local communities –and its accompanying repression- impacts
on water, ecosystems, soil. Such impacts will almost certainly
fall mostly on Southern communities, where the bulk of those plantations
would be established. At the same time, the serious environmental
threats of genetic manipulation of trees (see WRM Bulletin Nº
88) and enzymes are also ignored.
A
simple question has yet to be answered by those promoting treethanol
and other agro-fuels: can a solution to one problem (climate change)
be considered a solution if it creates serious problems to other
equally important problems? Large scale agrofuel crops and treethanol
plantations will result in biodiversity loss, water depletion,
soil degradation, impoverishment, malnutrition, human rights abuses
–to name only the more obvious. Our answer to the question is
that this is an unacceptable solution which must be opposed.
Source
of information used: “Energy: Could new techniques for producing
ethanol make old-fashioned trees the biofuel of the future?”,
Derek Bacon, March 2007, The Economist Newspaper, sent by STOP
Genetically Engineered Trees Campaign, e-mail: info@stopgetrees.org,
http://www.stopgetrees.org
index
-
Brazil: Agro-fuels represent a new cycle of devastation of the
Amazon and Cerrado regions
The
present energy matrix is basically compounded by oil (35%), coal
(23%) and natural gas (21%). The nations of the OECD -- the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and Development -- which account for
56% of the planet’s energy consumption are desperately in need
of a liquid fuel replacement for oil. Worldwide petroleum extraction
rates are expected to peak this year, and global supply will likely
dwindle significantly in the next fifty years.
The
Bush Administration is committed to significantly expanding biofuels
to reduce its dependence upon foreign oil (the US imports 61%
of the crude oil it consumes). Although a range of prospects for
biofuels exists, ethanol derived from corn and soy currently constitutes
99% of all biofuel use in the US.
The
energy contained in grains or plants is actually an agro-chemical
metamorphosis of solar energy transformed into fuel – biodiesel
and ethanol – through vegetable oil or alcohol. The best conditions
for this process are present in the countries of the South where
there is greater solar energy.
The
production of fuel from sunflower seeds, corn, soybean, almonds,
oil palm or sugar cane is presented as a good intention – that
of substituting oil, a contaminating and non-renewable fuel, by
renewable fuels – and will be widely advertised because it is
presented as a gesture of goodwill to curb global warming.
However
the so-called “solution” aims at leaving untouched the present
energy wasting and individual transportation model that must be
replaced by a model based on collective transportation.
The energy crisis has provided an opportunity for powerful global
partnerships between petroleum, grain, genetic engineering, and
automotive corporations. These new alliances are deciding
the future of the world’s agricultural landscapes. The biofuels
boom will further consolidate their hold over our food and fuel
systems and allow them to determine what, how and how much will
be grown, resulting in more rural poverty, environmental destruction
and hunger. The ultimate beneficiaries of the biofuel revolution
will be grain merchant giants, including Cargill, ADM and Bunge;
petroleum companies such as BP, Shell, Chevron, Neste Oil, Repsol
and Total; car companies such as General Motors, Volkswagen AG,
FMC-Ford France, PSA Peugeot-Citroen and Renault; and biotech
giants such as Monsanto, DuPont, and Syngenta.
In
an initiative promoted by the Governor of the State of Florida,
Jeb Bush, the former Brazilian Minister of Agriculture, Roberto
Rodrigues and the President of the Inter-American Development
Bank, the Inter-American Ethanol Commission was launched in Miami.
Furthermore, the purpose of President Bush’s Latin American tour
this March to Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico
was to achieve that the governments of the region promote large-scale
production of biofuels – such as alcohol from sugar cane and ethanol
from corn – for export to the US market. The objective is for
the countries of the South to concentrate their agriculture on
producing fuel to supply the cars and trucks of the first world
and thus it will not have to depend on oil imported from countries
that the US considers problematic
(such as Venezuela, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and
Angola).
All
this will reinforce the trade relation between Brazil and the
US which is already the largest importer of Brazilian ethanol,
importing 58% of the nation’s total produced ethanol in 2006.
Far from good news for Brazil, if the renewable fuel standards
for ethanol proposed by the Bush administration were to be met
by Brazilian sugarcane, Brazil would need to increase its production
by an additional 135 billion liters per year.
Given
the new global energy context, Brazilian politicians and industry
officials are formulating a new vision for the economic future
of the country, centered on production of energy sources to displace
10% of world gasoline use in the next 20 years. This would require
a five-fold increase in the land area devoted to sugar production,
from six to 30 million hectares.
And
not only sugar but also soybean and other potential energy crops.
In response, Brazil alone will likely deforest an additional 60
million hectares of land in the near future. New cultivation will
lead to land clearing in new areas that will likely face deforestation
comparable to that in the Pernambuco region, where only 2.5% of
the original forest cover remains.
Biofuels
are initiating a new cycle of expansion and devastation in the
Cerrado region where the planted area is rapidly expanding and
where the natural vegetation cover is expected to have disappeared
by 2030. The Amazon is also threatened. The Brazilian chemical
engineer, Expedito Parente, who owns the first patent registered
in the world for the production of biodiesel on an industrial
level declared that “We have 80 million hectares in the Amazon
that are going to become the Saudi Arabia of biodiesel.”
Presently,
85 percent of Brazil’s total soybean production comes from five
States: Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraná, Goiás and Rio
Grande do Sul, although lately in areas in the north of the country
(Rondonia, Pará and Roraima) amazing advances have been recorded.
The total land used for soybean cultivation has increased by a
factor of 57 since 1961 and the volume of production has multiplied
138 times. Fifty-five percent of the soy crop, or 11.4 million
hectares, is genetically modified. The development plan “Avança
Brasil” is aimed in this direction. It seeks to expand the agricultural
frontier, penetrating deeply into the forest area to promote soybean
cultivation, with the Government intending to allocate some 40
billion dollars for this purpose. President Lula has declared
that transgenic soybean will be used for agrofuels and “good soybean”
for human consumption.
Soy
cultivation has already resulted in the deforestation of 21 million
hectares of forests in Brazil. Monocultural production of soy
in the Amazon Basin has rendered much of the soil infertile. Poor
soils necessitate increased application of industrial fertilizers
for competitive levels of productivity. One hundred thousand hectares
of depleted former soy-growing lands have been abandoned to cattle-grazing,
which leads to further degradation. Furthermore, soybean expansion
leads to extreme land and income concentration. In Brazil, soybean
cultivation displaces eleven agricultural workers for every new
worker it employs. This is not a new phenomenon. In the 1970s,
2.5 million people were displaced by soybean production in Parana,
and 300,000 were displaced in Rio Grande do Sul. Many of these
now landless people moved to the Amazon where they cleared pristine
forests.
The
advancement of the “agricultural frontier” for biofuels is an
attempt against the food sovereignty of Southern
nations as land for food production is increasingly
being devoted to feed the cars of people in the North. The amount
of cereal needed to fill a tank of almost 100 litres once is sufficient
to feed one person for a whole year. Biofuel production
also affects consumers directly by increasing the cost of food.
Only
strategic alliances and coordinated action of social movements
(farmers’ organizations, environmental and farm labor movements,
NGOs, consumer lobbies, committed members of the academic sector,
etc) can put pressure on governments and multinational companies
to ensure that these trends are halted. Joint work is needed to
ensure that all countries retain the right to achieve food sovereignty
via agroecologically-based, local food production systems, land
reform, access to water, seeds and other resources and domestic
farm and food policies that respond to the true needs of farmers
and consumers.
Article
based on: “O Mito dos Biocombustíveis”, Edivan Pinto and Marluce
Melo, Comisión Pastoral de la Tierra Regional Nordeste – CPT NE,
and Maria Luisa Mendonça, Red Social de Justicia y Derechos Humanos,
23 February 2007; “The ecological and social tragedy of crop-based
biofuel production in the Americas”, Miguel A Altieri, Elizabeth
Bravo, complete version (in English) in
http://www.wrm.org.uy/subjects/biofuels.html#analytical; “Estados
Unidos y Brasil: La nueva alianza etanol”, Raúl Zibechi, http://www.wrm.org.uy/temas/Biocombustibles/Alianza_Etanol.html;
El mito de los biocombustibles, Edivan Pinto, Marluce Melo and
Maria Luisa Mendonça, Agencia Latinoamericana de Informacion –
ALAI, March 2007, sent by Biodiversidad en América Latina http://www.biodiversidadla.org/content/view/full/30737;
“Bodiesel… o biotrampa?” 2006, http://www.iccc.es/2006/08/07/biodiesel-o-biotrampa/#pp0.
index
FOCUS ON CLIMATE
CHANGE
-
Obscenity of carbon trading
If
we want to curb climate change, carbon trading won't do.
In
1992, an infamous leaked memo from Lawrence Summers, who was at
the time Chief Economist of the World Bank, stated that "the
economic logic behind dumping a load of toxic waste in the lowest
wage country is impeccable, and we should face up to that".
The
recently released Stern Review on climate change, written by a
man who occupied the same position at the World Bank from 2000
to 2003, applies a similar sort of free market environmentalism
to climate change.
Sir
Nicholas Stern argues that the cost-effectiveness of making emissions
reductions is the most important factor, advocating mechanisms
such as carbon pricing and carbon trading.
While
dumping toxic waste in the global South might look like a great
idea from the perspective of the market, it ignores the glaringly
obvious fact of it being hugely unfair on those getting dumped
upon.
In
a similar way, Stern's cost-benefit analysis reduces important
debates about the complex issue of climate change down to a discussion
about numbers and graphs that ignores unquantifiable variables
such as human lives lost, species extinction and widespread social
upheaval.
'Junk economics'
Cost-benefit
analysis can be a useful tool for making choices in relatively
simple situations when there are a limited number of straight-forward
options to choose from.
But
as Tom Burke, visiting professor at Imperial College London, has
observed: "The reality is that applying cost-benefit analysis
to questions such as [climate change] is junk economics... It
is a vanity of economists to believe that all choices can be boiled
down to calculations of monetary value." Some commentators
have applauded the Stern Review for speaking in the economics
language that politicians and the business community can understand.
But
by framing the issue purely in terms of pricing, trade and economic
growth, we are reducing the scope of the response to climate change
to market-based solutions.
These
"solutions" take two common forms:
-
under emissions trading, governments allocate permits to big industrial
polluters so they can trade "rights to pollute" amongst
themselves as the need arises
-
another approach involves the generation of surplus carbon credits
from projects that claim to reduce or avoid emissions in other
locations, usually in Southern countries; these credits may be
purchased to top up any shortfall in emissions reduction
Such
schemes allow us to sidestep the most fundamentally effective
response to climate change that we can take, which is to leave
fossil fuels in the ground. This is by no means an easy proposition
for our heavily fossil fuel dependent society; however, we all
know it is precisely what is needed.
What
incentive is there to start making these costly, long-term changes
when you can simply purchase cheaper, short-term carbon credits?
Forcing the market
In
the current neo-liberal economic environment, trading rules inevitably
succumb to the pressures of corporate lobbying and deregulation
in order to ensure that governments do not "interfere"
with the smooth running of the market.
We
have already seen this corrosive influence in the European Union's
Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), when under corporate pressure,
governments massively over-allocated emissions permits to the
heaviest polluting industries in the initial round. This caused
the price of carbon to drop by more than 60%, creating even more
disincentive for industries to lower their emissions at source.
There
are all manner of loopholes and incentives for industry to exaggerate
their emissions in order to receive more permits and thereby take
even less action.
Market
analyst Franck Schuttellar estimated that in the scheme's first
year, the UK's most polluting industries earned collectively £940m
($1,792m) in windfall profits from generous ETS allocations.
Given
all we know about the link between pollution and climate change,
such a massive public concession to dirty industries borders on
the obscene.
We
are being asked to believe that the flexibility and efficiency
of the market will ensure that carbon is reduced as quickly and
as effectively as possible, when experience has shown that lack
of firm regulation tends to create environmental problems rather
than solve them.
Community interest
There
is a groundswell of opinion that the "invisible hand"
of the market is not the most effective way of facing the climate
challenge.
The
Durban Declaration of Climate Justice, signed by civil society
organisations from all over the world, asserts that making carbon
a commodity represents a large-scale privatisation of the Earth's
carbon cycling capacity, with the atmospheric pie having been
carved-up and handed over to the biggest polluters.
Effective
action on climate change involves demanding, adopting and supporting
policies that reduce emissions at source as opposed to offsetting
or trading. Carbon trading isn't an effective response; emissions
have to be reduced across the board without elaborate get-out
clauses for the biggest polluters.
There
is an urgent need for stricter regulation, oversight, and penalties
for polluters on community, local, national and international
levels, as well as support for communities adversely impacted
by climate change. But currently such policies are nigh-on invisible,
as they contradict the sacred cows of economic growth and the
free market.
There
is, unfortunately, no "win-win solution" when it comes
to tackling climate change and maintaining an economic growth
based on the ever increasing extraction and consumption of fossil
fuels.
Market-based
mechanisms such as carbon trading are an elaborate shell-game
of global creative accountancy that distracts us from the fact
that there is no viable "business as usual" scenario.
Climate
policy needs to be made of sterner stuff.
By:
Kevin Smith, researcher with Carbon Trade Watch, a project of
the Transnational Institute , email:
kevin@carbontradewatch.org.
index
