Report from the Frontier: securing forest peoples rights to curb - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Report from the Frontier: securing forest peoples’ rights to curb tropical deforestation

Marcus Colchester, Oxford Centre for Tropical Forests Oxford University 17th February 2017

Linguistic and biological diversity

• verlap

Why are forests undefended and Forest Peoples landless?

• Emperor Charlemagne first

instituted ‘forestry’ laws in Europe

• England’s first ‘forest’, the New

Forest, was created by the Norman conquerors as a royal hunt (1079).

• Some 3,000 peasants were torched
• ut of their houses to clear the

‘New Forest’

• By Henry II 25% of England was

‘forest’. Less than half this ‘forest’ was in fact wooded.

• In law and history, ‘forests’ are not

vegetation types, they are (royal) jurisdictions.

• Robin Hood symbolises this

struggle between the Saxon people and Norman forests

Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog, by Caspar David Friedrich, 1818 Looking Down Yosemite Valley, by Albert Bierstadt, 1865 Grand Canyon of the Yellowstone, Thomas Moran, 1827

‘The consent of the governed’ and the end of imperialism

‘No peace can last, or ought to last, which does not recognize the principle that governments derive all their just powers from the consent of the governed...’ We believe that every people has the right to choose the sovereignty under which they shall live... The small states of the world shall enjoy the same respect for their sovereignty and for their territorial integrity’

‘

‘Self-determination’

WWII and the Atlantic Alliance

The right to self-determination

All peoples have the right to self-

determination, by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources…. In no case may a people be deprived

• f

its

• wn

means

• f

subsistence (Common Article 1 of ICESCR and ICCPR)

Indigenous Peoples at the UN

UN Declaration on the Rights

• f Indigenous Peoples (2007)

Recognises IPs’ rights to:

• self-determination
• lands, territories and

natural resources

• exercise customary law
• self-government
• choose their own

representatives

• give or withhold their

free, prior and informed consent + + +

Forestry law or peoples’ rights?

• Forests
• State controlled for

strategic purpose

• Customary rights

diminished or denied

• Regulated by statutory

laws

• Administered by

designated State agency

• Violations are crimes

against the State

• Territory (IP land)
• Community controlled for

livelihoods and identity

• Customary rights upheld

and enforceable

• Regulated by people

through customary law

• Managed by self-

governing community

• Infractions subject to

customary fines

Forests for Peoples : Peoples for Forests

Source: RF-Norway

Indonesia: ‘Unity in Diversity’

Indonesia has 240 m people speaking more than 500 languages (about 200 are ‘Austronesian’ and 300 are Papuan (New Guinea and Eastern areas)). 70% of Indonesia classed as ‘forest’. About 33,000 villages overlap forests = up to 90 million forest people. Some 2/3 are long term residents with customary rights.

Case study

Deforestation in Indonesia

• 1900:

170 m ha

• 1990:

128 m ha

• 2005:

99 m ha

• 2014: (est)

80 m ha Over ½ forest lost

Map shows forest loss in Sumatra Island

Direct drivers of deforestation

• Logging (600 large logging licences: 62 m ha)
• Timber plantations (5 m ha expanding at

c.250,000 ha / year > govt. target 9 m ha)

• Oil palm plantations: near 12 million ha,

expanding at c.800,000 ha / year

• Transmigration (State sponsored colonisation

programme) was major and still continues

• Spontaneous expansion of agriculture

frontier especially on Sumatra

Weak or Absent Tenures

• Less than 20% of all land

holdings on Outer Island have been titled

• %age is declining as

holdings being created faster than BPN can register

• BAL reduces customary

rights to weak usufructs on State lands that must give way to national interest

• Forestry laws limit rights

even further

• Administration treats

forests as ‘State forest areas’

• Being contested….
• Rural people v. vulnerable

Development policy

• Constitution gives State

control of all natural resources for the benefit of the people

• Government promotes large-

scale natural resource exploitation with foreign investment

• Spatial planning: carve up

landscapes into economic development areas

• Peoples rights ignored in

land use planning

Peatlands being cleared

12 million hectares of oil palm

5 million hectares of pulpwood

People being squeezed off their land

The real economy

• Forestry and land

concessions major source of elections funds

• Massive graft in hand
• ut of concessions
• Rent seeking for every

permit

• Permits to release

forest land for palm

• Regents make most

money releasing agricultural lands to concessionaires

• US$3 million estimated

need for election (2010)

• Election campaign funds

and payback

• Ministries, companies

and local politicians all benefit from status quo

Land conflicts and human rights abuses

• 4000 land conflicts with

palm (BPN)

• Land grabs trigger

resistance & repression: companies pay army and police

• Killings and violence
• Destruction of properties
• Deprived of livelihoods
• Criminalization of

subsistence

• Labour disputes, debt

slavery

• See : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF1h9chcWVo&feature=plcp

Oil palm main direct driver today

Source Mongabay

Protest & Private Sector response

• Civil society protests:

market sensitization

• Roundtable on Sustainable

Palm Oil – Just land acquisition – Customary rights – FPIC – No clearance of primary forests and HCVs

• ‘Zero Deforestation’

demands.

• High Carbon Stocks (HCS)

Approach (GP and TFT)

• No Deforestation, No Peat, No

Exploitation policy

High Conservation Values

• 1. RTE species
• 2. Landscapes
• 3. Ecosystems
• 4. Environment

al Services

• 5. Basic needs
• 6. Critical to

cultural identity

Location of case study

Source: GAR

Palm concessions in Kapuas Hulu

Danau Sentarum NP peat-swamp, lake and

• forest. Rich fishery.

Red permits granted to Sinar Mas group (Govt data) PT Kartika Prima Cipta, Golden Agri Resources, part of Sinar Mas

University of Maryland data Screenshot showing forest loss in PT KPC area

KPC palms

Deep Peat areas in PT KPC

Market campaign

• GAR’s forest and peat

clearance exposed

• Nestle and Unilever

targetted

• Call for them to stop

buying from GAR

• GAR agrees to zero

deforestation

• GAR works with TFT

and GP to develop HCS system

High Carbon Stocks (HCS)

• RSPO 2013 standards revision did not make

requirements to curb GHG emissions

• ENGOs campaigned for brands to adopt

‘Zero Deforestation’ pledges: CGF

• HCS method identifies what is ‘forest’
• Uses biomass as a proxy for carbon content

(35 TCO2e/ha. guide threshold) and then stratifies forests into classes: what can be cleared and what cannot.

• Refined method as ‘HCS Approach’

Biomass-based land stratification

Source: GAR

Kenabak Hulu

1 3 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 Main interview sites Mining area

Sustainable landscape?

Land Acquisition without FPIC

• No participatory mapping, boundaries unclear
• No study of customary land ownership system
• No process to let communities choose representatives
• ‘Simpak beliung’ (‘thanks’ for temporarily

surrendering land in exchange for wider benefits) but recorded as land surrenders.

• Fixed payments (told it was a government rate)
• Told land would come back after 30 years
• No copies of agreements held by original land owners
• US$26/ ha (company valuation US$930/ha)
• Only half of promised smallholdings provided

Promised benefit sharing

• Jobs
• Shares in the

smallholder scheme

• Scholarships
• Schools
• Road improvements
• Piped water
• Buildings
• Clinics
• Few realised (yet)

HCV Assessment

• Done after land acquisition
• HCV 1-4 only
• Not well explained
• Not understood by people
• No copies in communities
• Resented because:

– Limits their livelihoods – Reduces area of smallholding (as proportion

• f planted area)

Forbidden!!! Open land, burn land, take plants, illegal logging, hunting game and destroy conservation area.

HCS Assessment

• Not yet explained
• Not widely or well

understood

• ‘What is ‘carbon’?’
• Unclear implications

for land use

• ‘We don’t want this

HCS, we’ve given up too much land already’

‘Forbidden!!! Opening or burning land, taking plants’

‘slash and burn’?

HK 1 BT BM LT

• r ‘rotational farming’?

Sequester carbon in rotational farming (whole rotation is HK1)

Mean 78 t Ce

How can we put communities rights & livelihoods into land use plans?

Concerns: fisherfolk

Majority of population in Suhaid are Melayu fisherfolk

Fisherfolk’s main concerns

• Water pollution of

whole river system

• Feel they are part of a

wider set of communities protecting whole Kapuas-Danau Sentarum system

• Plantations are causing

drying out

Concerns: smallholders

• Some people have been

excluded

• Smallholder site developed

late, in distant, hilly location

• Very high overheads
• So far, tiny payments
• Huge disappointment
• ‘Our message to you. You are

coming from Jakarta, so please, please tell them of our concerns and our expectations’

Dayak concerns

• Been there many

generations

• Have long history of
• ccupation and ownership
• Clearly defined territories
• Adat still revered
• Forest and reserve lands

held communally

• farmlands and fallows held

by individual families

Complaint filed with RSPO

• Complaint upheld. Golden Agri Resources

told to stop clearing or acquiring any more land until it:

• resolves land disputes
• remedies people for land taken without

proper consent

• provides 1000 ha of smallholdings for lands

taken

• redoes HCV assessments
• resubmits NPP

Field visits every few weeks

Local workshops

• n commmunity

land use planning

Sekretaris Kecamatan Seberuang The satellites seem to show we are in an empty area, so we should make clear there are communities here.

Initial phase community mapping

DNL KPC

LEGENDA

EXTENTS – KENABAK HULU EXTENTS – MANTAN EXTENTS – MENSUSAI EXTENTS – KERANGAS EXTENTS – HGU EXTENTS – KPC CONCESSION EXTENTS – AREAS of HCS

TOTAL KPC IL = 20,311 Ha TOTAL HCS = 5,622 Ha (28% IL) TOTAL HGU = 5,238 Ha TOTAL HCS within HGU = 540.53 Ha (10% HCS) TOTAL HCS outside HGU = 5,081 Ha (90% HCS)

Conclusions

• Original HCS idea is that companies will manage palms and

conserve forest set asides

• Challenge is that actually these areas are communities’ lands
• Current HCS Approach (1.0) allows HCS zoning to be

imposed on community lands even without FPIC

• HCS system now being adjusted to accommodate livelihoods

and secure rights: must clarify what restrictions will be imposed on community land use and what incentives are for communities to limit their land use and manage set asides; not imposed on customary lands without agreement.

• Ensure community land use planning
• Social Requirements of HCS in palm oil development for

whole supply chain now adopted for field trials

Avoiding ‘land grabs’ by respecting land rights

Tongod, Sabah, August 2013

University of Maryland data Screenshot showing forest loss in PT KPC area

KPC palms

Mensusai ‘No’ Kenabak Hulu ‘No’ Kerangas ‘No’ Caram ‘No’ Menapar ‘Yes’ Mantan ‘Yes’ Semitau ‘Yes’ Suhaid ‘Yes’

Who is really stopping deforestation? Communities

• r companies?

Sketches show wilayah adat schematically

www.forestpeoples.org Thank you