Special Bonds Proposed To Fund Reforestation: Thailand

[webfact]

Special bonds proposed to fund reforestation

Janjira Pongrai

Pongphon Sarnsamak

Sirinart Sirisuntorn

The Nation

BANGKOK: -- Government issued "forest bonds" should be used to raise money from the private sector to fund the recovery of 30 million rai of degraded forest areas across the country, a leading thinktank has proposed.

The new bond would be issued to private firms looking to invest in forest restoration as part of corporate social responsibility programmes, while also turning a profit.

The proposal is the brainchild of Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) senior researcher Assoc Prof Adis Israngkura, who conducted a study to develop a new financial mechanism to fund the recovery of degraded forestland.

The results of his study were presented at a seminar titled "Method to Manage Thailand's Forest Bond" organised by the Thailand Research Fund.

Adis said the new bond would be managed by a public organisation or forestry industry organisation. Its task would be to raise money via the sale of the bonds to the private sector, and to develop financial resources to support the bond.

Financial resources for bond management would come from three activities: selling carbon credits, selling timber and ecotourism.

These activities are expected to raise Bt200 billion to support the bond and return a profit to investors.

Bondholders are expected to see a return of at least 8 per cent a year on their investment, Adis said.

The new public organisation would hire local people to plant trees to recover degraded forest areas, Adis said.

The bond is expected to fund the restoration of degraded forests nationwide. About 30 million rai of degraded forest will be selected as pilot areas.

Of this amount, about 20 million rai comprise forest reserves that have been encroached upon and illegally occupied by local people. The other 10 million rai are overseen by the Agricultural Land Reform Office (ALRO) and cannot currently be used for agricultural purposes.

"[Conventional] government measures are not the only way to stop forest encroachment," Adis said.

"I don't think that every forestrelated agency will agree with my idea; I've just tried my best to find a new financial mechanism and an easy way to recover degraded forest areas. The forest bond is the fastest way to raise money from the private sector to speed up the forestrecovery process, but at the moment it is still just an idea," he said.

ALRO deputy secretarygeneral Suthitpong Sudchookiat said he agreed with Adis' proposal and would make available some landreform plots that can no longer be used for agricultural purposes to support the plan.

-- The Nation 2012-06-30

[theblether]

Excellent idea...........where do I sign?

Oh sorry, I can't, I'm not allowed to own land, oh well.

[canopy]

Projects like this work in a developed countries, but without answering a simple question I do not think it can be successful. What are you doing to prevent this degradation from happening again? Because once the reforestation project finishes, the forests will be looted and burned by the locals and become depleted all over again. Nothing of value will survive. Paying a pickup load of local women to do the planting will not change this behavior.

[JurgenG]

I've to admit that's very smart.

What is it about ? Taking the lands from people who living there to do what ? Selling timber and ecotourism, meaning running resorts. Basically what the current occupants are doing there on top of some subsistence farming.

It would be the biggest land grab ever. Because don't let us get fooled. It's communism with North Korean characteristics. The profit of the exploitation from these lands is going to be taken from individuals and given to "public organization". And we all know what it means in Thailand (and elsewhere too).

This Suthitpong Sudchookiat is really a cunning individual. Hat off !

[Reasonableman]

Forest recovery -> income from selling timber... <deleted> does that mean in practice?

[JurgenG]

Forest recovery -> income from selling timber... <deleted> does that mean in practice?

Exploiting national forest resources for the profit of a few civil servants.

Basically before it was illegal. Now it suddenly becomes legal because it's "ran" by the government .

Very cunning indeed.

[JurgenG]

And later, under the pretext of efficiency, everything will be handed to private firms

Edited June 30, 2012 by JurgenG

[maidu]

I don't like the smell of this new proposal. It sounds like a land grab.

Why does anyone need to own the properties in order to reforest them?

There should be programs to reforest, for sure, but overseen by a Forestry Dept. - preferably run by a country that understands what reforestation should and could be like.

Thais cannot be trusted with reforestation. For starters, they will plant mono-culture (one type of tree per tract). A healthy forest is multi-culture, with various types of trees, preferably indigenous.

For real reforestation, the trees would not all be timber-bearing. Better yet, would be to have vast tracts - big enough for animals to thrive. Currently, in northern Thailand, there are no wild mammals, other than rats and bats - and no plans for that to change for the better.

Actually, forests grow back pretty much on their own. What they need, is to be left alone by humans. Yet that becomes more difficult, year by year, as this one species is spreading faster than rats in an abandoned cheese factory.

[abhaya]

_{Resposible forestry can be both profitable and substainable. Hopefully they allow for bodiversity and avoid the pitfalls of what is happening in Indonesia and Malaysia and their monocutural practice of just planting one species like palm oil with little regard to the local wildlife. No doubt there will be an element of tea money and jobs for "the lads" but I rather see the money go into a project like this than a face lift for Khao San.}

[Reasonableman]

Agree entirely with your post, while acknowledging that we must count ourselves among the overly successful plague of "rats". ;-)

[Reasonableman]

_{Resposible forestry can be both profitable and substainable. Hopefully they allow for bodiversity and avoid the pitfalls of what is happening in Indonesia and Malaysia and their monocutural practice of just planting one species like palm oil with little regard to the local wildlife. No doubt there will be an element of tea money and jobs for "the lads" but I rather see the money go into a project like this than a face lift for Khao San.}

On this scale, tea money could amount to buying the whole plantation.

[maidu]

I think the person proposing this idea is sincere. However, he appears steeped in the concept of every good idea has to be money-based, money-related. Not surprising this article appeared in the Nation, where most news items revolve around money and finances.

Here's an idea: How about if people of means, simply donate some of their money to The Forestry Dept, while earmarking it for reforestation. Of course, this being Thailand, any gov't Department is prone to corruption, so it's a toss-up whether such donations would get to the proscribed places.

Few people know this, but the US National Parks System (the 1st and best of its kind in the world), grew substantially from rich people (mainly J.D.Rockefeller) who clandestinely purchased large tracts of beautiful terrain, and later gave it to the US Park Service.