Certification and Green Labelling: A View from the Tropics
11/12/97
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Headline: Certification and Green Labelling: A View from the Tropics
Source: Julio Cesar Centeno, PhD
Las Tapias, Edif. Carreto
Pent House Tel. +58-74-714576
PO Box 750 Fax +58-74-714576
Merida - Venezuela Email: JCenteno@ciens.ula.ve
http://www.ciens.ula.ve/~jcenteno/
Date: 11/12/97
CERTIFICATION AND GREEN LABELLING:
A VIEW FROM THE TROPICS
Julio Cesar Centeno
Presentation at the International Conference on
Sustainable Forest Management: Certification, Criteria and Indicators.
Prince George, Canada. September 21-26, 1997
The concern with environmental deterioration around the world has lead
to a wide range of initiatives, aimed to improve industrial processes,
trade, consumption, recycling and disposal of all kind of products, so
as to minimize the environmental impact of economic activity.
The alarming and increasing depletion of tropical forests has motivated
a series of initiatives aimed at improvements in forest management from
a variety of perspectives, such as the Tropical Forest Action Plan
[TFAP], the International Tropical Timber Organization [ITTO], and the
Forest Stewardship Council. The FSC was originally meant to work
exclusively on tropical forests. It later corrected its approach to
include other types of forests.
The certification of forest management, as well as the labeling of
forest products, are in principle intended as voluntary, market-oriented
tools, to promote sustainable forest management.
The first set of internationally agreed guidelines and criteria for
sustainable forest management are those of the International Tropical
Timber Organization, ITTO. The commitment of tropical countries to
manage production forests according to these criteria is thus part of an
international agreement, under the auspices of the United Nations. Most
tropical countries continue to support this unique and challenging
commitment, while progressing in their efforts to accomplish this
objective by the year 2000.
Nonetheless, the impression has been created among the general public
and environmental groups in industrial countries, that forest
certification and timber labeling will provide the ultimate solution to
the tragedy of tropical deforestation. In fact, the international trade
of wood products has little to do with tropical deforestation. About 80
percent of all wood used in the tropics each year is consumed as fuel,
mainly as firewood, in the country of origin. Firewood is the primary
source of energy for hundreds of millions of people who do not have
access to fossil fuels, or can not afford them.
The remaining 20 per cent of the yearly production of tropical wood is
used as industrial timber, of which four-fifths are also consumed in the
country of origin. Therefore, international trade accounts for only 4 to
5 percent of all wood production in the tropics.
In the case of the country-members of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty,
three-quarters of the deforestation registered during the decade of the
80s were due to the expansion of the agricultural frontier.
It is thus obvious that tropical deforestation is a phenomenon that
cannot effectively be dealt with by focusing on the international trade
of tropical timber. A credible and effective approach to this global
environmental priority must confront its fundamental causes: generalized
poverty, population pressure, and the structural inequalities of an
international economic order deeply biased against the interests of
developing countries.
Those who insist that the timber trade is the root-cause of
deforestation in the tropics should review the implications of claims
that mislead the general public, and their own constituency. It is a
tactic that effectively diverts attention from the root-causes of this
social and environmental drama, overshadowing major national and
international responsibilities in this process. It is a tactic that
works against the objectives such groups often claim to pursue.
With the Helsinki and Montreal initiatives, an attempt is on the way to,
at least partially, overcome the discrimination to which tropical
countries have been subject to in the forestry sector. It is now widely
recognized, at least in principle, that the concept of certification
must apply on an equitable basis to all types of forests. As a
consequence, all types of industrial wood products would need to be
labeled.
However, a political discrimination persists, based on the assumption
that tropical timber is "guilty until proven innocent". While temperate
and boreal timber products from industrial countries are usually
considered "environmentally acceptable", until the contrary is
demonstrated.
Thus, multiple regulations applicable only to tropical timber are in
place in a variety of European counties, cities or municipalities, as
well as in several states of the USA. Such initiatives are often
considered "fair" and "reasonable" by the general public, often under
the influence of governments and environmental groups, whom otherwise
claim to adhere to principles of equity and fair play.
In September of 1992 the government of Austria enacted national
legislation demanding that only tropical timber from well-managed
forests could enter the country. The legislation applied only to
tropical timber, even through it is small proportion of Austrian imports
of wood products. The reaction from trading partners in SE Asia, and the
threat of being summoned at GATT for violation of established
regulations on trade barrier, forced the Austrian Government to revoke
its awkward piece of legislation.
In June of 1993, the Netherlands Framework Agreement on Tropical Timber
(NFATT) was signed, according to which only tropical timber originating
from sources considered as "well managed" could enter the country after
December of 1995. The regulation had the force of a civil law, and
applied only to tropical timber. Not to timber products coming from
industrial nations, the bulk of wood products imported into the
Netherlands. This agreement could not be implemented, was later
modified, and finally dropped. Among the key supporters of this piece of
discriminatory legislation, were major international environmental
groups, such as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and IUCN.
Nevertheless, over 400 German municipalities have successfully issued
guidelines forbidding the use of tropical timber in public projects. A
number of local authorities in the Netherlands have done likewise, as
well as local councils in the United Kingdom and Belgium. Proposals to
extend such discriminatory bans to the whole of the European Union have
been introduced to the European Parliament.
In the USA, legislative actions have been introduced in the states of
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York, Arizona and
California to prohibit the use of tropical timber in state projects. A
proposal to extend such discriminatory practices to the whole country
was introduced and defeated at the U.S. Congress in 1993 (HR 2854,
presented by Kostmeyer).
Such unfair and discriminatory practices are in clear violation of World
Trade Organization procedures. They are also in violation of the
commitments made by these same countries at the ITTO, where they agreed
on a transition period which extends until the year 2000 to comply with
the commitment made by tropical countries with regard to sustainable
forest management.
These discriminatory policies are often supported by some environmental
groups. Sometimes due to the misunderstanding of the political and
technical dimensions of the issue. Other times as a consequence of their
hidden agendas, where the interest of financial contributors outweighs
the sincerity of their rhetoric.
On the other hand, it is only tropical forests whose management is
subject to an existing international agreement. No such agreements are
in place for other kinds of forests. Furthermore, tropical countries did
not develop on their own the ITTO guidelines and criteria for the
sustainable management of tropical forests. Industrial countries took an
active and decisive role in this process, accounting for half of the
decision making power within this organization. They also account for
half of the international responsibility to accomplish these objectives.
In contrast, the development of the Helsinki and the Montreal process
takes place almost exclusively among temperate countries. The
participation of tropical countries in these processes is either
non-existent or completely marginal.
It is necessary to acknowledge both the opportunities and limitations of
forest certification and timber labeling as tools to improve forest
management throughout the world. It is also necessary to establish a
sincere international dialogue, aimed at the unification of existing
processes, in order to ensure that discriminatory practices are
eliminated, and that a fair and balanced treatment be given to all wood
products in the market. Only then will consumers have the opportunity to
fairly exercise the right to choose.
For certification and labeling to become valid and effective tools to
improve forest management, where applicable, they must necessarily
adhere to some basic principles:
* They must apply on an equitable basis to all types of forests and wood
products.
* Comparative certification mechanisms must be developed for substitute
materials, such as aluminum, steel, and plastics.
* Certification and labeling must be based on internationally agreed
standards, applicable to the management of all types of forest, and the
trade of all types of wood products.
* An open, transparent and credible mechanism needs to be established to
monitor the implementations of these processes around the world, to
ensure effectiveness and fair play.
* Certification and labeling must not become a non-tariff barrier to
trade. These tools must serve as fair and balanced trade incentives,
whereby consumers are allowed to freely and effectively exercise their
right to choose.
_______________________________________________
Julio Cesar Centeno, PhD
Las Tapias, Edif. Carreto
Pent House Tel. +58-74-714576
PO Box 750 Fax +58-74-714576
Merida - Venezuela Email: JCenteno@ciens.ula.ve
http://www.ciens.ula.ve/~jcenteno/
_______________________________________________