International And National Law On Forest Trade And Management

55% of Canada’s trade balance in 2006, with a value of 21.8 billion Canadian dollars, was from forest products (Martin, 2012). Canadian government policies are used to pursue social, economic, and environmental goals (Martin, 2012). This includes regional development, job creation, community stability, the conservation of forests, and ecosystem protection (Martin, 2012). While each province has different policies, the overall goals are quite similar. In the late 1980’s there were two changes that led to much greater forest sustainability. An agreement from 1985-1990 named the Canada-British Columbia Forest Resource Development agreement led to a significant increase in funding (Brown, 1997). The funding was used for forest renewal research and reforestation of areas that had previously been improperly stocked (Brown, 1997). In 1987 the responsibility of covering the cost and regenerating the forests after harvest was traded off from the government to the forest industry (Brown, 1997). According to Robert G. Brown, manager of Silviculture Practices at the Forest Practices branch of the BC government, the two changes

After analyzing the forestry problem described earlier, the problems are clearly linked domestic government policy and not only the giant multinational corporations as Ellwood has posited. The incentive for corporations to conduct cross-border trade is not the unperturbed environmental laws, it is the comparative advantage they would gain from cheap labor and resources. LeGrain advances the argument that approximately 80% of polluting industries are in industrial nations, such as America where Greenpeace affirms that oil corporations receive billions of dollars in subsidies for their production purposes which does the most environmental damage that affects the rest of the world with it. Initiatives should be started to reduce the Global South’s dependency on the Global North because it is their high debt-GDP ratios which keep the prices of natural resources (often tied to their currency) low enabling large consumption. There is a clear incentive for the international community to reduce the Global South’s dependency because it is widely agreed that as the GDP per capita of a nation increases the residents are able to afford environmental remediation products and

International law has relatively little relevance for environmental law, the standard of justice revolves around the advancement of peace and respect for basic human rights. The absence of mechanisms under international law does not seem to be unjust, as it does not impinge on international peace and security or the enjoyment of human rights, at least not directly. A wide variety of positions on global justice and fairness support normative obligations for outsiders to compensate rainforest states for protecting their forests, obligations that may well have to be translated into binding law. International law should take into account, much more than is now the case, positive obligations of international solidarity, including the protection of the global commons.

Although the cries for deforestation to be stopped may not be heard by those in power, or by companies whose business and profits depend on doing so, many individuals were shown that this is a problem. According to the World Wildlife Fund, its goal is to “… eliminate one of the largest drivers of deforestation… prevent the irresponsible expansion of agricultural operations.” The World Wildlife Fund is also committed to ensuring that businesses, government, and others meet their commitments to help conserve the world forests, and protect the only world we

Since the clearance of the rainforest continues, negative repercussions on the environment and people all around the world are unavoidable. Every individual should step in and stop consuming products that lead to deforestation of the Amazon. From deontological point of view, deforestation is unethical, because it sacrifices the well-being of indigenous people for economic prosperity of a larger group of people. Secondly, destruction of the Amazon is wrong from the relationship-oriented theory, because it ignores the value of nature by prioritizing people`s interests. Contrastingly, the Utilitarian theory views deforestation unethical, because it leads to destructive aftermath that will affect everyone. Therefore, in order to slowdown and counteract the domino effect, everyone should carefully choose products for

Environmental issues affect every life on this planet from the smallest parasite to the human race. There are many resources that humans and animal needs to survive; some of the most obvious resources come from the forests. Forests make up a large percentage of the globe. The forests have global implications not just on life but on the quality of it. Trees improve the quality of the air that species breath, determine rainfall and replenish the atmosphere. The wood from the forests are used everyday form many useful resources. Moreover, thinning the forests increases the amount of available light, nutrients and water for the remaining trees. Deforestation (forest thinning) is one of the most

Legally-binding forest agreements have failed due to the inability to reach consensus on a wide range of objectives. Unable to agree on objectives, global forest treaties and negotiations since 1992 have become non-binding with strong opposition. Though hundreds of negotiated proposals have been raised, conflicting negotiations prevent the establishment of agreements due economic concerns and the multiplicity of unclear objectives. Mackenzie suggests that the repeated failure to generate legally-binding agreements by international parties results from issues that are too complex to be resolved by a single instrument (251). As such, there are “18 international treaties which relate to forests” (250), that attempt to address smaller components of these large issues, yet there are none currently in place that are

Mercilessly, loggers and cattle farmers choose to desecrate the precious lands of forest to satisfy their impractical demands. For instance, farmers graze their livestock over land which used to inhabit luxuriant forest life. Likewise, loggers ignorantly fell countless trees, contributing to insidious repercussions that harm more than just the atmosphere. Forest components, whether biotic or abiotic, serve pertinent roles for the health of the earth. But, with these lumbermen slashing trees in some of the world’s most rich and diverse ecosystems, interventions must occur. All countries should outlaw deforestation; not only does it disturb the forest elements, but it also engenders effects that cause major pernicious disruptions in the global

Three to six billion trees are cut down each and every year! Deforestation is a huge problem in the rainforests. Because these forests are home to much of the Earth’s species of life. Covering 30 percent of our land forests provide homes, protection, and oxygen for humans and other wildlife in the forests. There are 7.125 billion people that count on the benefits provided by the forest, which is: food, clothing, traditional medicine and shelter. If something isn 't done soon to reduce our carbon footprint, we will not have forests of any type to soak up the carbon dioxide(CO2) in the atmosphere.

We may not realize it but many of our everyday necessities’ come from all sorts of things that live in nature. Whether it’s paper or beauty products, we rely on nature for certain things we need and use. What we also may not realize is the demands for certain necessities are the reason why all life within nature decreases. This is primarily focused on tropical rainforests. Over the years we have slowly decreased life within them. We have even cut down parts or entire rainforests to make space for certain facilities we use. This is bad for us and for all life within rainforests. We are destroying the homes of many plants and wild life as well as the air that we breath. If we continue to harvest parts of rainforests it could destroy all the life that inhabits it forever.

Throughout the course of history, humans have long used the exchange of goods as a way to socially interact and provide for themselves. Trading is a cornerstone of modern society and it is how materials and objects can be transferred around the world. The ivory trade is a practice that has been in place for centuries. In the last one to two hundred years, the negative impacts of the trade have begun to surface. The elephant populations, specifically in Africa, are rapidly declining with the illegal trade taking place today. The ban on the ivory trade was put into place in order to save the elephant populations and reduce the harmful environmental impacts. The use of international law in the creation of the ban on the trade and the current

According to the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), an estimated 18 million acres of forest, which is roughly the size of the country of Panama, are lost each year. Undeniably, the deteriorating environmental situation, the increasingly severe pollution of the atmosphere, and water, the severe damage to the living environment of wild animals and plants, the extinction of many species, the deforestation and the transitional mining of mineral resources caused contrary facts. Human existence and development have brought real and more serious potential threats. The scarcity of environmental resources is manifested gradually. As environmental issues are becoming a bottleneck restricting economic growth, it is imperative that lousy effect governed the environment.

Nature has always played an important role in human history. Increase in international trade, globalization and creation of big corporations caused negative impact on the environment. The new economic framework established after the end of the World War II benefited the interests of the multinational corporations. The Bretton Woods system was aimed to boost the production and consumption of commodities. The World Bank and the IMF, led by the US, financed corporations and exploitation of resources. The Bretton Woods system was supposed to make use of the world’s natural riches. The fall of Communism in the world gave more power to the corporations and led to the creation of the free market system. The US government tried to help underdeveloped nations to export wood, livestock and other commodities to industrialized countries.

As the countries that own the wood do not have the technology available to manufacture such products, the wood is sold at a cheap price, as it is a primary resource. Loggers cut down 10's of trees to get to the valuable hardwood trees they want, which themselves often bring down many trees around them. Logging in the Amazon is closely linked with road building. Studies by the Environmental Defence Fund show that areas that have been selectively logged are eight times more likely to be settled and cleared by shifting cultivators than untouched rainforests because of access granted by logging roads. Logging is the second largest cause of deforestation.

In addition to logging for exportation, rainforest wood stays in developing countries for fuel wood and charcoal. One single steel plant in Brazil making steel for Japanese cars needs millions of tons of wood each year to produce charcoal that can be used in the manufacture of steel. Then there is the paper industry. A pulpwood project in the Brazilian Amazon consists of a Japanese power plant and pulp mill. To set up this single plant operation, 5,600 square miles of Amazon Rainforest was burned to the ground and replanted