The World Economic Forum-hosted Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 is advocating a 10-point plan to remove deforestation from commodity supply chains by 2020. Aimed at company executives, policy-makers and civil society leaders, the Commodities and Forests Agenda 2020 plan lays out strategies to address one of the biggest drivers of pollution, greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss.
The Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 (TFA 2020) is a partnership of over 100 governments, companies, NGOs, experts and indigenous groups committed to reducing the tropical deforestation behind palm oil, soy, beef, and pulp and paper.
Since 1990 the world has lost the equivalent of 1,000 football fields of forests every hour, according to World Bank development indicators. That is 1.3 million square kilometres of forest – an area larger than South Africa. Despite ambitious commitments to stop it, satellite data shows that forest loss has increased in recent years and many of the solutions have yet to be scaled.
The 10-point plan was prepared through consultation with over 250 experts in private organizations, governments, indigenous peoples and civil society groups. The 10 priorities for action are:
1.Eliminating illegality from supply chains: businesses can and should support government law enforcement by improving the way in which legal compliance is monitored in their own supply chains.
2.Growing and strengthening palm oil certification: Consumer countries and companies should commit to buying through strong palm oil certification programmes such as the Roundtable for Sustainable Palm Oil.
3.Scaling up sustainable intensification of cattle grazing: businesses and governments need to drive out illegal forest clearance and redirect incentives away low-yielding beef production.
4.Sustainably increasing smallholder yields in palm oil and cocoa: Investment barriers that prevent best practices must be removed, while greater risk management and training can help to boost yields at smallholder plantations.
5.Achieving sustainable soy production: Global demand is rising and production is expanding, causing major deforestation. Collaborative initiatives supported by companies, civil society and governments can help to ensure that production occurs without further landscape conversion. The 2006 Soy Moratorium in the Amazon has shown that, with improved forest governance and public-private initiatives, reduction in deforestation from soy expansion is possible.
6 Accelerating jurisdictional programmes: advanced climate and forest programmes that integrate land planning, sustainable forest management and commodity production are models for rural development in other countries and regions. More private-sector commodity commitments can be incorporated into government-led programmes.
7 Addressing land conflicts, tenure security and land rights: Assigning formal land titles is particularly relevant for areas traditionally occupied by indigenous peoples. It is essential to accelerate land registration efforts and put in place effective and fair conflict resolution mechanisms for competing land claims.
8 Mobilizing demand for deforestation-free commodities in emerging markets: China and India are among the world’s biggest importers of soy, pulp and paper and palm oil. China alone is a huge importer of beef. Businesses and governments along these supply chains must work towards sustainable sourcing.
9 Redirecting finance towards deforestation-free supply chains: Shifting to deforestation-free agricultural investment presents a $200 billion annual opportunity by 2020, while mitigating reputational and stranded asset risks. Risk management policies and subsidy reform – especially in agricultural credit – are needed.
10 Improving the quality and availability of deforestation and supply chain data: More data must be collected and shared so that governments and companies can target and monitor their activities effectively.
Marco Albani, Director of TFA2020, said that by singling out 10 priority areas, the Commodities and Forest Agenda 2020 opens a dialogue to accelerate progress towards the 2020 goal of eliminating commodity-driven deforestation by 2020 through increased focus and collaboration: “The 10 areas are not exhaustive – there are many other areas where action is needed, and individual stakeholders will have different geographical or commodity priorities – but they represent a triage of priorities for the short window to 2020 as it emerged from our analysis and extensive consultation.”
The TFA was founded in 2012 at Rio+20 after retailers, manufacturers, service providers and other stakeholders at the Consumer Goods Forum committed to zero net deforestation by the year 2020.
Kavita Prakash Mani, Practice Leader, Markets & Foods, World Wildlife Fund, and Jeff Seabright, Chief Sustainability Officer, Unilever, a major buyer of palm oil and Co-Chair of the Consumer Goods Forum Environmental Sustainability Committee said in a joint statement:
“Commitments are in place, and much process has been made, but it is clear that that we must intensify and accelerate those efforts if we are to have any chance of meeting our 2020 goal. The Commodities and Forests Agenda 2020 provides a roadmap to encourage everyone with a stake in commodity-driven deforestation to align as a community of action so that we can accelerate our efforts together.”
The Commodities and Forests Agenda 2020 is part of the ongoing efforts of the Tropical Forest Alliance 2020 as a global and regional platform for accelerating high impact partnership to halt deforestation across commodity supply chains in the potential to deliver economic benefits to tropical forest countries, while address environmental and social constraints.
The TFA 2020 is hosted by the World Economic Forum and funded by the Governments of the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom.
The World Economic Forum is convening its first Sustainable Development Impact Summit in New York on 18-19 September 2017. The Summit is dedicated to accelerating progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Agreement through public-private cooperation and the application of technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.
Rails, Roads And Emissions
It is common knowledge that emissions affecting climate are least for rail travel in comparison with airplanes or road vehicles. Consequently the $80 billion allocated to rail in an otherwise laudable budget appears paltry.
Why is the US not investing in rail? The usual reason given is that distances are so vast that it’s a no-brainer for business travellers to rely on commercial airlines. But the way the technology is advancing, and as Europeans (and the Chinese) have demonstrated, a network of high-speed rail can offer a greener alternative.
Trains are getting faster and new innovations like tilting trains lower the cost of replacement tracks. If 200 mph is being breached more often, then 250 mph should be in our sights. And Elon Musk has proposed vacuum tubes to remove wind resistance and reach even higher speeds.
Yet a 250 mph rail network with average speeds in excess of 200 mph would revolutionize the concept of travel. New York to Chicago in five hours and east to west coast overnight with the possibility of visiting neglected areas out of reach with expressways and airplanes would bring new growth and dynamism where it is needed.
A point to note is prevailing interest rates. They are so low historically that railroad bonds at a competitive interest rate would be snapped up especially if they were guaranteed by the government.
While one can agree with the aims and compassion clearly evident in the president’s proposals, the process to achieve them is less clear. In particular on climate change the goal of net zero emissions within a decade is laudable. But a speedy switchover to electric vehicles raises questions: Simply, how?
The system is geared to internal combustion engines. Mechanics train for years to become proficient. Aside from that, has anyone wondered what happens to all those large electric car batteries when they have to be replaced? Since lithium used in them is a finite resource, it would have to be recovered or the 80 million tons estimated to be the world’s store would eventually be depleted.
Another issue is the electricity used to charge the batteries. If it comes from a coal-fired plant, are we back to square one? Currently about a quarter of the electricity generated in the US comes from coal. Of course dealing with pollution at the source (like a coal plant) is easier.
The number of Americans living paycheck to paycheck (roughly half) is just one more reason the changeover to electric vehicles might take a while; they just don’t have the funds. Add to these numbers the elderly living on fixed incomes or the ranks of the unemployed and one can understand the scale of the problem.
One can laud the US president’s goals but we need to see some action (even proposals) to facilitate them.
Global Environmental Governance and Biden’s Administration
Being the largest emitter of greenhouse gas in the world, it is the responsibility of U.S to contribute expeditiously to manage the environmental issues at domestic and international level but the previous government, under the leadership of Trump, took back seat and reversed all the decisions of Ex-president Barack Obama to combat the climate change. Unlike this, New Elected President, Joe Biden, who is very enthusiastic and firm to fulfill all the promises regarding climate change which were done during the general election’s campaign. Moreover, he views climate change a thwart to national security. One of the biggest achievements associated with Biden’ administration regarding environmental issues is to bring U.S back into Paris Climate Accord and brought executive order’’ Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring science to tackle the climate crisis’’ on the surface.
A flurry of changes to U.S environment policy is going to play a constructive role in global environmental governance under Biden administration. Even before elections, climate change was one of the top priorities and aimed to put the U.S on a path which leads towards ‘’ Zero Net’’ greenhouse gas emission. In the very early of His office days, He is very committed to deal with the climate change as they hosted ‘’ Climate Day’’ to introduce government climate centric approach to emphasize on the climate change. Biden administration also ordered to revoke a permanent issued for Keystone XL oil pipeline which trump issued for extraction of oil and energy which is dangerous to national ecosystem. In addition to this, they are also very active to promote US role to tackle the climate change at domestic and abroad. At domestic level, Biden’s actions are speaking louder than the words as he has ascribed the climate crisis with a national emergency. At the time of his inauguration, Biden said: ‘’ A cry for survival comes from the planet itself, a cry that can’t be any more desperate or any clearer’’. He also directed his cabinet to work on the policy of ‘’ social carbon cost’’ to measure the cost of actions and how costs will impact the climate change. He endeavors to control the climate change by keeping a strict eye on the big project’s reviewing process before working under the National Environmental Policy Act which calculates the social costs of greenhouse gas emissions.
On international level, Biden has been striving to improve the spoil image shaped by the previous government regarding global environmental governance as he has declared to rejoin the Paris Climate accord which would help to reduce the greenhouse gas emission. In the result of this action, Biden was welcomed by the General Secretary of the United Nations and French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron by saying ‘’ Welcome Back to the Paris Agreement’’. Moreover, Biden Administration is very determined to convene a global climate summit on the earth day to encourage leaders to align themselves with scientist to alleviate the impacts of climate change. On international forums, US need to cooperate and compel the economic trade partner to take actions to combat with climate crisis. One of the essential steps taken by the Biden administration is to manage the climate refugees which aim to make strategies to compensate the climate affected migrants.
The thin majority of democratic in the senate does not only limit the possibility for Biden to achieve climate change reforms along strong anti-climate lobbyist business group who are inimical to the reforms particularly relevant to vehicle, power plants and oil and gas drilling industries. Without new climate legislation from congress, it would be not an easy task to implement the climate agenda across the borders. The vocal resistance comes from the coal production sectors which result in burning of fossil fuels and caused of greenhouse gas emissions. Whereas, few sectors are opposing the agenda there are also companies specially electrical vehicles are exclusively offering assistance to Biden for the sustainable development. Undoubtedly, environmental organizations and scientists community applauded the Biden decisions but few business groups have also filed a lawsuit against Biden to not stop the new permit for oil and gas drilling. There are also concerned raised by the community that climate actions will delete many jobs and cause of upsurge in unemployment percentage across the federation.
It is very evident from the ambitions of Biden’s action regarding climate crisis that he is very interesting to mitigate and curb the climate change but it will require highly comprehensive strategy aims to manage the reforms in laws while taking congressmen in confidence because most of them are not in favor of climate actions due to clash of interests. On the other hand, there is need to work on renewable energy resources at domestic and international level and for this US should compensate the companies to compete with the old capitalized firms which do not want safe and peaceful planet. Moreover, there is need to bring reforms in existing environmental treaties and their compliance process which should be strictly followed by the harsh actions against the violators. The process of financing the agendas which are very environment friendly and transforming the resources to the periphery states should be done swiftly to improve the environment across the globe. The aims of achieving sustainable development should be promoted and supported by the US across the world.
EU-Asian Partnerships are necessary to prevent the next pandemic
COVID-19 has demonstrated the vulnerability of global supply chains and revealed the ever-increasing ecological dangers of industrial expansion, which has amplified the risks of diseases migrating from animals to humans. This is demonstrated in a new report launched by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres which argues that to prevent future pandemics the world must cooperate to addresses interlinked challenges presented by biodiversity, pollution and the climate crises. The UN chief encouraged everyone to use the report to “re-evaluate and reset our relationship with nature”.
This is precisely the time for countries in the European Union (EU) to re-evaluate their trade relations with producer nations in order to protect local environment and prevent deforestation.
The relationship between deforestation and public health and cannot be denied. Unfortunately, in recent years the EU’s economic model has not paid sufficient attention to sustainability, trade and global forest management. So far, the EU’s approach to trade has ended up alienating the most important areas of biodiversity in Asia, while emboldening some of the biggest despoilers of biodiversity and polluters in the Americas.
The Konrad Adenauer Foundation, the leading think-tank of Germany’s ruling political party, has published its own report on how EU policies have unfairly targeted Asian commodities by fostering protectionist market dynamics which harm the environment.
In one case in point, the EU initiated a ban on the import of palm oil from 2030, as a means to reduce deforestation in Asia. However, scientific evidence actually indicates that sustainably cultivated palm oil is far better than other seed oil alternatives – rapeseed, coconut, soy and sunflower. Those commodities need up to ten times more land to produce the same amount of oil. Therefore, instead of halting deforestation, the ban simply transfers the effects of ecological degradation elsewhere – namely within the EU on the back of domestically produced commodities.
Meanwhile the EU continues to import beef and soy, the top two contributors to deforestation globally. In fact, beef production requires more than double the forest land than for the production of soy, palm oil, and wood products combined. Land clearing for beef and soy production in the Amazon has reached a 12 year high, leading scientists to warn of an irreversible ‘tipping point’ that could mean huge drought, forest death, and release of great amounts of stored carbon to the atmosphere.
As the Konrad report indicates, the move to ban palm oil while maintaining beef and soy imports is a double standard that has created a trust gap between the EU and ASEAN nations. This has inhibited collaborative efforts to combat deforestation as EU policies exclude ASEAN nations from important sustainability debates. Moreover, the EU ban does nothing to cease palm oil production. Producer nations will continue to produce without adhering to EU environmental standards and regulations. This will spell disaster, not only for the diverse wildlife found in Asia’s tropical forests, but for humanity’s public health – a correlation which cannot be divorced from the economy.
If the EU sought out a trade deal with ASEAN then it could integrate mandatory sustainable standards and enforce regulations to produce sustainable palm oil and limit deforestation. The EU could also work with existing schemes like the Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil (MSPO) standard, which purportedly meets the EU’s key sustainability criteria and is the standard against which almost 90% of Malaysian palm oil is now produced.
This is an example of how the EU has overlooked Asian success stories in creating adaptable blueprints through strict and proactive measures which have largely kept the virus at bay and allowed their economies to stay afloat. While Europe’s economy is only expected to grow by 3.7% in 2021, ASEAN nations are predicted to rebound over 6%.
That means we could have the best of both worlds; trade that opens up two powerhouse regions to a new era of economic vitality and cooperation – underpinned by ecological conservation through an unfailing commitment to protect pristine ecosystems, exotic wildlife and precious forests.
The EU should use the lessons of the pandemic to capitalize on its environmental goals, working with producer nations to ensure they are participating in ethical markets and enforcing sustainable practices which maintain biodiversity.
If the EU can build a global coalition with Asia, which prioritises trade and sustainability, they can underpin a bold new era in the fight for thriving, Covid-free economies.
Such cooperation would empower the European Union to encourage environmental consciousness across Asian economies—by incentivising compliance with laudable environmental goals and dis-incentivising noncompliance. There would be significant economic benefits to EU consumers as well like access to efficient and affordable edible oils from rapidly growing emerging markets. While in turn the producer would have access to the EU’s uniquely large market.
These are clearly more than enough reasons to compel the EU to act. Let’s hope they start soon.
Relations between Azerbaijan and the European Union
The crises, revolutions, and wars of the first half of the 20th century led to serious geopolitical upheavals, economic crises,...
When diplomacy cannot get the best of geopolitics: Cyprus’s lack of a way forward
On April 24, people from both sides gather in proximity of the demarcation line splitting the capital, Nicosia, in two....
Asian Ports Dominate Global Container Port Performance Index
Asian container ports are the most efficient in the world, dominating the Top 50 spots according to the new global...
First Aid: How Russia and the West Can Help Syrians in Idlib
Authors: Andrey Kortunov and Julien Barnes-Dacey* The next international showdown on Syria is quickly coming into view. After ten years...
World Bank Supports Serbia’s Move Toward Greener, More Resilient, and Inclusive Growth
Serbia is making strides toward accelerating economic growth that is more green, resilient, and inclusive, by implementing a series of...
Secrets to Successful Selling Online
Online commerce has opened a new revenue for people to earn money with very little overhead costs. It’s much easier...
Religion Freedom Index of Bangladesh: Current Developments and Government Responses
Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) recently published its annual Religious Freedom in the World 2021 Report (RFR) that...
Economy3 days ago
Russia and France to strengthen economic cooperation
Reports3 days ago
Germany still leads the world in industrial competitiveness, but China is inching closer
Southeast Asia2 days ago
Is Quad 2.0 transforming into a Pentad?
South Asia2 days ago
Feasible Outcomes after Withdrawal of US Troops from Afghanistan
East Asia3 days ago
Post COVID-19, Can China Emerge as the New Global Power?
Reports2 days ago
Lithuania is well placed to lead on clean energy and energy security in the Baltic region
Middle East2 days ago
Iran’s Impunity Will Grow if Evidence of Past Crimes is Fully Destroyed
Europe3 days ago
Marine Le Pen Has the Strongest Chance to Succeed, Of All Progressive Political Leaders in the World Today