- World Bank to log primary rainforests

On 30th October, the World Bank's Board of Executive Directors approved a new Forests Policy. After one of the longest and most controversial consultation processes the Bank has ever carried out, the revised policy was pushed through in two days of unprecedentedly strong debates, despite objections from some governments. Although the final text of the policy has yet to be officially released, the main elements are already clear. Reversing the 1991 policy which had proscribed World Bank funding of logging in primary moist tropical forests, the new policy is instead meant to prevent all Bank operations from causing 'significant' damage to 'critical forests' , while forestry projects are in addition to be subject to certification.

Most NGOs had called for retaining the proscription on old growth logging and extending it to boreal, temperate and tropical dry forests. They are deeply concerned that lack of clarity, about how much damage is 'significant' and in the definition of 'critical' forests, will allow many destructive projects to go ahead. The lack of effective safeguards to protect the rights of vulnerable forest peoples is another major NGO concern. Protections offered to forest-dwellers in forestry projects have not been extended to forest-dwellers affected by non-forestry lending. The new policy also relies on the procedures of the existing Natural Habitats policy which, some critics claim, actually does allow critical habitats to be destroyed, at the discretion of the Bank's Regional Vice-Presidents.

One of the issues longest debated at the Board was whether this policy should apply to Structural Adjustment and Programmatic loans, which now make up over a third of World Bank lending. The new policy does not apply to such loans but a compromise agreement was reached at the Board, requiring the Regional Vice-Presidencies to get technical opinions on any such loans that might cause 'significant' damage to forests. This requirement will not be written into the Policy, however. In view of the controversial nature of the new policy, the Board also required an independent review of the implementation of the new policy in three years time.

By: Marcus Colchester, Forest Peoples Programme, e-mail: marcus@fppwrm.gn.apc.org

---

top

- FSC is misleading consumers

A press release from the FSC UK recently claimed that the FSC label on timber and timber products gives the public an "assurance that the timber used comes from forests managed to the highest environmental, social and economic standards" and that "anyone buying FSC certified products is helping to ensure a safer future for the earth's forests and the people and wildlife that depend on them".

However a new report to be published by the Rainforest Foundation prior to the FSC General Assembly in November, shows that such claims do not stand up to scrutiny and that the FSC is misleading the public about the reliability of its certification procedures. The report is based on 18 months of investigations, and includes detailed case studies of 'problematic' FSC certifications or national 'FSC processes' in Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Ireland, Malaysia and Thailand (see article by Chris Lang in this bulletin).

FSC's Principles and Criteria (P&C) for assessment and certification of logging operations have been widely supported by NGOs internationally (although there are strong reservations with regard to Principle 10 on plantations, as discussed elsewhere in this bulletin). However, there is much evidence that many FSC certificates have been awarded to logging companies that are in serious breach of the FSC P&C.

The Rainforest Foundation believes that one of the underlying reasons for this is that the FSC's accredited certifiers have a strong vested corporate interest in ensuring 'successful' outcomes to certification 'assessments' --regardless of whether or not the logging company actually complies with the FSC's P&C. The certification bodies compete in a fierce market to sell their certification 'services' to clients (i.e., logging companies) who want the 'marketing opportunities' that the FSC logo represents. This has led to a 'race to the bottom' in the standards and rigour with which logging companies are actually assessed. The Foundation's report documents examples where certified companies have been implicated in gross abuses of human rights, are logging in pristine tropical rainforest containing some of the world's most endangered wildlife species, and have falsely claimed to comply with the FSC's certification requirements.

The FSC Secretariat, which is responsible for monitoring and disciplining the certifiers, and ensuring that the P&C are upheld, has been either unable or unwilling to take effective action to stop this abuse. Local communities, indigenous peoples and NGOs have often been poorly informed or consulted about certifications, and have found themselves confronted with an impossible task in challenging certification decisions once certificates have been awarded.

In some countries, the 'FSC process' has helped to bring different 'stakeholder' groups together, and has produced national certification standards that accommodate all interests. In others, however, environmental and social groups --usually represented by NGOs-- have been heavily marginalised, and have been dominated by timber industry interests. The resulting FSC national certification standards have, in some cases, been lower even than is required by national laws.

Over the last few years, the FSC has sought to expand the area certified, and to get FSC-labelled products onto the shelves of shops, as quickly as possible. Partly, this has been in order to 'compete' with other, non-performance based, certification schemes such as the 'Pan European Forest Certification' scheme (PEFC). Partly it has also been to satisfy the demand of an increasing number of large northern wood processors and retailers, which have been encouraged to 'ask for FSC certified products'. However, FSC's 'fast growth' approach seems to have encouraged a 'lax' attitude in ensuring that the certifiers actually uphold the P&C.

Moreover, several FSC 'policies' now in place such as the 'percentage-based' labelling policy --which allows for the FSC labelling of products which contain up to 70% of material which is actually not from FSC certified forests or recycled sources-- are specifically designed to help large industrial interests, but are almost impossible to police in practice. Community forests and small-scale forest managers, meanwhile, find it extremely difficult and costly to obtain or retain FSC certification.

The Rainforest Foundation believes that urgent structural, political and practical reform is needed if FSC is to survive as a credible mechanism for the certification of environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial and economically viable forestry. A number of detailed proposals for reform are made in the Rainforest Foundation's new report. Most importantly, the FSC must take immediate action to prevent the issuing of further certificates to logging companies that do not actually comply with the Principles and Criteria. The FSC should aim to compete with other certification schemes on quality, not quantity.

The Rainforest Foundation's report 'Trading in Credibility: the myth and reality of the Forest Stewardship Council' will be available from http://www.rainforestfoundationuk.com , or by e-mailing rainforestuk@rainforestuk.org , from November 20th.

By: Simon Counsell (Director RFUK), e-mail: simonc@rainforestuk.com , and Kim Terje Loraas (Policy Officer RFUK), e-mail: kim-lor@online.no

---

top

- Tropical Prawns versus Mangroves

The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands was signed in the city of Ramsar, Iran, in 1971 and entered into force in 1975. Ramsar is the only environmental convention that addresses a specific ecosystem, that of the wetlands. Wetlands, as recognised by the Ramsar Convention, fulfil essential ecological functions, as regulators of hydrological regimes and as habitats for a very rich biodiversity and are a resource of great economic, cultural, scientific and recreational importance that must be preserved.

Mangroves, coastal forests located in tropical and equatorial areas of the world, are part of these wetlands. They are presently seriously threatened. According to FAO, over 50% of the mangroves have already disappeared. Today the main cause of mangrove loss is the expansion of the shrimp industry, breeding shrimps or tropical prawns in coastal areas of poor countries to export them to rich countries such as Spain, the United States or Japan. In fact, most of the prawns found today on the market are a product of the destruction of coastal ecosystems in the countries of the South and of the displacement of local populations.

Resolution VII.2, taken at the Seventh Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (Costa Rica, 1999), recognises the economic, social and environmental value of the wetlands such as mangroves for fishing, biodiversity, coastal protection, leisure activities, education and water quality. It recognised that the subsistence of a considerable number of populations depends on the productivity and value of wetlands located in inter-tidal zones and also showed concern over the advanced process of degradation that is to be found in many coastal wetlands, mainly as a result of unsustainable aquaculture and contamination.

In view of the above, the Convention urged the Contracting Parties --that is to say, the States-- to suspend the promotion and creation of new facilities for unsustainable aquaculture activities, damaging to coastal wetlands, including the expansion of already existing facilities, until measures aimed at establishing a sustainable aquaculture system, in harmony with the environment and local communities can be identified, by means of environmental and social impact assessments on such activities and through appropriate studies.

Unfortunately, this resolution is not being implemented. For this reason, Greenpeace and the Mangrove Network (Redmanglar) (a network gathering NGOs from Ecuador, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Brazil and Colombia working in defence of mangroves) will submit a very concrete demand regarding mangroves: a moratorium on the expansion of the shrimp industry, to the Eighth Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention, to be held in November, in Valencia (Spain).

Without this stoppage, we will be unable to save these ecosystems and we will prevent the local populations that depend on them from having a different opportunity --other than poverty or migration. Perhaps the Eighth Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention is one of the last opportunities to curb the destruction of the only forests that can live with their roots in the sea.

By: Eva Hernández, article sent by CODDEFFAGOLF, e-mail: cgolf@sdnhon.org.hn

---

top

- Danish NGO censured for protecting rainforests

According to the Danish Data Protection Agency, the environmental NGO Nepenthes is not allowed to advise Danish consumers against purchasing from shops where they risk buying garden furniture whose production has contributed to the destruction of rainforests.

The Danish Data Protection Agency (Datatilsynet) has ordered Nepenthes to remove its "Blacklist" of retailers from the home page http://www.tropetrae.dk . The order was issued after the Danish Timber Trade Federation complained to the Agency on behalf of the hardwood furniture company, Kircodan Furniture, which is one of the companies found on the Blacklist. "It is highly regrettable that Kircodan Furniture and the Danish Timber Trade Federation try to suppress us instead of changing their business profiles. They should rather spend their energy on supplying sustainable FSC-labelled wood products to their customers", says Jacob Andersen, President of Nepenthes.

The Data Protection Agency characterise the case as a "new delimitation" of the legislation, and it is therefore surprising and deplorable that the Agency agrees with the Danish Timber Trade Federation's view on the case. With the new delimitation of the law, the Data Protection Agency puts an effective halt on the ability of NGOs to advise consumers against purchasing from certain companies." By this act, the essential role for NGOs and consumer organisations as critical watchdogs and debaters of society is amputated. That is of course totally unacceptable", Jacob Andersen says. Illegal timber trade is seen as one of the most important reasons for the massive destruction of rainforests that is taking place in many countries, and governments in poor rainforest countries are annually losing billions of dollars due to timber that is smuggled out of their countries in order to be sold on Western markets.

"With the decision of the Danish Data Protection Agency, the trade in illegal timber is not only allowed to continue. It will have even better conditions than before, because it has been deemed illegal to dissuade consumers from buying from companies not doing enough to avoid trading in wood from illegal and destructive timber harvest", Jacob Andersen rounds off.

Nepenthes press release, 31 October 2002. Additional information is available from: Jacob Andersen, President of Nepenthes, Phone: + 45 26 24 12 75 /+ 45 66 17 96 27, E-mail: ja@nepenthes.dk ; http://www.nepenthes.dk / http://www.tropetrae.dk