in Uncategorized

“No REDD – A Reader” new publication from Carbon Trade Watch and Indigenous Environmental Network

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on StumbleUpon

“No REDD – A Reader is a must read for all who seek to know the truth about this mercantilist tool. It is also highly recommended for those who believe that policies to fight the current climate chaos must see the people and Mother Earth and not merely see trees as commodities for cash and carbon speculation,” – Nnimmo Bassey, Chair of Friends of the Earth International and Executive Director of Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria.

The report can be downloaded from noredd.makenoise.org in Spanish and English. Edited by Joanna Cabello and Tamra Gilbertson of Carbon Trade Watch, it features articles by Global Justice Ecology Project, Censat Agua Viva, Amazon Watch, Acción Ecológica, COECOCEIBA, OFRANEH, World Rainforest Movement, Carbon Trade Watch, RisingTide, ETC Group, Indigenous Environmental Network and REDD-Monitor.

There will be a press conference to launch the book in Cancún on Monday, 6 December 2010 at 9am in the Moon Palace (Azteca- Luna Room 2).

The following is the introduction to the book, followed by a press release in English and Spanish.

No REDD – A Reader

Introduction

This reader aspires to broaden the debate on the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) mechanism.1 It is not a comprehensive overview on REDD nor does it pretend to be. It aims to highlight critical perspectives that are frequently drowned out by large NGOs, corporative lobbies, governments, carbon traders, international financial institutions and the United Nations.

This collection of articles reveals how REDD is being used to establish a new set of tradable property rights based on trees and other environmental services, while at the same time propping up extractive industries. From an environmental perspective, REDD will not save the climate nor protect forests, nor will it stop dangerous emissions levels. In fact, REDD will offer polluting industries a way to avoid emissions reduction through cheap REDD offsets and allow them to actually increase pollution.

From an indigenous and human rights perspective, REDD criminalises the Peoples who protect and rely on forests. Furthermore, there are no enforceable REDD safeguards at the national or sub-national level that would guarantee protection of the rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities. Meanwhile, carbon traders eager for the large sums of money offered by REDD schemes are already forcing Indigenous and forest-dependent Peoples to sign away their land rights. Several examples of how this is already happening are highlighted in this reader.

The articles are clustered in three sections: The first section outlines the relation of REDD with the carbon market and various financing mechanisms. The second section critiques some of the players involved including extractive industries, geoengineering and GMO trees. The third section looks at case studies and how REDD is being implemented at the local level including current impacts and reactions. The annex holds three landmark statements from social movements warning of the dangers of REDD.

REDD is the wrong direction. The grassroots and social movements demand to be heard and this collection allows us to hear and heed some of these brave and inspiring voices.

UN forest scheme risks the climate

New publication exposes links between REDD and carbon trading, International Financial Institutions, extractive industries, GMO trees and biotech

No REDD – A Reader is a must read for all who seek to know the truth about this mercantilist tool. It is also highly recommended for those who believe that policies to fight the current climate chaos must see the people and Mother Earth and not merely see trees as commodities for cash and carbon speculation,

– Nnimmo Bassey, Chair of Friends of the Earth International and Executive Director of Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria

Cancún, Mexico, 6 December 2010. Grassroots groups warn that the UN forest protection scheme being negotiated in Cancún amid the UN 16th Conference of the Parties may severely undermine climate mitigation policies and exacerbate environmental and social problems. No REDD, a Reader, includes groundbreaking research exposing links between REDD and carbon trading, International Financial Institutions, extractive industries, GMO trees and biotech. Moreover, original case study research explores problems with the Socio Bosque Programme in Ecuador, the threat to Indigenous Peoples in voluntary isolation in Perú, corruption and coercion in the REDD scheme in Papua New Guinea and the real face of “community participation” in Indonesia, among others. The publication highlights how REDD is being pushed by powerful interests to allow continued pollution and increase profits to a series of industries while damaging the rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependant communities and thus, the forests and ecosystems themselves.

“We already know that offset schemes like REDD won’t protect forests or the rights of Indigenous peoples. If we are going to save the climate, we need to focus on real solutions that assure that forests will be left standing and people’s rights are respected,” stated Tom Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network.

No REDD, a Reader exposes the question as how Indigenous and forest-dependent Peoples are being cheated in the name of conservation and development. Looking from the vantage point of communities living where REDD projects are taking place, the articles dive into the layers of contradictions inherent in REDD and its power-base.

Joanna Cabello from Carbon Trade Watch states, “The Ministry of Environment in Peru plans to implement REDD+ on 54 million hectares of the Peruvian Amazon, which would open the doors of more than half of forested territory to the carbon markets.” Chris Lang from REDD Monitor affirmed, “What we do know is that carbon trading in PNG [Papua New Guinea] is a mess. It’s doing nothing to stop the logging of PNG’s forests. And local people are at the back of a very long queue when it comes to benefiting from REDD.”

The groundbreaking new publication, No REDD, A Reader depicts why REDD is flawed, bankrolled by big polluters, intrinsically linked to the carbon market and may result in the largest land grab of all time. This publication is being launched at the Cancún climate summit where a package of market-based forest protections measures called “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation” (REDD) is being pushed as a key outcome, highlighting critical perspectives that are frequently silenced within debates.

Download NO REDD, a Reader in English or Spanish at: noredd.makenoise.org

Please contact for interviews:
Tom Goldtooth, Indigenous Environmental Network: +52.998.108.0751 (English)
Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project: +52.998.167.8131 (English)
Ana Filippini, World Rainforest Movement: +59.898.407.572 (Spanish)
Silvia Ribera, ETC Group: +52.552.653.3330 (Spanish)
Tamra Gilbertson, Carbon Trade Watch: +34 625 498 083 (English)
Joanna Cabello, Carbon Trade Watch: +31681289805 (Spanish)

Press conference: 9am, Monday, 6 December 2010, Moon Palace (Azteca- Luna Room 2), Cancun, Mexico

Esquema Forestal de la ONU pone en riesgo el Clima

Nueva publicación expone los vínculos entre REDD y el mercado de carbono, las Instituciones Financieras Internacionales, las industrias extractivas, los árboles GM y la biotecnología

No REDD – Una Lectura Crítica es obligado para todos los que buscan saber la verdad sobre este instrumento mercantilista. También es altamente recomendado para aquellos quienes creen que las políticas para enfrentar al caos climático deben ver a los pueblos y la Madre Tierra y no ver meramente a los árboles como mercancías para generar lucros y especular con el carbono“,

– Nnimmo Bassey, Director de Amigos de la Tierra Internacional y Director Ejecutivo de Environmental Rights Action en Nigeria

Cancún, México, 6 Diciembre 2010. Grupos de base advierten que el esquema de protección forestal de la ONU que se viene negociando en Cancún a través de la 16va Conferencia de las Partes de la ONU puede socavar severamente las políticas de mitigación climática y exacerbar los problemas ambientales y sociales. No REDD, una Lectura Crítica incluye investigaciones innovadoras que exponen los vínculos entre REDD y el mercado de carbono, las Instituciones Financieras Internacionales, las industrias extractivas, los árboles GM y la biotecnología. Además, originales casos de estudio exploran los problemas del Programa Socio Bosque en Ecuador, la amenaza a los Pueblos Indígenas en aislamiento voluntario en Perú, corrupción y coerción en el esquema REDD en Papúa Nueva Guinea, la verdadera cara sobre “participación comunitaria” en Indonesia, entre otros. La publicación resalta como REDD está siendo empujado por poderosos intereses para permitir una continua contaminación e incrementar el lucro de una serie de industrias mientras que perjudica los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas y comunidades dependientes de los bosques y por ende, los mismos bosques y ecosistemas.

“Nosotros ya sabemos que los esquemas de compensación como REDD no van a proteger a los bosques ni a los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas. Si vamos a salvar el clima, necesitamos enfocarnos en soluciones reales que aseguren que los bosques queden en pie y los derechos de los pueblos sean respetados”, declaró Tom Goldtooth de la Red Indígena Ambientalista.

No REDD, una Lectura Crítica expone la pregunta sobre cómo los Pueblos Indígenas y dependientes de los bosques están siendo engañados en el nombre de la conservación y desarrollo. Viéndolo desde el punto de las comunidades viviendo donde los proyectos REDD se están realizando, los artículos se sumergen en las capas y contradicciones inherentes a REDD y su base de poder.

Joanna Cabello de Carbon Trade Watch afirma que “El Ministerio del Ambiente en Perú planea implementar REDD+ en 54 millones de hectáreas en la Amazonía Peruana, lo cual le abriría las puertas a más de la mitad del territorio boscoso a los mercados de carbono.” Chris Lang de REDD Monitor afirma, “Lo que sabemos es que el comercio de carbono en Papúa Nueva Guinea es un desastre. No está haciendo nada para detener la tala en los bosques de PNG. Y los pueblos locales están al final de una muy larga fila cuando se refiere a beneficiarse de REDD.”

La innovadora publicación, No REDD, Una Lectura Crítica, describe por qué REDD está dañado, financiado por los grandes contaminantes, intrínsecamente vinculado al mercado de carbono y podría resultar en el despojo de tierras más grande de todos los tiempos. Esta publicación está siendo lanzada durante la cumbre climática en Cancún, donde un paquete de medidas basadas en el mercado llamadas “Reducción de Emisiones por Deforestación y Degradación” (REDD) para proteger los bosques está siendo empujado como un resultado clave, resaltando perspectivas críticas que son frecuentemente silenciadas en los debates dominantes.

Descarga No REDD, Una Lectura Crítica en Inglés y Español en: noredd.makenoise.org

Por favor contactar para entrevistas:
Tom Goldtooth, Red Indígena Ambientalista: +52.998.108.0751 (Inglés)
Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project: +52.998.167.8131 (Inglés)
Ana Filippini, Movimiento Mundial por los Bosques Tropicales: +59.898.407.572 (Español)
Silvia Ribera, Grupo ETC: +52.552.653.3330 (Español)
Tamra Gilbertson, Carbon Trade Watch: +34 625 498 083 (Inglés)
Joanna Cabello, Carbon Trade Watch: +31681289805 (Español)

Conferencia de Prensa: 9am, Lunes, 6 Diciembre 2010, Moon Palace, Cancún, México

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on StumbleUpon

Leave a Reply

  1. PNG is far from a mess.
    The VCS developer Nupan has already completed a VCS IFM ‘Improve Forest Management” Methodology which is being used for many projects over great areas of forest areas.
    The first project has finished its CCBA PDD that has been attacked by the countries REDD+ supporter and the worlds biggest logging companies RH.
    Its VCS PDD is completed and ready soon for verification.
    Where else in the world has this been achieved.
    The robust Voluntary Carbon Standard is the only true mechansium to create a Ligitimate tenable instrument VSU vouluntary carbon unit , that will be traded to protect Nupan projects from logging.
    Nupans website http://www.carbonowontok.org
    The UN representive Wari Iamo is also paid by the logging companies RH , he also works closely with Rainforest Coalition who support REDD+ but have no authority from the people of PNG.
    The Incorporated Land Groups of PNG have supported VCS for many years now , they will not support REDD+ it is not welcome in PNG.

  2. Date: October 2, 2002
    Original URL: Status DEAD

    After a three-year investigation, the Ombudsman Commission has published its final report on the National Forest Board decision in February 1999 to award the Kamula Dosa logging concession in Western Province to the logging company Rimbunan Hijau.

    The Ombudsman report concludes that the decision of the National Forest Board to grant the extension was based on improper considerations and should be revoked.

    The report finds that the Chair of the National Forest Board, the Managing Director of the National Forest Service and two Forest Ministers (including current Fisheries Minister, Andrew Baing) all acted “wrongly” and that the Board and the Minister acted in breach of the Forestry Act.

    The Ombudsman Commission has made a total of ten recommendations. These include the termination of Wari Iamo as the Chair of the National Forest Board.

    The report describes the conduct of Wari Iamo as “wrong” and finds that “he failed to give any proper advice and consideration to environmental concerns” and “he failed to live up to the standard demanded of him”. The report concludes therefore that he “should not continue to hold an office he has shown himself unable to adequately perform”.

    The Ombudsman has also highlighted the behaviour of the logging company Rimbunan Hijau.

    The Ombudsman has recommended that the “present projects and future proposals by the Rimbunan Hijau group of companies be carefully audited and monitored” and that the National Forest Board should “have a particularly close look at how the Rimbunan Hijau Group conducts its business in Papua New Guinea”.

    Other recommendations from the Ombudsman include that all logging operations be subject to an annual review to ensure compliance with contractual obligations; changes to the Forestry Act to reduce political interference; the better implementation of legislation; and improved diligence in the performance of their duties by Provincial Forest Management Committees.

    Background

    Rimbunan Hijau has been operating the Wawoi Guavi logging concession in Western Province since 1992 through its subsidiary company, Wawoi Guavi Timber Company. This concession covers an area of 432,000 hectares.

    In February 1999 the National Forest Board decided to award the much larger Kamula Dosa logging concession to the Wawoi Guavi Timber Company as an ‘extension’ to the Wawoi Guavi timber permit. The Kamula Dosa concession covers an area of 791,000 hectares

    The decision to award the concession as an extension meant that the Board could avoid the usual requirement for a public tendering process. This meant that the Board was denying any other logging company the chance to make a bid for the concession.

    The Board decision was made contrary to the advice of the Provincial Forest Management Committee and the views of the National Forest Service technical staff, which had been presented to the Board in several written papers. The Board was also ignoring the wishes of many of the local landowners.

    The Board also chose to ignore the very poor performance of Rimbunan Hijau in the Wawoi Guavi logging concession. The National Forest Service had described that performance in these terms:
    • “about one percent of the total log value is being paid to landowners”,
    • “Rimbunan Hijau have constructed nil roads, bridges or culverts”,
    • “the infrastructure constructed is of very poor quality” and
    • “the level of benefits provided per unit of production are the lowest in the country”.

    The Ombudsman Investigation

    The Ombudsman Commission investigation was initiated in June 1999.

    The purpose of the investigation was to establish if there was any wrong conduct surrounding the decision of the National Forest Board to allocate the Kamula Dosa logging concession to Wawoi Guavi Timber Company as an extension to their Wawoi Guavi logging operation.

    As part of its investigation the Ombudsman Commission advised both the National Forest Board and the Forest Authority of its investigation and conducted a total of 26 interviews with people concerned in the affair.

    The Ombudsman produced a preliminary report in November 2000. This was distributed to the 22 people and organisations named in the report and they were invited to give their responses to the preliminary findings and recommendations.

    The Ombudsman Commission received and considered a total of nine written responses to its preliminary report. These included a written response from Wari Iamo and both a written and oral submission from Rimbunan Hijau who also sent 8 letters to the Ombudsman through their lawyers.

    The Findings

    One: The decision of the National Forest Board to grant the extension was in breach of the Forestry Act and was therefore wrong.

    Two: The National Forest Board also acted wrongly in failing to give paramount consideration to the Constitution and the Forestry Act rather than the needs of a logging company.

    Three: The National Forest Board was wrong not to have a clear policy on extensions.

    Four: The Managing Director of the National Forest Service was wrong in rejecting the advice of his technical officers and in maintaining that the resource owners supported the extension when this was clearly not true.

    “Mr Nen’s conduct was confusing and contradictory and gave the impression that he either did not know or did not care what official documents he signed”.

    Five: Mr Nen was wrong not to ensure that Rimbunan Hijau follow the law in setting up their processing unit at Panakawa. The managing Director was wrong as he “condoned the company’s illegal action and demeaned his position and diminished respect for his position”.

    Six: Wari Iamo was wrong to state that the landowners supported the extension; it was “irresponsible and highly questionable and made without any supporting evidence”.

    “Dr Iamo was prepared to disregard the advice of the technical staff of the NFS and the recommendation of the Western Provincial Forest Management Committee in favour of the views of one private landowner company”.

    Seven: Dr Iamo was also wrong in not satisfying himself that environmental concerns had been addressed. He did not “give proper consideration to environmental matters” and his “conduct was baffling and negligent”.

    Eight: National Forest Board member Gabriel Samol was wrong to vote in favour of the extension when he knew that the necessary procedural steps had not been completed.

    Nine: The conduct of Andrew Baing, then Minister for Forests and now Minister for Fisheries, in giving directions to the National Forest Board was contrary to law and wrong.

    “Mr Baing meddled in the affairs of the Forest Authority. His directions were arbitrary and irresponsible”.

    Ten: The conduct of Mr Fabian Pok as Minister for Forests in also trying to give directions to the Board was contrary to law and wrong.

    Eleven: The conduct of Norbert Makmop, then Governor of Western Province, in encouraging Ministers to apply undue pressure on the National Forest Board was wrong.

    “Mr Makmop’s motivation was not a desire to see a fair, transparent and well-considered decision made”.

    Twelve: The conduct of the Department of Trade and Industry in not consulting with other government bodies when preparing a National Council Submission was wrong

    The Recommendations

    The Ombudsman Commission has made a total of 11 recommendations. According to the Ombudsman, these recommendations must be implemented within 30 days unless he is given cogent and convincing reasons why they cannot or should not be carried out.

    One: The National Forest Board formally revoke its decision to award the Kamula Dosa logging concession as an extension to the Wawoi Guavi timber permit.

    Two: The National Forest Board and the Department of Environment and Conservation ensure that the Environmental Planning Act be complied with in the allocation and implementation of all forestry development projects

    Three: All Provincial Forest Management Committees strictly and diligently carry out their duties

    Four: The Forestry Act be amended to expressly exclude Ministerial interference with the National Forest Board.

    Five: The National Forest Board make clear guidelines on the size of allowable extensions

    Six: The National Forest Board undertake annual reviews of all logging operations to ensure full compliance with contractual obligations and to carefully screen future applications from defaulting companies

    Seven: The future public re-employment of Thomas Nen be carefully and critically reviewed

    Eight: The National Executive Council (NEC) terminate the appointment of Wari Iamo to the National Forest Board

    Nine: The NEC terminate the appointment of Gabriel Samol to the National Forest Board

    Ten: Coordination between departments be observed to ensure compliance with all requirements relating to forestry projects

    Eleven: Present projects and future proposals by the Rimbunan Hijau group be carefully audited and monitored to ensure strict compliance with the law and future proposals be critically screened before approval.