306
FORESTRY GOVERNANCE
the entire forest sector. Examples include the creation of the Liberia Forest Initiative in post-conflict Liberia and a reform process that cost US$20 million, funded equally by the World Bank and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).33 As is often the case when the root of corruption is at a high level, however, donors have failed to achieve the desired results. A World Bank funding programme in Cambodia and international debt relief in Cameroon gave way to business-as-usual corruption. Essential political support from the donor community for Global Witness, which served as an independent forest monitor in these countries, shrivelled in the face of diplomatic awkwardness caused by the organization’s field-based findings that suggested there was top-level corruption.34 International donors have yet to comprehend that failing to match anti-corruption rhetoric with action actually entrenches corruption, sending a clear message that, when push comes to shove, they will not act. In Liberia the process of forestry reform entered the implementation phase after five years of work in 2008, with the start of concession auctions and sales of old timber stockpiles. Almost immediately the regulations, guidelines and various checks and balances that had been built in to the reform process were allegedly routinely broken or ignored.35 In early 2009 the country’s Forest Development Authority unilaterally altered the tax structure for the concessions after the bidding process was under way, reducing the requirement for 25 annual payments to one initial payment. This would have cost the government up to US$150 million in revenues.36 Behindthe-scenes protests from the donor community prevented this from going through, but no one was held accountable and no investigation was conducted. Although no investigation has been carried out as to whether corruption played a role in this process, a Special Presidential Committee established to investigate a forest carbon deal recently released its report which documented various allegations of corruption, and recommended the dismissal of and further investigation into various officials, some of whom were involved in both processes.37 So while there is no evidence that corruption played a role in the concession allocation process, the Forest Development Authority’s decision to unilaterally give up millions of dollars in a sector specifically reformed to bring economic and social benefit is questionable. Such examples illustrate that the tropical forest sector’s ability to deliver economic and social benefits can be undermined in practice by the failure of governments and their aid partners to solve problems. Indeed, the international donor community has displayed a remarkably tolerant attitude towards illegality. Significantly, until 2008, no country had a law that made it illegal to import illegally sourced timber. In May 2008 the US led the way by passing an amendment to the Lacey Act38 that not only
GLOBAL_CORRUPTION_CS4.indb 306
3/15/2011 9:42:32 AM