Amsterdam, 10 March 2010 - The proposals from the European Commission on post-Copenhagen climate policy that will be released today [1] will undermine the UN negotiations on climate change, warns a group of forest campaigners. The Global Forest Coalition [2] says the report paves the way for highly volatile carbon markets that jeopardize forest-dependent peoples’ livelihoods, and urges policymakers to focus on domestic emission cuts and finance for forest conservation and restoration instead.

The European Commission communication proposes to work together with ‘interested’ developed and developing countries to create sectorial carbon market mechanisms, outside the scope of the UN Climate Change negotiations. Forest campaigners fear chaos if a scheme to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) is included in these carbon markets. 

“Financing forest conservation through carbon markets strongly increases the risks of negative environmental and social impacts”, says Simone Lovera, coordinator of the Global Forest Coalition.

The Global Forest Coalition recently launched a report [3] which provides examples of these risks:

• In Colombia, carbon traders, are offering forest inhabitants contracts to ‘sell oxygen’ on the international market. These ‘carbon cowboys’ are offering projects in exchange for the right to make decisions about the territory and resources.
• In Paraguay, speculation about a market in biodiversity offsets has led to limitation of Indigenous Peoples’ access to their original territories.

Recent scandals in countries like Papua New Guinea and Norway [4] have strengthened concerns that carbon markets, especially voluntary carbon markets, can easily lead to corrupt practices. 

"Voluntary forest carbon offset projects are increasingly leading to forced evictions of Indigenous Peoples and other local communities", alerts Sandy Gauntlett, chairperson of the Pacific Indigenous Peoples Environmental Coalition (PIPEC)."That is why Indigenous Peoples worldwide are demanding that our rights are recognized before governments continue to experiment with REDD programs and projects."

While the European Commission communication recognizes that the so-called Copenhagen Accord [5] fell "well short of the EU's ambition for Copenhagen" and represents "the lowest common denominator", it still proposes to "anchor" this weak compromise in the UN process. These attempts will likely be opposed by the group of developing countries that successfully resisted the adoption of this informal document as a formal UN decision, as they felt the targets in the Copenhagen Accord were far too weak to halt global warming.

 ###

FOOTNOTES:
[1] "Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: International climate policy post-Copenhagen: Acting now to reinvigorate global action on climate change"
[2] The Global Forest Coalition is a worldwide network of NGOs and Indigenous Peoples' Organizations from over 35 countries, www.globalforestcoa lition.org
[3] REDD realities: How strategies to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation could impact on biodiversity and Indigenous Peoples in developing countries: http://www.globalforestcoalition.org/img/userpics/File/publications/REDD-Realities.pdf
[4]
• The Papua New Guinea scandal: http://www.redd- monitor.org/ category/ countries/ papua-new- guinea/
• The Norway scandal: http://e1.wrs. yahoo.com/ _ylt=A0oGk3D6qJZ LMzsAyHYDEQx. ;_ylu=X3oDMTByYW Zxb2M3BHNlYwNzcg Rwb3MDNQRjb2xvA3 NrMQR2dGlkAw- -/SIG=13rmvgct4/ EXP=1268251258/ **http%3a/ /www.forexyard. com/en/news/ Three-charged- in-Norway- CO2-tax-fraud- investigation- 2010-02-26T18554 2Z
• See also: http://planetark. org/wen/53152  for an interview with an environmental crimes specialist at Interpol, about REDD fraud.
[5] The Copenhagen Accord was developed at a series of meetings of 29 large countries that took place in the corridors of the official Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. It is noteworthy the Commission's Communication refers to a "Copenhagen Climate Change Conference" and not the Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.