Forestry and Development E-News: February 2009
Forestry and Development (F&D) is an online resource on sustainable forestry. It supports commercial forestry as a viable source of economic growth which is compatible with sustainability.
Illegal logging regulation in Australia? February 2009: The Rudd Government is currently considering measures on 'illegally logged' timber, in line with an election commitment that was made in 2006. A draft impact assessment on any regulation is expected to be released in March of this year. There are indications that Greenpeace Australia is attempting to garner industry support for a joint statement on the measures in order to pressure the Rudd Government to adopt its preferred regulatory option. That NGOs should attempt to lobby their traditional enemy - the Australian forestry industry - for Green-preferred measures seems to be an odd move, but it was a tactic that worked for the introduction of mandatory labelling of imported timber products in New Zealand. Australian industry may counter that any regulatory regime on timber imports will only apply to importers of timber. On the surface this is true. But support for the Green position on timber imports will ultimately harm the Australian industry. Here's why: The AFS (Australian Forestry Standard) is Australia's industry- and government-developed standard for forestry. AFS standards for sustainability and chain-of-custody labelling are widely used by the Australian industry for domestic timber. The AFS is widely accepted and endorsed by the Australian industry and the Australian Government. It has since been accredited by the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification schemes (PEFC) and is now a part of the world's largest certification scheme. Yet a number of Australian Green NGOs - Greenpeace, the Wilderness Society, the Australian Conservation Foundation and Friends of the Earth - have expressed considerable opposition to the AFS. Green NGOs attempted to lobby Standards Australia to reject the standard. Their opposition to the standard most probably continues to this day. Greenpeace recently attacked an independent third-party legality and chain-of-custody certification scheme in Papua New Guinea, simply because it was not FSC certification, the preferred certification 'brand' of Green NGOs. Is it not unreasonable to assume that, based on this behaviour, these same NGOs will continue to attempt to discredit certification systems that are not FSC? In other words, the NGOs are attempting to have it both ways. They wish to undermine the industry's own initiative that gives it credibility in domestic and international markets, but are now asking that same industry for support. The Australian industry should be wary.
Fierce deforestation debate at the Smithsonian January 2009: A symposium held at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC brought out a fierce debate on the future of tropical rainforests. S. Joseph Wright of the Smithsonian's Tropical Research Institute in Panama argues that tropical deforestation and species extinction will not be as severe as many believe. Wright contends that slowing population growth, combined with increased urbanisation, will allow abandoned forest areas to recover and foster tropical species survival. This would alleviate pressure on forests and allow secondary forests to regenerate on abandoned farmland, according to Wright. At the other end of the debate is Wright's colleague, William F. Laurance. He argues that only a fraction of tropical biodiversity will be sustained by secondary and degraded forests. He also argues that increasingly dominant drivers of tropical deforestation include industrial agriculture, logging, mining, and economic globalisation (as opposed to changing populations). FAO: "Deforestation is land use conversion, not harvesting of timber" February 2009: The most recent issue of Unasylva, the FAO's forestry journal, clearly states something that this e-newsletter has been arguing since its inception: deforestation and timber harvesting are not the same thing. The article by R.M. Martin, Director of the FAO's Forest Economics and Policy Division, argues that the promotion of forest restoration projects and the implementation of sustainable forest management (SFM) is more likely to mitigate climate change than a pure focus on reducing emissions from deforestation. This is a view that is supported both by the IPCC in its Fourth Assessment Report and by the UNFCCC. Both argue that implementing SFM is the more cost-effective and easily achievable option. However, the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) is focusing purely on deforestation. PNG climate change office under pressure February 2009: Papua New Guinea's newly established Office of Climate Change and Environmental Sustainability (OCCES) has been under pressure from a number of sources. On 16 February, Eastern Highlands provincial Governor Malcolm Kela-Smith claimed that the office was 'illegal' and, according to The National newspaper, was urging local resource owners not to engage with the office. On 2 February, according to the same newspaper, the Office was forced to suspend registration of forest-climate participants due to overwhelming demand and lack of capacity. Additionally, the office was forced to change its public name from the Office of Climate Change and Carbon Trading to its current moniker, which was the name under which it was gazetted. The OCCES is currently engaging local stakeholders as part of a public consultation process. The World Bank criticised Papua New Guinea for lack of consultation in its application for funding under the FCPF.	Green protectionism on the rise February 2009: This e-newsletter has often reported on attempts by developed countries to erect barriers to timber and other commodity imports from the developing world. Most notable are the United States' recent amendments to the Lacey Act and the EU's proposed regulation for imported timber products in the European market. The EU proposals were primarily driven by Green groups, but the US legislation was driven by an unwieldly combination of domestic timber industry interests, Greens and organised labour. The Lacey Act amendments were originally sponsored by politicians based in Oregon – the largest timber-producing state in the US. The US timber industry had been hit particularly hard by hardwood flooring imports from China. With the global financial crisis now gripping the world economy, these types of protections can be expected to proliferate - and they will hit timber producers in developing countries. Moreover, they will be dressed up as environmental initiatives. For example, last month, Australia introduced an anti-dumping action against paper tissue producers in China and Indonesia. The action was instituted by two of Australia's biggest paper producers, which had long been struggling against cheaper imports and rising domestic costs. Leading up to the action was a long campaign that claimed that these imports were environmentally destructive, but at its heart were Australian union and industry interests. Similarly, the EU recently indicated that it would introduce restrictions on imports of palm oil from Indonesia and Malaysia for renewable fuels. The EU sustainability criteria for palm oil and other biofuels are currently before the European Parliament. They are expected to be adopted in May. The restrictions fall neatly into line with a long-running Green European campaign against imported palm oil. Underlying this is the fact that imported palm oil is a cheaper alternative to EU-produced rapeseed oil - which can also be used for renewable fuels. Also on Forestry and Development News > About F&D > Contact Us >
You have permission to forward this email newsletter to other interested persons provided it is passed on in its entirety. Forestry & Development E-News is published monthly by ITS Global (http://www.itsglobal.net). ITS Global are accredited assessors for the International Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification Schemes (PEFC) Questions and feedback can be sent to forestrydevel@bigpond.com If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please click here. © 2009. All rights reserved | Forestry & Development Website | Contact |