|
|
WRM Bulletin
|
|
OUR VIEWPOINT Latin America's forests: the time is ripe for change The Climate Change Convention meeting held in Argentina is a good opportunity to highlight the issue of forests and tree plantations in Latin America. We have therefore focused this issue of the Bulletin on a number of representative examples of the problems and struggles which are currently occuring in the region. Government double-speak is exemplified -though by no means monopolized- by Brazil. While championing forest protection in global fora, its policies and actions continue resulting in further forest loss. Government-sponsored migration to the forest, conversion of forest lands to agriculture and cattle raising, forest fires, dam building and illegal logging continue unabated, while its global international discourse clearly pertains to the area of virtual reality, with little in common with what is actually happening at the ground level. Large-scale tree plantations -one of the cherished solution of global technocrats to climate change- are increasingly being opposed by local people affected by their social and environmental impacts, as well as by most environmental NGOs. Struggles against them are mushrooming from Mexico to Argentina, but governments seem to be deaf and blind to peoples' opposition to such forestry model. We are improving the environment! they say. We are planting forests and countering the greenhouse effect! they add. Impacts on people, on water, on soils, on biodiversity are quickly dismissed as scientifically unproven facts. Supported by multilateral development institutions, bilateral aid agencies, northern consultancies and machinery providers, Latin American governments increasingly subsidize transnational wood-based companies with both Northern and Southern taxpayer money to increase the area of fast-growing tree monocultures. In most cases, such policy results in the substitution of forest ecosystems by plantations (therefore becoming a direct cause of deforestation), while in some few countries (particularly those located in temperate areas such as Uruguay and certain regions of Argentina), plantations substitute grassland, thereby implying the total destruction of the native prairie ecosystem. Government-sponsored "development" projects continue resulting in further deforestation and forest degradation and in most cases the only visible change has been the inclusion of the word "sustainable" to the same type of projects which have proven to be detrimental to forests in the past.. Guyana's and Suriname's forests, for instance -some of the more well preserved forests in the region- are being destroyed by foreign mining and logging companies through concessions awarded by government, without the approval and with the opposition of indigenous peoples and other local communities who struggle to preserve the forest. Mangroves throughout the region continue to be destroyed -with government support- by shrimp farming, with the aim of increasing exports to obtain foreign currency to pay back loans from international credit institutions. Local peoples, whose livelihoods depend to a large extent on products obtained from the mangroves, are deprived access to them and only receive back a completely degraded ecosystem once the shrimp farms are abandoned. Oil and and increasingly gas exploitation are being promoted throughout the region, both by governments and multilateral institutions, with the resulting destruction of forests, (including water and air pollution and biodiversity loss) and peoples' livelihoods. Local communities are opposing such activity and a number of struggles are under way to halt it. Among them, we wish to highlight the successful struggle of the Cofan indigenous peoples in Ecuador (see article in this issue), who have recently closed down an oil well in their territory. Deforestation is further increasing the consequences of natural disasters. The tragedy which recently happened in Honduras and Nicaragua during the occurrence of hurricane Mitch could have been much lesser if forests areas had not been cleared. Mudslides and deadly floods were the result of years of deforestation. Clearance of forest land in the region is always a direct or indirect result of government policies and not -as they try to portray- the result of ignorance and poverty. Unfair land-tenure policies, the promotion of logging and of the substitution of forests by other "more productive", export-oriented activities, as well as many other policies leading to deforestation, are all the result of government-led "development". Road-building, now acklowledged as one of the major underlying causes of deforestation, continues being promoted both by governments and multilateral agencies. In Ecuador, a large tract of primary forest belonging to the Chachi indigenous peoples will be soon affected by a new road linking the area to southern Colombia and to other Ecuadorian provinces. Even in cases where governments seem to have finally decided to protect the forest by creating reserves, they break their own rules whenever their economic policy decides that the economy comes before conservation. Such a case is highlighted by the struggle of local communities in Venezuela, fighting to protect the Imataca forest reserve, which the government is destroying to export electricity to Brazil and to produce cheap energy for mining companies which will further destroy the forest. Indigenous peoples are struggling throughout the region to achieve the official recognition of their territories, which constitutes a basic step to ensure forest conservation. Such struggle has achieved some important successes in specific cases, but almost always against a background of lack of political will from the government and the frequently violent opposition of local or transnational economic interests. In general terms, the protection of local communities' human rights and the conservation of forests and other ecosystems are dangerous activities in the region. The long list of people murdered increases every year and we sadly inform in this bulletin about the most recent deaths in Colombia. Within such context, there are however positive signs. Both at country and international level, more and more people are becoming aware about the vital need to protect the forests and are taking action to support the rights of forest peoples and forest-dependent peoples as a means to ensure such aim. At the local level, more communities are standing up to defend their rights and their forests. Even though governments' discourse is clearly divorced from their actions, the adoption of such a discourse is a clear sign that the time is ripe for change.
LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS LATIN AMERICA Argentina: investors’ paradise for forestry projects After the attempt of the Argentinian authorities during the recent COP4 on Climate Change in Buenos Aires to gain the favour of Annex I countries putting forward the polemic issue of voluntary reductions of greenhouse gases by developing countries, the Argentinian government continues its efforts to pave the way for the entry of the country into the globalized economy. Last September the Lower House passed a forestry promotion bill that offers tax breaks and subsidies for foreign investors interested in establishing tree plantations in that country. The government hopes that an average of 200,000 hectares a year will be planted between the year 2000 and 2009. Tree plantations averaged 23,000 hectares during the year 1992 but the annual plantation rate reached 126,000 hectares in 1998 as a result of promotional policies by some provincial governments. Spokespersons of the Secretary of Agriculture, stated that the guarantees offered to private investors in the forestry sector can be considered a model for the whole of Latin America, and expressed that as a result of this law a large influx of foreign investment is expected. To their eyes, Argentina is an investors’ paradise for forestry projects, since growth rates in several species –as yellow pines and eucalyptus- is very high and land prices are even cheaper than in Brazil. However, it is not hard to realize that there is actually nothing new in the Argentinian Forestry Law. It is the same scheme repeated in the neighbour countries Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay: neoliberal oriented economies, that deny resources for social security and education or to promote other productive sectors, but devote large sums of money not only for directly supporting private investors in the forestry sector, but also for creating the required infraestructure such as roads, ports, etc. Obviously a very good deal for investors. A number of foreign companies have quickly perceived this. The Chilean firms Arauco and Compania Manufacturera de Papeles y Cartones (CMPP) are keen to occupy vast grassland areas with tree monocultures. While giant Arauco already owns the second largest plantation in the country, CMPP is expanding its plantations to feed a large pulp mill to be installed in in the near future. Other newcomers include New Zealand’s Fletcher Challenge, US’ Inland Container and Germany’s Danzer. In a workshop held in Rosario this November, organized by the forestry industry, Mr Erik Kivimaki, Ambassador of Finland to Argentina, promoted the import of Finnish machinery and know-how for promoting the development of the forestry sector in Argentina. Finland is a strong stakeholder in the sector worldwide and its forestry model for export has been severely criticised by environmental organizations in the host countries and in Finland itself. Of course the Anglo-Dutch oil company Shell –that also owns big eucalyputs plantations in Uruguay, Chile, Brazil and Paraguay- could not be absent in this process. Shell’s move looks still more worrying for the environment, since the company aims to obtain environmental credits on greenhouse gas emissions -under the Clean Development Mechanisms established by the Kyoto Protocol- for the 24,200 hectares of plantations it has installed in Buenos Aires Province. Another plantation project with ponderosa and oregon pine in Chubut Province, in the Patagonia region, is also seeking to obtain carbon credits. Such project, in charge of CIEFAP and supported by the German Agency GTZ, already occupies 55,000 hectares and 10,000 additional hectares are to be planted by the end of this year. According to its promoters, exotic trees would act as pioneer species in this southern savanna ecosystem, to be later replaced by native species, but such reasoning does not seem to make much sense. Having faced severe criticism over the development of monoculture tree plantations in tropical areas --that imply the destruction of natural forests-- now foresters and governmental agencies are seeing with good eyes projects related to LUCF (Land use Change and Forestry) in temperate regions, under the Clean Development Mechanisms. They are claiming that tree plantations in grasslands would contribute to recover degraded soils, as well as to counteract the greenhouse effect, which are seemingly good arguments to obtain public support. However a capital issue is being put to side: grasslands are not only the natural and physical basis for production in those regions, but also the major source of biodiversity in their ecosystems. Large scale plantations are definitively not a positive factor to this regard. Therefore promotion of large-scale tree monocrops in Argentina must be seen as a different type of environmental destruction under the guise of a "green" activity. Sources: Financial Times, 24/9/98; La Capital, 5/11/98; Buenos Ayres Issue # 6 9/11/98.
The two faces of the Brazilian policy on forests At the COP4 of the Climate Change Convention held in Buenos Aires, Brazil, together with China and India, led the position of developing countries demanding the acknowledgement of historical responsibilities by countries in relation to climate change. The Brazilian delegation also underscored the need for the protection of the Amazon forest. However, domestic forest policy does not seem to go in the same direction. During a recent workshop on the environmental impact of large-scale development projects in the Amazon and Mato Grosso regions, organized by CIMI (Conselho Indigenista Misionario), information was revealed that the Ministry of Mining and Energy will build 400 new hydroelectric dams by the year 2015. Many of them will flood large areas of forest lands belonging to indigenous communities. Additionally, the degradation and destruction of vast areas of the Amazon forest by fires has continued throughout 1998. Both degradation and elimination of forests will contribute to accelerate global warming. Research carried out by the Instituto de Pesquisa Ambiental da Amazonia –an NGO based in Belem, in northern Brazil- and the Woods Hole Research Center, based in Massachusetts, had predicted that approximately 400,000 square kilometres of the Brazilian Amazon would become vulnerable to fire during the 1998 dry season. The unusually low amounts of rainfall in 1998 have increased the area of fire-vulnerable forest to more than one million square kilometres, or one third of the Amazonian forest. However, the degradation of forests burnt and left standing is not included in the government's monitoring program, that only considers total burning and clearcutting as deforestation and therefore official figures hide significant amounts of carbon released through partial burning of forests. In relation to climate change, these results are important for the estimation of carbon emissions from Amazonian forests associated with land use practices: the partial burning of standing forest can release 10 to 80% of forest biomass to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Such large amounts of carbon dioxide are not included in current estimates of carbon emissions from Amazonia. On the other hand, according to a computer model programme run by Centre Hadley for Climate Change and presented at the COP4, if the destruction of the Amazon forest continues at the present rate, vast areas of tropical forests are menaced of becoming deserts by the year 2050. This would mean -among many other things- the loss of the largest carbon reservoir in the world. Forest fires are enhanced by the selective removal of trees, which allows the sun's rays to reach the forest soil and to create a dry and prone to fire environment. The Brazilian Institute for the Environment (IBAMA) recently revealed that logging companies have illegally extracted US$ 70 million worth of mahogany from the Kaiapo indigenous peoples' territory in southern Para province and it has also accused 16 local sawmills of theft and falsification of documentation. IBAMA has been carrying out a number of actions to curb illegal logging in the Amazon, which will probably be discontinued as a result of a 47.4% cut in the budget of the Ministry of the Environment. The Amazonian Working Group (Grupo de Trabalho Amazonico), composed by 355 Brazilian NGOs, has recently denounced a 90% reduction in the resources devoted to projects to be implemented in the Amazon and Mata Atlantica regions, and sent messages to the Parliament trying to stop the budget reductions proposed by the Federal Government. The Brazilian government's international discourse on the importance of the Amazon forest in relation with climate change therefore seems to have little in common with what is actually happening in the real forest. Sources: "Estudo preve desertificacao na Amazonia", Estado de Sao Paulo, 4/11/98; "Aquecimento global debe criar desertos na Amazonia", Jornal da Tarde, 4/11/98; Woods Hole Research Center , "Flames in the Amazon forest: carbon emissions go up", E. Melloni & A. Galvao, "Ibama prepara reduçcao dos custos fixos", Estado de Sao Paulo, 5/11/98; Information Bulletin for the Buenos Aires Conference, 11/11/98; CIMI, 16/11/98 and 23/11/98; Resenha Ambiental Ecopress, 24/11/98.
Venezuela: forests menaced...plantations promoted In WRM Bulletin nr 14 (August 1998) we informed about the blockade of the highway Venezuela-Brazil by a group of indigenous peoples of the Imataca and Gran Sabana regions to stop a high voltage electrical transmission line (Macagua II-Santa Elena de Uairen), that is being built through the Imataca Forest Reserve. This is a particularly rich in biodiversity and vulnerable area, menaced by mining projects promoted by the controversial Decree 1850, which was highly resisted by indigenous communities, environmental NGOs and academics (see WRM Bulletin nr 12). In spite of their efforts to have their rights over their ancestral territories recognized by the subsequent governments, the indigenous communities of this country have always been ignored and deceived and their wish that Venezuelan society becomes a multicultural and multiethnic one, is still far from being achieved. According to local organizations, Venezuelan legislation is even less progressive than that of other Latin American countries to this regard. A group of representatives of the indigenous comunities of Imataca, Gran Sabana and Paragua sent a letter dated October 3rd to the Brazilian Ambassador in Caracas, denouncing to the Brazilian people and authorities the terms of the Guzmania Protocol –signed by Brazil and Venezuela in 1994- that promotes mining, tourism and forestry in Imataca and Gran Sabana, ignoring the ancestral rights of indigenous peoples over these lands and inducing negative environmental consequences. They expressed that the Guzmania Protocol violates Article 77 of the Venezuelan Constitution, where an exception regime for indigenous peoples is recognized to guarantee their territorial rights. Continuing their actions, on October 22nd a group of indigenous leaders, representatives of several indigenous peoples of Imataca and Gran Sabana regions, addressed the Supreme Court of Justice, demanding the total suspension of the construction of the transmission line, since it will negatively affect the environment, their livelihoods and culture. They claim that while the Universal Declaration of Human Rights –whose 50th anniversary is celebrated in 1998- establishes that every people has the right to create and enjoy its own culture, and that the Venezuelan Constitution guarantees an exception regime for indigenous peoples territories, they are actually plunged into material and spiritual poverty. Land tenure is at the centre of the problem. Indigenous peoples’ ancestral territorial rights and their communal property regime are not recognized. Meanwhile their territories are sold out to transnational companies, squandering the national heritage. There are many examples of this depredation, besides that of Imataca: the indigenous terrritories of the Amacuro Delta, Monagas and Anzoategui have been occupied by oil companies, and the Bari and Yukpa of Zulia Estate are facing coal exploitation in their traditional lands. Unwilling to protect the forests and the people that make a sustainable use of them, the Venezuelan State is actively promoting tree plantations under the usual scheme. The so-called National Programme for the Development of Forest Resources establishes a zonification for plantations in soils considered marginal for other activities. Putting to side the issue of the adequacy or not of such zonification (zones considered as marginal by the state are usually considered very useful by local people), the fact is that there are cases where the law has been ignored and tree plantations have been established in lands considered apt for agriculture and cattle raising. A paradigmatic example is that of the transnational company Smurfit -established in 27 countries all over four continents- which has occupied fertile peasants’ lands in Portuguesa State with pine, eucalyptus and gmelina monocultures, forcing their displacement. Unfortunately, the Venezuelan case is not an exception in Latin America: repression to those who protect the forests and benefits to those who destroy them. Sources: Alfredo Torres (pers.comm.); AMIGRANSA, 7/11/98; "Contra los pinos, eucaliptos y melinas de Smurfit", Ecologia Politica, 14, 1997
Ecuador: the Cofan's successful action against an oil well While government officials were politely exchanging speeches in Buenos Aires at the 4th Conference of the Parties of the Climate Change Convention, -all of them refering to the need of conserving the world's forests as a way of mitigating the impacts of climate change- a group of indigenous people, in a much less comfortable situation, were doing in Ecuador something far more concrete to this end. Last October a group of Cofan indigenous peoples occupied and closed the Dureno 1 oil well, near Lago Agrio city in the northeastearn region of Ecuador, as an action of protest against the activities of the oil industry in their ancestral territories. The well -located only 20 metres away from the water sources of the Cofan community- had been polluting this precious resource and depleting the flora and fauna of the area. "We have lived in this ancestral territory, as guardians of this forest, for centuries, as its sons and only owners. We have offered land, food, materials, work, for what they call 'development' and during this process we are just getting poorer and poorer and even risking our possibilities of surviving as a people" stated a spokesperson of the Cofan. The occupation, initiated on October 12th (anniversary of the date when the continent's indigenous peoples suffered the Spanish invasion) ended on the 22nd, after having achieved their purposes. Initially, the Ecuadorean government had reacted by sending soldiers to the conflict area, trying to frighten the Cofans, stating that it would not negotiate "under pressure". However, the government finally agreed to carry out a number of important actions such as: 1) The removal of the storage tanks and gas flares and the
closure of the waste pool In sum, the action carried out by the Cofan people has had very positive results and they now have a unique opportunity to reverse the damage inflicted to people and the environment by the oil industry. Source: Oilwatch, Accion Ecologica, Ecuador, November 1998
Indigenous peoples fight for territorial rights in Guyana The opening of Guyana to foreign companies from the mid-1980s has caused destruction in the country’s tropical forests -a rare case of virtually untouched ecosystems until then- and the complete disregard of the Amerindians that have lived in these forests for centuries using their resources in a sustainable way. This process continues to the detriment of Guyana’s forests and indigenous peoples, who are carrying out actions to revert such situation. On November 2 the government of Guyana and Vancouver-based mining company, Vannessa Ventures Ltd., signed an agreement granting Vannessa more than two million hectares of land in which to conduct geophysical and geological surveys for gold and primary diamond sources over the next two years. This concession includes the heavily forested Kanuku mountain range, through to the upper reaches of the Corentyne River on the border with Suriname in the eastern region of Guyana. The area is part of the ancestral territory of the Wai Wai, Wapisiana and Macusi indigenous peoples. They have vigorously objected to any mining or logging company operating on their lands and are demanding that their rights to their ancestral lands be legally recognised and respected. It is also the location of a proposed National Park as part of a National Protected Areas System project to be implemented in the country. Guyanese Prime Minister pointed out that, even if the Geology and Mines Commission has legal authority to permit exploration for or exploitation of any minerals -including those found under Indigenous lands- the government has adopted a policy according to which the permission of the affected communities is to be previously obtained. Such a position may sound positive and progressive concerning the rights of Indigenous peoples, but several aspects are raising concern. Given that this policy is not instituted in law there is no legal support to suppose that it is not going to be ignored by the Geology and Mines Commission as has happened in the past. On the other hand, Amerindian titled lands are only a small part of the lands over which indigenous peoples of Guyana have asserted ownership rights. To date, indigenous villages have received title to just one-quarter of the area recommended by the Lands Commission -established in 1967 in accordance with a legal condition for the independence of the country- and approximately one-seventh of that identified by Amerindians themselves as theirs. The failure of the government to address indigenous land rights is also causing problems in connection with the establishment of a protected areas system. Several communities –as those of the Patamona and the Rupununi- have rejected National Parks on their lands until their land rights have been fully recognised by the national authorities. The full recognition of the Amerindian land rights in Guyana is a necessary measure to stop the detrimental activites of the multinational (mostly Canadian) mining companies and Asian logging companies that operate in the country. The case of Vanessa is just an example of this state of things. Indigenous peoples of Guyana have been very active in this regards. For example, in October 1997, all of the community leaders of the Wai Wai, Wapisiana and Macusi peoples formed the Touchau's Amerindian Council of Region 9 to defend their ancestral territories from miners and loggers. Last month six Akawaio and Pemon Indigenous leaders, from the Upper Mazaruni, filed the first ever land rights law suit in the High Court of Guyana. "Our communities have been requesting title to these lands, which we know to be ours, since the Amerindian Lands Commission visited our communities in 1967. Since then we have attempted to discuss this matter on many occasions without result" states the written statement presented in Court. Time for patience seems to be over. Now it’s time for action. Sources: Guyana Information Update, Forest Peoples Programme, 5/11/98 and 13/11/98.
Nicaragua: hurricane Mitch devastation linked to deforestation High rates of deforestation contributed to the flash floods and mudslides which caused most casualties due to Hurricane Mitch, Central America's deadliest disaster. More than ten thousand perished, and thousands more are still missing in Nicaragua and Honduras. According to Father Miguel d'Escoto, a member of the FSLN National Directorate, "This is the worst natural disaster in our [Nicaragua] history; even more so than the earthquake [in 1972]." In Nicaragua every year, 150,000 hectares [approximately 375,000 acres] of forested land are destroyed by commercial timber cutting, the advancing agricultural frontier, slash and burn farming and forest fires. The country has lost nearly 60% of its forest cover in the last 50 years. According to Jaime Incer, former Nicaraguan Minister of Natural Resources, deforestation has dried up 200 rivers and contributed to the erosion of 3 million tons of topsoil. Without tree roots to hold soil in place, heavy rains on barren hillsides cause the highly unstable soil to slide, taking with it everything and anything in its path. Since the devastation has been linked to widespread deforestation, the Nicaragua Network Environmental Task Force is calling for an end to multinational logging ventures in the Atlantic Region of Nicaragua. The Atlantic Region has the largest intact segment of moist forest remaining in Central America. The region hosts many rare and unknown ecosystems (coastal wetland, mangrove, mid-altitude humid forests and bamboo forests and others), as well as numerous endangered species. "In the wake of this hurricane, with all of the information coming out about the links of deforestation to the wholesale destruction we have seen in Nicaragua and Honduras, anything short of a total ban on commercial logging by multinationals in Nicaragua would be criminal," stated Mary Brook of the Nica Net ETF. In addition, nationwide reforestation projects must be initiated. But above all, unconditional cancellation of the IMF and World Bank debts of the affected countries is imperative to allow them to focus their financial resources on their long-term recovery efforts. Source: ACERCA, Action for Community & Ecology in the Rainforests of Central America. Email: acerca@sover.net, http://www.nativeforest.org/campaigns/acerca/index.html
Colombia: the murder of three environmentalists Gloria Sofia Zapata, Hernando Duque and Eder Alexander Valencia were murdered on October 14, October 20 and November 9. They were members of the environmental organization "Hojas de Hierba" (Herb Leaves) of the municipality of Belen de Umbria in the province of Risaralda. Hector Ivan Escobar and John Jairo Lopez, of the same organization, have had to leave the country. According to information from the region, the assasination seems to be linked to a local struggle to protect the Umbria valley as an archeological and touristic site against a landfill project in the area. The three activists had also organized events with the community and municipal authorities to halt the spread of large-scale eucalyptus and pine monocultures in the region. As a result of those activities they had received threats and requested protection from the govenment, which was denied under grounds of lack of resources to protect NGOs. Local NGOs are now demanding the regional Ombudsman to conduct an enquiry into these murders and express their concern over the lack of response from municipal and environmental state bodies. At the same time, they are organizing a meeting with environmental, community, peasant and indigenous peoples' organizations to analize the situation created in the region, which will take place on November 28th. Source: CENSAT-Agua Viva. E-Mail: censat@colnodo.apc.org
AFRICA In defence of Central African forests By means of a letter dated October 22 a group of environmental NGOs addressed Mr Henri Djombo, Minister of Forest Economy of the Republic of Congo, to express their disapproval regarding a number of actions carried out by him, believed to be aimed at undermining the Brazzaville Process. As informed in WRM Bulletin nr 11 the Brazzaville process is trying to build a concertation framework open to all actors participating in the sub-region's forest sector, aiming at the sustainable management of forest ecosystems in Central Africa. 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. "The forests of Central Africa may suffer a similar fate of those in the West African region unless a process promoting transparency, broad consultation and coordination involving all stakeholders, especially those at the community level, can take root" expressed the signatary NGOs, in support of the Brazzaville process.
ASIA Indonesia: APRIL the troublemaker Finnish and Indonesian NGOs have repeatedly denounced that UPM-Kymmene’s partner -the Singapore-based APRIL (Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Ltd.)- is violating human rights and causing severe environmental problems in Indonesia. The company has converted rainforests to exotic monoculture plantations, to feed their pulp mills and NGOs demand that the project is abandoned (see WRM Bulletins nr. 6 and 8). Four representatives of the human rights group of the Finnish Parliament recently visited APRIL's pulp mill in Riau Province to check the situation in situ. Even if all of the parliamentarians were at the same place, not all of them were able to see the same things . . . While the representatives of the Greens and the left wing parties concluded that the logging of thick rainforest looked ruthless, the deputy of the Conservatives considered that population pressure is the cause for forest destruction and that acacia plantations in Indonesia are similar to Finnish fields in their homogeneity. UPM-Kymmene stated that the methods used by APRIL are the best option for supplying the mill. UPM also reminded that last Spring APRIL committed itself to a wide environmental programme. APRIL is still in financial trouble and hasn't been able to find finance for the second paper machine in Riau. Before that machine is ready, its full alliance with UPM will not take place. Even if Finnish export credit has in some way already granted some US$500 million loan for APRIL, the loan has not been awarded yet, probably due to conditions in Indonesian markets. The above is not the only conflict created by APRIL in Indonesia. The holding owns 61.3% of the shares of Inti Indorayon Utama, a pulp mill in North Sumatra Province. Indorayon produces up to 240,000 tons of pulp and 60,000 tons of viscose fiber for the production of paper and rayon by APRIL. The company was hurt by the 1997 economic crisis and decided to close down the mill, which would mean the loss of their jobs for about 7,000 workers, who thereby oppose the closure. At the same time, villagers of Porsea demand that the factory remains closed, since the company’s activities had been causing acid rain, damaging water supplies and fisheries, and plundering natural forests. Residents of Porsea continue to live under military intimidation. Environmental groups and university student organizations support this struggle and state that the eucalyptus trees in Indorayon's reforestation programme are draining water reserves. On the opposite side, APRIL's shareholders in New York have recently addressed president Habibie warning about the "negative effects" of the closure on the confidence of foreign investors in Indonesia. The conflict has even resulted in direct confrontations between workers and villagers. On November 22nd, villagers burned logging trunks and workers’ accomodations in Porsea. The case of APRIL can be considered an example of how workers and villagers are held hostage by a situation created by the economic interest of investors and central government decisions. Given that neither local people nor the environment were taken into account when the mill and the plantations were set up in the area, this has resulted in environmental degradation and social conflict, where workers tring to protect their jobs confront villagers trying to protect their livelihoods. Comfortably seated in Jakharta or New York, APRIL's shareholders use the dire needs of the workers to serve their purposes. Sources: Otto Miettinen, Friends of the Earth/Finland, Forest Group, 8/11/98 (based on Minna Asikainen, "MPs disagree about environmental impacts of April. Finnish MPs visited mill of UPM's partner", Helsingin Sanomat, 5/11/98); Tom Bannikoff, "A company copes in post-Suharto Indonesia", Asiaweek, 8/11/98, Liz Chidley, 23/11/98 (based on SiaR WEBSITE: http://apchr.murdoch.edu.au/minihub/siarlist/maillist.html)
Indonesia: violent confrontations related to Indorayon A policeman was rushed to hospital in Medan with a serious head injury after being beaten up in a confrontation on Monday 23rd November between security forces and local people at Porsea, North Tapanuli, North Sumatra. Another police officer suffered wounds to the back and leg. A police patrol vehicle and a government official's car were destroyed by the crowd and three other cars plus 23 homes and shops were smashed up and burnt. A spokesperson for local NGO KSPPM said four local men had leg injuries from rubber bullets. The violence erupted after another Porsea man was shot on Sunday. Thousands of local people took to the streets and burnt 15 Indorayon logging trucks. A number of houses, shops and other vehicles were also damaged or burnt. The crowd were prevented from approaching the Indorayon paper and rayon pulp factory at the Sosor Ladang site (on the outskirts of Porsea) by security forces that night. But they succeeded the following day when the crowd had swelled to around 5,000 and that is when the four were shot. The crowd dispersed due to the violence of the security forces. This incident is part of a long running dispute between the local community and the Indorayon pulp mill. Local people have protested repeatedly to local and central government since 1989 that the factory should be closed due the adverse effects of the pollution and deforestation it causes. Indorayon workers recently held a five-day counter demonstration in Medan to keep the mill open in order to safeguard their jobs. The government ordered an independent audit to settle the dispute. As part of that process, the factory has been allowed to resume operations after a three-month shut-down and this -and the high level of security forces- is what has angered local people. Former assistant to the Environment Minister and Bandung law professor, Daud Silalahi, accused PT IIU of serious violations of air and water pollution laws since the early 1990s. He said that attempts to prosecute the company by successive environment ministers had failed due to manipulation at local and central government levels. Source: Kompas 24/11/98 (Summary/translation by Down to Earth)
Northern Thailand: a bridging meeting in London In June 1998 we published a special WRM bulletin focused on the environmental and social problems affecting the lives of highland people in Northern Thailand, including a critical response regarding a previous article published in WRM bulletin 11. We are pleased to inform that a number of people, both from within and outside Thailand, got together on October 2nd in London, with the aim of clarifying the differences in analysis and approach of the wide number of actors involved directly or indirectly with this very complex situation. The meeting, designated as "A Consultation on Conservation and Conflict among Tribal Peoples, Lowlanders and the State in Northern Thailand" also discussed a number of possible ways forward. 'The meeting heard the views of NGOs, conservationists, Karen and Hmong leaders and a number of Thai and British academics. The debates highlighted a number of different aspects of the dispute, including the scientific uncertainties regarding the environmental impact of highlander economies and the degree to which perceived reductions in water flow and rising siltation in the lowlands are the result of upland agriculture or other factors such as intensified land use in the lowlands. The highlanders emphasised the way they are modifying their own land use practices to moderate their impact on upland forests. All parties to the meeting agreed that forced relocation of highlanders was unacceptable but there remained disagreement as to whether relocation was necessary and what 'voluntary resetttlement' might mean. Above all the meeting made clear the need for clearer information and improved dialogue between all parties, although the present polarised nature of the dispute is making this increasingly difficult. Notes of the meeting are available upon request from the Forest Peoples Programme ( wrm@gn.apc.org ) or from the International Alliance of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forests ( morbeb@gn.apc.org )
EUROPE A group of 22 organizations sent a letter dated 10 November 1998 to the German Development Minister, Ms. Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, in order to express their concern over the environmental and social impacts of the European Commission's development aid programme and demanding clear actions from the forthcoming German Presidency of the European Union. The group quotes as an example of the mismanagement of the Community's aid programme the case of road-building programmes in Cameroon, that has negatively affected the Dja World Heritage Site, one of Africa's most important rainforest conservation areas. Among other points, the NGOs highlight the need to include high environmental and social standards in the EU development assistance programme, and the full consultation and participation of stakeholders –especially local communities- throughout the whole period of each project. Source: The Rainforest Foundation, 16/11/98.
INTERNATIONAL Climate Change Convention: much ado about nothing Nothing much seems to have happened during the 4th Conference of the Parties held in Buenos (COP4) Aires from 2 to 13 November. From a broad perspective, this can be regarded as very bad news, given that climate change is happening and will increasingly affect the lives of millions of people. From a more concrete perspective, the same news can be seen as positive, given that the majority of governments don't seen to be willing to make the difficult decisions that need to be made: subsitution of fossil fuels by renewable, clean and low impact energy sources and worldwide forest conservation. As the whole discusion on how to address climate change is focused on negotiations to avoid major cuts in fossil fuel use and to avoid real measures to halt deforestation, the seemingly bad news coming from Buenos Aires can be considered -in such a context- as good news. Regarding forests and tree plantations as carbon reservoirs and sinks, decisions on the definitions of deforestation, reforestation and afforestation as per Article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol will be taken by the first COP following release of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of a Special Report on Land-Use Change and Forestry (which will take place at COP6). Additionally, it was agreed that decisions on the inclusion of any additional human-induced land-use and forestry activities eligible for consideration by Parties under the Kyoto Protocol (Article 3.4) will also be decided at the first COP following release of the IPCC-Special Report (additional activities could include forestry, forest conservation, soil conservation, other agricultural activities, etc.). There was pressure from some countries, including Australia and some EU countries to accelerate decisions on definitions under article 3.3 to be made prior to the IPCC Special Report. In the end, these pressures for early decisions were held back, which can be considered a good thing given the important consequences that such definitions may result in. Canada -for instance- has taken the position that clearcutting of forests, including old-growth forests, should not count as a carbon "debit" since they do not consider that as "deforestation", but that replanting clearcuts should count as a carbon "credit" under reforestation. Absurd as this may seem -it would be like a bank account where none of your checks are debited, and all your deposits are credited- Canada's position is indicative of the wide range of problems that will emerge if definitions on deforestation, reforestation and afforestation are adopted without careful analysis of their consequences. The Buenos Aires meeting also witnessed marked differences in NGO opinion regarding sinks. Some US based NGOs (namely the Environmental Defense Fund, The Nature Conservancy and the World Resources Institute) promoted very wide expanded use of sinks. The World Rainforest Movement, Friends of the Earth, JATAN, WWF, Greenpeace and many other NGOs took the opposite view, stating that not only will wide use of sinks undermine achievement of the objectives of the Convention -which is to stabilize greenhouse gases at levels below which irreversible impacts to ecosystems, including forest ecosystems, will occur- but that additionally, activities promoted under it will more likely lead to overall negative impacts on forest biodiversity and local communities. Concerns included perverse incentives to log and clear primary forests, accelerated expansion of fast-growing monoculture tree plantations and impacts resulting from those processes on local communities and indigenous peoples. In sum, neither governments nor NGOs are particularly united at the climate change level and many issues still remain open for discussion. Such situation provides a breathing space for all those concerned with people and the environment, to raise awareness among the public about the role that their governments are playing in these negotiations, so as to influence them in a more positive direction than the one they seem to be heading to. As part of these activities, we include below a contribution received from Rainforest Relief and a summary of the NGO Forest Working Group's press release at COP4.
Contribution to the debate on carbon sinks One point that is not being sufficiently taken into consideration in the debate about plantations as carbon sinks is the production end of the issue. That is, most of these monocultural non-native species plantations are being grown for either of two products: paper or fiberboard. In both cases, the trees will be turned into chips and then made into something else. How much of the actual wood fiber grown on the plantation is sequestered? Very little, especially in the case of paper. Let's see: the trees grow, sucking up a certain amount of carbon as wood fiber mass. Much of the soil around the trees is compacted in the logging process. This does two things: drives out much of the carbon in the organic layer, and makes the soil more prone to erosion, which further frees up the carbon it holds. Much of the carbon, of course, is turned into leaves which eventually fall to the ground as the tree grows. These leaves rot into the soil, becoming part of that organic layer mentioned above. The trees are cut and chipped, eventually being turned into pulp and then into paper or cardboard. These products are then used and most often thrown away. In the case of corrugated cardboard, very few countries have achieved recycling rates over 50%. Most of the corrugated in the world is used once and then landfilled. Even in the US, a country with a relatively high recycling rate (as compared with the rest of the world, not with other industrial countries, that is), only about 14% of white office paper is recycled. Much of the plantations in Brazil and Indonesia, two of the world's leading pulp and paper producers, is going into office paper. So, this paper --where one would argue that most of the carbon taken up by the plantation has been sequestered-- is pretty much landfilled. Here, the bulk of it will, over time, decompose in an anearobic environment -that is, without the presence of oxygen- and be released into the landfill (and eventually the atmosphere) as methane. Methane is 25 times more effective as a global warming gas than is carbon. Therefore, most of the sequestered carbon will be ultimately released as methane or simply re-released as carbon in the process of harvest, chipping, pulping, waste, production into paper, and finally, decomposition. A small portion (that going into fiberboard) will become non-durable wood products which will also soon be landfilled. That is, even fiberboard is disposable over a relatively short period of time (at least in America, where this type of furniture lasts only a few years). And when it is buried in the landfill at the end of its short life, it too, will generate methane. A tiny fraction of the wood fiber produced by the plantation will be sequestered over the long term as durable wood products, far exceeded, however, by the methane generated by the disposal of all the paper and fiberboard thrown out by an ever-expanding overconsumptive global economic machine. The science behind carbon sequestration in plantations is not science at all, but is instead smoke and mirrors used to generate more plantations, benefitting large paper, pulp and wood products companies, at the expense of the Earth and local people. Carbon sink plantation promoters seem to have forgotten that in order to actually sequester the carbon, the trees must either: - be left to grow; or None of this is happening in any substantial way when it comes to fast-growing non-native plantations. Source: Tim Keating, Rainforest Relief
NGO Forest Working Group: Every Tree a Good Tree? Press release. Buenos Aires, 9 November 1998. NGO Forest Working Group expresses strong concern about inclusion of forests in the Clean Development mechanism. The NGO Forest Working Group, an informal coalition of NGOs, which has been following intergovernmental negotiations relating to forests since 1995, has expressed strong concerns about the potential inclusion of forestry and land use change in the Clean Development Mechanism established by the Kyoto Protocol. One of their main concerns is that this inclusion will lead to a strong increase in large-scale monoculture tree plantation development in developing countries: Large-scale plantation development is increasingly becoming one of the most important causes of the destruction of native forests and other natural ecosystems. These plantations tend to have very negative social and environmental consequences for local communities, as they deprive them from their land and livelihood. For the complete version of this press release, please request it from us at : wrm@chasque.apc.org
WRM GENERAL ACTIVITIES News from the International Secretariat Ricardo Carrere participated in the Africa Workshop of the Joint Initiative to Address the Underlying Causes of Deforestation and Forest Degradation held in Accra, Ghana, from 26 to 30 October. The case studies presented at the workshop will be shortly available in our web site, where we have already included some of the studies presented in other regional processes, such as Latin America, North America and Western Europe. He also took part in the meeting of the Global Secretariat of the above initiative with the regional focal points, held in Buenos Aires (6-11 November), parallel to the Climate Change Convention's COP4. The aim of the meeting was to make the final preparations of the Global Workshop which will be held in Costa Rica next January 18-22. The International Coordinator of the WRM also participated as panelist in a conference organized by Sobrevivencia (Paraguay) on November 6 at the Centro Cultural Recoleta, Buenos Aires, on the issue of the impacts of large-scale tree plantations. Alvaro González, member of the International Secretariat of the WRM, attended the XI Global Biodiversity Forum held in Buenos Aires, from 6 to 8 November, organized by IUCN. The aim of the meeting was to strengthen the links between climate change and biodiversity issues. At the "Climate Change, Forests and Biodiversity" workshop, several presentations were made and an interesting discussion took place on CDM and LUCF, including the controversial issues of measurements of carbon storage and plantations as carbon sinks. Ricardo Carrere and Alvaro González were also present during part of COP4. The WRM Statement to COP4 (see WRM Bulletin nr 16) was distributed among observers and participants of the event.
|
 |
|||
|
|||
|
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
