Forest carbon offset projects can also result in serious negative impacts on indigenous peoples, who may be forcibly removed from their territories. To cap it all, forest carbon offset projects are fraught with technical difficulties, and have been avoided by governments in the past for precisely this reason.

what happened

Friends of the Earth US built a coalition with US-based organizations, which has been effective in reframing the climate debate to focus on what is necessary rather than what is seen as politically possible. This coalition also published analyses of climate policy, and drafted letters as well as lobbying collectively. 

Friends of the Earth US also built relationships with environmental justice advocates whose communities stand to be impacted by increased pollution from regulated industries that purchase offsets instead of reducing their own emissions. 

Friends of the Earth also analyzed policies related to forest carbon and carbon trading, and provided detailed recommendations to policy-makers to improve the efficacy of US forest-climate policy, including on transparency, governance, human rights and environmental effectiveness. Campaigners addressed the Energy and Commerce Committee, and alerted the Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus to serious flaws in the proposed climate bill. They also lobbied members of the US House of Representatives to limit the use of offsets in any carbon trading system, and prohibit the most problematic types of offsets - international offsets and forest-related offsets. 

FoE US also invited Sam Nnah Ndobe of Friends of the Earth Cameroon to meet with policy makers in both the House and Senate, and coordinated lobbying visits for Vicky Tauli-Corpuz, the Chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, who met with Donna Lee, the lead US delegate on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD). 

In 2009, publications included a report entitled “Subprime Carbon” which highlights how the financial crisis tells a cautionary tale about the risks of carbon trading, and another on offsets, “Dangerous Distraction.” Through flash videos, online advertising, and e-mail alerts, the group also mobilized its members and activists to reach out to their members of Congress. 

Friends of the Earth US also participated in several conferences on the failures of the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Fund (FCPF).

what changed

During 2009, the US House of Representatives passed the climate change bill, proposing a massive carbon market in the US. While Friends of the Earth US ultimately opposed the bill, its advocacy efforts around forest carbon, carbon offsets, and carbon trading resulted in concrete improvements to the language contained in it. For example, both the House-passed climate bill and Senate climate legislation recognize the need and provide for non-market based sources of financing to protect forests. The Senate bill also has new and robust transparency and anti-corruption language applying to forest carbon schemes. 

FoE US also successfully shifted the US government position on REDD to allow for the inclusion of provisions on respecting the rights of indigenous peoples, and noting the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. While this position has not yet been formally adopted, it is a significant victory. 

FoE US also secured greater civil society access to and transparency in the operation of the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF).

what next?

Campaigners still face considerable challenges. Leading US climate legislation still relies heavily on the use of carbon offsets, including forest offsets. The World Bank’s FCPF has also attempted to sidestep pressure from civil society to comply with safeguards, by attempting to shift its decision-making process to allow for less rigorous compliance with the Bank’s operational policies. 

with thanks to our funders: the isvara foundation

Since December 2005, the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) has been awarding certificates to controversial logging concessions run by European companies. However, these companies have a long record of 'infractions' and illegal activities in the region. This has endangered the credibility of the FSC label, which is meant to guarantee socially responsible and sustainable management of forests. 

Industrial plantations are also expanding rapidly, replacing forests, destroying biodiversity, and depriving forest-dependent communities of their homes and livelihoods.

Mining is also becoming a serious concern, with an increasing number of mining concessions granted in the forest, even in protected areas. Chinese and Indian corporations are active in the area and often have very low operating standards.

monitoring fsc-certified companies 

Over the course of the last four years, FoE Cameroon/CED, FoE France, and FoE Netherlands/Milieudefensie have worked together to expose shortfalls in the implementation of FSC standards, and to raise the more general issue of the social aspects of certification.

In 2009, FoE Cameroon continued monitoring the activities of a number of FSC-certified forestry companies, including SEFAC, Pallisco and Wijma, to ascertain whether or not they are successfully protecting biodiversity in Central Africa. The data collected so far revealed cases of non-compliance with FSC principles (SEFAC); issues affecting indigenous communities (Pallisco); and persistent non-compliance (Wijma). The companies are failing to making provisions that ensure indigenous communities have access to the land and resources they need and are entitled to. 

Eventually the FSC responded, suspending both FSC certificates (those of Wijma and SEFAC) and FSC certifiers (Bureau Veritas, ICILA). The FSC’s certification system has also been improved. For instance, Transformation REEF Cameroon (TRF) abandoned more than 20,000 ha of forest claimed by local communities, and has established a process for dealing with conflicts with local communities. Rougier has also requested advice for improving communication with communities, to develop conflict-prevention techniques. 

Improving the social aspects of certification, including the recognition and protection of indigenous communities, has become the most important priority for the FSC and companies involved in certification in Central Africa.

FoE Cameroon also participated in meetings with the Interafrican Forest Industries Association (IFIA), bringing the issue of the social impacts of logging to the table. There is now a dialogue underway on this issue.

tracking industrial plantations 

FoE Cameroon is also monitoring the impact of industrial plantations in Cameroon, gathering evidence that clearly demonstrates the severe negative impacts that companies such as SOCAPALM (palm oil) and Hevecam (rubber) are having on the environment, and on indigenous communities living in the area. This includes:

• Research into SOCAPALM’s activities published in December 2008 by the World Development Movement (“Resistances contre deux géants industriels en forêt tropicale,” Julien- François Gerber, www.wrm.org.uy).
  
  
• A preliminary review of all the indigenous communities living in and around the SOCAPALM and Hevecam plantations, gathering photographic evidence, locating villages, and talking to communities about their experiences. 
  
  
• Detailed work with an indigenous community documenting the real social and environmental impacts of living next to a SOCAPALM plantation. A French professional photographer visited the community. A map of the area was also drafted, showing how the community is completely surrounded by palm plantations. 
  
  
• An in-depth mapping exercise with communities, using global positioning system (GPS) sets, to document the communities’ uses of the forest. 

An analysis of the impact of the SOCAPALM and La Fruitière de Marseille banana plantations on water resources has also been initiated, as part of the process of revising Cameroon’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) rules.

This growing body of evidence underpins FoE Cameroon's position that industrial plantations are not the best way to promote sustainability and development. It is also leading to real change. The evidence relating to SOCAPALM and Hevecam, for example, led to the disclosure of the companies’ extension plans, which target the last portions of the forests were indigenous communities are located. Those plans are now on hold as a result.

In the meantime, knowledge about the companies’ impacts is spreading, with media coverage in France, including a piece on a well-known radio program in Paris (the journalist and the radio are now facing a court case for defamation in Paris, and FoE Cameroon is a witness in the case.) 

FoE Cameroon also worked with the Dodge College of Film and Media Arts, at Chapman University in the US. Together they produced a film about the situation of indigenous communities within the SOCAPALM plantations. “Shadows in the Forest” was launched in November 2009 in the USA and can be viewed here: www.jacobmtaylor.com

illegal logging 

A joint field visit to a concession being logged illegally was also undertaken by FoE Cameroon, FoE France and FoE Netherlands, together with representatives of European logging companies active in Africa, and timber buyers in Europe. The visit exposed illegal operations and their social and environmental impacts. The European buyers decided not to buy any more timber from companies that are unable to prove the legality of their operations. 

FoE Cameroon is also contributing to the EU’s Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT), by engaging in the revision of Cameroon’s forestry law. Based on the information it has gathered about industrial plantations FoE Cameroon has been able to make cogent arguments in favor of addressing land issues in the new legislation.

what next 

The three strands of work will all continue. The material gathered in relation to industrial plantations will be published in a report in 2010. Reports on the activities of companies including Pallisco and Wijma are also due to be published.

with thanks to our funders: the dutch ministry of foreign affairs (dgis)

Photo courtesy of World Resources 

12 percent of the funding for Friends of the Earth International comes from the membership dues paid by the member groups, and 0.7 percent comes from sales and donations. Member groups contribute a percentage of their income on the basis of their revenue from two years ago to the international network. This core funding is used to cover the

operational costs of the Secretariat.

subsidies

86.5 percent of our income is subsidies received from government agencies and foundations. These funds are granted 

to us for specific projects and campaigns and for our Membership Support Fund.

membership support fund

Our Membership Support Fund seeks to pool resources and share them across FoE member groups for the following 

objectives: network development, program coordination, capacity building, strengthening national campaigns, and increasing participation in international campaigns.

In 2009, we distributed 995,266 Euros to 32 of our members: Bangladesh, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, El Salvador, England, Wales & Northern Ireland, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Liberia, Malaysia, Malawi,Mozambique, Netherlands, Nigeria, Palestina, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Togo, Tunesia, Uganda and Uruguay.

We also distributed 106,142 Euros to the our regional groupings for regional meetings and capacity building.

our funders

Friends of the Earth International gratefully acknowledges financial support from:

• HIVOS
• NOVIB/Oxfam Netherlands
• The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGIS-TMF/MFS)
• The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Matra)
• The European Union (joint grant with IPS)
• The Sigrid Rausing Trust
• The Swedish Society for Nature Conservation
• The Netherlands Committee for Sustainable Development (NCDO)
• The Isvara Foundation
• The C.S. Mott Foundation
• The Wallace Global Fund
• The Rockefeller Brothers Fund
• The V. Kahn-Rasmussen Foundation

Their financial support has been crucial in strengthening our campaigns and our network.

• In January 2009, FoE Indonesia sent a complaint to Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, following the Australian government’s failure to fulfil a promise to respond directly to Indonesian organizations challenging the activities of Australian mining companies. FoE Indonesia has compiled a dossier detailing the involvement of numerous Australian mining companies in environmental destruction and human rights violations.

• In February 2009, communities in Guatemala asked the legislature and the Ministry of Energy and Mines to issue a moratorium on mining licenses of all types, until reforms to the Mining Act are agreed with them. Social organizations in the affected municipalities claim that current amendments to the document do not provide for community interests. 

• Also in February, and after years of being marginalized in relation to decisions about their ancestral lands, the Subanon people on Mindanao island came another step closer to asserting control over their territory. Their lands are currently being exploited by TVI Resource Development Phils (TVIRDI), a subsidiary of Canadian mining company TVI Pacific. Around 20 Subanon Indigenous People and farmers living within the TVIRDI mining area in Mount Canatuan, the Subanon tribe’s sacred site, halted blasting and drilling activities at the Canadian company’s open-pit mining operation, after a successful occupation of the site. 

• In March 2009, the Ghana National Coalition on Mining, a group of communities affected by mining in Ghana and civil society organizations including FoE Ghana, opposed the Ghanaian Environmental Protection Agency, which had granted environmental permits to Newmont Ghana Gold Limited and Adamus Resources to conduct surface gold mining activities. 

• In September 2009, FoE Hungary published their first annual alternative report on the Hungarian Oil Company (MOL). The report held a mirror up to the company’s annual report and assessed the company’s activities in 2008. After examining company data, the authors gave examples showing that the company’s practices do not actually match up to its rhetoric. 

• Also in September, FoE Costa Rica, together with and as part of Costa Rica’s popular movement, participated in a visit to mining company Crucitas, organized by the Supreme Court of Costa Rica, which had suspended Crucitas’s mining permit. There is a risk that the Supreme Court will favor the mining company, in which case FoE Costa Rica plans more mobilizations across the country, to stop this mining company restarting its activities.

• Again in September, FoE Guatemala organized an international mission to verify violations of human, environmental and economic rights by mining transnational corporations operating in Guatemala, such as GoldCorp. The aim of the mission was to ensure that the voices of victims, who are criminalized in Guatemala, can be heard at the international level. Participants included FoE Uruguay, FoE El Salvador, and FoE Costa Rica, together with people from Amnesty International and others. 

Building strong networks and alliances against the mining and extractive industries is also a priority for the RMOG Program. For example, a new network in Colombia, the Colombian Network Against Mining, has been established to challenge transnational corporations operating in Colombia with the support of the Colombian government. One of the first acts of this network was to support the demands of workers and the population struggling against British Petroleum in Tauramena, Colombia.

Many other critical activities were also undertaken by the Federation in 2009. For example:

• In Nigeria, the Second National Consultation on the Environment, 25 - 26 November 2009, saw civil society leaders, community-based organizations, civil society organizations, development experts, academia, legal practitioners, the media and representatives of government agencies come together to consider a post-petroleum Nigeria. The event was organized by FoE Nigeria in collaboration with the Federal Ministry of Environment.

• FoE Philippines and Alyansa Tigil Mina co-hosted a discussion on "Tracing the Gold, Tracing the Money," in Cagayan de Oro City on 29 June. The event was designed to give participants the knowledge and skills they need to find out how mining companies finance their activities and where they sell their products. This kind of research often reveals excellent intervention points for advocates wanting to stop mining operations in their localities.

• A new report from FoE Netherlands, "Mining Matters," which was published in June 2009, reviewed practices used in mining tin (in Indonesia, Bolivia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Burma), bauxite (Guinea and Jamaica), and copper (Chile, Peru, Zambia and Indonesia (Grasberg)). It also examined the policies of seven companies using imported metals in the Netherlands.

• Security forces arrested the director of FoE Indonesia and the Head of FoE Indonesia's Regional Department during a peaceful protest organized by FoE Indonesia and other NGOs together with fisherfolk organizations. The groups organized an event parallel to the World Ocean Conference (WOC) and Coal Triangle Summit 2009 which was held in Manado, Indonesia, 11-14 May. The peoples’ gathering was to draw the attention of WOC to small fisherfolks’ concerns – especially their call to ban the dumping of tailing minings into the sea - and to demand that these concerns be put on the WOC’s agenda.

• In 2009 Young FoE Norway’s priority campaign was against oil drilling off the beautiful Lofoten Islands, home to the world’s largest stock of cod and biggest cold water coral reef. They started several local groups in a network called "O`olkaction against oil drilling outside the Lofoten Islands." They also took a group of representatives from political youth parties out to the Lofoten Islands for one week, to highlight the fact that there are other possibilities besides drilling for oil in Northern Norway. 

• FoE France has published a synthesis report "Public subsidies to fossil fuels in France and the European Union," which reveals that the wealthy oil industry benefited from French subsidies of over €400 million between 2004 and 2008, mainly in the form of export guarantees. FoE’s research also shows that €6 billion of European money has been given to the fossil fuel industry over the past five years. 

The main areas of work of the program are:

• Community Resistance
• Campaign Against Corporations
• Policies and Mechanisms that Promote Mining, Oil and Gas
• Decreasing Consumption to Stop Demand for Mining, Oil and Gas

coordinators and participants

Co-coordinator: Natalia Atz Sunuc, FoE Guatemala
Co-coordinator: Romel Cardenas de Vera, FoE Philippines

The RMOG steering group includes:

• For Africa, Chima Williams, FoE Nigeria
• For APac, Natalie Lowrey, Australia
• For ATALC, Andres Idarraga, Colombia
• For Europe, Geert Ritsema, Netherlands
• For North America, Adina Matisoff, FoE USA

This is a new FoEI program and the co-coordinators and steering group are still in the processing of developing and implementing a fully-fledged strategy and workplan. Groups that have expressed an interest in participating include: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Curacao, El Salvador, FoE Europe, EWNI, France, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Japan, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mozambique, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Togo and the US.

membership support

Additionally, we challenged false publicity about the potential of jatropha, and other plants that might be used for agrofuel production. In particular, FoE Africa groups and others set out to research the extent to which agrofuels are expanding across Africa, through a literature review, on-the-ground observation, and interviews with government officials, community leaders, local authorities, farmers and farmers’ organizations, civil society groups and academics. The resulting report considers the state of agrofuels production in Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cote D’Ivoire, Ghana, Malawi, Mali, Mauritius, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Zambia and Zimbabwe. It records details, where available, on incoming investment, key companies, case studies, issues relating to land and legal rights, and environmental impact assessments. It also delves into government and state policies on agrofuels promotion and energy self-sufficiency.

The FoE Europe campaign on agrofuels was selected by the European Parliament Magazine as the most effective NGO campaign, specifically because of our high-visibility creative actions organized in collaboration with groups from all our regions. Improvements to our web site, and investments in communications in FoE Europe, allowed us to mobilize 47,000 people in May to participate in a poll by EC President Barroso, which changed the poll from 95% in favor of the EU's biofuels target to 89% against, in just three days.

FoEI also organized two speakers’ tours (in May and December 2008) for leaders from the South, in order to raise awareness in Europe about the devastating impacts of growing crops to produce agrofuels. We also organized an action in front of the Brazilian embassy in Brussels to protest against their agrofuels policies, in collaboration with La Via Campesina and FIAN (Face It Act Now – for the right to food). The speakers took part in lobby meetings to demand an end to the EU 10% biofuels target, with Members of the European Parliament and representatives of the European Commission. Similar meetings were organized with national parliaments in France, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK. The visiting speakers also lectured at universities in Brussels, Grenoble, Leuven, Montpellier, and the UNDP University in Namur. They received good media coverage, including through outlets such as Télé Grenoble, Midi Libre, France 3 TV, Planète Libre Magazine, national TV RFO, Radio Campus in Belgium, Panoramica magazine, ANP Netherlands, Agrarisch Dagblad, and Agripress Belgium.

When the Round Table for Responsible Soy (RTRS) met in Buenos Aires, FoEI helped  gathering civil society from producer countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) as well as importing countries in the EU, to protest against the use of ‘sustainable soy’ certification schemes, which are bound to fail because they do not address the overall expansion of monoculture plantations to produce increasing quantities of agrofuels. Similar round-table approaches around the world have completely failed to address the major social and environmental impacts of industrial-scale soy cultivation and actually serve to frustrate real solutions.

Photo credits: FoE Brazil

During the past two years, agrofuels have been a top advocacy priority for the federation, cutting across almost all of our program areas. During this period, more than 35 FoEI groups in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Denmark, El Salvador, England Wales & N Ireland, France, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary, Indonesia, Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Mozambique, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Scotland, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo, Uganda, Uruguay and US, worked in solidarity to achieve this goal.

accomplishments

We received a lot of press attention and succeeded in helping to shift public opinion on agrofuels, not just in Europe but throughout producer countries. The fact that increasing attention has been paid to food production, because of the global food crisis, meant that we were presented with an important opportunity to raise concerns about competition between crops for food and crops for fuel (although we approached this issue cautiously as we believe that the food crisis is driven by many significant factors, including speculation in agricultural commodities, and false solutions such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and increased dependence on artificial inputs to agriculture).

Our various activities also reinforced national and regional alliances with social movements fighting for food sovereignty and resisting large scale monocultures, raised FoEI’s profile in debates about energy and climate justice, and contributed to the implementation of FoEI’s Agrofuels campaign internationally.

The Forest and Biodiversity Program’s focus on strengthening and promoting sustainable local initiatives means that some of its key activities and successes occur at the national level. 

For example, in Uruguay, Friends of the Earth succeeded in a case against logging company ENCE for misleading advertising and destruction of native forests in Uruguay. We successfully halted construction of the controversial pulp and paper mill proposed by ENCE, who had been planning to invest US$1,500 million. The company was financially sanctioned and then decided to sell its land and leave the country. We also supported a local community in Uruguay to sue a company that was going to plant genetically modified soybeans in an area rich in family and organic farming.

In Malaysia, Friends of the Earth has also filed a lawsuit to save a water-catchment forest on the Jerai mountain in Kedah, from a quarry project that has been illegally approved by the State Government. The communities located in the foothills of the mountain depend on the mountain’s rivers for water supply for domestic use and to irrigate their rice fields.

The Forests and Biodiversity Program is also focused on challenging and changing intergovernmental policies that already or potentially could contribute to the destruction of forests and biodiversity, in forums such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the World Forestry Congress.

For example, the Forests and Biodiversity program participated in the CBD’s High-level Working Group on the 2010 biodiversity target and post-2010 target(s), which took place 11 March 2009 in Bonn, Germany. FoEI successful persuaded governments to inorporate a number of key paragraphs into the final 2010 Biodiversity Targets document (even though it still generally favors the dominant vision of mercantilization and commercialization).

Collaborative side and parallel events during intergovernmental forums have also been extremely successful in raising civil society’s concerns and challenging government perspectives. The joint efforts of FoEI's Forests and Biodiversity, CJE and EJRN programs, together with key allies such as the Global Forest Coalition, has helped to ensure that a number of governments, such as Bolivia and Paraguay, have voiced their concerns about the potential negative impacts of policies on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), especially if REDD is used to support plantations and is funded through carbon markets. The subsequent REDD draft reflected these concerns. 

A key element in this effort was a side event on the potential impacts of REDD on Indigenous Peoples’ rights and biodiversity and the risks of genetically engineered (GE) trees, on 3 June, parallel to the meetings of the Subsidiary Bodies to the UNFCCC in Bonn. This was co-organized with the Global Forest Coalition and the International Alliance on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples of the Tropical Forest. Many FoEI member groups have also been enabled to participate in national REDD policy discussions currently underway.

Similarly, a three-day capacity-building event on the impacts of tree plantations was organized prior to the World Forestry Congress, 16-18 October, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, together with the World Rainforest Movement, the Global Forest Coalition and La Via Campesina Argentina. This event helped to build capacity and provide a space for more than 150 representatives of indigenous organizations, farmers’ movements and NGOs, enabling them to voice their concerns about the current forestry model and to propose alternative solutions on an international platform.

The Plantations Campaign and a delegation of ATALC groups also produced a video about the performance of Finnish pulp and paper company Stora Enso in Uruguay, and presented a photo exhibition on the impacts of cellulose/logging corporations in the Southern Cone of South America, which was exhibited at the World Forestry Congress.

FoEI is collating vital information about alternative approaches to forest management, which clearly demonstrate that community management of forests is a viable contribution to food sovereignty and community control of resources, and is already practised in many parts of the world. To this end, we published and distributed "Community-based Forest Governance: from resistance to proposals for sustainable use" in 2009.

We also highlighted local struggles and promoted alternative practices for sustainable livelihoods through a number of publications and statements. With FoE groups from Nigeria, Brazil, and Papua New Guinea, and the World Rainforest Movement, we compiled three detailed case studies that show the impact plantations have on women. These were launched to mark International Women’s Day on 8 March 2009, and celebrate women’s role in opposing plantations and fighting for a better world. On the back of these studies, and in collaboration with FoE France, the Forests and Biodiversity Program also initiated a campaign against Michelin’s destructive activities in Nigeria. FoE Liberia, FoE Cameroon and FoE Netherlands also produced a video on "Illegal Logging: African stories," which has so far been viewed 1,139 times on YouTube in addition to viewings via FoE websites.

In reaction to the alarming data released in the 2009 "State of the World’s Forests" report from the UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), FoEI and the Global Forest Coalition again called on world governments to stop promoting plantations, and to halt the conversion of forests into biofuel plantations. The FAO report notes that the expansion of large-scale monocultures of oil palm, soy and other crops for agrofuel production has been a key factor in the failure to halt deforestation, and that cellulosic biofuels could have further dramatic impacts. It also says illegal logging could increase due to the global economic crisis, if it leads to a contraction of the formal forestry sector.

The Forests and Biodiversity program, together with other FoEI programs, also collaborated with La Via Campesina to elaborate a declaration on the International Day of Action on Monoculture Tree Plantations on 21 September 2009. Various FoEI groups – including from France, Mexico, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Colombia, Chile and Argentina – marked the day with a variety of actions.

The program also participated in the 2009 World Social Forum in Belem, Brazil, co-hosting a workshop on plantations, market mechanisms and false solutions, with the Global Forest Coalition. 100 hundred people participated.

The Forest and Biodiversity Program’s working areas are:

• Plantations campaign
• Destructive logging campaign
• Community forest governance
• Biodiversity agenda
• Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD)

The Forest and Biodiversity Program currently works with the following FoEI Programs on cross-cutting themes:

• With the Economic Justice Resisting Neoliberalism Program -  the Plantations campaign
• With the Climate Justice and Energy Program, - the REDD campaign

Coordinators and participants

Coordinator: Isaac Rojas, FoE Costa Rica, isaac@coecoceiba.org
The Forests and Biodiversity Steering group includes:

• For APac: Shamila Arifin, FoE Malaysia
• For Europe: Danielle van Oijen, FoE Netherlands
• For ATALC: Eduardo Sanchez, FoE Argentina
• For Africa: discussion with African region is ongoing

Groups that participated actively in 2009 included Argentina, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Finland, France, Honduras, Indonesia, Liberia, Malaysia, Netherlands, Paraguay, Sweden, Switzerland and Uruguay.

As a follow up of the FoEI Conference and workshops on Investor/State Dispute Settlement Mechanisms held in Montevideo, in 2007, FoE Uruguay launched the report, “People's sovereignty or corporate interests?". This homes in on the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), highlighting the way in which this World Bank mechanism is biased towards corporate interests. The report was presented several times in Bolivia, at the CEDIB (Bolivia’s center for documentation and information), at FTFC (the Factory Workers’ Union) in Cochabamba, and at Bolivia’s Press Federation in La Paz: it was received with great enthusiasm, and we succeeded in reaching out to more than 800 organizations. FoE Uruguay was also invited for an audience with senior officials at Bolivia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and representatives of the Solón Foundation. In May 2008, Bolivia became the first country in the world to withdraw from ICSID, and Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Venezuela seem prepared to follow its example.

FoE Cameroon published an assessment of the relevance of the different certification mechanisms within the context of Central African forests, in 2007. The main conclusions of this report (with regard to socio-economic aspects, corruption, participation and access to information) also fed into above-mentioned discussion on FLEGT’s Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs).

global europe

The Global Europe campaign aims to expose the negative impacts and the corporate bias of the Global Europe  strategy; and to counter trade and investment agreements that harm men, women and the environment in the Global South, but also harm Europe's peoples as well.

corporate power

The Corporate Power campaign campaign focuses on dismantling corporate power by exposing and countering corporate crimes and their social, environmental and human rights impacts, specifically on women’s and men’s productive and reproductive activities. It also counters corporate influence over governments and institutions, including international financial institutions and the World Trade Organization (WTO); and building peoples' power by developing and advocating for legal measures to give rights to women, men and communities and to protect them against corporate power.

plantations

EJRN is also engaged in the Plantations campaign (led by the Forests and Biodiversity program) through exposing and countering the role of relevant corporations, and trade and investment flows, and by promoting resistance activities.

Further, the EJRN program also contributed to the Agrofuels campaign by exposing and countering the role of corporations, trade and investments in that sector. 

Finally, the EJRN program contributed to the Climate and Finance campaign (which is led by the Climate Justice and Energy program) by exposing and rejecting the World Bank’s involvement in controversial projects on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD); stopping the World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds (CIFs) and other World Bank involvement in fighting climate change; and proposing and promoting an alternative climate financing mechanism

accomplishments

In 2008, FoEI's EJRN Program successfully:

• Strengthened the fight against the EU’s Global Europe policy
• Continued the fight against free trade agreements
• Disclosed the truth, built awareness about and mobilized against specific corporate abuses
• Tackled corporate lobby and greenwash
  
• Halted destructive projects
  
• Denounced corporate-driven policies
  
• Used legal strategies to defend people from corporate abuses

FoEI has also consolidated the joint work with social movements and organizations around Agribusiness. This will allow the Federation to strengthen their resistance strategies, as well as the promotion of solutions, throughout the joint fight with our allies.

FoE groups have produced materials (documented studies, briefings, fact sheets and websites in different languages, and short films) and have made strategic use of the internet for media outreach and advocacy work to fight corporate control over food systems. This corporate control includes monopolistic technologies such as the production and commercialization of GMOs, agrofuels, industrial fishing and aquaculture. For example:

• FoE EWNI’s Food Chain Campaign and report “What's feeding our food?” (December 2008), which highlights the environmental and social impacts of the intensive livestock sector.
• FoE Australia’s Real Food Campaign.
• FoE Uruguay’s influential research work and publications on agribusiness such as: “Agronegocios Ltda. Nuevas modalidades de colonialismo en el Cono Sur de América Latina”; and their documentary: Soberanía Alimentaria en marcha. Recuperación del Molino Santa Rosa.
• The report “Malaysian palm oil - green gold or green wash?” (October 2008), which reveals that Malaysian palm oil exported for use in food, biofuels and cosmetics is far from 'green', contrary to claims by Malaysian palm oil producers.
  

These materials are helping to mobilize people; they help European consumers to make informed choices; help to ensure that social and environmental issues are taken into account by companies; mobilize the public and decision-makers to support changes that will help to build a more equitable North-South relationship in a key area affecting biodiversity, food security and poverty reduction; and contribute to the debate about Europe’s overall levels of consumption.

The EU is one of the world’s biggest importers of agriculture commodities, to supply a range of needs, from the food on our plates to animal feed for our livestock. In addition, in response to demands to reduce dependence on oil imports, and in order to minimize climate-damaging greenhouse gas emissions, EU and national energy policies are now resulting in the rapid increase of a new commodity – agrofuels.

This has raised new and complex challenges for developing countries that are expanding agricultural production to meet Europe’s demand. In 2008, FoE groups in Europe (Austria Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, England Wales & N Ireland, Estonia, France, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain) developed a campaign called “Feeding and Fuelling Europe” to raise public awareness in the EU about the impacts of the food commodities trade, on food security, rural livelihoods and the environment in developing countries. The campaign provides opportunities, solutions and recommendations for citizens, policy makers and industry. The work is coordinated with national campaign activities aimed at fighting agribusiness and promoting food sovereignty in FoE groups in Asia (Indonesia, Malaysia and Philippines), Africa (Cameroon, Ghana, Nigeria and Sierra Leone) and Latin America and the Caribbean (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay).

These reports were very controversial as far as industry participants were concerned, and Syngenta and others walked out of the process in December. The final report was remarkably strong about the need for a radical change in agriculture, and did not promote genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It addressed the need to strengthen regional markets and protecting natural resources; the importance of traditional knowledge; diversity; agro-ecology; and the role of women in agriculture. It recognized the threats from agrofuels; GMOs; intellectual property rights rules; and the model of industrial agriculture. In short it called for more Food Sovereignty! The report was supported by 58 governments.

Europe continued to be an essentially GMO-free zone, which is a very important achievement for the European people, but also for other regions in the world. The food price crisis was cleverly used to try and persuade the EU to weaken its GMO laws and therefore get other regions of the world to grow more kinds of GMOs. FoE groups in Europe researched the issue and were able to prove that lobby groups had manipulated the facts. While this is an important success, however, we need to continue to monitor the process and ensure that laws aren’t weakened behind closed doors.