Making the Forest Sector Transparent Annual Transparency Report 2009 Prepared by Global Witness November 2010 CED Global Witness is a UK-based non-governmental organisation which investigates the role of natural resources in funding conflict and corruption around the world. References to ‘Global Witness’ in the report are to Global Witness Limited, a company limited by guarantee and incorporated in England (Company No. 2871809). Global Witness Limited 6th Floor Buchanan House 30 Holborn London EC1N 2HS Email: [email protected] www.globalwitness.org www.foresttransparency.info © Global Witness Limited, 2010 All images copyright Global Witness unless otherwise marked. Global Witness is happy to provide copies of our images and reproduction and dissemination of material for non-commercial purposes are authorised without any prior written permission provided Global Witness is fully acknowledged as the source. This material has been funded by UK aid from the Department for International Development, however the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the department’s official policies. CED Perú Ghana Cameroon Liberia Derecho Ambiente y Recursos Centre for Indigenous Centre pour l’Environnment Sustainable Development Naturales (DAR) Knowledge and Organisational et le Développement (CED) Institute (SDI) www.dar.org.pe Development (CIKOD) www.cedcameroun.org www.sdiliberia.org Jr. Coronel Zegarra N°260 www.cikodgh.org BP 3430 PO Box 5678, Duarzon Village Jesús María PO Box MD Yaoundé Robertsfield Highway Lima, Perú Madina, Accra, Ghana Cameroon Monrovia, Liberia Project Leader: Project Leader: Project Leader: Project Leader: Hugo Che Pui Deza Willie Laate Germain Djontu Jonathan Yiah [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Table of Contents Foreword 6 1 Introduction: Making the Forest Sector Transparent 6 2 Why is transparency important to the forest sector? 8 2.1 Transparency and the right to information 8 2.1.1 What do we mean by transparency? 8 2.1.2 The benefits of transparency 9 2.2 Features of the right to information 13 2.3 Some reasons why public authorities are not transparent 14 2.3.1 Making the Forest Sector Transparent and the right to information 14 2.4 Transparency and environmental information: three pillars 16 2.5 Transparency in the forest sector 16 2.6 Civil society, transparency, and the attempt to achieve good forest sector management 20 2.7 Other initiatives on assessing forest governance and transparency 22 3 Methodology 23 3.1 What are Report Cards and how do they help? 23 3.2 Applying Report Card methodology to forest transparency 28 3.3 A forest transparency Report Card 30 3.4 Country cases 35 4 Cameroon 38 4.1 Methodology 38 4.2 Data 39 4.3 Analysis 42 4.4 Conclusions 46 4.5 Recommendations 47 5 Ghana 48 5.1 Methodology 48 5.2 Data 50 5.3 Analysis 53 5.4 Conclusions 56 5.5 Recommendations 58 6 Liberia 60 6.1 Methodology 60 6.2 Data 62 6.3 Analysis 64 6.4 Conclusions 67 6.5 Recommendations 70 7 Peru 71 7.1 Methodology 71 7.2 Data 72 7.3 Analysis 75 7.4 Conclusions 78 7.5 Recommendations 80 8 Analysis of the four Report Cards together 81 8.1 Analysis 82 9 Conclusions and recommendations 86 9.1 Overall conclusions 86 9.2 Opportunities 87 9.3 Emerging issues 88 9.4 Recommendations 88 Annex 1 2009 Transparency indicators 92 Annex 2 Country data 2009, by theme 101 Annex 3 Making the Forest Sector Transparent project partners 107 References 109 1 LFI Liberian Forest Initiative Abbreviations MDGs Millennium Development Goals MINFOF Ministère des Forêts et de la Faune CED Centre pour l’Environement et le (Ministry of Forests and Wildlife, Développement (Cameroonian partner Cameroon) in Making the Forest Sector Transparent ) NGO(s) Non-governmental organisation(s) CFDC(s) Community Forestry Development NTFPs Non-timber forest products Committee(s), Liberia OASL Office of the Administrator of Stool CIFOR Center for International Forestry Lands (Ghana) Research OBI Open Budget Initiative CIKOD Centre for Indigenous Knowledge and OSINFOR Organismo Supervisor de los Recursos Organisational Development (Ghanaian Forestales (Forestry supervisory partner) agency, Peru) CITES Convention on International Trade in PWYP Publish What You Pay coalition Endangered Species RTI Right to information C-MRV Measurement, reporting and SDI Sustainable Development Institute verification of emissions reductions and (Liberian partner) carbon stored in forests SRAs Social Responsibility Agreements (in CONAFOR Comisión Nacional Forestal (National Ghana) Forest Council, Peru) TI Transparency International CSOs Civil society organisations TPA Trade Promotion Agreement (normally DAR Derecho Ambiente y Recursos referring to the trade promotion Naturales (Peruvian partner) agreement between Peru and the US) DGFFS Dirección General Forestal y de Fauna UN United Nations Silvestre (General office for forests and UNCAC UN Convention Against Corruption wildlife, Peru) UNDP UN Development Programme DFID Department for International UNECE United Nations Economic Commission Development for Europe EIA Environmental Impact Assessment UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Change Initiative UN-REDD UN framework for Reducing Emissions EU European Union from Deforestation and forest FDA Forest Development Authority (Liberia) Degradation FGI Forest Governance and Integrity US United States (of America) programme (Transparency International) USAID US Agency for International FLEGT Forest Law Enforcement, Governance Development and Trade programme of the EU VPA Voluntary Partnership Agreement, a FWG Forest Watch Ghana European Union bilateral timber trade GFI Governance of Forests Initiative (World agreement under the FLEGT initiative Resources Institute) WRI World Resources Institute IFM Independent Forest Monitoring IMF International Monetary Fund INRENA Instituto de Recursos Naturales (former National Institute for Natural Note to the reader Resources, Peru) This report is based on research and assessments LEITI Liberia Extractive Industries up to December 2009. Transparency Initiative Finalisation of the text took place in July 2010. 2 needs or pro-poor development goals, but rather Foreword facilitates unsustainable forest use and trade in illegal timber. The value of forests Problems of law enforcement and revenue Forests are immensely important, both to the redistribution are systemic. Forest-rich countries environment and to human societies. They are a are deprived of valuable revenues from taxation, central component of the natural resources that fees, and potential payments for avoiding support life on earth, and we are coming to learn of deforestation because the demands of international the importance of their role in combating climate markets promote mismanagement and subsequent change. Millions of people are wholly or largely unsustainable forest use and practices. dependent on forest resources for their livelihoods. No-one is as dependent on these precious assets as The dominance of policy processes by a narrow the world’s poorest and most vulnerable. group of interests also means a lack of transparency. Too often, use of public forests is Although both the human and the natural worlds are undemocratically agreed without the knowledge or highly dependent on the existence and survival of consent of ordinary people, who find themselves the world’s forests, and despite widespread locked out of discussions and consultation recognition of the immense importance of public processes. The common needs of poorer, forest- forests, they have not been protected from dependent communities have been neglected in aggressive destruction on an enormous scale. favour of the private needs of elites. Forest sector mismanagement What to do about it In many forest-rich but economically poor Solving the problem of forest sector developing countries – where governance is often mismanagement is not straightforward. weak and problems of law enforcement and revenue distribution are systemic – corruption and poor law A key step towards improving forest sector policy enforcement have been exploited by governments and practice is to make forest sector governance and unscrupulous big businesses in the pursuit of more responsive and accountable. This means their own commercial interests. The forest sector is increasing transparency. particularly prone to bad governance, and has suffered from years of poor management and a lack As identified in the UK Government’s 2006 white of accountability, because policy processes have paper, Making Governance Work for the Poo r 1 – been dominated by elite groups of powerful the impetus for the funding for Making the Forest individuals or corporations looking to exploit the Sector Transparent – transparency is key to the forests for their own gain. Under these demand side of good governance. Strengthening circumstances, forest use is agreed behind closed the ability of ordinary people to access and analyse doors and without the knowledge or consent of information will help to refocus forest policy on locals. Consultation processes, where they do exist, their needs. tend to take place between unequal partners – one informed, the other uninformed and with little Effective public participation in decision-making capacity to negotiate. Resulting management of depends on the availability and accessibility of full, public forests fails to deliver according to public accurate, reliable and up-to-date information. Civil 3 society organisations