| EC blind spot on natural resources and poverty The European Commission’s aid programme in India has been criticised by the EC Court of Auditors for failing to properly address key poverty-alleviation issues including natural resource management. The report,1 released in June 2003, says that in its Country Strategy Paper for India (2002-06), the European Commission has ignored EC policy on fighting rural poverty, even though poverty in India is predominantly rural. Natural resource management and agri-culture are noted as conspicuously absent from the Country Strategy Paper (CSP). The Commission’s official statement on fighting rural poverty says that hunger and poverty are mainly rural problems, and that rural poverty is closely connected to environmental degradation, which itself is becoming increasingly severe in rural areas. The EC’s official approach to rural development is to integrate the objectives of poverty reduction, food security and sustainable natural resource management into a coherent framework. However, in the case of India’s CSP, the Commission focuses its support on programmes for health and education (both key aspects of rural poverty), but skips the specific problems of agriculture and natural resource management. This is more evidence of the Commission’s ‘blind spot’ on the link between poverty alleviation and natural resource management,2 and adds to an emerging pattern of EC misunderstanding of the crucial role played by natural resources in the daily life of the poorest – especially women and children. With CSPs under discussion in the mid-term review process, it is clear there is an opportunity for current oversights to be corrected. In the case of India, the EC’s forthcoming ‘Agreement with a specific Indian State’ is also a chance for the Commission to improve its record. 1 www.eca.eu.int/EN/reports_opinions.htm under Special Reports section. 2 For more examples CSPs overlooking the inatural resource management, see FERN’s report Forests at the Edge at www.fern.org. |
Climate directive excludes sinks projects In July 2003, the European Commission adopted a proposal for the last of four directives related to the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). The proposal will allow companies using the European Carbon Trading Scheme to avoid real, domestic emission reductions and instead use carbon credits originating from the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms, inlcuding the Clean Development Mechanism. The directive has drawn severe criticism from NGOs as the value of carbon credits in tackling climate change is highly questionable, and their inclusion in the directive undermines the integrity of the ECCP. The fact that credits from carbon sink projects have been specifically excluded is cold comfort. Equally, it is disappointing that the most clear and unambiguous wording on sinks projects comes from the Commission’s press release: “they do not bring technology transfer, they are inherently temporary and reversible, and uncertainty remains about the effects of emission removal by carbon sinks”.1 FERN calls on member states to ensure national Kyoto targets are met without the use of carbon sink credits. In particular, those member states investing in Plantar, the World Bank Prototype Carbon Fund project, must immediately withdraw from this project. Plantar claims carbon credits from monoculture plantations, thereby providing a subsidy to the plantations industry while bringing no benefit to the climate. 1 See Commission document IP/03/1077. |
Illegal logging finalé? European Council Conclusions on the Commission’s Action Plan on Illegal Logging could be finalised this month, though last-minute negotiations may yet stall progress. Several drafts have been circulated to members states, the Development Working Group and the Forest Working Group. Meanwhile, NGOs have called for a halt to the import of illegally-produced logs into the European Union, and for the role of consumer countries in fuelling illegal logging to be emphasised.1 It is hoped that the final Conclusions will be be agreed towards the end of September, after which the Council of Ministers could adopt the Conclusions in October. 1 www.fern.org/pubs/ngostats/NGOFLEGT.htm |
Indigenous peoples slashed from aid programme In a paper presented to NGOs on 14 July, it appears that indigenous peoples have been cut out of the priorities of the EC human rights and democracy budget line for 2004. In contrast with previous years and the agreed programme, projects no longer eligible for funding include those promoting indigenous peoples’ issues, targeted projects with the UN Permanent Forum or other UN bodies, and country-specific calls for proposals (other than Nepal and Mexico). Instead, out of the €5m previously earmarked, only a tiny fraction will go to indigenous peoples’ issues and programmes. Given the vociferous official support for indigenous peoples in recent years – the 1998 Indigenous Peoples’ Resolution, Commissioner Poul Nielson’s public commitments at the EC funding conference of June 2002, and the Council Conclusions of November 2002 – the funding cut is a radical and contradictory move. On the one hand the Commission calls for the mainstreaming of indigenous issues in EU projects, programmes and policies, while on the other it is unable to prioritise it under a budget line specifically designed to promote initiatives in this area. The Commission should restore indigenous issues as a priority, and commit the totality of funds earmarked to this end in the 2004 programme it will present the Human Rights Committee on 30 September. |
ECA rejects Camisea In early September the directors of US Ex-Im Bank surprised many forest NGOs by declining $214 million in loan guarantees for the controversial Camisea Gas Project in the Peruvian Amazon. They claim that supporting the project would violate the export credit agency’s (ECA’s) environmental policies to protect sensitive areas and indigenous populations. The Belgian parliament is also sceptical about the project and is investigating its ECA’s involvement. Meanwhile, Hermes and SACE, the German and Italian ECAs, do not share these scruples and are anticipating filling the gap left by Ex-Im. The Camisea news should resonate in the minds of OECD members who are renegotiating the ECA agreement on common standards and policies on sustainable development. Germany and Italy are resisting minimum binding environmental policies and transparency. The European ECA Reform Campaign has provided negotiation language and a case book illustrating the inadequacy of the current agreement.1 1 For a copy of the Race to the Bottom, Take II and the NGO proposed text, see www.eca-watch.org. |
NEWS IN BRIEF Call for input to EU forestry strategy The 1998 EU Forestry Strategy will be updated this autumn. DG Agriculture will be sending a questionnaire to member states seeking their input. Civil society groups are also invited to present their thoughts. The first draft of the review is expected to be ready in mid-November. Unlike the current forestry strategy – which did not allow for any consultation – it is hoped that the review will be based on a thorough consultation with all stakeholder groups. Forest owners, the pulp and paper industry, and environmental NGOs all have ideas about what a forestry strategy should include. The final Commission draft is expected at the beginning of 2004. Certification at EU level After a lull of several years in activity on forest certification, the European Commission is expected to present a paper this month exploring the role the EU could play. The timber industry is split, with those in the South calling for a clear EU position, while those in the North prefer the current silence. NGOs hope that the paper will recognise the importance of independent third-party certification. Once published, member states will be invited to comment, followed by NGOs and industry. Bad news for certified timber The European Commission has rejected amendments proposed by Parliament to ensure that the new EU Directives on Public Procurement will allow for environmentally and socially responsible public purchasing. Without these amendments, possibilities for meaningful green procurement of timber products will be severely curtailed. The Commission’s rejection of the amendments has triggered the EU’s conciliation procedure1 to resolve the differences. 1 Information on conciliation at www.europarl.eu.int /code/ongoing/default_en.htm World Parks Congress Following the World Parks Congress? Then read Salvaging Nature from the World Rainforest Movement and Indigenous peoples and protected areas in Africa: from principles to practice from the Forest Peoples’ Programme.1 Both critique the role of conservation organisations and parks in preserving a damaging status quo. 1 See www.wrm.org.uy and www.forestpeoples.org Changes at FERN Goodbye and thank you to Emilie Thernard who is leaving FERN after 18 months of excellent achievements as co-ordinator of the European ECA Reform campaign. Hello and welcome to Sylvia Fransen who joins us as our Office and Finance Manager. |
Forest Agenda 3-17 September: World Parks Congress, Durban, South Africa. 10-14 September: WTO Ministerial, Cancun, Mexico. 21-28 September: World Forestry Congress, Quebec City, Canada. |
| EU Forest Watch is
published by FERN, the forest campaign group focusing on EU policy. For subscription details, please contact us below or subscribe online at www.fern.org. |
| FERN Brussels, 20 Avenue des
Celtes, 1040 Brussels, Belgium. Tel: +32 (0)2 742 2436. Fax: +32 (0)2 736 8054. E-mail: info@fern.org FERN UK, 1c Fosseway Business Park, Stratford Road, Moreton-in-Marsh, GL56 9NQ, UK. Tel: +44 (0)1608 652 895. Fax: +44 (0)1608 652 878. E-mail: info@fern.org |
| PHOTO: Kakamega
Forest. Half of Kenya’s only tropical rainforest has already been lost. What is left provides a unique sanctuary for biodiversity and a vital resource for local people, many of whom depend on it for fuel, medicine and food. Credit: A. Arbib. |