Tuesday 20 August 2013

Is Ghana's FLEGT VPA grinding to a halt and failing to achieve improvement in forest governance?

A new paper from Kingsley Bekoe Ansah (to be published soon). Just a preview of the abstract.

Summary
Even though forests remain important in the socio-economic sectors of Ghana, they are declining at an alarming rate (approximately 135, 000 ha annually)[1]. As a result their contribution of providing raw materials, employment, income and support for rural livelihoods is under threat. In 2009, Ghana ratified a Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) with the European Union (EU) to halt deforestation and improve governance in the forest sector by regulating the trade in timber and timber products into the EU market. According to the VPA, Ghana is expected to reform the policy and legislative framework of the forest sector to improve governance. Ghana is also expected to install a Legality Assurance System (LAS) to monitor and verify the legality of processed timber for domestic and international markets. Five years since the VPA was ratified, the governance challenges facing the forestry sector persists and in some cases it has even worsened. Overexploitation of timber resources is continuing at alarming rates fuelled in part by the Chainsaw Milling (CSM). There is still unclear and unfair access and benefit sharing of naturally occurring trees on farmlands. Government’s abuse of the permits regime (especially salvage permits) is on the rise. Concession leases have not been converted to Timber Utilization Contracts (TUCs) as mandated by law and the VPA. There is inadequate accountability, transparency and disclosure of information on forestry operations.  Stumpage fees have not been revised since 2004 as stipulated by law[2] resulting in millions of US dollars loss in revenue and high social cost in timber exploitation.  And finally, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) dynamics have changed resulting in decreased momentum and involvement in the implementation phase of the VPA. These challenges clearly threaten the ability of the VPA to live up to the expectation of improving forest governance in the sector, halting trade in illegal timber and improving sustainable forest management.

There is urgency for all stakeholders to work towards achieving the objectives of the VPA. Government should stop the rhetoric and actually demonstrate commitment to governance reform by reviewing and enforcing new stumpage fees and convert all leases to TUCs. Parliament should exercise its oversight responsibility by investigating the administrative abuse of the permits regime (especially the salvage permits) by government, recommend and implement corrective measures. CSOs should re-organize and re-strategize to maximize the effect of their seat at the table and influence the process to ensure reforms respond to the objectives of the VPA. CSOs need to provide workable and credible proposals and alternatives on the way forward. They need to hold the government accountable to all forest stakeholders. The EU and donors of the forestry sector need to put pressure on government to ensure that governance reforms are implemented. The implementation of governance reforms should therefore be strictly tied to funding and that release of funding is tied with achievement of governance reform targets set. A reformed land and tree tenure regime that fairly and equitably shares the benefits from tree exploitations and rewards farmers for nurturing trees on their farms should be pursued vigorously by the government and all actors in the sector.  

In conclusion, there is hope for the Ghana VPA to achieve its objective of ensuring improvements in transparency, accountability and good governance in the forest sector.  However all stakeholders must rise to the challenge and show the same level of commitment, enthusiasm, optimism and good will that characterised the negotiation process.



[1] Data is obtained from the Ghana government Forest Investment Plan. Available at www.fcghana.org
[2] The Timber Resources Management (Amendment) Regulation (2003), LI 1721 provides for timber right holders to pay stumpage fees which “shall be reviewed to reflect market demand and inventory levels of timber species”.

No comments:

Post a Comment