EU Forest Watch

September 1999

Issue #37

Greens on the WTO

Communication on tropical forests

EC project rejected

FSC in Asia

EU Forest Agenda

Many environmental NGOs are, for a number of reasons, firmly against a new legally binding instrument. They note in particular that to date there has been a distinct lack of political will to implement existing agreements affecting forests1 .

Uncertainties about the usefulness of a forest convention were also expressed by Governments and NGOs in regional meetings which have already taken place in Asia and Africa, but the official EU position remains pro-convention.

The continued lack of consensus on a forest convention has shifted the forest debate towards a discussion on the follow-up of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (IFF). The IFF will hold its final session in January 2000 and will report to the 8th session of the Commission for Sustainable Development next April.

NGOs have lost faith in the willingness of governments to address the forest crisis through this process. They argue that existing commitments made within the IPF process as well as within other international agreements need to be implemented first.

They also pointed out that there is a limit to what governments can do at the international level to address the root causes of forest loss, which are often at the national level. They further urged that participation of all major groups is ensured in any future forest policy dialogue.

It was hoped that the meeting in Madrid would attempt to facilitate an open and participative discussion on the issues. However, since the CRCI was designed by its two sponsors to build a case for a forest convention, the meeting was not set up to objectively explore all possible options. These are new or existing governmental or non-governmental instruments or initiatives. NGOs had similar concerns at the first meeting of the CRCI held in San Jose earlier this year, which they expressed in a statement presented at the meeting, available on Fern's website.

The last stage of the CRCI will be held in Ottawa 6-10 December. Its conclusions will be presented to the fourth session of the IFF, 31 January - 11 February 2000.

Greens on the WTO

On September 10, the European Parliament's Green Party held a meeting to discuss the views of various parties in preparation for the WTO's ministerial meeting (Forest Watch 35, 36).

At the meeting Fern presented NGO concerns on forests and trade which focus on further tariff liberalisation of forest products. Fern stressed that liberalising tariffs sent the wrong signal, encouraging consumers to increase already unsustainable levels of consumption of forest products, even though the direct impact might be limited. Non-tariff measures, as well as agriculture negotiations could also pose significant threats to environment protection. Fern will produce a paper on this shortly.

Caroline Lucas MEP stated Commissioner Lamy’s (trade) willingness to work more closely with the European Parliament. Lamy has indicated the possibility to amend the Amsterdam Treaty so that EU positions on the WTO are taken through the co-decision procedure. The European Greens are also in favour of the proposal presented by NGOs that the Parliament set up an ad hoc committee to scrutinise the Commission’s activities on the WTO.

In their position paper the Greens state their opposition to the Commission’s position to launch a new trade round. In their opinion the WTO’s competencies should not be enlarged until the current agreement is subject to thorough review and reform. They share this view with the developing countries (the G77).

A new point included in their statement is a proposal to externalise the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism so that it no longer ‘acts as judge and jury and so that other international legislation is given equal weight’. The fact that the WTO has a dispute settlement mechanism which does not respect rules protecting the environment and social rights while other international agreements have not is called ‘perverse’.

Communication on tropical forests

The development and external affairs DGs have presented their Communication on Tropical Forests to the Council and to the Parliament. The Development Council should adopt a Resolution on November 11.

Although the latest draft of the Communication, which has not been made available to NGOs directly, has improved considerably in comparison with an earlier draft, discussed with NGOs at a meeting in February, the document still lacks a clear focus.

One of the main problems is that the proposed actions do not address the problems identified in the analysis. The lack of prioritisation gives the impression of a ‘wish-list’ rather than of a strategic policy paper. Furthermore the paper lacks concrete actions to address the issue of non-forest grants (e.g. roads, mining), which often have greater and more negative impacts on forests and forest peoples. However, there is hope as the Communication states that country and regional strategy papers will be developed.

In a letter to the Commission, Fern and the Rainforest Foundation UK have expressed their disappointment about the lack of further participation in the development of the Communication. They hope there will be more NGO involvement in the development of the strategy papers.

In what may be a landmark decision, the European Development Fund Committee has rejected a proposed 52 million Euro grant for road ‘maintenance’ in Cameroon, over doubts about possible environmental and social impacts of the project. At the Committee meeting on July 7th, representatives from several governments, including the UK, Germany, Denmark and France raised serious concerns about the lack of environmental information in the ‘PERFED II’ project’s Financing Proposal, and demanded further details about project implementation and financing. It is understood that the PERDFED II project will be considered again at the EDF committee meeting in October.

The involvement of the European Community in Cameroon’s road network has been highly controversial, because of the apparent relationship between the construction and maintenance of roads and the expansion of destructive logging activities and poaching in areas of rainforest. The European Commission has previously supported several major such projects, totalling more than 200 million Euros, some of which appear to have promoted a growth in the logging industry.

Indonesia and Malaysia, which supply 70% of tropical timber to the EU, recently signed two Memoranda of Understanding with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Both countries have already developed national certification standards. The aim in Malaysia is to compare the national and the FSC standards. In Indonesia, there will be a 2 year trial of parallel certification.

In both countries, a national working group will be set up. According to FSC rules, these working groups should be equally composed of social, environmental and economic sector representatives and should have a majority of FSC members. Since, in the past, environmental and social NGOs have often been denied participation in different ways, it will be a challenge to create working groups with real participation.

FSC faces an even greater challenge to ensure that indigenous peoples’ land rights are recognized, although this is a requirement of FSC’s principles and criteria.

EU Forest Agenda

• 12-15 October: Transatlantic Environment Dialogue, Washington

• 14 October: NGO meeting with Mrs. Walstrom, the New Environment Commissioner, Brussels