Global Forest Coalition
EIGHTH
SESSION
OF
THE
OPEN
WORKING
GROUP
ON
THE
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
GOALS
(OWG8)
CO-‐CHAIR
MORNING
SESSION:
FORESTS
AND
BIODIVERSTY
3
February
2014,
UNHQ,
NEW
YORK,
USA
Remarks
by
ISIS
ALVAREZ
GLOBAL
FOREST
COALITION
Distinguished
Co-‐Chairs,
friends,
all
protocols
observed.
I'm
Isis
Alvarez,
representing
the
Global
Forest
Coalition
and
the
Women's
Major
Group.
The
Women’s
Major
Group
believes
that
forests
and
biodiversity
and
the
policies
to
protect
both
must
be
discussed
together
and
not
be
separated
into
two
different
topics
as
has
been
done
in
the
TST
Issues
Briefs.
The
importance
of
diverse
forests
as
well
as
other
ecosystems
to
achieve
global
sustainable
development
cannot
be
over-‐emphasized
and
many
benefits
are
still
beyond
human
understanding.
Thus,
their
diligent
conservation
must
be
central
to
any
sustainable
development
planning
and
policy.
Indigenous
women,
often
heads
of
households,
are
particularly
dependent
on
free
access
to
resources
including
fuelwood,
medicinal
plants,
fodder,
fruits,
nuts
and
seeds
as
they
constitute
the
basis
of
their
culture,
spiritual
values
and
livelihoods.
Studies
have
shown
that
when
rural
women’s
access
to
forest
resources
is
improved,
their
income
increases
and
they
are
most
likely
to
spend
this
income
on
their
children's
education,
health
care
and
feeding
the
household.
Thus,
women’s
access
to
forests
and
associated
biodiversity
therefore
has
a
direct
bearing
on
poverty
erradication
and
the
well
being
of
families.
Women
often
cultivate
lands
that
they
do
not
own,
and
gather
resources
from
forests
to
which
they
lack
titles.
Even
where
there
are
land
tenure
policies
in
place,
some
patriarchal
cultures
will
not
consider
women’s
land
tenure
rights.
Historically,
land
reforms
have
tended
to
grant
tenure
rights
to
men
ignoring
gender
aspects.
Women’s
role
as
care-‐takers
and
food
providers
makes
them
highly
dependent
on
the
good
state
of
natural
resources
and
any
restriction
or
depletion
of
these
could
particularly
severely
affect
them
and
contribute
to
the
feminization
of
poverty.
Women
are
more
dependent
on
biodiversity’s
non-‐monetary
benefits.
According
to
commonly
used
forest
definition,
there
is
no
difference
between
a
forest
and
a
plantation.
This
allows
for
the
conversion
of
real
forests
into
monoculture
tree
plantations,
including
of
alien
tree
species,
oriented
towards
the
global
market,
thus
leading
to
further
biodiversity
loss,
soil
erosion,
depletion
of
water
sources,
and
other
social
and
ecological
impacts.
Current
policies
proposed
during
different
intergovernmental
processes
do
not
necessarily
identify
and
address
the
drivers
behind
the
loss
of
forests
and
other
biodiversity,
which
are
very
much
embedded
in
a
macro-‐economic
model
that
benefits
large
corporations
rather
than
rural
and
Indigenous
women
and
men.
Most
rural
women
depend
on
subsistence
farming,
whereas
privatization
and
market-‐
oriented
policies
have
tended
to
benefit
larger
farmers.
Communities
in
Africa
and
Latin
America
are
increasingly
being
violently
evicted
from
their
ancestral
lands,
especially
where
property
rights
have
not
been
clearly
defined,
often
to
make
way
for
extensive
agroindustrial
plants
and
plantations,
as
well
as
for
carbon
offsets
projects.
Land
grabbing
conflicts
have
been
widely
increasing
at
a
fast
rate
and
women
are
in
the
fore-‐front
of
this
struggle.
Continued
unsustainable
consumption,
trade
and
production
patterns,
mainly
in
northern
countries,
increases
environmental
pressures
as
more
and
more
biomass
is
required
to
supply
their
demand,
while
governments
subsidize
such
“alternative”
means;
this
is
indeed
the
case
of
renewable
energies,
such
as
biofuels
and
wood-‐
based
bioenergy,
that
has
already
impacted
valuable
forests
and
biodiversity
around
the
world.
Forest,
biodiversity
and
land
policies
that
are
gender
blind
and
do
not
take
a
rights-‐based
approach
will
continue
to
marginalize
women,
both
legally
and
socially.
The
Women’s
Major
Group
believes
the
protection
of
biodiversity,
including
forests
and
other
ecosystems,
must
be
central
to
Sustainable
Development
Goals.
Therefore,
at
this
stage
Mr/Mrs
Chair,
we
can
share
with
you
the
following
recommendations
for
Goals
&
Targets:
Goal
1:
Conservation
of
Ecosystems
and
Sustainable
Use
of
Land
and
other
Natural
Resources
Targets
include:
·∙
Zero
loss
of
forest
cover
(based
on
a
definition
of
forests
that
excludes
industrial
tree
and
shrub
plantations);
·∙
Zero
depletion
of
clean
freshwater
resources,
full
protection
and
ambitious
restoration
of
healthy
freshwater
ecosystems.
This
requires
both
the
protection
and
restoration
of
healthy
ecosystems
and
ending
over-‐extraction
of
water,
especially
for
irrigation
and
water-‐intensive
industries;
·∙
Zero
loss
of
other
ecosystems,
including
grasslands,
peatlands,
savannah,
tundra
and
alpine
ecosystems;
·∙
50
million
hectares
of
degraded
or
destroyed
ecosystems
restored
or
allowed
to
naturally
regenerate;
·∙
Phasing
out
all
agricultural
practices
that
cause
soil
erosion,
depletion
and
compaction;
·∙
All
potentially
perverse
incentives
promoting
unsustainable
consumption
and
production
patterns
that
might
trigger
biodiversity
loss
have
been
redirected
or
eliminated;
·∙
The
territorial
rights
and
customary
conservation
practices
of
Indigenous
Peoples,
women
and
local
communities
have
been
fully
documented
and
recognized;
·∙
Women
and
men
participating
equally
in
forests
and
other
natural
resource
governance;
·∙
Free,
Prior
and
Informed
Consent
of
all
communities,
including
Indigenous
Peoples,
required
for
any
projects
and
developments
that
may
affect
lands
which
they
own,
occupy
or
otherwise
use.
Indicators
for
these
targets
should
be
gender
sensitive
and
include
an
indicator
based
on
the
implementation
of
the
Aichi
Targets.
The
target
on
perverse
incentives
should
include
an
indicator
on
mainstreaming
biodiversity
in
all
Overseas
Development
Aid
and
other
public
financial
flows,
as
well
as
an
indicator
on
eliminating
subsidies
that
are
potentially
harmful
for
biodiversity.
Last
but
not
least,
it
should
include
a
gender-‐disaggregated
indicator
of
the
amount
of
public
support
and
other
positive
incentives
provided
for
sustainable
use
of
biodiversity
by
Indigenous
Peoples
and
local
communities.
SESSION
OF
THE
OPEN
WORKING
GROUP
ON
THE
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
GOALS
(OWG8)
CO-‐CHAIR
MORNING
SESSION:
FORESTS
AND
BIODIVERSTY
3
February
2014,
UNHQ,
NEW
YORK,
USA
Remarks
by
ISIS
ALVAREZ
GLOBAL
FOREST
COALITION
Distinguished
Co-‐Chairs,
friends,
all
protocols
observed.
I'm
Isis
Alvarez,
representing
the
Global
Forest
Coalition
and
the
Women's
Major
Group.
The
Women’s
Major
Group
believes
that
forests
and
biodiversity
and
the
policies
to
protect
both
must
be
discussed
together
and
not
be
separated
into
two
different
topics
as
has
been
done
in
the
TST
Issues
Briefs.
The
importance
of
diverse
forests
as
well
as
other
ecosystems
to
achieve
global
sustainable
development
cannot
be
over-‐emphasized
and
many
benefits
are
still
beyond
human
understanding.
Thus,
their
diligent
conservation
must
be
central
to
any
sustainable
development
planning
and
policy.
Indigenous
women,
often
heads
of
households,
are
particularly
dependent
on
free
access
to
resources
including
fuelwood,
medicinal
plants,
fodder,
fruits,
nuts
and
seeds
as
they
constitute
the
basis
of
their
culture,
spiritual
values
and
livelihoods.
Studies
have
shown
that
when
rural
women’s
access
to
forest
resources
is
improved,
their
income
increases
and
they
are
most
likely
to
spend
this
income
on
their
children's
education,
health
care
and
feeding
the
household.
Thus,
women’s
access
to
forests
and
associated
biodiversity
therefore
has
a
direct
bearing
on
poverty
erradication
and
the
well
being
of
families.
Women
often
cultivate
lands
that
they
do
not
own,
and
gather
resources
from
forests
to
which
they
lack
titles.
Even
where
there
are
land
tenure
policies
in
place,
some
patriarchal
cultures
will
not
consider
women’s
land
tenure
rights.
Historically,
land
reforms
have
tended
to
grant
tenure
rights
to
men
ignoring
gender
aspects.
Women’s
role
as
care-‐takers
and
food
providers
makes
them
highly
dependent
on
the
good
state
of
natural
resources
and
any
restriction
or
depletion
of
these
could
particularly
severely
affect
them
and
contribute
to
the
feminization
of
poverty.
Women
are
more
dependent
on
biodiversity’s
non-‐monetary
benefits.
According
to
commonly
used
forest
definition,
there
is
no
difference
between
a
forest
and
a
plantation.
This
allows
for
the
conversion
of
real
forests
into
monoculture
tree
plantations,
including
of
alien
tree
species,
oriented
towards
the
global
market,
thus
leading
to
further
biodiversity
loss,
soil
erosion,
depletion
of
water
sources,
and
other
social
and
ecological
impacts.
Current
policies
proposed
during
different
intergovernmental
processes
do
not
necessarily
identify
and
address
the
drivers
behind
the
loss
of
forests
and
other
biodiversity,
which
are
very
much
embedded
in
a
macro-‐economic
model
that
benefits
large
corporations
rather
than
rural
and
Indigenous
women
and
men.
Most
rural
women
depend
on
subsistence
farming,
whereas
privatization
and
market-‐
oriented
policies
have
tended
to
benefit
larger
farmers.
Communities
in
Africa
and
Latin
America
are
increasingly
being
violently
evicted
from
their
ancestral
lands,
especially
where
property
rights
have
not
been
clearly
defined,
often
to
make
way
for
extensive
agroindustrial
plants
and
plantations,
as
well
as
for
carbon
offsets
projects.
Land
grabbing
conflicts
have
been
widely
increasing
at
a
fast
rate
and
women
are
in
the
fore-‐front
of
this
struggle.
Continued
unsustainable
consumption,
trade
and
production
patterns,
mainly
in
northern
countries,
increases
environmental
pressures
as
more
and
more
biomass
is
required
to
supply
their
demand,
while
governments
subsidize
such
“alternative”
means;
this
is
indeed
the
case
of
renewable
energies,
such
as
biofuels
and
wood-‐
based
bioenergy,
that
has
already
impacted
valuable
forests
and
biodiversity
around
the
world.
Forest,
biodiversity
and
land
policies
that
are
gender
blind
and
do
not
take
a
rights-‐based
approach
will
continue
to
marginalize
women,
both
legally
and
socially.
The
Women’s
Major
Group
believes
the
protection
of
biodiversity,
including
forests
and
other
ecosystems,
must
be
central
to
Sustainable
Development
Goals.
Therefore,
at
this
stage
Mr/Mrs
Chair,
we
can
share
with
you
the
following
recommendations
for
Goals
&
Targets:
Goal
1:
Conservation
of
Ecosystems
and
Sustainable
Use
of
Land
and
other
Natural
Resources
Targets
include:
·∙
Zero
loss
of
forest
cover
(based
on
a
definition
of
forests
that
excludes
industrial
tree
and
shrub
plantations);
·∙
Zero
depletion
of
clean
freshwater
resources,
full
protection
and
ambitious
restoration
of
healthy
freshwater
ecosystems.
This
requires
both
the
protection
and
restoration
of
healthy
ecosystems
and
ending
over-‐extraction
of
water,
especially
for
irrigation
and
water-‐intensive
industries;
·∙
Zero
loss
of
other
ecosystems,
including
grasslands,
peatlands,
savannah,
tundra
and
alpine
ecosystems;
·∙
50
million
hectares
of
degraded
or
destroyed
ecosystems
restored
or
allowed
to
naturally
regenerate;
·∙
Phasing
out
all
agricultural
practices
that
cause
soil
erosion,
depletion
and
compaction;
·∙
All
potentially
perverse
incentives
promoting
unsustainable
consumption
and
production
patterns
that
might
trigger
biodiversity
loss
have
been
redirected
or
eliminated;
·∙
The
territorial
rights
and
customary
conservation
practices
of
Indigenous
Peoples,
women
and
local
communities
have
been
fully
documented
and
recognized;
·∙
Women
and
men
participating
equally
in
forests
and
other
natural
resource
governance;
·∙
Free,
Prior
and
Informed
Consent
of
all
communities,
including
Indigenous
Peoples,
required
for
any
projects
and
developments
that
may
affect
lands
which
they
own,
occupy
or
otherwise
use.
Indicators
for
these
targets
should
be
gender
sensitive
and
include
an
indicator
based
on
the
implementation
of
the
Aichi
Targets.
The
target
on
perverse
incentives
should
include
an
indicator
on
mainstreaming
biodiversity
in
all
Overseas
Development
Aid
and
other
public
financial
flows,
as
well
as
an
indicator
on
eliminating
subsidies
that
are
potentially
harmful
for
biodiversity.
Last
but
not
least,
it
should
include
a
gender-‐disaggregated
indicator
of
the
amount
of
public
support
and
other
positive
incentives
provided
for
sustainable
use
of
biodiversity
by
Indigenous
Peoples
and
local
communities.
Stakeholders