Bridges Trade BioRes • Volume 5 • Number 13 • 8th July 2005

ITTA: TIMBER NEGOTIATIONS HOLD ON TO COMMODITY FOCUS

Do More

Subscribe to the BioRes

* Required Field

Email Address: *

Country: *
Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua And Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, Democractic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) Croatia (Hrvatska) Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Islands Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Honduras Hong Kong S.A.R. Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea Korea, North Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau S.A.R. Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, The New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua new Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Island Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts And Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent And The Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia And The South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard And Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad And Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks And Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Minor Outlying Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vatican City State (Holy See) Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands (British) Virgin Islands (US) Wallis And Futuna Islands Yemen Yugoslavia Zambia Zimbabwe

Employment Sector (Academia, Govt., Private Sector, NGO, IGO): *

First Name:

Last Name:

Organisation:

Enter the letters shown above:*

Download this issue

See also

ITTA: TIMBER NEGOTIATIONS HOLD ON TO COMMODITY FOCUS

Delegates meeting for the third round of negotiations on a successor pact to the International Tropical Timber Agreement, 1994 (ITTA-1994) in Geneva from 27 June to 1 July failed to agree on a new accord, although they converged increasingly around the idea that the revised ITTA should retain its focus on commodities and not become a conservation agreement. The question of the focus of the new ITTA along with concerns regarding national sovereignty over forest resources — were central to debates on the extent to which environmental issues should be recognised in the successor agreement. The new ITTA would come into force after the current agreement expires at the end of 2006.

Producers defend narrow scope of agreement

Debate continued on whether the new agreement should broaden its focus from just tropical timber trade to other products and issues that address environmental and development concerns (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 4 March 2005). Many producers of tropical timber, which are predominantly developing countries such as Brazil, India and Indonesia, argued against references to "ecological services" (ES) and "non-timber forest products" (NTFPs) as part of the introduction or "chapeau" to the objectives of the new agreement. On behalf of the producer group, India argued that references to ES and NTFPs should be limited to the sustainable forest management (SFM) context in the preamble of the draft agreement and should take into account poverty alleviation goals such as the Millennium Development Goals. According to Malaysia, this position was driven by the need to ensure that the limited resources available for project funding are focused on the commodity-based aspects of the timber trade, while ES and NTFPs fall under the jurisdiction of other organisations such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Brazil argued against the use of the term "ecological services" because it has not been used extensively in international agreements, and also noted that on the other hand environmental services were a very complicated issue that was already being dealt with at the WTO (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 24 June 2005), and as such should remain at the sidelines of the ITTA focus.

The US, on the other hand, advocated strongly for the inclusion of ES and NTFPs in the chapeauto the objectives, with support from Norway and Switzerland, and argued more generally for a new agreement with a wide scope to address environmental issues. For example, the US along with the Republic of Korea, Honduras and New Zealand wanted the name of the ITTO to be changed to the International Tropical Forest Organization. Sources suggested that the US advocacy for an expanded ITTA was driven by their hope that a substantial ITTA would dissuade efforts towards the creation of a binding international mechanism on forests, as currently discussed at the UN Forum on Forests (UNFF; see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 29 April 2005). The US has consistently opposed such a binding mechanism. Despite these divergences, delegates were able to agree to include coniferous wood in the definition of tropical timber, which had previously only included non-coniferous wood.

Negative versus positive ways to address illegal logging

Delegates also struggled with the best way to address increasing international concern regarding illegal logging and trade in illegally harvested timber. They were unable to agree on a clause that would make strengthening members’ capacity to "address illegal logging and related trade in tropical timber" an objective of the new agreement. Many countries, including Brazil, had objected to this provision, arguing that the issue of illegal harvesting and trade was a national problem in which international intervention was not welcome. Other developing countries said that they did not have a problem with the ITTA urging countries to combat illegal logging, but that it was fundamentally a national issue, which the international community could support through capacity building, technology transfer and financial support. As such, Brazil sought to take a "positive" approach to addressing illegal logging, proposing to include "legal harvesting and certification" in the list of "themes" that earmarked funding could address. One delegate suggested that illegal harvesting of timber existed because of the trade in illegal timber, and as such certification could be a useful tool.

Certification of sustainable forest management has emerged in recent years as a result of consumer-driven demand for environmentally sustainable forests, but is a sensitive issue because timber-producing countries do not want certification to become a barrier to market access for their forest products. A section asking the new ITTO to "promote the certification of tropical timber producing forests" and "encourage information sharing on the use of voluntary mechanisms to promote such trade" was opposed for these reasons by countries including Ecuador, India, Japan, Papua New Guinea and Venezuela. The US, Brazil and other countries argued that it was not appropriate for an international organisation to tell a national government to promote a certain type of private-sector activity. However, most countries agreed that ITTO work on the promotion of phased certification schemes (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 29 April 2005) should continue in one way or other, despite the fact that it might not be "politically correct" for the ITTA to tell countries to promote such schemes.

Genetic resources and NGOs on the sidelines

Members agreed that the ITTA should encourage countries to develop policies aimed at sustainable utilisation and conservation of timber-producing forests and maintaining ecological balance, although Mexico, supported by Venezuela and Papua New Guinea, opposed including "genetic resources". They felt that the CBD was already looking at this linkage and had expertise on it, and that including such an environmental focus would weaken the ITTA.

Civil society voices were notably missing in the negotiations, although a written statement was submitted to the meeting on 27 June. From a labour perspective, Agronomes et Forestiers Sans Frontiers, Hari Environment and Development Society, the International Federation of Building and Wood Workers and the Roman Forum called for the new ITTO to have a strong core mandate to promote and facilitate international trade in tropical timber products. They also felt that the ITTO should be given the mandate to identify appropriate international market prices to take into account the costs of sustainable forest management and to promote a phased approach to forest certification to ensure that certification does not act as a non-tariff barrier to trade and is instead supportive of sustainable forest management, conservation and development.

Additional Resources

Additional Information on the ITTO and ITTA-1994 is available at http://www.itto.or.jp/live/index.jsp

For daily reporting, see IISD Linkages at http://www.iisd.ca/forestry/itto/itta3/

ICTSD Reporting; ENB, Vol 24 No. 59-63; "Statement by NGOs and civil society groups attending the United Nations Conference of a Successor Agreement to the International Tropical Timber Agreement," NGO STATEMENT, 27 June 2005.