Teak forest exploitation, South Sudan

<div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Description</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld"></td><td class="columns">Newly-independent South Sudan is heavily reliant on oil as an income earner, which is why harvesting extensive teak forests, originally planted by the British in the 1940s, is seen as important in generating foreign exchange. Large land concessions have already been granted to foreign companies to harvest the teak. Of these, two of the largest are a 50,000 hectare natural forest concession to Central Equatoria Teak Company (CETC) and 18,640 hectares (1,319 hectares of which are under teak)[1] to Equatoria Teak Company (ETC). There have been years of local opposition to the deals, signed in 2007, because of a lack of consultation. Although there has not been displacement, there are reports that suggest the government wants people to be moved from forestry areas. The CETC agreement stipulates the payment of $200,000 into a social fund plus $155 per m^3 of teak exported. The ETC agreement also involves a $200,000 social fund amount (ETCs website, however, says under the terms of its concession agreement they have contributed $70,000) plus $110 per m^3 of teak exported. Government officials have expressed dissatisfaction with these amounts compared to the price that Sudanese teak, considered to be of the highest quality in Africa, earns on international markets[2]. The concessions have an interesting history involving the development department of the British and Finnish governments. As reported by the Oakland Institute, the Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC), whose sole shareholder is the UK Department for International Development, and the Finnish Fund for Development Cooperation (Finnfund) held majority interests in Equatoria Teak Company and Central Equatoria Teak Company. They later sold their interests to unnamed investors, but as the Oakland Institute points out, the implication is that the Government of South Sudan entered into the investment because they believed CDC and Finnfund were responsible investors. Having divested, there is no guarantee that new investors are as committed to sustainable development. However, Oakland acknowledges some benefits, citing job creation (a Forest Stewardship Council report indicated ETC was employing 246 people, 98 percent of whom were from the local population) and that the wood is processed onsite. But there have also been complaints that expectations of large amounts of jobs have not been fulfilled and that existing jobs are poorly paid[3]. <br/><br/></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Basic Data</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Name</td><td>Teak forest exploitation, South Sudan</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Country</td><td><a href="/country/south-sudan">South Sudan</a></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Province</td><td>Western Equatoria</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Site</td><td>Nzara</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Accuracy of Location</td><td>LOW country/state level</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Source of Conflict</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Type of Conflict (1st level)</td><td>Biomass and Land Conflicts (Forests, Agriculture and Livestock Management)</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Type of Conflict (2nd level)</td><td>Land acquisition conflicts<br /> Deforestation<br /> Plantation conflicts (incl. Pulp</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Specific Commodities</td><td><a href='/commodity/timber'>Timber</a><br />Teak</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Project Details and Actors</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Project Details</td><td class="columns">Processed timber (teak) can retail at prices from $750 per cubic meter to $1,500 per cubic meter[1]. <br/><br/></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Project Area (in hectares)</td><td>68600</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Level of Investment (in USD)</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Type of Population</td><td>Rural</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Potential Affected Population</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Start Date</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Company Names or State Enterprises</td><td><a href='/company/equatoria-teak-company'>Equatoria Teak Company</a> from <a href='/country-of-company/united-kingdom'><small>United Kingdom</small></a><br /><a href='/company/central-equatoria-teak-company'>Central Equatoria Teak Company</a> from <a href='/country-of-company/united-kingdom'><small>United Kingdom</small></a><br /><a href='/company/maris-capital'>Maris Capital</a> from <a href='/country-of-company/united-kingdom'><small>United Kingdom</small></a></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Relevant government actors</td><td>Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Investment, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ministry of Environment</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">International and Financial Institutions</td><td><a href='/institution/department-for-international-development'>Department for International Development <small>(DFID)</small></a> from <a href='/country-of-institution/united-kingdom'><small>United Kingdom</small></a><br /><a href='/institution/finnfund'>Finnfund</a><br /><a href='/institution/forest-stewardship-council'>Forest Stewardship Council <small>(FSC)</small></a><br /><a href='/institution/us-agency-for-international-development'>US Agency for International Development <small>(USAID)</small></a></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Environmental justice organisations and other supporters</td><td>Generation Agency for Development and Transformation-Pentagon (GADET- Pentagon), South Sudan Law Society (SSLS), Oakland Institute, Norwegian Peoples Aid</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">The Conflict and the Mobilization</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Intensity of Conflict (at highest level)</td><td>LOW (some local organising)</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">When did the mobilization begin</td><td>In REACTION to the implementation (during construction or operation)</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Groups Mobilizing</td><td>Indigenous groups or traditional communities<br /> International ejos<br /> Local ejos<br /> Local government/political parties</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Forms of Mobilization</td><td>Development of a network/collective action<br /> Involvement of national and international NGOs<br /> Lawsuits, court cases, judicial activism<br /> Official complaint letters and petitions</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Impacts</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Environmental Impacts</td><td><strong>Visible: </strong>Deforestation and loss of vegetation cover<br /><strong>Potential: </strong>Biodiversity loss (wildlife, agro-diversity), Food insecurity (crop damage), Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Soil erosion</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Socio-economic Impacts</td><td><strong>Visible: </strong>Lack of work security, labour absenteeism, firings, unemployment<br /><strong>Potential: </strong>Displacement, Loss of livelihood, Land dispossession, Loss of landscape/sense of place</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Outcome</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Project Status</td><td>In operation</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Pathways for conflict outcome / response</td><td>Migration/displacement<br /> Strengthening of participation<br /> New Environmental Impact Assessment/Study<br /> Cancellation of the concession agreement.</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Development of Alternatives</td><td>Teaching local farmers agro-forestry, promoting afforestation and giving smallholder farmers equity in the venture have all been suggested as possibilities.</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Do you consider this as a success?</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Why? Explain briefly.</td><td>There are reports of dissatisfaction with the amount of money that South Sudan will get out of the deals, lack of consultation with the local community and poor wages and working conditions. Recently, the CETC project has lost its FSC certification but it is not clear what the reasons behind this were [4].</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Sources and Materials</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Legislations</td><td><table><tr><td><p> Land Act (2009)<br/></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> Draft Land Policy (2011)<br/></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> The Local Government Act (2009)<br/></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> Investment Promotion Act (2009)<br/></p></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">References</td><td><table><tr><td><p> [1] Ferrie, Jared (2013). South Sudan to Start Teak Exports to Cut Dependence on Oil. Available at: Accessed 10 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bloom.bg/V15RT0." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> [2] Norwegian Peoples Aid (2011). The New Frontier. Available at: Accessed 7 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bit.ly/12enYKI." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> [3] Oakland Institute (2011). Understanding land investment deals in Africa: South Sudan. Available at: Accessed 13 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bit.ly/12gvSDE." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Links</td><td><table><tr><td><p> [4] Is All Well In The Teak Forests Of South Sudan? – By Aly Verjee<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://africanarguments.org/2013/03/14/is-all-well-in-the-teak-forests-of-south-sudan-by-aly-verjee/" target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr></table></td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Media Links</td><td><table><tr><td><p> Standard Group Kenya (2013). South Sudan to export teak tree. Available at: Accessed 14 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bit.ly/Ya6zeF." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> UNMISTV (2011). UNcover Sudan Show 6 - Teak. Available at: Accessed 14 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bit.ly/VhDLUH." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> Flickr (2011). Ngari Norways Photostream. Available at: Accessed 14 February 2013.<br/><a class="refanch small" href="http://bit.ly/12NDcXf." target="_blank">[click to view]</a></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> VIDEOS:<br/></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> PHOTOS: <br/></p></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div class="horipane"><div class="title active">Meta Information</div><div class="content"><table class="table"><tbody><tr><td class="fld">Contributor</td><td>Patrick Burnett</td></tr><tr><td class="fld">Last update</td><td>08/04/2014</td></tr></tbody></table></div></div>
Comments