|
|
WRM Bulletin
|
|
WRM GENERAL ACTIVITIES International Assembly of Oilwatch WRM's International Coordinator, who is a member of Oilwatch's Steering Committee, participated in this network's first international assembly, held in Mexico City on 27-30 July. Oilwatch, whose international secretariat is hosted by Accion Ecologica in Ecuador, is a Southern network fighting against oil exploration and exploitation in the tropics. The meeting was attended by some 50 activists from Africa, Asia, Central, North and South America and Europe, who shared experiences and discussed strategies and actions to halt the detrimental activities of the oil industry in tropical countries. The reason for focusing on oil companies is simple: both transnational and state enterprises are responsible for extensive human suffering, ranging from loss of culture and livelihoods to harassment, imprisonment and assassination of opponents. From an environmental point of view, their activities result in deforestation, water, soil and air pollution and biodiversity loss. Accordingly, Oilwatch had presented a declaration at the Kyoto conference on climate change, whose first demand was to call for "a moratorium on all new exploration for fossil fuel reserves in pristine and frontier areas." The Mexico City Assembly was a success in many ways, but particularly because --for the first time-- it brought together people from all over the world with a shared perspective and, most importantly, with a shared desire to gather their strengths to continue carrying out the common struggle against the oil industry.
International Expert Consultation Invited by GTZ, Alvaro González of the International Secretariat of the WRM, participated at the International Expert Consultation on the Six-Country Initiative "Putting the IPF Proposals for Action into Practice", that took place in Baden Baden, Germany, from June 29 to July 3. During the 1st session of the IFF, held in October 1997, the governments of Finland, Germany, United Kingdom, Indonesia, Uganda and Honduras, in cooperation with the IFF Secretariat, UNDP and FAO, agreed to join in a government-led initiative to conduct a case study exercise in each of these countries and produce a synthesis report on the national experiences. The objectives of the consultation were to review the findings of such studies and to elaborate recommendations and inputs to IFF-2 (Geneva, August 24-September 4). More than 100 participants worked on the analysis of the cases presented and set up recommendations for the Forum. NGO representatives emphasized the importance of land tenure rights, underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation and the influence of international trade on the sustainability of forest management. It was pointed out that while most of the participants of the consultation were government and international agency officials, no indigenous or local community people were present. This implies a contradiction with point 32 of IPF-4 report which states that "Traditional Forest Related Knowledge constitutes an important body of knowledge and experience relevant to many aspects of the Panel’s mandate". The meeting's conclusions and recommendation will be now circulated among IFF-2 participants at the Geneva meeting. Those interested in receiving more information related to the meeting, please contact: Marlene.Steigerwald@gtz.de or Doris.Klein@gtz.de
Chad oil pipeline: response from the World Bank On June 10, the WRM secretariat addressed a letter to the president of the World Bank, expressing our concern over the arrest of Ngarlegy Yorongar and two journalists in relation with a declaration by the former opposing the construction of the oil pipeline Chad-Cameroon, which is being financed by the World Bank. The World Bank's country director for Chad, Mr Serge Michailof, responded on June 22, expressing that he believed that the three had been released. On the general situation he added: "As I am sure you are aware, we are supporting the Chad/Cameroon petroleum pipeline project because of its potential to substantially increase spending in Chad, one of the poorest countries in the world, on poverty alleviation activities. Let me assure you that notwithstanding the project's potential to reduce poverty, we will only proceed if our environmental and social safeguards have been respected, included meaningful consultation with local populations in Chad on the impacts of the project."
The WRM International Secretariat addressed the President of Venezuela and environmental authorities of that country expressing concern for the energy transmission line being built between Macagua power station and the Brazilian states of Roraima and Amazonas. The plan is expected to cause deforestation and loss of livelihood for the Pemon indigenous people. Faxes were also sent to Venezuelan authorities concerning the energy transmission line across the Imataca Forest Reserve, that is being resisted by the Kari’na, Arawako, Akawaio and Pemon indigenous peoples due to its negative environmental impact (see article in this issue). We supported the struggle of the Mapuche nation in Chile opposing the extension of industrial tree plantations by Bosques Arauco S.A. and Forestal Mininco S.A. in their traditional lands of the southern VIII Region, sending faxes to the companies and to regional and national authorities. The International Secretariat expressed its support to the Government of Thailand for its decision to impose a complete ban on shrimp farming within the Central Plain. Sustainable rice production in this region, that is crucial for the country’s food security, could be menaced by this industry. The expansion of shrimp industrial farming –in this case on mangroves areas- was also questioned in Ecuador. In relation to Greenpeace International's action in Esmeraldas (see article in this issue), the Ecuadorian government was asked by the WRM to abide by the decree that declares illegal mangrove destruction and its substitution by shrimp pools. On July 14 the International Secretariat addressed the President of Costa Rica in relation to the draft Law for the Autonomic Development of Indigenous Peoples, whose first version was recently approved by Parliament. The President of Costa Rica, Dr Miguel Angel Rodriguez sent us a letter, dated July 29, showing his gratitude for our support to the project and expressing that his government is committed to supporting the empowerment of the indigenous cultures, the valorization of their values and traditions and the improvement of their living conditions.
PLANTATIONS CAMPAIGN Information on general activities After the launch of the plantations campaign last June (see WRM Bulletin 13), the secretariat has been focusing on: - preparation of campaign materials. As to campaign materials, they are currently being produced in English and will soon be translated into Spanish (some of them already translated), French and Portuguese. These materials are being posted in the WRM web page, where they can be accessed, downloaded, printed and disseminated locally, both in electronic and printed formats. In relation to information, we are actively establishing new contacts with organizations who are either confronting plantations or concerned about their spreading in new places. Much of the information is being disseminated by the WRM bulletin, which in this issue contains information on plantations (also including oil palm and the paper industry) in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Indonesia and Vietnam. We therefore request our readers to supply us with any information considered useful in this respect. All relevant information is at the same time linked to the plantations campaign area of the web page. As respects influencing global processes, we have produced an analysis of the IPF proposals for action in relation to plantations (see "Comments on the IPF's proposals for action on tree plantations"), to be distributed during the coming session of the IFF in Geneva later this month.
INTERNATIONAL Underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation The Steering Committee of the Joint Initiative to Address the Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation will meet in Geneva on August 22nd. The meeting will be focused on strategic planning for the Global Workshop which will be held in Costa Rica on 18-22 January. At the same time, there will be presentations on the regional and indigenous peoples' workshops whose findings will form the basis of the discussions in Costa Rica. Special attention will be given to the CIS (ex-USSR) workshop which recently took place, to share the experiences with all Steering Committee members. The Intergovernmental Forum of Forests will be holding its second session in Geneva (24 August-4 September), and a group of NGOs will be present throughout the meeting, interacting with government delegates. Documentation prepared for this session, as well as on its first session and the IPF process are available in the IFF's web page, which can be easily accessed through the WRM web page (related sites). Comments on the IPF's proposals for action on tree plantations The IPFs proposals for action contain a number of items which refer to tree plantations, which the WRM believes should be further reflected upon by the IFF in view to their implementation. Paragraph 22 states that: "Both sustainably managed natural forests and forest plantations, as components of integrated land-use that takes account of environmental and socio-economic concerns, fulfil a valuable role in meeting the need for forest products, goods and services, as well as helping to conserve biological diversity and providing a reservoir for carbon. The costs, benefits and disbenefits of different types of forest management, including forest plantations, need to be appraised under different social, cultural, economic and ecological conditions. The role of forest plantations as an important element of sustainable forest management and as a complement to natural forests should be recognized." Few human productive activities are good or bad per se, and most impact on people and the environment. Depending on a number of issues, their advantages can in some cases outweigh their drawbacks, while they can be basically negative in others. The above paragraph clearly incorporates this approach by stating the important role that plantations can have, while taking into account "environmental and socio-economic concerns" and the need to appraise plantations "under different social, cultural, economic and ecological conditions." The WRM believes that representative existing examples of plantations need to be appraised to determine how they benefit or disbenefit local populations, which type should be promoted in which situations, by whom they should be implemented, and how. First, there are many types of tree plantations, ranging from agroforestry systems to large-scale industrial plantations. Some have been beneficial, while others have had strong negative impacts. Most of the negative impacts --on people and the environment-- have been documented in large-scale plantations: deforestation, displacement and loss of livelihoods of local peoples, erosion and nutrient depletion, biodiversity loss, water shortages, etc. On the other hand, positive impacts have been recorded in some agroforestry systems which have been carried out by local communities. Tree plantations are therefore neither positive nor negative per se and their impact in one way or the other will depend --as paragraph 22 states-- on the "different social, cultural, economic and ecological conditions." The IPFs proposals for action contain another very important element in paragraph 58 (b ii), which also needs to be considered for implementation of these proposals: "(ii) To plan and manage forest plantations, where appropriate, to enhance production and provision of goods and services, paying due attention to relevant social, cultural, economic and environmental considerations in the selection of species, areas and silviculture systems, preferring native species, where appropriate, and taking all practicable steps to avoid replacing natural ecosystems of high ecological and cultural values with forest plantations, particularly monocultures . . ." The above is an important step forward in that it correctly addresses one type of destructive forestry model --large-scale exotic tree monocultures-- which in many cases have replaced "natural ecosystems of high ecological and cultural values with forest plantations, particularly monocultures." At the same time, this paragraph provides clear guidance on the steps that should be taken before implementing plantations: - social, cultural, economic and environmental considerations should be addressed in the selection of species, areas and silviculture systems - native species should be preferred - monocultures of exotic species should be avoided. The WRM believes that if these guidelines are taken into account, they will result in a radical change in the currently predominant plantation forestry model, based on a few exotic species (particularly eucalyptyus and pines), planted as large-scale monocultures, which are having dramatic negative impacts on local communities and on local environments.
LOCAL STRUGGLES AND
NEWS AFRICA Central African Conference on Forests As informed in WRM bulletin 11, the second meeting of the Conference on Central African Moist-Forest Ecosystems (CEFDHAC) took place in Bata, Equatorial Guinea from 8 to 10 June 1998. We include here the Indigenous Peoples' and NGO declarations presented at that conference. - Indigenous Peoples' Declaration Declaration by the Indigenous Peoples of Central Africa to the 2nd Conference on Central African Moist Forest Ecosystems (CEFDHAC, or the ‘Brazzaville Process’). We, the indigenous peoples of Central Africa, gathered together under the auspices of our network Coordinating Committee of African Indigenous Peoples, Central African section, have the distinguished honour of putting forward the following recommendations and proposals: In view of the fact that we are forgotten and marginalised despite being the great trustees and protectors of the equatorial forests of Africa, we ask you to: 1. Involve us in all international and national fora, as well as the major forestry [meetings]. 2. Not take premature decisions about the forests without consulting with us and without guaranteeing our right to live there as protectors of the forests, which are for us a paradise. 3. That the Governments recognise the rights of indigenous peoples in financial legislation concerning the inhabitants living in the depths of the forest, without pressurising them or expelling them from their ancestral domain which they consider their paradise. 4. That CEFDHAC in relation to the [proposed] code of conduct [for forestry operations] considers and takes measures guaranteeing the indigenous peoples’ right to live in or near the forest so that they can play their role and do not have to exchange their forest way of life for a mundane life without land. 5. That the national and international organisations providing support for protection and conservation of nature are not fooled by non-indigenous peoples who oppose the development and integration of indigenous forest peoples who have been expelled from their ancestral domains without compensation or restitution of other lands. 6. That the Governments create buffer zones for indigenous peoples living in protected areas to enable them to lead their customary lives (hunting, fishing...). 7. That the proceeds of all activities (tourism, industrial exploitation) carried out in the territories of indigenous peoples are shared equitably with the original owners of the land. Signed at Bata, 9 June 1998 On behalf of the representatives of indigenous peoples of Central Africa Kapupu Diwa M. Declaration of NGOs at the 2nd CEFDHAC Conference (Conference on Moist Forest Ecosystems of Central Africa), Bata, June 1998 Your Excellency, the Prime Minister, Head of Government, Representative of the Head of State of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea; Your Excellency, the Congolese Minister for Forest Economy, current chairman of CEFDHAC; Your Excellencies, Ministers responsible for the forest ecosystems of Central Africa; Honourable Members of Parliament; We have the honour to speak to this illustrious assembly, to convey our thanks to the Secretariat of CEFDHAC for having recognised our role in giving us the opportunity to express our point of view on the Brazzaville process. Nevertheless, we wish to express our disappointment about the provisional programme, which could not take our intervention into account, despite the fact that this process claims to be participative, open and democratic. Please allow us to present the quintessential elements of our Declaration: We, the NGOs of the Congo Basin, - considering that the Brazzaville Process is an important platform for collaboration between the different players: states, NGOs, local communities, private sector, working towards sustainable management of forest resources, - Considering that the Brazzaville Declaration constitutes the political will affirmed by the State of the sub-region to harmonise policies for sustainable management of forest resources, - Considering the political instability in the sub-region, - Considering that large-scale development projects are sources of conflict and grave threats to biodiversity, - Noting the inefficiencies in the current functioning of CEFDHAC due to 1. the instability of national correspondents arising unexpectedly after the change in Ministers responsible for forest ecosystems 2. the laxness of certain national correspondents in setting up contact groups, - Noting that, despite their participation at different meetings, the NGOs’ positions are rarely taken into account, - Noting that there is still confusion about the role of NGOs in the process, - Noting that efforts to establish peace are currently inadequate in the Central African sub-region, - Noting that hasty political decisions are taken to set up large-scale development projects in defiance of the serious and real threats to populations and to biodiversity: We recommend: 1.- Amendments to certain tasks of the organs and principles of functioning of CEFDHAC, notably the principles: 7, concerning conditions of membership; 10, concerning the method of designating national correspondents; 11, concerning the collaboration between the national correspondent and NGOs, and 15, concerning the method of designating the contact groups, as defined in the workshop on programming the activities of CEFDHAC at Kinshasa. 2.- Effective involvement of NGOs in decision-making (meetings and steering committee) and in carrying out the action plan 3.- Establishment of real mechanisms to promote peace in the Central African sub-region. 4.- Completion of genuine and transparent environmental impact studies before carrying out any development project. Signed at Bata, 07/06/1998 Source: Forest Peoples Programme
ASIA Sarawak: Dayak Ibans sue the police Seven Dayak Iban natives from Rumah Bugah, Tubai, Ukong, Limbang are suing the Police for wrongful arrest and baseless imprisonment. The facts date back to 19 October 1996. The Ibans of Rumah Bugah longhouse were putting up a blockade to stop logging activities of Syarikat Gunung Utama, a contractor to Limbang Trading Limbang Ltd, a company owned by Datuk Amar James Wong, the Sarawak State Environment and Health Minister. A police party wrongfully and without reasonable or probable cause or suspicion arrested the Ibans on their native customary land at upper Sungai Tubai Eka, Ukong and caused them to be taken to the Limbang Central Police Station where they were detained without being told of the charges against them. They were released two days later. In the Magistrate’s Court the police failed to frame any charge against them. On 15 June 1998 the Ibans denounced in Court that the above named logging company illegally encroached and extracted timbers on their native customary land without their informed consent. The operation of the company caused extensive destruction to their land, forest and resources. The Court was told that they acquired the customary rights by virtue of their "Adat" or custom and the extent of their native customary land is well defined by a territorial boundary map issued by the colonial government and is still recognised by the Sarawak Land Code. They also denounced the action of the police as an abuse of power and opposed to the rights of the native Ibans guaranteed under the Federal Constitution. Despite of repeated inquiries by the Ibans, the Police was not able to provide to the Court the reasons for their arrest and detention. Source: Borneo Resources Institute (BRIMAS), June 1988.
The ban on the activities of three environmental NGOs -LBBJ; Plasma and SHK Kaltim- in Kutai district, East Kalimantan has caused general concern. LBBJ (better known as PutiJaji) carries out community empowerment through legal rights education, Plasma is a forest campaigning organisation, and SHK Kaltim is a branch of a national network which promotes community-based forest management systems. They have played a very important role in campaigning on the Bentian people's struggles against Bob Hasan's companies; Rio Tinto's operations at the Kaltim Prima coal mine and Kelian Equatorial (gold) mine; the London-Sumatra oil palm plantations; the forest fires last year and earlier this year and the problems which the drought and rising food prices have caused for local communities. The ban (No. 200-209/330/IV/1998, dated 26 May 1998) was issued by the local Social and Political Affairs office on the grounds that they were illegal organisations since they were not registered at that office. It is remarkable that the ban has come after the fall of Suharto. This may indicate the new government's attitude towards NGOs opposing large-scale commercial exploitation of Indonesia's natural resources, coinciding with President Habibie’s strategy to overcome the economic crisis through the promotion of exports. WAHLI (Indonesian Environment Forum) considers that: 1. This banning order is an arrogant expression of power which contravenes clause 28 of the Indonesian Constitution which guarantees the right to associate, meet and express oneself. The prohibition of these human activities also violates human rights in which there is now renewed interest in Indonesia. 2. This instruction also demonstrates that the authorities involved are unable to grasp fully the aspirations which are developing in the four corners of the country. It clearly demonstrates the shallow understanding of politics on the part of those involved in the face of the wave of reforms sweeping the land. It reveals that these authorities are still trapped in the paranoid, anti-change political rhetoric of the New Order (Suharto) regime. 3. The authorities involved do not recognise or understand the existence of NGOs --their history, vision, purpose-- nor their legal position or their position and experience at the very heart of a changing society. National and international NGOs demand that the banning order on these three NGOs are inmediately and unconditionally withdrawn. Source: Down to Earth, 6/8/98.
Sawit Watch: an Indonesian network against oil palm plantations Oil palm (known as "Sawit" in Indonesia) is an increasing problem for people and the environment in that country. In May this year, the Minister of Forestry and Plantation Estates stated that the government had allocated 30 million hectares of forest for oil palm plantations. Indonesia has already 3.2 million hectares of oil palm plantations, mainly located in Sumatra (1 million ha). Every year 330,000 hectares of forest is targeted for conversion into new plantations and 650 investors --75% of which foreign companies-- are applying for converting forest into oil palm plantation. The negative impacts of oil palm plantations Oil palm plantations have resulted in numerous negative impacts on the environment, on indigenous peoples, on people's livelihoods, on the national economy, and have resulted in the concentration of land in the hands of few companies. Negative impacts on the environment are a consequence of this being a large-scale industrial monocrop which therefore reduces biodiversity. At the same time, it implies high levels of agrochemical inputs --fertilizers and insecticides-- that have polluted many rivers, and have directly and indirectly caused deforestation and forest fires. Much of the land allocated to oil palm plantations are not even technically appropriate for such crop. According to a study carried out in 1998 by JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) and BAPENAS (National Development Planning Board), only 15% of the 3.2 million hectares of land earmarked for that purpose by the provincial government of West Kalimantan are suitable for planting oil palm. But, even within this 15%, the environmental impacts will be enormous: land erosion of 57-1,500 ton/year, loss of soil nutrients of 386,000 ton/year, pollution caused by 145,000 liters/year of insecticides and 5,900 ton/year of other chemical substances. Plantation projects ignore the existence of indigenous peoples and expropriate their lands. For example, in West Kalimantan oil palm plantations are developed in the productive gardens of Dayak people, which include rubber trees, fruit trees, etc. The government of Indonesia has encouraged companies to cut down hundreds of thousands of trees in Dayaks' gardens and to replace them with oil palm. As a result, local peoples' economy, based on local resources is destroyed. If millions of hectares of lands are converted to oil palm plantation, the regional and peoples' economy will be very dependent on a single commodity that is subject to international price fluctuations. On the other hand peoples' economy, that is based on non -timber forest products such as honey, medicinal plants, fruit, etc., is destroyed by the expropriating process. The Central Bureau of Statistics (1996) has noted that 457 large oil palm companies control already more than 3.2 million hectares of land. In the future, 650 new companies will control 30 million hectares more. This means that there is and will be high concentration of land holdings. Experience shows that when indigenous and local peoples' lands are expropriated for this purpose, many more people become landless and are thus pushed into a massive poverty process. The creation of "Sawit Watch" Many Indonesian NGOs are very concerned about this trend and have conducted activities during the last six years to empower indigenous and local peoples to fight for their rights in their respective regions. Given the need to work and develop plans together for strengthening all efforts at the local, national and international levels, some Indonesian NGOs initiated on July 25, 1998 Sawit Watch and since then more NGOs joined the initiative. The Sawit Watch has three main goals: 1). To support local and indigenous peoples' struggle against large-scale oil palm plantation companies; 2) To campaign against the IMF/World Bank's Sectoral Adjustment Loan for liberalizing oil palm plantation; 3) To raise public awareness at the local, national and international levels on the social and environmental impacts of oil palm plantations. For achieving those goals, Sawit Watch will carry out activities such as: 1. Support local and indigenous peoples' struggle against large scale oil palm plantation companies: Land expropriation and environmental destruction caused by oil palm plantation are major problems to local and indigenous peoples. Advocacy and empowerment activities are carried out to support them to reclaim their expropriated land. More than 10,000 people regained last month control over about 10,000 hectares of land in North Sumatra that had been given to military and bureaucrats. Reclaiming activities by indigenous and local peoples in Sumatra, Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Java over large-scale plantations and forest concessions range from taking to court land right cases to the direct occupation of lands. Sawit Watch's support consists of providing legal advice, putting political pressure on provincial governments and the military, and litigation at court. Compensation for environmental destruction is also being demanded from the companies. People are poor and don't have funds to cultivate their land after reclaiming and therefore fund-raising activities are also carried out to support, for instance, the purchase of seeds. People are encouraged to cultivate alternative crops, so in the future they are not dependent on one crop (oil palm), to develop mixed crops and to increase biodiversity. People-based management of the forest that was once destroyed by large-scale oil palm plantations, could therefore be developed again. 2. Campaign against IMF/World Bank's Sectoral Adjustment Loan for liberalizing oil palm plantation. The Indonesian government stopped new foreign investment in oil palm plantation in early 1997, because 1.5 million hectares of land had already been allocated for oil palm plantation to Malaysian and other foreign investors. The IMF/World Bank's 50 point programme package for Indonesia to counter the economic crisis included liberalization of oil palm plantation. This means that Indonesia will have to re-open for new foreign investment in the oil palm sector. The IMF/World Bank's crisis program for Indonesia comprises lending of US$ 4.5 billion, divided into US$ 2 billion for fast disbursing support and US$ 2.5 billion for regular investment lending support, among which an Agricultural Sectoral Adjustment Loan of US $ 400,000 that will be disbursed in November 1998. It is important to note that this programme for liberalizing oil palm plantation is not based on any social or environmental studies carried out by the World Bank. This loan therefore increases new investments in the oil palm sector, ignoring the social and environmental problems that people will have to face. To campaign against it will therefore be an important part of Sawit Watch activities to stop new investment in oil palm plantation. 3. Raise public awareness at the local, national and international levels on the social and environmental impacts of oil palm plantations by implementing activities such as: - Policy study on oil palm plantation in Indonesia. The aim of the policy study is to draw a picture of the whole "sawit" complex for monitoring, campaigning and advocacy purposes, and also to predict its trends in the future. The policy study includes a number of aspects such as the ecology (analysis of biodiversity loss, soil erosion, pollution, etc.); social and economic aspects (analysis of impacts of oil palm plantation to the social and economic condition of people at the local, regional and national levels); legal and policy aspects (analysis of regulations on oil palm plantations, trend of policy adopted by government in relation with the intervention of institutions such as the IMF/World Bank and other multilateral banks); political aspect (analysis of main actors --e.g. government and private sector, multilateral banks-- and respective interests); supply-demand analysis in relation with consumer patterns and foreign trade. - Compiling investigated data/facts from local level. Many NGOs have conducted investigations in oil palm plantation areas that affected indigenous and local peoples' life. For the purpose of raising public awareness, all data and facts will be compiled as evidence of the negative impacts of oil palm plantation, in different formats such as slide packages (in Indonesian and English) and video films. - Providing data and facts (newsletters, fact sheets, slides, video films and online information in Indonesian and English) on social, economic and environmental impacts of oil palm plantations. - September 24 is Agrarian Day in Indonesia. On September 24, 1998 rallies in all regions in Indonesia will be organized simultaneously by members and supporters of Sawit Watch, together with indigenous and local people affected by oil palm plantations. This will be part of the activities to put political pressure on the provincial and national governments. -. A national seminar on oil palm plantation will be held in October 1998, with presentations of the policy study, the compiled investigated data/facts from local and regional levels, testimonies of indigenous and local people. A press conference will be also held during the seminar. The seminar will not only be aimed at raising people's awareness on the impacts of oil palm plantations, but also at putting pressure on the IMF/World Bank, which will disburse the agricultural sector adjustment loan in November 1998, as well as on the Indonesian government for stopping new investments in this sector. To date, the following organizations are participating in Sawit Watch: Bentayan, Palu, Central Sulawesi; Bioforum, Bogor; Community Based Forest Management (East Kalimantan), Samarinda; Community Based Forest Management (West Kalimantan), Pontianak; Consortium for Supporting Community Based Forest Management (KPSHK), Bogor; ELSAM, Jakarta; Institute for Dayakology Research and Development (IDRD), Pontianak-West Kalimantan; International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID), Jakarta; Lembaga Alam Tropika Indonesia, (LATIN) Bogor; Lembaga Bela Banua Talino (LBBT), Pontianak-West Kalimantan; LRA, Padang-West Sumatra; Plasma, Samarinda-East Kalimantan; RMI-Institute for Forest and Environment, Bogor; WALHI Aceh, Aceh; WALHI, Jakarta; Warung Informasi (WARSI), Jambi; WATALA, Lampung; Yayasan Alam Hijau Indonesia (YAHI), Bogor; Yayasan Evergreen Indonesia, Palu-Central Sulawesi; Yayasan Lingkungan Hidup Irian Jaya (YALI), Jayapura-Irian Jaya; Yayasan Padi Indonesia, Samarinda-East Kalimantan; Yayasan Telapak Indonesia, Bogor Source: Titi Soentoro, Coordination Office of Sawit Watch. Email: euron@indo.net.id
The struggle against Indorayon in Indonesia On July 20 over 1,000 security forces arrived to break through a blockade set up by villagers and students at Indorayon's paper and rayon pulp factory (PT IIU) in Porsea, near Lake Toba in North Sumatra. Demonstrations have hampered production since mid-June. Hundreds of local people supported by university students and members of environmental groups had blocked roads leading to PT IIU's mill, forcing the factory to stop production since its supplies of timber and fuel have been cut off. After the violent confrontation at least 13 local people are reported seriously injured and some are missing. That of Indorayon is a long history of actions undertaken by local people and environmental groups in defence of the environment. It became a landmark case after the environmental NGO WALHI brought a court case against the company and the government which sanctioned its construction in 1989 for the high pollution it was provoking. Powerful interest soon moved in, but the villagers continued their struggle against the company. Some 300,000 people are thought to have been affected by the mill and the plantations that feed it. By 1997 the company had established approximately 41,000 hectares of eucalyptus and acacia plantations . The Finnish company Jaakko Poyry was responsible for the feasibility study for the PT IIU plant and acted as consultant for the feeder plantations. Last February people from four villages affected by pollution caused by the plant formed a campaign group against PT IIU with others from the island of Samosir in Lake Toba. This is one of the areas where forests are being felled, since natural wood is the second supply of raw material for the pulp plant. The company has cleared 150,000 hectares of rainforest. The group, called KAPAL, refused to be placated by company officials or intimidated by local officials and issued an ultimatum to PT IIU on Environment Day (June 5th) to stop logging on Samosir. Huge popular demonstrations took place in June in front of the Governor of North Sumatra. The Environment Minister himself, Panangian Siregar added to the debate by stating that the Indorayon plant should be closed due to public complaints over many years, which surprised the Indonesian public opinion. Nevertheless the plant did not close. Indorayon’s response was limited only to temporarily suspending logging on Samosir island. In view of the company's unwillingness to respond to local communities' grievances regarding its operations, people reacted blocking the street in Porsea and preventing supplies of raw materials from reaching the Indorayon factory. Resisting local communities are facing harsh problems in relation to this issue. There is some tension between local activists and larger city-based NGOs. While local people feel having suffered all the costs, without enjoying any of the benefits in terms of employment and development the company promised that the factory would bring, city-based NGOs consider closure of the mill is an unrealistic demand and that the community would gain more from campaigns to make the company take responsibility for its negative impacts. A second point is that the strategy PT IIU has adopted since 1996 to neutralize opposition is to set up new community organisations through which to channel contributions and organise social events instead of recognising traditional community leaders. Source: Based on an extended version of an article in the Down to Earth newsletter No. 38 (now at the printers).
Vietnam: good old incentives for plantations It seems amazing that tree plantations can be promoted all over the world as a profitable activity, while at the same time they need to receive a number of incentives to make it really profitable. Recent reports from Vietnam shows that this country is following the lead from what other countries have either done in the past (e.g. Brazil) or are doing at present (e.g. Chile, Mexico, Uruguay): to promote via subsidies an activity which in this way will indeed become very profitable ... for the powerful pulp and paper industry and other connected and equally powerful corporations. The subsidies will be paid by the people and so will the impacts of the plantations and the attached future pulp mills. As usual in these cases, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) appears in the forefront, with its representative Christy Lawrence declaring that "the state must construct a sound legal basis in order to guarantee the legitimate interests of forestry investors." And what about --might we ask-- the "legitimate interests" of the peoples whose land will be taken over and whose environment will receive the impacts? For the government's plan to establish five million hectares of new plantations by the year 2010 to be successful, a number of incentives are being offered to the plantations industry: - land leases for longer periods than for other activities - exemptions from land rent for the first five years - a 50% reduction of land rent for the following five years. However, these incentives seem to be yet insufficient for plantation and industrial companies, who are putting pressure on the government to obtain further subsidies such as: - revenue tax breaks of at least 50% during the first five years - exemptions from import taxes on equipment, machinery and vehicles for plantation and processing activities - low interest rate loans - long term loans Neither the government not the industry are inventing anything. The same pattern repeats itself all over the South and the real reason is not to help "development" of "developing" countries but to serve --as usual-- the interests of the powerful to make them yet more powerful. Source: WRM analysis based on information from Minh Anh's article "Incentives sow seeds for forestry investment boom", Vietnam Investment Review, 22-28 June 1998.
NORTH AMERICA The "Mexican version" of pulpwood plantations The increased activities of the "maquiladora" industry (installed within Mexico and based on imported inputs and external export markets), have resulted in an enormous deficit in packaging papers --which are currently being imported from the US and Canada-- used in the necessary packaging of the industrial goods for the supply of external markets. Responding to pressures from the country's industrial sector, the Mexican government is now paving the way for the promotion of large scale pulpwood plantations to provide industry with raw material to produce cheap pulp and paper to fill in that gap. The adopted strategy has three components: 1) to introduce changes to the legal framework; 2) to profit from the "comparative advantages" of Mexico for producing cheap pulpwood; 3) to promote plantations through direct and indirect subsidies. The first component was already implemented in April 1997, with the passing of the Forestry Law, which was approved after strong lobbying from high ranking federal officials, parliamentarians linked to the national paper industry and the active participation of International Paper's CEO. This new law provides plantations with a clear legal framework, including the right of association with the peasants who own the land. As a result of pressures from peasant, environmental and civil organizations --and to a lesser extent from political parties-- plantations are not allowed to be established in forested areas and some conditions are established for large-scale plantations, including management plans and impact assessments. The second component has also been addressed by the federal government, though the Environment Agency (SEMARNAP), which has incorporated the proposals of the national and transnational companies as if being its own. Its implementation has consisted of a discourse to convince the public about the alleged advantages for the country of tree plantations subsidised by public resources, cheap labour with no rights, and with the lack of requirements concerning social and environmental impacts. Not surprisingly, one of the most active high-ranking officials promoting this strategy is a former employee of one of the large paper transnationals. As much of this propaganda has not convinced the majority of the Mexican people --particularly the peasants-- the plantation proponents have established new alliances and created a "National Committee from Tree to Book". The third component is half way through. The Environment Agency has created a "Support Programme for the Development of Commercial Forestry Plantations". Under this programme, plantations will receive subsidies covering 65% of the plantation and management costs for up to seven years, and will also be exempted from taxes. However, there are still some problem areas. The first is that the distribution of resources wasn't as easy as imagined and some companies were left out. Another issue, linked to the drop in oil prices and oil revenues, is that the tax holiday will still need some time to be implemented, as well as some additional subsidies which were expected to be in place. Additionally, a new and unexpected problem has arisen: now other forest-based enterprises and peasant organizations are demanding subsidies to assist them in taking care of the forest, so as to be kept in line with state support to the plantation sector. In sum, the Mexican version of plantations holds nothing new. Its aim is to integrate the transnational productive process, to subordinate the environmental policy to the needs of the transnational demand of the export-oriented industrial capital and to ignore the rights of indigenous peoples and peasants and their environmental culture. The new logic has imposed itself as a result of the official abandonment of other people-based alternatives. However, the above is only part of reality. Peasant and indigenous peoples' reactions are surfacing, such as in the case of the recent massive action of peasants from the state of Guerrero against the US wood and paper company Boise Cascade or the complaints of Tabasco peasants against the unfair contracts of the plantation companies. These are also part of reality. Source: Alejandro Villamar.- Datos de la "version mexicana" de la estrategia global de la industria maderera-papelera internacional bajo el TLCAN, April 1998.
SOUTH AMERICA Aracruz: some polite suggestions from a forester We received the following message from Brazilian forester Jackson Roberto Eleoterio (from the University of Sao Paulo), which we can't but share with our readers: Why doesn't your "organization" mind your own business instead of mixing yourselves with the confusion created by indian delinquents incited by a bunch of unemployed leftists, who only wish to embarrass a productive enterprise such as ARACRUZ, which is thereby forced to make concessions to avoid an international scandal. The situation is that the indians destroy the fertility of their land, which has already been demarcated, and want new lands, preferably with all the infrastructure in place. Original version in Portuguese Por que a "organizacao" de voces nao cuida de seus proprios problemas e vem se meter nas confusoes criadas por indios deliquentes incitados por um bando de desocupados da esquerda, que soh querem atrapalhar uma empresa produtiva como a ARACRUZ e que assim eh obrigada a ceder, senao formaria-se um escandalo internacional. A situacao eh que os indios destroem a fertilidade de sua terra, jah demercada e querem novas terras, de preferencia com toda a infra-estrutura.
Brazil: NGOs oppose WWF-World Bank's 10% Campaign We, the undersigned Non-Governmental Organizations, wish to express our concern with both the content and the potential consequences of the campaign lead by the WWF International, and supported by both the World Bank and the Brazilian Government, to protect some ten percent of the Amazon region through the establishment of environmental conservation areas of indirect use. We do not oppose the creation of new conservation areas of indirect use. On the contrary, we consider the system of protected areas currently in existence as insufficient to protect the Brazilian ecosystem, both in terms of overall size, and in the variety of environmental systems being protected, with respect to the Amazon as well as to other regions. We do support the creation of new reserves in the entire country, specifically in those areas that have been indicated as priorities for the conservation of biodiversity. But these new reserves should encompass a broad mosaic of protected areas, including extractive reserves which take into account the rights of traditional populations. In addition, we consider that the quantitative goal of this campaign--ten percent before the year 2000--as randomly chosen, inadequate, and ignorant to the reality of Brazil. For the effective protection of the Amazon--85 percent of which survives today--ten percent is an unacceptable goal. On the other hand, ten percent is most probably excessive for the exclusive creation of areas of indirect use, when there are as yet no studies or dependable data to answer the question of the availability of such a large amount of land without the presence of indigenous populations or extractivists. We also do not understand the selection of the year 2000 as a deadline, considering that currently less than four percent of the Amazon is reserved for conservation areas of indirect use, and a major part of that has only been formed on paper. In fact, the presence of traditional populations can be found in most of these areas, including 10 parks and reserves, covering more than three million hectares, which have been superimposed on 12 pre-existing indigenous territories. The plan to create, in two years, twice as many reserves as have been created in all the years to date, means a great risk of creating more paper parks, existing in name only. And without studies to indicate priority areas, or areas which would most benefit from this type of protection, there are the added risks of incorporating lands occupied by traditional populations, and thus intensifying the conflicts that already exist among these populations and IBAMA (Brazilian Environmental Institute). Moreover, we understand that the protection of the Amazon depends upon defined and articulated government policies, in actuality non-existent, which would allow for more than just the creation of areas of indirect use, and encourage the fundamental role that the traditional populations in reality exercise in this protection. The Brazilian government has not managed to finance the protected areas which already exist, and it is of common knowledge that, were it not for the resistance of these populations to the predatory behaviour of large estate owners, lumber companies, prospectors, and political forces (with some honourable exceptions), the Amazon today would be in an even worse condition. Meanwhile, these populations today live in miserable conditions, without access to consistent government support to develop their traditional economic activities, or even to guarantee minimum prices for their products, the making of which essentially depends on the continued existence of the forest. We would also like to express our surprise with the fact that this campaign does not taken into consideration other regions, some of which are even more fragile, and have been more devastated, than the Amazon forest. For example, the Mata Atlantica, which is of enormous importance in terms of biodiversity, has been reduced to less than seven percent of its original size, while the regions of Caatinga and Cerrado are being converted with increasing rapidity into soybean plantations and cattle ranges. Moreover, we are surprised at the failure of this campaign to consider efforts already underway, such as the organization of the Amazon Workshop, as a part of Probio [The Protection Fund for Biodiversity], lead by a consortium of Brazilian NGOs. The Workshop has been contracted for one year by the Brazilian government with the purpose, by means of a participatory process, of gathering information and creating alternative suggestions for public conservation policy, including the selection of potential areas for the establishment of new conservation areas of both direct and indirect use. And finally, we, the undersigned organizations, propose that the Brazilian Government, the World Bank, the World Wildlife Fund, and all concerned organizations, combine forces for the successful realization of the Amazon Workshop. It may be hoped that in this way the Workshop will result in the establishment of collective goals, well-defined, comprehensive regional policies, and mobilization campaigns, which effectively balance the conservation of biodiversity in the Amazon with the respect for the rights of the populations that inhabit it, and with the goal of sustainable development in the country as a whole. Brasilia, 1 July 1998.- Brazilian NGO and Social Movements Forum for Development and Environment (Forum Brasileiro de ONGs), Rubber-tappers Nacional Council (CNS), Amazon Working Group (GTA), Brazil Network on Multilateral Financial Institutions (Rede Brasil) Source: Kenneth Walsh, EDF, July 1998
Colombia: monoculture tree plantations promoted in the Andes As in a number of other countries, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) is now promoting the development of pulpwood plantations in Colombia. The bank has recently approved a "non-reimbursable" loan of 2 million dollars --through the Multilateral Investment Fund-- to support the creation of a Training and Technological Development Centre for the Pulp, Paper and Cardboard Industry (CENPAPEL). According to journalistic reports, the objective of this centre is to find alternatives for pulp production in view of the depletion of appropriate and abundant pulpwood resources from native forests. It will be located in Pereira, home of the country's two main paper companies (Papeles Nacionales and Colpapel). The project had been presented four years ago to the IDB by a group of entrepreneurs from Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela and Peru and receives support from Pereira's local government and from the Risaralda government Additionally, the Organization of American States will also provide financial support to the project and had previously paved the way for the participation of foreign companies, establishing contact with 25 such firms, of which six are already participating. Given that the stated aim of this project is to find alternative raw material for the pulp industry, it is no secret to local populations that this will mean the establishment of large-scale eucalyptus and pine plantations in the region. In such situation, local environmentalists are organizing a regional meeting to support local peasants, based on the analysis of the impacts that commercial pine and eucalyptus crops will have on the Andean biodiversity and on soils and water. Source: Margarita Florez, ILSA, Colombia
Ecuador: Greenpeace action to protect remaining mangroves 31 July 1998. Ecuador's Minister of Environment has promised Greenpeace that she will take steps to secure a permanent ban on mangrove clearcuts by the country's shrimp farming industry and investigate evidence of illegal mangrove destruction in a protected national reserve. In a meeting with Greenpeace, Minister Flor Maria Valverde also agreed to confront the Ecuadorian Forestry Institute of Natural Areas and Wildlife (INEFAN) over evidence of 745 cases of mangrove destruction by shrimp farm operators that were lodged with it by local environmental organization Fundecol since 1989. Only four cases were investigated. However, Greenpeace is calling on the incoming government of Ecuador to honour the agreements made prior to its recent coming into office by Minister Valverde. "The international community is now waiting to see how the present and future governments of Ecuador will stop the many shrimp farming operators from destroying what's left of Ecuador's mangrove forests," said Greenpeace spokesperson Gina Sanchez. Greenpeace and it's ship Rainbow Warrior were invited to Ecuador by Fundecol to highlight the widespread and illegal destruction of mangrove forests by the shrimp aquaculture industry. The destruction of mangrove forests by shrimp farming interests has been illegal in Ecuador since 1994 under Decree #1907.94.b. The meeting with the minister followed an earlier protest by Greenpeace activists and Fundecol at an illegal shrimp farm recently built in one of the last remaining mangrove forests in the Muisne region near Esmereldas. In this area, 20,800 hectares of mangrove forests have been reduced to 650 hectares after clearcutting by the shrimp aquaculture industry in the last 10 years. During the protest, the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior was ordered to remain in port. Ecuadorian authorities released the Rainbow Warrior after the Judge who ruled against Greenpeace was dismissed by the President of the Supreme Court. Similarly, the court order issuing arrest warrants for Fundecol directors and Rainbow Warrior crew members is now invalid. Source: Greenpeace's web page ( www.greenpeace.org )
Venezuela: highway blockade against electric transmission line Indigenous peoples of the Imataca and Gran Sabana regions began a blockade of the only highway between Venezuela and Brazil, to protest against a high voltage electrical transmission line being built through the Imataca Forest Reserve. The indigenous peoples are demanding that the Venezuelan government legally recognize and respect the boundaries of their ancestral lands. Their action is taking place in the context of a number of demonstrations all over the country related to the 500-year anniversary of the arrival of Columbus to Venezuela. The government’s policy in relation to Imataca had already been resisted by indigenous and environmental organizations of Venezuela (see WRM Bulletin nr. 12). At a press conference held in August 7, 16 indigenous leaders coming from the Sierra Imataca, the Gran Sabana and the Caroni and Paragua watersheds declared that they had tried by all means and unsucessfully to have their territories recognized by the consecutive Venezuelan governments. They consider that the building of the electrical transmission line is in violation of their rights, since they were not consulted or even informed. They said that they had decided the closure of the highway as a response to the government's inaction to their demands and that this was their opportunity to inform the community about the issue. Work on the transmission line began in October, and local populations had not been informed about it. No social evaluation had been carried out and the existing environmental assessment is not adequate and its findings don't provide real solutions to the problem. EDELCA is the firm in charge of the work, while the construction contract is held by the transnational corporation Asea Brown Boweri, which subcontracted the Venezuelan company Vincler for the construction of the sub-station. Wood extraction is in charge of the companies COVEMAT and SVECA The government agency responsible for the permits is the Ministry of the Environment, but the Minister has never provided the communities with information about the project. The main promoter of the project is the Minister of Frontiers, Pompeyo Marquez, who has repeatedly told the press that the project will be implemented, regardless of the oposition it might receive. The project will not benefit any of the communities through which it will pass, with the exception of Santa Elena de Uarien and the mining companies operating in the Imataca Forest Reserve. Apparently there are some hidden negotiations linked to the power line, particularly in relation with mining and logging companies, but EDELCA has not been willing to provide any information and only declares that the aim is to benefit the village of Santa Elena and to sell electricity to Brazil. Deforestation related to the project is high. Contrary to what the public has been informed, the power line is not being built along the existing main highway of the Conaima National Park. Openings are being cut in the forest of some 30-40 metres of width and 800 metres long. This work has included the destruction of communities' crops, while also water, soil and ecosystems have been affected. Places where indigenous communities used to take water from have been closed with logs and heaps of soil. A number of constitutional, legal and international agreements favourable to indigenous peoples rights have been violated to implement this project. This leads to the conclusion expressed in the press conference by the indigenous peoples representatives: "Development is for others and makes us more dependent. There is no real development plan, neither for Venezuela nor for the frontier and whoever says the contrary is lying." In consequence, they have decided "to maintain indefinitively the peaceful occupation of the national and international highway Venezuela-Brazil until our demands are satisfied." Source: Leobardo Acurero, cineco@sa.omnes.net
|
 |
|||
|
|||
|
Go to Home Page
World Rainforest Movement
Maldonado 1858 - 11200 Montevideo - Uruguay
tel: 598 2 413 2989 / fax: 598 2 410 0985
wrm@wrm.org.uy
