Return to North American Hearing
Panel I, moderated by Commissioner Charles Caccia, considered sustainable equitable use and management of forests. They based their debate on a discussion paper outlining, inter alia: assessment of the impacts of increased forest conservation; assessment of the impacts of increased intensity of forest management and intensified wood products manufacturing; assessment of the impacts of forest clearing; securing of local control over forests; and the equitable distribution of benefits from public forests.
Several participants raised different views on the role of government. One speaker called for a more active role for government in creating a balanced and inclusive approach to policy-making. Another participant said that large companies have a disproportionate voice in government, while another called for more local control and involvement rather than expanded government bureaucracy. Another noted that government cutbacks are drawing expertise away from local communities. One speaker called for increased resources for environmental NGOs through legislation, increased environmental assessments and improved monitoring.
Several speakers emphasized the need to avoid confrontational or polarized positions and called for a cooperative approach. One participant urged the use of the term "partnerships," noting that the term "stakeholder" has a more divisive than unifying effect. She also called for promotion of values such as equity and participation for the poorest groups. Another participant highlighted examples of successful local community cooperation, and others called for a more balanced approach toward the needs of consumers and industry. One speaker noted the difficulty in conciliatory approaches and recalled lawsuits and other confrontations from the past.
Another speaker noted that sustainable development was practiced in Central Europe until economic concerns made it too expensive. He reminded the Commission that good forest practices create profits and said that money derived from forests must be returned to forests. Another reminded participants that humans are part of the ecosystem and called for balancing biodiversity and environmental concerns with human needs.
Forest health was highlighted by several speakers, who stressed the importance of carrying capacity for wildlife and plant life, reforestation and controlling disease outbreaks. There were also calls for reduced consumption and increased recycling. Several participants noted the need to view nature as a guide for forest management, with another speaker noting that humans should not feign control over nature because of the lure of dollars. One participant spoke against equating sustained yield with sustainability and compared forestry to risk management.
Local control, self-empowerment and self-determination were also emphasized by many participants, who noted that discussions on a global scale were futile without local empowerment. One speaker called for increased consideration of the differences between the three countries in North America, and requested that participants show equal interest in Mexican forests because their management will also affect the rest of North America. The Moderator noted the many calls for a cooperative approach, but reminded participants that the values of all in the room were vastly different.
The Panel on forest products, trade and the environment was moderated by Commissioner Angela Cropper. One participant noted that unsustainable forest practices not only hurt the environment but laborers as well. She stressed the need for a diversification of products from forests and more research in this regard, and called on industry to promote such diversification. Many individuals emphasized that certification is one of many tools to enhance sustainable forest management. Others highlighted: the need for consumer education to accompany certification; the extension of certification to other natural resource-based industries; the inappropriateness of applying WTO rules to voluntary schemes; the need for further market analysis of certified products; the importance of having impartial interests involved in the development of criteria for certification; and the need for performance-based, as opposed to process-oriented, standards.
One participant emphasized that domestic and local commerce should not be left out of discussions on forest products trade. Many participants recognized that demand for forest products will increase in the near future and therefore it is important to reduce present demand to conserve forests for the long term. The forest industry cannot be expected to promote a reduction in demand as it is not in their best interest, so decision makers and other stakeholders must take action to promote reduced demand. Another participant underscored the danger in reducing consumption of forest products without first exploring how they would be replaced by other products, as substituted products might be more unsustainable and environmentally harmful. Some participants mentioned the need to explore the substitution of forest product consumption with alternative fiber products, while many others highlighted the need to address overconsumption, particularly in the North.
Many participants expressed concern that self regulation by industry has not proven to be very effective in the past. Several individuals stressed the need to change existing tax structures to abolish subsidies and incentives that encourage unsustainable forest practices. One participant highlighted the importance of valuation in terms of pricing policies to capture the indirect values associated with forests. Another participant noted that resources and technology should be made available to help land-owning local communities and indigenous peoples develop the use and trade of non-wood forest products, wildlife products and tropical wood species that are not overexploited.
While some participants expressed support for a global forest convention, others argued that there are several other useful tools to promote sustainable forest management that should first be further explored. Some suggested that the WCFSD should give serious consideration to the question of the rationales for a forest convention.
Many participants highlighted the need to refrain from pointing fingers. All stakeholders should work together to find a middle ground regarding the dual function of forests in environmental conservation and economic development. One individual stressed the need for a balance between industry and environmentalists, and labor, which depends on that balance, could help these seemingly opposing camps to strike such a balance. The moderator stressed the importance of discussing and formulating solutions to this and other problems facing forests.
Panel III on finance, international agreements and international organizations, was moderated by Commissioner Wakako Hiroaka. She noted that this is the first time the Commission has addressed these issues. Hans d'Orville, Advisor to the Panel, presented the Commission's findings on financial mechanisms. He said that intellectual property must be balanced with resource property rights and emphasis should be given to the value of forests. A new international global fund is unnecessary and implementing taxes on global markets may take decades. He called for the provision of funds for local initiatives in sustainable forestry practices. A number of proposals exist to help sustainable forest initiatives at the national level, such as: private sector green funds; national funds; issuance of bonds; stumping fees; land-to-forest conversion fees; and the auctioning of concessions. He also commented on carbon taxes, tax incentives for forestry management and loan subsidies.
Proposals on the international level addressed: debt forgiveness; debt swaps; reallocation of resources; joint implementation; and the creation of international green funds. Civil society could be involved in rechanneling revenues from bio-prospecting or eco-tourism into forestry efforts. It was noted that tropical countries have few national financial alternatives, that incentives are difficult to create and that the IMF is an impediment. He stressed the need for creative international funding mechanisms.
One participant noted the benefits of negotiating individual bio-prospecting agreements with pharmaceutical companies, including technology transfer, direct contribution to conservation efforts and royalties. It was noted that funds are limited for the production of pharmaceuticals in Mexico and that eco-tourism and loans from banks often encounter problems. Participants also emphasized national and international alternatives.
One participant felt that efforts should go beyond debt forgiveness to reform the international monetary system and free people from assumption of more debt. One participant felt that the linkages between the three topics of this panel should be very strong and called for a more coherent framework. He said that this process could convince investors to put more resources into the forestry sector and said a legally-binding instrument could be connected to a funding instrument. The moderator highlighted the green fund that Japan started after World War II as a good model that educated and involved citizens and business in reforestation efforts. One person indicated that farm workers in Mexico have been given too little attention and need to be empowered.
Kilaparti Ramakrishna introduced the discussion on international agreements and organizations by noting the frequent disconnect between governments' statements in international fora and actions taken locally. He stated that international agreements should be based on what they can accomplish nationally. He noted mixed views on whether international agreements promote cohesiveness or exploitation and said they can give a false impression that a problem is being addressed. To be beneficial, an improved process would include broader stakeholder representation, national policy changes and continued dialogue.
One participant asked, in light of the lack of funds, what mechanisms will be used to recognize different locally set priorities. Another participant noted that agreements are valuable because they put pressure on governments and said mechanisms should ensure local participation. One speaker called for mechanisms that are more inclusive and private sector-driven. Another participant suggested that an alternative to a global convention could focus on inclusive dialogues among the 28 counties containing 85% of world forests, trade and consumption. One observer asked whether such limitations could create another OPEC-type bloc on forests. Another said that the Commission's fundamental political role is to support the movement of funds from government subsidies to international aid.