Proposed legislation in the European Union would require suppliers to prove their products haven’t contributed to legal or illegal deforestation.
The law would focus on the industries with some of the most egregious environmental track records, including soy, beef, palm oil, wood, cocoa and coffee, as well as leather, chocolate and furniture.
Conservation groups have expressed satisfaction with the first-of-its kind legislation but are concerned about the lack of protections for Indigenous peoples, as well as carbon-rich ecosystems like savannas, wetlands and peatlands.
The European Union is considering an ambitious new proposal that would regulate imports of products linked to global forest loss.
The law would require suppliers to prove their products haven’t contributed to deforestation, whether legal or illegal. If passed, it would force producers to raise their environmental standards or risk losing out on a market of 27 countries and 450 million people.
“Europe is finally taking steps against the deforestation that it drives, and it is doing it not by placing the burden on consumers, but on the big companies that produce these products,” Nico Muzi, Europe director of environmental advocacy group Mighty Earth, told Mongabay. “If we want change, we need to regulate the industries that cause deforestation.”
The proposal, introduced by the European Commission earlier this week, gives special focus to products with some of the most egregious environmental track records, including soy, beef, palm oil, wood, cocoa and coffee, as well as leather, chocolate and furniture. Should the proposal pass, importers will have to meet stricter traceability measures, such as sharing geographic coordinates of where their products originated.
It also establishes a benchmarking system to determine which countries are the most at risk of deforestation, and pledges 1 billion euros ($1.1 billion) to help them develop more sustainable forest management programs.
The EU predicts the proposal will cut at least 31.9 million metric tons of annual carbon emissions and save around 3.2 billion euros ($3.6 billion).
“We must protect biodiversity and fight climate change not only in the EU, but globally, and our consumption should not contribute to global deforestation, which is a major cause of biodiversity loss and greenhouse gas emissions,” said Virginijus Sinkevičius, the European commissioner for the environment, oceans and fisheries.
Between 1990 and 2020, an estimated 420 million trees were lost to deforestation worldwide, according to the U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Agriculture is responsible for nearly 90% of that, with cattle ranching being the biggest contributor.
Globally, Europe is the second-largest importer of products associated with deforestation, according to a 2021 WWF report. In recent years, trade to the region has led to around 16% of global forest loss.
A herd of cattle on a ranch in Colombia. Image by Rhett Butler, Mongabay.com
The deforestation proposal is part of a package of recently announced environmental initiatives that include more rigorous regulations for waste and waste trafficking, as well as improved soil protections to increase carbon storage in agricultural areas, fight desertification and restore degraded land, the European Commission said in a statement.
“If we expect more ambitious climate and environmental policies from partners, we should stop exporting pollution and supporting deforestation ourselves,” Sinkevičius said, adding, “With these proposals, we are taking our responsibility and walking the talk by lowering our global impact on pollution and biodiversity loss.”
Other countries, coming out of the U.N. climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland, have announced similar plans to clean up supply chains. Last week, the U.K. passed a law banning products linked to illegal deforestation. In October, U.S. lawmakers introduced a bill that holds importers accountable for forest loss.
However, unlike the European proposal, neither of those measures targets legal drivers of deforestation.
Loopholes and missed opportunities
While the EU’s proposal takes ambitious steps to protect forests, it falls short when it comes to other types of carbon-rich ecosystems, some environmental groups pointed out. For example, the proposal’s current language would exclude protection of many savannas, wetlands and peatlands.
In addition to storing massive amounts of carbon, these ecosystems prevent soil erosion and flooding, and help provide clean drinking water.
“There’s simply no need to destroy native ecosystems to make room for commercial crops,” Mighty Earth’s Muzi said. “There are more than 1 billion acres [400 million hectares] of previously degraded land where all future agricultural needs can easily be met without threatening the world’s last ecosystems.”
Mongabay has reported extensively on the rapid disappearance of wetlands and peatlands due to palm oil, timber and other agricultural commodities, as well as governments’ continued omission of these landscapes from legislation.
The EU’s proposal also fails to include special protections for Indigenous communities, which often serve as stewards of the environment. Instead, it relies on the local laws of the exporting countries despite the fact they’re often weak or ignored.
Muzi said he expects officials to close this loophole by including international human rights standards in the proposal’s language. And because proposals by the European Commission are often heavily revised, he expects many of the other loopholes to be addressed, too.
“Usually, Europe sets the standard for environmental regulations,” he said. “It is often at the forefront. We expect other regions will follow.”
Afi River Forest Reserve (ARFR), in eastern Nigeria’s Cross River state, is an important habitat corridor that connects imperiled populations of critically endangered Cross River gorillas.
But deforestation has been rising both in ARFR and elsewhere in Cross River; satellite data show 2020 was the biggest year for forest loss both in the state and in the reserve since around the turn of the century – and preliminary data for 2021 suggest this year is on track to exceed even 2020.
Poverty-fueled illegal logging and farming is behind much of the deforestation in ARFR. Resource wars have broken out between communities that have claimed the lives of more than 100, local sources say.
Authorities say a lack of financial support and threats of violence are limiting their ability to adequately protect what forest remains.
IKOM, Nigeria — When 57-year-old Linus Otu was a child, each dawn arrived with the chatter of monkeys and occasional belches of gorillas from the mountain that overlooks his small bungalow home in the village of Kanyang II in southeastern Nigeria’s Cross River state. He recalled peering up at the foggy, forested mountains, uncertain what to make of his noisy animal neighbors.
One morning, while exploring the banks of the Afi River, Otu came upon a mother chimpanzee bathing its infant. “It acted like a human, like a mother will care for her baby,” Otu told Mongabay.
But when Otu walks beside the river today, once a watering hole for diverse wildlife, the cacophony of the forest is different, quieter. Decades of habitat loss have taken their toll on Cross River’s rainforest, and even the state’s protected areas haven’t been able to escape the intertwined forces of agriculture, poverty and war.
A village near Afi River Forest Reserve. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
Afi River Forest Reserve (ARFR), named after the river that bisects it into two unequal halves, was established in the 1930 to protect more than 300 square kilometers (about 116 square miles) of rainforest near Nigeria’s border with Cameroon. The reserve, now managed by the government’s Cross River State Forestry Commission harbors many species, including blue duikers (Philantomba monticola), bay duikers (Cephalophus dorsalis), red river hogs (Potamochoerus porcus), yellow-backed duikers (C. silvicultor), mona monkeys (Cercopithecus mona) and African brush-tailed porcupines (Atherurus africanus).
The region is also home to critically endangered Cross River gorillas (Gorilla gorilla diehli) that occasionally inhabit ARFR but prefer to live more permanently in nearby Cross River National Park and adjacent Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary (AMWS). However, despite becoming an official protected area in 2000, poaching has persisted in AMWS; according to Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), an infant gorilla was killed by a snare trap in 2010; in 2012, two gorilla carcasses were found at a hunter’s camp.
The Cross River gorilla remains Africa’s most endangered ape, with fewer than 300 individuals believed to remain in the wild, all of which are relegated to a small, mountainous portion along the Nigeria-Cameroon border. Around 100 – a third of the entire subspecies – are found in a patchwork of three adjoining protected areas in Nigeria: AMWS, the Mbe Mountains Community Sanctuary and the contiguous Okwangwo division of Cross River National Park.
The cross River gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli) is considered one of the most endangered primate subspecies on the planet. Image by user Julielangford via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0).
Poaching isn’t the only threat that the gorillas face. Habitat loss is on the rise in Cross River, with satellite data from the University of Maryland (UMD) showing that more primary forest was cleared in 2020 than in any year prior since measurement began in 2002. Overall, Cross River state lost nearly 5% of its primary forest cover between 2002 and 2020.
As with many of Nigeria’s forest reserves, ARFR has been beset by increasing deforestation. The reserve has had the highest rate of forest loss in the region, according to a 2018 study published in the Open Journal of Forestry, which found that annual deforestation in ARFR increased twelve-fold between 1986 and 2010. UMD satellite data show the reserve lost another 4% of its primary forest cover between 2011 and 2020. Like Cross River state, 2020 saw ARFR’s highest levels of deforestation since the beginning of the century – and preliminary data suggest the reserve is experiencing another year of intense habitat loss.
Habitat in flames
2021 started with a bang in Cross River state as the region saw some of its highest fire activity in years, according to data from the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The data show several fires spread and broke out in ARFR.
Satellite data show clearing and associated fire events in Afi River Forest Reserve and other protected areas in Cross River state, Nigeria.
Local sources said the 2021 fire season was one of the worst they’ve ever experienced in the region, dwarfing even the outbreak of 2002. Blazes in ARFR lingered for several weeks, defying firefighting efforts from local communities, said George Mbang, a WCS ranger who works in adjacent Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuar. Mbang said he and his team were eventually able to snuff out the fires, but not before dozens of farms and tracts of forest were lost in and near the two protected areas.
Sources said the origins of the fires remain unclear but suspect that some of them may have been started by farmers clearing land for new fields. Satellite imagery shows many of the fires that invaded ARFR occurred near areas that had been previously cleared.
Fighting forest fires in ARFR is difficult. Rangers are challenged by a lack of resources and varied, inaccessible terrain, with peaks soaring to 1,300 meters above sea level. Mbang said unstable rocky outcrops can become dislodged as fire burns the vegetation holding them together and can crush firefighters and houses as they careen downhill. He said that the only option is to raze the edges of affected areas to restrict further spread.
Some communities around ARFR have proposed new, stiffer penalties for those linked to fire outbreaks, Otu told Mongabay. He said the new clause, when fully enshrined, will require those found responsible to forfeit their own cocoa farms to the victims of fire incidents, in addition to monetary fines.
Cocoa farms are common near Afi River Forest Reserve. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
Farmers told Mongabay that fires that spread onto land they already used for agriculture deplete nutrients in the soil, forcing them to seek – and clear – replacement farmland in protected areas. Research has shown that fire replenishes some, but not all, nutrients in the soil as it breaks down organic matter. Critically, fire has been found to reduce nitrogen in soil, and farmers told Mongabay that it was easier for them to clear more forest for new farmland than use fertilizer to replace nitrogen and other nutrients.
Poverty and conflict
During a visit to ARFR in Aug. 2021, Mongabay observed several trucks loading logged timber day and night in and near ARFR, destined for urban centers where a growing demand for timber products is increasing the pressure on dwindling habitat in Nigeria’s forest reserves. Many areas of ARFR were pockmarked by deforestation and strewn with logs as distant rattles of chainsaws mingled with the moist forest breeze.
Cocoa trees bearing yellow and green pods spread across the undulating landscape in and around the reserve. It was the peak of farming season, with farmers continuing to clear new farms even as rains fell, burning stumps and applying chemicals to control crop pests and disease. At numerous homesteads, farmers were collecting harvested cocoa pods and bagging dried beans. Bagged cocoa beans were then weighed and loaded onto trucks at depots, where they’ll be transported to nearby cities before being exported abroad.
orkers stack bags of cocoa near Afi River Forest Reserve. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
The search for new agricultural land to grow cocoa, plantain, banana and cassava is driving forest loss in ARFR, said Otu, who is a former community leader of Kanyang II. “As you enter you start clearing as much as you have the power to clear,” he said. “Almost every portion of the reserve has been claimed.”
Cocoa farming became commercialized fairly recently in surrounding communities, spurring a new wave of demand for larger farming spaces. Farmers, backed by wealthy cocoa merchants from urban centers, competed to dominate the emerging market primarily by farming larger portions each year. The surge of cocoa farms in the likes of ARFR, linked to the growing demand for the product in the international market, has made Nigeria the world’s fourth largest cocoa producer.
With most surrounding communal forests nearly depleted, community residents say customary practice allows them to permanently own any portion of land they can clear and farm in ARFR – despite official laws that prohibit it. Several farmers told Mongabay that they have cleared more land in the reserve than they need in the short term, hoping to either transfer the land to their children, use it for new farms or rent it out to migrant cocoa farmers for a fee. In addition, locals said that by taking possession of large expanses of land, they stand a chance of receiving eviction payouts if the government steps in to reclaim remaining forest in the reserve.
Cocoa pods dry near Afi River Forest Reserve. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
The underlying factor driving deforestation in ARFR and elsewhere in the country is poverty. Nearly half of Nigeria’s 190 million people live in extreme poverty, and unemployment reached a record 33% in 2020, according to figures from the National Bureau of Statistics. With few legal options to make a living and with the country’s population expected to double by 2050, Nigerians say they are forced to turn to the forests to make a living.
The situation has deteriorated to the point at which resource wars have broken out, local sources told Mongabay. Power conflicts and boundary disputes over access to timber, cropland, bushmeat and other forest products have intensified in recent years as resources diminish in and around ARFR and communities fight to control what remains.
Customary negotiators once relied on traditional boundaries such as trees, rivers and oral practices to delineate borders between local communities and mitigate disputes. But 61-year-old Leonard Akam said this is no longer sufficient to deter bloodshed, and multiple sources said that resource wars between communities have led to the deaths of at least 100 people.
Akam is calm in his demeanor, often witty with words and brutally honest. He was the head of the Boje clan when a dispute over communal boundaries within the reserve with neighboring clan Nsadop led to a brutal communal war in 2010. “So many lives were lost,” Akam told Mongabay. Local authorities temporarily restored peace by deploying the military, complete with a panel of inquiry and an arbitration committee. But Akam said the government’s approach was half-hearted and ineffective.
One such war erupted in 2018 between the Boje and Iso Bendeghe communities. After a year of conflict in which at least two people were reportedly killed, the Nigerian government again deployed the military in an effort to restore peace in the area.
Lumber milled near Afi River Forest Reserve. Timber is one of the vanishing forest resources inciting conflict among Cross River communities, according to local sources. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
This time intervention was more successful. A fragile truce was struck between Boje, Nsadop and Iso Bendeghe as well as other communities such as Bouanchor and Katabang. Boundary tracing, aided by old documents retrieved from the archive, is in progress. Meanwhile, communities around the reserve are in dialogue to avoid further bloodshed.
Despite this progress, Akam said sustainable peace depends on addressing the root causes of the crisis: unemployment, lack of infrastructure, poor educational systems – and the poverty that underpins them all.
Running out of time
ARFR has long been too degraded to provide permanent habitat for Cross River gorillas but researchers still consider it a lifeline that connects resident populations in AMWS and Cross River National Park. However, ARFR may be losing its capacity as a habitat corridor. A 2007 study published in Molecular Ecology found evidence of “low levels” of gene flow between gorilla populations, suggesting that while individuals were still able to move between populations to breed, it wasn’t happening very often. A related study published in 2008 in the American Journal of Primatology found Cross River gorillas have less genetic diversity than western gorillas (G. gorilla gorilla), putting them at greater risk of extinction.
“These results emphasize the need for maintaining connectivity in fragmented populations and highlight the importance of allowing small populations to expand,” the study states.
A 2008 survey of the southeastern portion of ARFR conducted by WCS in 2008 found that primary forest covered just 24% of the surveyed area.
“Unless the current rate of habitat destruction is reduced, the critical link between the AMWS and the Mbe Mountains that this reserve provides will be lost, with the obvious consequence being further isolation of the Afi gorillas and other wildlife,” WCS Cross River landscape program director Inaoyom Imong and primate researcher Kathy L. Wood wrote in their survey report. “Results of this survey show that farming, uncontrolled logging, and hunting are currently the most important threats to the Afi River Forest Reserve. These threats need to be urgently addressed in order to protect this very important corridor area.”
But in the years since this research was published, deforestation in ARFR has only increased. Satellite data from the University of Maryland show the reserve lost around 4% of its remaining primary forests between 2009 and 2020, with more deforestation detected in 2020 than in any year previous since measurement began in 2002. Preliminary tree cover loss data for 2021 and NASA fire data indicate ARFR is experiencing another year of heavy deforestation.
2020 saw the highest amount of deforestation in Afi River Forest Reserve since the turn of the century, according to data from the University of Maryland. But preliminary data for 2021 suggests the reserve has experienced even more deforestation this year.
Satellite imagery shows a large fire consumed forest in Afi River Forest Reserve following clearing of a smaller area.
While recent conservation efforts led by the government, local communities and NGOs have focused on gorilla strongholds Afi Mountain Wildlife Reserve and Cross River National Park, habitat corridors like ARFR remain porous.
Some blame the government for allowing the destruction of ARFR to continue. A 2017 capacity study of the Cross River State Forestry Commission concluded that the agency is “grossly understaffed and deficient in managing the forest estate,” with only 324 active staff – less than 10% of the 3,458 recommended by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.
Paddy Njar, director of wildlife at the Cross River State Forestry Commission said there’s little else they can do without better state support.
“There is no support from the state government,” Njar said. “We are seriously handicapped. No mobility. No funding. No allowances for rangers who ought to be on patrol. I feel bad.”
Njar said this lack of state support has emboldened loggers and communities to exploit protected forest. He told Mongabay the agency doesn’t even have access to permanent vehicles necessary for enforcement. He said he is in the process of requesting support from other institutions within and outside Nigeria to secure vehicles to carry out monitoring of protected sites and other field operations.
“If we have mobility, we can control 80% of the deforestation happening at the moment,” Njar said. “We have the laws but we are not mobile enough to reach the field for enforcement. For now, the commission has no single vehicle. Sometimes rangers have to hire motorcycles before they go to work.”
Milled lumber near Afi River Forest Reserve. Image for Mongabay by Orji Sunday.
But Njar said that even when they’re able to get to the areas they’re supposed to protect, rangers are often still prevented from doing their job. He spoke of a recent operation in which his team arrested loggers and confiscated their chainsaws in one of the state’s protected areas. But he said their enforcement efforts were thwarted when the loggers joined forces with a nearby community to block the exit road and threatened to assault the rangers unless they surrendered the chainsaws.
“I can’t risk my life anymore,” Njar said.
Meanwhile, conservationists say the porosity of ARFR is bleeding threats into other nearby protected areas, including those that shelter critically endangered gorilla populations. For instance, WCS said its staff have documented more than 1,000 farms in adjacent Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary, as well as hundreds of snares, gun cartridges and empty shells, and chainsaws recovered from loggers.
“Now that they have almost finished Afi River Forest Reserve, their attention has turned to the sanctuary,” Mbang told Mongabay.
Imong sums up the situation with dire concision: “We are running out of time to save what is left of the forest.”
Editor’s note: This story was powered by Places to Watch, a Global Forest Watch (GFW) initiative designed to quickly identify concerning forest loss around the world and catalyze further investigation of these areas. Places to Watch draws on a combination of near-real-time satellite data, automated algorithms and field intelligence to identify new areas on a monthly basis. In partnership with Mongabay, GFW is supporting data-driven journalism by providing data and maps generated by Places to Watch. Mongabay maintains complete editorial independence over the stories reported using this data.
For International Orangutan Day, Mongabay spoke with Leif Cocks, founder and president of The Orangutan Project, which seeks to protect the endangered orange-haired primates and their rapidly disappearing habitats in Southeast Asia.
All three species of orangutans — Sumatran (Pongo abelii), Bornean (P. pygmaeus) and Tapanuli (P. tapanuliensis) are one step away from extinction.
Deforestation is the biggest threat the primates face, and at the moment most conservation efforts have only been able to slow forest loss, not turn the tide around, Leif told Mongabay.
Oil palm plantations replacing primary rainforests is a major problem in Malaysia and Indonesia, but Cocks says simply banning these plantations is not the answer; instead, he advocates for replacing exploitative production systems with those that recognize the services that these forests provide to the local communities and building on that.
To some humans, the idea of treating an orangutan as a person is absurd. For Leif Cocks, spending billions of dollars to find life on Mars while living beings are driven to extinction on Earth is what is truly incomprehensible.
Cocks, the founder and president of The Orangutan Project, spoke to Mongabay ahead of International Orangutan Day on Aug. 19. From his time as a zookeeper in Perth to his years mingling with the orange-haired primates in Indonesia’s rainforests, his belief in their sentience has only deepened. In 2015, he took the stand at an Argentinian court to support treating an orangutan named Sandra as a person. The court agreed, recognizing Sandra’s rights to life, freedom and to be kept safe from harm.
However, for Sandra’s peers in the wild, their very right to exist remains in jeopardy. All three species of orangutans — Sumatran (Pongo abelii), Bornean (P. pygmaeus) and Tapanuli (P. tapanuliensis) — are critically endangered, or just one step away from extinction. There are fewer than 800 Tapanuli orangutans in the world, found in an area about the size of Los Angeles.
Orangutan in Malay means “person of the forest.” But the forests they call home in Southeast Asia are being hacked down incessantly. Bornean orangutans are native to the island of Borneo, which is divided between Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei. Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutans live on the neighboring Indonesian island of Sumatra. In 2019, 324,000 hectares (801,000 acres) of primary forest was destroyed in Indonesia, much of it cleared to make way for palm plantations. Deforestation is the biggest threat the primates face, Leif told Mongabay.
Baby orangutans are frequently kidnapped to be sold as pets. In the process, many are orphaned, depriving them of a necessary initiation into the wild. The mother-child bond is a pillar of orangutan society. Young ones spend three to four years learning the ropes from their mother. Like humans, orangutans are known to be self-aware, able to recognize their own face in a mirror. Where they outdo humans is in their ability to move their legs like humans can only move their arms. They also sport opposable thumbs on their feet that allow them to latch onto branches in a signature spread-eagled fashion. They are true acrobats of the treetops, where they spend most of their time, nesting in beds of branches and leaves, safe from predators like mighty tigers, lithe leopards and slithery crocodiles that still roam the rainforests of the Greater Sunda Islands.
Below are excerpts from a conversation with Cocks, condensed and edited for clarity.
Mongabay: Do you remember the first time you came across an orangutan?
Leif Cocks: I was brought up in Southeast Asia and spent my early years in Hong Kong. Back in the ’60s, it was common for wild animals to be kept as pets in Asia, I remember seeing people with pet orangutans. But the first time I got to know orangutans in a deeper sense was while working with 15 of them at a zoo in Perth.
From my perspective, orangutans are persons, self-aware beings with feelings, hopes and aspirations for the future, anxieties about the past. Apart from it being an environmental and economic catastrophe that we are destroying their rainforest home, they deserve not to be killed and destroyed and driven to extinction in the most horrific ways we can imagine. It became my life’s work to save them.
What do you think the relationship between humans and orangutans should be? How can the interests of both be served?
Both interests would be best served if all orangutans live free in wild and secure habitats. The best situation for orangutans is also the best-case scenario for us because the rainforest mitigates global warming, creates rain and provides regular water supply and environmental services that allow agriculture to prosper. By preserving orangutans and their rainforest home, we not only do what is the best thing for them, but we also provide the best sustainable future, both environmentally and economically, for the local communities and the entire planet.
What are the biggest threats to the survival of orangutans today?
It is unsustainable agricultural practice that is the biggest challenge that orangutans face. There are other significant factors too. But the disappearance of habitat, the permanent conversion of their rainforest home into unsustainable monocultures is the biggest problem. Illegal logging and illegal poaching are significant too, but once the rainforest is gone, it’s gone. There’s no hope for recovery.
Do you believe that oil palm plantations are viewed with the same skepticism by local people as they are by some Western observers?
It is probably about education and a sense of understanding. Because all monocultures are unsustainable by their very nature. Monocultures will destroy the environment that they’re in. That’s just science. They are very good at doing two things: squeezing the profit from many years into a few short years before they destroy the habitat, and reducing the profit from the many to the few.
Polyculture and agriculture, which includes mixed plantations with natural vegetation, can be sustainable, and provide maximum long-term income to the maximum number of people. We have a choice. Do we want a few people to get very rich quickly? Or do we want agriculture that supports economies that maximize sustainable profit for the maximum number of people?
Forest cleared to make way for a palm oil plantation in Indonesia. Image by Rhett A. Butler/Mongabay
You have spoken about how we are passing on the true cost of production to people who can’t afford to pay for this kind of economic activity. Why do you say that?
For example, if there’s a rainforest and the local community is making a living off the rainforest. They gain timber products, and their economy is based on the rainforest. But it’s also doing other things, what we call the environmental services. The rainforest is like a big sponge; when it rains, the water is absorbed, and when it’s not raining the water is let go. In a rainforest, you have rivers that flow year-round despite rainfall being intermittent.
Destruction of their habitat is the greatest threat facing these great apes, according to Cocks. Image courtesy: The Orangutan Project.
You take the rainforest away, and you put a palm oil plantation there, you have a flood that destroys the village, and then you have droughts that destroy crops. It increases the temperature in the local area, which can lead to more crops failing. The rainforest harbors predators that keep pest species under control. So all these environmental services that the rainforest provided are taken away, and the profits go to the person who put the plantation there. In the big picture, destruction of rainforest causes more global warming than all the transport systems in the world combined. It’s passing a financial cost to future generations. So, what they’ve done is they have passed the true cost to the powerless.
Orangutan on a tree. Photo by Dawn Armfield on Unsplash.
How does The Orangutan Project protect orangutans and their habitats?
It is a multifaceted project with many partners. Our vision is to save up to eight complete ecosystems of the right type, shape and size of rainforest where orangutans can survive with the other megafauna like tigers, tapirs, monkeys and elephants, survive the extinction crisis. We are supporting companies and foundations to get the land and manage it and piece together functioning ecosystems.
We’re also working with the local communities to develop the agricultural systems that I mentioned before like dragon’s blood, a dye derived from vines that grow underneath the rainforest canopy, vanilla production and honey production. These are a couple of examples of agricultural systems that can be created under the rainforest canopy with the local communities. We have shown that within seven to 10 years, we can leave these viable, functioning ecosystems not only environmentally sustainable but economically self-sufficient. The local communities get wealthy and prosper. And there’s enough surplus money to pay for the protection and security of the ecosystem.
Is there a successful approach that you would like to highlight either from within your organization or from outside?
The first thing I have to say is simplistic solutions are great for marketing and fundraising, but they don’t really work in the real world. Let’s say we say “let’s ban palm oil.” That seems good. Like you see a rainforest, and then it disappears, and a palm oil plantation is now there. So the logical conclusion would be if we stopped palm oil, we will stop the rainforest from disappearing. But it doesn’t really address the issue. The person destroying the forest isn’t a palm oil person; he is a person seeking to make money. The trees are worth a lot of money. They’ll destroy the rainforest just for the value of the trees, and there is more than one unsustainable form of monoculture that can replace the rainforest.
So let’s say you weren’t allowed to plant palm, you can put paper on it, you could put a rubber plantation there, you can put a coconut plantation there. You may not make as much money, but it is still profitable, still worth destroying the rainforest. If you address one commodity, you’re not going to make a meaningful change because you’re not really affecting the driver.
People want me to say, “look, this community education program achieved great things,” or “the rangers have achieved great things.” But to have a meaningful impact, it’s always a lot of different things in the right dosage, with many partners putting their skills together.
If somebody wanted to look for examples where this multisectoral approach is working, where should they look?
In general, at least for orangutans, it is hard to pick out, because we’re losing at the moment. Even the well-run projects are reducing habitat loss. So in the next 10 years, we are really in the process of having to go from reducing the rate of destruction to stopping it and expanding reforestation and protection. Some people are doing some fantastic work, but once you look into it, they’re still losing, they’re just losing less. We really haven’t turned that around.
Do you have a wish list of three things that you’d want done immediately to be able to save the orangutans and their habitats?
I think one is funding, that seems to be the most limiting factor. Not enough money to do the work. Number two is removing special interests from political decision-making. This is not unique to Indonesia and Malaysia and the orangutan world. Businesses donate and influence a government to make decisions that benefit them at the expense of decisions that may benefit the entire community or country.
The third would be developing economic systems where the true cost of production can’t be passed on to the powerless. So the costs of environmental services that are lost in rainforest destruction are paid by taxes, or given to the local community, which have lost those services.
Has COVID-19 made it more challenging to do the work you do?
In the short term, it has devastated our funding. Because as people lose their jobs and feel threatened, they are less giving. People have taken the opportunity at the moment to increase poaching, increase illegal logging. The immediate short-term effect is reducing our ability to affect change from lack of money and increasing the pressure on the forests.
The long-term effect is now unknown because there’s lots of special interest groups who are trying to make the COVID-19 recovery about benefiting a few and keeping the old status quo going. But there is also at the same time a movement for a “green recovery,” this opportunity to build a better, fairer world and a sustainable world for our grandchildren. Whether we are going to go down the dark road, increasingly right-wing, increasingly nationalist, selling off more opportunities to exploitative industries, or do we move to a fairer world and a greener world? That’s the greatest challenge of our time.
Malavika Vyawahare is a staff writer for Mongabay. Find her on Twitter: @MalavikaVy
FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.
