The Future 500 Methodology:
Harnessing feedback to drive corporate adaptation, innovation, and sustainability.
More...
Grappling with CSR questionnaire fatigue?
Learn about our Global Citizenship 360
More...
See our SEED Initiative for Bioplastics
More...
Subscribe to the Future 500 mailing list.
More...
Read Our Articles.
Hydrogen Economy, CSR Standards Fatigue
More...
Support Future 500.
More...
At the close of the twentieth century, the world finds itself undergoing the most rapid and complete deforestation it has ever experienced under the human hand. Since 1950, a fifth of the world’s forest cover has been removed. At least 55% of the world’s 30 to 40 million hectares of rare but incredibly productive temperate rainforest has been logged or otherwise cleared. Current rates of loss for rainforests and other ecosystems are over 20 million hectares a year, 40 hectares a minute. According to reports by World Resources Institute (WRI) and Rainforest Alliance, tropical forests account for 80% of that loss. An area almost the size of Washington State is destroyed each year, and at current rates, tropical forests will be reduced by almost half from existing levels in the next 45 years. The problem is not limited to the tropics. Temperate and Boreal forests in the US, Canada, Asia, and Europe are similarly threatened. WRI reports that in Canada alone, over 200,000 hectares of forest are destroyed each year, close to one hectare every two minutes. In Siberia, over 3 million hectares of boreal forests are lost annually through logging operations. In many areas, loss of old-growth forests is an issue. In the contiguous United States, less than 10% of the old-growth temperate rainforests survive. Much of the original forestland in the United States has been replaced by agricultural lands, second-growth forests, plantations, and development. In British Columbia, only one of 25 large coastal watersheds has wholly escaped logging.
A forest is a natural, self-sustaining community characterized by vertical structure created by the presence of trees. Trees are large, generally single-stemmed, woody plants. Forests can exist in many different regions under a wide range of conditions, but all true forests share these physical characteristics.
Because a forest is a natural community, no forest is static in time. That is, because forest communities respond to outside, or edaphic, influences, most forests are in a state of constant flux. Depending upon the systems within which forest communities exist, such factors might include rainfall, fire, wind, glaciation, seismic activity, flooding, animal activity, insulation, and so on. At any time, a forest is the collection of past responses to edaphic influences and internal competitive interactions. Therefore, the present status of any forest, indeed of any natural community, reflects what has gone on before.
Any discussion of forests must recognize the inherently dynamic nature of forest communities, and must acknowledge that, while defined by the presence of trees, forests consist of much more — animals, plants, water, soil, time, gases, fungi, bacteria, and people — and are always greater than the sum of their parts.
Humans are indisputably a part of most forests. With the exception of extremely inaccessible forestlands, such as those found atop the Tepuis of southern Venezuela and northern Brazil, all forests present on Earth today have been influenced by human beings for tens of thousands of years. In many cases, extant forest communities have never been without the influence of human activities. Present-day North Temperate and Taiga forest communities, for example, developed during the Holocene as the latest continental glaciers receded. During this same period, human populations were moving northward with the developing ecosystems, and were an integral part of these communities right from their inception.
Because of the widespread nature of human activity in forests, it is tempting to think of human endeavor as one more edaphic factor influencing forest development. This approach is misleading, however, since it denies the role of self-awareness in human activity. Because human beings can understand cause and effect, and because we have amassed an increasingly deep body of knowledge about forest processes over the past ten millennia, human influences simply cannot be likened to the blind forces of nature.
Since prehistory, human beings have realized benefits from forested lands in the form of spiritual values, medicines, shelter, food, materials, fuel and more. Often, humans have sought to manipulate natural processes so as to compel forest systems to produce more of the goods and services desired by people. Examples range from culturally modified trees and edge habitat maintained by the Haida and others in west-coastal North America to Pre-Colombian enrichment planting of Brazil nut trees in the Amazon to traditional coppice management in the English lowlands. At times, human management has become so intensive as to become the primary set of factors under which the forest system operates. Such systems move towards the near total human control found in agricultural systems and cannot be thought of as forests in any natural sense, although they may continue to resemble forests superficially.
One of the forest products most important to human economies has always been wood — lignified plant material. Wood is a durable, light-weight, easily worked, waterproof material and fiber source. It is also a safely handled and easily stored fuel. For these reasons, wood has always been a primary forest product for human populations, and wood and its derivatives have always been the primary forest products for industrial interests.
Since wood is an important structural component of any forest, its removal has immediate implications for forest health. Light extraction can be negligible, but intensive harvests can lead to severe degradation, even beyond a forest’s capacity to recover. Of course, the specific levels of wood removal that can be tolerated by a forest depend on many factors, including the type of forest involved, the harvesting methods used, the weather, and so on.
Because the products derived from wood have been important to many civilizations, and because wood has therefore acquired value within these civilizations, there has always existed a powerful incentive for individuals to capture the wood value of old growth timber. The extraction of such wood requires little investment and the wood is usually of high value. In contrast, the production of wood in plantations or woodlots requires added investment — at the very least, the landowner must incur the opportunity cost of holding the land under trees rather than converting it to some other use. Thus, whenever old growth timber has been accessible to exploitation, it has been cut. Additionally, during periods of rapid growth by agrarian populations, agricultural land is in great demand, thus rendering the value of cleared land greater than the value of forestland realizable by an individual. This, too, promotes the clearing of natural forest.
The result has been a steady loss of natural forest as civilizations have expanded outwards. This pattern is evident in the development of ancient civilizations in such diverse regions as China, Europe, India, Africa, Central America, and the Middle East. Similarly, this pattern has been evident on a global scale over the past three centuries as the currently dominant industrial and mercantile civilization has grown.
Locally, the effects of deforestation are well-known. Removal of forest cover leads directly to a loss of animal habitat, and thus a decline in animal diversity and abundance, a loss of watershed moderation, and thus increased spring runoff coupled with summer drought, soil destabilization, which can culminate in large-scale erosion and land slips, a reduction in local microclimate attenuation, and thus hotter summers and days and cooler nights and winters, and a drying of the forest, and thus an increased risk of fire. These impacts contribute directly to a decline in the well-being of human populations in deforested areas, whether or not their primary livelihoods are forest-based. These impacts of local or regional deforestation have been noted repeatedly as human civilizations have spread around the globe, but today they have acquired a new dimension.
Today the scale of deforestation is such that the “externalities” — the unintended and uncompensated consequences of forest removal — have gone far beyond localized effects such as erosion and fire risk. Today, the effects of primary forest logging are global. The major unintended effects associated with global deforestation are loss of cultural diversity, biological and genetic diversity, and carbon storage capacity.
The world’s forests, particularly the tropical rainforests, are home to over 10 million members of the last surviving intimately resource-based cultures. Forest dwellers around the world have lived with this resource for millennia, yet today it is often literally stolen from them by governments and industries intent on turning natural capital into hard currency. There have been more extinctions of tribal peoples in this century than any other, with Brazil losing 87 tribes between 1900 and 1950. Even in the rare cases when forest dwellers are compensated for this loss, the changes visited upon their cultures by the inexorable expansion of industrial culture are devastating. As cultures around the world become more and more alike, the destruction of each one of these different models is a profound loss in both the richness of the human experience and in the global knowledge base.
A study on the correlation between cultural diversity and biodiversity found that ecoregions consisting of moist tropical forest, the Amazon Basin in particular, are not only the most species rich, but also support the largest number of indigenous populations (over two-thirds of all those found in Latin America). In this study, biodiversity was a measurement not only of species diversity, but also of biological utility, in the form of carbon storage and the development of genetically diverse ecosystems.
Pressure to join the consumer driven, cash-based economy often leads indigenous societies to sell their natural resources so as to have access to the products of this economic system. Such decisions are rarely made in light of full knowledge of the economic values, costs, and benefits involved because such groups almost never have access to the information sources available to those with whom they trade.
Biodiversity is the level of difference among living things. It is important to the biological health of the planet and therefore to the human race because diversity contributes to resiliency. Because most ecosystems persist in dynamic equilibrium, a diverse community is more likely to be robust and to withstand large scale disturbances. A world without diversity would be fragile and likely to amplify disturbance into catastrophe through the collapse of ecosystems that had lost “keystone” species — species that form crucial links in a system’s equilibrium. Thus, anthropogenic biodiversity reduction, combined with anthropogenic climate change, has the potential to spin out of control and to threaten the prosperity of global civilization.
Additionally, biodiversity is important because it represents the scope of nature’s richness. Throughout human history, this richness has contributed to the well-being of humanity by providing food, materials, and medicines. Even the dominant industrial culture draws many of its most basic supplies from this biological storehouse. All of our foods have been made possible by biological diversity and many of our most basic medicines, such as aspirin, are derived directly from naturally occurring compounds. It would be foolish to imagine that our dependence on this fount of useful diversity has passed, and that the human race can now provide for itself independent of the natural world.
Biodiversity happens to be greatest in the world’s primary tropical rainforests. Destruction or fragmentation of these forests therefore contributes directly to a reduction in global biodiversity. Because many rainforest plants and animals have extremely limited ranges, operations as small as a single timber extraction can damage global
Already the scale of biodiversity disruption engendered by the present generation of human activities ranks with the great prehistoric extinctions. Recovery from this level of disturbance will require tens of millions of years.
The earth’s atmosphere is an elaborate and delicately balanced cycle of gasses that protects and makes possible life on Earth. Among the gasses present in the atmosphere is carbon dioxide, a gas that contributes an insulating capacity to the atmosphere and moderates heat loss to outer space. Such gasses are called “greenhouse” gasses because their function is much like that of the glass in a greenhouse: they allow solar heat into the system, but discourage its escape. Thus, additional greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere lead to increased temperatures on the surface of the Earth. Increased temperatures have important implications for weather patterns, sea levels, and other natural cycles that directly influence human life on Earth.
Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is linked to the biological processes on Earth through a complicated series of interactions. Essentially, increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is moderated by plant growth, and carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere by processes of decay. Today, the world is experiencing a rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide due to the release of carbon dioxide through the burning of fossil fuels. This carbon was removed from the atmospheric cycle during the Carboniferous period, over 300 million years ago, when vast amounts of plant material were buried. The anthropogenic reintroduction of this carbon into the atmosphere is leading to global climate change.
The only ways in which carbon is removed from this cycle at present are through the growth of woody plant material or through the growth of coral reefs. Wood is a carbon sink that can keep carbon out of circulation for up to several centuries, while coral is more permanent. Thus, the world’s forests represent one of the largest carbon storage mechanisms in the global carbon cycle. When forest is destroyed, not only is this carbon storage capacity lost, but additional carbon is released into the atmosphere through decay and burning — indeed, some 15% of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere during the 1980s can be attributed to the destruction of tropical forests alone.
Today, both biodiversity loss and global warming have become such clear dangers to our biosphere that they have both been addressed by international treaties. These include the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Additionally, the loss of cultural diversity associated with global deforestation has been addressed by Chapter 26 of Agenda 21 of the UNCED (the 1992 Rio Conference). These treaties are the most visible manifestation of a growing recognition and acceptance of the mounting costs of deforestation — costs so high that they threaten the future of human civilization.
Nevertheless, from a timber extractor’s point of view, it would be foolish to pass up the opportunity to get something for nothing that is represented by primary forest logging. The returns are enormous, often in excess of 50%, and the risk is small. However, the writing is on the wall — consumer awareness and concern is growing, and this is beginning to be reflected in wood product trade statistics. Austria’s 1992 Tropical Timber Labeling Act was one of the first demand-side attempts to place limits on rainforest destruction associated with logging. The 1990s have seen several other initiatives begin, and a groundswell towards sustainability certification has brought these issues to the fore in the logging industry. In a very few cases, industrial concerns are beginning to negotiate in good faith with the indigenous stewards of the land. Furthermore, wood product conservation and recycling is growing rapidly around the world, and alternative fiber sources are poised to emerge.
However, the momentum established by these initiatives is still very small in comparison with the potential for windfall profits in the mining of primary forests. Where significant improvements have been realized, they have usually been the result of substantial external pressure exerted on industry by private citizens, consumers, and governments. This relationship has been overwhelmingly antagonistic, and a great deal of effort has been expended on all sides to compel or resist changes to the status quo.
While the globalization of markets makes available new pools of consumers for products from around the world, it also makes corporations, if not more responsible, at least more susceptible to the demands of the diverse interests of these consumers. At this juncture, it behooves any large wood product interest, be it a corporation, a government, or a consumer, to take a long, hard look at its role in global deforestation. Now is the time for forward-looking actors to seize the initiative and help usher in a more sustainable millennium. The stage is set for thoughtful corporations to accept a new, less antagonistic role in dealing with natural resource use. The companies that do this will gain substantial first-mover advantages in the move to a sustainable society, and will help bring about the changes that will make ecological and economic sustainability compatible.
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
Comment
CommentFuture 500's stakeholder engagement methodology is based on feedback and adaptation. In this spirit, we encourage you -- our stakeholders -- to share your ideas below.
Design, Development, and Maintenance by LoginIncluded and PapayaSoft