Abstract

This article explores the attempts to create a global tropical timber regime and its underlying competing environmental norms of exploitation, conservation and preservation. It outlines a history of forestry exploitation over time and tracks the stilted development of a global tropical timber regime. It further examines the development of the International Tropical Timber Agreement and its concomitant Organisation. Legro’s test of the robustness of a norm will be applied to the tropical timber regime to determine when and why, and through whose agency, normative change has not been effected within the International Tropical Timber Organisation where conservationist norms have failed to take root.

Highlights

  • One can observe a mass extinction of biomass occurring: that of the loss of irreplaceable tropical forests

  • While attempts have been made by various global actors including Environmental Non-Governmental Organisations (ENGOs), International Organisations (IOs) and concerned states to strengthen the environmental norms of the regime efforts, even with global support for improved environmental outcomes, efforts have come to naught

  • The International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO) budget for 1989 saw over 50% of the monies supplied by Japan, Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia, the U.S.A. and Korea, all of which were heavily invested in the continuation of the global tropical timber trade.[59]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

One can observe a mass extinction of biomass occurring: that of the loss of irreplaceable tropical forests. The ITTA conferred voting rights on states only and merely asks that its members should “cooperate” with ENGOs to avoid ongoing duplication of efforts (Article 14(2) ITTA 1983).ENGOs can participate in Council Meetings as Observers (Article 15 ITTA 1983), but the ITTA was not configured to allow for increased ENGO presence over time Such an integral failure to allow ENGOs to effectively contribute to the organisation has been to the ITTO’s detriment in achieving its stated environmental goals.[88] Another structural deficiency is that the ITTA does not confer on the International Tropical Timber Council (ITTC), the deliberative body of the ITTO, any specific powers or mandates (e.g. submitting proposals to further conservationist ends).[89] The ITTC has no monitoring or enforcement powers, it cannot even force member states to provide an Annual Report.[90].

Conclusion
Findings
50. High Stakes
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.