|
|
WRM Bulletin
|
|
OUR VIEWPOINT - Climate Change: The lesson from Lyon Government delegates from all over the world met this month in Lyon, France, in a Preparatory Conference prior to the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Climate Change which will be held next November in the Hague, Netherlands. The only positive thing that can be said about the Lyon meeting is that delegates worked very hard, late into the evenings, and that some delegates -- unfortunately too few -- actually tried to do something about climate change. But the general character of the meeting was one of blackmailing, arm-twisting, marketing, bribing and trading among the various elites present. Most of the time was spent discussing money for programmes which actually have little or no relevance to climate. One of the topics talked about was something called the "Clean Development Mechanism." This is a scheme which could (among other things) allow industrialized countries to "compensate for" their emissions through the use of biospheric "carbon sinks" in the South -- such as tree plantations, forests and changes in land use -- thus enabling them to maintain and even increase the fossil fuel emissions that are at the root of climate change. Little attention was paid by most of the diplomats and technocrats present to the proven negative impacts that forestry projects similar to those contemplated have already had on people and the environment. Fortunately, this false climate "solution" has not yet been approved by the Conference of the Parties. But the preliminary negotiations at Lyon gave little reason for optimism. Some of the delegations present focused on blackmailing ("We won't sign the Kyoto Protocol unless lots of carbon sinks are included"), accompanied by arm-twisting ("You are free not to agree, but . . ."). The US and Japan scored very high here. Others tried to trade their countries' "carbon sink" capacity for money. Some Latin American delegates had a very high profile in this respect. A third group --including many European delegates -- tried to show commitment to Kyoto-agreed emission cuts, but left the door open for forestry projects in the Hague agreement. The small group of countries who strongly oppose the inclusion of carbon sinks in the Kyoto Protocol seemingly could do little more than try to find ways of avoiding the very worst of the possible deals on offer. Sadly enough, those were the meeting's highlights. There was almost no discussion of the real issues: equal rights to the atmosphere, fossil fuel use reductions, especially in the North, alternative energy sources, and energy efficiency and conservation. If governments had been truly willing to address climate change, they would have focused on how to achieve drastic cuts in fossil fuel emissions through the active promotion of clean, renewable and low impact sources of energy. North and South would have begun to share the research and experience that both have regarding low-impact energy use and would have considered mechanisms to ensure the effective exchange of the relevant knowledge, technology, and political experience both from South to North and from North to South. Those should have been the core issues in discussions regarding any "Clean Development Mechanism." But the governments present chose otherwise. One lesson can be drawn from the Lyon meeting: unless people put pressure on their governments, climate negotiators will do nothing to head off the world's looming climate disaster. Peoples' movements must have the courage to disbelieve what most technocrats in governments, research institutions and even NGOs are telling them -- namely, that climate change is an issue for "experts" only. They must understand that this is not a technical but a power issue and that the arena is political, where everyone is entitled to participate. They must keep firmly in mind that the issue is essentially very simple with an equally simple solution that anyone can understand: replace fossil fuels by alternative and environmentally-friendly energy sources. Climate change will not be solved by planting millions of hectares of pines and eucalyptus, which will only add to existing problems. If left alone, official delegates will lead us all to disaster. They must be pushed, both from outside and from inside their grand meeting halls, toward more sober and responsible action. That is the lesson from Lyon.
LOCAL STRUGGLES AND NEWS AFRICA - Gabon: Polemic agreement on the Lope Reserve Last July the government of Gabon, logging companies operating in the country and some environmental groups --among which the World Wildlife Fund-- reached an agreement to keep the Lope Reserve out of the reach of commercial logging. However, the deal includes a redrawing of the boundaries of the reserve substracting 10,352 hectares of land on the southeastern flank --that holds the richest stands of valuable okoume trees-- and adding about 5,200 hectares of a previously not protected area of remote upland primary forests. The agreement has generated opposite reactions. For those in favour, the net result of the agreement will be positive, since the new area incorporated to the reserve is a priceless reservoir of biodiversity. They also argue that thanks to the agreement loggers have committed themselves for the first time not to violate the boundaries of the protected area. According to one of the defenders of the agreement "we've gone from a situation where about two-thirds of the reserve was actually in logging concessions to the point where we've lost some land but the whole reserve is protected from logging forever. "For the logging companies, the now protected highland forest presented significant logistical challenges --requiring expensive road construction and costly harvesting methods-- and in exchange they will now have more access to the valuable okoume stands. However, environmental groups such as the Rainforest Foundation, that have been fighting against logging in the area consider that logging companies --mostly French and Malaysian-- have too much economic power and influence on the government to actually comply with this commitment. They say that the loss of a previously protected area sounds much like a giveaway, while the right thing to do would have been for the government to enforce the existing laws. There is no guarantee that, in the name of "realism", in the future the protected area borders will not be changed again and again. The attitude that the involved companies will take in the future is crucial. It is to be reminded that in 1995 the French timber company Rougier Group violated an agreement for the sustainable development of natural resources at the Ipassa Mingouli region, signed by the company itself, the Gabonese government, IUCN, and financially supported by the European Union (see WRM Bulletin 15). Finally, it needs to be stressed that no mention is made in the agreement regarding the opinion of forest people inhabiting the area. Article based on
information from: The New York Times, "Pact Is Reached to Save a
Rich Tropical Forest" by Andrew Revkin, 1/8/2000, in
Worldwide
- Kenya: Mangroves threatened by Canadian mining company The Kenyan coast is estimated to hold more than 10% of the world's unexplored deposits of titanium, a metal used in the pigment industry, and increasingly in the manufacture of many objects of modern life. A drilling recently performed in the Kwale area delineated a reserve of 150 million tons of sands containing rutile, ilmenite and zircon, the minerals used to make titanium. This is very bad news for local communities living along the mangrove coast nearby Mombasa, such as those of Tsunza village, which are being threatened by a planned massive titanium mining development by a Canadian firm. The possible transformation of thousands of acres of farms and forests on the Kenyan coast into a titanium mine has sparked criticism among local community leaders. Since foreign companies operating in the mining sector in the South do not adhere to the same business and environmental standards as in their home countries, it is feared that the project will cause the rapid destruction of this valuable ecosystem. The Canadian mining industry in particular has expanded significantly overseas during the past decade provoking severe impacts both on forests and forest peoples (detailed in "Undermining the Forests. The need to control transnational mining companies: a Canadian case study", available from the Forest Peoples Programme at info@fppwrm.gn.apc.org ). Article based on information from: Late Friday News 70th Edition, September 2000; e-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net For more information, contact Mr. Ted Kombo of the Tsunza Conservation and Community Development Programme: tsunza@swiftmombasa.com
- Nigeria: At whose expense is oil drilled in the Niger Delta? Indigenous peoples of the oil-rich Niger Delta region continue to suffer environmental degradation, poverty and violence to the hands of oil companies that operate in the area. The companies themselves, together with the Nigerian and Northern country governments are responsible for the present state of things. Shell, that holds a sad record during its long history in the Niger Delta, has set aside a total of $1billion to develop its offshore oil and gas field in the region. This project is being financed by a funding agreement between oil companies in Nigeria and the Nigerian Petroleum Corporation. Since oil accounts for 90% of Nigeria's foreign earnings, the Nigerian Government is interested in increasing the country's crude oil production at all cost. At the same time, the state is in charge of the "security" of the area. This does not mean defending the right of local communities to live in peace in a healthy environment but, on the contrary, defending oil companies' interests to the detriment of the Niger Delta population. The Nigerian government is not alone in this task. The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP-UK) has recently denounced that the US government has granted military aid consisting of eight fast attack vessels to the Nigerian Navy, in order to patrol the region. At whose expense is oil drilled in the Niger Delta? MOSOP-UK denounces that "the Niger Delta people are the ones who are bearing the brunt of the opportunity cost of oil exploration in Nigeria. The weight of this cost is increasingly proving too high to bear on the people". Paradoxically, the Niger Delta means enormous earnings for a few and at the same time poverty and sufferance for the vast majority. "While our children suffer malnutrition from starvation in a land of plenty; our husbands, fathers and brothers are being killed for protesting the injustice met on our land; our women raped by oil company contractors and security agents; our environment destroyed with no hope for our future generations" says MOSOP-UK's President Ms. Gbenewa Phido. She adds: "It is time the environment of Niger Delta people is protected. It is time the continuous harassment and intimidation of Niger Delta people by oil companies and the Nigerian Security agents is stopped. It is time Niger Delta people are appreciated and respected as a people with rights and not treated as hooligans and troublemakers as has been portrayed in the recent past. It is time Niger Delta people stood up and remain standing until their rights are restored." Article based on information from: 'Oil Exploration in Niger Delta - at whose expense?' by Ms. Gbenewa Phido, MOSOP OGONI, 5/9/2000; e-mail: mosopgb@hotmail.com
- Zimbabwe: Demystifying the role of "the poor" in forest destruction The image of the last tree in a dry region of Africa being cut down by a poor peasant --ultimate responsible for environment destruction-- is widespread. Nevertheless, such image is more based on propaganda than on empirical evidence. On the one hand, reliable data on key environmental resources in this continent is scarce, and on the other hand quantitative studies --for example of West African forests and in Kenya-- have shown that the assumption of systematic environmental degradation is wrong, and that smallholders actually improve their environmental resources through investments in natural capital. Rural households in the South use environmental resources quite extensively. Their renewability and spontaneous occurrence, and the fact that they are often held under communal tenureship patterns make environmental resource use --among which products resulting from gathering and hunting in the forest-- different from other economic activities. Since conventional economy analysis ignores them, little is known about their value in terms of rural household welfare. In Zimbabwe rural households are located in the Communal Areas (CAs), which hold the poorest soils and conditions of only 650 mm of rainfall a year. The native population was forcibly resettled by the former colonial government and things did not change much with independence. Additionally, their cash income is very low, so that they can be considered poor by conventional economy. A research study by William Cavendish ("Empirical Regularities in the Poverty-Environment Relationship of Rural Households: Evidence from Zimbabwe", February 2000) in a typical rural county of Zimbabwe --the Shindi ward-- in the mid 1990s found that on average each family derived over 35% of their income from freely-provided forest products. Around three quarters of all income comes from a wide range of other natural products. It was demonstrated that the poorest households depend the most on forest products. Even so, in absolute terms the richer households consume more forest products. While men do most of the hunting and wood related activities, women sell wild vegetables and fruits, and collect firewood. The results of the research admit interpretations from several points of view. Concerning forests, the study shows how important the so-called "minor forest products" or "non-wood forest products" are for local communities of low incomes in a harsh environment. The hegemonic vision of forestry focused exclusively on wood production does not take this into account. Additionally, the research shows that the idea that the poor are responsible for the degradation of the forests is not only false but also absurd, since forest destruction would mean the end of a "hidden" but substantial income, which can make the difference between life and death. Article based on information from: "Southern African forests - the poor people's safety net" by David Kaimowitz, 31/8/2000; e-mail: d.kaimowitz@cgiar.org ; Cavendish William, "Empirical Regularities in the Poverty-Environment Relationship of Rural Households: Evidence from Zimbabwe", February 2000; e-mail: william.cavendish@new.labour.org.uk
ASIA - UPM-Kymmene and APRIL: The Chinese-Indonesian connection UPM-Kymmene Corporation --one of the world's largest forest products companies and paper producers, with industrial plants in 15 countries-- the APRIL Group (Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Ltd.) and APRIL's majority shareholder have recently signed an agreement to sell APRIL's 51% interest in the Changshu paper mill to UPM-Kymmene. The value of the transaction is US$ 150 million. As a consequence of the agreement, the Finland-based UPM-Kymmene has now become the sole owner of the Changshu paper mill. At the same time, it has been agreed that APRIL will enter into a six and a half year contract for supplying bleached hardwood kraft pulp to the Changshu paper mill. The Changshu paper mill, which started to operate in March 1999, is located by the Yangtze River in Jiangsu Province, about 100 kilometres from Shanghai. The mill's paper machine --provided by the also Finnish company Valmet-- has an annual capacity of 350,000 tonnes of uncoated fine paper. Since the beginning, UPM-Kymmene has had the management responsibility of the paper mill. During year 2000 the estimated production of the mill will be about 290,000 tonnes of uncoated fine paper, and its exports will represent a half of the total Chinese paper sales to neighbouring countries. It is interesting to note that the now formally separated partners will continue carrying out joint activities during the coming six and a half years but in a different scenario. UPM-Kymmene will produce paper in its own plant in China, but with pulp supplied by APRIL. The strong criticism received by the alliance between both companies was to a large extent based on APRIL's bad reputation in Indonesia, where it destroyed extensive areas of rainforest, which were substituted by monoculture pulpwood plantations. Additionally, APRIL generated conflicts with local communities over land tenure issues (see WRM Bulletin 6) and between local dwellers and the company's workers (see WRM Bulletin 17). The new situation will allow UPM-Kymmene to try to dissociate itself from those negative impacts, while at the same time to benefit from purchasing cheap pulp for the cleaner and less contentious process of paper production. At the same time --and according to the company itself-- "the Changshu paper mill will become a significant platform for UPM-Kymmene's strategy in Asia. The strong growth in paper consumption in China and elsewhere in Asia create favourable circumstances for further development of the Changshu paper mill". Will the next move be to plant eucalyptus --with advice from Finland's Jaakko Poyry-- and to produce pulp in China? Would that be the reason for the "six and a half year" contract with APRIL? Article based on information from: "UPM-Kymmene will become a sole owner of Changshu fine paper mill in China" UPM-Kymmene Press Release, 23/8/2000, sent by Finnish Nature League, 28/8/2000, e-mail: annina@iki.fi
- India: Indigenous peoples victims of "conservation" at Rajive Gandhi National Park Two visions are confronted in relation to the conservation of protected areas. One of them --originated in the conservationist circles of the North-- considers that they have to be kept as natural scenarios, void of people. To make it possible, indigenous peoples and other local dwellers are seen as a menace which needs to be removed. From the modern viewpoint, nature needs to be considered in its coevolution with human cultures, and forest peoples constitute an essential part of this relationship, having a crucial role in forest biodiversity conservation. India has been and still is a typical scenario of this conflict. Problems are frequent in India's national parks, sanctuaries, and other natural habitats, between government officials and NGOs involved in wildlife conservation on the one hand, and indigenous peoples, local communities and social activists on the other hand. Even though there has been a civil society initiative to address the problem, trying to build bridges between such opposite visions (see WRM Bulletin 3), indigenous peoples that have historically protected forest areas continue to be victims of abuse and violence to the hands of national authorities. Such situation has happened again. After the brutal forceful dislocation of 51 families carried out by the Forest Department and the Police during midnight of June 12, last year, on September 23rd 2000, a large troop of Forest Department personnel arrived to the Kolengere tribal settlement in Nagarhole to forcefully dislocate the 30 tribal families from the settlement to a new "rehabilitation" site at Veeranahosalli, at the fringes of the National Park, and to demolish their existing dwellings. Local people tried to defend themselves from this attack, and were brutally repressed. Men and women were beaten by armed officers. Some very seriously injured individuals were admitted to hospitals at Gonikoppal and Kumara, while others were given primary treatments locally. Some local media, instigated by the Forest Department, falsely informed that local people were the ones instigating the clash with the support of NGOs like CORD, Kushalnagar and DEED, Hunsur. The historical conflict between the Forest Department and the traditional inhabitants of the Park intensified during the last years with the move of the Government of Karnataka to implement the controversial World Bank Eco-development Project in the area. The official plan went ahead, even violating the operational directives of the Bank itself with regard to the Indigenous/Tribal Peoples, as well as their constitutional rights. Affected indigenous people have been facing abuses related to this project. The World Bank's Inspection Panel that visited the area on 1-3 September, 1998 justified the tribals' position. Nevertheless, the Government of Karnataka has prefered to turn a blind eye to reality, and continues insisting that there is no forceful dislocation, and that it has the full consent of the people concerned. Protective Laws and Acts to safeguard the life of the ethnic minorities in India do exist, but they are often neglected and violated by the lawmakers themselves. Additionally, real victims of official violence are accused of rioting. Social and environmental Indian NGOs are claiming that a proper inquiry into the recent repression is performed, and the culprits are brought to trial. Article based on information provided by Tom Griffiths, 3/8/2000, e-mail: tom@fppwrm.gn.apc.org
- Malaysia: Penans' blockade against logging in Sarawak For years indigenous peoples of Sarawak have been fighting to defend their land and forests against "development" plans involving logging, oil palm plantations, pulpwood plantations, hydroelectric dams, mining activities and resorts development. These activities, which count on the support of the national and local authorities, are not only destroying their livelihoods but also --as in the case of the nomadic Penans-- are putting at risk their existence as a culture. Nowadays there are only about 10,000 Penans left in Sarawak's interior region. As well as other Dayak people, they have been and still are victims of all kind of abuses --including physical violence-- to the hands of the police force and intimidations by thugs deployed by timber companies. On August 11th this year, more than a hundred Penans, comprising men and women from various settlements in the interior area of Sungai Apoh/Tutoh in the Baram region, gathered at Long Kevok to stage a non-violent protest against logging activities in their communal lands and forests. They erected a wooden barricade on a logging road used by Lajung Lumber (a subsidiary company of Rimbunan Hijau Sdn.Bhd.), Shin Yang, and Rawood to stop the companies' timber extraction and transport operations in their traditional territories. They resorted to this action because, in spite of their numerous complaints, the companies and the higher authorities have been ignoring their rights over the territory and its resources. The Penans denounced that Rimbunan Hijau and Shin Yang invaded their territory, bulldozing their planted fruit trees and grave-yards. The companies also encroached into their Communal Forest Reserves and carried out logging activities there, without any previous consultation with the legitimate owners. Personnel from the Marudi Police Station and Long Lama Police Station were sent to the blockade site on August 13th. Even though no arrests took place, it was feared that violence against peaceful demonstrators might occur, as has happened in previous occasions. The blockade was lifted in the latter part of August as the Penans had to go back to their respective villages/settlements to complete their farming season (planting of rice). The blockades may be resumed if no solutions are achieved between the two parties. Nevertheless, petitions and support are still very much needed to persuade and influence the State government leaders to address the pressing issue faced by the Penans' rights to land and forest resources. If you wish to express your support to the Penans
struggle, please visit: Article based on information provided by: SAM Marudi Office, 16/8/2000; e-mail: sammarudi@yahoo.com
- Philippines: A new approach on forests in Palawan Palawan is an island of the Philippines, located in the Western part of the archipelago and surrounded by the South China Sea and the Sulu Sea. As a result of the democratic process started in 1992, the local government, in agreement with local communities and the private sector, cancelled existing logging concessions, and new legislation was issued banning all commercial logging on the island. The Philippines used to be densely covered by tropical forest, but nowadays only 3% of the original area is still standing. Forest destruction and degradation in this country has been the result of unsustainable industrial logging carried out by private companies --mostly aimed at export markets-- with support from vested interest within the military and relevant officials during former President Marcos' times. A logging ban proposed in November 1999 was never implemented, since the government argued that this would mean a loss of revenues for the treasury (see WRM Bulletins 27 and 28). Under such circumstances, the case of Palawan is to be highlighted. The territory of Palawan still bears the scars and open wounds from years of logging, including the siltation of lagoons and the death of coral reefs. Much has already been lost here and large stumps mark the site of what was once a dense forest of massive, ancient trees. Philippine parrots, once common, are now rarely found. However, this island has managed to escape ecological collapse, by ending logging before the island had been totally deforested. Now the challenge for them is to find new and sustainable ways of producing and living, with the aim of reverting a process of social and environmental destruction. The creation of jobs by eco-tourism is one of the priorities for the local government, based on a spectacular natural environment that is now protected.. Locally-based resource management and ecological restoration activities in the forests and coastal ecosystems could also mean an effective diversification and activation of the island's economy. If these efforts are successful, Palawan can become a much needed example for the protection of the Earth's remaining rainforests. Article based on information from: "Philippine island earns rare logging reprieve", Cable News Network, 4/8/2000, sent by Glen Barry, 5/8/2000, e-mail: grbarry@students.wisc.edu
- Whose trees? Vietnam's five million hectare "reforestation" programme Vietnam has a history of tree plantation programmes dating back to 1956. According to a report by Nguyen Ngoc Lung, Director of Vietnam's Forest Development Department, between 1956 and 1992 an area of over 1 million hectares was planted with trees. However survival rates have been poor and much of the wood produced has been exported as wood chips to Japan or Taiwan. Yet the Vietnamese government is determined to increase the area of plantations in the country. In 1992, the government introduced Programme 327, aimed at "regreening the barren hills". The state-run Vietnam News Agency reports that between 1988 and 1994, 115,000 hectares per year were planted, a figure that increased to 193,000 hectares per year between 1995 and 1998. The cost to the state was high, and by 1998 Programme 327 had cost the government approximately US$273 million. Three years earlier the Vietnamese government had unsuccessfully attempted to get World Bank funding for Programme 327. In 1998, the World Bank hired forestry consultants Fortech to "describe, analyse and evaluate" Programme 327. Fortech's consultant pointed out that under the programme areas of natural forest in Vietnam had continued to decline and that fast-growing tree plantation programmes had largely failed. Among the problems listed by the consultant are a top down bureaucratic approach, land allocation that does not involve local people, poor silvicultural practices, the project was simply imposed on poor households without their input, and Vietnam has little land available for large scale tree plantations. Perhaps as a result of this failure to secure World Bank funding the government proposed a new and bigger programme to replace Programme 327: the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Programme (see WRM bulletin 14). The programme's target is to increase the area of "forest" in the country to 14 million hectares by the year 2010. The target area --five million hectares-- came from French maps of 1943 which indicate that 43 per cent of Vietnam was then forested, five million hectares more than official figures in the mid-1990s when the programme was first dreamed up. The programme is expected to cost somewhere in the region of US$2.5 billion with around US$1.5 billion to come from international aid agencies. Of the five million hectares the government plans to designate one million hectares to plantations for pulp production. Six months after the government approved the project at the 10th National Assembly, bilateral aid agencies agreed to support the programme during the December 1998 Consultative Group meeting in Paris (chaired by the World Bank). A year later, on 10 December 1999, a Memorandum of Agreement was signed between Le Huy Ngo, Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, and 15 representatives of international aid agencies. Subsequently a "Joint Partnership Steering Committee" was established consisting of representatives of the Vietnamese government and international aid agencies. At the same time three Task Forces were established, which aim to investigate such things as forest policy, institutions, forest sector investment, assistance needs and financing strategy. The impacts of large scale tree monocultures on people and the environment will apparently not form part of the Task Forces' work. The Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) is one of the agencies involved in the discussions with the government about the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Programme. Rolf Samuelsson, First Secretary at the Swedish Embassy in Hanoi, described SIDA's attitude to the project: "We think it's perhaps a rather squarishly top down plan type of programme, political agenda and so forth. But as Sweden is very much encouraging partnerships and sector-wide programme approaches we think this programme, for all its constraints, is a good starting point for a dialogue with the government on forestry issues." SIDA has requested that the Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in Indonesia gets involved in the negotiating process, on the grounds that there is no "critical mass of experts in Hanoi to help the ministry in working out these documents" according to Samuelsson. Other agencies involved in the Joint Partnership Steering Committee include the Netherlands, Germany, UNDP and the World Bank. Some of these countries are already involved in funding or are planning other reforestation projects in Vietnam. For example the World Bank lists a US$75 million project titled "Barren Hills Afforestation" on its May 2000 Monthly Operational Summary. Few details are available although the Bank has listed the project for several months. In March 1997, the Asian Development Bank approved an interest-free US$33 million loan for a five-year Forestry Sector Project, which involves reforestation in mountainous areas in four provinces in Vietnam. Part of the project includes planting 12,000 hectares with fast-growing species. The consultant for this project is GFA (Gesellschaft fur Agrarprojekte mbH) a German agriculture and forestry consulting company based in Hamburg. While the aid agencies and the Vietnamese government discuss the future funding of projects the government has started planting. In 1999, 206,000 hectares of "forests" were planted, out of a target of 310,000 hectares. Over 5,000 hectares were planted by aerial seeding in the northwestern province of Lai Chau. The target for this year is for 403,000 hectares and a budget of approximately US$25 million has been allocated. The logic behind all this seems to be simply that trees are good. There appears to be little analysis about who or what the trees are for. One possibility is the pulp and paper industry, but in August 1999 Vietnam News reported that the Viet Nam National Paper Corporation had 18,000 tonnes of paper stockpiled --because of low consumption. Last year the Vietnam Paper Corporation was the biggest loss maker in the country with nine of its member companies reporting a loss for the year. A year earlier, Vietnam's wood suppliers were forced to stockpile timber because they had more wood than the country's pulp processors could handle (see WRM bulletin 15). In December 1999, the Hanoi-based newspaper Nhan Dan reported that farmers were selling their products as firewood in local markets rather than to the pulp and paper industry because of the lack of transportation and the "low economic value of these long-lasting trees". While these examples do not give the whole picture, they do indicate that a further one million hectares of plantations to supply the pulp industry would not necessarily benefit either the pulp and paper industry or the farmers on whose land the trees are grown. Ambitious planting targets and the business of attracting funding are in danger of crowding out the potential of increasing the area of native forests and increasing the well-being of the rural population, for example through community forestry. Earlier this year the Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development indicated that the area to be planted might be reduced to three million hectares "to correspond to the existing land area suitable for afforestation and the national development plan" according to the Vietnam News Agency. Perhaps this will help free up both political and geographical space needed to involve communities in managing their forests, woodlands, fallows, grazing lands and fields. By Chris Lang. For more detailed analysis on plantations in Vietnam, see "Globalization of the pulp and paper industry" by the same author at http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/plantations/material/Vietnam/vietindex.htm
CENTRAL AMERICA - Belize: Shrimp farming threatens Placencia Lagoon's mangroves In 1999 local residents of Placencia Lagoon --a shallow water body fringed by mangroves and very rich in terrestrial and aquatic wildlife, located in southern Belize-- organized themselves to resist a project to build a two-lane causeway and a bridge across the Lagoon. The works would have caused a severe environmental impact, damaging ecotourism, the main activity in the area, as well as small scale fishing (see WRM Bulletin 23). A new threat is now pending on this rich ecosystem: industrial shrimp farming. The Placencia Lagoon is largely responsible for the area's pristine waters and abundance of fish in the proximity to the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef, which furnish the basis for most resident's livelihood, and is a major scenario for ecotourism. The area has lately attracted shrimp farmers and "developers." Currently five shrimp farms are located on the Lagoon. Two new shrimp farms have been proposed and are in the process of applying for operational permits. Additionally, two of the existing ones have plans to expand and are in the final phase of approval for their respective permits. Taking into account the deleterious effects of shrimp farming in many other tropical countries and the specific conditions of Placencia Lagoon's environment --which because of its soil composition and geology is likely to have a low carrying capacity and high pollution susceptibility-- it is expected that such expansion would lead to an environmental disaster. Already in 1997 a report prepared by UNDP for the Belize Coastal Zone Management Authority warned that the shrimp farming industry in the Placencia Lagoon area was rapidly approaching its limit for sustainable shrimp production. Signs of what may occur in a near future have already been perceived. Local residents have witnessed a decline in the area's fish stock and fear that the new and expanded shrimp farm operations, plus increasing commercial and residential developments will continue to degrade the Lagoon environment and their livelihoods. However, the government appears to be more interested in the promotion of shrimp farming than in the protection of mangroves. Shrimp farmers enjoy a favourable tax policy as well as lack of regulations for pollution control and mitigation. To the official view, currency generated by industrial shrimp exports is more important than mangrove conservation. Those interested in expressing their support to the Placencia Lagoon local communities to conserve their mangroves and livelihoods, are invited to visit: http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/tropical_forests/alerts4.html#Belize Article based on information from: Late Friday News, 67th Edition, August 2000, e-mail: mangroveap@olympus.net
- Nicaragua: Indigenous peoples' rights and the Bosawas Reserve The East of Nicaragua is known as the Atlantic Coast (Costa Atlántica), and is geographically divided in a Northern and a Southern region. This area is characterized by being mostly inhabited by indigenous peoples --mainly Miskitos-- and for being the richest area concerning natural resources. Some 500,000 people (8% of the national population) live in this area (42% of the Nicaraguan territory), representing six ethnic groups who obtain their livelihoods from agriculture and fishing. In 1987 during the Sandinista government, for the first time in Latin American history, an Autonomy Law was passed recognising community rights to use and benefit from natural resources as well as their right to practice their traditional forms of land tenure and transfer. Even though this law constitutes a victory for the indigenous peoples' struggle, during the last years those rights have been ignored by the voracity of foreign and national investors in the overexploitation of forest and marine resources. In October 1991 the Nicaraguan government declared a large extension of the Atlantic Coast's indigenous territory as a National Reserve of Natural Resources, which is now widely known as Bosawas. This is the most extensive reserve in Central America, and in January 1998 it was declared Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO. The Bosawas area is the home of 12 animal species under threat of extinction, and of 18 species already extinct in the Central American region. The core area of the Reserve is composed of 750,000 hectares of dense primary tropical rainforest. The reserve was created with no prior consultation with the 34,000 indigenous inhabitants of the area --Miskitos and Mayagnas-- who are still demanding such consultation to the governmental authorities. They also suspect that the government declared the area as a Natural Reserve in order to take profit of its natural resources, and consider that this act is in violation of their rights to the land and its resources. The indigenous communities' demand for the demarcation and legalization of their lands has strengthened even further, given that day after day they are confronted with the spontaneous colonization of their territories. Additionally, they consider that the creation of Parks or Reserves does not contribute to the protection of the forests, but result in actually ignoring their legitimate right to their lands. These communities are therefore demanding the government of Nicaragua to support a process of self-demarcation of their territories. This year the government has presented a draft bill for the regulation of indigenous communities' land ownership in the Atlantic Coast. However, the indigenous leaders argue that the project was elaborated without indigenous peoples' participation. Communities inhabiting the Bosawas Reserve demand to be recognized in their own identity and not by any designation related to the reserve and in that manner to have their right to the use of the natural resources guaranteed. They also claim that in no case the government should be the protagonist in the legalization of their territories but that that role should be asigned to the communities themselves. For further information, please contact the indigenous organization ADEPSIMISUJIN, e-mail: pdessost@ibw.com.ni Article sent by: Centro Alexander von Humboldt, 15/9/2000, e-mail: humboldt@ibw.com.ni
NORTH AMERICA - Mexican "justice" finds environmental activist guilty Mexican "justice" has once again ruled against justice. Rodolfo Montiel, a "campesino" leader imprisoned for leading a successful opposition movement against logging operations by the US-based Boise Cascade in the state of Guerrero (see WRM Bulletin 26), was found guilty and received a sentence of six years and eight months, in a sentence issued by Fifth District Court Judge Maclovio Murillo. Montiel, together with his colleague Teodoro Cabrera, have already been imprisoned for 15 months. Cabrera was also found guilty and given a 10-year term. Mexican and international environmental and human rights organizations have reacted against the sentence, arguing that there are evidences that the charges against them were all fabricated and confessions obtained under torture. The Human Rights Centre Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez, which represented the two peasant leaders during the process, will appeal both the verdict and sentences. The organization has questioned whether a report issued by the government's own human rights commission, stating that the two accused had been tortured to declare themselves guilty, was taken into account. Amnesty International has adopted both Montiel and Cabrera as prisoners of conscience, and the Sierra Club has started a campaign for their release. The case of Montiel and Cabrera exemplify many wrongdoings, among which we wish to highlight the difference --in Mexico and in a large number of other countries throughout the world-- between law and justice. The law allowed a company from the US --Boise Cascade-- to destroy forests and local peoples livelihoods in Mexico. Local people reacted believing that justice was on their side, but their actions were declared unlawful. Their leader was imprisoned and unlawfully tortured, this being a pre-requisite to be able to "lawfully" declare him guilty of violating the law. Justice has been done! Everyone knows, however, that this is but a parody of justice and now environmental and human rights groups are trying to exert pressure on newly elected president Fox, who is expected to concede a reprieve to both accused peasants. This would be a auspicious sign of pacification and an act of --finally-- true justice. Article based on information from: "Mexico Finds Activist Guilty In Drug Case. Peasant won Goldman environmental prize" by Wendy Patterson, San Francisco Chronicle, 29/8/2000, sent by: Pat Rasmussen, Leavenworth Audubon Adopt-a-Forest, 1/9/2000, e-mail: patr@crcwnet.com
SOUTH AMERICA - Argentina: Forest loss and plantations in two provinces Coinciding with the conquest of the vast territory of Argentina by the Buenos Aires centralized government, started in the second half of the 19th century in the name of modernization, forests in different regions of the country entered a period of decline which has continued until present times. The two cases mentioned below are only examples of a process happening throughout the country. In the Province of Santa Fé, forest cover decreased in nearly 4.6 million hectares over the last 80 years. According to a report recently issued by the Secretary of Natural Resources and Sustainable Development, the total forest area of the province now reaches only 1.3 million hectares. In 1915, the Santa Fé Forest Census revealed the existence of 5.9 million hectares of forests. Between 1915 and 1970 the deforestation rate was of 52,700 hectares a year, but it jumped to 121,500 hectares per year between 1970 and 1984. Two forestry companies were directly responsible for this state of affairs. One was the British "La Forestal", which began to operate in the region in 1880 owning nearly one third of the Province's area to exploit "quebracho" (Schinopsis balansae) forests. It employed local people, who had to work in near slavery conditions. In the decade of 1960, when quebracho forests declined, the company closed business and left a desert behind, both in ecological and social terms. In the decade of 1930 "Celulosa Argentina" arrived to the region. To feed its pulp and paper mills this company both exploited native forests and set up eucalyptus plantations. The Province of Misiones is also undergoing a severe process of forest loss and substitution by plantations. At the beginning of the 20th century 90% of its area was covered by a dense subtropical forest. Nowadays there are only 1,500,000 hectares left, only one third of which is included in natural protected areas. Deforestation continues unabated. One foreign pulp and paper company alone is expected to deforest 7,000 hectares per year and no steps have been programmed to stop this destructive process. At the same time, Misiones is increasingly being covered by large-scale fast-growing pine tree plantations, and pines are invading even the few protected forests in the province. As usual, forest loss in these two provinces has gone hand in hand with the spread of plantations. However, most foresters --supported by the FAO definition of forests-- will say that in both provinces "forest cover" has increased, simply by adding the plantation area as part of that "forest cover." Fortunately, the public is becoming increasingly aware that eucalyptus and pine monocultures are not "forests" and that in fact plantations constitute a major cause of deforestation. Article based on information obtained from: Elsa Ortalda, 24/6/2000, e-mail: elgozante@punillanet.com.ar ; Centro Investigaciones Ecológicas Subtropicales, 2/8/2000; e-mail: cies@fnn.net
- Bolivia: Hydroelectric dam project questioned The basin of the Beni River in western Bolivia, which comprises part of the Andean region and part of the Amazon forests, is being threatened by a hydroelectric megaproject, that is generating grave concern among local communities, environmental NGOs and academic circles. The affected region occupies an area of 68.000 square kilometres, with altitudes ranging from 6,500 metres to 200 metres at "El Bala", where the river becomes very narrow. This has been the place chosen to set up this dam project. As a result of the topographic and hydrographic features of the region in relation to its potential for the generation of hydroelectric energy, the idea of such a project has been present for over 50 years. In 1998 it received new support by it being declared a "national priority" and now the elaboration of the reference terms for the prefeasibility study has been put out to tender. However, the area is not a "void space" as government planifiers view it. On the contrary, it is populated by a very rich flora and fauna which extends over its altitudinal gradient, which allows the existence of different forest ecosystem types, like tropical dry forests, tropical rainforests and subandean rainforests. Additionally, five protected areas are included in the basin. Two of them --the Madidi National Park and the Pilón Lajas Biosphere Reserve and Indigenous Territory-- are located in the area of influence of the dam. More importantly, the threatened area is inhabited by some 1,000 people, most of them belonging to traditional Amazonic cultures, as the Chimanes, the Tacanas and the Mosetenes. For decades these peoples have been subject to an acculturation process caused by the advance of the agricultural frontier and deforestation in their territories. A study recently published by the NGO Foro Boliviano sobre Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo (FOBOMADE) reveals the negative environmental, social and economic impacts that the project would entail in case it is implemented. The opening of new roads will mean --as has happened in the Brazilian Amazon-- the penetration by loggers, poachers and colonizers. The filling of the reservoir will flood an area of 2,505 km2, entirely covered by primary forests. Vegetation will be completely lost and animals will run away. The hydrological, nutrient and sediment fluxes will be completely altered, and the consequences of this phenomenon will affect peasants' villages and fields downstream. It is feared that the low quality of water coming out of the dam --which will be highly eutrophied-- will turn it useless. Additionally, even though from the engineering point of view the dam could work to avoid the effects of rises in the river's level on the populations of Rurrenabaque and San Buenaventura, the latest research concerning river conservation and management indicate --on the contrary-- that maintaining natural flood areas is essential to obtain benefits from the rivers' dynamics. From the economic point of view the project is also non-viable, since the expected sale of energy to Brazil will not compensate the expenses required to build the dam. It is to be underscored that to implement the project the Bolivian state will increase its external debt even more. On July 21st and 22nd 2000 a Seminar-Workshop, organized by Foro Paceño, was held in the village of Rurrebaque in order to analyze this issue. Once the studies on the expected impacts of the project, as well as previous similar cases in Colombia and Brazil were presented, the participants --local people, representatives of indigenous and peasant communities, staff in charge of the management of protected areas, organizations and institutions of the region, and some local authorities-- expressed their critical viewpoint on the El Bala project. At the same time, they are demanding that the expected impacts as well as other alternatives for the sustainable development of the region are considered before the prefeasibility study is undertaken. Article based on information from: Dario Jana, 5/8/2000, e-mail: darioj@bigfoot.com ; "Consideraciones sobre un megaproyecto: El Bala", FOBOMADE, La Paz, s.f.e.; Bayler Peter B., "Understanding Large River-Floodplain Ecosystems", Bioscience Vol 45 Nr 3: 153-158, March 1995. Those interested in obtaining further information on this project are invited to address FOBOMADE, e-mail: fobomade@mail.megalink.com
- Colombia: Even historical documents confirm the U'wa's territorial rights The U'wa indigenous people are maintaining a long conflict with the Colombian state and the oil company Occidental Petroleum in the defense of their traditional territories. The permit granted to the company and the beginning of the works of oil prospection at the Bloque Samoré, located in the premontane forest region along the border between Colombia and Venezuela, constitutes a threat por the U'wa's life and environment. To the U'wa culture, oil is Mother Earth's blood, and to drill it would be a desecration. Their struggle has been long and the U'wa have suffered violence to the hands of the government's armed corps. At the same time --as was proven by the independent international mission that visited the region in March 2000-- the works undertaken by Occidental have already caused negative environmental impacts in the area of the Gibraltar 1 well (see WRM bulletins 22, 23, 26, 27 and 29). The struggle is being carried out in different scenarios and one of them is that related to the legal aspects. Article 332 of the 1991 Colombian Constitution recognizes indigenous peoples' rights to the subsoil and natural resources in their territories. The U'wa have recently presented to the national and provincial authorities new documentation which confirm that they are the legitimate owners of the contested lands. To obtain such documents, a delegation of the U'wa travelled to Spain. At the Indian Archives (Archivo de Indias) of Seville they were able to find the land titles granted by the Spanish Crown in the 18th century, when this territory was part of the New Kindom of Nueva Granada under the Spanish empire. This means that their land titles were documented even before the existence the Colombian state, which now questions the U'wa's rights. Together with these highly important historical documents, the U'wa presented jurisprudence generated by the Colombian Court of Justice and State Council, which clearly define and protect their right to the land and its subsoil. Even though these new documents are in themselves not sufficient to make the government change its mind and to stop defending the interests of Occidental, they constitute an important tool in the struggle of the U'wa people for their rights. The Colombian authorities --led by the Ministry of the Environment-- have until now done nothing but deceive, intimidate and repress the U'wa. Nevertheless, they will not give up in their fair struggle. The U'wa's resistance --as well as that of other indigenous peoples and black communities all over Colombia-- constitutes an example of peaceful people's action in a country trapped by violence and intolerance by the armed forces, the paramilitary and the guerrilla. Article based on information from: Editor Equipo Nizkor, 20/9/2000, e-mail: nizkor@teleline.es ; Censat Agua Viva, 21/9/2000, e-mail: censat@colnodo.apc.org
- Venezuela: "Stop it, Mr. President" say indigenous Pemon leaders The inclusion in the Venezuelan National Constitution --approved in 1999-- of a chapter that establishes legal rights for indigenous peoples and indigenous communities in line with International Labour Organization Convention 169 led to the idea that indigenous peoples in that country would be in a better position to protect their environment and their traditions against the powerful interests that in the name of "progress" want to destroy them. However, things appear not to have changed much in real life. The Pemon indigenous people continue to fight against the construction of a high-voltage power line in the south-eastern Gran Sabana region, that will cross the Brazilian border. Four indigenous leaders have recently asked President Chávez to stop the works. "They understand the world as something that can be divided into small boxes. For us the world is a round place, where the gods, sacred sites, great rocks, large rivers, mountains, plants and animals coexist; where the sun impregnates the earth so that she can give birth. And as part of nature there is the indigenous people". Silviano Castro, from San Rafael de Kamoirán; Melchor Flores, from Mapaurí; Cleto Javier Ramírez, from Agua Fría; and Darío Castro, from San Juan de Kamoirán addressed the Venezuelan President with this cosmologic view of the world as perceived by the Penan people. The government had tried to convince them that the power line is a good thing for them. Vicepresident Isaías Rodríguez himself, accompanied by Army and National Guard representatives, organized a meeting with the steering committee of the Bolívar Indigenous Federation. The government offered them U$S 200,000 to create a fund devoted to the Federation. In a move to weaken opposition against the project, the government took to Caracas some indigenous leaders who did not oppose the works with the aim of signing an agreement. Many of them did not even speak Spanish . . . President Chávez showed his satisfaction for such agreement and thanked the vicepresident for his work. The four Pemon leaders consider they have been deceived and claim "Itachimak, tatadepurú", "Stop it, Mr. President". They wonder what is the use of having a new Constitution, indigenous representatives at the National Assembly and even an indigenous individual as Minister for the Environment, if in every case the Pemon will be condemned to disappear. The disruption of modern economy activities in the area --under the form of high voltages power lines, mining and luxury tourism-- would mean the destruction of their livelihoods and culture, based in the simplicity of nature and a life in harmony with it. No money can substitute this. Article based on information from: Amigos en Defensa de la Gran Sabana.AMIGRANSA/Orinoco Oilwatch, 15/8/2000; e-mail: amigrans@ccs.internet.ve
OCEANIA - Fiji: A coup d'etat sparked off by a mahogany plantation It is already a well-known fact that large scale tree monocultures result in a large number of social and environmental impacts. However, we had not yet heard of a situation such as that of Fiji, where plantations generated such acute social and economic tensions that they eventually led to a coup d'etat. The roots of the issue can be traced back to the 1950s and 60s, when the former British colonial administration decided to implement two large-scale plantation projects, one based on pine trees and the other on Honduran mahogany. The land occupied by the plantations was leased to Fijian landowners at a nominal price of some 10 cents per hectare per year. Many of the leases gave landowners rights to share profits at harvest. The pine plantation was harvested in the 1980s --the decade after the British left-- by the state-owned Fiji Pine company, created for that purpose. Most of the logs were converted into chips and exported at low prices. Landowners made no profit. In the year 2000, the time had come for harvesting the mahogany, and a number of actors appeared in the scenario. A group of Fiji landowners, discontent about the results with the pine plantation, contacted in 1996 a US businessman -- Marshal Pettit-- and convinced him to get involved in the harvesting of the mahogany plantation. However, he was totally unaware about the fact that the issue was not a typical business deal, but involved land rights, local politics, ethnic conflict, a British company and Fijian international policy. The US businessman, in partnership with the newly appointed chairman of Fiji Pine --George Speight-- seemed about to succeed in the bid to harvest the plantation, when the party that backed Mr Spreight lost a parliamentary election. As a result, he was out of his post and the new government gave the contract to the British company Commonwealth Corporation, in spite of the fact that the US$ 65 million offered by this company was far less than the US$ 210 million offered by Pettit's Timber Resources Management company. The reason for this apparently absurd decision was that the new Prime Minister, the first ethnic Indian to occupy the post in 13 years, needed British backing in the European Union over export support for sugar, Fiji's leading industry and dominated by ethnic Indians. The decision gave rise to mass demonstrations organized by landowners and spurred by both Pettit and Speight. In May, a 20,000 people-strong demonstration resulted in riots and the destruction of ethnic Indian businesses, while at the same time Speight occupied the Parliament building with paramilitary troops and held the Prime Minister and his cabinet hostage for two months. In July the army arrested him and he is currently awaiting trial. The final result from this plantation is that a British company will receive most of the benefits. On the other side, the Fijian people will be more divided over ethnic conflict than before, local landowners will receive very little for the trees planted on their land, the Fijian democratic system will be weaker and the country's economy will have gained almost nothing. Article based on information from: "Fiji's rich resources became political prize. Plan for timber harvest led to ethnic unrest", by Joseph Kahn, New York Times Service. International Herald Tribune, September 15, 2000
- Hawaii: Are eucalyptus the only possible crop in Hamakua? Friends of Hamakua is gravely concerned over a proposed plywood/veneer plant and about the State Forest Hamakua Management Plan, which would imply the harvesting of 4,000 acres of old "non-native" plantations. There are several reasons for this concern. Access roads will have to be built into all of these, many forested areas. Once harvesting begins, all public access to these roads will be closed off due to liability concerns. Once the roads are in place, access will be gained to the few remaining native tree stands, which the plan says, may be removed if necessary. Government officials reported at a public meeting held in Laupahoehoe --which was well represented by nearly 100 residents who were very opposed to this plan-- that the old eucalyptus plantations are worth $6 million. However, it has been proven in several states that the cost of planning, building infrastructure, harvest liabilities, and loss of old growth far exceeds the potential income. Much of the costs of this incoming industry will be born by the taxpayer, like fire prevention, property tax reductions, infrastructure, and possible future subsidies. Why does the State think Hawaii can experience a profit, when this industry survives elsewhere only through subsidies? Current plans involve the plantation of 105,000 acres, mostly composed of eucalyptus (85,000 acres) and only 20,000 acres of native hardwoods. To this, Friends of Hamakua replies: "Are we sick already of the 16,000 acres already planted! Do we really want to dedicate so much more land to this crop? It cannot be true that only eucalyptus trees are the solution to the non-irrigated sugarlands. It rains, and there should be many crops and higher value trees that will benefit the land and the people. Many of us remember Capitol Wood Chips and what that was like. Imagine 10 times that amount of logging and chipping along the Hamakua." Friends of Hamakua say that they would embrace a forest industry that promotes long term goals of higher value hardwoods that would be managed selectively, incorporating sustainable practices so that their children may prosper, but not the short term 4-7 year rotation that Prutimber plans. They would support a forest industry that doesn't spray inordinate amounts of herbicides around its neighbours, who treats local contractors fairly, whose words they can believe in, and who immediately invests in on-site fire fighting infrastructure. They say that they would also be open to a State Forest Plan that takes each parcel of forest individually, without the threat of a huge mill that wants to greedily harvest all the trees. Taking into account that the Hamakua State Forestry Management Plan's objective is to supply the proposed plywood/veneer plant with trees, Friends of Hamakua are demanding an environmental impact study (EIS) to be conducted on the entire monocrop eucalyptus, and on the plywood/veneer timber industry before more land is dedicated either to planting or to harvesting. They have requested that the County Council conduct such a study, but its Chairman responded with only replies from the forest industry and affiliated parties. In view of that, they are beginning to circulate a petition that demands an EIS be conducted before going a step further. "How can we support", they ask, "an industry that will dedicate so much of our land, change our way of life, and effect our property values and businesses?" Article based on information from: Friends of Hamakua, Linda Lyerly, e-mail: lindal@interpac.net
THE CARBON SHOP FILES - The word of Indigenous Peoples in Lyon The following are some quotes from indigenous peoples' representatives at Lyon, which --in sharp contrast with government delegates-- address the true issues at stake, in a climate change process which has until now ignored indigenous peoples, the Forum of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities on Climate Change also issued in Lyon a declaration, which is available at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/IPlyon.htm : "Developed country proposals to buy the right to continue polluting the atmosphere by planting more trees makes a farce of the climate change negotiations," said Héctor Huertas, an indigenous leader from Panama. Clark Peteru from Samoa warned: "Not only are indigenous peoples on small island states on the brink of losing their lands to sea level rise, but indigenous peoples throughout the world, particularly forest-dwellers, are in danger of losing their lands and livelihoods to proposals to plant thousands of hectares of trees to act as gigantic carbon sponges. Mature forests will be cut down to make way for more rapid growing tree species and agricultural land will be transformed into tree plantations." "The proposal stinks, it gives the impression of doing something when the net effect is to make the problem worse. It allows industrial countries to continue polluting the atmosphere, and throws the social cost on marginalised populations" explained Raymond de Chavez of the Philippines. "It also establishes a market in carbon emissions which will benefit only developed countries. Profits will be made even as countries disappear under water or entire populations lose their lands. It's obscene," Chavez said. "What is needed is a fundamental change in philosophy regarding our relationship to the earth. Only then will developed countries get serious and honour their pledges, already quite small, to reduce their carbon emissions rather than fiddle as the earth burns," concluded Antonio Jacanamijoy of Colombia. Article based on information from: 'Indigenous Strive to Influence Global Climate Talks', by Jaya Ramachandran, IPS, September 13, 2000
- Compensating for emissions through carbon sinks: a cheat's charter In WRM bulletin 35 we exposed the conflict of interest among some of the experts who produced the IPCC special report on land use, land use change and forestry last June ("Sinks that stink"), resulting from their direct involvement in companies which would economically benefit from the inclusion of sinks in the Kyoto Protocol. One of the named experts --Richard Tipper-- replies in the current issue of Multinational Monitor magazine that "you could say all scientists have vested interests when they participate in such a panel because they're interested in advancement or research money" and adds: "if you disagree with somebody then you should be able to make a coherent argument, not just slag people off." We believe that most scientists would disagree with Mr. Tipper's view about participation in expert panels. We also believe that people with vested interests should not accept appointments to expert panels whose findings might economically benefit them. Nor should they be invited to participate in them. Regarding Mr. Tipper's reference about "slagging people off", it is important to remember that the World Rainforest Movement has been disseminating not one but a number of "coherent arguments" against plantations as carbon sinks for more than a year -- all of which Mr. Tipper seems to ignore (see all relevant WRM materials in our web site at: http://www.wrm.org.uy/english/climatechange.htm ). Perhaps he feels we are not sufficiently "scientific" for our arguments to be taken into account. However, it will be difficult for him to say the same about the scientists from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Laxenburg, Austria. IIASA carried out a detailed study of Russia's biosphere,which contains a fifth of the world's forests. The full report, announced on 25 August in a news release under the suggestive heading "Is the Kyoto Protocol Workable?" puts in question the whole idea of using carbon sinks as a means of "compensating" for CO2 emissions. Anatoly Shvidenko, one of the scientists involved in the study, stated that under the Kyoto Protocol, Russia is likely to be able to claim credit for improving its biosphere's ability to soak up carbon, but that the uncertainties involved in calculating such credits are huge and "greatly exceed likely changes in industrial emissions." In plain English, that means that including trees in the Kyoto Protocol is a recipe for confusion and cheating. Sten Nilsson, also from IIASA, concluded that "the scientific uncertainties in measuring carbon movements into and out of ecosystems are just too great," and that "by opening up the whole of the biosphere to actions under the Kyoto Protocol, governments have made it completely unverifiable." IIASA's Michael Obersteiner summarized the whole issue by saying that the Protocol "really is a cheat's charter." Asked to comment on the IIASA report, A US analyst of the Kyoto Protocol, David Victor, working at the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, concurred with its findings. "Their analysis is fundamentally correct. It is essentially impossible to verify compliance if the targets include forests," Victor said. After analysing the IIASA report and other relevant information and viewpoints, "New Scientist" journalist Fred Pearce reaches the conclusion that "the message from the IIASA seems clear. Science is not yet up to policing a system of greenhouse gas targets that includes the biosphere. Until it is, the only viable Kyoto Protocol is one that relies solely on slashing the world's use of fossil fuels." With which we totally agree. Article based on information from IIASA web site: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/IR-00-021.pdf The recent report is backed by several other IIASA analyses going back two years, which are available to the public at: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/IR-99-025.pdf http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/IR-99-062.pdf http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/IR-00-043.pdf http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Admin/PUB/Documents/IR-98-028.pdf and http://www.iiasa.ac.at/admin/pub/documents/ir-00-010.pdf The scientific upshot of the recent report is explained in Fred Pearce, "Smokescreen Exposed" New Scientist magazine, 26 August 2000, vol 167, issue 2253; see also Larry Lohmann "Is Tree Planting a Practicable Way of Meeting Kyoto Targets?", Multinational Monitor (forthcoming).
- Tanzania: Another case of Norwegian CO2lonialism A project implemented in Uganda by Norwegian company Tree Farms to set up between 80,000 and 100,000 hectares of plantations of pines and eucalyptus to act as carbon sinks has been severely questioned because of its negative social and environmental consequences. It has been defined as a "loss-loss-loss" situation, where the profits for the company are doubtful, local peasant communities are losing their lands and working for miser salaries, and Uganda is losing its sovereignity in relation to the management of its territory and natural resources (see WRM Bulletin 35). In a report published in July 2000, a project also managed by Tree Farms --this time in neighbouring Tanzania-- is analyzed ("Carbon Upsets. Norwegian "Carbon Plantations" in Tanzania" by Jorn Stave, NorWatch). So far Escarpment Forestry Company Ltd., subsidiary of Tree Farms, has planted 1,900 hectares of Pinus patula and Eucalyptus saligna at Sao Hill, Mufindi and Kilombero districts in the Tanzanian highlands. The company is in the process of acquiring larger areas. Additionally it is funding the activities of TAGGAT (Tanzania Greenhouse Gas Action Trust), a foundation that is working with the company in the development of simulation models for carbon fixation in tree biomass. Even though this project differs in several aspects to that implemented by the same company in Uganda, the research concludes that this is another case of "CO2lonialism" provoking negative impacts on the environment, local communities and Tanzania as a country. Local biodiversity --including two orchids and one Aloe species endangered-- will be affected by tree monocultures. At the same time, the fate of carbon content of soils and roots of natural vegetation once plantations are set up is uncertain. Even though Tree Farms made consultations with local villagers before works began, it has used local work force for plantations hiring them by a salary well below the official recommended minimum wage. Moreover, there are still more than 100 workers with several months of pay outstanding. The sum the company is paying as annual rent to the Tanzanian government for land use (U$S 1.9 per hectare) is lower than the rent at Tree Farm's project in Uganda. Nevertheless, the Norwegians are pushing the authorities in order to reduce the rent by as mush as 50%. At the same time, Tanzania will lose control of the leased land during a period of 99 years. The activities of Tree Farms in Tanzania can be considered as even worse than those in Uganda, since in this case the company is expected to make huge profits taking advantage of the very low negotiation power of local communities and the scarce institutional development of the Tanzanian state. Since the "carbon market" implies an absurd trade between agents with very different power, it is not surprising that the more powerful and richer gain while the more feeble and poorer loose. Definitely carbon sinks are not a solution for climate change, but an additional problem, both at the global and the local levels. Article based on information from: "Carbon Upsets. Norwegian "Carbon Plantations" in Tanzania" by Jorn Stave, NorWatch, July 2000; e-mail: norwatch@fivh.no
- Brazil: Dump your carbon garbage with us please! Although the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Climate Change has not yet approved plantations and forests as carbon "offsets", the carbon shop is already very active. What follows is an e-mail message advertising Brazil as a place where cheap land and cheap labour is available for energy utilities to dump their carbon emissions: "From: OMNITRADE aaa@yawl.com.br Our company is located in Brasilia, capital city of the Republic of Brazil since 1978. Deals in the real estate business, acting as intermediary in rural properties as well as urban areas. Since the "Kyoto Protocol" in 1997, signed by many developed countries, there is an agreement that in the near feature there will be a reduction of pollutants to minimize the "greenhouse effect". One of the options under consideration is the trade of emission credits with other nations. This may involve the reforestation of large areas or the deals involving existing forest like the negotiation that took place between electric utility industries and the Government of Costa Rica. We understand that if the developed countries proceed with the negotiations in COP - 6 in Hague next November and they approve the set of international standards needed of how compliance issues will be resolved and what role of carbon sequestration activities (land use, land use change and forestry) in the Protocol, the demand for credits will surge. We are able to submit competitive offers to energy utilities for reforesting projects (land at low prices, cheap labor and reasonably priced fertilizers). We realize that the first option of the energy sector will be to invest in its own country or neighbors, but the alternative options in Brazil should be kept in mind as it could provide great savings compared to similar investments in other places. Aside the sale of land and native forests, we can offer the option for lease or can act as intermediary on joint ventures for reforestation. The lease has the added advantage that is an excellent option for the cash flow of the company with the reforestation providing the necessary credits now and years later the benefit of the wood supply. Our site is under construction ( http://www.ecobiz.com.br ). However, we have listed some properties of interest as well some information about environmental issues. It is to your advantage to take a look at them as you may find business opportunities of interest. If you need further information, have recommendations or suggestions, please e-mail at ( contactus@ecobiz.com.br cc to omnitrade@hotmail.com ). Thank you in advance for your kind attention and hopping in the near future to do business to our mutual benefit, we remain Yours truly. Demetre Calimeris Director OMNI Consultoria Imobiliaria Ltda SHIS
|
 |
|||
|
|||
|
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
