– My output here has been light of late. I’m dealing with the fallout from a knee surgery that didn’t go as well as it might have. It seems to be healing now but it’s been a major distraction over the last 10 days or so.
– In the year I’ve been Blogging and following various threads, I’ve been coming to an increasingly strong conviction. And that is that one of the root problems facing mankind in its evolution now is the fact that it has made the mistake of allowing corporations too much power in human affairs. Corporations are, after all, entities which exist to seek profit for their stockholder/owners. That’s their point. That’s their reason for being. But, in some nations, the United States notably, corporations have been granted the same rights as citizens and this has led to many problems.
– I don’t want to rag on this theme until I’ve put together a better exposition on it but just read the following story and ask yourself if we should allow powerful corporate entities like these to do what they are doing around the world in the name of profit? What ever happened to the idea of governments and institutions for the people? We seem to have drifted a period in which many governments seem to exist primarily for their most powerful citizens; corporations.
—————————————————–
Vast forests with trees each worth £4,000 sold for a few bags of sugar
· Congo village chiefs not told value of concessions
· World Bank blamed over deals causing ‘catastrophe’
Lamoko, 150 miles down the Maringa river, sits on the edge of a massive stretch of virgin rainforest in central Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). On February 8 2005, representatives of a major timber firm arrived to negotiate a contract with the traditional landowners.
Few in the village realised that the talks would transform all their lives, but in just a few hours, the chief, who had received no legal advice and did not realise that just one tree might be worth more than £4,000 in Europe, had signed away his community’s rights in the forest for 25 years.
In return for his signed permission to log thousands of hectares for exotic woods such as Afromosia (African teak) and sapele, the company promised to build Lamoko and other communities in the area three simple village schools and pharmacies. In addition, the firm said it would give the chief 20 sacks of sugar, 200 bags of salt, some machetes and a few hoes. In all, it was estimated that the gifts would cost the company £10,000.
It was the kind of “social responsibility” agreement that is encouraged by the World Bank, but when the villagers found out that their forest had been “sold” so cheaply, they were furious.
They complained to the local and central government that there had been no proper consultation, that the negotiations had been conducted in an “arrogant” manner, and that people had been forced to sign the document. They demanded that the company pull out.
Since February 2005, logging roads have been driven deep into the forests near Lamoko and the company has started extracting and exporting trees, but the villages have yet to see their schools and pharmacies.
“We asked them to provide wood for our coffins and they even refused that,” said one man who asked to remain anonymous.
The Lamoko agreement is just one of many contracts, or concessions, that European companies have signed with tribal chiefs in the DRC as the country begins to recover from a decade of civil wars and dictatorship.
But according to a Greenpeace report released today, Lamoko did better than many communities. Some contracts seen by the Guardian show only promises of sugar, salt and tools worth about $100 (£55) in return for permission to log. Others have reported that pledges made three years ago have still not been fulfilled. The report, which took two years to compile, claims that industrial logging backed by the World Bank is now out of control. “Younger people feel that elders have failed to look after the long-term interests of the community,” it says.
Last week many community leaders told the Guardian that their villages would sink into destitution if logging went ahead. As many as 40 million of the poorest people in Africa depend on the Congolese forests and all the concessions handed out by the transition government in May 2002 are in inhabited areas. More than a third are home to pygmy communities.
“If the trees go, then we will have nothing. We will be consigned to poverty forever. The forests are our only hope. If they go, we only become poorer”, said one man who lives near Kisangani. Like most people in the area, he did not want to give his name for fear of intimidation from local authorities, who are known to be mired in corruption.
“The companies are obliged to employ local people, but they bring in their own people and we are left at best with unskilled jobs that pay the minimum wage – less than 50p a day,” said another man.
It is believed that 20 foreign-owned forestry companies are active in the DRC, and that Chinese and other logging groups are also seeking to gain concessions. The companies should be prevented from doing so by a moratorium negotiated by the World Bank in 2002 as part of an initiative to control the forestry industry.
Most of the major logging companies, including Danzer, Trans-M, TB, NST, Olan, and Sicobois, have concession contracts signed after the World bank moratorium, but although there is an investigation into their legality the majority are expected to be rubber stamped this year.
“Most of the companies have benefited from the World Bank’s failure to ensure that the moratorium it negotiated with the transitional Congo DRC government has been enforced,” said Greenpeace’s Africa forests campaigner, Stephan van Praet.
The companies, which export both logs and sawn timber, supply wood all over Europe but considerable amounts are thought to be shipped to Britain, mostly as finished products such as flooring, windows, furniture and doors.
African teak wood is protected by global agreement and cannot be exported from some tropical countries such as Cameroon, which have few trees left, but there are still no restrictions on its export from the DRC.
Greenpeace and other international forestry groups say the fate of the Congo forests depends on the World Bank and other donors, including Britain, rejecting industrial logging, demanding a comprehensive land-use plan for a country that is effectively lawless, and insisting that the government tackles corruption.
The bank accepts that logging could destroy the forests in a short time, leading to immense social problems.
“If we do nothing it is certain that the forests will disappear and poverty will increase. Not one dollar of tax that has been collected has returned to the provinces,” said Kankonde Mukadi, the forest officer for the World Bank in Kinshasa.
There is also concern because rainforests provide important carbon reserves. Up to a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions are now linked directly to tropical deforestation, the report says.
Original article is here: ➡
Thx to the Globalisation and the Environment Blog for alerting me to this
, disagrees with a lot of what Friedman had to say and wades into him.