Status of Implementation of
Forest-Related Clauses in the CBD
AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
An analysis of Papua New Guinea’s Implementation
of the Convention on Biological Diversity
with a Focus on Forests
Written by Glen Barry, Forests.org, Inc
March 2002
2
This report is part of a series of 21 country reports analysing the implementation of the
CBD with a focus on forests. All country reports, as well as a synthesis report compiling
and analysing the outcome of the 21 country reports, are available at www.fern.org. Fern
has been commissioned to co-ordinate and carry out this research by the Global Forest
Coalition.
Fern is a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that aims to improve European Union
policies and practices in order to achieve conservation and sustainable management of
forests and respect for the rights of forest peoples.
The Global Forest Coalition (GFC) is a group of NGO’s and indigenous peoples
organizations (IPO’s) that aim to facilitate the informed participation of NGO’s and
IPO’s in intergovernmental processes relating to forests, such as the United Nations
Forum on Forests (UNFF) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
Fern UK, 1C Fosseway Business Centre, Stratford Road, Moreton-in-Marsh,
Gloucestershire, GL56 9NQ, UK email: [email protected]
3
Background Information
The rainforests of Papua New Guinea (PNG) constitute one of the most significant remaining
tropical rainforests on the Planet, in terms of both their tremendous biodiversity and critical
global ecosystem functions.
PNG’s rainforests are the largest intact tropical rainforest
wilderness in the Asia Pacific region and the third largest on the planet. Some thirty-six million
hectares, 77% of the total land area, are covered by closed natural forest. PNG's forests are
among the most complex and species-rich terrestrial ecosystems in the world and contain an
estimated 5-7% of the world’s total number of species.
Papua New Guinea holds many records for diversity, including human cultural diversity. Over
700 distinct languages are spoken - one quarter of the world's languages. PNG's rugged
geography, with peaks over 13,000 feet high, offers a wide variety of microclimates, landforms
and vegetative community types. Ten forest types are generally acknowledged, from highaltitude cloud and montane forests to lowland mixed forests and mangroves along the coast.
PNG's forests provide habitat for around 200 species of mammals, 20,000 species of plants,
1,500 species of trees and 750 species of birds, half of which are unique to the island. The
world's largest butterfly (10.4-inch wingspan) and the world's largest mangrove expanses can be
found in PNG.
PNG’s citizens continue to rely heavily on their forests for their subsistence and economic wellbeing. These forests are vital to the livelihoods of the mostly rural population of over 4.5 million
people - providing them with their food, shelter, medicines and their spiritual identity. There
exists a strong attachment to the land, as some 97% of the country is under customary land
tenure. Tribal clans living on their land thus have the final say regarding the fate of PNG’s
forests and biodiversity. Foodstuffs and other materials from the forests and seas remain a
central component of the Papua New Guinean diet. There are an estimated 5,000 cultivars of
sweet potato found within the country. Dozens of other native plant species have traditionally
been, and continue to be, cultivated.
Forest degradation and diminishment of biological resources is a serious problem in Papua New
Guinea. There is general agreement that the most significant threat currently posed to PNG’s
biodiversity values stem from the degradation of terrestrial habitats by total or partial removal of
natural forest cover. The country is currently experiencing a logging boom, as a large
commercial timber industry is carrying out highly unsustainable resource extraction.
The
country is incurring high environmental and social costs from this industry.
The present forest allocation process remains biased towards large-scale intensive management
for log export by foreign companies. Almost half of the country's accessible forests are already
committed to industrial logging, and dozens of proposed timber projects threaten the rest. It is
estimated that 15 million hectares of forests could potentially be harvested for timber. At least
two million hectares have already been logged. Annually at least 125,000 hectares (likely to be
considerably higher) are selectively logged in an unsustainable and highly ecologically damaging
manner. Many approved timber blocks have been placed in areas known to be high priority
biodiversity areas. It is estimated shifting cultivation clears another 200,000 a year, although it is
4
believed only a small proportion of this is primary forest. Another 25,000 hectares of natural
forest are deforested for agricultural, clearcutting and infrastructure construction.
The Questionnaire and Overview of Status of CBD Commitments
Given the importance of Papua New Guinea’s rainforests and biodiversity, it was important to
include an analysis of the country’s progress in implementing commitments under the CBD in
the broader analysis of progress worldwide. Identifying a suitable country monitor delayed the
process somewhat. But once the ideal candidate was contracted, the questionnaire process began
– albeit a bit later than the other countries surveyed. The questionnaire was given to the
government and eight civil society organizations and individuals in mid-February.
Three different approaches were made to the government; as questionnaires were sent to the
country’s GEF focal point (the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Conservation),
the Ambassador of the PNG embassy in the United States, and a representative of the Prime
Minister’s office. No responses were received from the government. One non-governmental
organization and two academics responded substantially to the questionnaire, a few others
indicated that they did not have enough knowledge to answer the questions. Their responses,
along with the considerable knowledge of the country monitor who has worked extensively in
forest and biodiversity conservation policy in PNG, form the basis for this analysis. The lack of
a governmental response is troubling; and is indicative of lack of capacity, and perhaps an
unwillingness to comment on their lack of progress. We now turn to synopsizing the status of
implementation of the Convention of Biodiversity in Papua New Guinea.
PNG signed the Convention on Biological Diversity on June 13, 1992 and ratified it on March
16, 1993. Shortly thereafter, given its history of involvement in forest management and
environmental issues in PNG, the World Bank successfully lobbied to be named the GEF
implementing agency with regard to conducting the Biodiversity Enabling Activities to
formulate a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, and provide the conduit for
financing from the GEF to carry out this work. From 1994 to 1998 essentially no progress was
made by the government or the World Bank to implement the convention. Inexplicably, the
World Bank simply forgot about its obligations, despite repeated attempts to remind them by the
Department of Environment and Conservation and NGOs. The senior staff person responsible
for the matter moved to a new position, and Bank management lost track of their obligation in
this regard. In 1998, as the Bank was preparing a major new forestry operation, a Bank
consultant (who happens to be the country monitor) became aware that the enabling activities
had lagged. It was brought to the attention of senior Bank management that they were obliged to
assist the PNG government, and formal enabling activities slowly began. This four year lag
represents a critical missed opportunity to capitalize on other local initiatives in biodiversity
conservation.
During the hiatus civil society, with the help of other international organizations, conducted
many of the stocktaking activities required under the convention. The Papua New Guinea
Country Study on Biological Diversity (Sekhran and Miller eds., 1994) was carried out with
support from the United Nations Environment Program. The Papua New Guinea Conservation
5
Needs Assessment Volume 1 (Alcorn 1993) and Volume 2 (Beehler 1993) sought to identify
geographic areas of primary biodiversity importance and the Catalogue of Biodiversity Data
Holdings for Papua New Guinea (Hedemark and Peters 1997), also with UNEP, systematically
constructed a database regarding all known information concerning the biodiversity of PNG.
These works are cited extensively in this report. In addition, a group of NGOs took it upon
themselves to develop a Framework document as the basis for the coming strategy. Much work
and effort went into developing a draft document that, while quite substantive, was never
completed. These information gathering and planning processes nearly a decade ago have been
of little significance. The reports have languished without resulting in development of the
formalized National Biodiversity Strategy, much less in formal implementation of an Action
Plan. They are rapidly becoming outdated.
The World Bank has belatedly begun to assist the PNG government to carry out their
Biodiversity Enabling Activities Project, a major step in the implementation of commitments
under the Convention on Biological Diversity. A National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
is to be produced and the first national report submitted. Even after the Bank waited four years
to acknowledge their obligations to serve as the conduit for GEF resources to PNG’s biodiversity
planning efforts in 1998, things have still progressed extremely slowly. In 1998 some $182,000
in GEF resources were acquired to finance these activities. Only in April of 2000 did the
government committees and World Bank staff first meet to discuss the activity, and as of March
2002 the contracting to actually start the project has only just begun.
Nearly a decade of biodiversity loss has occurred in Papua New Guinea without the benefit of a
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan as the World Bank and government had more
pressing business – both in economic and commercial forestry reforms. There were a number of
reasons for this further delay. The World Bank and PNG government were at loggerheads
during this period over a number of economic issues, which resulted in all interactions grinding
to a halt – including things like biodiversity planning activities. There also arose disagreements
regarding the use of the funds – the Bank insisted that the funds be used for bringing in expertise
from civil society and consultants, while the government wished to use the money to pay
government salaries.
In summary, important CBD outputs necessary to move forward on biodiversity conservation in
PNG have inexcusably been allowed to languish. The government of PNG has shown lack of
commitment to implementing its obligation under the treaty. The World Bank is also largely at
fault – having failed to fulfill their promise to help Papua New Guinea develop a biodiversity
conservation strategy. Meanwhile, the World Bank and government of PNG are embarking on a
major reform effort of the commercial logging industry which includes substantial GEF funding
($US 17 million) – all without the benefit of a comprehensive biodiversity planning exercise and
National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.
6
Questionnaire Results
Reporting
The PNG government has not submitted the national report on the implementation of the CBD or
the thematic report on forest ecosystems to the CBD secretariat. Failure to develop these reports
is indicative of lack of interest in biodiversity conservation by the government. It also
demonstrates that in situ biodiversity conservation through protection of habitats is far less
important to the World Bank than bolstering continued commercial forestry through another
round of reform efforts and subsidies – an area where there has been feverish activity during the
same period of no progress on the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan.
Implementation and Integration
Formulation of the National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan process under the biodiversity
enabling activities has been delayed for nearly a decade. Under the stalled enabling activities
proposal that belatedly commenced in 1998, the First National Report and the PNG National
Biodiversity Strategy were to have been published some three years ago, yet there is no sign of
either. An in-country clearing house mechanism was to be established, of which there is no sign.
A donor round table was to be convened as the NBSAP is finalized – to allow the government of
PNG to present its priorities to the donor community. There are no indications that this has or
will happen. There has still not been a completed strategy published. Despite having started
some four years ago, only now has the process begun issuing a call for proposals for consultants.
Efforts to date have been conducted in isolation from the broader conservation community
outside the government, the World Bank and perhaps some international NGOs.
The country monitor has no reason to believe that the IPF processes have been carried out.
While there have been repeated forest planning exercises for the purpose of expanding industrial
log exports, it is unlikely that an explicit National Forest Plan/Programme that conforms to IPF
commitments has been completed. Forest planning gives short shrift to biodiversity. The
national forest plans are primarily concerned with facilitating commercial scale logging of most
of the nation’s rainforests. While some provisions are made for biodiversity conservation setasides, this is not the focus. Biodiversity planning is thus poorly integrated into forestry
planning and vice versa. There is virtually no integration with other sectors such as agriculture,
mining, oil and gas, etc.
Negative Impacts on Biodiversity and Monitoring
There have been a number of UN sponsored stocktaking exercises, as well as other reports which
have clearly identified the threats to PNG’s biodiversity (references given previously). Papua
New Guinea carried out a country study on biological diversity in 1994 with assistance from
UNEP that made preliminary investigations into factors negatively impacting biodiversity. Far
and away the greatest threat was shown to be commercial scale logging by foreign companies for
log export. Again and again industrial forestry has been shown to have devastating impacts on
biodiversity, the environment, and the social fabric of the nation. But the government, World
Bank and most donors adamantly refuse to consider options for biodiversity conservation which
limit these activities. There has been reluctance to develop and implement national policies that
support local efforts to carry out less damaging alternatives – such as community based small
and medium scale use and protection of forest resources. There exists a well developed eco-
7
forestry movement in a country which is continually thwarted by lack of government and donor
support.
Failure to reign in the logging industry threatens most biodiversity in the country. Other threats
include clearing for development, slash-and-burn agriculture, oil palm development, which all
exist at a much smaller scale than logging. Clearly the massive timber boom encompassing the
country is a threat of a magnitude of its own. There is no rigorous and on-going monitoring
program on these activities. This is mostly due to the low level of capabilities in the Department
of Environment and Conservation – despite tens of millions of dollars of failed donor capacity
building programs.
Participation
The proposal approved by the GEF, entitled “Papua New Guinea Enabling Activity Proposal in
Biodiversity”, stated “The Biodiversity Strategy will be formulated through extensive
consultation with stakeholders…” Most of those in civil society surveyed are completely
unaware of the critical biodiversity planning activity that is soon to commence, much less are
they participating. The proposal funded by the GEF stated there would be a series of national
workshops to launch the consultative and participatory process, to set broad parameters and
priorities, and to consider options for pursuit of biodiversity conservation. With the enabling
activities about to commence, there is no indication that the groundwork of liaison and
collaboration with civil society has been established. Large well-funded international NGOs
have access to decision making processes; while the local groups doing the most innovative and
important biodiversity and forest conservation initiatives are not contacted, not involved and are
unaware of the CBD and its ongoing processes. There has been little coordination on the
enabling activities with grassroots groups, much less local landowners.
The rainforest and biodiversity conservation policy debate is largely dominated by reform efforts
that seek to improve the performance of commercial forestry, and addresses biodiversity as an
afterthought, and only as long as it does not threaten to limit the scope of industrial forestry. The
development of a new World Bank Forestry and Conservation Project – which includes money to
establish a trust fund to finance activities that conserves biodiversity – has been developed in
virtual secrecy (particularly in the later stages when the project was radically changed). This
trust fund would provide much needed financial support for landowners who wish to pursue
biodiversity conservation based development alternatives. But the project fails to ensure that
forest management alternatives, once established, will be free from continued pressures to pursue
commercial logging.
Currently, many ecologically sensitive alternative forest management
projects fail because their status is not given legal recognition as a valid land use.
There has been a gross failure to get broad-based participation in the process. This is because the
government wants to use international funds for biodiversity conservation for their own
purposes, such as government salaries, and the World Bank is pursuing its agenda of maintaining
continued exports of raw logs. Those that question the assumption that better monitoring of
industrial log exports is the best way to protect PNG’s biodiversity, and wish to foster a new
paradigm of community based ecologically derived development and protection, are
systematically excluded from deliberations and portrayed as villains. Biodiversity planning is
being conducted by the government, World Bank and those that agree with their desire to
8
maintain, accelerate and subsidize commercial scale logging of primary rainforests.
Protected Areas, and Biodiversity Conservation
The customary land tenure system whereby PNG’s tribal clans control their land communally
presents tremendous opportunities to develop culturally appropriate conservation models.
Landowners maintain final control over the use of the land. Clearly the Western national park
model does not work under such a circumstance. If decisions by clans to pursue conservation
were granted the same legitimacy as other land use decisions – such as logging or oil palm
production – there would be the opportunity to construct extensive protected areas on the basis of
many individual clan based conservation agreements.
There has been a remarkable lack of imagination shown regarding how to use customary land
tenure for the benefit of biodiversity conservation. The World Bank views the land system as an
obstacle to economic development, and thus fails to support dynamic and innovative local
initiatives to implement culturally appropriate protected areas. There are means to establish
protected areas under PNG law. However, one type focuses primarily on wildlife and does not
make provision for land-use planning and management guidelines; while the other provides more
meaningful protections but is so difficult to implement that it has never been pursued. This
global biodiversity treasure trove is in risk of having grossly inadequate strictly protected areas.
There have been two major efforts to identify areas of relatively high biodiversity importance –
the Conservation Needs Assessment and the BIORAP mapping exercise. Both were done mostly
by international consultants and have not resulted in building lasting mapping and planning
expertise in PNG. Once an area is identified as a priority in terms of biodiversity, there is no
system in place to remove these areas from the pool of forests likely to be industrially harvested.
The requirement that logging areas include conservation set asides is widely flaunted and usually
targets lands that lack forest resources which are commercially viable. Even if done properly,
these areas would not be large enough to maintain the full range of biodiversity and ecosystem
values found in the now intact and contiguous rainforests.
Indigenous Peoples’ Rights/ Customary Use and Local Support
As noted previously, PNG’s forest owners have not been engaged in biodiversity planning to any
meaningful extent. Rarely do international conservation planners set forth out of the capital,
only occasionally making it to a provincial center, and rarely to a village or actual rainforest.
Strengthening indigenous and local community’s participation in the National Biodiversity
Strategy and Action Plan would require taking these proceedings out to remote villages where
Papua New Guineans live. Those managing the World Bank’s program on the biodiversity
enabling activities have little in-country experience and have little understanding of the needs,
aspirations and feelings regarding biodiversity of PNG’s indigenous peoples. This dangerous
lack of knowledge of the country by those facilitating implementation of the CBD virtually
guarantees that another document is written that is removed from reality, rarely read, and does
little to conserve biodiversity.
The tremendous non-market benefits of forests to PNG citizens are not appreciated. The poverty
associated with dispossessed ecological refugees – as occurs elsewhere - is confused with frugal,
subsistence living of PNG’s citizens which, while materially lacking, meets most needs for food,
9
shelter and other basic needs from the forests. The continued focus of government and donors
on policing industrial forestry in order to limit its environmental impact fails to acknowledge
other forest values – including both current subsistence uses and foregone opportunities to
pursue ecologically based and sustainable community development.
Threatened Species
New environmental legislation has recently been enacted, but has not fully entered into force due
to delays in writing regulations to implement the legislation. Given the millions of dollars
invested in increasing capacity at the Department of Environment and Conservation, they remain
amazingly without capacity. Over the last few years there has been little operational funds
meaning little or no monitoring or fieldwork has been occurring. So, while there is legislation in
place, it is not being implemented. This is not deemed a priority by the government. So little is
known regarding patterns of biodiversity in PNG that only very few species benefit from such
legislation. Even when protection is given, as with the Queen Alexandria Birdwing butterfly –
the largest butterfly in the World, and is critically endangered – projects such as the World
Bank’s Oro Oil Palm project are still allowed to destroy critical habitat – against PNG law and
Bank policy. Threatened species are given no real protection in PNG.
Incentives
The recently approved GEF “Mama Graun” trust fund, part of the World Bank’s new Forestry
and Conservation project, shows potential to provide the much needed funding source for those
that wish to pursue biodiversity friendly development options. The problem is that there is still
no legislation, or rules and regulations in place to ensure that such projects have legal standing
and are not continually encroached upon. Many good alternative forest uses succumb to
pressures to pursue commercial logging because there is no system of legal conservation status
and enforcement.
Environmental and Strategic Impact Assessments
The new environmental legislation provides a well developed methodology that is beyond PNG’s
capacity and is not adequately funded. Logging, mining, oil palm and other highly destructive
development activities continue to occur with cursory or non-existent environmental
assessments. When they do occur, they are viewed as a formality – not as a real review that may
stop the biologically damaging project.
Country Monitor Comments, Conclusion and Recommendations
In the decade since ratification of the CBD by Papua New Guinea, not even rudimentary first
steps have been taken to implement the convention. Meanwhile, a voracious timber industry
threatens essentially all forest biodiversity in PNG and the continued existence of contiguous,
intact, unfragmented habitats in which they are maintained.
Low levels of governmental
commitment to biodiversity conservation, and the World Bank’s failure to honor in a timely
fashion their obligations to serve as the implementing agency, border on negligence and show
bad faith. This report will now highlight several aspects of current biodiversity policy that are
most troubling, and threaten to eliminate huge areas of biodiversity rich forest habitats before
CBD processes such as a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan are developed and
implemented.
10
Logging Boom Threatens Biodiversity and Ecosystems
There has been a complete breakdown in forest sector management in Papua New Guinea. One
of the World’s last great rainforests – an ancient store of evolutionary brilliance displayed
through its biodiversity – is being razed to the ground. For one and a half decades, reform of this
industry has failed miserably. Papua New Guineans receive only a pittance for these log exports
– while bearing significant immediate environmental costs and forgone development options. In
essence, Papua New Guineans are paying for their forests to be logged.
In the late 1980s, the Barnett Inquiry, which exhaustively investigated the PNG timber industry,
reported "It would be fair to say, of some of the companies, that they are now roaming the
countryside with the self-assurance of robber barons; bribing politicians and leaders, creating
social disharmony and ignoring laws in order to gain access to, rip out, and export the last
remnants of the province's valuable timber." The Prime Minister of PNG recently admitted
"Governance has been particularly poor in the area of forestry, with the side effect of promoting
corrupt practices and undermining environmental sustainability in logging activities". Recent
reports indicate the following problems continue to systematically plague the industry:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Still virtually no sustainable forestry projects
Widespread environmental damage
Logging projects provide few long-term benefits, causing social upheaval
Corruption a persistent problem at all levels of the industry
Minimal domestic processing investment
Alternatives to industrial log exports such as eco-forestry projects are not supported
Continued violations of human rights
After countless broken promises to pursue reform by the government, and millions of dollars of
failed donor aid programs, including massive subsidies to reform commercial logging, nothing
has changed – in fact, it has gotten worse. The emphasis for biodiversity conservation continues
to be upon reforming the poorly performing logging industry – trying to establish monitoring and
policing that would end the worst of the abuses. But after 15 years of efforts this has still not
been successful. There has been no questioning of the dominant paradigm that commercial scale
forestry in these tropical rainforests may be inimical to biodiversity conservation, and will never
achieve acceptable levels of ecological sustainability, biodiversity conservation and community
development. Local initiatives by forest peoples to protect and benignly manage their forests are
actively impeded.
Papua New Guinea's magnificent ancient forests and biodiversity are at a crossroads. They can
continue to be ravaged by industrial logging, or they can flourish and be sustained, providing
long-term livelihoods for communities that manage them while maintaining biodiversity and
operable ecosystems.
Given well-documented concerns regarding the environmental and social
costs of the current timber industry, it is difficult to justify continued exploitive and nonsustainable log exports. PNG has a real opportunity to change the way that forest are managed to
ensure greater benefits for PNG, conserve biodiversity and achieve long term sustainability. But
first it needs a well-conceived National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan that addresses,
head on, the threat posed by commercial logging – while detailing a new forest management
paradigm based upon community eco-forestry management and protected areas.
11
World Bank & PNG Rainforest Policy: Good Conservation Actor or Hidden Agenda?
The World Bank heralds its Papua New Guinea program as innovative in terms of contributing to
rainforest conservation. It is true that over the past decade and a half, the World Bank has
successfully used its leverage to stop the most flagrant timber industry abuses. PNG has been a
test case of sorts, one of the first countries where forest management issues have been raised by a
multi-lateral lender as conditionality for economic loan packages. In addition to structural
adjustment lending, the World Bank has been involved in PNG rainforest conservation policymaking through implementation of the national Tropical Forest Action Plan program,
formulation of a Forestry and Conservation project which is soon to launch, and as the
implementing agency for the Biodiversity Enabling Activities.
The linking of forest
management conditions to finance has been critical – as the Bank has successfully used its
economic leverage to slow down what otherwise may have been even higher rates of rainforest
diminishment and loss.
Yet, these advances have come at a price. The Bank’s establishment of forestry legislation,
monitoring of logging operations, setting of taxation rates, and other reforms are subsidies that
legitimize and extend the life of widespread, highly intensive industrial logging.
As they
continue to subsidize industrial log exports, they have failed to promote other more ecologically
sustainable forest conservation policies and management options.
Indeed, they and the
government actively obstruct pursuit of community-based ecologically sustainable development
options that would much more effectively conserve biodiversity. It is not clear whether the Bank
can perform the role of biodiversity protector, timber industry reformer, and loan maker
simultaneously; and in a manner that reflects the interests of PNG’s rainforest and biodiversity
conservation.
The World Bank, the organization tasked with assisting Papua New Guinea to implement its
obligations under the CBD, also has other agendas. The World Bank’s program of economic
assistance requires opening of markets, reductions in subsidies and pruning of government
bureaucracy. The Bank’s interest in the export of forest products for economic growth is
divergent and contradicts requirements for ecologically, socially and economically rigorous
sustainable forest management and biodiversity conservation. Increasingly, the Bank reform
efforts are propping up a failed forest sector rather than substantively contributing to rainforest
conservation. Recent Bank and government backsliding on commitments to PNG rainforest and
biodiversity conservation are best illustrated by the failed logging moratorium.
In 1999, the PNG government, World Bank and Australian government (PNG’s major donor)
committed to a moratorium on new logging operations as a requirement for a new loan program.
The moratorium was to stay in place until there had been independent reviews of proposed and
existing timber operations, and the review findings and recommendations were implemented in
new policy and legislation. With thirty new logging concessions waiting to be granted and plans
for a total of over perhaps as many as one hundred, the moratorium was to provide crucial
breathing space for meaningful reform of the country’s rainforest management. The moratorium
presented perhaps the last chance to rationalize forest management in a manner that reduced
environmental costs while enabling pursuit of a greater variety of alternative forest management
options.
12
During the course of the moratorium, the government allowed several new projects to
commence, violating the loan conditionality and providing justification for the Bank to withhold
funding. Landowners in the Kiunga-Aiambak area of Western Province, Papua New Guinea,
have lodged a claim with the World Bank Inspection Panel regarding the Bank's failure to adhere
to policy and commitments regarding rainforest conservation. Landowners claim that they have
suffered economic, social, environmental and cultural loss as a result of the illegal logging on
their land during the period of the moratorium. This project falls in PNG’s largest and most
important rainforest wilderness. Despite having been brought to the attention of the government
and the World Bank, nothing has been done to stop illegal logging operations.
The government of PNG, World Bank and Australia are guilty of frittering away the opportunity
offered by the moratorium. When loan conditions were violated and new illegal logging
operations started during the moratorium, the Bank refused to take putative actions allowed
under the loan agreement. Indeed, despite strong public pressure, the World Bank refused to
hold the PNG government to its loan commitments. The moratorium on logging was allowed to
lapse, final loan payments were authorized and business as usual overly intensive and highly
environmentally damaging industrial forestry recommenced. The World Bank has not followed
its policies nor held the government of PNG accountable for meeting its forest conservation
commitments under the loan. This moratorium was a failure from which little good has come.
Failed forest sector reform in PNG is occurring within the context of the World Bank loosening
its restrictions on investments in rainforest logging. Turning the Bank loose to, in their own
words, "integrate forests into sustainable economic development", will guarantee the demise of
PNG’s remaining large, contiguous and natural old-growth primary forests. It is becoming
abundantly apparent that the intent of the Bank's efforts to reform its forest policy is to be
allowed to finance commercialization of PNG’s and the World's remaining forest wildlands.
The World Bank is yet to present any scientific, peer-reviewed evidence that large-scale
commercial logging can be practiced in an ecologically sustainable or socially responsible
manner in the tropics or elsewhere. The Bank routinely uses "sustainable forest management" to
refer to the extensive and intensive, ecologically diminishing and predatory industrial forest
management occurring in PNG and most other tropical rainforests. What is being sustained is
foreign exchange revenues and timber yields (at least for awhile longer than completely
unregulated logging). The Bank has spearheaded failed tropical timber industry reform efforts
worldwide for over a decade.
The Bank's effort to bring Papua New Guinea’s rainforests into the global economic system
cannot be reconciled with ecological requirements for national rainforest and biodiversity
sustainability. Efforts to "integrate forests into sustainable economic development" appear to
primarily be driven by principles of trade liberalization and export growth for poverty alleviation
(for some anyway), rather than any deep-rooted concern for forest conservation and global
ecological sustainability. The World Bank’s entire PNG rainforest policy is based on the false
premise that commercial logging in primary forests is ecologically sustainable and represents a
biodiversity conservation strategy. This is patently false.
13
The Bank has shown a troubling unwillingness to support any type of forest management other
than industrial log exports. The World Bank's proposed PNG Forestry and Conservation project
initially won support from PNG environmental organizations because it promised to develop and
implement much needed alternative forest management practices. The project was to support
development of policy, legislation, regulations and guidelines to legitimize forest management of
different types, scale, ownership and levels of processing. These essential elements have now
been removed from the World Bank project, just prior to final approval. The new forestry
project does little to protect biodiversity while entrenching and expanding industrial log exports
at a net cost to the country.
Barriers to Ecologically Sustainable Use of Biological Resources
The voice of Papua New Guineans working for meaningful forest conservation that includes
ecologically rigorous community based forest management and protection is not being heard. In
contrast to destructive large scale export logging by overseas companies, small and medium
scale operations have been shown to provide greater financial returns to local communities, bring
new skills and provide a simple means to achieve the sustainable management of forest
resources. Forests provide the basis of livelihood and cultural life for 80% of Papua New
Guineans. Working with national and international environmental organizations, hundreds of
PNG forest communities are developing and implementing creative and sustainable ways of
harvesting forest resources without destroying the forest. Known collectively as "eco-forestry,"
these community-based alternative forestry programs promote viable economic development and
forest and biodiversity conservation at the same time.
Eco-forestry encompasses a variety of activities that both preserve and sustainably use forest
resources, bringing as much economic and social benefit as possible to local communities.
Under eco-forestry management plans, communities carry out economic development projects in
specific areas, giving strict preservation to surrounding forests. Eco-forestry can include such
activities as fruit and butterfly collection, rattan and medicinal plant harvesting, scientific
research and eco-tourism.
Community-based timber production makes use of small-scale
portable sawmills that can be carried through the forest and used to mill timber on-site where a
tree is felled. Such low-tech logging can be done with minimal environmental impact, bringing
forest communities the benefits of employment and new skills, and serving as a catalyst for other
local enterprises.
These examples of truly "sustainable forest management" are virtually impossible to pursue in
PNG because of sectoral policy weighed towards commercial logging for log export. In spite of
their importance for PNG forests and forest peoples, eco-forestry projects are largely ignored in
PNG forestry policy, planning and financing. Despite an active and capable civil society
working to support biodiversity conservation and promote eco-forestry and other alternatives, the
government and World Bank refuse to make these activities as legally valid as industrial resource
extraction. The Forestry Act, regulations and guidelines, as well as Forest Authority processes
and structures, must be updated to legitimize and make fully accessible small-scale eco-forestry
management.
Ironically, the World Bank recently supported the production of a document entitled “Forest
Strategies for Community-Based Forestry and Conservation in Papua New Guinea”, which
14
recommends that government revise the National Forest Policy to fully recognize eco-forestry
and small-scale and medium-scale logging. The report recommends a wide range of forest
conservation measures aimed at upgrading the status of eco-forestry. It calls for the updating of
logging maps to clearly show current and planned conservation areas, fragile forest types, areas
of threatened or restricted plants and animal species and important water catchments not
available for logging. Bank staff should read their report and support it.
Immediate Recommendations to Ensure PNG’s Biodiversity Is Not Devastated in the ShortTerm
Industrial forestry is the greatest threat to PNG’s rainforest biodiversity. The boom is just
peaking, and unless addressed immediately, PNG’s biodiversity will be significantly reduced
over the next several years. Biodiversity in Papua New Guinea will not be protected in any
meaningful way unless commercial logging is restricted quickly. Under such circumstances,
local and international NGOs and individuals have been calling upon the PNG government and
donor community to immediately pledge to:
•
•
•
•
Establish a timeline to permanently end industrial log exports from PNG, and a process to
transition the industry to small and medium scaled community and certified forest
management.
Establish a Commission of Inquiry with broad discretionary power to investigate all aspects
of the current logging industry and make necessary recommendations, including possible
criminal prosecutions.
The PNG government must develop and implement forest policy, legislation, regulations and
guidelines to establish a timber industry based upon ecologically sustainable, small to
medium scale, community-based eco-forestry management.
End donor subsidies to industrial log export. Redirect donor funds to transitioning the
industry to sustainability and community based production and protection, cushioning the
economic impact upon the government and landowners of doing so.
The above must occur immediately if PNG’s rainforests are to avoid being fragmented with
devastating impacts upon biodiversity, ecosystems and local well-being.
In addition, the
government and World Bank must make development of the National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan a top priority, and ensure that the strategy addresses the following:
•
•
•
Limits all logging in country to small and medium scaled, certified eco-forestry operations
whose timbers are locally processed. Commercial scale logging will never be ecologically
sustainable in PNG, and as noted above, needs to be immediately discontinued.
Identifies culturally appropriate manners within the clan based land tenure system to develop
protected areas. This will require easy and accessible mechanisms for landowner clans to
declare their lands protected areas. Such lands must be granted protected status that excludes
commercial logging, and makes landowners eligible for trust fund financing.
Financial mechanisms must be implemented – building upon the existing Mama Graun trust
fund – to provide incentives to keep most of PNG’s native rainforest intact as either clan
based eco-forestry or protected areas.
15
The international community must be challenged to finance preservation and conservation of the
majority of PNG’s vast and globally significant rainforest expanses. A visionary and ambitious
program of payments from over-developed countries to Papua New Guinea – to end commercial
logging and develop small scale eco-forestry and protected areas as an effective and
comprehensive biodiversity and rainforest conservation strategy – is required. Over-developed
countries must pay for the benefits - in terms of biodiversity and global ecosystem processes provided by Papua New Guinea’s intact rainforests. Anything less is unacceptable and dooms
PNG’s biodiversity to oblivion.
For more information please see the Forest Conservation Portal at http://forests.org/ and the
Papua New Guinea Rainforest Conservation Portal at http://www.pngweb.com/ . A special
thanks to the PNG Eco-Forestry Forum (http://www.ecoforestry.org.pg/) and PNG Forest Watch
for their work and constant stream of quality information that has assisted in the writing of this
report.
16