Asia Pulp & Paper’s change of heart is good news for forest conservation, but consumers need to keep up the pressure, says Greenpeace’s Andy Tait

In recent years, Greenpeace has helped persuade some of the world’s largest corporations to tackle deforestation in their supply chains, both through hard-hitting confrontational campaigns and through backroom lobbying and collaboration.

In fact, the one often leads to the other. With Kimberly-Clark, we fought a five-year campaign to end its links to destructive forestry in Canada’s Boreal Forest. With McDonald’s, the campaign to end its involvement in Amazon deforestation for soya was short and sharp, as was our campaign against Nestlé regarding the sources of its palm oil. Change within Indonesia’s largest palm oil producer – Golden Agri-Resources, the palm oil division of Sinar Mas – came after a longer fight.

Many of these companies, and others, have become strong advocates for broader action to tackle deforestation across supply chains, partly as a result of our work. 

The most recent and perhaps the most unexpected shift has come with our decision to suspend public campaign work against Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) – one of the largest paper companies in the world.

In February 2013, the company announced a new forest conservation policy. The policy commits APP to no further plantation establishment or peatland development on forested land. Underscoring this commitment, APP announced the immediate suspension of all remaining natural forest clearance and peatland development across all concessions that supply it.

APP has not suddenly “seen the light”. Remember that the new policy follows roughly a decade of persistent campaigns from Indonesian and international NGOs. Commercial pressure also played a role, coming from international businesses such as Adidas, Disney, Mattel, Nestlé and Unilever whose customers did not want to buy products linked to deforestation. This decision is based on an assessment that APP can cope without further expansion into forest areas and that this move will end up being a good one for business.

Onus on APP

Only time and on-the-ground evidence of change will succeed in convincing APP’s critics and its former customers that the company is genuinely turning over a new leaf. Unquestionably, the onus is on APP to demonstrate that it is delivering on its commitments and addressing the major environmental and social costs of its operations until now.

Fortunately, at this stage, the signs are positive that APP is serious about implementing its forest commitments. An endorsement by the company chairman suggests that the new policy is supported at the highest level, and the company is investing a lot of money and resources on the ground to oversee the first stage of implementation.

If implementation does succeed, many challenges remain. Until the end of January 2013, APP suppliers were still clearing rainforest. Many social conflicts across the company’s supply chain must still be addressed. Peatland areas previously drained and cleared will continue to emit large amounts of greenhouse gases if management of these areas does not change rapidly.

In this context, at what stage should the international market recognise and reward progress? And if there is no market benefit where is the incentive for the company to change practice?

In the short term, the attention of some campaigns will now turn to APP’s main competitor in the Indonesian pulp sector, April (Asia Pacific Resources International), which continues with the deforestation activities APP has just committed to end. This now makes April the leading driver of deforestation for pulp in Indonesia. And April, like APP, depends on the international market.

Greenpeace has recently sent letters to April’s chief executive, Sukanto Tanoto, some of its key customers and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development of which, surprisingly, this most unsustainable company is a member.

Indonesia’s pulp and palm oil industries have relied on rainforest peatland destruction for far too long. Forests play a vital role, not just for biodiversity and for the communities that depend on them, but also for storing carbon and thereby protecting the global climate. By continuing to clear rainforests, plantation companies put themselves on a collision course with their customers, consumer-facing brands that have pledged to tackle climate change and to clean up their supply chains.

Zero deforestation policies driven from the consumer side are helping to drive change in supply chains through excluding poor practice and supporting commodity producers that commit to implement more responsible practice. But the landscape remains extremely complex and questions remain about how to link market changes to political policies and governance that genuinely protect forests and reward better industry practice.

Through confrontation and collaboration, NGOs can play a vital role in driving change on the ground and in corporate supply chains. But that market pressure alone cannot deliver change quickly enough for Indonesia and other countries’ rainforests. Ultimately, we need political solutions. And soon.

Andy Tait is a senior campaign adviser at Greenpeace. He tweets at @andyrtait.

Andy Tait  Asia Pulp & Paper  deforestation  Greenpeace  supply chains