Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Maginnis of Drumglass (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Thursday, 13 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on Rainforests and Logging.


Rainforests and Logging

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Eden of Winton, for choosing to give us the opportunity to debate such a vital matter. This is an issue that impacts on every aspect of life as we know it and is not merely a problem of forest loss alone. While deforestation accounts for approximately 14 million hectares per year, only about a third of that is being offset by new forest or natural reforestation. But those new forests mainly excel in the provision of industrial roundwood. Hence, the world is losing around 9 million hectares of forest each year. That is mainly in the tropics and includes some of the most biologically diverse forests. Indeed, the World Conservation Union’s red list estimates that almost one third of all threatened species are found in tropical and sub-tropical forest habitats. But that is only the tip of the iceberg. At least as great a threat comes from the degradation of remaining forests. Only in places such as the Congo and Amazon basins do large uninterrupted swathes of forest remain. Elsewhere, the World Resources Institute estimates that 60 per cent of remaining forest is now fragmented into isolated blocks and, even more alarmingly, 60 per cent of fragmented blocks is being massively degraded. One can only imagine the effect all this is having, since what remains will contain less biodiversity, will supply less clean water, will store less carbon and so on. I am speaking about half a billion hectares that are now subject to a spiral of ongoing degradation by burning and the removal of the last few logs by an over-capitalised logging industry. To try to put this in perspective, the world’s forests are home to up to 90 per cent of terrestrial biodiversity. Critically, 90 per cent of the world’s very poorest people depend to some degree on tropical forests for their livelihoods. An example is Ghana, which is probably loosing $100 million per year because of illegal logging and failure to enforce the law. To put that in perspective, it amounts to about half the Ghanaian Government’s education budget each year. So what is to be done? Combating deforestation has traditionally been a technocratic matter, predicated on establishing improved management and conservation systems. Now there is a growing realisation that, while a good scientific base is still important, the real challenges are much more political. Forest governance systems are dysfunctional in so far as 80 per cent of forest lands are still state owned and present, in size and logistics, an impossible challenge to urban-based management. Poor local communities have traditionally had little or no part to play. Having been marginalised from directly and legally benefiting from the forest, they have sometimes contributed to the problem as they struggle to maintain their livelihoods. However, there is now a slowly emerging trend towards decentralisation and towards involving local communities and enabling them to benefit directly from the forest. Where this has occurred there is better management, and logging, potentially, can be more effectively controlled. But that requires proper resourcing, a simple transfer of responsibility is not enough. Local communities need to be helped to develop adequate administration and management skills. Such help would be crucial. The private sector—so often lambasted as the architect of forest loss—must also be recognised as a key player. It can be prevailed upon and has shown itself capable of startling turnarounds. I saw an example of that in Costa Rica. The private sector is a reality and its logging operations in the tropics need to be certified for good-quality management by bodies such as the Forest Stewardship Council. That will have an effect if the clear message from developed countries goes out that they will only accept timber from legally verifiable and well managed sources. We should welcome the voluntary partner agreements that the European Union is negotiating with a number of tropical countries. However, it would be wrong merely to salve our consciences by finding means to eliminate illegal timber coming into our domestic markets. We must invest, and invest significantly, in the establishment of good forestry governance and move towards sustainable forestry management in tropical countries. Finally, on the issue of investment, it is regrettable that, while loss of tropical forest has not abated and while so many poor people in rural areas still rely on goods and services that forests provide to sustain their livelihoods, international aid spending on tropical forests has declined drastically over the last decade, including that from the United Kingdom. Notwithstanding the excellent work done by aid agencies, such as the Department for International Development, governments in developed countries, including the United Kingdom, are making less money available to support developing countries that seek to curb deforestation and to promote sustainable forest management. These figures are alarming. Recent studies indicate that overseas development assistance for the forest sector could have declined by as much as 50 per cent during the 1990s. That trend continues into the current decade. Again I give my thanks to the noble Lord, Lord Eden of Winton. I hope that our Government have listened and will give a lead to developed countries that currently are not pulling their weight in terms of adequate financial support in the area of forest conservation.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c478-9 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Agriculture Climate change Biodiversity Development aid International assistance Law and order Forestry Ethnic groups Nature conservation Rainforests Regulation Trade Sustainable development Timber Tree felling World Bank Democratic Republic of the Congo Forest products