TL: ANNEX 1 - UNDERLYING CAUSES OF FOREST LOSS: SO: GREENPEACE INTERNATIONAL, (GP) DT: OCTOBER, 1994 ANNEX TO: ON THE POSSIBLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, Prepared for the African Regional Meeting on a Biodiversity Input to CSD-3, 24-26 October 1994, Nairobi INTRODUCTION While the direct cause of forest and biodiversity loss can be reasonably easily pinpointed, it is often not easy to recognise the underlying factors that act as a catalyst for the more direct agents for forest and biodiversity loss. The following is a brief presentation of some of these underlying factors. It is by no means conclusive. 1. TEMPERATE FOREST AND BOREAL FOREST LOSS: A) CLEARING FOR AGRICULTURE For forests to be cleared for agriculture, there must be an inherent incentive to value the cleared in favour of the services the forest provides in its own right. In Australia, for example tax incentives are given to farmers to 'improve land' by clearing. This is not a uniform policy as one state has banned the clearance of native vegetation. During the last two decades, temperate forests in the United States have declined as widening grain export markets have encouraged forest conversion to agriculture (Brown, p87). B) LOGGING FOR TIMBER In historical times forests in Europe were cut for building materials and military equipment, especially warships. Today, temperate forests are primarily being overcut by large multi- national timber companies. Market pressures appear to be the major driving force behind this industrial forest mining. This is due to a high demand, arising from an over-consumption of forest products. Other factors include a belief that native forest mining is necessary until plantations come on stream; that there is a need for additional land for plantations, that corporations are myopic, that there are political pressures to maintain jobs and that there is a desire to exploit cheap forest resources as quickly as possible before their real value is appreciated (Dudley, p65). Governments appear to be incapable of monitoring and regulating the operations of multi-national corporations. In a number of instances that actually subsidize logging operations. The United States government, for example, sells timber at prices below, its own growing, road building, harvesting and selling expenses at a cost to taxpayers of about $100 million per year (Repetto, 1988). C) CUTTING FOR FUELWOOD Major forest losses in Europe were attributed to fuelwood burning at the start of the Industrial Revolution (Dudley, p22). In effect, forest burning provided the foundation plank for Europe's industrial development. Europe has effectively mortgaged its forests in exchange for industrial development. In the developing world, population increases, particularly in urban areas is placing an unsustainable pressure on fuelwood resources. The natural growth rate of forests cannot match the demand in high population density areas (Brown, p86). Due to the high cost, alternative sources of energy production sources are often not available to populations within developing countries. D) CUTTING FOR PULP AND PAPER There are strong short term economic reasons why forests are being liquidated for pulpwood. While the pulpwood industry is more capital intensive, it does provide the highest gross forest product per unit of raw material (Westoby, p35). The age and size of trees is not so critical, so forests can be worked over rapidly and intensively. Market pressure due to over-consumption is providing a substantial incentive to overcut forests for the pulp industry. The average person in North America, for instance, consumes over 300 kg of paper per year. It has been estimated that the amount of paper thrown away every year in the United Kingdom is equivalent to 130 million trees (Dudley, p22). E) DAMAGE FROM AIR POLLUTION Excessive use of fossil fuels and poor energy and transport planning appear to be the major underlying causes of both air borne pollution and the greenhouse effect. 2. TROPICAL FOREST LOSS A) SHIFTING AGRICULTURE: The reasons for short fallow agriculture are complex and are often related to poor development planning. Resource pressure from rural expanding populations is creating a need for ever more forests to be worked over (WRI et al, p133). These pressures do not allow sufficient time for the forests to recuperate. While it may be easy to blame the poor for so-called population problems, there is an underlying fact that rural populations have been displaced from productive land to allow the production of cash crops for export. It has been suggested that World Bank agricultural development policies have encouraged land reforms resulting in rising land prices, land speculation, land ownership concentration and the subsequent displacement of peasants. These displaced peasants are forced into felling forests for short fallow agriculture (Colchester, 1993(b)). The problem is exacerbated by the fact that in a number of tropical regions large transborder migrations are taking place. Displaced peasants are crossing borders in Central Africa, Latin America and South-east Asia (Colchester(b), p8). B) PERMANENT CLEARING FOR AGRICULTURE: Inappropriate development strategies appear to underpin the problems of tropical forest clearance for agriculture. Many tropical countries have experienced colonial interventions into their agrarian economies. In many instances, these interventions were deliberately established to provide cheap agricultural products for Europe. Inappropriate agricultural systems based on the European model of broad land clearance were passed on tropical countries. Since the 1950's, the FAO and the World Bank appear to have taken over the role of promoting market oriented agriculture (Colchester(b), p12). These agrarian reforms have virtually ignored traditional land use and land ownership patterns. This has created large populations of landless peasants, who without their traditional customary laws are being continually displaced into forest areas. According to the FAO, mini-land holders and the landless are projected to rise from 167 million in 1980 to 220 million by the year 2000 (Colchester(b), p11). In Brazil land ownership is heavily skewed in favour of a few. Fifty-three percent of landowners, classed as small farmers, own just 2.7% of the countryside, while 0.8% land owners possess 43% of the land. Multinational companies own 36 million ha of Brazil (Monbiot, 1993). Further, forest clearance is encourage through a variety of tax breaks and fiscal incentive schemes (Hecht, p167). C) LOGGING FOR TIMBER: In a similar fashion to the liquidation of temperate forests centuries ago, tropical forest countries are now cashing in on their natural forests in the pursuit of so-called development. Governments impelled to raise foreign exchange to meet debt repayments are turning to their forests as a low outlay source of income. Substantial markets in the North and wasteful consumption patterns ensure that there is a ready market for tropical timber. This is matched, if not exceeded by a substantial domestic market for tropical timber. In fact, the volume of tropical timber exported, represents only five percent of all trees removed from tropical forests (Lyke & Fletcher, p13). In most, if not all, tropical timber countries, governments do not have the resources or skilled staff to actively monitor and regulate the trade. Even where forest agencies monitor concessions, the profits from timber exploitation are so high, corruption becomes an inherent element of the industry (Johnson & Cabarle, p18). Governments also fail to capture much of the considerable stumpage value of mature tropical hardwoods (Johnson & Cabarle, p17). As a result forest are undervalued and poorly managed. Timber concessions are granted for short periods of time (5-25 years). With tropical hardwoods taking at least 60 years to be replaced, there is little incentive for companies to replant or manage their concessions on a sustainable basis (Johnson & Cabarle, p18). The non-timber value of tropical forests and the rights of indigenous people are easily overlooked in this forest mining boom era. International institutions like the World Bank, the International Tropical Timbers Organisation, the Tropical Forestry Action Programme and the FAO all appear to be incapable of addressing the tropical timber liquidation sale (Lyke & Fletcher, p13). The TFAP and the World Bank have had policy reforms but the logging continues. Each of these institution have their inherent problems: * The World Bank has been criticised because it is only concerned with large scale projects and incapable of focusing on the needs of local communities. It also funds development projects which often result in the displacement of poor rural communities. Some end up cutting down new forest areas. * The ITTO has been criticised because it places a strong emphasis on expanding the volume and value of trade and has shown little evidence of improving forest management practices (Lyke & Fletcher, p16). Some argue that it is being too closely influenced by Japan, a major consumer of tropical timber (Lyke & Fletcher, p22). * TFAP has been criticised because it is too focused on the forest sector; it places undue emphasis on financing classical forestry projects eg logging, road building, has minimal contact with local people and NGO's, fails to address underlying problems of poverty and is donor driven (Lyke & Fletcher, p10). * The FAO is embroiled in a rivalries amongst the ITTO and the TFAP (Lyke & Fletcher, p27). As the principal United Nations body on the forest industry the FAO has failed to stem the tide of massive forest losses worldwide. 3. MANGROVE FOREST LOSS: Fisheries development projects supported by international financial institutions, including the Asian Development Bank, are encouraging the conversion of mangroves into fish farms.