Elizabeth Dowdeswell
Executive Director, UNEP
(Delivered by Prof. Reuben Olembo, the Deputy Executive Director of United Nations Environment Programme)
Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Completion of more than hundred years - in the service of humanity is a matter of pride for any organization. In the life of organizations, it marks a point when - after inevitable detours and experiences - they have reached solid ground and established for themselves a distinct personality and can see a clear path to their future development.
As we review the past 103 years of lUFRO's existence, we cannot help appreciating the manifold changes that have occurred during this time.
There have been many "ups" - its increasing membership over time, and some "downs" - the interruption of its work during the two great wars.
It was in part due to the sagacity and foresight of its members, that the organization has not only been able to survive these downs but also flourish.
Today, IUFRO can look back at a proud record of achievement. It has finally established itself as the central place where research oriented institutions can turn for sound advice and information on forestry issues.
When the decision of establishing IUFRO was taken, the objective was to prove that fruitful cooperation among scientists was possible. Today, conscious of the growing awareness of the global problems, we know that not only is this cooperation possible but also inevitable.
Thus, it is a step of great courage and farsightedness, that brings together here in Tampere this group of scientists and representatives of nongovernmental organizations of international distinction, with one objective, that of working together and to pool their wisdom and their creativity toward the solution of global problems that are interlinked and affect each other.
Mr. Chairman,
The word sustainablity has greatly influenced thinking on environment and economic growth from the moment of its use by the Brundtland Commission. Not many words uttered by a committee have ever had so much resonance.
This word has caused scholars as well as general public around the world to pause and reflect on where our civilization is heading.
Some attribute the popularity and wide acceptance of this term to the wide range of meanings it gives rise to.
But for all us who have a stake in conserving the environment, sustainable development can only mean an integration of ecological considerations into social, economic and foreign policy making. And sustainable development can only connote the meeting of current human needs while protecting the planet for future generations. The concept of sustainable development also connotes the interdependent nature of the global environmental problems that we are confronted with.
Today, we know that oil fires in Kuwait can damage the ecological balance of the Alps. We know that a slight deviation in an ocean stream can strongly influence a country's economy. We know about the dangers of the damage done to ozone layer, the dangers of deforestation, the importance of the rain forests.
Most importantly, we know about how damage to one system correlates with damage to another.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Human beings and trees are part of the same heritage of life. The relationship between the two - so distinctive and yet so intricate - represents the intricate balance of the entire creation itself, complementary, nurturing and beneficial.
Forests are the primordial component of the environment.
Gautama Buddha defines the forest as: "a peculiar organism of unlimited kindness and benevolence that makes no demands for its sustenance and extends generously the products of its life activity. It affords protection to all beings, offering shade even to the axe man who destroys it".
As we go about reassessing the legacy of our so called technological progress - our polluted rivers, degraded mountains, the choking atmosphere - this metaphor seems singularly apt. It becomes a symbol of interconnectedness, of the essential unity of things.
It becomes symbolic of the need to reestablish good relationship with nature and taking responsibility for its well being.
By wounding trees we only end up wounding ourselves and our future generations.
Mr. Chairman,
It is clear that a habitable earth needs its forests.
But in recent times, deforestation has emerged as a major ecological problem worldwide.
In the course of history, the global forest cover has reduced by about onethird - from an estimated 6.3 billion hectares to about 4.2 billion hectares. According to FAO figures, since 1980, 180 million hectares of forest cover has disappeared. Between 1980 and 1985 almost 6 million acres of tropical dry forests were destroyed each year in Africa. Between 1976 and 1980 more than 4 million acres of rainforest were lost annually in Asia.
The impact of deforestation is most severely felt at the local level. Deforestation changes the microclimate, increases floods and droughts and contributes to soil erosion and erosion of biodiversity. In addition, it depletes the biological resources that local communities need for survival in the form of food, medicine, fodder, fibre and timber.
Let us also not forget that forests are the mainstay of the economies of many countries, developed and developing alike. In developing countries more than seven out of ten men, women and children depend on forests for their cooking and heating needs.
In the temperate region, the logging of the old growth forests in the Western United States and Canada has become a major source of conflict between forest industry and conservationists. But the problem is at its most severe in tropical forest countries. Every week a million acres of tropical forests are cleared or seriously degraded.
The questions that we have to ask ourselves are: Do we need an internationally agreed solid base of information on the world's forests? Do we need more political consensus between nations than is already expressed in the Rio documents? Isn't forest management and conservation a concern of people who live in the forests? What should be the role of the local communities and the national governments in this?
Forests grow on land over which international community does not have any control. International bureaucracies cannot govern these forests. Ultimately, their good management depends on the willingness, means and knowledge of the local communities and the national governments.
Clearly, the preservation of forests cannot be divorced from the rights and aspirations of the communities that surround the forest.
I submit that the protection of the forests has to be seen in the context of the dire need to alleviate poverty itself. I know this is and will continue to be one of the greatest challenges for development policy in the coming decades.
Let us remember that seen in the perspective of fulfilling their shortterm needs, each decision taken by the poor has meaning. Whether it is consuming next year's seed corn to stay alive, overexploiting the soil cover merely to subsist or even cutting trees for fuel wood supply. For the poor these are the only means of survival.
How can we then suggest that the poor must remain mired in poverty just to conserve the environment? I think this notion goes against the canons of universal justice and human solidarity itself.
Two points need to be emphasized here.
First, that poverty and environmental degradation as exemplified by deforestation, have the same or related causes. Poverty is the cause of environmental degradation in many developing countries. At the same time it is also one of the main effects of environmental degradation. The poor are, then, both the victims and the cause of environmental degradation.
But, we should also not forget to take into account the effects of the unsustainable consumption patterns that are equally a cause of environmental degradation.
The contribution of 80 percent of mankind in the developing world to deforestation and to global environmental degradation is insignificant in comparative terms.
Secondly, no longterm strategy of poverty alleviation can succeed in the face of environmental forces that permit the persistent erosion of the physical resources upon which the poor depend. And, that no environmental conservation programme can make headway without removing the daytoday pressures of poverty. After all it is a condition that leaves people little choice but to discount the future so deeply that they fail to protect the resource base to ensure their and their children's wellbeing.
How should we formulate our development strategies to conserve our forest resources.
First of all, our fundamental definition of development must change. It can no longer be regarded as merely a problem of modernizing traditional societies. It should not be a mere duplication of the energy and resource intensive development path pursued by the developed countries. It has to recognize local circumstances, potential for internally generated growth, the contribution of traditional institutions and knowledge. It has to be inherently geared towards sustainability.
The new paradigm of development has to have a human face. It has to focus on human needs and poverty alleviation in addition to economic growth. It has to concern itself with equity. It should enlarge peoples' choices, increase opportunities and develop human capabilities.
Long before European forestry had taken shape, forestry in Asia and Africa had addressed the needs of the village, incorporated social and religious values, and reflected on the wisdom of the arts. Hinduism, Buddhism and other religions emphasized the wholeness of society and nature and the union of the forester and the forest, the scientist and the poet.
Those who used and protected the forests were part of the local community, and they reminded us to approach nature with gratitude, with awareness of its immense unity and with awe.
We have to incorporate this approach in our strategy for preserving our natural bounty.
Secondly, we have to realize that natural capital is a scarce and limiting factor rather than a free good and that new socially and ecologically based methods of economic analyses are needed to account for depreciation of natural and human capital. Until recently, the language of mainstream economics has defined the economy in market terms, without giving much attention to nonmarket elements such as subsidies provided by ecosystem services, subsistence activities, household labor or cultural aspects of human social systems. This must change.
From an ecological and an economic perspective, both poverty and environmental degradation are symptoms of a poorly functioning economic system. We cannot ignore the huge social and ecological externalities that exist and that provide incentives to lower prices at the expense of human and natural capital. We should be aware that such a system only leads to poor working conditions, low wages and environmental degradation. Inequalities of wealth and power contribute to environmental degradation because they permit some people to reap the market benefits while others are forced to pay the nonmarket costs.
But then we have also to realize that we cannot put a price on everything. There is a limit to natural resource accounting. Can we price the value of the pristine mountains, the majesty of the rain forests, the beauty of the sunset, the sound of the swirling brooks?
Thirdly, we must realize that no strategy to conserve the forests would be successful unless the needs of the least advantaged and most vulnerable sections of the society are met. It is the livelihood of the poor and their hopes that shrivel in the arid anguish of drought and are drowned in the raging fury of the floods.
Fourthly, the unsustainable consumption patterns in the North must change. It requires no sophistication to see that indefinite increases in certain forms of consumption are incompatible with sustainable development. Growth cannot be maintained on overexploitation of resources.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The global community has to devise new and innovative strategies to attack the vicious cycle of poverty and environmental degradation.
One thing should be clear. Achievement of sustainability is a longterm process. Harmonizing our goals of poverty alleviation and environmental conservation will require investments in human and natural capital as well.
What is required is:
- an enabling process for the poor to participate in decisions crucial for the protection of their natural capital .
- ensuring that commodity prices fully internalize the human and environmental costs of their production.
- supporting ecologically appropriate technologies.
- improving natural resource accounting, using social and environmental indicators in addition to economic indicators .
- encouraging community participation in development projects.
- recognizing traditional land rights and enforcement of those rights - a measure which will assure the poor and lengthen their time horizons and broaden their options for resource management.
- encouraging land reforms which could significantly reduce pressure on marginal and ecologically fragile lands.
- strengthening international institutions for purposes of understanding and addressing global problems.
We will also need to involve nongovernmental organizations more closely in our integrated approaches to alleviate poverty and protecting the environment.
Mr. Chairman,
Investments in human capital will be a major factor in reversing the downward spiral of human and environmental impoverishment. Improvements in nutrition, health and education can serve to lengthen the time horizons of the poor and strengthen their ability to combat the environmental degradation of which they are the victims. With better nutrition, health and education, the poor become better able to resist the economic and political pressures of the rich and better analyze the consequences of environmental degradation.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
As our dependence upon a healthy forest ecosystem becomes clear, throughout the world, forestry has moved from the shadows of social indifference to the dazzling glare of the international media.
At the same time, people around the world - from the Chipko movement in India to Amerindians in the United Pacific Northwest - are challenging contemporary forestry practices and asserting their traditional religious and social uses of indigenous tree species and forest ecosystems.
We are being challenged to change from a custodial, reactive profession to one of participation and action.
This is a challenge that all of us have to face together. and adapt to if we are to succeed in preserving our forests. I am sure that this Twentieth World Congress of IUFRO will come out with some bold suggestions. The challenge of communitybased conservation is indeed a formidable one. And practical and innovative solutions are not easy to come by.
Thank You.
Ms. Elizabeth Dowdeswell is Under Secretary General, United Nations Offices
at Nairobi and Executive Director of United Nations Environment Programme.
Before joining the UN, Ms. Dowdeswell was Assistant Deputy Minister at Environment Canada and head of the Canadian Atmospheric Environment Service.
Ms. Dowdeswell has been Canada's principal delegate to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Canada's Permanent Representative to the World Meteorological Organization, twice elected to its Executive Council.
OE Nov 21, 1996