"The Bitter Fruit of Oil Palm"

back to index

Other cases around the tropics: America

Oil palm was introduced in Colombia in 1932, but its commercial development started by the end of the fifties. In the mid sixties there were over 18,000 hectares of that crop in the provinces of César, Magdalena, Santander and Norte de Santander. Palm cultivation expanded to other provinces and according to data published in 1995 by Fedepalma, by that year there were already around 130,000 hectares, being the country's main oil crop, mainly in the north, central and eastern zones of the country.

Currently, within the framework of the so called "Plan Colombia", the government aims at replacing plantation of illegal crops with oil palm and plans to plant up to 300,000 new hectares. These new plantations would be included under the agricultural plan of the present administration, disregarding both people and the environment.

As stated by the Peasant Association of the Valley of River Cimitarra (Asociación Campesina del Valle del río Cimitarra - ACVC), these plantations are a "a sad example of the coctail of large land owners with aspirations of efficiency or modernity who, pretending to be productive, not only don't abandon but reaffirm themselves in their exclusivist and monopolistic land use structure." And ACVC adds: "This system aims at increasing yield per hectare without altering the structure of land ownership at all. The new feudal lords talk about productive alliances, which are nothing but a sort of disguised sharecropping. These alliances are the legal remedy to elude their obligations with poor agricultural workers. As workers become partners, large land owners save the payment of wages and eliminate extra time and social contribution duties. According to the owners, they should remain in charge of the administration of these alliances, as they are "experienced". In other cases these "new" large land owners offer a plan to small and even medium sized land owners and producers for association with their monoculture projects through their indebtedness under the sophism of the "peasant palm economy". The actual plan of the large land owners, which control the industrialization and commercialization processes, is one for getting a permanent raw material supply without establishing any labour link between them and the impoverished peasants.

Not even the declared objectives -such as a higher monetary incomes per hectare- will be achieved, since, as stated by ACVC, the actual aim is to increase the raw material supply.

The Malaysian situation last year was an example of what could happen in Colombia in the near future. Despite an increase of 30% in the September-October harvest, the price kept a steady falling trend along the year and by October was 40% lower than in January of the same year. Malaysia is the world's main producer and exporter of palm oil. The country has great experience in oil palm production, which is not precisely very positive, especially regarding people and the environment. A short time ago, by the end of May, many Malaysian producers had to burn their production of ripe fruit ("because it is too costly to transport the produce to the nearest processing mill in Beaufort, in the wake of the low price of palm oil in the global market"), as informed by the local newspaper Daily Express.

But the most irreversible damage will be the one caused to the environment and therefore to the people and fundamentally to those with less resources. According to a study which was recently published by the Alexander Von Humboldt Institute (Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander Von Humboldt), "it is important to remember that palm plantations are not forests but uniform ecosystems which replace natural ecosystems and their biodiversity. This usually results in adverse social and environmental impacts: water production decreases; the soil structure and composition is modified; the abundance of fauna and flora and their species' composition are altered; the livelihood base of the native population is lost, and in some cases black and indigenous populations and peasant communities are displaced". Some examples of these have already been recorded, such as that of the western palm cultivation zone (Municipality of Tumaco), where the destruction of the primary forest is mostly associated to palm cultivation. Furthermore, as is widely known, one of the main causes leading species to enter into the higher endangered categories, is the destruction of their habitats".

The main aim of that study was to prove the "perversity" of certain incentives, such as the Incentive of Rural Capitalization (Incentivo a la Capitalización Rural - ICR), which are claimed to "achieve peace" and are promoted within the framework of the Plan Colombia. "The ICR was chosen for the late yield crops as a potentially perverse incentive, as it is directly oriented to the expansion of oil palm plantation wherever within the country, disregarding considerations of biodiversity conservation. The ICR is a condonation of the credit granted by FINAGRO to farmers and cattle-ranchers and could reach 40% of the total credit, depending on the type of producer involved."

It is important to clarify that this incentive is just a new formula of an old history of incentives, as "incentives have been granted to oil palm producers since the 50’s, and the increase of planted areas from 250 hectares in 1957 to over 150,000 hectares in 1999 has been the result of all sort of incentives, including "fiscal and tax incentives, research and technical assistance, free distribution of plants and seeds, access to credit", among others.

Through a microeconomic analysis which made it possible to determine the behaviour of producers regarding changes in the price of credit, it was possible to establish that the ICR "can encourage both established producers as well as new investors to increase the area planted with oil palm, replacing other plant covers, like tropical rainforest and grass." The model used in this study allowed to "simulate the possible effects on biodiversity of applying the ICR in two palm producing areas: north and west" and to "estimate the optimal areas which would be required by the producers" . It also enabled the calculation of the Indicator of Biodiversity (IBD) which allows the comparison of the present biodiversity level with the level those potentially required areas would have if they were actually turned into palm cultivation". The results indicated a biodiversity loss ranging from 21.8 and 39.15% in the various areas analysed.

But above all the environmental and social impacts which may arise from an expansion of oil palm monocultures, it is unbelievable that the "solution" offered by the Plan Colombia to the peasants currently growing illegal crops should be the plantation of oil palm. A viable solution will only be such if illegal crops are replaced by others with similar income levels of the ones they presently receive and this is something which for sure will not be provided by oil palm cultivation. The current price for oil palm is already not profitable and the increase in the area devoted to oil palm plantations will further reduce it. This is therefore a new deception, which will only render higher profits for the Colombian palm oil companies, while its impacts will be suffered by people and the environment.

- Ecuador: Oil palm in the devastated Garden of Eden
By Ricardo Buitrón

In Ecuador, the relaunching of oil palm cultivation has given rise to different reactions. In a long interview published by a widely read newspaper, for instance, the question was raised on whether oil palm plantation in the province of Esmeraldas would bring this poor Ecuadorian region nearer to paradise (El Universo, 11/3/2000), while at the same time other headlines stated that oil palm cultivation is destroying native forests and that thousands of hectares have been destroyed in San Lorenzo (La Hora, 18/5/2001).

Other press media, on the other hand, echoed the massive campaign carried out by the Association of Oil Palm Cultivators of Ecuador (Asociación de Palmicultores del Ecuador ANCUPA), aimed at cleaning up their image after having been blamed for the destruction of forests. In this sense, they claimed that oil palm monocultures constitute a development proposal which is subject to "environmental censorship" and put forward the question of whether oil palm cultivation was the hen that laid the golden eggs or the "bad guy" for the environment.

Salomón Gutt, manager of Palmeras de los Andes, one of the companies responsible for the most extensive destruction of primary forest in San Lorenzo, declared that "this area had been forgotten by God and the world" until they arrived. He also stressed the fact that the palm is environmentaly friendly and that "in the end a new palm forest emitting lots of oxygen is obtained. There is probably no other entrepreneurial project which can equal oil palm cultivation, where man and nature are completely intertwined."

The governmental sector also participated in the discusion. Hans Thiel, former Forestry Director and now undersecretary of the Ministry of Environment, declared that the Ministry sees the creation of alternative sources of employment by the palm companies as something positive, since the main pressures on natural forests arise from poverty, colonization and population displacements (sic) (Diario Hoy. Blanco y Negro, 6/5/2000).

Now, after several months have elapsed since the start of the accelerated implantation of these monocultures in Esmeraldas, several points of the present situation need to be highlighted:

- the process of land acquisition has resulted in the displacement of Afro-Ecuadorian population. Some of these people, fostered by palm cultivators, are now putting pressure on the territory of the Awa and Chachi indigenous communities, which have denounced the situation to the Ministry of Agriculture.

- almost 8,000 hectares have already been deforested, most of them illegally, and areas within the Forest Heritage of the State has been illegally awarded.

- the companies have not submitted the necessary environmental impact studies to carry out these operations, and the sanctions and timely actions to stop deforestation have not been taken, as can be deduced from the declarations of government officials.

As a result of environmental organizations' accusations, the Environment Minister had to make an appearance in the National Congress, where he explained that eight judicial actions had been filed on account of the clearance of native forest and that seven of them had already received a verdict. The situation of those cases would be as follows: in the case against Palmeras de los Andes, the proceedings were rendered void in the appeal, due to errors in the location of the land. Palesma was sentenced to pay a fine of 67,908 US dollars for clearing 250 hectares of secondary forest. Ecuafinca has been sanctioned with a fine of 10 minimum vital salaries. Palmeras del Pacífico was acquitted by the Forestry District of Esmeraldas due to lack of evidence. Aiquisa was sanctioned with a fine of 10 minimum vital salaries. The case against Agrícola San Lorenzo was rendered void by the appeals court due to administrative errors. Teobrama was sanctioned with a fine of 10 minimum vital salaries, and the same fine was imposed on Ales Palma (the minimum vital salary amounts to 4 US dollars!).

The activity of oil palm companies is also affecting the Forest Heritage of the State. Ales Palma has areas which "overlap" the Forest Heritage of the State in Ricaurte; Alzamora has similar "overlapping areas" in Corriente Larga; Palesema in Campanita and partly in the mangroves reserve Cayapas-Mataje, and Palmeras de los Andes, in Corriente Larga. Such illegal awards were made by the National Institute of Agricultural Development, INDA (Instituto Nacional de Desarrollo Agrario), which has been accused of being a "cave of thieves" by the Minister of Agriculture.

As a consequence of so many irregular situations, on March 14, 2001, the Constitutional Court decided in favour of the appeal filed by environmental organizations to immediately halt the further implementation of oil palm monoculture activities and to declare a state of environmental emergency in the province of Esmeraldas, demanding the initiation of legal actions to sanction those who have cleared forests and that the action of the Ministry of Environment be in accordance with the legal provisions in force.

Instead of abiding by the legal provisions, San Lorenzo’s palm cultivators threatened to paralyze activities and leave the zone, stating that the Ministry of Environment was not providing them with "sufficient guarantees". Former Minister of Environment Rendón insinuated that his resignation, which occurred a few days after those declarations, had been the result of the oil palm companies' pressure.

Despite all the evidence regarding the illegal activities of oil palm companies and despite the ruling of the Constitutional Court banning further oil palm activities in the region, the situation continues to be serious. The derisory fines imposed, the fact that no one has been indicted on the charges provided for those guilty of forest destruction, and that no civil servant collaborating with deforestation has been sanctioned for negligence, are proof of the above. Furthermore, the companies continue with their business in zones in which the State cannot even enter, by making use of their power and influence within the Government, and thus evading all sort of sanction and control.

The current devastation in the province of Esmeraldas arises from a logic of development that allows the destruction of forests to give way to monocultures; shrimp exports in exchange for mangrove destruction; wood extraction over biodiversity. And on top of it all, the green province of Esmeraldas is affected by the aerial spraying carried out during these months in Colombia to eradicate coca cultivation. This Garden of Eden should be urgently declared in emergency.

Chiapas means much for many people all over the world. It is a synonym of Zapatistas and of Subcomandante Marcos, and these, in turn, of struggle for liberation and against injustice. However, for national and transnational corporations, Chiapas is still merely a synonym of cheap land, cheap labour, abundant resources and profit opportunities.

It is not surprising then that both the government and the company owners are promoting a number of projects that would harm the rich cultural and biological diversity of Chiapas. Among these is the promotion of oil palm monocultures by the government, opening the door to foreign investors, especially from Malaysia, who dominate the international palm oil market.

Oil palm still occupies relatively small areas (some 3,000 hectares), located in the municipalities of Acapetahua, Acacoyagua, Mazatán, Mapastepec and Villa Comaltitlán, which supply the oil extracting plants installed in Villa Comaltitlán and Acapetahua. However, the impacts are beginning to be perceived.

In the year 2000, the oil palm producers of Acapetahua already felt that they were "at the mercy of the voracity of buyers, the owners of the extracting plants, who pay the price they choose per ton". According to the producers, the government -who was responsible for the introduction of the farming programme of this crop- should be responsible for regulating a guarantee price for the product. However, as the government did not take on that role, the producers, confronted with the prices established by the industrial monopoly were on the verge of bankruptcy. Since then, prices have dropped even more.

Why is there so much interest in oil palm production in Chiapas? The answer is simple: because it yields high profits, does not need much labour, requires few inputs, and it is low-risk capital for companies. In general terms, peasants provide land and labour; they do not own the production process, but just the fruit extraction. Cultivation of this crop also takes advantage of the cheap labour offered by migrants in the border region. It is the case of the day labourers of the Guatemalan border: those who are lucky earn 32 pesos a day (3.5 dollars), not including food, and even children are often hired. In addition, in some cases, the Guatemalan authorities have had to act to require the payment of unpaid wages to Guatemalan workers. This means that the workers are literally being exploited.

From the environmental perspective, the impacts can already be perceived. In fact, large scale monocultures imply the destruction of great extensions of forests of the region and their rich biodiversity. If government plans of allotting thousands of hectares to cultivation of this crop are carried out, it would also imply the occupation of great extensions of land belonging to indigenous and farmer communities of Chiapas. The oil palm production potential of Chiapas is estimated at 940,000 hectares in the Northern, Forest and Coastal zones. But since these areas are not empty, the promotion of this and other crops (such as eucalyptus), will result in the appropriation of vast areas currently used by local peoples.

It is thus clear that the promotion of this crop is not aimed at improving the life quality of local peoples, because among all the possible alternatives, it is one of the worst in terms of wages and employment generation. Furthermore, it endangers the survival of forests and of resources of the local people, through the occupation of huge extensions of land by palm monocultures. The local people have already begun to perceive it, which explains the increasing opposition of the Chiapaneca people, who are not willing to change their natural resources for false promises.

The history of oil palm in Central America is closely linked to the history of the economic group United Fruit. Preston and Keith, two US businessmen who, for 20 years since 1870 concentrated on planting and exporting bananas to the USA, merged their companies in 1899 to found the United Fruit Company (UFCO), as a means of diversifying their plantations and increasing their profits.

In 1901, the Guatemalan dictator Manuel Estrada Cabrera granted UFCO the exclusive right to transport mail between Guatemala and the USA. The Compañía Guatemalteca de Ferrocarril (The Guatemalan Railway Company) was created, as a subsidiary of UFCO. The company was allowed to buy land at cheap prices, it was granted subsidies, and with some variations, it obtained in many Central American countries the control of transport and communications, which also allowed it to collect money for every product transported from one place to another. This was the entrance door for UFCO’s large investments in Latin America. In few years, the power of UFCO, also known as "yunai" or "La Frutera" (the fruit company), stretched over several countries.

During the first two decades of the twentieth century, the consolidation of the banana business in Honduras was hindered by serious political problems, and in Costa Rica, the coffee grower oligarchy showed a strong opposition to the banana business. In 1923, United Fruit created a research department and an experimental station (both of them in Honduras), with the objective of introducing and assessing new tropical crops in Central America.

The appearance and dissemination of Fusarium wilt in banana plantations forced UFCO to abandon large farming areas. Part of those areas were used to plant oil palm.

In the 1940's, the first oil palm plantations were established in Nicaragua in an area of approximately 1,800 hectares, in the municipality of Rama, on the Atlantic Coast. The location of the plantation allowed good adaptability and profitability. However, due to armed conflicts in the area, the exploitation was discontinued and its development as a commercial crop was disregarded.

Another pilot project considered experimental, was installed in the southern area, near the border with Costa Rica, in Rio San Juan. All this region is considered of high potential for this crop.

After 1942, UFCO accumulated considerable experience and information about the extraction and processing of oil from oil palm. Evaluation studies were carried out by area, and many samples were sent to the USA. The results were so promising that UFCO began its commercial plantations.

In 1962, UFCO began a period of strong incentive to this crop, and the decade of the sixties was characterized by the adoption of a number of measures to expand plantations. In 1965, UFCO acquired the NUMAR group in Costa Rica for processing and marketing vegetable oils -as a means of vertically integrating its business- and in 1967 it established processing units in Honduras. In 1969, it bought Compañía Aceitera Corona in Nicaragua.

In 1970 United Fruit changed its name to United Brands after merging with another company, leaving behind a name linked to a long history of political and social manipulation. However, for the seasonal workers in the fields life continues being harsh. Working conditions are physically dangerous, work is seasonal and the toxic chemicals used in the crop are a permanent hazard.

The oil palm industry has been in permanent expansion in the main tropical regions of Central America, and oil palm is nowadays one of the main crops in those areas where it is established. However, this expansion has not been exclusively carried out by the companies. In Nicaragua, in the eighties, two experimental stations were established in the humid tropical zone in the same area of Rio San Juan through the Fondo Simón Bolívar -a multilateral voluntary fund.

At present one of these stations has been abandoned and has no link with the local communities, while the other one has been reactivated for commercial exploitation, including the installation of an industrial facility for raw material processing. At a Seminar on Pesticides, Ecology and Scientific Research in the Xolotlán, Cocibolca and Río San Juan Lakes held in 1999, local organizations and communities settled in the south of Nicaragua, denounced the direct contamination of water courses as a result of the oil plant activity, and the consequent death of species of the local fauna.

For the oil palm to reach high productivity levels, high sun radiation levels are also required, which has generally led to the deforestation of vast regions of primary forests. Until now it has not been possible to force the company to take on its responsibility for the damages denounced by the communities.

The accusations were swiftly followed by threats. "25 year-old Genoveva Gaitán Matamoros from San Miguelito, says that Mr. Juan Reyes threatened to shoot her if she did not stop going around with those environmentalists, who did not let him earn his money. And he earns it destroying our forests and our lives, because the forests mean life for everyone: people and animals"

Following a recommendation of the Privatisation Unit's Board, the government of Guyana is considering a proposal under which Primegroup Limited and Matthews Associates would take over the Wauna Oil Palm Estate in the north west region of the country, on condition that they establish a local company. Primegroup Ltd. is a major investor in oil palm development in Malaysia, ranked as the first producer in the world.

Matthews Associates and its local partner are providing US$ 1 million in the initial investment financing and Primegroup Limited has committed itself to a capital injection of US$ 2.5 million in the estate. Approximately 4,000 hectares of land in the North West District will be granted to the investors at a first stage of the project. The government has said that an additional lease of 10,000 hectares will be executed in favour of the investors if the feasibility, environmental and other studies required by the work programme indicate that oil palm cultivation in the region is viable.

Malaysian investment in Guyana is yet another example of the spread of monoculture oil palm plantations throughout the tropics, which is causing widespread social and environmental impacts in Asia, Africa and Central and South America, while generating very few benefits to local people. As usual, in this case the investors have given an undertaking that the level of employment will increase on a yearly basis -moving from 339 employees at the end of year one to 1,545 employees by year seven- but experience shows that employment levels in this activity is minimal and working conditions poor.

- Costa Rica: the depredatory practices of an oil palm plantation company
By Juan Figuerola

Palma Tica is a company working in the area of cultivation, processing and production of oil palm products. It owns thousands of hectares of oil palm plantations in the Central Pacific Region (Quepos Division) and in the Southern Region (Coto Division). To face the rapid advance of its competitor Agroindustrial Cooperative of Oil Palm Producers (Coopeagropal R.L.), Palma Tica started in 1995 an aggressive campaign of land purchasing in the communities of Colorada and La Palma de Corredores, located in the extreme south of the Coto Division. The company bought more than one thousand hectares, including several estates with oil palm already in a productive stage.

In January 1997 Palma Tica began to expand its plantations at Hacienda La Palma estate after clearing a secondary forest area. The fact was denounced to the Ministry of the Environment and Energy (MINAE). Officials of the Ministry inspected the affected area and demanded Palma Tica to stop deforestation. The newspaper "La Nacion" published an article titled "MINAE recommends Palma Tica".

In February, three members of the Surveillance Committee for Natural Resources (Comité de Vigilancia de Recursos Naturales - COVIRENA) of La Palma de los Corredores inspected the area, after being alerted by a neighbour of La Palma, who had been working for Palma Tica. The company had ignored the "recommendations" of MINAE and continued advancing to reach its main objective: an area of about one hundred hectares of wetlands and primary forests at the bottom of the La Palma gully. They found that a vast area of such wetlands had been deforested, and that a stretch of about one kilometre and a half long had been dredged at La Palma gully -where the Colorado River flows- with the purpose of draining the whole wetland. To complete the dredging works, the whole vegetation cover of the area -including the trees located at the right bank of the gully- had been destroyed, and the area converted in a quagmire. The waters at the gully were brown-coloured. Many lizards and turtles died, as well as fishes and crustaceans, that the inhabitants of La Palma used as food and leisure resources. COVIRENA went to Court to denounce this depredation. To preserve its public image, Palma Tica abandoned its previous idea of planting oil palm in that area, and currently the flora and fauna are slowly recovering.

Even though the La Palma gully now seems to be relatively well protected, this experience does not seem to have served the purpose of improving Palma Tica's attitude regarding the environment and people. Given its obvious impunity concerning law compliance, Palma Tica has always applied an abusive and disdainful labour policy and continues doing so, through a sub-contracting system similar to that of the banana companies. Palma Tica hires contractors which lend themselves to foul play and, in exchange of money and privileges, assume the role of bosses. They then subcontract agricultural labourers in need of a job, who work to earn miserable salaries, without any social security or other benefits, and exposed to systematic dismissals every three months. Many of them are illegal workers -immigrants from Panama and Nicaragua- who arrive in Costa Rica with the illusion of finding better job opportunities.

The presence of Palma Tica has provoked a stagnation of the economy and community disintegration at La Palma. Young people and adults have migrated in search of job opportunities. Crime has increased while poverty and insecurity reign.

After the events that took place at La Palma gully, Palma Tica did not abandon entirely its original intention of expanding plantations at the expense of natural areas. The company recently moved to neighbouring Osa Peninsula, where local conservationist groups have already denounced illegal logging in several gullies in the locality of Canaza.

The case of Palma Tica is typical of a very powerful company that hides itself under different names, so that it is practically impossible to identify those who are responsible for its depredatory actions. Uncertainty and distrust are so widespread that rumours are circulating that Costa Rica's President himself, Miguel Angel Rodriguez Echeverria, is suspected of being one of the shareholders of this big company, which makes profits at the expense of natural resources and that of the impoverished workers and people. To the world's eyes, Costa Rica has gained prestige as a country committed to the conservation of natural resources and the defence of social rights. However, those of us who live here know that a great part of that is pure demagogy serving the interests of those who hold economic power.

Working conditions

- Working conditions in oil palm plantations

The following description of work in plantations was written in 1987. Unfortunately, the situation has in general terms not improved much and it is therefore applicable to most of today's plantations.

"Work on an oil-palm plantation is back-breaking and dangerous. Palm-oil fruits (used in making margarine and cooking oil) grow alongside thorny fronds, 12 to 15 feet above the ground. They are cut down with a long and heavy pole and the skin, head and eyes of the harvester are likely to be cut by the falling fronds. In Malaysian plantations, fruit is cut down mainly by men, while women collect and load the 40-kilogram fruit branches, and thorns can become permanently lodged in the hands, causing constant irritation and infection.

Only rarely is protective clothing issued to the women who spray a mixture of lethal paraquat on the ground to kill weeds. The clothes are too warm for the climate and they don’t even afford much protection: as the sprayers aim for weeds the fine mist drifts and slips inside the clothing. Some people believe the chemicals cause the material to disintegrate.

Wages on plantations are low. Oil-palm plantation workers in Malaysia earn just under the industrial wage - if they are lucky.

Earning the full weekly wage usually involves long hours in the baking sun, struggling to fulfil the company’s quota of palm-oil nuts. The whole family - mothers, grandparents, fathers and children usually work together. Their wages are also dependent on the world market price for palm-oil, and so fluctuate with that price."

In 1996, the World Rainforest Movement and the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Association (IUF-UITA-IUL) made a joint statement to the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (IPF) focused on the social aspects of plantation development, where "plantation workers are among the poorest and most exploited of all agricultural labourers."

The joint statement -endorsed by many other organisations- expressed that "low wages are not the only problems faced by plantations labourers. The ILO (International Labour Organization) notes that, by and large, housing conditions in plantations continue to be characterised by overcrowding and insufficient and poor infrastructure. Medical assistance is poor especially in the lack of provision of preventive health care, sanitation and clean water supplies. Primary education facilities are generally insufficient to enable children to attend school regularly and complete their primary education. Poor safety standards are common particularly with regard to the misuse of agro-chemicals. All these problems are linked to the fact that the rights of plantations workers to organise and collective bargaining are commonly denied. These problems are exacerbated by the fact that, globally, prices for most plantation commodities have progressively declined in real terms in the past decades."

Additionally, the WRM and IUF stress that "rights to organise and bargain collectively are still denied in many countries and private companies have exploited this lack of protection by maintaining or driving down wages and benefits. Mechanisation has reduced the demand for and hence the bargaining force of labour. Even where commodity prices have risen in real terms, such as in the pulp and paper sector, benefits have rarely been passed on plantations workers. The trend towards the divestment of lands and reliance on contract farming and smallholder nucleus estates has had very varied effects. In some countries, small farmers have been able to benefit, by organising as cooperatives and through effective collective bargaining with processing and exporting industries. In other countries, however, where small-farmers are weakly organised or their rights to organise and bargain collectively are suppressed, companies have been able to increase their profits by shifting onto small-farmers the costs of health, schooling, pension and insurance provisions as well as the risks associated with spoiled and injuries".

The statement urged the IPF to take the issue on board, stressing the "urgent need for renewed efforts to ensure stronger protections for plantation workers and new mechanisms to allow more adequate consideration of their rights and interests in planning.

What follows is the full statement:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Forests has provided an important opportunity for the international community to take stock of developments in forest policy-making. By encouraging the participation of non-governmental workers and indigenous peoples organizations –in line with the commitments made at Río to involve "Major Groups" in the implementation of Agenda 21- the IPF is promoting a cross-sectorial approach to forest policy-making.

This has enhanced the realization that debates about forests are not just about trees but are also about the welfare of people who live in and depend on forests and forests-based industries.

Our organizations are concerned that emerging international standards and principles relating to the environment should harmonise with and support existing and emerging international standards regarding the welfare of workers, human rights and social justice. We have been encouraged to note that the first two sessions of the IPF have at least opened debate about two important social sectors whose rights are often marginalized in forestry and forest policy-making: namely indigenous peoples and landless peasants. We look forward to further progress being made on these themes in this and next sessions of the IPF.

In this submission we wish to focus attention on another social group, plantation workers, who are among the most ignored of all the social sectors affected by international and national forest policy-making.

The rapid development of plantations has become a major theme in recent forest policy debates. With often questionable logic, planners have emphasised the advantages of expanding plantations to reduce pressure on natural forests, protect watersheds, offset carbon emissions, provide woodfuel and paper-pulp, increase national revenues and profitably use degraded lands. However, the social implications of these proposals have received little consideration.

Yet, according to the International Labour Organization (ILO), total plantation wage employment is of the order of 20 million workers, or 2% of the agricultural economically active population in developing countries. Of these between 20 and 50 % are women, the numbers varying widely from country to country. Children are also very involved, making up between 7 and 12 % of the total plantation labour force. In addition, several tens of millions of smallholders are involved in plantations commodity production, although no precise estimate is possible. ILO data suggest that plantation workers have one of the highest incidences of poverty of any agricultural group.

International legal standards evolved through the tri-partite structure of the ILO have clearly defined the rights of plantations workers and the corresponding obligations of employers and governments. Among the most important of these rights are:

• rights relating to Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize (as set out in ILO Convention 87 (1948)
• rights relating to the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining (as set out in ILO Convention 98 (1949)
• rights concerning Conditions of Employment of Plantation Workers (as set out in ILO Convention 110 (1958)
• rights specific to Rural Workers’ Organizations (as set out in ILO Convention 141 (1975)

To date only 11 countries worldwide have ratified the ILO’s Convention 110 on plantation workers, one of the lowest rates of ratification of any ILO Convention. Corresponding to this lack of protection of their rights, plantation workers are among the poorest and exploited of all agricultural labourers.

Low wages are not only problems faced by plantations labourers. The ILO notes that, by and large, housing conditions in plantations continue to be characterised by overcrowding and insufficient and poor infrastructure. Medical assistance is poor especially in the lack of provision of preventive health care, sanitation and clean water supplies. Primary education facilities are generally insufficient to enable children to attend school regularly and complete their primary education. Poor safety standards are common particularly with regard to the misuse of agro-chemicals. All these problems are linked to the fact that the rights of plantations workers to organise and collective bargaining are commonly denied. These problems are exacerbated by the fact that, globally, prices for most plantation commodities have progressively declined in real terms in the past decades.

Despite the chronic problems faced by plantation workers, despite sluggish growth in international demand and despite falling prices in real terms for plantations commodities (with the notable exception of paper-pulp) and the consequent reduced returns to plantation workers, producer countries have continued to increase output of all major plantation products, in turn contributing to declining world prices.

In recent years, these increases in production have been matched by important changes in production techniques. Governments and international financial institutions have strongly promoted the privatisation of this once heavily government-controlled sector. Foreign direct investment has increased massively, especially in non-traditional crops, such as fruits, vegetables, flowers and wood for paper-pulp and timber. Plantation commodity-marketing has been liberalised and pervasive government controls have been relaxed. Mechanization has increased. Meanwhile, the plantation industry has increasingly divested itself of lands and increased reliance on contract farming.

Unfortunately, these changes have not been matched by corresponding benefits for plantation workers. Wages remain stagnant or have declined in real terms. In the context of a global labour surplus and abundant migrant labour, real wage increases have only come about through government wage determination or collective bargaining.

However, rights to organise and bargain collectively are still denied in many countries and private companies have exploited this lack of protection by maintaining or driving down wages and benefits. Mechanisation has reduced the demand for and hence the bargaining force of labour. Even where commodity prices have risen in real terms, such as in the pulp and paper sector, benefits have rarely been passed on plantations workers. The trend towards the divestment of lands and reliance on contract farming and smallholder nucleus estates has had very varied effects. In some countries, small farmers have been able to benefit, by organising as cooperatives and through effective collective bargaining with processing and exporting industries. In other countries, however, where small-farmers are weakly organised or their rights to organise and bargain collectively are suppressed, companies have been able to increase their profits by shifting onto small-farmers the costs of health, schooling, pension and insurance provisions as well as the risks associated with spoiled crops and injuries.

Plantation workers constitute a poorly protected and vulnerable social sector whose rights and interests are all too easily overlooked in forest policy-making, at both national and international levels.

Consequently there is an urgent need for renewed efforts to ensure stronger protections for plantation workers and new mechanisms to allow more adequate consideration of their rights and interests in planning. All this has important implications for a number of themes being considered by the IPF.

Where they have not already done so, member governments need to take immediate steps to ratify and then implement the relevant international instruments relating to plantation workers, including ILO Conventions 87, 98, 110 and 141.

Special provisions should be made to ensure the effective participation of plantation workers’ associations in national forest policy and land use planning.

These considerations apply equally to programmes of afforestation and in countries with low forest cover.

Bilateral donors and multilateral agencies need to revise their forestry assistance programmes to ensure compliance with internationally agreed standards.

Resources need to be mobilised to ensure effective participation of plantations workers’ associations in the national and international policy making.

National and international efforts to develop appropriate criteria and indicators of sustainable plantation management must embrace the rights and interests of plantation workers.

Recognition of international standards relating to plantation workers should be a criterion of acceptable management, and effective respect for these rights an indicator.

Governments which are leading national and international efforts to establish such C&Is need to review their mechanisms of participation to ensure that plantation workers’ associations are involved in standard setting exercises. Resources need to be mobilized by donor governments to effect such participation.

4. Trade and environment related to forest products and services

The links between trade flows, protected markets, plantation commodity prices and the welfare of plantation workers are very complicated and not well understood. Detailed studies of these connections need to be made before plantation policies are developed, to ensure that the interests of plantation workers are properly taken into account. Special attention should be paid to the promotion of small-scale plantations under local control.

In reviewing existing international organizations, multilateral institutions and instruments, critical attention needs to be given to the activities of organizations promoting plantations and smallholder nucleus estate programmes. Reviews need to be carried out to assess the extent to which these initiatives have adhered to the above mentioned international standards regarding plantation workers.

Future international efforts under the IPF and CSD, and subsequent bodies, to develop international principles and standards on forests must make better provisions to ensure a consideration of the rights and interest of plantations workers.