View
217
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
WBCSD & WWF Collaboration on sustainable forest management
Per Rosenberg Executive Director, Global Forest and Trade Network
The Forests DialogueHong Kong, 09 March, 2005
Content WBCSD WWF Collaborative Framework
Agreement WWF WBCSD Joint Statement for the TFD
on illegal logging Presented by Per Rosenberg, GFTN
Provide context for joint case study on verifying legality of wood origin in Latvia Presented by Anna-Liisa Myllynen, Stora Enso,
Chair WBCSD WWF Pilot Project Team
WBCSD WWF Collaborative Framework Agreement Objective – positively influence global sustainable
forest management & industry issues, processes and developments
Signed Jan 2003 between WWF International WBCSD’s Sustainable Forest Products Industry working
group (14 global forestry/forest product companies) Framework for
Consultation and platform joint research, work programs & communications on strategic issues
WBCSD WWF Collaborative Framework Agreement Principles
Open & honest dialogue/Chatham House Rule Consensus on joint action & communications on
Framework activities Involvement of other stakeholders Credible outputs based on research, transparency
and stakeholder input e.g. via The Forests Dialogue Priorities 2004 and 2005
Forest certification Illegal Logging & Illegal Forest Products Trade
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement for the TFD on illegal logging What is it and what is our intent?
Leadership statement from global NGO and business stakeholder groups for the TFD process
Outlines our common views about illegal logging & its impacts
Provide some clarity around the definition of illegal logging to facilitate stakeholder focus and action
Outlines set of joint activities to combat the problem
Others are welcome to support and join us!
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement: Recognize:Recognize:
Extensive scope & serious env, eco & social impacts Coordinated action needed to strengthen good
governance, ensure law enforcement & combat practices that undermine sustainability
Clear understanding of the term will facilitate and focus stakeholder action to address casual factors
Stakeholders need to appreciate respective roles, set priorities and implement cost effective, just and timely responses
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement:Understand – our Understand – our « definition »:« definition »:
Focus on widespread, systematic and premeditated violations, and not isolated, unforeseen infractions
Three components parts Illegal sourcing - when unprocessed wood is procured in
absence of the sellers legal right to sell or harvest Illegal logging – timber harvesting in violation of relevant
forestry & environmental laws and regulations Illegal forest products trade – procurement, processing,
distribution & marketing of forest products from wood obtained by illegal sourcing or illegal harvesting and/or not in compliance with relevant national & international trade laws
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement:Agree that:Agree that: Varies in causes, intensity, impact & nature
Different responses and levels of stakeholder participation needed
Some illegal activities require international action because of level/extent of impacts
In some countries this is part of larger governance and corruption problems
Forest products meet legitimate needs but lack of information on raw material origin can undermine confidence
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement:Agree that:Agree that:
Robust, reliable and auditable tracing systems can help stakeholders counteract/curtail illegal activities
Best practice traceability and procurement systems can help when consistently applied by companies
Credible, independent forest certification can help if legality and enforcement addressed, although limitations in countries with extensive corruption
Enhanced public awareness important to support political solutions in countries weak enforcement
Legal compliance is a basis requirement but cannot in itself guarantee long term sustainability forests & ecosystems
Processes need to be sensitive risk of injustice, comply competition, consumer, environmental & trade law
WWF WBCSD Joint Statement:Announce collaboration with Announce collaboration with stakeholders to:stakeholders to:
Further joint projects focusing regions/framework conditions that drive illegal sourcing, harvesting & trade
Evolving best practice company traceability and responsible purchasing policies e.g. Latvia case study
Support TFD & positively engage FLEG/FLEGT Urge WBCSD member companies to seek dialogue
around tracing systems and improve practices if needed Encourage other stakeholders to appreciate distinction
between illegal sourcing, harvesting & trade in their discussions and responses
Activity promote agreement to other audience groups
WBCSD & WWF Pilot Project on Illegal Logging in Latvia Anna-Liisa Myllynen
VP, Forest Environment, Stora Enso Wood Supply Europe
The Forests DialogueHong Kong, 09 March, 2005
Content
What is WBCSD & WWF pilot project on illegal logging in Latvia?
Questionnaire to forest companies Results of the questionnaire; best practices Conclusions
Next steps
Participants of the WBCSD & WWF pilot project in Latvia
Norske Skogindustrier ASA Silva / Thomesto Ltd, Metsäliitto Group Stora Enso UPM-Kymmene Pasaules Dabas Fonds WWF International World Business Council for Sustainable Development
Background State Forest Service statistics:
illegal logging was 0.8% of total harvesting volume in 2003 Logging without a felling license in own or other property Ignoring normative requirements
WWF/WB Alliance study: Evasion of income tax: a substantial portion of private forest
owners pay income tax Illegal practices provide a cost advantage of 15-20% in
comparison with legal business Evasion of social charges currently affects 6 000 - 10 000 forest
workers Loss of budget revenue estimated at USD 15-30 million/a
Goal
Case study on developing best wood tracking practices
for verifying legality of wood origin in Latvia,
Based on the existing wood tracking systems of companies operating in Latvia
To support distribution of the best practices in Latvia and other countries
To support dialogue with authorities to improve the law enforcement in Latvia
To support the Forests Dialogue (TFD) process on illegal logging
Working mechanism
Questionnaire sent to the main forest sector enterprises in Latvia
11 biggest logging and wood processing companies Reply from 7 companies
Work group discussions based on questionnaire results Preparing case study paper and slides Distribution
Questionnaire to forest companies What kind of documents do you require from suppliers concerning the origin
of wood?
What kind of additional requirements/activities do you perform to verify wood origin?
Could you describe these activities? What kind of requirements do you include in wood purchase contracts
regarding wood origin?
Suppliers Required byProcurement point
Standing forest By the road side At the mill gate
Forest owners
Law
Company
Logging companies
Law
Company
Wood traders
Law
Company
Results, summary
All respondents at all wood trade points ask for Wood Transportation Waybill (WTWB), as required by law
Additional measures, exceeding the requirement of law: Clauses in wood purchasing agreements Proof of the wood origin and legality is wood cutting license Supplier and forest audits can take place in order to verify the
delivered information and forestry practices Third party verification increases credibility and transparency
Wood origin documentsSupplier
Required by
Delivery place
Standing forest By the road side At the mill gates
Forest owner
Law WTWB (CL) WTWB (CL) WTWB (CL)
Company
CLCL, agreement (Land book, authorization, ID document)
CLCL, agreement(authorization, ID document)
CLCL, agreement(authorization, ID document)
Logging company
Law WTWB (CL) WTWB (CL) WTWB (CL)
CompanyCLCL, agreement
CLCL, agreement
CLCL, agreement
Wood trader
Law WTWB WTWB WTWB
Company
CLCL, agreement
CL, agreementCL or CL list, agreementCL or CL number in WTWBCL or CL number in WTWB, agreement
CLCL, agreementCL or CL list, agreementCL or CL number in WTWBCL or CL number in WTWB, agreement
CL – cutting licenseWTWB – wood transportation waybill
Environmental clauses in contracts Signed
with main suppliers or all suppliers prior to delivery with big suppliers, or on wood delivery with small
suppliers
Included requirements: Supplier has environmental policy Wood origin is known and documentation filed Information can be verified Wood is procured in a legal way Audits can be done by the buyer’s representative or by third party No wood from protected areas unless in line with protection plan Supplier is responsible for sub-suppliers’ and contractors’ activities Clause allows to discharge contract and reject non-acceptable
wood
Wood origin information
Cutting license issued by State Forest Service Cutting license contains information about:
Unique license number Forest owner Property name and location Land register number Cutting site: cutting type, area, main species, volume Etc.
Companies ask for: Cutting license copy Cutting license number in WTWB List of cutting license numbers
Audits Audits assess
the way suppliers collect and file their wood origin data, reliability supplier’s legal status authenticity of the cutting license own wood origin data filing system forestry practices in logging area (legislation and instructions) Environmental and biodiversity aspects in logging area
Different audits Internal audits for control, monitoring and development Supplier audits to verify wood origin information Field audits to verify wood origin and forest management practices
Third party audits of certified system ISO 9002, ISO 14 001, Chain-of-Custody
Wood origin tracking system - recommendations
Basic requirements: Company commitment on wood legality that is addressed to
suppliers with contract Wood origin information is based on cutting license Auditing system is in place to prove wood origin and legality
Optional Third part verification of system as part of ISO/EMAS/CoC
Conclusions
Wood origin tracking system is a major step of verifying the origin and legality of wood
The most important challenge in Latvia is ensuring legal business environment in the forest sector
To ensure fair competition in the market, more attention needs to be paid to preventing phenomena such as tax evasion, money laundering, etc.
This can only be solved by the Latvian government, using a combination of measures, in cooperation with private sector and non-governmental organizations.
Conclusions
The project allowed project partners to develop a better understanding of the scope and magnitude of the problem
The project’s conclusion can also benefit other actors in Latvia, as well as other industries and countries.
WBCSD and WWF pilot project in Latvia is a good example of how the forest companies together with NGO's can work at regional level to reach a common goal.
Next steps
WBCSD & WWF Latvia Case study paper published and communicated
Dialogue with national authorities in Latvia The working group suggests WBCSD & WWF to contribute in
dialogue with Latvian government
Dissemination of results to other regions The working group suggests WBCSD & WWF consider to
engaging in dialogue in other relevant regions and sectors
Recommended