PROÉTICA Consejo Nacional para la Ética Pública

(Peruvian Chapter of Transparency International)
Phones: (511) 446 8941, 446 8943
Manco Cápac 826, Lima 18 - PERÚ contra la corrupción / Proética
Issued on August 2017

This document is based on the information generated during the international event “Cli-
mate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”, organized
by Proética, Peruvian chapter of Transparency International, held on June 20 and June 21,
2017 at Lima, Peru.

The event aimed to share experiences and good practices at the international, national and
sub-national level on climate governance focused on forestry and REDD+, as well as cove-
ring issues related to the Paris Agreement and climate finances. Participants at the event
were members of the TI1 Climate Finance Integrity Programme, international and national
forest and governance specialists, as well as national and sub-national decision makers in
forest and climate management.

Transparency International’s Climate Finance Integrity Programme was created in 2011 and has been supported by the German
Ministry of the Environment since that year. The program takes place in 8 countries and aims to promote the improvement of public
information, demand greater responsibility, transparency and integrity in the management of resources for climate change projects at
the national level.
Climate Governance Program 1
Progress from civil society

The first part of the document is based on the presentations and comments made by the
panelists during the two days of the event. The first day addressed the Paris Agreement
and the Transparency Framework, aiming to learn about the experiences promoted by civil
society regarding open data, the monitoring of the Nationally Determined Contributions
(NDCs) and climate finances.

The second day, the discussion was about corruption as a governance challenge in the fo-
rest sector, where corruption risks and vulnerabilities that affect forest management were
also discussed, especially illegal logging, land trafficking and palm oil.

Civil society and its proposals to improve forest
management and transparency in climate finance
Transparency International2 has participated as a civil society representative with observer
status in the negotiations of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Chan-
ge (UNFCCC) since 2010, looking for climate change financial resources to be allocated
and implemented in a transparent, participatory and efficient way, and through it mitigate
the negative impacts of climate change. TI has also been promoting initiatives to mitigate
corruption risks and fight impunity, by encouraging the improvement of public and private
resources management.

Throughout the years, Transparency International has identified the main corruption risks
and vulnerabilities of climate finances, such as the lack of systematized information on pu-
blic and private climate resources, the lack of concrete accounting on climate finances and
the lack of mechanisms for civil society participation in decision-making processes.

On the other hand, there are initiatives from civil society that promote participation, ac-
countability and access to information in climate finances and forest management. Thus,
we find the Global Forest Watch3 (GFW) initiative that monitors emissions from defores-
tation, so that this information is complementary to others coming from official sources.
GFW alerts are available every eight days, and in Peru they have been delivered to the
Ministry of the Environment (MINAM). In addition, recent studies have found that several

Transparency International is an international coalition present in over 100 countries, from civil society organizations working to
address corruption globally.
It is a free online system where people can monitor forest change. This tool provides the most updated, reliable and feasible informa-
tion on what is happening in forests around the world.

2 Climate Governance Program
countries did not actively disseminate data on forest concessions in open data format and
that the relationship between transparency and open data dissemination initiatives were
not consistent.

Therefore, it is necessary for civil society to promote the dissemination of data in the ab-
sence of government leadership. It is also important to mention that the need for data
transparency is necessary for the monitoring of forests and other land uses; as well as for
the rights of communities and indigenous peoples.

Another initiative from Peruvian civil society is the Land Governance Platform, which brings
together a group of civil society organizations that work for legal land security and have
open data experience. This platform4 pointed out that “little information is available about
peasant communities and indigenous peoples, no public institution has information on the loca-
tion of communities and the extent of land they have. Also, the information that is available, is
unofficial data from various public sectors and it is scattered, but so far there is no initiative and
willingness from the public sector to systematize this information”.

To have open data on forest management and climate finances is important for monitoring
the implementation of the Paris Agreement, especially the Nationally Determined Con-
tributions (NDCs), as well as the pledge of developed countries to deliver up to USD 100
billion per year by 2020 for climate change action. In the case of Peru5 , “to date, the inven-
tories of GHG (Infocarbono) have been implemented; for monitoring, there are records of miti-
gation initiatives, records of GHG inventories of organizations and institutions, and record of the
support received. Likewise, there are reports such as national communications, Peru’s Biennial
Update Report (BUR). However, Peru never had commitments to the UNFCCC because it is a de-
veloping country, unlike developed countries that have had 20 years for capacity development.
For this reason, flexibility is a principle of the Paris Agreement, which indicates that the develo-
pment situation of each country must be taken into account to comply with UNFCCC systems”.

On the other hand, in Latin America6 , “a comparative analysis made on the NDCs, showed
that only Guatemala is considering the creation of a national fund for climate finances. It was
also argued that there is no link between financial mechanisms and NDCs at the national level.
Finally, Chile, Ecuador and Peru were the countries that best promoted spaces for prior partici-
pation or during the NDC elaboration stage.”

Pedro Castillo, Land Governance Platform Manager. Panelist of the 1st session “Paris Agreement and Transparency Framework” of the
event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.
Rosa Morales - General Director of the Directorate of Climate Change and Desertification from the Peruvian Ministry of Environment.
Presentation “NDCs and the Transparency Framework: Progress in its elaboration and implementation” made at the event “Climate
Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”
Paula Fuentes - Project Manager of Grupo de Financiamiento Climático para América Latina y el Caribe – GFLAC. Presentation “Re-
gional Challenges for the implementation of the Paris Agreement: NDCs analysis on financing, transparency and participation” made
at the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”

Climate Governance Program 3
Vulnerabilities and Corruption Risks in Forest
Peru has the fourth place in terms of territory covered by tropical forest in the world. At the
national level, forests cover almost 60% of our territory, it is also a place of great biodiver-
sity and numerous indigenous peoples. In spite of having all this wealth, in recent years de-
forestation in the country has increased due to economic activities related to agribusiness,
construction of infrastructure projects, land use change, etc.

In the face of increasing deforestation, a proposal at the international level - promoted by
the UNFCCC - for forests conservation known as REDD+ saw the day. But this mecha-
nism and the agreements Peru signed with the international cooperation7 for result-based
payment for forest conservation outcomes would be jeopardized by the increasing defo-
restation due to palm oil, land trafficking and illegal logging, contemplated as drivers of
deforestation in the National Strategy of Forests and Climate Change.

In one hand, there is concern about land trafficking increase in the Amazon, due to lack of
control, legal voids, contradictory policies and institution inefficiency as well as corrupt offi-
cials who play an important role in the land trade (Shanee, 2016). Likewise, the State does
not make clear enough the procedures for the establishment of palm oil plantations, and it
also lacks the capacity to sanction the offenders (Dammert, 2015).

Regarding possible solutions to the palm oil expansion, it was pointed out that8 “agricultural
intensification is not the solution for palm oil, due to the capitalist logic that promotes the infi-
nite expansion of value. Likewise, the moratorium on palm cultivation is also not the best path,
because there is no palm oil and cacao project that has been developed respecting national
procedures, since most companies find legal voids to not comply with the law. That is why it is
necessary to have a mechanism for land governance”.

In that sense, it is important to understand that land governance includes State institutions
and structures; as well as regulations, processes, and organizations through which deci-
sions about land use and control are made. They also state how decisions should be made,
and how conflict of interests for land will be manage (PROFOR, 2011).

On the other hand, illegal logging9 “must be understood as part of organized crime and not only
as a way of deforesting the Amazon”. As stated at the event10 , “for illegal logging, the first step
in the timber laundering chain is a corrupt official who helps pass the first forest control post.
It is therefore important that the seven or eight authorities involved in timber marketing issues
share information to improve their performance. While there are devices that help fight crime,
such as interdiction actions in forestry to destroy transportation, it is necessary to have efficient

In September 2014, Peru signed the Joint Declaration of Intent with Norway and Germany for USD 300 million.
Juan Luis Dammert - Territorial Rights and Extractive Industries Program Officer of OXFAM Peru. Panelist of the 2nd session “Co-
rruption: A Governance Challenge in the Forest Sector” of the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest
Sector and REDD+”

4 Climate Governance Program
Presentation of the investigative journalistic research developed by Proética and Convoca abot land trafficking in the Amazon. Photo: Proética.

controls as well as promote bureaucratic simplification in order to have greater formality in fo-
restry activities.”

While it is claimed that the private sector is involved in illegal logging11, “it is important to
distinguish illegal loggers who are part of the corruption circles, and hence are delinquent, from
formal loggers. The first sell the wood in the national market at international prices. This occurs
because the wood that has already been laundered by the informal logger in the forest has a
legitimacy that has been granted by a public official”.

Julia Urrunaga - Programme Peru Director – EIA. Presentation “New state of the international forest market: international standards”
made at the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”
Julio Guzmán - Public Prosecutor of the Ministry of the Environment of Peru. Panelist of the 2nd session “Corruption: A Governance
Challenge in the Forest Sector” of the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”
Erik Fischer Llanos - President of the Committee of Timber and Wood Industry from the Association of Exporters (ADEX). Panelist
of the 2nd session “Corruption: A Governance Challenge in the Forest Sector” of the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and
Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”

Climate Governance Program 5
First day of the forest governance event organized by Proética. Photo: Proética.

Participants gathered in five working groups to discuss the challenges of the forest sector and REDD+. Photo: Proética.

6 Climate Governance Program
Perceptions from civil society
The next section is based on the working groups’ discussions that took place on June 20,
2017 during Proética’s event. In this event, there were five working groups according to
the following topics: good governance, forest funding, safeguards, indigenous peoples and
illegal logging, which involved the participation of about 80 national and international spe-
cialists. Each of the working groups’ discussions had three different questions that sought
to encourage dialogue among participants as well as identify the progress and challenges
for each of the topics covered.

Good Governance

There are several concepts of governance, the term was used for government action or the
fact of governing a region (Loyo, 2002), now it is known as the framework of established
rules, institutions and practices that set boundaries and incentives for individuals, organiza-
tions and companies behavior (Prats, 2001). This made different actors or research centers
generate their “own concepts” of governance based on their daily work. Thus, we have the
concept of multilevel governance, understood as a multilevel governance perspective to
elucidate relationships among actors and to understand how different actors influence land
use and land use change, as well as related decision-making processes. This perspective fo-
cuses on the “processes and structures of public policy, decision-making and management
that involves people in a constructive way through public agencies, levels of government
and/or public, private and civil spheres to achieve a public purpose “(Emerson et al, 2012).
Another concept is good forest governance, which is characterized by stakeholders’ parti-
cipation, transparency in decision-making, actors and decision makers’ accountability, rule
of law and predictability. “Good governance” is also associated with efficient and effective
management of natural, human and financial resources and with a fair and equitable redis-
tribution of resources and benefits (PROFOR, 2011).

This way, part of this diffuse conceptualization of good governance12 is present among the
various forest management stakeholders. That is why we can say that there is no global
concept accepted by all the different actors, but there are principles of good governance
such as transparency, participation, accountability, anti-corruption, and others, which help
to understand the concept of good governance. In spite of this, most actors are able to
recognize when there is good governance in processes and spaces. That is why, it can be
affirmed that the current spaces in our country that promote good forest governance are
temporary and most of them appear due to a temporary context. After “work” or collabora-

Information based on the good governance group discussions during the collaborative working sessions held as part of the event
“Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.
Climate Governance Program 7
tion time is over, many spaces lose dynamism.

On the other hand, it is difficult to distinguish real multi-actor State spaces for the design
of projects. What exist is a multi-sectoral coordination, but there is very little coordination
between civil society and the State. Examples of good governance spaces are the REDD+
Roundtable, the Forestry Executive Board and the Commission to Fight Illegal Logging, etc.
However, most of the spaces are used to validate projects or processes but not necessarily
for designing projects or political decision-making on illegal logging, forest conservation,

In addition, one of the most well-known ways to coordinate between civil society and the
State is through information or participation workshops, where there is little space or time
for participation and recommendations to be given in a binding way and thus enrich the
decision-making process, since most of the workshops look to validate products. Although
there are some spaces that promote good governance, it is acknowledged that there is
mechanisms that promotes good governance, like the participatory budgeting or the com-
munity monitoring system in the forest system.

On the other hand, regarding participation, it is still expected that public entities will call for
participation processes. Likewise participatory processes still have difficulties in the logis-
tics, administrative and/or representative level. In addition, concerning transparency, there
is bureaucracy that goes in the way of granting access to information to build baselines.

Forest Funding
Peruvian forests provide a range of goods and services such as timber and non-timber
products, components for pharmaceuticals, food and industrial products, wildlife manage-

Discussion on challenges in the implementation of climate projects and land data transparency. Photo: Proética.

8 Climate Governance Program
ment, and ecosystem services. These goods and services differ depending on the type of
forest where they are found, as it is the case of the Amazon, Andean or dry forest.

Funding sources for climate change are defined as entities that provide resources for mi-
tigation or adaptation projects. Within climate change finance, public and private sources,
multilateral or bilateral, and national or international sources should be considered. In addi-
tion, each of these sources has a variety of financial mechanisms that promote investments
to address associated risk, profitability or the amounts invested for climate change (Sama-
niego et al, 2015).

Thus, forest financing is understood as funding from public and private, multilateral or bila-
teral, and national or international sources for the forest sector which may include timber
and non-timber products, agroforestry, plantations (Urban et al, 2011).

On forest financing13, a variety of mechanisms have been identified from public, private
and international sources. But while there is an identification of public mechanisms and
international cooperation, it is necessary to think about the opportunities and challenges
for forest financing.

Some of the opportunities for forest funding are the wide range of forests that exist in
the country (Peru), which could generate a favorable environment for businesses, and the
existence of a demand and supply offer for forest businesses. As benefits, it helps achieve
sustainable management, generates jobs and fosters a culture of coexistence between the
private sector and farmers or landowners. It can also help the financial sector to have a
social responsibility focus that will improve its image.

On the other hand, the challenges for forest funding are the lack of knowledge and research
on investment potentials, complex and disorganized institutionalization, unfair competition,
illegality, lack of regulation, challenges regarding traceability, constraints to forestry invest-
ments, forestry entrepreneur profile, corruption and level of investment. Likewise, there is
a lack of coordination between the different levels of government, lack of information on
existing projects and lack of knowledge of the national government on the needs of the
local territory. The national government manages the funds of international cooperation
while regional and local governments do not directly access these resources, this brings an
absence of multisector approach in the subnational governments, which hinders the impact
of the projects. Also lacking official information (updated cadasters and databases) from the
competent agencies, which makes difficult the implementation of projects.

Part of the challenges for forest financing is the access to transparent calls with require-
ments that can be met by most companies, not just some. Concerning the financing of
international cooperation, projects need to be sustainable, with monitoring done by local
authorities and real beneficiaries. There are still weaknesses in forest project management,
in the sense that there is a disparity between staff payroll costs and the project’s final im-

Information based on the forest funding group discussions during the collaborative working sessions held as part of the event “Cli-
mate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.
Climate Governance Program 9
pact. To improve, the workshop participants indicated that a sub-national and non-imposed
agenda should be promoted.

Social and environmental safeguards
Safeguards are principles, conditions or social and environmental criteria that, based on
the implementation of standards and good practices, guarantee the attention, participation
and improvement of conditions of specific and vulnerable groups, as well as the protection
of the environment. Safeguards aim to prevent and mitigate any direct and indirect negati-
ve impacts on ecosystems and the communities that inhabit them. In addition, it manages
to identify, analyze and manage risks, since its implementation contributes to maximize the
benefits and positive impacts.

On safeguards14 , the knowledge on this subject is diverse since it is understood at a natio-
nal and international level but the stakeholders do not have a common understanding of it.
That is why the more general conception of safeguards is that they are policies to quantify
the impact and how these impacts can be mitigated. Although safeguards instruments such
as environmental impact studies, participation laws, consultation law, etc are identified,
there is still a need for its adaptation at the sub-national level, which means that sub-natio-
nal governments should have guidelines to comply with certain standards. It is also unders-
tood that safeguards not only reduce the impacts of activities but also generate benefits for
the community and should improve processes performance to be more participatory and
articulated to national processes.

At the international level, Cancun safeguards define the social and environmental safe-
guards of REDD+. There are also projects funded by Multilateral Development Banks such
as the IDB or the World Bank where social safeguards exist, but in these cases weaker sa-
feguards are appearing for issues like forests and indigenous peoples’ rights.

While this international framework exists, so far there is no greater clarity about the im-
plementation of safeguards at the national level and how they would be articulated with
processes at the sub-national level with the early initiatives. This is why it is urgent to pro-
pose strategies to ensure that what is planned in REDD+ can be fulfilled and has the lowest
possible risk. There should be a safeguards framework that would identify aspects of cultu-
ral, environmental, and social norms whose compliance allows to understand that progress
is made in safeguards implementation. That is why it is important that there should be a
conceptualization of the term as well as leadership from MINAM.

Although we have a general understanding of international and national safeguards, pro-

Information based on the social and environmental safeguards group discussions during the collaborative working sessions held as
part of the event “Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.
10 Climate Governance Program
blems arise when REDD+ safeguards formulation starts. One of the problems is institutio-
nal, until a few years ago the National Forest Conservation Program had the responsibility
to develop REDD+ safeguards, now it is the National Directorate of Climate Change the
one in charge. To this we need to add the little communication between the different pro-
jects funded by Multilateral Development Bank that require their own safeguards proces-

Another problem is the lack of identification of those responsible, it is not clear the role of
the sub-national governments for the implementation of safeguards. In addition, there are
several safeguards regulation issues that are the responsibility of the national forest autho-
rity that is SERFOR.

Indigenous Peoples
In Latin America, after their independence, the States created maintained a vision where
the indigenous peoples were considered inferior and incompetent. This gave the States a
guardianship role, which allowed them to decide on the territories and ways of life of the
indigenous peoples (Yrigoyen, 2009).

The Convention 107 of the International Labor Organization (ILO) on Indigenous and Tribal
Populations in Independent Countries (1957) noted that indigenous peoples made less
progress than other sectors and, as such, promoted their equality in rights and opportuni-
ties for the purpose of integrating them. Subsequently, in 1989, the ILO Convention 169
on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples was adopted, recognizing the status of indigenous peo-
ples (Leiva, 2016).

Regarding the indigenous peoples15 , legal mechanisms for the protection of their rights are
known, such as the mechanisms of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, ILO
Convention 169 and the UN Declaration of Indigenous Rights. In Peru we have the Law
No. 27811 Protection of Collective Knowledge of Indigenous Peoples related to Biological
Resources, Law No. 29763 on Forestry and Wildlife, Law No. 28736 Indigenous Peoples in
Voluntary Isolation and Initial Contact (PIACI), etc.

While there are a variety of laws that protect the rights of indigenous peoples, more em-
phasis should be placed on sub-national/local development plans in order to create a direct
relationship with the life plans of indigenous peoples. An example of linking development
plans with a sub-national vision occurred in San Martín, where quality of life plans were
worked out with locals, not necessarily indigenous peoples, but all forest users. For that,
the ecological economic zoning (EEZ)16 was used to help with land planning. Likewise, work

Information based on the indigenous peoples group discussions during the collaborative working sessions held as part of the event
“Climate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.

The EEZ is a technical and integral analysis process of a region, province, district or basin that identifies the different alternatives for
sustainable use and occupation of the territory, based on the evaluation of its potentialities and limitations using physical, biological,
social, economic and cultural criteria.

Climate Governance Program 11
was done regarding the communal certification and it was incorporated into rural planning,
which helped decide priorities that take into account social, economic aspects, etc.

On the other hand, the Law of Prior Consultation in Peru, has points for and against. One of
the points against is that the sector that proposes the administrative or legal initiative that
could impact the rights of indigenous peoples, is the same that determines if this initiative
is consulted. Once you have the process of prior consultation, indigenous peoples can have
good will but if the proposals are very technical, it will be difficult for them to understand.
Another problem is underrepresentation, because there are communities that do not feel
represented by indigenous organizations. However there is also positive experiences in our
country, we have the example of a process that had the acceptance and validation of the
people, it was the regulation of the Forest and Wildlife Law, which was consulted article
by article.

Although Article 89 of the Political Constitution of Peru states that “Peasant and Native
Communities have a legal existence and are legal persons. They are autonomous in their
organization, in communal work and in the use and free disposal of their lands, as well as
in economic and administrative aspects, within the framework established by law. The ow-
nership of their lands is imprescriptible, except in the case of abandonment foreseen in the
previous article. The State respects the cultural identity of Peasant and Native Communi-
ties”. There is a lack of dialogue at the national, sub-national and local level on indigenous
policies. One possible case, is indigenous policies’ roundtables, but these should be able to
solve the problems discussed. Thus, we have the example of Costa Rica, where in protected
areas, inhabited by indigenous peoples, the private sector began to obtain land, thus crea-
ting conflicts. In that context, roundtables were set up to resolve the conflicts. Roundtables
were effective in Costa Rica, since they helped to know if the companies were taking lands
from the indigenous peoples.

One of indigenous peoples’ demands is the titling of their lands as well as access to natural
resources. In Peru, there is a law for the titling of indigenous communities, which establi-
shes the steps for titling, but in the process of implementing each step there are problems,
such as information on the greater land use and these data is not always available. Likewise,
it is necessary to know the difference between cession of use, title for the area of agricultu-
ral use, title of indigenous communities, etc. Concerning forestry use within communities,
this is considered under the internal rules of the community but it may be the case that a
person outside the community can take advantage of the situation.

All of the above, confirms the legal insecurity of indigenous peoples and, therefore, greater
vulnerability to land trafficking. But they would not be the only vulnerable actors, there are
also the other users of the forest like chestnut farmer.

12 Climate Governance Program
Roberto Espinoza, technical advisor of AIDESEP was one of the panelists who commented on land trafficking in the Amazon. Photo: Proética.

One way to solve the problems mentioned is to make the necessary regulation changes to
avoid perverse consequences and voids of the norm. In addition, promoting the coordina-
tion between sub-national governments, the National Police and the Public Prosecutor’s
Office for due control in cases where corruption has been identified by officials, will require
political will to punish those responsible.

Climate Governance Program 13
Illegal logging
In 2001, a system of forest concessions was established with 40-year contracts, inventories
and operational plans (POAs). Nevertheless, concessions had an impact on deforestation as
well as a role in illegal timber laundering, this process includes combining legal and illegal
timber and using concession permits to avoid detection (AIDESEP & FPP, 2014).

One of the biggest challenges for illegal logging17 is the traceability of timber. There is a
lack of information and monitoring of the wood, there is no verification of the wood in its
way out. There is a direct link between corruption at forest control posts and the licensing
cycle at the national and sub-national level.

The wood comes from a very isolated area with little presence of the State and with few
resources for its control; and the processing place has not much control. In addition, there
are problems to define traceability18 , either for the domestic or export market, for example
when wood is from secondary transformation in production areas, it is no longer necessary
to issue forest transportation guides. Due to the differentiation of primary and secondary
wood transformation, traceability could be made to the electronic reference guides.

At the institutional level, one of the most important spaces created by the Forestry and
Wildlife Law was the National Consultative Council on Forest Policy (CONAFOR), which
is the consultative body on forestry and wildlife policy of the Ministry of Agriculture and
Irrigation (MINAGRI), however it is not yet operating. In addition, Sub-national Govern-
ments (GOREs), Sub-national Environmental Authorities (ARAs) and the Forest and Wildlife
Resources Monitoring Agency (OSINFOR) have different monitoring functions from each
other because they deal with different things, but when they find themselves in the same
spaces their functions overlap.

Therefore, coordination and information mechanisms must be established between these
three sectors. Likewise, it is necessary for the judicial branch to implement better options
for the specialization of judges, such as in the case of administrative control to do it in
alliance with the private sector, the civil sphere and the criminal area.

On the other hand, the transition between the old and the new Forestry and Wildlife Law,
generated legal voids for illegality, per example the term “timber origin” does not have a
legal definition since it is not considered the same for all users. In addition, there are several
institutions that can intervene in the wood process of sale and purchase in Peru, but despi-
te the number of institutions, internal controls continue to fail to detect corruption risks, as
well as laws that promote impunity. It is therefore fundamental to permanently monitor the
legal forest concessions and such monitoring should be accompanied by mechanisms that

Information based on the illegal logging group discussions during the collaborative working sessions held as part of the event “Cli-
mate Finances, Good Governance and Integrity in the Forest Sector and REDD+”.
SERFOR is the entity that should define the term “traceability”, which is pending since the regulation of the Forestry and Wildlife
Law was given. In addition, the Ministry of Production (PRODUCE) must define the concept of “second transformation”, while SERFOR
should define the concept of “primary transformation”.

14 Climate Governance Program
Julia Urrunaga of EIA addressed the issue of illegal logging during the forest governance event. Photo: Proética.

will monitor the timber traceability cycle, as well as to promote early initiatives to monitor
local actors, who have human, logistic, technological and economic resources to supervise.

Although there are few formal entrepreneurs for the extraction of wood, there are more
than 5000 small units of concessionaires who, by grouping them, produce large areas and
tons of wood, whom without authorities’ supervision, could incur in illegal activities. This
would change, if legal investments were encouraged with financial support for large and
small entrepreneurs. Likewise, SERFOR could grant forest concessions according to the
capacity of the forests, so that there is no free space for illegal loggers to enter; and for the
packaging of the wood the critical roads of the wood must be controlled, which involves an
effective coordination between SERFOR, DICAPI and the Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Climate Governance Program 15

• There is no unique definition for the term governance. Likewise, it is difficult to say there
is real State multiactor spaces for projects design and the participation carried out from the
State is wrong, since this is understood as workshops to validate products and not conside-
red a space where stakeholders can have a say in the decision-making process.

• It is important to have more political will to promote mechanisms of good governance. It
is also necessary for good governance instruments to be measurable (quantifiable) and help
improve management. Likewise, there is a need to improve capacities to manage participa-
tory and inclusive processes from the State.

• Forest funding requires market studies related to risks, return on investment, technical
data sheets by product, investment benefits, among others, to encourage investment in the
sector. In addition, sub-national forest authorities should be involved in the various forms
of funding available to them.

• OSINFOR’s role is important to establish the origin of timber, so it is necessary for this
institution to remain independent vis-à-vis the authority in charge of giving the permits.
Supervision should also be carried out prior to the removal of the wood to verify and report
the extraction points. It is necessary to give more resources to this institution, in order to
maintain its autonomy.

• Involvement of the formal private sector as well as sub-national forest authorities and
control bodies is important to fight illegal logging at the sub-national level. The formal pri-
vate sector can help demanding timber of legal origin, as well as sub-national governments
can improve their surveillance systems by involving local actors such as indigenous peo-
ples, NGOs, and small and medium-sized entrepreneurs.

• For climate financing to be effective, the international community must do more than
simply increase the flow of resources to isolated local interventions. The international com-
munity must address three crucial issues: transparency of information, approved quantifi-
cation methods, and finally make reports accessible to citizens. Although these points are
still in process, it is important to indicate that Latin America is included in climate finances’
flows, and a significant amount of resources are managed for this purpose, whose origins
are internal, budgetary, from Multilateral Development Bank or international donors.

• Greater and more efficient open data access tools need to be created to monitor forest
concessions. Having this data would help generate an inventory of information that would
decrease timber “laundering”. It is necessary to have authorities that are willing to work on
this issue, at national, sub-national and local level, as well as coordinate with the control
and audit entities.

• The lack of an intercultural vision for the management of the territory that takes into ac-

Climate Governance Program 17
count the life plans of indigenous peoples, has generated conflict as well as demands that
have not been resolved or that take many years to find a solution, like in the case of the
communal titles. It is necessary to insist in the relevance of generating a policy that adds
this vision in a cross-sectoral level.

• Authorities with responsibilities in forestry, supervision and control require information
on the economics of illegality and illicit financing of parties and political campaigns that
come from illegal activities taking place in the Peruvian Amazon (such as illegal logging,
illegal mining, land trafficking, among others), in order to identify illicit financial flows from
illegal activities that finance key positions in the public sector and generate regulatory and/
or state capture.

18 Climate Governance Program

ARAs Sub-national Environmental Authorities

BUR Peru’s Biennial Update Report

CONAFOR Forestry and Wildlife Law was the National Consultative
Council on Forest Policy

DICAPI General Direction of Captaincies and Coast Guard of the Navy

EEZ Ecological Economic Zoning

GFW Global Forest Watch

GOREs Gobiernos Regionales

IDB Inter-American Development Bank

ILO International Labor Organization

MINAGRI Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation

MINAM Ministry of the Environment

NDC Nationally Determined Contribution

OSINFOR Forest and Wildlife Resources Monitoring Agency

TI Transparency International

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

Climate Governance Program 19

Palmer,D. Fricska. S & Wehrmann.B (2009) Documento de trabajo sobre la tenencia de la
tierra. Hacia una mejor gobernanza de la tierra. Programa de las Naciones Unidas para los
Asentamientos Humanos.FAO.

Dammert Bello, J.Luis (2015).Hacia una ecología política de la palma aceitera en el Perú.

Shanee, Noga (2016) Tierra de Nadie: El tráfico de tierras, la migración y las iniciativas de
conservación en el nororiente de Perú. Neotropical Primate Conservation.

AIDESEP&FPP (2014) Revealing the hidden. Indigenous perspectives on deforestation in
the Peruvian Amazon. The causes and the solutions.

Emerson K, Nabatchi T & Balogh (2012) An integrative framework for collaborative gover-
nance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22(1): 1-29.

Loyo Hernández, Juan Carlos (2002). “La arquitectura de gobernanza y la gobernabilidad
del sistema político venezolano. Una explicación de la estabilidad y el cambio de la demo-
cracia en Venezuela”.

Prats, Joan (2001). “Gobernabilidad democrática para el desarrollo humano. Marco con-
ceptual y analítico”. Instituciones y desarrollo, N° 10. IIG/PNUD/Generalitat de Catalunya
Samaniego.J & Schneider,H. (2015) Financiamiento para el Cambio Climático en América
Latina y el Caribe en 2014. CEPAL.

PROFOR (2011) Marco para la evaluación y seguimiento de la gobernanza forestal.

Urban, Roland & Ullilen, Lucetty (2011). Mecanismos de financiamiento para el sector fo-
restal en el Perú. Diseño participativo de un mecanismo de financiamiento para el desarro-
llo del sector forestal en el Perú. FONDEBOSQUE. FAO / NFP Facility. Lima – Perú.

Yrigoyen, Raquel (2009) De la tutela indígena a la libre determinación del desarrollo, parti-
cipación, consulta y consentimiento. Instituto de Derecho y Sociedad (IIDS) pp5-8.

Panelists and speakers at the event: 1. Frank Mpahlo of TI Zimbabwe; 2. Rosa Morales of
MINAM; 3. Anne Larson of CIFOR; 4. Rolando Navarro, former CEO of OSINFOR.

20 Climate Governance Program

2. 3.

Climate Governance Program 21

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful