Forestry & Development E-News: October 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.

Contents

Greens at the fringe in global forest-climate debate

Green campaigners have relegated themselves to the fringes of the forestry debate by lobbying against the international consensus on sustainable forest management.

Canberra issues illegal logging impacts paper

The Australian Government has issued a draft paper that attempts to cost introducing legislation that would ban imports of so-called 'illegal timber'.

Forest carbon markets susceptible to "wide abuse", expert warns

The forest carbon market is likely to attract organised crime gangs, international law enforcement agency Interpol has warned.

Emissions from deforestation tally exaggerated: expert

The level of carbon emissions caused by global forest destruction is likely to be significantly lower than 20 per cent, according to the Head of Brazil's widely respected National Institute for Space Research.

PNG leading Pacific economy

AusAID has published its annual Pacific Economic Survey.

Greens at the fringe in global forest-climate debate

October: Green campaigners have relegated themselves to the fringes of the forestry debate by lobbying against the international consensus on sustainable forest management (SFM).

Two activist groups – Greenpeace and Global Witness – have taken aim at the generally accepted concept of SFM.

In doing so, both groups are lobbying against the work of the world's most respected and technically proficient forestry and environmental organisations, including the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

They are also lobbying against what has become the international consensus within international climate negotiations.

Although the negotiations themselves have almost stalled, nations have agreed that REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) be broadened to REDD-plus; the 'plus' includes sustainable forest management, conservation, afforestation and reforestation.

This broadening is consistent with the outcomes of the 1992 Rio Summit, which reached an international consensus that forests must be used for economic, social and environmental purposes.

Unfortunately for the world's poor, Greenpeace and Global Witness want to take 'economic' out of the equation.

The Green position demonstrates that they are more interested in politics than climate.

A 2007 report issued by the UNFCCC itself demonstrated that there is greater potential in emissions reductions from implementing SFM than pure REDD – and at a lower cost.

Despite the clear higher benefits and lower costs, neither Greenpeace nor Global Witness is interested in SFM. Global Witness has gone so far as to suggest that the inclusion of SFM in the negotiations is a sign of 'vested interests' infiltrating the United Nations.

Why?

Both groups have a political rather than an environmental agenda. Their opposition (in Greenpeace's words) is opposition to 'industrial' activity in forests.

They have called for 'zero gross deforestation' and do not support reforestation or afforestation projects under the UNFCCC.

Simply, they do not want any trees cut nor do they want new forests established in developing countries.

The world's forest industries provide significant contributions to GDP and employment. In Brazil, for example, more than one million people are employed in the forest industry.

Applying SFM to all operations in developing countries would provide clear economic and environmental benefits.

But the implications of Greenpeace's position are nothing less than horrific.

The UNFCCC reports that almost three-quarters of the world's deforestation is caused by a combination of subsistence and commercial agriculture.

Are Green activists prepared to tell market gardeners in Papua New Guinea that they are unable to clear land to grow crops for their families? Or tell the 44 million additional people that Indonesia is projecting in its population figures that they must live on the same amount of food?

Canberra issues illegal logging impacts paper  Error! Bookmark not defined.

13 October: The Australian Government has issued a draft paper that attempts to cost introducing legislation that would ban imports of so-called 'illegal timber'.

The draft is the result of an election promise made in 2007 by the Rudd Government to address the issue.

There has already been a great deal of Green lobbying over the outcomes of the report and any policies to be implemented.

Yet the paper – prepared by the Canberra-based Centre for International Economics – makes a number of clear findings on the impact of any new legislation.

First, it finds that that effectiveness would be limited. The draft states that unilateral Australian import restrictions would only stop production of about one-tenth of the products incorporating illegally logged timber coming to Australia. The rest would be diverted to other markets.

Moreover, any actual reductions in illegal logging activity would be tiny: 0.0035 to 0.0331 per cent of all illegal logging activity.

Second, it finds that Australia will incur all of the costs without achieving the commensurate benefits of reducing the damage caused by illegal logging.

Third, it finds that the measures are likely to cause welfare losses in Australia and those developing countries from which Australia may be importing products incorporating illegally logged timber.

While welfare losses in a profitable industry might be a clear reason for not proceeding with the legislation, perhaps welfare losses in the forestry sector are precisely what the Greens want.

Forest carbon markets susceptible to "wide abuse", expert warns

5 October: The forest carbon market is likely to attract organised crime gangs, international law enforcement agency Interpol has warned.

According to the agency, the increasing amounts of money flowing into the voluntary carbon market sector means that there will be attempts by criminals to take advantage of fledgling systems of governance.

"Alarm bells are ringing", Peter Younger of Interpol told the Guardian newspaper.  "It is simply too big to monitor. The potential for criminality is vast and has not been taken into account by the people who set it up." 

Younger, who made similar remarks earlier this year, is preparing an Interpol report on illegal logging.  "Organised crime syndicates are eyeing the nascent forest carbon market. I will report to the [World] Bank that REDD schemes are open to wide abuse."

He added that the corruption associated with forest carbon schemes could take many forms.  "Fraud could include claiming credits for forests that do not exist or were not protected or by land grabs. It starts with bribery or intimidation of officials, then there's threats and violence against those people. There's forged documents too."

There has been widespread media reporting in The Economist and other international newspapers of alleged corruption associated with forest carbon credits in Papua New Guinea.

Emissions from deforestation tally exaggerated: expert

August: The level of carbon emissions caused by global forest destruction is likely to be significantly lower than 20 per cent, according to the Head of Brazil's widely respected National Institute for Space Research (INPE), Gilberto Camara.

In an interview with Reuters, Camara said that the 20 per cent figure was based on poor science, adding that rich industrialised countries had no interest in questioning the figure because it placed greater pressure on developing countries to reduce emissions.

"I should only state that the two people who like these figures are developed nations, who would like to overstress the contribution of developing nations to global carbon, and of course environmentalists".

The findings of the INPE are consistent with a number of papers that have been issued in recent years that question the rates of deforestation as reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and other bodies.

PNG leading Pacific economy

October: AusAID has published its annual Pacific Economic Survey.  It confirms that the two largest economies in the region, PNG and Fiji, accounted for 63 per cent and 16 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in the region, respectively.

PNG's economic growth was over 5 per cent in 2008.  Its GDP was forecast to fall back to 2007 levels, although foreign direct investment (FDI) is rising after falling for a number of years.  According to the report, export volumes of logs in PNG doubled between 2001 and 2007.

The report also noted that the sector has been affected by both the global recession and by poor weather.  The volume of logs for the first quarter of 2009 was down by 74 per cent relative to the corresponding 2008 quarter.

Also in Forestry & Development E-News:

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 |