Will the Kyoto Protocol stay afloat between now and Tree Hague? Listening to the LULUCF debate, one becomes more and more doubtful. From many a forest and forest peoples’ point of view, there is only one appropriate place for the current compilation on Methodological Issues on Land-Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry: a high shelf in a deep, dark, cupboard. Look out US and Japan, that could be a credit worthy sink..!
Obviously, FCCC negotiators have not the faintest idea what they are talking about when they refer to forests. Meanwhile, the voices of the people present that know about forests, the Indigenous Peoples who depend upon these ecosystems, have been massively ignored. But then, countries like Canada, Australia and the US are not really interested in the Peoples who live in their forests, as there are no reliable methodologies to measure their carbon content. Yet. And they are a troublesome stand-in-the-way for their “ongoing forestry practice” of harvesting and “regeneration”. After all, neat “plantations established for forestry purposes” are so much easier to manage in the Kyoto context than those complicated real forests full of nasty Peoples making land claims and talking about incomprehensible concepts like philosophy of life and fundamental rights. Human rights violations, the destruction of biodiversity, the loss of cultural and spiritual values, land concentration, unemployment and the depletion of soils and water cycles: surely the US has already come up with a”science-based solution” to these problems too? Besides, the social and environmental problems linked to the promotion of large-scale monoculture tree plantations cannot even be measured in carbon units. So why would FCCC-Parties bother about these s(t)inky consequences?
Moreover, land claims and other demands of Indigenous Peoples and local communities related to sinks would seriously harm the overall strategy of this meeting: to make sinks attractive for Private Investment. And we all agree that we have to seduce Private Investment flows to sinks…
Now that official development aid budgets are s(hr)inking to historically low levels, it’s hardly surprising the GRILA-group has decided that they might as well make some money out of this S(t)inky mess. They are being screwed anyway. ProsTreetution at the diplomatic level, is that where the Kyoto Protocol has arrived? Talking about indecent behavior: how must FAO feel now that it sees its already embarrassing definition of forests being violated. How low can we go in finding common denominators? 25 cm?
So can the Treetanic sink any deeper? We all look forward to the “Great Seduce the World with S(t)inky Cash” tour of the US in the coming weeks. “I had a forest in Africa” isn’t that what every colonialist dreams of? But beware. Remember what happened to Karen Blixen’s coffee farm: It went up in flames. And the US is still trying to stop forest fires in its own country.
But then, the real Titanic was also thought to be unSinkable.