• Trade
• Unsustainable Consumption
• Sovereignty
• Aid
• Participation
• Existing agreements
• European Forests
• Signatories

Name
Ministry address
Fax Number:

Dear Minister

GLOBAL ACTION ON FORESTS BY THE EUROPEAN UNION

NGOs and European Union governments have developed apparently opposing positions about the desirability of a Global Convention on Forests. We are concerned that this debate has focused largely on political considerations and opportunities and has not dealt with substantive issues.

We are thus writing this letter to draw your attention to some of the key issues that need to be addressed in international debates and processes regarding forests. For each issue, we suggest actions to be taken. The lack of consensus at the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests on some of the following issues has revealed a need for clear objectives.

[Top]

Trade
There is currently a stalemate in discussions about trade and the environment. Given the present dogma of 'free trade', no government seems prepared to suggest that countries or trading blocks should have the right to restrict or penalize imports of forest products on environmental grounds. Consequently, the standards of forest management and prices of timber and other forest products are being kept low, making responsible forest management uncompetitive and economically unsustainable.

Furthermore, much timber is traded illegally and no proper action was taken at IPF IV to stop this trade. To break this deadlock we strongly urge that your government, if possible in concert with other EU countries adopts an action plan to track and prohibit the trade in illegally produced timber and other forest products. This will focus attention on a completely unacceptable aspect of present trade. It will also open up the debate on the need for regulation of other unsustainable land use practices.

[Top]

Unsustainable Consumption
Unsustainable consumption of forest products, particularly the rising demand for pulp and paper, threatens the remaining primary forests. Principle VIII of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development as well as the EU's Fifth Environmental Action Programme therefore recommend that action should be taken both to reduce the consumption of timber, paper and pulp, and promote the recycling of paper and board.

We consequently urge all European governments to develop action programmes to stop the unsustainable consumption of pulp and paper products, and promote both recycling and the use of independently certified forest products.

[Top]

Sovereignty
A third major obstacle to international progress on forests is that many governments of North and South insist that key issues relating to forest policy, in particular land tenure and participation mechanisms, are 'internal matters' subject to 'national sovereignty'. This makes it almost impossible for the global community to adopt binding but equitable policies on key issues such as: the rights of timber industry workers; the rights of indigenous peoples and other forest dwellers; the need for agrarian reforms to secure the livelihoods of the rural poor (who are obliged to move into the forests for their livelihood). Progress towards these goals must therefore be achieved by other means.

As an important first step, we urge all European governments to ratify the International Labour Organisation's Convention No. 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples and to express their support for the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

[Top]

Aid
A fourth major stumbling block towards achieving international consensus on forests derives from the fact that industrialised countries have offered no additional funds to help financially constrained developing countries to reform their forest policies and practices. At IPF IV, the EU suggested that funding should be channeled through the Global Environment Facility. In our view, this suggestion is quite inappropriate as the GEF's mandate limits its assistance to covering the 'incremental costs of global benefits' and cannot be used to fund 'national benefits'. The GEF is also not seen as a truly democratic institution, particularly by developing countries because the more a country pays, the greater its decision-making power.

We therefore urge European governments not to suggest that future forest-related funds be channelled through the GEF, until the GEF is properly reformed. Meanwhile alternative funding mechanisms should be developed.

We are also concerned that no reforms are contemplated to improve the quality of foreign assistance by taking into account local needs. The risk, therefore, is that any proposed new forestry aid programme will end up repeating the mistakes made in the early phases of the Tropical Forestry Action Plan, where aid monies were primarily benefitting political elites, logging companies, plantation industries and urban bureaucrats, while denying local peoples' rights to their lands and intensifying pressure on primary forests.

A thorough review of current aid mechanisms related to forests is thus necessary taking into account the views of local communities, and NGOs such as environment and development groups. New transparent, participatory mechanisms need to be elaborated to ensure that future forest-related bilateral and multilateral aid is effective.

[Top]

Participation
A fifth major obstacle to resolving the global forest crisis comes from the reluctance of many governments to adhere to the commitment made in Rio to ensure the effective participation of 'Major Groups' in the implementation of Agenda 21. As a result, no new formal mechanisms have been established to allow 'Major Groups' to have an equal voice at intergovernmental fora. We firmly believe that effective progress in resolving the crisis of the world's forests requires the full participation of civil society and we cannot support processes and legal instruments which preclude such participation. They will not work and may well cause harm. In particular, we insist that those who directly live in and from the forests, must have a seat at the table. A global process that excludes the customary owners of these forests from decisions about their own homelands is against the spirit of Rio, and all democratic and human rights principles.

We therefore urge all European governments and the EU as a whole to take a lead in pushing for new effective and adequately resourced mechanisms for equal participation of local and indigenous peoples and NGOs, such as environment and human rights groups, in all future forest-related processes.

[Top]

Existing agreements
A sixth major obstacle to resolving the forest crisis is the failure of governments to promote and strengthen the substantial opportunities to address forest problems under existing, international, legally binding, forest related agreements, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The CBD has a series of far reaching framework obligations which are directly relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of forests and the equitable sharing of their benefits. Forest ecosystems contain an estimated 50% to 90% of the species found on earth and thus are ecosystems of particular relevance to the CBD's mandate. The CBD obliges countries to: establish protected area networks; promote the sustainable use of forests; establish environmental impact assessment procedures; engage in holistic planning processes and policies related to forests.

The most pressing global forest problems can be addressed within existing international legal agreements, like the ILO Convention 169, the CBD and the Draft UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The true 'gap' is political will. Governments have the legal framework in hand but are failing to develop it and apply it.

We therefore urge European governments to take action by using already existing instruments.

[Top]

European Forests
Even within the EU, in many cases forests are not well protected or need restoration. This is despite an increase in the wooded land area in recent years. The last old growth forests in Scandinavia and other European countries are still under threat from logging. Most forests suffer from biodiversity loss and atmospheric pollution. Although we applaud recent efforts to monitor impacts of air pollution on forests and to combat forest fires, more is needed to protect European forests effectively, and bring about their truly sustainable management.

We therefore call upon the different Member States, as well as the EU as a whole:

• to step up its efforts to establish an extensive ecological network of protected forest areas covering all existing forest types, in line with the EU Habitats Directive.
• to develop a "national forest restoration programme" in order to re-establish lost forest habitats like swamp and riparian forests.
• to develop an EU strategy to combat biodiversity loss in European forests.
• to protect forests against atmospheric pollution through emission reductions as well as monitoring forest health.
• to produce annual reports of the state of European forests, followed by concrete action plans to halt the deterioration of their quality.
• to enhance education and training of forest owners and managers to promote environmentally acceptable, socially beneficial and economically viable forest management.

  We look forward to hearing your reaction to these proposals and would be happy to meet to discuss these ideas further.

  Yours sincerely

   

  Marcus Colchester
  Forest Peoples Programme, UK

  Saskia Ozinga, Ariane Crampton
  Fern, UK and Brussels

  Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud, Andrea Finger
  WWF International

  Stefan Leiner
  WWF European Policy Office

  Patrick Anderson
  Greenpeace International

  Georgina Green
  Friends of the Earth, England Wales and Northern Ireland

  Jutta Kill
  Urgewald, Germany

  Wolfgang Kuhlman
  ARA, Germany

   

  [Top]