OUR
VIEWPOINT
-
Beijing: The carbon-cheating Games
According
to the Chinese Technology Minister Wan Gang, the Beijing Olympic
Games will result in the release of some 1.18 million tonnes of
carbon to the atmosphere, “in part because so many athletes and
spectators were traveling long distances”. However, we need not
worry about this, because the Chinese authorities assure us that
the Olympics will be “basically” carbon neutral.
This
is of course impossible. No-one can be “carbon neutral” once the
fuel needed for “traveling long distances” (mostly by fossil fuel-powered
planes, buses and cars) has been used. The carbon stored in that
fuel will have been released, thus increasing the net amount of
carbon in the atmosphere, by adding the carbon that had until
then been stored in underground oil deposits. In the case of the
Beijing Olympics, this will result in an additional 1.18 million
tonnes of carbon that will contribute to increase global warming.
The
problem is that many people honestly believe in the possibility
of becoming “carbon neutral”, mostly because –as the saying goes-
“a lie repeated often enough becomes truth”. And this particular
lie is being constantly repeated by numerous “experts” with much
to gain from carbon trading and even by some supposedly “green”
organizations.
Such
is the case of the well-known WWF (which has a panda bear as its
logo), whose Chinese section has created a special web page for
facilitating payments for becoming “carbon neutral”. The site
explains that “Through its Go for Gold global campaign, WWF is
also calling Olympic athletes to commit to a carbon neutral trip
for the Beijing Games by donating the equivalent of the carbon
cost of their flight to a Gold Standard climate-change offset
project.” WWF-China even recommends five specific “sales points”:
www.climatefriendly.com,
www.myclimate.org,
www.atmosfair.de, www.nativeenergy.com,
www.tricoronagreen.com
The
above quote lends to believe that by paying –“donating”- a certain
amount of money, the carbon released by the plane, bus or car
will be made to disappear somewhere by someone doing something
that will “offset” those emissions. Paraphrasing a well known
film, this is in fact “Emission Impossible”.
However,
people are made to believe that a number of measures, that can
be useful in themselves, but that bear no relationship whatsoever
with “neutralizing” fossil fuel carbon emissions, can result in
them achieving the “carbon neutral” status. For instance, there
is no doubt that energy saving measures, energy efficiency, the
use of solar, wind and geothermal power, the reduction in the
use of cars, are all positive steps in the right direction. The
problem arises –as in the case of the Beijing Olympics- when the
organizers claim that these measures will ensure that the Games
will be “basically” carbon neutral. They will not.
What
is necessary for truly addressing the problem of climate change
is to drastically reduce and eventually eliminate the use of fossil
fuels. This is not an issue of individual choice about being “carbon
neutral”, but a political issue that needs to be dealt with at
that level. In this case, the pressure –and guilt- must not be
put on the Olympic athletes –who will have enough trouble in finding
sufficient oxygen in the polluted air of Beijing- but on the governments
that continue to promote a development model based on fossil fuels
and environmental destruction.
The
Beijing Olympics may have a successful outcome from a sporting
perspective, but they will not have the “positive effect on climate
change” claimed by Chinese minister Wan and will certainly not
be “basically” carbon neutral. Trying to greenwash 1.18 million
tonnes of carbon may prove to be a difficult endeavour.
index
COMMUNITIES AND FORESTS
- Brazil:
Amazon deforestation takes on new force
This
month, provisional measure No.422 was adopted as law by the Brazilian
parliament, providing for an increase in the area of the Amazon
that may be granted for rural use with no need to call for bids.
The limit, previously set at 500 hectares, has been increased
to 1,500 hectares, allowing deforestation of up to 20 percent
of the area granted.
The
voting had the strong opposition of the former minister of the
Environment, Senator Marina Silva, who accused the Government
of legalizing the illegal appropriation of Amazon lands. “This
measure will mean a land privatization process,” she declared,
forecasting serious detriment to the Plan for Combating Amazon
Deforestation.
This
news appeared at the same time as the revelations of a new US
study published in the journal “PNAS” denounced in the Folha de
Sao Paulo newspaper on 1/7/2008. The study shows that between
2000 and 2005, Brazil headed the list regarding area of deforestation
and speed of devastation, although it had managed to reduce by
59 percent deforestation rates (dropping from 27,429 km2 between
August 2003 and July 2004, to 11,224 km2 at the time of the latest
measurement taken between August 2006 and July 2007). However
everything seems to indicate that this will now be reverted.
According
to data from the National Space Research Institute – INPE – (Instituto
Nacional de Investigaciones Espaciales), the Brazilian Amazon
lost 1,096 square kilometres during May and more than half of
this deforestation took place in the State of Mato Grosso
do Sul (646 km2), where historically great pressure on the forest
from soybean plantations and cattle-raising has been denounced.
Furthermore,
although the expansion of sugar-cane to produce ethanol does not
involve Amazon land, it exerts indirect pressure insofar as it
is located in neighbouring areas making them more expensive and
shoving other plantations and cattle-raising towards the Amazon,
contributing to its penetration with the building of highways
and facilities.
Additionally,
deforestation also has a direct impact on global warming from
the release of carbon dioxide, altering the evaporation-transpiration
process regulating climate behaviour.
Repeating
our opinion in this respect, there is no doubt that forests are
disappearing, not because the people and their governments are
ignorant or because of the lack of appropriate management plans.
Forests are disappearing because a series of interconnected national
and international policies are preparing the ground for this to
happen. Therefore it is at this level that solutions must be found.
Article
based on information from: “Brasil é líder total em desmatamento,
mostra novo estudo”, Instituto Humanista Unisinos, Internet, 1-7-08,
http://www.biodiversidadla.org/content/view/full/42192;
“Deforestación amazónica superó los 1.000 km2”, Newspaper “El
Universal C.A.,” (Venezuela)
http://www.eluniversal.com/2008/07/15/ten_
ava_deforestacion-amazon_15A1799685.shtml
index
-
Guatemala: Agrofuels cause deforestation
and displacement
In
Guatemala, like in several other countries of the South, indigenous
communities and the environment are paying a high cost due to
the expansion of agrofuels. Deforestation, forced displacement,
threats, illegal arrest and even murder are the signs of this
encroachment.
The
organization
Salva la Selva (Save the Rainforest) has denounced a situation
that has been occurring over the past three years in an area known
as “Finca Los Recuerdos”, where Ingenio Guadalupe, one of the
companies producing ethanol in the country, has been deforesting
indigenous land to plant sugar-cane for ethanol production.
In
the midst of a food crisis and increase in the price of foodstuffs,
on 30 June this year, 60 Keqchi families from La Isla, Caserío
el Morador Semano, Corazón de Maíz and Teleman Punto 15,
in Panzos, tried to recover part of
their land to cultivate it and produce food.
According
to
Salva la Selva, in response “they were attacked by paramilitary
forces associated with the company. During the attack, they
shot at the indigenous people from a helicopter, and a 35-year-old
man, father of three children had to be taken to hospital. The
next day, families and representatives of the peasant organization
CUC, carried out a peaceful protest, during which they were again
attacked by the paramilitary forces who were accompanied by two
representatives of Ingenio Guadalupe. There were shots, threats
to kill and two women were illegally arrested.” In the area of
Coatepeque similar attacks took place, this time involving the
expansion of oil palm plantations for the production of biodiesel.
According
to information supplied by CUC and by the international human
rights organization Rights Action, these events are representative
of what is happening all over Guatemala. Members of CUC have denounced
the following: “We make people see that the Government does not
have any clear measures to face the food and high price crisis
and we make them responsible for the reaction and action taken
by the population as this crisis becomes more acute.”
So
far the measures adopted have been in support of agribusiness
groups and, as has been denounced, to enable them to “illegally
obtain land that belongs to indigenous communities and where violence
committed by paramilitary forces and even by the State security
forces is used to displace the communities.”
Environmental
destruction and violation of human rights are promoted by the
world financial system: in January this year the Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB), approved funding that enables the Guatemalan
Government to develop a national strategy for agrofuels.
This will inevitably be expressed in more deforestation, more
land appropriation, more forced displacements, more violation
of the indigenous communities’ human rights.
IDB
is one of the major financers of the expansion of agrofuels in
Latin America and is preparing private credits for an amount of
3 billion dollars. Rights Actions is exhorting people to address
a letter to the IDB, denouncing the situation and demanding immediate
suspension of all support and funding of agrofuel production in
Guatemala. This letter ends by stating: “The production of agrofuels
in Guatemala has increased deforestation, desertification and
accelerated climate change. It also increases hunger and violates
the territorial rights of indigenous communities, increasing violent
repression. Please immediately suspend your support of agrofuels
in Guatemala.” (Accessible at:
http://www.salvalaselva.org/protestaktion.php?id=283).
Article
based on information from: “Empresa de agrocombustibles reprime
violentamente a indígenas en Guatemala,” (Agrofuel company violently
represses indigenous people in Guatemala), Salva la Selva,
http://www.salvalaselva.org/protestaktion.php?id=283
index
- Malaysia: Sarawak
forest peoples harassed by logging and dams
In
last month’s WRM bulletin we recalled the long standing battle
that local communities had waged for Sarawak’s forests, notably
through road blockades for stopping the entry of logging trucks
into their territories.
Now
the Kenyah people are in again for the defence of their livelihood.
According to a report from the Borneo Resources Institute (BRIMAS),
“More than hundred (100) indigenous Kenyah peoples from various
longhouse communities living in the interior of Telang Usan (Kedaya
Telang Usan) area in the Baram region of the State of Sarawak,
East Malaysia, gathered at upper Moh River to stage a non-violent
protest against logging operations of Samling Timber Company.
On 19th May 2008, the Indigenous Kenyah from six (6) longhouse
communities, namely Long Moh, Long Je'eh, Long Bela'ong, Long
Sawan, Long Silat and Long Mekabar started with the blockade.
The blockade is set on the major logging roads used by Samling
Timber Company to carry out its logging activities within the
communal lands and forest area of the Kenyahs of Kedaya Telang
Usan in Baram Region.”
The
Samling group, one of Sarawak’s timber giants certified by the
Malaysian Timber Certification Council MTCC, had been carrying
out illegal logging without prior consent within the indigenous
communal land area. Not only that but also it ignored "reasonable
demands for social benefits and development of the community as
they are the rights stakeholders that should be fairly benefit
from forest resources in their area," said the Borneo Resources
Institute.
The
Kenyahs had repeatedly complained to the authorities and the logging
company about the problems caused by the destruction of the forest,
on which they still rely very much for their existence.
However, no measure was taken and the company had continued
untouched, so they decided to resort to blockades to bring attention
to their claim and stop the logging trucks so the company couldn’t
extract and transport valuable trees born in the Kenyah’s forest
in the upper Sungai Sebua, Sungai Jekitan and Sungai Moh area.
Their banners said: "Samling, do not rob the wealth from
the poor people's land and give it to the rich in the city."
According
to BRIMAS, on the last 14 June, Police personnel have been ordered
to the blockade site to enforce a Warrant of Arrest granted by
the Magistrate Court in Miri. Yet, so far we have no news that
any arrest has taken place.
But
it seems that no truce is given to Sarawak’s forest peoples. According
to Survival International, a leaked secret document reveals plans
of the company Sarawak Energy Berhad to build a series of massive
hydroelectric dams in Sarawak, submerging the homes of at least
a thousand Penan, Kelabit and Kenyah indigenous people. One dam
would also submerge part of the Mulu National Park, a UNESCO World
Heritage.
The
power projects are planned to be constructed between now and 2020.
The Sarawak Energy Berhad presentation was posted –it seems accidentally--
on a Chinese website and has now been removed. However, it still
can be downloaded
together with a map of the proposed dam sites from Survival’s
website, at
http://www.survival-international.org/news/3450
Article
based on information from: “Malaysian police ordered to clear
Kenyah logging road blockade”, Bruno Manser Fonds,
http://www.bmf.ch/en/news/?show=102
index
-
Peru: National strike demands respect for indigenous
collective rights
This past 8-10 July, the Peasant Confederation of Peru and the
National Agrarian Confederation, with the wide backing of a large
number of indigenous and peasant organizations, carried out a
country-wide protest which coincided on July 9 with a national
general strike called by the General Confederation of Workers
of Peru (CGTP).
The
protest drew together numerous communities, federations and organizations,
including Amazonian indigenous groups, and was used to voice a
range of messages. Chief among these was the demand for respect
for the collective rights of indigenous peoples affected by the
policies that the government is attempting to impose in the Amazon
region, aimed at promoting industries with destructive impacts
on the environment and inhabitants of the region, such as mining,
oil drilling and tree plantations.
Some
of the demands voiced by indigenous peoples in Peru relate to
a series of draft laws and other legislative initiatives that
violate indigenous collective rights, including the following:
*
Legislative decrees 1015 and 994, aimed at coercively imposing
a process by which collectively owned indigenous community lands
throughout Peru would be divided into parcels and transferred
to private individual ownership. This would leave the land unprotected,
and open the way for the invasion of powerful economic groups,
mainly representing extractive industries. The proposed regulations
would also violate numerous articles of the Constitution, which
guarantee the right to communal property and the right of communities
to autonomously choose their own forms of organization.
*
Draft law 840, known as the “Forest Law” (see WRM Bulletin Nº
129), which is aimed at the privatization of thousands of hectares
of land in the Amazon forest, purportedly to facilitate their
“reforestation”. The justification used is that the land in question
is unforested, idle wasteland, with no acquired rights over it.
However, indigenous organizations have countered that there are
in fact no unused wasteland areas in the Amazon forest.
*
Draft law 2133, which would authorize the sale of beaches, sandbars
and marshes along riverbanks in the Amazon region.
The
Front for the Defence and Development of the Upper Amazon (FREDESAA)
maintains that these laws would leave the Amazon region’s inhabitants
landless, converting the legitimate owners of the land into workers
and eventually slaves.
The
July 9 general strike, which left much of the country paralyzed,
particularly in the southern Andes, central and Amazon regions,
was also aimed at protesting the government’s neoliberal policies,
the United States-Peru free trade agreement, and the privatization
of ports and basic services like water.
In
numerous cities people took to the streets to demonstrate and
set up roadblocks on highways. The government mobilized 100,000
police officers throughout the country and called out the armed
forces to take control of strategic facilities such as electric
power stations, drinking water reservoirs and airports. Around
200 protestors were arrested during the strike.
Article
based on information from the following sources: “Unidad
de los Pueblos ante Paro en la Amazonía del Perú”, Red Ucayali,
09/07/2008,
http://peru.indymedia.org/news/2008/07/40434.php;
“El paro pegó fuerte en Perú”, Carlos Noriega, Página 12, 10/07/2008,
reprinted by bilaterals.org,
http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=12653;
“En defensa de las tierras de la Amazonía”, FREDESAA, 06/06/2008,
http://frentes-
regionales.blogspot.com/2008/06/fredesaa-frente-de-defensa-y-desarrollo.html
index
- Mangrove Loss and Climate Change—A Global
Perspective
Mangroves
are the rainforests by the sea. Large stretches of the sub-tropical
and tropical coastlines of Asia, Africa, Oceania, the Americas
and the Caribbean are fringed by mangroves, once estimated to
cover an area of over 32 million hectares. Now, less than 15 million
hectares remain —less than half the original area.
The importance
of the protective mangrove buffer zone cannot be overstated. In
regions where these coastal fringe forests have been cleared,
tremendous problems of erosion and siltation have arisen, and
terrible losses to human life and property have occurred due to
destructive hurricanes, storm surges and tsunamis.
Today there
is a growing urgency to recognize the importance of conserving
and restoring protective mangrove greenbelts to lessen the dangers
from future catastrophes, because as sea levels rise so will the
frequency and intensity of hurricanes and storm surges. Mangroves
can buffer against the fury of such destructive storms, protecting
those settlements located behind a healthy mangrove fringe.
Mangrove
Action Project (MAP) is working with other organizations in the
global South towards restoring degraded and cleared mangrove areas
as a high priority. MAP is especially interested in restoring
some of the 250,000 ha of abandoned shrimp farms located in former
coastal wetland areas, especially in Asia and Latin America. But,
even more importantly, MAP is working to help conserve and protect
existing mangrove wetlands around the world.
Conserving
existing mangroves and restoring the vast areas of degraded and
cleared mangrove wetlands will serve as a partial solution to
global warming. Our planet perhaps faces one of the greatest threats
to life as we know it. This crisis is being fueled by human induced
climate change. Because nearly half of humankind today lives in
cities and settlements located along the now vulnerable coasts,
global warming and consequent sea level rise cannot be ignored.
Already evacuations of low-lying islands have begun in South Asia
and the South Pacific Islands. It is expected mass evacuations
of millions of coastal residents will occur within the next 50
years as sea level continues to rise as a result of the greenhouse
effect caused by excessive carbon gas emissions.
Nevertheless,
mangrove wetlands are often the first line of defense, helping
to secure the coasts against erosion and storms. Mangroves are
also one of nature’s best ways for combating global warming because
of their high capacity for sequestering carbon. This is a characteristic
of mangrove wetlands that now demands our most immediate and undivided
attention. One of the greatest contributions that mangroves may
have to offer is their great propensity to sequester carbon from
the atmosphere and store this in their wetland substrate. According
to the Feb. 2007 issue of National Geographic, “Mangroves are
carbon factories… Measurements suggest that mangroves may have
the highest net productivity of carbon of any natural ecosystem
(about a hundred pounds per acre per day)…”
Mangroves have been seriously undervalued by those government
agencies responsible for their protection and management, as is
so clearly evidenced in the Caribbean, especially in the Bahamas
where such travesties in shortsighted developments are now occurring
at Guana Cay and Bimini Islands.
This combined lack of conservation ethic, shortsighted greed and
weak law enforcement have allowed massive losses of these coastal
wetlands, with one huge, hidden cost arising from the oxidation
and release of stored mangrove carbon.
From a study performed by Dr. Ong of Universiti Sams in Malaysia,
it was found that the layers of soil and peat composing the mangrove
substrate have a high carbon content of 10% or more. Each hectare
of mangrove sediment might contain nearly 700 metric tons of carbon
per meter depth. In building large numbers of shrimp farms or
tourist complexes, the resultant clearing of mangroves and subsequent
excavation of the mangrove substrate could result in the potential
oxidation of 1,400 tons of carbon per hectare per year.
Again, according to Dr. Ong, “Assuming that only half of this
will become oxidized over a period of 10 years, we are looking
at the return of 70 tons of carbon per hectare per year for ten
years to the atmosphere. This is some 50 times the sequestration
rate. This means that by converting a mere 2 percent of mangroves,
all of the advantages of mangroves as a sink of atmospheric carbon
will be lost…”
According to the latest study by the UN’s Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO), the current rate of mangrove loss is around
1% per annum—or around 150,000 ha of new mangrove area loss per
year. This translates to around 225,000 tons of carbon sequestration
potential lost each year, with an additional release of approximately
11 million tons of carbon from disturbed mangrove soils each year.
Obviously,
this is an immense problem requiring our concerted action. Not
only are we losing the important potential for carbon sequestration
offered by the mangroves, but we are also seeing the release of
major quantities of polluting gases from the disturbed mangrove
substrate itself. This continued clearing of mangroves for whatever
reasons must now be perceived in an entirely new light…a light
that illuminates far beyond the dark crevices of development for
convenience and profit to a future for life and a sustainable
living on this now endangered planet…this home we call our Earth.
By Alfredo
Quarto, Executive Director, Mangrove Action Project,
www.mangroveactionproject.org
REFERENCE:
Ong, Jim Eong, Prof., Centre for Marine & Coastal Studies,
Universiti Sams, Malaysia, The Hidden Costs of Mangrove Services,
Use of Mangroves for Shrimp Aquaculture , Intl. Science Roundtable
for the Media, 2002
index
COMMUNITIES AND TREE MONOCULTURES
-
Brazil: Historic federal court decision sentences
Veracel Celulose (Stora Enso-Aracruz) for environmental violations
On
17 June 2008, a federal court in the city of Eunápolis, in the
state of Bahia, passed sentence in a public civil suit filed in
1993 by the Brazilian Federal Public Prosecutor's
Office against Veracel Celulose – known
at the time as Veracruz Florestal – and the government environmental
agencies CRA (Centre for Environmental Resources, responsible
for environmental licensing in the state of Bahia) and IBAMA (Brazilian
Environmental Institute, the national environmental authority).
Under
the federal court sentence, Veracel has been ordered to replant,
with native trees, all of the land encompassed by the licences
it was granted between 1993 and 1996 to plant eucalyptus trees.
This means that an area of 96,000 hectares currently covered by
the company’s eucalyptus plantations must be cleared and reforested
with tree species endemic to the Atlantic Forest, one of the planet’s
most biologically diverse biomes, as well as one of its most seriously
endangered. The company was also sentenced to a fine of BRL 20
million (USD 12.5 million) for deforesting areas of the Atlantic
Forest with tractors and bulldozers during its first years of
operation (1991-1993). Veracel has announced that it will appeal
the decision.
Veracel
Celulose is a joint venture formed by two of the world’s biggest
pulp and paper companies: Swedish-Finnish pulp giant Stora Enso
and Brazilian-based Aracruz Celulose, each of which owns 50% of
shares in the company. Veracel controls approximately 205,000
hectares of land in the extreme south region of the state of Bahia,
with monoculture eucalyptus plantations accounting for around
96,000 hectares. Its pulp mill produces roughly 900,000 tons of
pulp for export annually. Half of this production belongs to Aracruz,
and the other half to Veracel.
This
recent Brazilian federal court decision can be described as historic
for a number of reasons:
-
The decision means that justice has been done in the struggle
waged for the last 15 years by the Socio-Environmental Forum of
the Extreme South of Bahia and the Alert Against the Green Desert
Network to have Veracel Celulose sentenced for its role in the
destruction of the Atlantic Forest in the region. This destruction
was documented in a videotape released by Greenpeace, which led
then Minister of the Environment Fernando Coutinho Jorge to order
a halt to Veracel’s eucalyptus plantation project, despite the
company’s attempts to deny and camouflage the environmental damage
caused. At the same time, this is the first time ever that a court
decision has penalized an environmental violation committed by
a large eucalyptus plantation company. While other companies have
committed the same crimes, none have ever been sentenced for them.
-
The decision means that justice has been done in the struggle
waged by the Socio-Environmental Forum and the Alert Against the
Green Desert Network, which have always maintained that companies
like Veracel have been authorized to operate illegally, without
complying with the rules and criteria for environmental impact
assessments (EIAs). In 1994, three years after it had begun planting
eucalyptus trees, Veracel commissioned an EIA for its plantations
and the construction of a pulp mill, under orders from the Ministry
of the Environment. The assessment was hastily prepared by the
Finnish firm Jaakko Poyry (currently known as Poyry), which subsequently
benefited from the plantation project by being contracted for
consultancy services. At the time, the EIA was harshly criticized
by auditors hired by the CRA and by NGOs. Nevertheless, the CRA
granted the licences that the company needed to further expand
its plantations and build the pulp mill.
-
This decision marks the first time that the courts have stood
up against the political and financial power of companies like
Veracel and its owners, Aracruz and Stora Enso. These companies
seize unlimited control over vast areas of land, finance political
campaigns at every level and use their influence over public officials
to obtain rules, incentives and financing to facilitate their
investments, and hire the best legal firms in the country to avoid
culpability for damages in environmental, social and labour-related
lawsuits.
It
should be stressed that this is not the
first time that Veracel has been fined or questioned by the competent
agencies for committing illegalities:
-
In March 2007, Veracel was fined BRL 400,000 (USD 250,000) by
the federal environmental agency, IBAMA, for the illegal use of
a toxic substance (the herbicide Roundup) on 31.6 hectares of
land in a permanent preservation area.
-
In December 2007, the company was fined BRL 360,900 (USD 225,563)
by IBAMA for obstructing the natural regeneration of the Atlantic
Forest through eucalyptus plantation projects on 1,203 hectares
of land within this endangered biome.
-
The company has 7,428 hectares of plantations bordering the Monte
Pascual and Pau Brasil National Parks, in violation of an explicit
recommendation from the Federal Public Prosecutors Office in Bahia
for companies to refrain from planting more eucalyptus trees within
a 10-kilometre radius of the region’s natural parks, in compliance
with federal regulations.
What
is most remarkable of all is that, despite these antecedents,
in March of this year, SGS QUALIFOR granted Veracel Celulose FSC
certification of environmentally appropriate forest management
for its monoculture eucalyptus plantations. The certification
was issued in spite of severe criticisms voiced by local and international
civil society, expressed in a letter signed by 347 organizations
in August 2007. Moreover, even though an audit conducted by the
FSC’s accreditation agency ASI in March of this year documented
various reasons for which FSC certification should never have
been granted, the audit report did not recommend revoking the
certification.
It
is obviously in the company’s interest to enjoy the legitimacy
granted by the FSC label, given the fact that it is currently
in the process of doubling its plantations and building a new
pulp mill. The 2007 annual report of one of its two shareholders,
Aracruz Celulose, quoted in the daily A Gazeta on 16 January 2008,
states that: “Before the end of 2008, approximately 70% of the
forest base needed to double Veracel’s operations will have been
acquired. The new production line will have a capacity for 1.4
million tons of pulp annually, which will raise the unit’s nominal
production to 2.3 million tons annually (50% for each of the partners,
Aracruz and Stora Enso).”
In
addition, Aracruz’s own website announced that “USD 65 million
has already been invested in the acquisition of 35,000 hectares
of land and forests.” (http://www.aracruz.com.br/show_press.do?act=news&id=1000557&lang=1)
This
expansion will mean the continuation of the negative impacts on
the environment that have long been denounced by local communities
living near the company’s monoculture tree plantations. It is
extremely troubling when the FSC notes in its own audit report
that “the company does not have appropriate procedures for monitoring
water and environmental impacts, before, during and after forestry
operations…” This in itself is more than enough reason for not
certifying the company.
With
regard to the doubling of the company’s plantations and the new
pulp mill, announced in the official Aracruz annual report, Veracel
made this surprising claim: “At the end of the ASI audit, Mr.
Alípio (forestry director of Veracel) stated to the ASI and SGS
auditing teams that no decision had been made regarding the expansion
of Veracel’s activities. He indicated that for the moment the
shareholders had only given the green light for initiating a viability
and impact study for this project.” (FSC Surveillance of SGS Qualifor
in 2008, Forest Management Audit to VERACEL, Brazil, 26-28/03/2008)
Does
this mean that the previously quoted statements by Aracruz are
false? Or is the forestry director of Veracel lying?
These
blatant contradictions, in addition to the facts outlined earlier,
should be more than reason enough for the FSC to immediately revoke
the certification granted to Veracel Celulose.
At
the same time, it is crucial for Brazilian and international civil
society to take action to ensure that the Brazilian federal court’s
decision is upheld, given its significance for all those who are
opposed to the activities of these companies, and its special
importance at this time of rapid expansion by Veracel and its
owners, Aracruz and Stora Enso, which will mean even more negative
impacts on local communities and the environment caused by projects
of this kind.
It
is for this reason that the Socio-Environmental Forum of the Extreme
South of Bahia has formulated a motion of support for the Public
Prosecutors Office of Bahia, to congratulate this Brazilian public
agency, as well as the Federal Court of Bahia for its ruling in
this case. The Socio-Environmental Forum invites everyone to sign
this motion, which can be accessed at:
http://www.wrm.org.uy/countries/Brazil/motion_support.html
By
Winnie Overbeek, Alert Against the Green Desert Network/Brazil
index
-
Chile: Documentary-maker jailed for filming
a documentary on the Mapuche struggle against forestry companies
The
occupation of the Mapuche peoples’ ancestral territories by large-scale
eucalyptus and pine plantations belonging to major forestry companies
such as CMPC and Forestal Bosques ARAUCO relies for its expansion
on the support of State machinery. Repression, torture, death
and criminalization of Mapuche resistance are the background for
the “forestry model.”
The
Mapuche conflict is a sort of leprosy in Chilean society: concealed,
stigmatized and denied.
Elena
Varela, a documentary-maker and music teacher had become interested
in Mapuche music and decided to carry out research work in the
9th Region to learn more about their music and instruments. However,
the situation she found there changed the focus of her work.
According
to her declarations “I saw that they are impoverished, that their
lands are dry, that behind the forestry companies there is a whole
political and military machinery and I saw that the forestry industry
spends any amount of money to silence anyone rebelling against
the system. The raids on Mapuche communities are constant and
terrible. I believe that some people are still searching among
the Mapuche for that terrorist Pinochet [former Chilean dictator]
imagined, a terrorist that will never be found in the Mapuche
area because that terrorist does not exist.”
So
Elena Varela devoted herself to filming a documentary which she
called "Newen Mapuche" (the Force of the People of Earth),
endeavouring to record the conflict the Mapuche communities are
facing with the forestry industry over their historical territorial
claims in defence of their collective rights and the protection
of their environment from the depredation of monoculture tree
plantations (see WRM Bulletins Nos. 120, 106 and 101).
Over
the past few years, in the framework of social, cultural and environmental
degradation caused by the territorial expansion of forestry industries,
the legitimate social protests of the Mapuche people – the most
affected party – have been answered by violent repression against
them and against those who address this issue supportively.
The
long arm of criminalization is reaching out. Ranging from the
murder of Matías Catrileo, a young man who was killed from behind
to the imprisonment -during the current administration- of more
than 55 Mapuche accused of attacking the tree plantations, who
were given prison sentences of up to ten years (see Bulletin No.
26), to the dozens of people injured in demonstrations or subjected
to situations of intimidation and fear.
On
7 May, while she was producing her film, Elena Varela was arrested
by over 20 armed police. In her declarations during an interview
with the journalist Jaime Diaz Lavanchy, Elena Varela stated that
“For 24 hours they would not let me talk with a lawyer, nor would
they tell me what I was accused of.” It was only later that she
learnt that she was being accused of “illegal association with
the intention of committing a crime.”
She
claims that she is innocent and affirms that she is in jail because
of her film. “I am a prisoner because of my professional work
as a filmmaker, because of the information I handle, because of
my interaction with Mapuche activists who are struggling for their
beliefs, because of my interviews with people from repressed Mapuche
communities who dare not say anything, because I know many cruel
things that make me sick. The Mapuche people have been humiliated,
have been persecuted. I have seen so many people who have been
emotionally and psychiatrically crushed, so many people who do
not dare to talk! That is why I am in prison.”
“What
hurts me most, are the children” says Elena “the sick children
of Temucuicui! [a Mapuche community in the area of Ercilla, subject
to constant raids by the Special Police Forces] You can see it
from their drawings. They paint soldiers inside their homes, explosions
of tear-gas bombs. That is what they don’t want people to know!
And they also want to know the whereabouts of the Mapuche who
are fighting, in order to exterminate them, as they want to do
with me. I wanted to make a film and they put me in jail. This
is a way of exterminating me, of silencing me.”
Amnesty
International has officially declared that it believes that “the
authorities have arrested her in an attempt to curb the investigation
on this conflict and to try to intimidate both her and the Indigenous
Mapuche people. The police confiscated video tapes, sound equipment,
cameras and mobile phones and the wardrobe needed to film the
documentary from her home. They also took the research material
prepared by Elena Varela and documents related with the funding
of the film by the Fund for Audiovisual Promotion of the National
Culture and Arts Council. Amnesty International fears that this
information may be used by the Chilean security forces to intimidate
and harass Mapuche activists and those who contribute with their
opinion to the research.
The
situation experienced by Elena Varela is not unique. Since March
2008, the authorities have arrested three filmmakers who denounced
the conflict between the plantation companies and the Mapuche
people. The Mapuche Mapuexpress news programme reported that “Two
French journalists, Christopher Cyril Harrison and Joffrey Paul
Rossj, were arrested on 17 March in Collipulli, while they were
filming a Werken [a traditional authority of the Mapuche people].
The police confiscated their filming equipment and the tapes containing
the work they had done up to then. Although there was an attempt
to extradite them, the French consul avoided it. Two days later,
together with the Werken, they were attacked in the street by
a group of twelve people. On Saturday 3 May something similar
happened with Giuseppe Gabriele and Dario Ioseffi, two Italian
documentarians, while they were filming a Mapuche demonstration
taking place on one of Forestal Mininco’s plots, claimed for almost
two decades by a Chupilko community.”
Amnesty
International recommends a series of actions in the case of Elena
Varela, among them addressing letters to the President, the Minister
of Culture and the Minister of the Interior (see
in
http://www.amnistia.cl/index_aauu.shtml?x=87763). For their
part, various well-known people from the film world have circulated
a letter addressed to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,
demanding the liberation of Elena Varela and stating their “concern
over the situation of freedom of expression in Chile” (see
http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Chile/medidas_cautelares.pdf and
a video of the press conference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaS9Fcoz3LA
Elena
Varela’s grief is very great “because I cannot show what I had
to show. But I must be strong, because now it is I who is suffering
the pain of the Mapuche people.”
Article
based on “Estoy presa por la información que manejo”, Jaime Díaz
Lavanchy / La Nación Sunday 9 June 2008,
http://www.lanacion.cl/prontus_noticias_v2/
site/artic/20080628/pags/20080628180307.html; “Chile: Libertad
de Expresión”, Amnesty International
http://www.amnistia.cl/index_aauu.shtml?x=87763; “Documentalista
de Film Mapuche y las graves violaciones al trabajo documental”,
Mapuexpress,
http://www.mapuexpress.net/?act=news&id=2870; input from
Alfredo Seguel, Coordination of Mapuche Territorial Identities
(Coordinación de Identidades Territoriales Mapuche), alfredoseguel@gmail.com
index
-
Colombia: Oil palm grows by the force
of violence
Since
the beginning of the decade, all the areas of expansion of oil
palm plantations have coincided geographically with areas of paramilitary
presence and expansion, to the extent that some of the new plantations
being developed have been financed as farming projects for the
same demobilised paramilitary from the AUC (Autodefensas Unidas
de Colombia – United Self-Defence Force of Colombia) who had previously
made incursions into these very areas.
This
strategy of territorial control through the expansion of oil palm
is reinforced by government policies supporting and providing
incentives for the planting of oil palms, also clearly in a quest
for economic, political and military control of large areas of
Colombia currently outside state control.
These
state policies are reinforced by the investment strategies of
international bodies. An analysis of the investment plans of the
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) illustrates this: “For the
IDB, medium and long-term crops have greater export potential,
a greater capacity for surviving in an open economy, yield greater
benefits in terms of the pacification process and generate sustained
growth of the agricultural sector, thereby overcoming the problems
of long-term financing of farming. (…) And in accordance with
the Country Document (IDB), the programme focuses its activities
on the zones and important projects from the perspective of pacification
efforts. In general, the IDB regards investment in medium and
long-term crops as strategies for governability or territorial
control in the face of problems such as guerrilla conflict, political
violence, common criminality and drug crops. Extensive farming
provides a genuine alternative for the occupation of territory
and for the creation of employment in conflict areas.”
Ultimately,
all these policies share the idea that oil palm cultivation is
a type of economic development useful in the pacification of the
country. This confluence of illegal and criminal acts, government
policies and international investment forms the Colombian oil
palm model.
This
model can be described as having 5 phases:
1.
Attacks or conquest of territory by paramilitaries.
2.
Illegal appropriation of the land. Theft or purchase with armed
intimidation.
3.
Sowing of oil palm.
4.
Palm Complex = Plantations + Extraction Plants.
5a.
Flow of oil towards national and/or international markets.
5b.
Territorial control.
This
description is a summary of the different processes being developed
in the oil palm-growing regions of the country, but in its entirety
(phases 1 through to 5) it is particularly applicable to the new
plantations developed since the beginning of the decade.
In
previous processes such as in Santander or Tumaco, the model began
with the oil palm complexes already established (4), the palm
companies being the ones who formed or invited and financed paramilitary
groups as private security corps, in response to the guerrillas.
In contrast in Casanare, the palm plantations expanded at the
same rate as paramilitary activity, both expansions overlapping
each other. The case which perfectly fits the model is that of
plantations in the Chocó where it was the paramilitaries themselves
who invited the oil palm companies to establish themselves in
areas under their control.
The
Attorney’s office itself states that, “the appropriation, illegal
seizure and theft of land by paramilitary groups (33%), guerrillas
(17%), drugs traffickers, emerald traders, large landowners, some
palm-producers and other actors has been described by analysts
and the media as the ‘agrarian counter-reform’ and ‘paramilitary
agrarian reform’”.
Of
the estimated 2.6 to 6.8 million hectares, many are now planted
with oil palm. This ‘agrarian counter-reform’ denounced by different
analysts and the media has been denounced for a long time by the
victims themselves, as in the case of the communities of Curvaradó
and Jiguamiandó affected by oil palm plantations.
The
incursions, attacks or subsequent takeover of territory has taken
a grim toll in Colombia’s rural areas. The murders or massacres,
the forced disappearances, the threats, the kidnappings, the torture
and other types of persecution are causing the forced displacement
– collective and/or individual – of the inhabitants of the land
which is to be seized.
The
statistics on forced displacement in Colombia are alarming. According
to different records it is estimated that between 1,874,917 and
3,832,525 people have been displaced by violence in Colombia.
Of this high number, two out of three displaced people owned land
at the time of displacement. (Excerpted and adapted from: “The
flow of palm oil Colombia- Belgium/Europe. A study from a human
rights perspective”)
Complaints
continue: the Colombian organization Salva la Selva denounced
that the community leaders opposing oil palm plantations and those
supporting displaced communities possessing legal land tenure
deeds to return to the locations they were displaced from, have
been receiving death threats. Other people in the area have been
attacked by members of paramilitary and military forces. In September
2007, two people received bullet wounds from men whom are believed
to be members of a paramilitary group. The threats to the communities
that have already returned to their lands also continue.
Since
2001, 113 murders and 13 forced displacements have taken place
and many death threats and illegal land occupations have been
reported. Last December the Attorney General of the Nation filed
a claim against 23 representatives of oil palm companies, although
this has not led to any real efforts to halt the expansion of
oil palm or of cattle ranching on community lands.
Last
May, members of the Caracoli community, collective territory of
Curvaradó, Jair Barrera, Jonny Barrera and Devis Salas and the
Human Rights defenders of the Justice and Peace Commission, Elizabeth
Gomez and Luz Marina Arroyabe were illegally arrested by the police,
with accusations aimed at incriminating them. They were later
subject to cruelty, torture and threats. The police action was
accompanied by beneficiaries of paramilitary groups and oil palm
growers (see
http://www.salvalaselva.org/protestaktion.php?id=255)
For
its part, the National Council for Economic and Social Policy
(CONPES) announced new policies increasing Government support
to the expansion of agrofuels with the intention of turning Colombia
into an agrofuel exporting power.
The
violation of Human Rights in the Choco and other locations and
the accelerated destruction of tropical forests and other vital
and biologically diverse systems are the direct result of these
government policies.
Article
based on: “The flow of palm oil Colombia- Belgium/Europe. A study
from a human rights perspective”, Fidel Mingorance, Conducted
by HREV for the Coordination Belge pour la Colombia,
http://www.cbc.collectifs.net/doc/informe_en_v3-1.pdf; “Colombia:
agrocombustibles destruyen comunidades y biodiversidad”, Salva
la Selva,
http://www.salvalaselva.org/protestaktion.php?id=255
index
-
Malaysia: Blockades against Sarawak oil
palm company
In
Europe and the US, palm oil is being promoted as an agrofuel that
will allegedly prevent the increase of carbon dioxide emissions
to the atmosphere. Of course, it is the large scale and not the
small-scale diversified model which is being implemented and in
fact it’s just a way of delaying the imperative need of changing
energy-intensive production, consumer and trade patterns. Oil
palm plantations for agrofuel just add to the already damaging
effects of palm tree plantations for industrial use.
In
the meantime, big corporations take the lion’s share profiting
from the burgeoning market of an industrial crop that covers wide
areas. Southern countries are being targeted, but the fruit of
palm trees tastes bitter for their communities, that receive less
than the promised crumbs. The following is one more example of
this.
In
1996, Iban landowners in Sarawak agreed that their land in the
Kanowit District be planted with oil palm. A joint venture between
Boustead Plantations (60%), the villagers (30%) and the state
government agency Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA)
(10%) was established.
Through
the agreement, villagers were promised roads that would connect
the longhouses in the area, electricity and piped water supply,
as well as 60-year land titles for the Native Customary Rights
(NCR) landowners.
However,
it was reported that despite the fruits have been harvested for
many years, NCR landowners have been paid no dividends up to now
except for an initial meagre advance paid in 1997. None of the
other promises has been fulfilled.
The
natives could no longer bear the abuse and decided to take action
to protect their interests. In April a blockade action was staged
to stop the company from entering their oil palm plantation. At
first it was carried out only by three longhouse communities but
later on others followed up to the present 20. According to an
article by Tony Thien, about 400 people from 20 Iban longhouse
communities in Machan have stopped the company from entering their
oil palm plantation while at one access point into Ladang Kelimut
situated on the right bank of the Rajang River, the villagers
placed their own people to prevent workers from entering the estate.
At another access road, they erected two barriers across. Many
more villages are expected to join them in the blockades.
At
the same time, the villagers lodged a police report in Kanowit,
saying the company had failed to pay dividends to them and that
they were giving the company notice unless such payment was made
soon they would have to take the case to court and at the same
time stop the company's operations.
As
usual in these cases, the journalist reporting on the issue informs
that “the company could not be contacted immediately for comment”.
Article
based on: “Angry native landowners act against Sarawak oil palm
company”, Tony Thien, Malaysiakini,
http://www.bmf.ch/en/news/?show=103
index
- West
Africa: Wilmar and Olam International ambitious expansion
plans for palm oil
An
article in June’s WRM Bulletin highlighted Unilever’s role in
the threat to Tanoe Swamps Forest, one of the last remaining forest
blocks in Cote d’Ivoire. Following international protests,
Unilever now ‘promises’ an Environmental Impact Assessment but
has given no guarantee that the forest will be protected.
Instead, they have publicised their long-standing plans to sell
shares in PALM-CI, which holds the concession for Tanoe, although
they will remain a major PALM-CI customer. Behind the announcement,
and possibly behind the plans to destroy Tanoe Forest, lie far-reaching
changes in the region’s palm oil industry.
In
November 2007, Singapore-based Wilmar International and Olam International
announced plans for aggressive expansion into West Africa.
They formed a 50:50 joint venture, Nauvu, which acquired shares
in Palm-CI, in the West African agribusiness firm SIFCA (also
a major investor in Palm-CI) and in a new refining business set
up by SIFCA and Unilever.(1)
The Ivorian government has sold its shares to SIFCA. Since
Wilmar International acquired the Kuok Group last year and became
the world’s largest palm oil trader, they have been looking at
expanding into new regions, including in West Africa. Their
plans are ambitious: Palm-CI, the largest palm oil and palm oil
mill owner in Cote d’Ivoire, plan to more than treble their production
by 2020. Wilmar, Olam and SIFCA seek to expand palm oil,
sugar and rubber production, not just in Cote d’Ivoire but across
the region, including in Guinea, Liberia and Nigeria, Africa’s
largest palm oil producer. An initial trial for producing
palm oil biodiesel in Cote d’Ivoire has been held.(2)
The
new Wilmar-Olam partnership and investment in West Africa is worrying
news because both companies have been implicated
in deforestation and disregarding the rights of communities.
Wilmar’s concessions are in Indonesia, where palm oil expansion
has been closely tied to deforestation. Companies routinely clear
the forest area than they actually plant with oil palms and make
extra profits from, commonly illegal, timber sales. A 2007 report
by Friends of the Earth Netherlands, Kontak Rakyat Borneo and
Lembaga Gemawan (3)
exposed Wilmar’s involvement in rainforest destruction, in ignoring
national laws and the rights of communities and in forest fires
in Sambas District, Kalimantan. The Greenpeace Report ‘Cooking
the Climate’ (4)
reveals a large number of Wilmar concessions on rainforest land
as well as a large number of fire hotspots during the dry season.
Unilever is involved as a customer rather than as a plantation
company, just as they now aim to do in West Africa. Olam,
on the other hand, has obtained timber concessions in DR Congo
in breach of a moratorium, and has had shipments of illegal logs
seized.(5) Both
Unilever and Wilmar are members of the Roundtable for Sustainable
Palm Oil, with Unilever as a founding member and also holding
the presidency of the RSPO Executive Board. There is no
evidence that their RSPO membership has translated into anything
other than a PR-coup.
Wilmar’s
record in Uganda, the only African country where the company has
held oil palm concessions so far, has followed the Indonesian
‘model’: Their subsidiary, Bidco, was granted permissions to destroy
forests, including in Ssese Islands, for palm oil (see WRM bulletin,
August 2006).
Tanoe
Swamps Forest could well be the first of many forests in West
Africa targeted by this new business partnership.
By
Almuth Ernsting, Biofuelwatch,
http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk, e-mail:
almuthbernstinguk@yahoo.co.uk
References:
1)
www.wilmar-international.com/news/press_releases/News_Release_15Nov07.pdf
2)
www.jeuneafrique.com/jeune_afrique/article_
jeune_afrique.asp?art_cle=LIN30038sifcaseuqit0
3)
www.foei.org/en/publications/pdfs/Wilmar_Palm_Oil_Environmental_
Social_Impact.pdf/view?searchterm=Wilmar
4)
www.greenpeace.org/international/press/reports/cooking-the-climate-full
5)
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/world-bank-congo-forest_300807
index
CLIMATE JUSTICE NOW!
-
Asian Civil Society Groups Call For ‘Climate
Justice’
Over
170 activists who gathered in Bangkok from 12-14
July harshly criticised governments and corporations for
their failure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. They called
for "climate justice" and a "fundamental departure
from the current global order" to solve the climate crisis.
Conference participants included fishers and farmers, forest and
indigenous peoples, women, youth, workers and non-government activists
from 31 countries.
"By
climate justice,” participants asserted in a conference document,
“we mean that the burden of adjustment to the climate crisis must
be borne by those who have created it, and not by those who have
been least responsible.”
The
conference signaled the growing voice of social movements and
civil society groups in Asia on the issue of climate change.
Throughout
the three-day conference, participants repeatedly expressed frustration
at how governments and corporations, who have thus far dominated
the climate discussion, have failed to address the root causes
of planet-threatening climate change.
After
over 30 workshops and plenary debates, participants reached consensus
on their opposition to carbon trading and "offset" schemes,
such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the Reduced
Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries (REDD) program,
which allow polluters to buy their way out of reducing emissions.
Participants
also rejected industrialized agrofuels, megadams, and nuclear
power, saying these “false solutions” will “merely exacerbate
the climate crisis and deepen global inequality.”
As
a solution, participants insisted that governments must confront
the problem of overconsumption, both in developed countries as
well as among elites in poorer countries.
The
conference heard that while industrialized countries have been
responsible for about 90% of historical greenhouse gas emissions,
99% of the risks posed by climate change
are being borne by people from developing countries.
"Dealing
with the climate crisis inevitably involves a fundamental departure
from the current global order, and a comprehensive transformation
of social, economic, political and cultural relations at the local,
national, and global level,” participants concluded.
The
conference was hosted by Focus on the Global South, a policy and
advocacy group housed at Bangkok’s Chulalongkorn University, together
with 24 other co-organizers from around the world. The majority
of participants came from Asian countries, but there were also
representatives from North America, Europe, Latin America, and
Africa.
For
more information about the conference, go to
www.focusweb.org/climatechange
index
