Upload
others
View
9
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SAVING THE RAINFORESTS:CIVIL SOCIETY MAPPING A project for the UK Environmental Funders Network
Harriet Williams and Jon CracknellMARCH 2010
PLEASE READ ALONGSIDE THE ACCOMPANYING ‘SAVING THE RAINFORESTS’ REPORT
THIS DOCUMENT IS BEST VIEWED AND NAVIGATED ON YOUR COMPUTER SCREEN USING THE ZOOM TOOL
1
Kn
ow
led
ge
Bu
ilder
s
Peo
ple
s H
ero
es
Inst
itu
tio
n
Wa
tch
ers
Fin
an
ce
Pio
nee
rs
Sta
nd
ard
Se
tter
s
Pa
rks
Ra
ng
ers
Bra
nd
A
tta
cker
s
Cri
tica
l Fri
end
s
Co
nsu
mer
G
uid
es
CA
RB
ON
RED
UC
TIO
N
[Clim
ate
an
d e
cosy
ste
ms]
CO
NSE
RV
ATI
ON
[Bio
div
ers
ity,
eco
syst
em
s
and
wild
ern
ess
]
ENV
IRO
NM
ENTA
L JU
STIC
E
[Fo
rest
Pe
op
les]
RES
OU
RC
E U
SE E
FFIC
IEN
CY
[Po
litic
al/l
ega
l in
tegr
ity]
INSI
DER
OU
TSID
ER
CSO exampleWorld
Resources
Insitute
Forest
Peoples
Programme
Global
Witness
Conservn.
Internat.
Rainforest
Alliance
Birdlife
Internat.Greenpeace
Envtl.
Defense FundWWF Greenpeace
Fauna & Flora
Internat.
Rainforest
FoundationClient Earth
Nat.
Resources
Defense
Council
Biofuel
Watch
CSO NAMEAfrican Wildlife Foundation • • • • •Amazon Watch • • •ARA (Working Grp. on Forests and Biodiversity) • • • • •Bank Information Center • • •Biofuelwatch • • •Birdlife International • • •Both ENDS • • • •Bruno Manser Fund • • •Center for International Environmental Law • • • • •Center for Internat. Forestry Research (CIFOR) • • •Chatham House • • • •ClientEarth • • • •Conservation International • • • • • •Environmental Defense Fund • • • •Environmental Investigation Agency • • • • •Fauna & Flora International • • • •FERN (Forests & EU Resource Network) • • • •Forest Peoples Programme • • • •Forest Trends • • • • •Friends of the Earth Europe • • • •Friends of the Earth International • • •Friends of the Earth US • • •Global 2000 • • • •Global Canopy Programme • • • • •Global Witness • • • • •Greenpeace European Office • • • •Greenpeace International • • • • •Greenpeace UK • • • •GRET (Groupe de recherche et d'echanges...) • • • •Internat. Institute for Envt. and Devpt. • • • •International Rivers • • • •Internat. Union for Conservation and Nature • • • •Milieudefensie • • • •National Wildlife Federation • • •Natural Resources Defense Council • • • •OilWatch • • • •Plan Vivo • • • • •Pro Regenwald • • • •Rainforest Action Network • • • •Rainforest Alliance • • • • •Rainforest Foundation Norway • • • •Rainforest Foundation UK • • • •Resources Extraction Monitoring • • • •Resources for the Future • • • •Rettet den Regenwald • • • •Rights and Resources Initiative • • • •Robin Wood • • • •Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) • • • •Solidaridad • • • •Terrestrial Carbon Group • • •The Corner House • • •The Nature Conservancy • • • • •Tropical Forest Trust • • • •Union of Concerned Scientists • • •Urgewald • • • •Wetlands International • • • •Wilderness Society • • • • •Wildlife Conservation Society • • • •Woods Hole Research Center • • •World Land Trust • • •World Rainforest Movement • • • •World Resources Institute • • • •WWF International • • • • •TOTAL CSO CAPACITY (# spheres) 20 18 21 7 5 12 13 19 12 7 22 18 16 37 26
STORYLINES: WHAT CSOs DO AND HOW THEY GO ABOUT IT
CORE MOTIVATION: WHY CSOs WORK ON
FORESTS AND WHO/WHAT THE WORK IS
FORCORE STRATEGY
PART ONE: STORYLINES MAP
OVERVIEW: Why do different parts of the CSO community think it is important to save the rainforest? This summary sheet unpacks their main motivations, and classifies CSOs according to various 'storylines', which relate to their organisational roles and beliefs, akin to niches within an ecosystem. The columns headed in pale blue consider what motivates these CSOs to try and curb deforestation, and the two pink columns give an indiction of whether they are 'insiders' or 'outsiders' in terms of their engagement with key institutions.
KEY: Spheres • indicate the storylines, motivation, and core strategy of each CSO. A single CSO may belong in up to three storyline columns, but only one motivation column, and only one core strategy column.
2
FINANCE &
INVESTMENT
SEE MAP REPORT FOR MORE INFO →
UN
FCC
C R
EDD
:
Stru
ctu
re o
f o
vera
ll
agre
em
ent
UN
FCC
C R
EDD
:
Rep
ort
ing
and
ver
ifyi
ng
ou
tco
mes
Fore
st c
arb
on
tra
din
g
and
off
sets
RED
D: C
on
sist
ency
wit
h
inte
rnat
ion
al p
olic
y/la
w
on
bio
div
ersi
ty
RED
D: C
on
sist
ency
wit
h
inte
rnat
ion
al p
olic
y/la
w
on
hu
man
rig
hts
Wo
rld
Ban
k fo
rest
an
d
clim
ate
fun
ds
Vo
lun
tary
car
bo
n
mar
ket
Pay
men
ts f
or
no
n-
carb
on
eco
syst
em
serv
ices
Stan
dar
ds
and
cert
ific
atio
n
Lan
d t
enu
re a
nd
qu
alit
y
of
gove
rnan
ce
Acc
ess
to R
EDD
de
cisi
on
-mak
ing
Ad
voca
cy
Ap
plie
d r
esea
rch
Cam
pai
gnin
g
Co
mm
un
ity
cap
acit
y
bu
ildin
g
Inve
stig
ativ
e/
wh
istl
e-b
low
ing
Lega
l
Pra
ctic
al f
ore
st
man
age
men
t
Pu
blic
/med
ia o
utr
each
CSO NAMEAfrican Wildlife Foundation •Amazon Watch • • •• ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •• ••ARA (Working Grp. on Forests and Biodiversity) • • •Bank Information Center • • •• ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •Biofuelwatch • ••• • • • ••Birdlife International •• • ••• •• ••Both ENDSBruno Manser FundCARE International • • •• • •Center for International Environmental Law ••• ••• •••Center for Internat. Forestry Research (CIFOR) ••• ••• •• •• •• ••• • ••• •• •Chatham House • • • • •ClientEarth •• ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •••Conservation International ••• •• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• • •• ••• ••• •• ••• •••Environmental Defense Fund ••• ••• •• ••• •• •Environmental Investigation Agency • • • • • ••Fauna & Flora International •• • ••• •• • •• •• •• •• •• ••• •FERN (Forests & EU Resource Network) •• •• •• •• •• ••• •• ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •• •• •Forest Peoples Programme ••• •• ••• •• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• •Forest Trends ••• • ••• ••• ••• • ••• •• •• ••Forests MonitorFriends of the Earth Europe Friends of the Earth International •• ••• •• • •• •• • •• •• • •Friends of the Earth US ••• •• ••• • ••• •• ••• • •• •Global 2000 Global Canopy Programme ••• •• ••• •• • •• •• •• • ••• ••• •• ••• •Global Witness •• ••• •• ••• ••• •• •• • ••• •• ••• • •• ••• ••Greenpeace European Office • •• ••• •• • •Greenpeace International ••• •• •• •• • •• • • • ••• •• •• •• ••Greenpeace UK •• • •GRET (Groupe de recherche et d'echanges...)Internat. Institute for Envt. and Development •• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••International Rivers •• •• •• • •Internat. Union for Conservation and Nature ••• •• ••• •• ••• •• •• •• •• •• • •• ••Milieudefensie • •• •• •National Wildlife Federation •• ••• ••• ••Natural Resources Defense Council ••• •• • ••• •OilWatch OxfamPlan Vivo ••• ••• •• ••• •••Pro Regenwald • •• • ••Rainforest Action Network • • •• • • • • •• • •Rainforest Alliance •• ••• ••• •••Rainforest Foundation Norway • • •• ••Rainforest Foundation UK ••• •• ••• ••• •• •• • ••• ••• ••• •• •• •• ••• ••Resources Extraction MonitoringResources for the Future ••• • ••• ••• •• •••Rettet den RegenwaldRights and Resources Initiative •• ••• •• •• •• ••• • •• ••• ••• ••• •Robin WoodRoyal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) ••• •• ••• •• ••• •• ••SolidaridadTerrestrial Carbon Group ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• •The Corner House ••• •• •• •• •• •••The Nature Conservancy ••• • ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• •• • • ••• •• ••• ••Tropical Forest TrustUnion of Concerned Scientists •• •• •• •• ••• ••UrgewaldWetlands International •• •• •• •• • •• •• •• •• • ••Wilderness Society •• • •• •• • •• ••Wildlife Conservation Society •• ••• •• •• ••• ••• •• ••Woods Hole Research Center ••• •• •• ••• • •• •• •••World Land Trust • ••• ••• •World Rainforest Movement • •• •• •• • •World Resources Institute ••• ••• • •• •• ••• ••• ••• • ••• ••• • •• ••• ••• •WWF International ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• • ••• • ••• ••• ••• •••TOTAL CSO CAPACITY (# spheres) 92 45 99 40 35 56 43 31 23 59 21 93 69 24 28 22 39 37 44
APPROACHES
FOREST
COMMUNITIES POLICY/GOVERNMENT MARKET / BUSINESS
INTERVENTIONS
PART TWO: PATHWAYS MAP
PATHWAY 1: PAYMENTS FOR CARBON AND OTHER ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
THEORY OF CHANGE: "Deforestation will decrease if nations are able to earn income from living trees"Creating and deploying new sources of finance for forest protection is an area of signficant CSO activity. The rationale for much of this innovation is that society should pay for ecosystem services provided by healthy forests. Payments for forest carb on via REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) are the best known example, but water and soil services could also be compensated. (Note also the pro ject-based conservation finance models described in Pathway 2).
There are significant divisions, some of them ideological, among the CSO community on how to generate, administer and distrib ute this income, and upon the very principle of turning ecosystem services into tradeable commodities.
KEY: Spheres • indicate the level of engagement of a CSO in a given issue or approach. Lighter shading and one sphere • indicates low level engagement, medium shading and two spheres shows medium -level engagement, and three spheres ••• and dark shading shows strong engagement.
Columns coloured orange indicate an important 'faultline' in the CSO community, in this pathway regarding the trading of for est carbon credits. CSOs shaded in RED OPPOSE the rapid integration of forest credits into carbon markets. CSOs shaded in GREEN SUPPORT the rapid integration of forest credits into carbon markets. CSOs shaded in YELLOW may CONDITIONALLY SUPPORT rapid integration, if stretching safeguards were in place. The number of spheres indicates how st rongly they hold these positions.
Columns coloured in blue show that the issue is strongly associated with questions of Rights and Governance.
3
SEE MAP REPORT FOR MORE INFO →U
NC
BD
an
d o
ther
inte
rnat
ion
al
agre
emen
ts
Pro
tect
ed a
reas
an
d
nat
ion
al p
arks
Inn
ova
tive
co
nse
rvat
ion
fin
ance
mo
del
s (n
on
-
RED
D)
Inst
itu
tio
nal
cap
acit
y
Co
mm
un
ity
con
serv
atio
n
Pu
blic
sec
tor
con
serv
atio
n f
un
din
g
Pri
vate
sec
tor
con
serv
atio
n f
un
din
g
Gen
erat
ion
of
new
con
serv
atio
n f
inan
ce
stre
ams
Pro
du
ct c
erti
fica
tio
n
stan
dar
ds
Lan
d t
enu
re a
nd
qu
alit
y
of
gove
rnan
ce
Fuel
, fo
od
an
d f
ibre
nee
ds
Ad
apta
tio
n t
o
envi
ron
men
tal c
han
ge
Enab
ling
eco
no
mic
dev
elo
pm
ent
Ad
voca
cy
Ap
plie
d r
esea
rch
Cam
pai
gnin
g
Co
mm
un
ity
cap
acit
y
bu
ildin
g
Inve
stig
ativ
e/
wh
istl
e-b
low
ing
Lega
l
Pra
ctic
al f
ore
st
man
agem
ent
Pu
blic
/med
ia o
utr
each
CSO NAME African Wildlife Foundation • ••• •• •• •• ••• • •• •••Amazon Watch • • • •• •ARA (Working Grp. on Forests and Biodiversity) •• •• •• •• • • ••• •• •Bank Information CenterBiofuelwatchBirdlife International ••• ••• •• • • ••• ••• • • • • •• •• •• ••• •Both ENDS •• ••• •• •• •• ••• •• ••Bruno Manser Fund ••• •• •• •• ••CARE International Center for International Environmental Law •• • •• •• •••Center for Internat. Forestry Research (CIFOR) •• •• ••• •• •• •• •• ••• ••Chatham House ClientEarthConservation International ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• ••• •• • • •• ••• ••• •• • ••• •••Environmental Defense FundEnvironmental Investigation AgencyFauna & Flora International •• ••• ••• •• •• ••• ••• •• • •• • • • •• ••• •• ••• •••FERN (Forests & EU Resource Network) •• ••• •• ••• • • ••• •• ••• •• • •• • •Forest Peoples Programme ••• •• •• ••• •• ••• •• • •• ••• •Forest Trends •• • • •• ••• • •• •• ••• •• •• ••Forests Monitor •• •• • •••Friends of the Earth EuropeFriends of the Earth International •• •• •• • • • • ••Friends of the Earth US Global 2000 • •• ••Global Canopy Programme •• ••• •• •• •• •••Global Witness • •• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• ••Greenpeace European Unit • ••Greenpeace International • • • •• • •• • • ••Greenpeace UK
GRET (Groupe de recherche et d'echanges...) ••• • ••• •• ••• •• ••• •••Internat. Institute for Envt. and Development •• • ••• ••• •• • ••• •• •• ••• •• ••• •• ••• ••International RiversInternat. Union for Conservation and Nature ••• ••• •• •• •• • •• • • •• •• ••• •• •• •••Milieudefensie National Wildlife Federation • •Natural Resources Defense CouncilOilWatch OxfamPlan Vivo •• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• •••Pro RegenwaldRainforest Action Network • •• ••• • •• •• •• ••• ••Rainforest Alliance •• ••• • • ••• •••Rainforest Foundation Norway • •• ••• ••• ••• • •• •• ••• •••Rainforest Foundation UK • •• •• ••• •• • •• •• ••Resources Extraction MonitoringResources for the Future
Rettet den RegenwaldRights and Resources Initiative •• • ••• ••• ••• • • •• ••• • ••Robin WoodRoyal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) ••• ••• •• • • ••• ••• • • • • ••• •• •• ••• •SolidaridadTerrestrial Carbon GroupThe Corner HouseThe Nature Conservancy ••• ••• ••• •• • ••• ••• ••• • • ••• ••• • ••• •••Tropical Forest TrustUnion of Concerned Scientists
UrgewaldWetlands International •• •• • •• • ••• ••• • • • •• ••• • •• •••Wilderness Society Wildlife Conservation Society •• ••• •• ••• •• •• •• • •• •• ••• • ••• •••Woods Hole Research Center •• •••World Land Trust ••• •• •• •••World Rainforest Movement World Resources Institute • •• •• ••• •• ••• •• •• ••WWF International ••• ••• •• •• • ••• ••• •• ••• •• • • • ••• •• •• ••• •••TOTAL CSO CAPACITY (# spheres) 49 46 22 50 42 35 28 33 22 59 17 15 38 59 56 14 58 8 31 54 28
INTERVENTIONS APPROACHES
POLICY/GOVERNMENT FINANCE, MARKET & BUSINESS [see also
PW1] FOREST COMMUNITIES
PATHWAY 2: BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND COMMUNITY FOREST MANAGEMENT
THEORY OF CHANGE: "Deforestation will decrease through protecting areas of high biodiversity value, and by aligning the economic interests of local communities with forest conservation" Older, top-down conservation models are evolving into more community-centred approaches, with an emphasis on making conservation 'pay its way' and a recognition that the marginalisation of forest peoples must end for them to act as effective forest guardians. Capacity-building and practical projects are hallmarks of this pathway. It also involves creating new sources of conservation finance (see also payments for carbon and other ecosystem services described in Pathway 1).
KEY: Spheres • indicate the level of engagement of a CSO in a given issue or approach. Lighter shading and one sphere • indicates low level engagement , medium shading and two spheres shows medium-level engagement, and three spheres ••• and dark shading shows strong engagement.
Columns coloured in blue show that the issue is strongly associated with questions of Rights and Governance.
4
FOREST
COMMUNITIES
SEE MAP REPORT FOR MORE INFO →
Bio
fuel
s
Trad
e ag
ree
men
ts, a
gri
and
en
ergy
su
bsi
die
s
Illeg
al lo
ggin
g: F
LEG
Illeg
al lo
ggin
g: T
rad
e
rest
rict
ion
s an
d
pro
cure
men
t
Cat
tle:
Bee
f an
d n
on
-
mea
t p
rod
uct
s
Ind
ust
rial
logg
ing
(in
clu
din
g FS
C)
Pal
m o
il (i
ncl
ud
ing
RSP
O p
roce
ss)
Soy
(in
clu
din
g R
TRS
pro
cess
)
Pu
lp/p
aper
(in
clu
din
g
FSC
)
Bio
fuel
s (i
ncl
ud
ing
RSB
pro
cess
)
Pro
du
ct c
erti
fica
tio
n
stan
dar
ds
Lan
d t
enu
re a
nd
qu
alit
y o
f go
vern
ance
Ap
plie
d r
esea
rch
Pu
blic
/med
ia o
utr
each
Pra
ctic
al f
ore
st
man
agem
ent
Co
mm
un
ity
cap
acit
y
bu
ildin
g
Ad
voca
cy
Cam
pai
gnin
g
Inve
stig
ativ
e/
wh
istl
e-b
low
ing
Lega
l
CSO NAMEAfrican Wildlife Foundation Amazon WatchARA (Working Grp. on Forests and Biodiversity) • ••• ••• • ••• ••Bank Information Center ••Biofuelwatch ••• •• •• •• ••• •• •• ••• ••• ••Birdlife International •• •• •• •• •••Both ENDS • •• ••• • •• •• •••Bruno Manser Fund •• •• •• •• •• ••CARE International • • • •Center for International Environmental LawCenter for Internat. Forestry Research (CIFOR) ••• •• • •• • • •• ••• ••• ••Chatham House •• • ••• ••• ••• ••• • ••ClientEarth • • •• •• •••Conservation International •• • •• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• •• ••Environmental Defense FundEnvironmental Investigation Agency • •• ••• •• • •• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •••Fauna & Flora International • •• •• •FERN (Forests & EU Resource Network) •• •• ••• •• •• • •• • •• ••• •• • • •• ••• ••• • ••Forest Peoples Programme •• • • ••• •• • •Forest Trends ••• ••• ••• • ••• •• ••Forests Monitor ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••Friends of the Earth Europe ••• ••• • • • ••• •• •• •• ••Friends of the Earth International •• •• • •• • •• ••• ••• •• •• ••• • ••Friends of the Earth US •• ••• •• ••• ••• •••Global 2000 ••• ••• ••• • •• ••• •• ••Global Canopy ProgrammeGlobal Witness • ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• •• ••• ••• ••• •••Greenpeace European Unit • •• ••• •• •• ••• • • ••Greenpeace International • •• • •• • • ••• •• ••Greenpeace UK •• • • ••• • ••• •• • ••• • ••• ••• ••• ••• •••GRET (Groupe de recherche et d'echanges...) •• •• ••Internat. Institute for Envt. and Development •• • •• ••• •• ••• •• • •• ••International RiversInternat. Union for Conservation and Nature •• •• •• •• •• •• • •Milieudefensie •• • •• ••• •• • • ••• ••• ••• •• ••National Wildlife Federation •• • •• •• •• ••• •• •• •Natural Resources Defense Council ••• •• •• •• •• ••• •••OilWatch Oxfam •• • ••• •• •Plan VivoPro Regenwald •• •• •• •• ••• •• •• •• •• ••• •• •• ••Rainforest Action Network • ••• •• ••• • ••• ••• ••Rainforest Alliance • ••• • • ••• • ••• ••• •••Rainforest Foundation Norway •• •• • ••• ••• • ••Rainforest Foundation UK ••• •• • ••Resources Extraction Monitoring ••• ••• ••• ••• •••Resources for the Future ••• •••Rettet den Regenwald •• •• •• •• • •••Rights and Resources Initiative •• • • • •• •• • • •• •Robin Wood • ••• •• •• •••Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) •• •• •• •• •• •••Solidaridad ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• •Terrestrial Carbon Group The Corner House •• • ••The Nature Conservancy •• •• ••Tropical Forest Trust ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• •Union of Concerned Scientists •• •• ••Urgewald ••• •• •• •• •••Wetlands InternationalWilderness Society Wildlife Conservation Society • •• •• •• •• •••Woods Hole Research Center ••• ••• ••• •• •• ••• ••World Land TrustWorld Rainforest Movement •• • •• •• ••• • •• •• •• ••World Resources Institute •• • •• •• •• • •• •• ••• ••• ••• • ••• •• ••WWF International •• • •• •• ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••TOTAL CSO CAPACITY (# spheres) 65 35 46 45 10 56 39 30 33 27 58 57 70 67 18 32 73 49 43 39
INTERVENTIONS
POLICY/GOVERNMENT
APPROACHES
MARKET/BUSINESS [see PW4 for mining and energy projects]
PATHWAY 3: COMMODITIES SUPPLY AND DEMAND
THEORY OF CHANGE: "Deforestation will decrease if investors, shareholders, trading partners and consumers demand supply chain reform" CSOs in this community may encourage companies to adopt minimum standards for commodity production, help develop and police these standards, and seek government action as well.
This pathway deals primarily with the size, shape and standards of global commodity markets. See Pathway 4 for more on the ph ysical infrastructure that enables the production of commodities in the first place.
KEY: Spheres • indicate the level of engagement of a CSO in a given issue or approach. Lighter shading and one sphere • indicates low level engagement , medium shading and two spheres shows medium -level engagement, and three spheres ••• and dark shading shows strong engagement.
Columns coloured orange indicate two important 'faultlines' in the CSO community within this pathway, regarding a) the devel opment of biofuels and b) the approach to certification systems designed to reduce deforestation associated with commodity prod uction. As regards biofuels,CSOs shaded in RED generally OPPOSE existing policies to increase biofuels use. YELLOW shading indicates CSOs that may CONDITIONALLY SUPPORT biofuels development, if the right safeguards are in place.
As regards product certification schemes, CSOs shade in RED play a WATCHDOG role against weak or poorly enforced standards. CSOs shaded in GREEN are more closely associated with the DESIGN or IMPLEMENTATION of certification standards.
Columns coloured in blue show that the issue is strongly associated with questions of Rights and Governance.
5
FOREST
COMMUNITIES
SEE MAP REPORT FOR MORE INFO →
Pu
blic
sec
tor
len
din
g:
Mu
ltila
tera
l dev
elo
pm
ent
ban
ks a
nd
EC
As
Pri
vate
sec
tor
len
din
g:
Co
mm
erc
ial b
anks
Larg
e co
rpo
rati
on
s:
Extr
acti
ve in
du
stri
es a
nd
agri
cult
ure
Lob
byi
ng,
tra
nsp
aren
cy a
nd
acco
un
tab
ility
Spec
ific
pro
ject
s: R
oad
s an
d
wat
erw
ays
Spec
ific
pro
ject
s: D
ams
Spec
ific
pro
ject
s:
Min
eral
s/fo
ssil
fuel
Spec
ific
pro
ject
s: L
ogg
ing
and
agr
icu
ltu
re
Lan
d t
enu
re a
nd
qu
alit
y o
f
gove
rnan
ce
Ad
voca
cy
Ap
plie
d r
esea
rch
Cam
pai
gnin
g
Co
mm
un
ity
cap
acit
y
bu
ildin
g
Inve
stig
ativ
e/
wh
istl
e-b
low
ing
Lega
l
Pra
ctic
al f
ore
st m
anag
emen
t
Pu
blic
/med
ia o
utr
each
CSO NAMEAfrican Wildlife Foundation Amazon Watch ••• •• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• •••ARA (Working Grp. on Forests and Biodiversity) • • •• ••• ••• •••Bank Information Center ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• •• ••• •• •• •• •• •• •BiofuelwatchBirdlife International ••Both Ends ••• • • •• •• ••• ••Bruno Manser FundCARE International • • •Center for International Environmental Law •• •• • •• •• •••Center for Internat. Forestry Research (CIFOR) • •• •••Chatham House ClientEarthConservation International ••• ••• •• •• •Environmental Defense Fund ••• •• ••• • • • • ••• •• •Environmental Investigation Agency •Fauna & Flora International ••• •• •• •••FERN (Forests & EU Resource Network) • • • • • • • • ••• ••• •• •• •• •• •Forest Peoples Programme •• • • •• • • • • ••• ••• ••• ••• •Forest TrendsForests MonitorFriends of the Earth Europe •• ••• ••• •• • ••• •• ••• ••Friends of the Earth International •• •• •• • • •• •• •• •• •Friends of the Earth US ••• ••• ••• •• •• ••• •• ••• ••Global 2000 Global Canopy Prog. (via Forest Footprint Disc.) •• •• • •Global Witness ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• • ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• ••Greenpeace European UnitGreenpeace International •• ••• •• •• ••• ••• ••• •••Greenpeace UK • • • •• •• ••• ••• •••GRET (Groupe de recherche et d'echanges...)Internat. Institute for Envt. and Development •• • •• ••• •• ••• •• ••International Rivers ••• •• ••• • ••• •• ••• •• ••• ••• •• ••Internat. Union for Conservation and Nature •• •• •• •• •• ••Milieudefensie • ••• ••• •• •• • •• ••• •• ••National Wildlife Federation Natural Resources Defense Council (in Patagonia •• ••• •• ••OilWatch •• • ••• ••• •• •• ••• ••OxfamPlan VivoPro RegenwaldRainforest Action Network •• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• •• ••• ••• •• ••• • •••Rainforest AllianceRainforest Foundation Norway • • •• • ••• ••• ••• ••Rainforest Foundation UK • •• •• ••• ••• ••• •• •• •Resources Extraction MonitoringResources for the Future
Rettet den Regenwald ••• ••• •••Rights and Resources Initiative Robin Wood ••• •• •• •• •••Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) •• •Solidaridad ••• •••Terrestrial Carbon GroupThe Corner House •• •• •• ••• • •• • ••• •• ••The Nature Conservancy •• ••• •Tropical Forest TrustUnion of Concerned Scientists
Urgewald •• ••• •• •• •• ••• ••Wetlands International • • ••Wilderness Society Wildlife Conservation Society ••• ••Woods Hole Research Center •• • • ••World Land TrustWorld Rainforest Movement • • • •World Resources Institute •• •• •• ••• •• ••• ••• ••• •• •• ••WWF International •• •• •• •• • •• •• •• •TOTAL CSO CAPACITY (# spheres) 60 37 70 45 8 19 35 31 44 66 36 41 31 44 36 13 44
INTERVENTIONS
POLICY, GOVERNMENT, FINANCE AND INVESTMENTAPPROACHES
PATHWAY 4: DEVELOPMENT FINANCE
THEORY OF CHANGE: "Deforestation will decrease if environmental and social impacts are worked into assessments of large -scale infrastructure projects"CSOs in this community typically highlight large transport, mining, logging and agricultural schemes likely to catalyse furth er deforestation. CSOs seek to minimise the impacts of individual projects, and/or to bring about systemic reform in project f inance policy and institutions. This pathway deals with the building of infrastructure required to bring commodities to market, e.g. oil pipelines, timber mills a nd agricultural processing facilities. See Pathway 3 for more information on markets for the finished commodities.
KEY: Spheres • indicate the level of engagement of a CSO in a given issue or approach. Lighter shading and one sphere • indicates low level engagement , medium shading and two spheres shows medium-level engagement, and three spheres ••• and dark shading shows strong engagement.
Columns coloured orange indicate an important 'faultline' in the CSO community, in this pathway regarding engagement with mul tinational corporations. CSOs shaded in RED aim to improve Corporate Social Responsibility by EXPOSING low standards and CAMPAIGNING against them. CSOs shaded in GREEN aim to improve Corporate Social Responsibility by COLLABORATING with corporations, and sometimes publicly endorsing them.
Columns coloured in blue show that the issue is strongly associated with questions of Rights and Governance.