FORESTRY IN ZAMBÉZIA: “CHINESE TAKE-AWAY” ORAM, 2005

Introduction How forests are supposed to be managed: According to policies, laws, international agreements calling for: sustainable forest management for poverty alleviation How forests are actually being managed: Stripping out precious timbers for export to Asia as logs Bypassing local resource rights and economic development Degrading the resource and rendering it unmanagable in the medium-long term

What should happen? Resource inventory Delimitation of permanent forest estate Approval by communities; benefit sharing agreements Delimitation of concessions Sound management plans Harvesting + regeneration Processing + Export = Sustainable Management + Economic Development DN/SPFFBOperators Supervision by SPFFB

What is actually happening? questionable inventory + annual allowable cut no permanent forest estate or spatial control of logging communities cheated of resources and benefits licensing of unqualified operators + unsustainable concessions Too many operators + fictitious management plans illegal harvesting + no post-harvest treatement most timber exported as logs = Sustainable poverty + forest resource degradation DN/SPFFBOperators collusion by SPFFB Industry paralysed

WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS ? Large number of operators without experience or professionalism abusing the resource Exploitation of local labour (below minimum wage, or not paid at all) Little contribution of forests to sustainable rural or industrial development; no benefits to local people, Lack of controls on volumes and areas harvested rendering resource unmanageable culture of corruption perpetuated

WHAT IS DRIVING THE SITUATION? Asian buyers secure logs by providing easy credit that attracts a large number of cowboy operators to get into logging, Booming Chinese economy with high demand for logs. Involvement of politicians and government officers in forestry Government supports Asians interests through policy and regulation Donors, consultants and civil society are unwilling to speak out!! Mozambique is not alone!! – the forests of Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Myanmar, Russia and Congo Basin are also being stripped to the detriment of indigenous people and local economies.

FORESTS OF ZAMBEZIA Zambezia, total area: 10,270,622 ha Saket 1994PMSR * Forest type Cover % Area (ha) Cover % Area (ha)Diff % Lowland high density> > Lowland mid-density Lowland low-density Tall thicket < Total Productive forest * Technical problems delayed publication until late 2005

Annual Allowable Cut Zambézia total area: ha Saket 1994PMSR 2005 Productive forest area (ha) * Total comercial volume (m 3 ) Annual allowable cut (m 3 /yr,118 spp) ** Annual allowable cut (m 3 /yr, 7 spp) * Excluding reserves ** For 75 species The PMSR report does not even mention this remarkable increase. Can it be true??

Who gets what? YEAR2003 (m 3 ) 2004 (m 3 ) Simple licence operators 15,41928,655 Industrial operators (with concession) 10,337 (2,265) 20,865 (???) TOTAL25,75649,340

A BOOMING FOREST SECTOR Industrial operators1124 Concessions request249 Simple licence loggers27144

Concessions in Zambezia No. of Concession Applications No. of Companies Total area (‘000 ha) There are concession applications for over half of Zambezia’s commercial forest area. Half of these applications, including nearly all the best forest, have been made by Asian buyers with influential national partners, and other foreign companies.

Scandals in forest sector governance (1) SPFFB licenses many more operators than it can supervise. Concession applicants are allowed to log their areas before preparing management plans! Management plans are approved that propose to harvest timber in < 10 years. Operators systematically under-report the volume of timber harvested – perhaps by 50%

Scandals in forest sector governance (2) Illegal export through Quelimane port revealed by contradictory forest statistics different agencies: DNFFB, SPFFB, CFM, DPIC – and direct observation! Widespread bribery and corruption Loss of government revenues of about $200,000/year in Zambezia alone Timber prices paid by Asian buyers reduced to cover “cost of doing business”

Contradictory Gov’t Statistics YearSPFFBPort authority Licensed (m3) Extracted (m3) Exported (m3) Exported (m3) ,09028,043 6, ,68226,62218,41742, ,17533,20028,46152, ,74425,39720,08440, ,340

WHAT SHOULD WE DO? Either we continue, as now to … Cut and export as much as possible while you still can! Degrade the resource! Impoverish the communities! When its gone - sell up and leave! Or: civil society lobbies for sustainable forest management for poverty alleviation!

WHAT SHOULD WE LOBBY FOR? A moratorium on log exports. WHY? Zambezia has the capacity to process at least 35,000 m3/year, and all timber types. National, regional and international markets exist for Mozambican processed timber. Mozambique should add value to its own timber, rather than exporting logs and jobs to China

Other immediate measures Moratoria on: – annual logging permits (licenca simples) – new concession approvals until systems for sustainable management are in place, and operators can demonstrate their ability to log responsibly. Demand independent review of previously approved concession management plans Revise legislation to give communities rights to the timber on their own land

ENVISAGED OUTCOMES Foreign log buyers will leave or switch to exporting processed timber The “credit system” buyers have been using to support inexperienced simple licence operators will be abandoned Only the more dedicated professionals operators will continue in forestry – cowboys will leave. Existing industrial capacity will be better utilised and developed, creating more jobs for Mozambicans.

Alternative vision for forestry Harness forests for economic development Integrate forestry in provincial and national development planning Sustainable management of forests for wide range of products Value-added processing of forest products Community-based concession management and processing

Who should do what Government (at national, provincial, district levels): constructive engagement with China to promote Mozambique’s economic development, not just China’s crack down on corruption in DN/SPFF establish and enforce regulations for best practice in fores management fulfil commitments to sound governance legislate to give resource rights to communities market support and financial incentives for in-country processing improve infrastructure (roads, power) needed for forestry facilitate regular dialogue with all stakeholders !!!

Who should do what Operators: Realise forestry is a privilege NOT a right. Promote high standards of forest management via professional associations Collaborate with local communities and respect their rights Process and transform timber locally Diversify products and markets Develop Zambézia’s forests for benefit of all

Who should do what? Communities: Commit to sustainable management of own forest resources for community development Organise themselves for effective decision- making and benefit sharing Seek management partnerships as appropriate Local NGOs: Facilitate and support community processes and interactions with private sector.

Who should do what? International NGOs: Provide Independent Forest Monitoring (IFM) Support local NGOs Donors: Put pressure on GOM to fulfil its policy commitments Financial and technical support Constructive multi-lateral engagement with China

What the “Chinese take-away” means for Mozambique Chinese presence in Mozambique could obviously bring many benefits, BUT: THE CHINESE ECONOMY SHOULD NOT BOOM AT THE EXPENSE OF POORER COUNTRIES LIKE MOZAMBIQUE. We must work with Chinese and other timber importers such as India, to ensure that: MORE PROCESSING AND MORE BENEFITS FROM FORESTRY STAY IN MOZAMBIQUE. For that: POLICIES PROMOTING ENLIGHTENED NATIONAL INTEREST ARE NEEDED

CHINESE IMPORT OF FOREST PRODUCTS YEAR VOLUME (m3) VALUE ($) million 6 billion million 16 billion million* 32 billion* * (mid-level estimate)

CHINESE EXPORT OF FOREST PRODUCTS YEAR VOLUME (RWE)* VALUE ($) m m3$3.6 billion m m3 $17.2 billion In 2005, 80% of all forest exports were timber products, primarily furniture and wood-based panels Approx. 70% of timber imported into China is re-exported * round wood equivalents White et al, (2006) Forest Trends

WHERE DO CHINA’S FOREST PRODUCT EXPORTS GO? Between 1997 and 2005 US imports of Chinese wood products boomed an astonishing 1000% In 2005, US imported 35% of its total wood based products, from China. Europe is the second biggest importer and imports increased almost 800% in the same period. Japan …

SO …. Americans, Europeans and Japanese are the biggest consumers of the “Chinese-takeaway timber” and should take action”! they must join local and international initiatives, and exercise consumer pressure to fight illegal and unsustainable logging.

OBRIGADO