Blog post
Legal timber production: who loses in Ghana?
Tropical forests are disappearing rapidly in Ghana. Commercial logging for both the export and the domestic market is one of the key drivers. Operations are often illegal and unsustainable. 84% of the domestic market is supplied with timber that is produced without permit, payment of taxes or environmental control. The percentage of illegal export is lower, but still substantial.
Who in Ghana are the winners and who the losers when the EU enforces legal timber production?
It is debatable to what extent deforestation has prompted Ghana government to undertake effective action, but the EU is alarmed. Western consumers increasingly feel bad that their hardwood window frame causes forest destruction. Add to that the threat of global suffocation, and policy agendas change.
As part of the FLEGT (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade) process the EU has drawn up ‘Voluntary Partnership Agreements’ (VPAs) with individual countries such as Ghana to enforce legal timber production. The trade between EU and Ghana is used as a lever for change. As from 2012, only legally produced timber is allowed to enter EU markets (as well as the domestic market). The EU sees legal trade as first step towards sustainable forest management. Good, who could be against this noble objective?
The Wageningen UR/DGIS partnership has funded a research project to study the implications of the VPA on the livelihoods of poor forest stakeholders in Ghana. What are the competing claims on forest resources? Who will gain and who will pay the price when law is enforced? And who are favoured by the existing laws and policies in the first place?
On November 25th and 26th 2011 a policy dialogue was organized in Elmina, Ghana. ‘Science’, in the form of a sizable Dutch delegation from Wageningen UR and NGOs, met with ‘policy’. Informed by research on forest policy and practice in Ghana and the current narratives on sustainable forestry, equitable development and participatory management, the debate has become quite critical about the design and implementation of the VPA - in particular regarding the pro-poor agenda of both Ghana Government and the EU. What under current legislation is called illegal forest use by 100,000 people in rural communities could also be considered as informal, small-scale, locally completely accepted rural livelihood opportunities. Existing forest laws and policies in Ghana are largely anti-poor. Enforcing them will predominantly benefit the large scale timber industry and political elite. So who wins and who looses out when the VPA is upheld?
The conference was held close to the Elmina Castle, which was built by the Dutch in the 17th century as a depot for slave trade. The hotel section accommodating me was called ‘Abissi’, referring to one of the local ‘Asafo’ warrior brigades. Their slogan was: When the Dutch boat leaves, Elmina will be at its own. I could not help thinking about this when a summary of the research results was presented to the Ghana Minister of Lands and Natural Resources. He honoured the conference with his presence for fifteen minutes to offer his ‘policy response’, saying that he appreciated the effort and was keen to receive the report.
Nico Rozemeijer
Wageningen Centre for Development Innovation
Photo: Syahmir