Deforestation in the Amazon is no longer only a matter of logging or an issue related to the wood industry. Currently the main drivers of the land use change in Brazil are cattle ranching, soy cultivation and logging, whose production has been increased as a result of increased demand both domestically and internationally.

The economic boom of the new emerging economies, with China as the main protagonist, is causing the emergence of a new global middle class whose income growth is causing a change in diet towards increased consumption of animal protein foods and dairy products. This is causing an increasing demand for these goods, in which Brazil is a world class producer and exporter.

Last week in an interview carried out by The Ecologist, WWF Brazil CEO Denise Hamu said increasing productivity can help combat deforestation in the Amazon. According to Hamu more intensive beef production can limit deforestation in Brazil “where the space used to rear cattle is ten times what you see in other countries”.

The majority of deforestation in the Amazon is being driven by the spread of cattle ranches with one report estimating that 40 percent of Brazil’s cattle is currently kept within the confines of the Amazon, where illegally occupied forest land is available. In total, cattle occupy around 80 per cent of land already in legal use in the Amazon.

But, according to Hamu, protecting against deforestation would only work if it was driven by consumers refusing to buy products that come from unknown sources. ”Sometimes we tend to expect that governments are going to solve everything but if the society doesn’t engage and doesn’t realise that we are part of the problem and part of the solution – no matter how many laws, how many protocols we sign in the multilateral world – we won’t change anything,” said Hamu.

Which could be a way to fight deforestation? Hamu responds: “We can increase productivity. The data we have in Brazil about the space used to raise cattle is ten times more than what you see in other, very competitive countries. Are we using the right scale to raise our animals? […] we need to review our productivity parameters and how we can really get into the market without deforesting. Brazil has realised that big companies such as Walmart have been putting conditions on the import of beef and soya products to include the origin of production.”

Via: The Ecologist

Last January 8th The Climate Project, the American branch of Al Gore ‘s climate change program, kick off its 2011 Asia-Pacific Summit in Jakarta, Indonesia. The summit was bringing together more than 300 grassroots volunteers from its branches in China, India, Australia, and Indonesia, along with representatives from 14 other countries in the region. This summit trained volunteers to deliver Al Gore’s slideshow on the causes of climate change and how we can reduce our pollution and transition to clean energy solutions.

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has also pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26-41 percent from projected levels. For this reason Nobel laureate and former US Vice President Al Gore thanked Indonesian President, during the opening of the meeting, for his vision, courage and leadership on climate change issues: "I would like to say a special word of thanks to the president of Indonesia, President Yudhoyono, because of his courage and vision and leadership on the issue that we are here to discuss and work on […] He spoke out at a time when no other leader of a G-77 nation was willing to stand up and take the initiative and break the mold, thus breaking a longstanding deadlock that had frustrated progress in some areas that are now amenable to some progress.”

Gore also added that Indonesia has the potential to become the world’s geothermal energy superpower: "Scientists and engineers are now saying confidently that certain forms of enhanced geothermal electricity production may represent one of the largest resources of carbon-free electricity available in the world today".

Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s largest economy, claims about 40 percent of the world’s geothermal reserves. By 2020, the Indonesian government wants to provide electricity access to 90 percent of its population; about 65 percent currently have access.

Via: Jakarta Globe | UPI

In our last post we addressed what may be one of the most important news of the year for our planet, the major decline in illegal logging by 22 percent since 2002, according to the last report released by Chatham House, a London-based thinktank.

In this post we are going to focus on the main outcomes of the report broken down by country, dividing them in two categories: wood producers and importers.

So, addressing firstly wood producers, the outcomes, by country, unveiled by the report are as follows:

Brazil: Illegal logging in the Brazilian Amazon has declined by 50–75 percent since 2000. Most of the reduction occurred in the last five years, and is closely correlated with a similarly dramatic decline in deforestation.

Indonesia: Illegal log harvest in Indonesia has fallen by 75 percent since a peak in 2000, but it still represents around 40percent of timber production. Log smuggling to China has fallen by 92percent since 2004.

Cameroon: Illegal logging in Cameroon has declined by around 50 percent since 1999. Most of the reduction occurred in the first part of the 2000s, and all is related to industrial production for export – small-scale illegal logging for domestic markets appears to have increased.

Malaysia: Illegal logging in Malaysia, at 14–25 percent of production, is more prevalent than commonly thought. Experts feel that on average the situation had improved slightly in the last few years, the wood-balance analysis was inconclusive.

Ghana: There do not appear to have been significant reductions in illegal logging in Ghana in recent years, although the number of cases detected has increased, possibly as a result of improved enforcement.

The main outcomes breakdown for the wood importers is as follows:

China: China’s imports of illegally sourced wood increased dramatically during 2000–04, but by 2008 had declined 16 percent from their peak, largely owing to the reduced supply of illegal logs from Indonesia and Burma.

Vietnam: Vietnamese imports of illegally sourced wood trebled between 2000 and 2007, and remained steady in 2008. Vietnam is the only one of the seven importing countries studied where imports have yet to show any significant decline.

UK: While UK imports of illegally sourced wood products from Indonesia rapidly declined during 2000–07, this was largely offset by increased imports of illegally sourced wood products from China.

US: Estimated US imports of illegally sourced wood products almost doubled between 2000 and 2006, driven by a growth in imports of wood furniture made in China from illegally sourced wood.

Netherlands: Estimated imports of illegally sourced wood products into the Netherlands fell 21percent between 2004 and 2008.

France: French imports of illegally sourced wood have been declining steadily since 2001, and had fallen 38 percent by 2008 – a larger percentage fall than in the US, the UK or the Netherlands.

Japan: Japanese imports of illegally sourced wood products have fallen further than those of the other four consumer countries studied, with a 43 percent reduction since their peak in 2004.

Via: BBC | Chatam House

The forest sector plays a key role in tackling climate change. One of the main recent reports addressing deforestation, The Eliasch Review, Climate Change: Financing Global Forests (an independent report commissioned by the British Prime Minister), stresses the next:

“Forestry, as defined by the IPCC, accounts for around 17 per cent of global GHG emissions – the third largest source of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions after energy supply and industrial activity. Forest emissions are comparable to the annual CO2 emissions of the US or China.”

The review goes further and estimates that in the absence of any mitigation efforts, “emissions from the forest sector alone will increase atmospheric carbon stock by around 30ppm by 2100” (current atmospheric CO2 leves stand at 433ppm).

But good news have come up. Consumer pressure, legal restrictions by importing countries and media attention have all contributed to the major decline in illegal logging in the world’s forests since 2002, according to the last report released by Chatham House, a London-based thinktank.

According to the in-depth analysis of twelve countries (exporters and consignees of illegal logging, by importation) a major decline in illegal logging of 22 percent has been experienced since 2002. “Actions taken by governments, civil society and the private sector over the last ten years in response to illegal logging and related trade have been extensive and had a considerable impact”, stresses the report.

So logging is estimated to have fallen by between 50 and 75 percent during the last decade in Cameroon, the Brazilian Amazon and Indonesia, while imports of illegally sourced wood to the seven consumer and processing countries studied are down 30 per cent from their peak in 2004.

As a result up to 17 million hectares of forest are estimated to have been protected from degradation and at least 1.2 billion tones of carbon dioxide emissions avoided over the last decade. Alternatively, if the trees saved were legally logged this could bring in US$6.5 billion in additional revenues to the countries concerned.

In the next post we will disclose in-depth the main results, by country, that have been unveiled by the report.

Via: BBC | Chatham House

The Great Green Wall will cost U$S 119 million and 11 northern African nations intend to participate in the initiative.

“We will make an allocation to each of your countries,” GEF Chief Executive Officer Monique Barbut told the leaders of the 11 nations in Ndjamena.

But, which is the main purpose of this project? The Wall represents a pan-African proposal to reforest the continent from west to east, an effort aimed at combating desertification in the Sahel-Saharan region. Linking Dakar in the west to Djibouti on the Red Sea in the east, the wall will cross through Senegal, Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Chad, Sudan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Djibouti.

But the announcement wasn’t made in a regular day: June 17 is known as the “World Day to Combat Desertification,” a United Nations sponsored day to promote public awareness relating to the international cooperation to combat desertification and drought, and the implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD).

According to the official website, the main effects and beneficiaries of the Great Green Wall will be:

1. slowing soil erosion: the presence of vegetal cover slows winds speed and favors rain water infiltration;
2. degraded soil restructuring: an increase in organic matter of vegetal and animal origin entails soil restructuring;
3. higher reforestation rate in countries crossed by GGW: in order, among others, to restore eco-climatic balances and biodiversity;
4. revival, development and diversification of agriculture and stockbreeding,
both in terms of vegetal and animal production volumes and size of the active population employed in these sub-sectors;
5. vegetal and animal biodiversity restoration, conservation and development,
the deferred grazing and other privately-owned wooded areas contribute to natural vegetation regeneration and return of wildlife: birds, small game, snakes, etc.
6. increasing coverage of local needs in forest products, especially firewood, lumber and also ligneous and non-ligneous products: gum, resins, roots, leaves, barks, fruits, pharmacopeia etc.
7. improved living standard and health due to noticeable improvement in nutrition, living environment and more easily available household needs ( water, energy, social infrastructures etc);
8. reversal of rural migration phenomenon, gradually, “ecological migrants” and the bones and sinews looking for employment will repopulate these zones that have been rehabilitated by GGW proximity.
9. control of water resources, through water retention pond, artificial lakes and hydraulic schemes that will contribute to enhanced production system GGW effects and impacts will benefit various categories of actors including:
1. international community, as indeed, GGW perfectly intersects international concerns for Clean Development Mechanism: reduction of greenhouse gas, carbon sequestration, reducing ecological and economic migrations;
2. States: find in it an opportunity to revitalize their reforestation program and to reduce the rhythm of degradation of their forests,
3. local communities: regions, municipalities and rural communities find in GGW a tool to boost local development ;
4. primary producers: farmers; herdsmen; coalmen; gum, honey and resin harvesters; healers; hunters; wood carvers;.
5. private businessmen: who are initiators of safari parks, modern farming, ecotourist sites find in it some economic opportunities etc ;
6. educational, training and research structures: GGW will be a privileged site for regional multidisciplinary research allowing great mobility of African scientists and increased synergy in program implementation;
7. populations living in GGW coverage area: gathering, fodder and water access, they find important opportunities to reduce under-employment, migration and poverty.

But the most important thing is that it will be an example to follow, a truly and genuine way of getting a continent to work together for it´s own benefit.

Via: Earth 911

We usually drink a cup of coffee or a can of Coke when we need a little energy boost, but the truth is, a stroll through nature has a much larger effect in making us feel rejuvenated and energized than any of our urban drinks.

“Research has shown that people with a greater sense of vitality don’t just have more energy for things they want to do, they are also more resilient to physical illnesses. One of the pathways to health may be to spend more time in natural settings”, says Richard Ryan, lead author and a professor of psychology at the University of Rochester. So this means nature might not only bring some energy into our lives, it might also bring a state of well-being.

People often don’t take the time to take a stroll through a nearby park or go somewhere green on weekends. The effect that nature has on us is very significant as Ryan’s studies show “we’re kinder, more gentle folks when we feel in-touch with the natural world”.

People living their whole lives in cities are like animals living in captivity: they become stressed and anxious. We need to remember humans are animal after all, and therefore need their green scene every now and then to keep their peace of mind and health. A weekly or even monthly get-away to some natural setting might have a very positive effect on people, not only mentally, but also physically.

via: Tree Hugger

The Brazilian government announced last week that the number of deforested trees in the Amazon over the past year is less than the amounts recorded in the last 20 years. This year, the deforested area was 45% smaller than in 2008.

In the past 12 months, 7008 km2 of forest were cut down, what became known thanks to satellite images from the National Institute for Space Research. This amount is the lowest since the government began monitoring deforestation in 1988.

How was this accomplished?

The government of Luis Inacio Lula da Silva points to its monitoring actions and the implementation and promotion of sustainable activities in the Amazon as main triggering factors. Further, the contribution of satellite images has been enormous, as it allowed the government to enforce its measures.

In Sustentator, we analyzed this year how different agreements were generated to curb the trade of soybean grown in the Amazon, and to discourage the trade of cattle raised there.

Furthermore, Paulo Gustavo, environmental policy director of Conservation International, believes that a major cause of the decline in deforestation is the fall in prices of products such as beef and soybeans. These products lead people to fell trees, and with lower prices, the incentive for deforestation decreases.

Deforestation accounts for 20% of greenhouse gases emissions (GHGs). In Brazil, it generates 75% of GHGs. The new data showing the decline in deforestation rates are really encouraging and positive. However, we must not forget that every minute the equivalent of 36 football fields of forest is cut down, or 13 million hectares per year.

COP15

The topics addressed in the WFC 2009 included forests and climate change, forests and bioenergy, deforestation, the different uses given to forests, and their present situation and future prospects, among other subjects. Speakers included Environment Ministers from several countries, representatives from the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), the World Bank, the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature), scientists, and many others.

It’s been the first time a WFC was carbon neutral: its carbon footprint, –meaning its greenhouse gas emissions– will be measured and offset.

In a joint press conference, on Wednesday, Avrim Lazar, President and CEO of the FPAC (Forest Products Association of Canada), emphasized the fact that “the impact of climate change is today”. He described the case of Canadian forests, which were invaded by insects and fires, due to climate change. Because they were “hit very hard”, and they experienced this crisis in their homes, their action has been “aggressive” protecting their forests. He highlighted the need for considering a forest as a living ecosystem, which has several values that ought to be seen as a dynamic whole. He added that if we view forests just as a sort of “carbon sink”, we would be committing the same mistake that has led us to climate change.

Lazar timidly (in a meat-devouring country such as Argentina) explained that one of the most powerful actions we can take as individuals is to eat less meat, which demands 10% more land to be produced.

Another interesting topic that came out during the press conference is the economic value given to the services offered to us by forests. Now, only wood has an economic value, a price. But the rest of the services are free, and maybe that’s why we have trouble recognizing and taking care of their importance. There is actually a market failure. But eventually, these values will materialize, and they will be incorporated to the economic system.

Amongst the good news, the speakers said that thanks to this Congress, it is clear that climate change cannot be solved without an integrated forestry strategy.

Furthermore, Gerhard Dieterle, Forestry Advisor for the World Bank mentioned some successful cases of forest management, such as Costa Rica, India and China, which should be recognized and prized. Otherwise, money is only given to leaders of deforestation…

An enriching event, which hopefully has eased the road to Copenhagen, in December.

More: World Forestry Congress