Picture 1
Person: Eddie Mabo
Who: Was a Torres Strait Islander who became famous in Australian history.
What: He had a role in campaigning for indigenous land rights and for his role in a landmark decision of the High Court of Australia.
When: Born 29th of June 1936, died on the 21st of January 1992
Where: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Why: He wanted to overturned the legal fiction of terra nullius so could characterised Australia laws with regards to land and title.
How:
Stolen Generation Aboriginal issues
With the Stolen Generation, the Aboriginals had many issues while this process was happening to them. Some of these issues included families grieving over their young children being taken away to be fitted into modern day society, Aboriginal culture being destroyed and lost, kids wanting to be home with their family, Aboriginals getting into a lot of crime and getting caught by the police in the end etc.
While back in the Stolen Generation some Aboriginal people didn’t really condmned
Unemployment does not only affect the economy, it also has an effect on society.
Find TWO (2) newspaper or magazine articles that relate to unemployment (1 MUST be about YOUTH unemployment) (They can be dated up to 12 months ago). In the Discussion Forum, provide a 3 sentence summary of each of the articles, and explain in 2 sentences what the impact of unemployment is on society as suggested in your article. You MUST include a LINK to each of the articles in your post as well.
Some possible sites that can help you with this: (You are NOT limited to using only these sites They are only suggestions!!!)
* www.smh.com.au
* www.theaustralian.news.com.au
* www.brw.com.au
* www.abs.gov.au
* www.cch.com.au
Log onto www.abs.gov.au and select ‘Labor Force’. Copy the table and graph into your notes and answer the following questions:
1. How many people were unemployed in April 2009?
2. Define the term ‘participation rate’? (HINT: See your glossary)
3. Looking at the graph for ‘Employed Persons’, what is the trend in employment from April 2008 to April 2009? What do you think has contributed to this trend?
4. It appears that the unemployment rate for April 2009 is 5.5%. What does this figure mean?
Catholic Churches view on deforestation
What the catholic churches view, on this particular social justice issuse, is that they think with deforestation it reduces the quality of life, and brings in resulting deaths. The church condemns the idea of deforestation, because when logging down trees you are destroying mother Earth, which then leads to the results of destroying life and not respecting it, which the church doesn’t like it to be this way, because all us living creatures on Earth really need trees to surive throughout our whole lives. So this is very disrespectful to nature and to the Catholic Church. What the Cathloic Church would like instead is that people should try reducing deforestation by using alternative solutions, so we can reduce the issue as much as possible around the world, which then helps life run more smoother and better.
Causes and effects of deforestation
There are many reasons why, there are a few causes and effects for deforestation, around the world, but lets start off talking about the reasons behind the causes of deforestation first. Now with the causes of deforestation the reasons for theses are heavy overgrazing, from farmers livestock because the farmers really depend on their livestock, to provide food for them and they keep getting more livestock also. Other reasons include excessive need of fuel, people being really dependent on their agriculture, removing trees to grow crops and last but not least logging from big companies.
Now lets talk about the effects from the causes of deforestation. Now with the effects from deforestation they are predominantly soil erosion, fertility declines, salinisation, desertification, agrochemical pollution and soil compaction which all leads up to pretty much land degradation. But their are other big effects like, disruption of the water cycle, loss of biodiversity, climate change and so on. So that’s all you need to know about the causes and the effects from deforestation, we hope this information provided everything you needed to know about it.
1: Define your issue.
Deforestation is the logging and/or burning of trees in a forested area. Purposes of deforestation are for the clearing of land to graze, make soy farms simply to survive but mostly for income.
2: Explain how your issue relates to the reverence for life topic.
This issue relates to the reverence for life topic because deforestation is destroying the environment, which contains animals and plant life. It is causing global warming. It is destroying the planet. Reverence for life is about respecting life and not destroying it.
3: Outline the causes of your issue (provide statistics).
The causes of deforestation is heavy overgrazing from farmers livestock because the farmers really depend on their livestock to provide food for them and they keep getting more livestock to, another reason is excessive need of fuel, Africans being really dependent on their agriculture and also logging from big companies.
4: Analyse the effects on people and society of your issue.
It affects their soil resulting in low quality crops, more pollution in the area and a hole in the ozone layer resulting in increased UV rays entering the atmosphere.
There is also desication of previously moist forest soil, dramatic Increase in Temperature Extremes, moist Humid Region Changes to Desert, no Recycling of Water, less Carbon Dioxide and Nitrogen Exchange, more Desertification, soil Erosion
There many rewards such as clean air and clean water, perhaps the two most important, that forests provide. Rainforests also provide many aesthetic, recreational and cultural rewards. If the rainforests are destroyed, then these rewards dissappear. This has major social repercusions for the entire world.
5: Evaluate the possible solutions for your issue.
To do more tree plantations and reduce illegal logging by more patrolling. Also to change the limits of logging to have a sustainable amount. There are also many countries with governments that are corrupt so we need non-government or international agencies to be moderators for deforestation.
6: Defend the Catholic Church’s position.
The Catholic Church goes against the idea of deforestation because it reduces the quality life and resulting deaths. The church condemns the idea of deforestation because when logging down trees you are destroying nature that was created by the lord. It is disrespectful to the environment to the Catholic Church.
What are the Causes of Deforestation?
The destruction of the forests is occurring due to various reasons, one of the main reasons being the short term economic benefits. Given below are some more common causes of deforestation:
Used for Urban and Construction Purposes: The cutting down of trees for lumber that is used for building materials, furniture, and paper products. Forests are also cleared in order to accommodate expanding urban areas.
To Grow Crops: Forests are also cut down in order to clear land for growing crops.
To Create Grazing Land: Forests are cut down in order create land for grazing cattle.
Used for Fuel: Trees are cut down in developing countries to be used as firewood or turned into charcoal, which are used for cooking and heating purposes.
Some of the other causes of deforestation are: clearing forests for oil and mining exploitation; to make highways and roads; slash and burn farming techniques; wildfires; and acid rain.
What are the Effects of Deforestation?
There are a number of adverse effects of deforestation, such as:
Erosion of Soil: When forest areas are cleared, it results in exposing the soil to the sun, making it very dry and eventually, infertile, due to volatile nutrients such as nitrogen being lost. In addition, when there is rainfall, it washes away the rest of the nutrients, which flow with the rainwater into waterways. Because of this, merely replanting trees may not help in solving the problems caused by deforestation, for by the time the trees mature, the soil will be totally devoid of essential nutrients. Ultimately, cultivation in this land will also become impossible, resulting in the land becoming useless. Large tracts of land will be rendered permanently impoverished due to soil erosion.
Disruption of the Water Cycle: Trees contribute in a large way in maintaining the water cycle. They draw up water via their roots, which is then released into the atmosphere. A large part of the water that circulates in the ecosystem of rainforests, for instance, remains inside the plants. When these trees are cut down it results in the climate getting drier in that area.
Loss of Biodiversity: The unique biodiversity of various geographical areas is being lost on a scale that is quite unprecedented. Even though tropical rainforests make up just 6 percent of the surface area of the Earth, about 80-90 percent of the entire species of the world exist here. Due to massive deforestation, about 50 to 100 species of animals are being lost each day. The outcome of which is the extinction of animals and plants on a massive scale.
Flooding and Drought: One of the vital functions of forests is to absorb and store great amounts of water quickly when there are heavy rains. When forests are cut down, this regulation of the flow of water is disrupted, which leads to alternating periods of flood and then drought in the affected area.
Climate Change: It is well known that global warming is being caused largely due to emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. However, what is not known quite as well is that deforestation has a direction association with carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Trees act as a major storage depot for carbon, since they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which is then used to produce carbohydrates, fats, and proteins that make up trees. When deforestation occurs, many of the trees are burnt or they are allowed to rot, which results in releasing the carbon that is stored in them as carbon dioxide. This, in turn, leads to greater concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Solomon Islands
2. Logging in Solomon Islands: a background
Discussions of logging in Solomon Islands often centre around the activities of three major actors in the industry. First, logging companies – their activities, operations, and how they affect economic, environmental, political and social developments in the country – usually come under scrutiny. Significant in this discussion is the assertion that logging companies, assisted by corporate powers in consumer countries, and taking advantage of weak state capacity in Solomon Islands have been able to maximise profits from the forest industry. Proponents of this view often base their analysis on the practices of multinational companies and how the weak administrative state in Solomon Islands has been unable to respond accordingly. They claim that logging companies have evaded taxes and maximise profit through practices such as transfer pricing, informal agreements between producers and buyers, under-reporting of export volumes, misrepresentation of species and by bribing political leaders (Dauvergne 1997; Price Waterhouse 1995; Duncan 1995). Duncan, for example, states that under-reporting of export volumes “is estimated to have cost Solomon Islands SI$96 million in revenues foregone and evaded in 1993″ (1995:12)
Second, the discussions usually centre around the state. It is sometimes assumed that the state is the most influential actor in the logging industry. Hence, poor management could be related to poor government policies, outdated parliamentary Acts, and a weak state administration. Such assumptions have given rise to calls for the introduction of a new Forestry Bill. Administrative and financial weakness as well as the lack of technology and trained personnel have given rise to the inability of the state to implement policies and enforce regulations. The tax collection system, for example, is ineffective. In 1995, despite increases in the value of log exports by SI$16.7 million, the amount collected as export duty to government fell by SI$12.6 million (Solomon Star, 4 April 1996). Proponents of a state-centred analysis would argue, therefore, that deforestation and forest degradation are as much a reflection of state incapacity as they are of logging company activities.
Third, discussions often centre around landowners and the role they play in the logging industry, how that affects logging operations, and whether or not they benefited from the industry. This discussion is closely related to the issues of land tenure, procedures for negotiating logging licences and the distribution of benefits from logging. Frequently expressed in this discussion is the assertion, both within the state and in civil society, that landowners have not benefited as they should, and that they are victims of corporate power agendas and the inadequecies of existing state policies, regulations and procedures. Emanating from this is the suggestion that state policies and regulations need to be changed and landowners ought to participate more in discussions of forestry developments. Furthermore, some argued that landowner interests should be protected by the state. The Minister for Forests, Environment and Conservation, Hilda Kari, for example, stated in parliament that there should be an increased local participation in the forest industry and legislations should be ammended to cater for that. Kari, in making reference to Solomon Islands Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation Act stated that “it has served its purpose . . . it had been largely conducive to the interest of foreign investment and logging on government land, but little focus to accommodate or be based on our own aspirations as resource owners” (Hansards Report, 20 April 1998, pp. 16-17). Not much of the literature attempts to discuss the role of landowners in a critical way.
To better understand the above viewpoints, let us explore in a historical way the development of Solomon Islands logging industry. Large-scale commercial logging in Solomon Islands started over 30 years ago. However, it was not until the 1980s that landowners became directly involved as a consequence of logging operations shifting into customary land. Prior to the 1980s most logging was done on government land or government leased land (Bennett 1995).
Fraser (1997) in discussing the struggle for control of Solomon Islands forests identified two periods. The first was between 1963 to the early 1980s when most logging took place on government land or customary land leased by government. The forests industry at that time was monopolised by Levers Pacific Timber which made up for about 75 percent of log production. Bennett (1995) also discussed forestry in public land or state controlled land.
The second period began in the early 1980s and continues today. This period is marked by a shift from government land to customary land and an influx of multinationals (particularly from Southeast Asia) in the logging industry. The industry at this time involved Solomon Islands landowners, the state and predominantly Malaysian and Korean producers, and Japanese and Korean buyers. Between 1981 and 1983 the number of logging licences issued to foreign companies increased fourfold (Fraser 1997:50) Politically this coincided with the coming into power of the first Solomon Mamaloni-led government which had a policy that encouraged foreign investor involvement in the logging industry.
The second period was also characterised by Solomon Islands economic dependence on the logging industry. By 1990, for example, log exports made up for 34.5 percent of the country’s total exports. This increased to 54.9 percent in 1993. In 1994 it contributed to 56 percent of the country’s export revenue and 31 percent of all government revenues (Montgomery 1995). In 1997, despite the collapse of the Southeast Asian log markets, forestry accounted for 48 per cent of total exports (Central Bank of Solomon Islands 1998). Furthermore, the rate of logging went beyond unsustainable rates. Log exports in 1994 and 1995, for example, were 659,000 and 748,500 cubic metres respectively (Central Bank of Solomon Islands 1995). This was more than double the potential sustained yield at that time which was about 325,00 cubic metres (Forestry Review). During this period there was also an increase in the incidents of logging-related conflicts. In 1995, for example, there were conflicts in Pavuvu in the Russell Islands which led to the deployment of police officers to protect the operations of Marvingbros, a Malaysian logging company against landowner resistance to logging the islands (Solomon Star, 18 April, 1995). The late 1980s and early 1990s were also characterised by numerous allegations that logging companies bribed political leaders. Indeed, it was alleged that logging companies played a crucial role in causing the collapse of the Francis Billy Hilly-led government in 1994 after only 18 months in power. A letter to the Private View column of the Solomon Star on 12 April, 1996, for example, states that “when Mamaloni took over the government in 1994, the mess in the forest industry developed into a very controversial issue.” My own researches have unearthed cases where government ministers were listed on logging company payrolls as directors of companies.
In late 1997 Solomon Islands’ logging industry was severely affected by problems in the Asian economies which consequently resulted in the collapse of log prices. This affected Solomon Islands’ log export. By November 1997 about 300,000 cubic metres of log were stranded in the country with nowhere to sell (Solomon Star, 15 December 1997). This affected the logging operations to extent that some companies suspended operation for a few months. This also coincided with the election of the Batholomew Ulufa’alu-led Solomon Islands Alliance for Change (SIAC) government which promised reforms in forestry policies. The SIAC government’s change in policy also attracted the re-establishment of the Australian government-sponsored Timber Control Unit.
But, in order to understand the logging industry in Solomon Islands, it is pertinent to have some understanding of the traditional land tenure systems and how these have changed over the years. This is significant because about 87 percent of Solomon Islands land is customary owned and that influences forestry outcomes.
3. Land, landowners and logging
Understanding the issue of landownership is vital to the development of land-based resources in Solomon Islands (as it is in other Melanesian countries). Peter Larmour (1979) explores the issues of forestry and ownership. Customary land tenure systems have often been regarding as an impediment to resource development in countries such Solomon Islands where a significant percentage of land is customary owned. Consequently, forestry development in Solomon Islands are shrouded by numerous questions such as: What is customary landownership? How is it organised? How does customary land tenure influence landowner responses to logging developments.
While it is not possible to identify a traditional land tenure system that exists throughout the Solomon Islands, there are commonalities in land tenure practices that influence landowner responses to the logging industry. One of the most important characteristics arguably found in most parts of Solomon Islands is the assumption that land is communally owned – a common property. Such an assumption implies that any dealings in the development of land-based resources such as forests will have to involve the community. This raises a related question: What is `the community’? – what constitutes it? In most instances the community is defined according to anthropological classifications such as tribe or extended family. Hence, land is often argued as the property of the tribe both in the work of outside scholars as well as Solomon Islanders. Zoloveke, for example, in discussing land tenure systems in Choiseul noted the fact that land is a common tribal property that, traditonally, is not a commodity that could be bought and sold (Zoloveke 1981). Questions not often asked are; what constitutes a tribe? does it really exist in Solomon Islands, or was it a social unit identified merely to fit anthropological discourses.
Although the specific objective of this paper is not to explore anthropological discourses on tribe and community, the above questions are significant because they illuminate discussions of the differences between ownership and rights of use to land. Because the tribe has become commonly accepted as the unit of ownership in most parts of Solomon Islands, negotiations for logging often involves the tribe. This is despite the fact that there is no standard definition of what constitutes a tribe. Consequently, in many instances difficulties in identifying the landowning unit is either because the tribe cannot be identified, or because land is not owned by the tribe. Such misunderstanding usually contribute in conflicts between landowning groups, or between landowners and companies. Furthermore, it could contribute towards the unequal distribution of logging incomes as will be demonstrated later when discussing forestry outcomes.
For the purposes of analysis, the landowners involved in Solomon Islands forestry industry could be categorised into three general categories. These are identified according to the nature of their participation in the forestry industry. First, are the royalty recipients who directly benefit financially from the royalty payments by logging companies. These are usually members of landowning groups (tribe, clan, family) and they benefit because of their membership to a defined social unit. Most of these social units, for example, the tribe, are large and because income received from royalty payments are distributed amongst members, the amount each member eventually gets is minimal and to the point of being neglegiable. The factors that motivates these people to participate in logging are promises of financial and social benefits in the form of the provision of education, health and infrastructural services.
The second group are `middlemen’ who negotiate between logging companies are landowning groups. These receive financial remuneration for their services. In most cases they are either landowners or community leaders of some sort. In Choiseul Bay where Eagon Resources Development Ltd. operates, for example, the middlemen were called “co-ordinators” either landowners or chiefs and leaders of the landowning group. They company uses them to get access to the land identified for logging. The case of Rendova in the Western Solomons also demonstrates a situation where an educated member of the landowning group has manipulated the community as middleman for the company and benefited from the logging company. The middleman, therefore, often has a multiplicity of interests and identity. There are, however, some middlemen who neither landowners or community leaders. They function purely as consultants for the company in its negotiations for logging rights licence.
The third group are landowners who do often benefit either directly or indirectly from logging operations. This group often includes women and children and some elders. This often results in the disempowerment of this particular group.
The three categories of landowners as identified above often overlap. There are cases where a single landowner functions in different ways.
4. Landowners and forest degradation
In Solomon Islands, landowners contribute significantly in influencing forestry outcomes such as deforestation and forest degradation, unsustainable logging, conflicts, and the distribution of incomes accumulated from forestry operations. The concern of this paper, however, is on forest degradation and deforestation, a concern that has consistently been raised by by NGOs (both domestic and international) (Roughan 1997) as well as by international institutions and donor governments (Price Waterhouse 1995; Duncan 1995; Montgomery 1996).
For Solomon Islands, the issue of most concern is not so much deforestation – the removal of primary forests to the extent that it results in the conversion of formerly forested land to grass land, or the complete desertification of the land (Johnson and Cabarle 1993). Rather, forest degradation is the most immediate problem. Here, the term forest degradation is employed to refer to the reduction in the forest’s capacity to sustain the ecology as well as the economic and socio-cultural needs of the local population. Deforestation, however, could become a problem if the current rate of forest degradation is not addressed. Most of the discussion on logging in Solomon Islands have used the two terms interchangeably. This has often confused the discussion. However, the purpose of this paper is not to deal with the technicalities of distinguishing between the two concepts. Rather, the paper is more concerned with examinig the role landowners play in either forest degradation or deforestation.
Much of the discussion on forest degradation in Solomon Islands often refer to the practices of logging companies and the government’s weak capacity to enforce its forestry and environmental regulations as the main underlying causes for forest degradation. There is a prevalant assumption that landowners are victims of logging operations because they suffer as a consequence of logging. It is important to note, however, landowners are not always victims of logging operations. Under the Standard Logging Agreement (SLA) landowners are both protected and authorised to participate activily in the negotiations and other processes leading to logging.
Because of the significance placed on landowners by the SLA, many have become active participants and cooperate with logging companies in encouraging logging operations. In these cases landowners are often motivated by the need for a source of income. For most of these landowning groups logging provided the only source of income generation. Landowners’ often sign logging agreements because of desire for income and economic development that would otherwise be unavailable in rural Solomon Islands. Also, some have been lured by promises of riches that the Company is able to provide. For example, the Korean negotiator for Eagon Forest Resources Development Ltd. told a landowner on Choiseul: “sapos iu givim kampani lan blong iu, ei! bae iu ia, iu wanfala rich man” (if you give your land to the company you will become a rich man). It was such promises and anticipation for quick money that attracted many landowners into signing logging agreements.
Indeed some landowners did become wealthy as a result of logging. These were, however, few and often involved educated villagers and leaders who had taken advantage of both the Company and the ignorance of the rest of the landowners. In the case of North New Georgia, for example, the close relationship between the logging and social control by the Christian Fellowship Church (CFC) meant that those who controlled CFC were in a better position to exploit the benefits of logging. In the case of Ndai Island on North Malaita, one individual working as a middle man between the Keyukeni Company of Korea and landowners was able to create for himself a financial empire in Solomon Islands. Other landowners who benefited from the industry often mismanaged their shares and directed it towards short term leisures such as drinking and women. In other instances because of the size of the landowning unit, the money is distributed to the extent that each individual’s share is so small that it could not be meaningfully invested.
In such a situation environmental considerations become secondary as financial benefits are deemed as significant. Logging operations on Choiseul Bay, Choiseul Province is an example of a case where landowners contribute to both the rate and nature of forest degradation. Here, landowning groups have formed themselves into the Poroporo Association which deals directly with Eagon Resources Development Ltd. Much of the land that was contracted to the company by the Association has been subjected to clear felling and converted into plantation after logging. The company views this as reaforestation (personal conversation with Camp Manager, Tarakukure, Choiseul Bay, 26 February 1998). Despite the fact that this is technically the development of a mono-culture forest plantation rather than reaforestation as in the regeneration of the original forest, the state has been unable to do much because of the agreement signed between Poroporo Association landowners and Eagon Resources Development Ltd. This, however, is often the result of few influential members of landowning groups who have been able to influence the rest of landowners. These are usually the middle man who benefit directly from dealing with the company.
Another example is the case of Rendova Island in the Western Province where a few individuals have become influential and accumulated much of the profit from the industry. These indivituals usually work with the logging company, either as consultants or middleman who negotiate for the Timber Rights Agreement and help the company obtain logging licences.
However, also in the same area are landowning groups who have resisted against logging on their lands. These include the Chiropodoko and Sasaqaramu land cases. In these cases landowning groups demanded compensation from the logging company for trespassing into land not included in the Timber Rights Agreement for logging.
Landowners, as signatories to the Standard Logging Agreement (SLA), have the authority to either stop logging company operations if they contradict environmental regulations. However, on the ground landowners often find themselves powerless. This is also partly because landowners often are either not literate enough to interpret the agreements or they do not have access to legal representation. In other cases, landowners’ ability to influence logging operations have been affected by the fact that logging companies have had close relationships with state officials. On Pavuvu, in the Russell Islands, for example, landowners ability to stop logging by Marving Brothers Company Limited was severely affected by the close relationship between the state and the company. There were also allegations that some government ministers received bribes from the company.
At the state level laws and regulations had to been amended to cater for these developments. At the time of independence the laws governing the exploitation of forest resources were contained in the Forest and Timber ACT 1969. This was a document passed by the British colonial government and tailored for that period of time and the purposes of the colonial regime. It has since been amended a number of times to include new regulations and ommit what were regarded as out dated potions of the law. In 1989 the Forest Resources and Timber Utilisation (Amendment) Act incorporated established processes and procedures for the exploitation of forest resources. This included procedures for obtaining licences. Such documents include the Standard Logging Agreement (SLA) which placed paramouncy on the rights and powers of landowners.
Discussions of landowner involvement in the forestry industry often states that there are legislations which provided landowners with more control and power over forest resources would enhance their benefit from the industry. Indeed at the outset these laws and procedures looked set to enhance landowner control over logging. The SLA, for instance, stipulates clear guidelines regulating matters concerning the environment, reforestation, preservation of tambu places, control of setlers, employment opportunities, royalty to landowners, provision of monthly statements, arbitration in any case of dispute, termination of operations, etc. There are two issues that generally concern landowners most: (i) roylaty payments, and (ii) environment. In so far as royalty is concerned the SLA stipulates that the rate of royalty payable by the Company to landowners is calculated monthly as a percentage of the average sale price. It states that the basic rate of royalty shall be 12.5 percent when average sale price amounts to S.I.$50 per cubic metre. “When the average sale price exceeds S.I. $50 per cubic metre or drops below S.I. $150 per cubic metre, the royalty shall be increased or reduced by 2 percent and a maximum of 17.5 percent”.
An interesting factor is that these calculations are based on the logging company records – the volume of timber on which royalty is paid is based on the Company’s production figures and so is the record of shipments. This means that both the state and landowners are depended on the company to provide truthful and reliable data. Government forest officers stationed at log points are often bribed by companies and invariably do not cross check company records. Figures supplied to the Ministry of Forest, Ministry of Finance, Customs and Excise and Inland Revenue Departments were often extracted from logging company’s computer inputs. Recordings of log exports by landowning groups in Choiseul and North New Georgia have indicated that Eagon Resources Development Ltd and Alladyce Timber Company respectively have under-recorded volumes of log export (Landowner records and recorded conversation with landowners, 17 March 1998 and 24 March 1998).
Furthermore, despite the above formular, in nearly all the agreements signed in the Solomon Islands in the period between 1983 and 1996 the royalty to landowners was paid at 10 percent of the FOB price regardless of the fluctuating average sale price of logs within that period of time. Many landowners did not really understand the formula and, therefore, did not take the issue up to either the courts or the logging companies.
Another salient issue is that despite the legal apparatus that supposedly protects the interest of landowners, the changes in the state system often fail to address questions such as; do landowners have the ability and resources to enable them to take control of the forest resources? does the state have the capacity to perform its coordinating and observer role? This is not to imply that landowners are either not ready or not capable. Rather, it is to say that the institutions and services landowners might need in the process of exploiting forest resources may not be available. For instance, legal representation for landowning groups are limited and in many cases nonexistent except for the over worked public solicitors in the provinces and Honiara.
The complications of the above issues are often exacerbated by socio-cultural factors relating to land, in particular the question: Who is the landowner? Answers to this question are made complex by confusions over notions of ownership and rights and conflicts emanating from these.. The next section attempts to answer this question and examine how these affect forest outcomes and landowners role in it.
6. Conclusion
The logging industry in Solomon Islands demonstrates that landowners have significant authority to determine forestry outcomes. They could influence the fate of forest degradation and deforestation. However, they have been unable to do so because of a lack of power. This lack of power emanates from the fact that they do not have access to appropriate and much needed legal councelling, they do not have access to government forestry advice.
Furthermore, many landowners have been motivated by the desire for income generation. They will continue to accept logging and, therefore, contribute to deforestation unless alternative means of income generation opportunities are provided. Landowner acceptance of logging is merely a pragmatic response to their changing needs and increasing influence of a cash economy.
One could conclude, therefore, that landowners currently contribute to the rate of deforestation. Furthermore, the concept of landowner is and should not be treated as ho
Everyone in the world would do well to know how to prevent deforestation. The profound effects of deforestation on the world are getting increasingly worse. More and more natural disasters are occurring every year, in all parts of the world. The tsunami in Phuket, the disastrous, devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina, and dozens of other disasters have left the communities they touch in ruins. Not so long ago, it seemed like we only needed to worry about deforestation in the rain forest. Now, however, it is occurring in every imaginable location. Trees and vegetation are being destroyed to make room for housing and businesses. The far reaching implications of this occurrence are almost too horrible to even consider but we must, for the sake of our environment.
Every person can do his or her part to prevent deforestation. Doing so is surprisingly simple. Every individual gesture helps; the gesture may seem small right now, but each one is like a ripple in a pond, which grows larger and larger. In order to neutralise a negative event, one must counter it with a positive one. To counteract the removal of trees, simply plant some more. Doing this in the yard of one’s own home can have a hugely positive effect. It also makes life healthier. After all, every tree, big or small, gives off oxygen. Trees also contain water, which guards and protects against soil erosion.
Naturally, recycling does wonders too. Quite a lot of things most people use in their day to day lives can be recycled. This includes books, paper products, shopping bags, bottles, and cans, just to name a few. This prevents the need for raw material to make new products. With paper products, this is especially important, as trees are, of course, used to make paper. Once, recycled paper seemed like a novelty. Now it is a necessity, and even some companies and businesses are using recycled products.
Those who farm the land should consider crop rotation. These means planting new crops in the plot of land from which other crops have recently been harvested. That way, new plots of land need not be used. Crop rotation actually makes for more fertile soil as well.
Sometimes, trees do have to be cut down. However, only mature trees should be cut. Saplings should be left to grow and thrive. It is also an excellent practice to make up for every tree cut down by planting a new tree.
Whenever possible, firewood should not be used to heat the house. Rather, coals are a much more environmentally safe alternative. Firewood is consumed in just a few hours. However, the tree which produced that wood took years to grow to maturity. Conversely, coals can burn for quite a while. They will not only keep the house warmer, they will also be safer for the environment and monumental in preventing deforestation.
Trees have long been a valuable resource. They provide food, oxygen, shade, and beauty. However, although with more and more animals and natural resources every year, they are in danger of disappearing altogether.
Buy Deforested Land, help it regenerate, and protect it from exploitation again forever. You can do something about Global Warming and deforestation right now. The Wild Again Reforestation Trust relies on public donations to purchase deforested land.
Recycling : we should recycle all the thing that are made of tree ex. Paper, bags, furniture, etc. because it lead to the less cutting of tree and also the products of trees will be used wisely.
• Wood factories: we should stop or lessen the production in those factories that cut down trees to make their products ex. paper, furniture, etc.
• People’s basic needs: we all know that the colossal cause of deforestation is people’s needs from the forests. Even though we depend on the forests, we should learn to lessen our dependency on the forests and their environment. So we need to use a little of them as possible and wisely.
• Paper: paper is one of the most important things in the world without it we can’t do almost anything. We can’t study, write, learn and a lot of stuff which is impossible to do without paper, but many of the forests are destroyed just to make paper out of them. So lessen your dependency on the paper and try to use as less as possible and recycle them.
• Reforestation: after cutting down a tree we should plant two because this way there will be a balance of ecosystem and the rate of deforestation will diminish.
The some solutions to preventing deforestation
There are many ways, to reduce the percentage of deforestation around the world. Some of the solutions to reduce deforestation globally, are in the following list of points:
1.Naturally recycling heaps of things which a lot people do around the world, can do extreme wonders. This includes paper products, plastic bags, books, bottles and cans. This prevents the need for raw materials to make new products especially with paper products.
2.Farmers planting new crops so that new plots of land need not be used. Crop rotation actually makes for more fertile soil as well.
3.Cutting only mature trees and then planting some new ones so that they replace the old ones. Saplings should also be left to grow and thrive too.
4.Using coal instead of using firewood because, coal is much more environmentally safer alternatively and also, it can burn for quite a long time while firewood on the other hand is consumed in just a few hours.
5. Using less tree products.
The impact that Gough Whitlam had
back in his golden days as pm
Reporter Joshua Serrao
Gough Whitlam back in the day impacted many people’s lives throughout the whole of Australia, in many different ways that no one could of ever imagined, when he was running for prime minister for about three years. Most People loved him so much back in the past, thanks to the things he done while being in power at that time, but when it came to his dismissal from the governor general some Australians regarded it as an outrage, but the Australian electorate voted to replace the Whitlam government by a record margin, and the Labor Party would not be a serious candidate for government again until Whitlam was replaced as leader.
