Transcript Document
International Legal Regime on Forests
An Overview
1. Regional Law on Forests
pre-UNCHE
international law on
forests restricted to
regional agreements
approximately 15
agreements at regional
level can be identified
that directly relate to
forests
Regional Agreements Relating to Forests
Convention Relative to the Preservation
of Flora and Fauna in their Natural
State (London, 1933)
Convention on Nature Protection and
Wildlife Preservation in the Western
Hemisphere (Washington, 1940)
African
Convention
on
the
Conservation of Nature and Natural
Resources (Algiers, 1968)
Convention on the Conservation of
Nature in the South Pacific (Apia,
1976)
Treaty for Amazonian Cooperation
(Brasilia, 1978)
Regional Agreements Relating to Forests
Convention on the Conservation of European
Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Berne, 1979)
Benelux Convention n Nature Conservation and
Landscape Protection (Brussels, 1982)
Protocol Concerning Protected Areas and Wild
Fauna and Flora in the Eastern African Region
(Nairobi, 1985)
ASEAN Agreement on the Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources (Kuala Lumpur,
1985)
Convention for the Protection of the Natural
Resources and Environment of the South
Pacific Region (Noumea, 1986)
Convention for the Conservation of the
Biodiversity and the Protection of Priority
Wilderness Areas in Central America
(Managua, 1992)
Regional Agreements Relating to Forests
North American Agreement on
Environmental
Cooperation
(Washington, 1993)
Regional
Convention for the
Management and Conservation of
the Natural Forest Ecosystems and
the Development of Forest
Plantations (Guatemala City,
1993)
Protocol
Concerning Specially
Protected Areas and Biological
Diversity in the Mediterranean
(1995)
Trends in Regional Forest Law
1. habitat: rationale for conserving forests is
most early regional agreements is that
they provide habitat; primary focus of
conservation were species of flora/fauna,
while forests got incidental protection by
virtue of being habitat
2. protected
area
approach:
early
conventions operate by isolating forests
from human interaction (unlike newer
concepts of community forestry and
social forestry)
3. most agreements explicitly reiterate
exclusive sovereign right of each country
to use natural resources within their
territory
4. South Asian region no regional legal
protective mechanism
2. Soft Law on Forests
Stockholm Declaration, 1972
World Charter for Nature, 1986
Rio Declaration, 1992
Agenda 21, 1992
Forest Principles, 1992
Programme for Further
Implementation of Agenda 21,
1997
Johannesburg Declaration and
Plan of Implementation, 2002
Non-legally Binding Instrument
on All Types of Forests, 2007
Stockholm Declaration, 1972
2. Natural resources of the earth must be
safeguarded for present and future
generations
through
planning
or
management
4. Man has a special responsibility to
safeguard and wisely manage the heritage
of wildlife and its habitat
21. States have in accordance with the UN
Charter and the principles of international
law, the sovereign right to exploit their
own resources pursuant to their own
environmental
policies
and
the
responsibility to ensure that activities
within their jurisdiction or control do not
cause damage to the environment of other
states
World Charter for Nature, 1982
Resln. adopted by GA in 1982
“Every form of life warrants respect regardless of its worth to man”
2. habitats shall be safeguarded
11(d). Forestry practices shall be adapted to the natural characteristics and
constraints of given areas
22. takes fully into account the sovereignty of States over their natural
resources
Rio Declaration, 1992
2. States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United
Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign
right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their
environmental and developmental policies, and the
responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction do
not cause damage to the environment of other states or of areas
beyond the limits of national jurisdiction
Agenda 21, 1992
comprehensive action plan
adopted at UNCED
chapter 11 – Combating
Deforestation
4 Programme Areas:
sustaining multiple roles and
functions of forests
enhancing protection, sustainable
management and conservation of
forests
promoting efficient utilization of
forest goods and services
establishing and/or strengthening
capacities for the planning,
assessment
and
systematic
observations of forests
Forest Principles, 1992
Non-legally Binding
Authoritative Statement of
Principles for a Global
Consensus on the
Management, Conservation
and Sustainable Development
of all Types of Forests
aims to relate subject of forests
to entire range of
environmental and
developmental issues
calls for efforts to increase
forest cover and productivity
Soft Law on Forests
unlike regional agreements, the
soft law instruments are
universally applicable
but they are not legally binding
although
countries
are
reluctant to be bound by a
legally binding convention, a
broad agreement over basic
underlying principles is evident
in range of declarations,
guidelines
and
principles
adopted
3. Related Law on Forests
many
global
binding
instruments relating to
different issue areas have
a bearing on forests
these are not specifically
designed to address
forests
but their goals and
programmes have a direct
bearing on forests
one reason for inability to
negotiate an international
instrument on forests is
existence of so many
forest-related instruments
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, 1971
Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as
Waterfowl Habitat
requires parties to promote conservation of listed wetlands and ‘wise use’ of
wetlands in general
no specific mention of forests
convention’s definition of wetlands is broad enough to encompass certain
forest ecosystems
mangrove forests (among most threatened of world’s forest types) are
situated in coastal wetlands
about a third of listed Ramsar sites (1886) are forests
India’s Ramsar sites Keoladeo National Park (Rajasthan), Bhitarkanika
Mangroves (Orissa)
World Heritage Convention, 1972
provides for protection of heritage of ‘outstanding
universal value’ from several points of view, including
science, conservation and natural beauty
states and international community are required to
cooperate to protect and conserve world heritage
World Heritage List: 890 sites [689 cultural; 176
natural; 25 mixed]
currently, about 61 forests included on WHL
criteria for selecting sites include;
“the most important and significant natural
habitats for in situ conservation of biodiversity”
“outstanding examples representing significant ongoing ecological and biological processes in the
evolution and development of terrestrial
ecosystems and communities of plants and
animals
India’s natural sites Kaziranga, Keoladeo,
Sunderbans, Nanda Devi and Valley of Flowers,
Manas
CITES, 1973
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora
and Fauna
subjects international trade in selected species to licensing system for import,
export, re-export etc.
covered species listed in three Appendices according to degree of protection
needed
applies to plant (tree) and animal species
proposals to list endangered tree species (especially commercially harvested
ones) are highly controversial
some tree species listed: Brazilian Rosewood (Appendix I); African teak,
Red Sandalwood (Appendix II)
Timber Working Group; Mahogany Working Group
CITES offers significant institutional capacity for addressing trade and
conservation concerns of managing impact of trade on forest species
UN Convention to Combat Desertification, 1994
aim curbing degradation of
arid lands
establishes framework for
national, sub-regional and
regional programmes to
counter degradation of
drylands
commits Governments to a
“bottom-up approach” that
involves local populace,
national authorities and
international community
deforestation is a cause of
desertification
Forests and Climate Change
climate change and forests are intrinsically linked
changes in global climate are stressing forests higher mean annual
temperatures, altered precipitation patterns and extreme weather events
CO2 biggest contributor to GHGs
trees sequester atmospheric carbon, serving as natural carbon sinks
natural forests can lower a country’s net emissions
in the tropics, forests can store as much as 15 tonnes of carbon per hectare
per year
afforestation and reforestation are acknowledged strategies for combating
climate change
according to IPCC, reducing/preventing deforestation is the mitigation
option with largest and most immediate carbon stock impact in short term
on the flip side, when destroyed or burned, forests become sources of CO2
UNFCCC, 1992
Kyoto Protocol mandates reduction of ‘net emissions’ of GHGs
concerns that ‘reforestation’ or ‘afforestation’ could lead to
planting of homogenous tracts in lieu of old-growth forests
concerns about sovereignty implications of allowing outside
investors to finance/control management of domestic forests
under Kyoto mechanisms
GEF decided to not fund forestry projects under climate
window
LULUCF: Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry these
activities can add or remove carbon from atmosphere
IPCC two major reports on LULUCF
rules governing LULUCF for Kyoto period finalized in 2001
mandatory for Annex I parties to account for changes in carbon
stock from afforestation, reforestation and deforestation and
voluntary to account for emissions from forest management
Good Practice Guidance for LULUCF adopted by IPCC in
2003
2009 identify and address drivers of deforestation; identify
activities to reduce emissions and increase removals and stabilize
forest carbon stocks; estimate forest-related GHG emissions and
removals and forest carbon stocks; establish robust and
transparent national forest monitoring systems
Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992
global treaty with most significant potential effect on conservation and
sustainable use of forest resources
conservation of forests is crucial to objectives of CBD
forests are both a component of and a habitat for terrestrial biodiversity
specific action relating to forest biodiversity undertaken at CBD:
inputs to IPF/IFF/UNFF processes
specific work programme on forest biodiversity
guidance to GEF to fund forest projects
implementation of Article 8(j) on traditional forest related knowledge
(TFRK)
ILO Conventions, 1957 &1989
many natural forests inhabited by indigenous peoples
they depend on forests for many aspects of their livelihood
and culture
they also often employ traditional management systems
ILO Convention Nos. 107 & 169
Convention 107 adopted in 1957; superseded by 169 in
1989
Article 7 indigenous and tribal people shall have the
right to decide their own priorities for the process of
development and that governments shall take measures …to
protect and preserve the environment of the territories they
inhabit
Article 14 recognizes right of ownership and possession
of the peoples concerned over lands which they traditionally
occupy
Article 15 rights of peoples concerned to natural
resources pertaining to their lands shall be specially
safeguarded, including right to use, manage and conserve
these resources
ILO Convention 169 has potential to strengthen human
rights dimension of international framework of forests
International Tropical Timber Organization
ITTA adopted in 1983; renegotiated in 1994 & 2006
primarily a commodity agreement between producer and
consumer countries
established ITTO in 1986
India is an ITTO ‘producing member’
ITTO’s paradox recognition that tropical timber trade
is key to economic development in its member states as
well as concern for alarming rate of deforestation
ITTO has adopted non-binding goals of sustainable
forestry and developed guidelines
tensions between consumer and producer countries
should sustainability requirements be binding?
objective of 2006 Agreement (Article 1) to promote
expansion of international trade in tropical timber from
sustainably managed … forests…”
4. Ongoing Forest Law Negotiations
issue of forests has been on international
policy agenda for last 18 years
UNCED (United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, 1992)
forest issue most controversial, polarizing
developing and developed countries
Rio outcome Non-legally Binding
Authoritative Statement of Principles for a
Global Consensus on the Management,
Conservation and Sustainable Development
of all Types of Forests (Forestry Principles)
Chapter 11 of Agenda 21: Combating
Deforestation
post UNCED effort to develop coherent
policies
to
promote
management,
conservation and sustainable development of
all types of forests
IPF/IFF Processes
IPF (Intergovernmental Panel on Forests) 1995 –
1997
IFF (Intergovernmental Forum on Forests) 1997
– 2000
constituted main intergovernmental forum for forest
policy development
operated under auspices of UN Commission on
Sustainable Development
IPF and IFF examined wide range of forest-related
topics over 5 years
key outcomes of these processes final reports of
IPF4 and IFF4 over 270 ‘Proposals for Action’
towards sustainable forest management
IPF/IFF PFA not legally binding
but each participant country of these processes is
expected to conduct a systematic national assessment
and to plan for implementation of PFA
UN Forum on Forests
UNFF was established by ECOSOC to
take forward work of IPF/IFF processes
UNFF Sessions:
9th Session – New York (24 January – 4
February 2011)
8th Session – New York (20 April – 1 May
2009)
7th Session – New York (16 – 27 April 2007)
6th Session – New York (13 – 24 February
2006)
5th Session – New York – 16 – 27 May 2005
4th Session – Geneva – 3 – 14 May 2004
3rd Session – Geneva – 26 May – 6 June 2003
2nd Session – New York – 4 – 15 March 2002
1st Session – New York – 11 – 22 June 2001
Organization Meeting – New York – 12
February 2001
UNFF Members & Bureau
Member States
UNFF is a subsidiary body of ECOSOC
composed of all member states of UN with full and
equal participation
Member States of UNFF designate a UNFF
National Focal Point
Member States are invited to provide voluntary
reports to each UNFF session
UNFF Bureau
UNFF Bureau consists of one Chairperson and four
Vice-Chairpersons in accordance with the principle
of equitable geographical distribution
Bureau members elected at end of each UNFF
session
Bureau is responsible for:
follow up of decisions made at UNFF sessions
preparation for subsequent session
management and organization of sessions
NLBI on All Types of Forests, 2007
28 April 2007 (UNFF 7) after 3 years of negotiations, Nonlegally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forests adopted
later adopted by UNGA on 17 December 2007
Article I – Purposes
(a) To strengthen political commitment and action at all levels to
implement effectively sustainable management of all types of forests and
to achieve the shared global objectives on forests
(b) To enhance the contribution of forests to the achievement of the
internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium
Development Goals, in particular with respect to poverty eradication and
environmental sustainability
(c) To provide a framework for national action and international
cooperation
NLBI – Principles
Article II – Principles
(a) instrument is voluntary and non-legally binding;
(b) Each State is responsible for the sustainable management of its
forests and for the enforcement of its forest-related laws;
(c) Major groups as identified in Agenda 21, local communities, forest
owners and other relevant stakeholders contribute to achieving
sustainable forest management and should be involved in a transparent
and participatory way in forest decision-making processes that affect
them …
(d) Achieving sustainable forest management, in particular in developing
countries as well as in countries with economies in transition, depends
on significantly increased, new and additional financial resources from
all sources;
(e) Achieving sustainable forest management also depends on good
governance at all levels;
(f) International cooperation, including financial support, technology
transfer, capacity-building and education, plays a crucial catalytic role in
supporting the efforts of all countries …
NLBI – Objectives
IV. Global objectives on forests
Member States reaffirm the following shared global objectives on forests …
to achieve progress towards their achievement by 2015:
Global Objective 1
Reverse the loss of forest cover worldwide through sustainable forest
management, including protection, restoration, afforestation and
reforestation, and increase efforts to prevent forest degradation;
Global Objective 2
Enhance forest-based economic, social and environmental benefits,
including by improving the livelihoods of forest dependent people;
Global Objective 3
Increase significantly the area of protected forests worldwide and other areas
of sustainably managed forests, as well as the proportion of forest products
from sustainably managed forests;
Global Objective 4
Reverse the decline in official development assistance for sustainable forest
management and mobilize significantly increased, new and additional
financial resources from all sources for the implementation of sustainable
forest management.
India
India has played an active role in the international
forest law matrix
India has no regional legal obligations in relation
to forests, although this action in this direction is
worth consideration
“SAARC Convention on Forests”?
India is an active participant and even a key player
in several forest-related agreements (eg. UNFCCC)
“India is committed to the Forest Principles
evolved at UNCED and implementation of
Chapter XI of Agenda 21. India has fully
supported and actively participated in the IPF, IFF
and now in UNFF.” (Statement by Mr T.R. Baalu,
Minister E&F, 14 March 2002)
National Report to the Third Session of the
United Nations Forum on Forests, 2002
National Report to the Fifth Session of the United
Nations Forum on Forests, 2005
Voluntary Sharing of Information on Progress on
Non Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of
Forests, 13 April 2009
Arguments in Favour of LBI on Forests
a convention would contribute to
development of a common understanding of
sustainable forest management worldwide
and improve knowledge base required for
sustainable management of all type of forests
it would provide forest community with a
mechanism to coordinate and manage
numerous
separate
initiatives
being
undertaken and would provide most
effective means for open and transparent
dialogue between stakeholders
it would ensure that protection of forests
remains on same institutional footing as
protection of atmosphere, biodiversity and
desertification
Arguments Against LBI on Forests
global
convention
=
lowest-common-denominator
consensus?
formalize unacceptably weak forest management standards,
thereby giving a global ‘green light’ to unsustainable forest
practices
such a convention might be dominated and driven by
powerful timber and commercial trade interests, and fail to
address predatory and unethical behaviour of an increasing
number of trans-national industrial timber corporations
it will undermine role of historic CBD and other existing
international and regional environmental agreements and
initiatives
many critical and controversial forest problems lie outside
traditional ‘forest’ sector and chronic underlying causes of
forest loss and degradation may not be addessed
risk of undermining important NGO initiatives (eg.
independent certification of forest products) and could
undermine ability of indigenous peoples and traditional rural
communities to help decide the fate of their own forests
stall or block action on a wide range of critical forest
problems during years of lenghty debate, negotiation and
ratification – a waste of scarce time and resources – better to
implement existing agreements
Options for the Future
1. Improved coordination of existing
arrangements
2. Continuation of ongoing
intergovernmental dialogue in a
permanent forum
3. Improvement of non-legally
binding instruments
4. Lead body role for an existing
organization
5. Use of existing related legally
binding instruments
6. Development of a forest protocol
to an existing instrument
7. Regional mechanisms
8. Framework convention allowing for
regional mechanisms
9. Globally legally binding instrument
Concluding Questions
Is it time to think of conservation of
‘global forests’ or should we
continue to view forests as the
property of states?
Will the international community
(and India?) gain from the adoption
and implementation of a legally
binding agreement in forests?
What should such an LBI look
like?
Thank You!