Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Norway is “throwing money out of the window” in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Posted on 15 May 2018

Norway has spent NOK 1 billion on saving the rainforest in the Democratic Republic of Congo. But deforestation in DRC is increasing rapidly. On 12 May 2018, Dagsrevyen, the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation’s daily news programme reported on Norway’s failure to address deforestation in DRC.

For Norwegian speakers, the news piece is available here. Two articles are also available, here and here.

A rough translation of the news piece is posted below (made using Google Translate – REDD-Monitor welcomes any corrections to the translation).

Inger Marit Kolstadbråten, a journalist with the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, interviewed Ole Elvestuen, Norway’s Climate and Environment Minister, for the news piece. Elvestuen tells her that,

“The main reason for the deforestation in Congo is poverty, shifting cultivation, charcoal production and population increase.”

It is telling that Elvestuen makes no mention of the impact of industrial logging on the forests of the Democratic Republic of Congo, despite the fact that DRC recently announced plans to lift the country’s 16-year-old moratorium on new logging concessions.

In March 2018, more than 50 environmental and human rights organisations wrote to key donor governments and agencies, including Norway, UK, France, USA, and the World Bank, calling on them to suspend funding immediately to the DRC government for forestry and forest conservation.

Here is the translation of the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation news piece:

Nina Owing (presenter): Norway has paid NOK 1 billion to Congo. Money to be spent on saving the rainforest. But it turns out that deforestation is increasing. Critics believe Norway has thrown hundreds of millions out of the window.

Inger Marit Kolstadbråten (journalist): She makes the oven ready for the pot. Charcoal is a fuel for millions of Congolese people.

Micheline Kebe (small restaurant owner in Kinshasa): I use charcoal when cooking, because the electricity is unstable here.

Kolstadbråten: For charcoal, rainforest is harvested. Deforestation in Congo has increased dramatically in recent years – for several reasons. Even though Norway has paid almost NOK 1 billion to maintain the rainforest.

Since 2009, NOK 404 million has been paid to the project via the UN and others. NOK 582 million has been paid for programs that have not yet started. In total, NOK 986 million.

Much has gone on improving conditions for indigenous peoples and to fight poverty. But Norway is facing criticism from several sides for its money spent in Congo.

Christian Nellemann (Director, Norwegian Center for Global Analyses, RHIPTO): It’s throwing money right out of the window if you do not focus on the places where deforestation is greatest.

Irene Wabiwa Betoko (Greenpeace Africa): Forests laws are even violated by the highest authorities of the country.

Simon Counsell (Rainforest Foundation UK): Most of the money that has actually been spent has been absorbed by those international agencies themselves, rather than hitting the ground and benefitting the communities.

Kolstadbråten: Millions are fleeing from war in the east of the country. Money from illegal logging and the production of charcoal helps keep the war going. Political instability and mismanagement has dominated the country for decades.

She works for Greenpeace and has uncovered illegal logging permits issued by three environmental ministers.

Irene Wabiwa Betoko (Greenpeace Africa): The DRC forest sector is still out of control. The governance is almost non-existant. Impunity is the rule for the forest sector.

Kolstadbråten: When new illegal logging permits were revealed in February, Norway stopped payments and demanded that the licenses be revoked. It’s not the first time this sort of thing has happened. Every time an improvement is promised. And Norway continues to pay big sums.

Irene Wabiwa Betoko (Greenpeace Africa): Norway has continued sending money to the DRC based on the promise that these illegalities would not be repeated. But nothing has been taken as action to sanction this kind of action.

Kolstadbråten: He has made several reports for the UN and Interpol on environmental crime.

Christian Nellemann (Director, Norwegian Center for Global Analysis, RHIPTO): The greatest deforestation takes place in the war zones in Congo.

Kolstadbråten: He believes Norway is using the wrong medicine.

Christian Nellemann: What is needed is a targetted effort towards the surrounding areas where deforestation is the greatest – deforestation driven by criminals and rebel groups.

Kolstadbråten: Climate and Environment Minister Ola Elvestuen agrees that more must be done to bring the perpertrators to justice. But he defends Norway’s spending.

Ola Elvestuen (Climate and Environment Minister): It is difficult to get results. The main reason for the deforestation in Congo is poverty, shifting cultivation, charcoal production and population increase. We must have a broad approach to achieving a reduction of deforestation in Congo.

Kolstadbråten: Transparency International: Congo is one of the world’s most corrupt countries. Norwegian money is not transferred to the government, but to the United Nations and the World Bank. And from there to countless organisations.

This overview shows the organisations involved in order to implement projects in a Congo region. This has been criticized in Norad’s evaluation and by environmental organisations.

Simon Counsell: What this means of course is that there are very high administrative and running costs for those programs and in fact so far most of the money that has actually been spent has been absorbed by those international agencies themselves, rather than hitting the ground and benefitting the communities in the forest that really need that support.

Kolstadbråten: The Climate and Environment Ministry admits that there have been mistakes along the way. Several programs in Congo have been extensive and costly.

Has it been correct to spend over NOK 1 billion when the results are so low?

Ola Elvestuen: Whether each of them has been appropriate must be continuously evaluated. But to have a commitment in Congo, one of the world’s most important forest countries, a country in crisis, with poverty, conflict, needing broad support, and to keep the forest, that is the right thing to do.

Kolstadbråten: The future of the world’s second largest rainforest is important for the whole world.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SUBSCRIBE!

Recent themes
30x30
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

Recent Posts

  • REDD-Monitor is moving to Substack
  • REDD Project in Brazil Nut concessions in Madre de Dios, Peru finally started paying communities a decade after the project started. “I’m still lacking money,” says one community member
  • REDD-Monitor’s top ten posts in 2022
  • The harsh reality of 30×30: The EU is keen to allow extractivism in the 30×30 target – but not Indigenous Peoples’ territories
  • Human rights abuses against Indigenous Peoples and the proposed “30×30” target

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Cryptocurrency Deforestation EcoPlanet Bamboo Evictions FCPF Financing REDD Fossil fuels FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post Human rights ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC Verra World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Gabon Germany Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Luxembourg Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Spain Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA West Papua
©2025 REDD-Monitor | Powered by SuperbThemes!