Russia Plans to Dramatically Increase Its Export Tax on Logs a Structural Change in Global Wood Markets
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
An Australian Mirage
An Australian Mirage Author Hoyte, Catherine Published 2004 Thesis Type Thesis (PhD Doctorate) School School of Arts, Media and Culture DOI https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/1870 Copyright Statement The author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/367545 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au AN AUSTRALIAN MIRAGE by Catherine Ann Hoyte BA(Hons.) This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Griffith University Faculty of Arts School of Arts, Media and Culture August 2003 Statement of Authorship This work has never been previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, this dissertation contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the dissertation itself. Abstract This thesis contains a detailed academic analysis of the complete rise and fall of Christopher Skase and his Qintex group mirage. It uses David Harvey’s ‘Condition of Postmodernity’ to locate the collapse within the Australian political economic context of the period (1974-1989). It does so in order to answer questions about why and how the mirage developed, why and how it failed, and why Skase became the scapegoat for the Australian corporate excesses of the 1980s. I take a multi-disciplinary approach and consider corporate collapse, corporate regulation and the role of accounting, and corporate deviance. Acknowledgments I am very grateful to my principal supervisor, Dr Anthony B. van Fossen, for his inspiration, advice, direction, guidance, and unfailing encouragement throughout the course of this study; and for suggesting Qintex as a case study. -
Auspinets07c
TAR GET’S STATE MENT AUSPINE LIMITED Auspine Directors ABN 48 004 289 730 recommend that YOU REJECT GUNNS’ OFFER For personal use only www.auspine.com.au How to REJECT the IMPORTANT NOTICES Gunns’ Takeover Offer TO SHAREHOLDERS Nature of this document This document is a Target Statement issued by Auspine Limited 1 Take no action under Part 6.5 Division 3 of the Corporations Act and in response to Gunns Limited’s Bidder Statement and Offer dated 13 June 2007. If you are in any doubt as to how to deal with this document, you should consult your broker or other professional adviser as soon 2 Ignore all as possible. Defined Terms documents Capitalised terms and certain abbreviations used in this Target sent to you Statement are defined in the Glossary and Interpretation on page 38. Investment Advice Disclaimer by Gunns This Target Statement does not take into account the individual investment objectives and constraints of any Auspine shareholder or any other person and as such should not be relied upon as the To make a fully informed decision, sole basis of any investment decision regarding the proposed you should read this Target’s takeover offer. Independent financial and taxation advice should be sought before making any investment decision. Statement in its entirety. If you have any questions, please send an email to the Forward-Looking Statements Disclaimer Auspine Shareholder email helpline: Some of the statements appearing in this Target Statement are [email protected] or visit our website forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, key considerations, uncertainties, at www.auspine.com.au assumptions and other important factors that could cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Auspine to be materially different from future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such statements. -
The Clearcut Case: How the Kyoto Protocol Could Become a Driver For
omslag CLEARCUT 31-10-2000 15:35 Pagina 1 THE CLEARCUT CASE: HOW THE KYOTO PROTOCOL Greenpeace International WWF Climate Change Campaign Native Forest Network Climate Campaign Director Southern Hemisphere Keizersgracht 176 Jennifer Morgan Beth Gibbings, Tim Cadman COULD BECOME A DRIVER 1016 DW Amsterdam c/o WWF US PO Box 301, Deloraine The Netherlands 1250 24th Street, NW Tasmania 7304 Tel: +31 20 523 6222 Washington DC 20037 FOR DEFORESTATION Fax: +31 20 523 6200 USA Phone: +61 3 6369 5474 www.greenpeace.org Phone: +1 202 861 8388 Fax: +61 3 6369 5150 Fax: +1 202 331 2391 ISBN: 90-73361-65-6 www.panda.org/climate www.nfn.org.au A report for Greenpeace International and WWF by Tim Cadman Design: Suggestie & illusie, www.illusie.nl Photos: top right - © Tim Cadman, top left - © Greenpeace/Perrine, bottom right - © Greenpeace/Vielmo, bottom left - © Tim Cadman Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 The use of plantations to respond to climate change in Australia 7 The Federal Government 7 Clearance of native forests for “carbon” plantations in Tasmania 8 State Government, associated agencies and plantation establishment 8 Case Studies 10 NORTH Forest Products, TEPCO and the Tamar Tree Farms Project 10 Gunns Ltd 10 Other forestry companies 10 Plantation Investments investigated in Tasmania (my emphasis) 10 Conclusions 16 Sources consulted in preparation of this report 17 Definition of Terms 18 Author: Tim Cadman, M.A. About the Author Tim Cadman M.A. is a graduate of Girton College, Cambridge, and a Ph.D student in Applied Science at Canberra University.He specialises in research into sustainable forest management and certification and labelling. -
2018 Annual Information Form
Western Forest Products Inc. Annual Information Form February 12, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND INFORMATION ...................................................................... 3 BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY ....................................................................................................................... 4 FOREST RESOURCES ...................................................................................................................................... 9 MANUFACTURING FACILITIES ..................................................................................................................... 14 SALES, MARKETING AND DISTRIBUTION ................................................................................................. 18 HUMAN RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................................... 20 ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH & SAFETY .......................................................................................................... 21 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................... 23 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................................................... 24 OTHER EXTERNAL FACTORS ...................................................................................................................... 26 RISK FACTORS ................................................................................................................................................ -
Western Forest Products Inc. 2020 Annual Report
Western Forest Products Inc. 2020 Annual Report Management’s Discussion & Analysis The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) reports and comments on the financial condition and results of operations of Western Forest Products Inc. (the “Company”, “Western”, “us”, “we”, or “our”), on a consolidated basis, for the three months and year ended December 31, 2020, to help securityholders and other readers understand our Company and the key factors underlying our financial results. This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our audited annual consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, which can be found on SEDAR at www.sedar.com . The Company has prepared the consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”), as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board. Amounts discussed herein are based on our audited annual consolidated financial statements and are presented in millions of Canadian dollars, unless otherwise noted. Certain prior period comparative figures have been reclassified to conform to the current period’s presentation. The Company has adopted IFRS 16, Leases , with a date of initial application of January 1, 2019, using a modified retrospective approach. Under the modified retrospective approach, the cumulative effect of initial application has been recognized in retained earnings at January 1, 2019, and comparative information has not been restated and continues to be reported under International Accounting Standards (“IAS”) 17, Leases. Reference is made in this MD&A to adjusted EBITDA 1. Adjusted EBITDA is defined as operating income prior to operating restructuring items and other income (expense), plus amortization of property, plant, and equipment and intangible assets, impairment adjustments, and changes in fair value of biological assets. -
Major Primary Timber Processing Facilities in British Columbia 2018
Major Primary Timber Processing Facilities in British Columbia 2018 1 Major Primary Timber Processing Facilities In British Columbia 2018 Forest Policy and Indigenous Relations Division Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development Victoria, BC April 2020 2 Foreword This edition of the Major Primary Timber Processing Facilities in British Columbia summarizes the activity of timber processing mills that operated during 2018. It covers sawmills, veneer and panel plants, pulp and paper mills, chip mills, pellet mills, shake and shingle, and pole and post mills. Some do not have primary log processing capabilities and process residual fibre from other mills. For mills that produced more than one product (e.g., lumber and veneer), each operation is listed in the respective section of the report. This report does not include re- manufacturing plants. Most of the information contained in this report was gathered through 2018 and earlier surveys of individual processing mills. If survey responses were not provided, the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development (the Ministry) staff might use trade publications and corporate annual reports to make estimations. In some cases, the Ministry staff provided estimates based on their knowledge of the operation and information reported in previous years along with production information for selected forest products from Statistics Canada. This report is available free of charge online at: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/forestry/competitive-forest- industry/forest-industry-economics/fibre-mill-information/major-timber- processing-facilities-survey Please note that all remaining errors are the responsibility of the Economic Services Branch. -
For Personal Use Only Use Personal For
22 November 2011 The Manager Companies Australian Securities Exchange Limited Company Announcements Office Level 4 20 Bridge Street SYDNEY NSW 2000 Dear Sir/Madam RE: Woolworths Limited – Corporate Responsibility Report 2011 Attached is a copy of the Woolworths Limited Corporate Responsibility Report for 2011. For and on behalf of WOOLWORTHS LIMITED PETER J HORTON Group General Counsel and Company Secretary For personal use only Corporate Responsibility Report 2011 Closer every day. For personal use only Woolworths Limited Corporate Responsibility Report 2011 CONTENTS Key Indicators – 2011 2 Statement from the CEO and CEO Designate 4 Understanding our Stakeholders and What is Important to Them 6 Issues of Public Interest 8 Our Business 10 Responsible Retailing 12 Our Community 20 Our Environment 24 Our People 34 Our Approach to Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability 49 Independent Assurance Statement 51 United Nations Global Compact 54 Global Reporting Initiative 55 Store and Trading Area Analysis 57 Glossary 58 Company Directory 59 For personal use only www.woolworthslimited.com.au ABN 88 000 014 675 Scope of Awards and Report Recognition Unless otherwise stated, — Woolworths Supermarkets — Association of Chartered — Woolworths and CHEP won this report covers all of our is Australia’s most valuable Certified Accountants the 2011 NZ Environmental operations in Australia and brand, valued at $7.59 billion (ACCA) Australia and and Packaging Award for New Zealand for the 2011 by Brand Finance in New Zealand Sustainability Supply Chain Influence on financial year (1 July 2010 accordance with the Reporting Awards 2010: Best Packaging Systems with our to 30 June 2011). Data for International Organization for Report in the Retail Sector. -
Gunns' Proposed Tamar Valley Pulp
GUNNS’ PROPOSED TAMAR VALLEY PULP MILL SAGA: Timeline of Key Events: 2003 - 2017 The saga of the pulp mill began in June 2003 with then Deputy Premier Paul Lennon spotted having dinner with John Gay, CEO of Gunns Limited, with documents sighted on the table which referred to a proposal to build a pulp mill. Following that revelation both the State and Federal Labor and Liberal parties were in lock-step support for the pulp mill despite growing community outrage and dissent. Below are a few key ‘highlights’ over the last 14 years that the toxic pulp mill cloud has hung over Tasmania, blighting Tasmanian politics, community, and reputation. ▪ June 2003 – Gunns’ intentions for a pulp mill were leaked to then-Greens Leader Peg Putt, who subsequently ‘blew the whistle’ on the plans by raising the matter in the State Parliament. ▪ November 2003 - guidelines for the mill were released by the government. ▪ June 2004 – revised environmental guidelines for a pulp mill in Tasmania released. ▪ June 2004 – Media reports that “Prime Minister John Howard has promised $5 million to Tasmanian timber giant Gunns Ltd if it goes ahead with its proposed $1 billion pulp mill.” ▪ August 2004 – Lennon Labor government announced that a pulp mill “co-ordinating unit” would be housed within the Department of Economic Development. The Unit would be headed by Mr Bob Gordon, formerly the Forestry Tasmania General Manager of Marketing, and would be known as the Pulp Mill Taskforce. ▪ November 2004 – Premier Lennon announces the Gunns’ pulp mill proposal to be assessed as a Project of State Significance under the State Policies and Projects Act 1993 (at Gunns Ltd’s request), ▪ November 2004 – also revealed that Forestry Tasmania and Gunns Ltd had entered into a pulp mill wood supply agreement before any pulp mill plans were made public. -
Western Forest Products Inc
WESTERN FOREST PRODUCTS INC. Annual Information Form – February 20, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND INFORMATION ...................................................................... 3 THE COMPANY ................................................................................................................................................... 4 SUBSIDIARIES .................................................................................................................................................... 4 DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUSINESS ............................................................................................................. 5 Company Profile and Strategy .................................................................................................................... 5 Summary History .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Significant Developments Since January 2011 ........................................................................................ 6 Changes Expected for 2014 ....................................................................................................................... 8 BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY ....................................................................................................................... 9 Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... -
The Regional Forest Agreement and the Use of Publicly Owned
The Regional Forest Agreement and the use of publicly owned native forests in Tasmania: an investigation into key decision making processes, policies, outcomes and opportunities. By Ula Majewski BA (Hon.) University of Tasmania A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for a Master of Environmental Management Degree at the School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania (November, 2007). it 1 • ■ .• 4.4 i'M40 • II.' l'I'll i 1 1 • 40 ' i', • . J! I' or. jo s 4 4,-,. c I , • lei / .• 1 • •• i • • . , • 4, : 1 % ,11;1441,. ' ,I • 11 i 0 r i• Ai, . ' • 1 4 r ' • ' 4 , i0 • Yr 4 kiti , ,A , , . .4, . to t ir w , Dedicated to my dear friend Ben Morrow, A whose fine intellect, courage, passion and spirit 4 % 1. • r , are a continual inspiration. ,112 a11 d , \PS 4 I f 4 I ; .,„:,,„,„ ••■4 •' 40 ,:vi 1,,s,i4 DECLARATION This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any tertiary institution, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference is made in the text of the thesis. Ursula Majewski BA (Hon) iv ABSTRACT The Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement is a defining policy tool that governs the use and management of the publicly owned native forests positioned at the centre of one of the most protracted and conflict-ridden debates over natural resource management in Australia's history. Drawing on multi-disciplinary discourses and data, and employing a qualitative approach including interviews with prominent participants in the RFA process and implementation, this thesis examines key aspects of the conflict, positions Tasmania's forestry system within a national and global environmental policy context, and undertakes a critical analysis of the scientific, political and governance processes and outcomes generated by the Tasmanian Regional Forest Agreement. -
Planning Versus Power: Tasmania's Forest Policy Network and Gunn's
Planning Versus Power: Tasmania’s Forest Policy Network and Gunn’s Tamar Valley Pulp Mill Dr Fred Gale University of Tasmania Launceston Tasmania Please do not cite without permission. Comments are welcome and should be forwarded to [email protected] Introduction When Gunns announced its intention to build a pulp mill at Bell Bay in Northern Tasmania in mid-2004, it plunged the state into a socio-political crisis from which it has yet to recover. The proposal has re-opened the state’s forest wars—barely healed from the bruising battle over the state’s Regional Forestry Agreement (RFA)—further polarising the community (Ajani 2007; Buckman 2008). As each faction battles for the hearts and minds of ‘ordinary’ Tasmanians, the truism that truth is its first victim of warfare is once again illustrated. For the past five years Tasmanians have been bombarded with claims and counterclaims concerning the pulp mill’s economic, social and environmental impacts (i.e. via the Government sponsored Pulp Mill Task Force newsletters and contributors to the online newspaper Tasmanian Times). A concerted media blitz by the government, Gunns and unions spruiking the mill’s benefits has been countered by a diverse array of sources ranging from conservationists to religious figures to academics (Gale 2008). In this paper, I do not intend to assess the merits of the arguments made by these protagonists. Instead, I aim to take advantage of the opportunity the pulp mill presents to analyse the actors, institutions and ideologies of Tasmania’s forest policy network. In addressing the general question of how Tasmania’s forest policy network secures its interests, I will argue that it does so by enmeshing itself within a range of public and private institutions that enhances the legitimacy of individual actors and enables them to collectively achieve their objectives. -
Western Forest Strategy Adaptive Management Summary
Forest Investment Account, Land Based Investment Program Resource Information Component – Monitoring Activity Area Progress Report – 2009/10 Western Forest Strategy Adaptive Management Summary W.J. Beese, MF, RPF Forest Ecologist J.A. Deal, RPBio, RPF Strategic Planning Biologist March 2010 Corporate Forestry 118 – 1334 Island Highway Campbell River, BC V9W 8C9 Acknowledgements Our sincere thanks go to all of the managers, foresters, engineers, loggers and support personnel that take the ideas in the Western Forest Strategy and put them into practice. We thank the senior management of Western Forest Products for having the vision to carry on with this strategy through difficult economic conditions. The authors are especially grateful to Glen Dunsworth, Fred Bunnell, Dave Huggard and Laurie Kremsater for laying the foundation for the Adaptive Management Program, and to Jeff Sandford for his important role in field coordination and database development. We also thank Nick Smith, Ken Zielke and Bryce Bancroft for their close collaboration on this effort, the many project leaders whose work is presented, and participants in various Working Groups over the years. We also thank Sue McDonald, Pat Bryant, Michael Fowler, Annette van Niejenhuis and Kathy Wood for their significant contribution “behind the scenes” to keeping many projects running smoothly. Executive Summary Western Forest Products is implementing a forest management strategy to sustain biological diversity within the company’s tenures. The Western Forest Strategy (WFS) has three broad goals: 1. Represent the full range of ecosystems within the non-harvestable landbase to maintain lesser known species and ecological functions. 2. Maintain structural attributes of older forests distributed across the landscape and in harvested areas to support biological richness.