Peacebuilding and Natural Resource Governance After Armed Conflict by Michael D. Beevers

Author:Michael D. Beevers
Language: eng
Format: epub, pdf
ISBN: 9783319631660
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Diminishing Confidence in Forest Reforms

Perceptions who is to blame for the problems discussed above differ. In numerous interviews, government officials and timber industry representatives suggested that the problems and substantial delays stem from interlocutors that want to put an end to timber extraction in Liberia. These interlocutors, most notably, are international and Liberian advocacy organizations. News reports have been highly critical of Global Witness, describing the organization as “paralyzing” the timber sector, and stating that “many Liberians especially rural Liberians … will remain jobless as long as Global Witness and its collaborators continue … to hold hostage the forest sector” (Analyst 2009). At the same time, Liberian advocacy groups have been accused of opposing all timber extraction and even the government’s ability to manage forests. The government issued press statements, and at least one member of its staff has written an article, “questioning the motives” of non-governmental organizations (UN Panel of Experts 2009, 19). The FDA published a public notice in the country’s newspapers stating that it was no longer necessary for the government or international organizations to support local groups engaged in discussions related to forest reforms and policies. The notice noted that Liberian groups had an obligation to acknowledge state authority on forest matters, and threatened that failure to do so would result in “actions compatible with the rule of law” (UN Panel of Experts 2009, 19–20).

Individuals interviewed at the FDA and other government agencies have also accused international peacebuilders, including staff of the World Bank and GEMAP of being “obstructionist.” An internal memo described GEMAP as engaging in a deliberate attempt to “retard our progress” and vilified the international advisors for acts of “economic sabotage” and subverting the national interest, both of which are crimes punishable by imprisonment under Liberian law. Such intimidation may be working as the World Bank advised its forestry advisor to “draw back from involvement of such contentious issues in the forestry sector, particularly commercial forestry” (UN Panel of Experts 2009, 19). The UN Panel of Experts for its part has come under criticism for purposefully undermining economic development and providing activist organizations with the information intended to “stop commercial logging” (UN Panel of Experts 2009, 19).

It is clear the government was under intense pressure to meet the expectations for timber extraction. According to the government representatives, the problem was the complex and time-consuming legal requirements of the forest reforms. For example, the UN identified 32 different steps in the concession allocation process. An official in the FDA mentioned that from the perspective of the government, so-called improprieties or “corruption” actually represented “efficiencies” designed to get timber extraction moving forward rapidly to keep promises to political constituents and international peacebuilders alike. There is a perception that the reforms and policies implemented after the conflict are “too legalistic” and “too complicated” for an FDA that lacks technical expertise and capacity. International peacebuilders, however, suggested that delays occurred because of other factors. Several timber contracts were delayed because the bidding companies failed to meet a financial obligation of $250,000 and other sales were deferred due to questions of land ownership.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.