Rainforest Politics & the Carbon-Credit Trade in PNG: An Essential Introduction

Since Papua New Guinea’s Special Envoy on climate Change to the United Nations, Dr Kevin Conrad, leaned into his microphone at the December 2007 UN Climate Change Conference in Bali and told the United States,”If, for some reason, you’re not willing to lead, leave it to the rest of us, please, get out of the way!“, PNG has been accoladed as a world leader in promoting international discussions on Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD).

And indeed, for a number of years now, PNG has been at the global forefront of promoting the idea of using carbon trading to slow the alarming pace of tropical forest destruction in developing countries. At the United Nations Climate Change Convention in Montreal in 2005, PNG and Costa Rica, on behalf of the newly formed Coalition for Rainforest Nations – a group of (then) 10 developing countries with tropical rainforest resources – proposed that parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) address emissions from deforestation and create incentives to reward developing countries for bringing these emissions under management.

PNG’s argument, and that of the members of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, is that they should be compensated for the services rainforests provide the rest of the world. The main premise for this argument is that as developing nations, they cannot be expected to forfeit income from economic activities that result in deforestation, especially while other countries benefit from forest services including carbon storage, water filtration, biodiversity preservation, fisheries protection, and climate regulation. If global powers want to preserve these valuable services afforded by rainforests, then they are going to have to pay – hence the idea of a global carbon-credit trading scheme.

In PNG, Sir Michael Somare and his Government have been hard at work in promoting and facilitating REDD discussions on a national level. In March 2008, he co-signed the Papua New Guinea – Australia Forest Carbon Partnership (PNGA FCP) in Port Moresby which aims to address REDD while improving the livelihood of forest-dependent communities and promoting biodiversity protection. The PNGA FCP has three initial areas for collaboration: 1) Policy dialouge, 2) Forest carbon monitoring and measurement, and 3) Participation in global carbon markets.

Hand-in-Hand with Our EnvironmentIn June 2008, the Grand Chief appointed his chief-of-staff and economic adviser, Dr Theo Yasause, as head of the newly formed Office of Climate Change and Carbon Trading (OCCCT) as part of PNG’s push for cleaner and greener environmental policy. One of the first assignments of the OCCCT was to provide a Readiness Plan Indicative Note or “R-PIN” to the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) – the proposed avenue of funding (made up of two new financial mechanisms) launched at the conclusion of the 2007 UN Climate Change Conference in Bali to fund Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degredation, i.e. REDD.

Now, here is where the first major flaw in the FCPF lies. Despite the fact that the FCPF was launched in Bali in 2007, the FCPF Charter (the foundational legal document of the Facility) still remained in draft form. One other major issue is that the World Bank held meetings to share information about the Facility with indigenous peoples only after the launch of the FCPF and only after the drafting of its legal Charter – there was no consultation with indigenous peoples before the actual launching.

When the OCCCT completed PNG’s R-PIN it was not at all surprising to me to discover that the Office had also neglected to consult with the landowners of PNG who own 97% of PNG’s rainforests. In the external review of PNG’s R-PIN (which was officially written by the DEC, PNG Forest Authority and the OCCCT) it is noted that:

1) There was no consultation process organized in the preparation of the R-PIN, neither forest owners, NGOs nor private sector representatives have been involved in the preparation of the R-PIN.

2) The ‘donor engagement partnership forum’ that has been established to support CC activities in PNG is not listed as having been consulted. The authors should consult one or more financing agencies since they can offer advice on appropriate ways to channel REDD funds to key stakeholders.

3. Representatives of rural communities who own local resources, and academic institutions who can help with inventory and monitoring activities are not listed as having been explicitly consulted in the process.

4. To conclude, it is difficult to know to which extent the proposal is owned by a variety of stakeholders”.

Despite this, PNG’s R-PIN has already been approved by the World Bank, thus undermining the Banks’ claim that all plans for the FCPF would have to be subject to wide consultation. PNG is not the only country which has fast-tracked the application of its R-PIN at the expense of NGO and indigenous landowner participation, simply so that it can enable itself to qualify for the ‘Readiness Fund’ – one of the FCPF’s new financial mechanisms. Under this fund, US$ 100 million will be available for REDD country participants – those countries (i.e. governments) which have developed their required national REDD strategy, monitoring system and baselines.

Who will Really Benefit from the Conservation of our Tropical Rainforests?So, what does this mean? Well, it raises a number of issues and presents a number of questions that need to be answered. One important issue has already become a problem. In October 2008, it was reported in the Post-Courier that the PNG Government was “grabbing the last tracts of virgin forests for the proposed REDD projects” and that “such ‘forest grabs’ by the State might lead to future conflicts if landowner’s equity interests were not properly catered for“.

This problem is a muddy reflection of the biggest issue concerning the global carbon-credit trade in PNG: How exactly is the OCCCT going to ensure that the small people who own 97% of PNG’s rainforests will rightfully benefit from this undertaking – particularly when these very stakeholders were left out in the cold when it came to formulating PNG’s R-PIN?

Thomas Paka, PNG’s Eco-Forestry Forum Executive Director, summed it up well when he commented on the PNG-Australia Carbon Partnership:

Although it’s good to see the government promoting sustainable management of forests, a number of issues remain outstanding. Issues like consent from the landowners, how the benefits will be shared, what mechanisms will be available for the trickling down of any benefits from carbon trading – going down to the people. So apart from the conservation, we’re now more focussed on how these benefits are going to be distributed – and given the mismanagement of large sums of money by PNG’s National Fisheries and Forest Authorities, there’s no guarantee that this new mechanism will benefit local people.

On 7 November 2008, Sir Michael Somare presented a lecture to the Lowy Institute as part of the think tank’s Distinguished Speaker Series. The topic of that lecture was ‘Pacific Regional Challenges’ and in it he presented a number of interesting points regarding climate change and PNG. One such point is that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), forests may sequester over 3.3 billion tons of CO2 annually and with todays’ carbon prices around US$33/tCO2, the rural communities owning most of them are effectively subsidizing the rich by $100 billion per year (Note: the current market value for carbon varies considerably around the world. A hectare of rainforest, if left intact, could be worth anywhere from US$400 – $8000 or more).

Apart from demanding a global paradigm shift in the way the world thinks of the Earth’s intricate ecosystem services as being “free”, Sir Michael also revealed that he is determined to find out whether PNG can energize our future economic growth 100 percent from renewable energy, and if so, to become ‘carbon neutral’ before 2050 while at the same time expanding our GDP per capital at least 10 fold.

It is somewhat comforting to see that a visionary leader such as Sir Michael has thrown his support behind seriously addressing climate change within PNG. However, it is essential that his Government, in looking at tapping into what is predicted to become a multi-billion dollar industry, NOT lose focus of the small people of PNG and the direct effects that climate change has on them now.

Finally, one of the mandates of the OCCCT is to “lead the development, comercialisation and management of carbon trading rights for the Government and people of PNG, and to ensure that the PNG community fully benefits from these schemes“. I really do hope that the OCCCT truly follows that mandate to the letter – for the sake of the people of Papua New Guinea.

Advertisements

~ by Tavurvur on February 6, 2009.

14 Responses to “Rainforest Politics & the Carbon-Credit Trade in PNG: An Essential Introduction”

  1. […] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 February 2009 Rainforest Politics & the Carbon-Credit Trade in PNG: An Essential Introduction A post on the blog Tubuans & Dukduks about REDD in Papua New Guinea. The post notes that the […]

  2. hey T, check this related site out http://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/169

    There are two relevant feedback qtns at the end of the article:

    (1) How do you think REDD might affect your community?
    (2) Will REDD lead to new opportunities or negative impacts?

    Views and comments can be sent to peoples@frontlines.org

    Thought you might be interested to send your blog link to them.

    Cheers

  3. Solo,

    Thankyou for another great find! I’ve been on a short break and have so much to catch up on.

    I’ve already sent them an email and will keep you updated on the matter.

    Tavurvur

  4. Hi Solo, thanks for pointing out Climate Frontlines!

    Hi Tavurvur,
    Thanks for writing to us. Apologies for the incorrect email address. Should be peoples@climatefrontlines.org !

    Will make sure that there is a link to this article.

    See some of the responses so far at http://www.climatefrontlines.org/en-GB/node/172

    cheers

  5. […] month I wrote an article about the Carbon-Credit Trade in PNG because I felt that the PNG Government was fast-tracking our involvement with the global […]

  6. First visiting your website and have a sneak preview very impressive…. keep up good work. Myself knocking my head on how to get started on this community-based double interest of my island Traditional Cultures Study and Environment Youth Club…. hoping for it to be formalise within the next 2 or so years, recycling and all… STUCK AT MOMENT even though interest high

  7. Tavurvur,

    Any chance I could use this article? I’ve been searching all over the place for a similar piece!!

  8. 1. Can you please outline PNG’s OCCCT policies,towards Carbon trade and conservation and what their strategies are, to effectively deal with the boom in the mining industry and the uncontrollable boom in the logging industry. It appears, they may come into conflict with certain government resource development goals/policies.
    2. What are the OCCCT’s selection criteria for landowner groups, wanting to invest in this industry.
    3. Can the OCCCT agree or deny that all logging operations in PNG are operating where some of our remaining virgin rainforests are? 4. Can carbon trade co-exist with the massive logging industry in PNG? Which of these is a better investment for landowners? Is it unfair that only those landowners who have their rainforests intact can benefit?

  9. Tonny,

    If I was in OCCES (no longer known as OCCCT: see this post:https://garamut.wordpress.com/2009/03/16/the-occt-cpwt-and-occes-who-is-who/ , I may be able to answer those questions.

    A LOT of people are asking those same questions and those questions do deserve answers from OCCES.

    I would love to know who is actually forming those policies – what interest groups are involved – are logging operations playing a role?

    I do know that the PNG Government has signalled that over the coming years it will change its logging operations to focus on selective logging procedures – but how effective that policy will be policed, if at all, is another issue all together.

    I would suggest that you put pen to paper and write OCCES a letter with those questions. It would be interesting to see how they answer – if they do.

    Tavurvur

  10. Hi, Fellas;
    This is a new thing to us locall land owners,we appreciate better
    toksave on this big issue as this will benefit the whole nation.
    can i have the address of the office of REDD and phone numbers,please? I`d like to talk things with the prper man incharge.

  11. Ellie,

    Thanks for your comment. You should be able to get in touch with the OCCES via the following contact number: (675) 323 9444.

    Thanks.

    Tavurvur

  12. The biggest problem, as I see it, is the taint of corruption that is now part and parcel of carbon trading in PNG. Everyone is suspicious that the biggest proponents of carbon trading in PNG, amongst them Sir Michael Somare, Keven Conrad, and others, are promoting this mainly because they stand to make millions on the side in commissions for these carbon trades. Whether that is true or not cannot be determined unless those under suspicion show high degree of financial transparency, which until now they are not. The problem with taking commission monies if you are a proponent is that it firstly destroys your credibility that you are doing anything ‘on behalf of the people’. Secondly, it is totally unethical to be an elected or appointed servant of the people while using the privileged information that comes with this service to personally profit.

    Corruption threatens to destroy every good thing that PNG has to offer the world and gain in return. Until the taint of corruption is removed from the main players in PNG carbon trading, we the people of PNG can rightfully assume that once again, as always, the customary landowners will get the scraps while the leaders get the meat.

  13. TJ,

    Thanks for your comment. You raise an interesting point, that is, how did the carbon trading industry within PNG become so distrustful and suspicious in under a year? One year ago carbon trading in PNG was an unknown to the masses, but not so to those you have mentioned above (and others too).

    The simple fact that in under a year the carbon trading industry in PNG has developed such an image internationally, is only a manifestation of the sort of culture that permeates throughout all of our society, and one of the biggest issues we face today is CORRUPTION.

    I did receive an email a while ago about Kevin Conrad’s unethical exploits within the carbon trading industry in PNG – I’ll see if I can find it.

    Tavurvur

  14. Here in Bangalore recently the Government has said that it will ask the private landowneres who have grabbed Agricultural lands to give them back to Farmers, whether it will be really implemented is a big question mark.

    All people who are simply adding to Global warming has to be at least punished so that they know what they are doing.

    There are some who contribute to global warming out of neccessity and they can offset it by buying carbon credits.

    Carbon offsets aim to neutralize the amount of Co2 emissions contribution by funding projects which should cause an equal reduction of emissions somewhere else, such as tree planting. Under the premise, first reduce what you can, then offset the remainder, offsetting can be done by supporting a responsible

    carbon project, or by buying carbon credits. Offsetting is sometimes seen as a charged and contentious issue. For example, Carbon Trade Watch describes offsets as “modern day indulgences, sold to an increasingly carbon-conscious public to absolve their climate sins.”

    So this is a way that they can remove their sins.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s