More than 75 Civil Society organisations call on Dutch development bank FMO to stop investing in industrial tree plantations
Plantations are not forests!
FMO, the Dutch Development Bank, has committed to investing up to €1 billion in industrial tree plantations by 2030. Obviously, FMO says that its investment will be in “forestry and sustainable land use”, but the reality will be enormous monocultures of fast growing trees.
FMO recently launched a consultation on its investment approach to what it euphemistically calls “responsibly managed forestry plantations”. The document describing FMO’s investment approach states that,
Our primary focus is on the Global South, where the favorable growing conditions in the tropical and sub-tropical regions make growing trees both efficient and financially sustainable.
Plantations are a false solution
FMO claims that,
Forest plantations [sic] have significant carbon sequestration and climate adaptation potential, and there is an urgent need to meet the global demand for timber with sustainable managed forestry plantations.
This is a bizarre statement. There is no such thing as a “forest plantation”. Forests are one thing. Plantations are something entirely different.
In 1999, Ricardo Carrere, then-international coordinator of World Rainforest Movement, wrote a short Briefing Paper titled “10 replies to 10 lies”.
The Briefing highlighted 10 of the lies pushed by promoters of industrial tree plantations. Lie number one is that “Tree Plantations are ‘planted forests’.” Carrere wrote that, “This confusion between a crop (of trees) and a wood or forest is the starting point of all propaganda in favour of tree plantations.”
After highlighting the differences between plantations and forests, Carrere concluded that,
Since the main objective is to produce and harvest huge volumes of wood in the shortest possible time, these plantations can be considered to have the same characteristics as any other agricultural crop. Therefore they are not a “forest”, but rather a crop, as is often admitted by plantation companies themselves when they are questioned. In short, a tree plantation is not a “planted forest”.
It is plainly impossible to “plant” the enormous diversity of plants and animals which characterize a native forest, nor is it possible to obtain the overall series of interactions which occur between the living and inorganic elements which make up a forest.
The rest of FMO’s claim about plantations is contradictory. While trees are growing, they absorb carbon. But if the trees are cut down to “meet global demand for timber”, there is every chance that the carbon will be returned to the atmosphere — especially if the plantations are supplying the pulp and paper industry, or biomass that will be burned for example by Drax in the UK.
In 2022, World Rainforest Movement wrote an update to the “10 replies to 10 lies” briefing. Plantations are a false solution to the climate crisis for two reasons. First, the carbon stored in trees is only temporarily stored. But emissions from burning fossil fuels will stay in the atmosphere for a very long time. A recent paper in Nature found that, “a CO₂ storage period of less than 1000 years is insufficient for neutralizing remaining fossil CO₂ emissions”.
And second, burning fossil fuels is what is driving the climate crisis. Keeping fossil fuels in the ground is the only way of addressing the climate crisis. The carbon stored below ground as fossil fuels is stored permanently — unless Big Oil comes along and drills it out.
In February 2025, 77 organisations raised the alarm about FMO’s industrial tree plantation plans. On its website, Milieudefensie (Friends of the Earth Netherlands) states that,
These plantations contribute to deforestation, climate change, biodiversity loss and human rights violations. We call on FMO and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to stop promoting these harmful practices.
The civil society statement opposing FMO’s planned investment in industrial tree plantations is posted in full below:
Joint Civil Society statement on FMO’s proposal to increase investment in industrial forestry plantations
24 February 2025
Undersigned organisations are alarmed by the announcement that FMO wants to increase their investments in industrial forestry plantations with €1 Billion by 2030. We challenge the setup of the forestry investment approach consultation, because of the false and misleading assumption that industrial forestry plantations need to expand, and that this can be done responsibly. These myths have been countered since long.
Industrial forestry plantations do not:
remove pressure from forests1
provide for sustainable development of local communities and Indigenous Peoples2
reduce greenhouse gases and contribute to halting the climate and biodiversity crisis3
Industrial forestry plantations do:
destroy local biodiversity and drive indirect or direct deforestation4
pollute the local environment with the use of pesticides, fertilizers and heavy machinery5
contribute to widespread fires and related deaths and health impacts6
play a central role in the carbon offset industry to greenwash emissions from destructive industries while generating more profits7
provide for fewer jobs than other land sectors and structurally exploit workers8
contribute to landgrabbing, displacement and increased land conflicts in a time of increasing land scarcity9
often increase the vulnerability of women and girls to sexual harrasment and violence due to the presence of external workers near their communities and homes10
source to the industrial pulp&paper sector, that has a significant energy, water and waste footprint globally11
The draft forestry investment approach paints an unrealistic picture of how FMO can improve company practices and does not have clear exclusion criteria for plantations with legacy land conflicts. Civil Society Organisations and affected communities have experienced that FMO’s procedures, including the grievance mechanism, are not able to resolve legacy land conflicts.12
Governments and financial institutions have been financing and subsidizing the plantation industry for decades, based on false premises. This controversial finance favours and expands a sector that would otherwise not be economically viable. The industrial plantation model that produces for the overconsumption of some by exploiting other people and nature is indefensible.
To make things worse, Indigenous Peoples and communities around the world are facing a rush for their lands to be turned into tree plantations to generate carbon credits, which largely benefit the carbon offset industry. FMO’s decision to increase forestry investments will exacerbate this. FMO disregards land scarcity, inevitable land conflicts as well as harmful direct and indirect landuse change driven by the expansion of monoculture tree plantations.
Investments into responsible forest and land management are possible. The financial sector and governments should promote and develop accessible and just financial products for direct funding of community based and smallholder area management. This should come without restrictive contracts and allowing these communities and smallholders to retain ownership and control over their lands and resources.
The transition in agricultural and forestry sectors is urgent, with the role of Indigenous Peoples and local communities acknowledged by IPBES13, the convention on biological diversity COP1614 and IPCC15 for climate and biodiversity protection. FMO needs to stop banking on biodiversity and climate collapse driven by exploitative models of production. The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs should take its responsibility and urgently address this with FMO.
We call upon FMO and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure it
stops investing in industrial plantations both through direct and indirect financing
stops using carbon offsets as an added value for investing in these destructive plantations
starts promoting community based and smallholder area management, where people’s rights over land and resources are respected
starts investing in the reduction of consumption of forest risk materials like single use paper, carton and biomass
provides redress for the harms related to its current and previous industrial forestry investments (see examples of harmful FMO forestry projects in the ANNEX)
refrains from using our engagement in this consultation as a way to greenwash its decision making on monoculture tree plantations.
Signatories:
2006 Goldman Prize Winner – Forests - South & Central America, Brazil
Africa Institute for Energy Governance, Uganda
Amadiba crisis committee, South Africa
Amigas da Terra Brasil, Brazil
Armenian Women for Health and Healthy Environment NGO, Armenia
Articulação carioca por justiça socioambiental, Brazil
Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy, Nepal
Associação de Amigos e Defensores do Jardim de Alah, Brazil
AXIAL Naturaleza y Cultura, Paraguay
Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association, Bangladesh
Biofuelwatch, International
Blue Dalian, China
Bruno Manser Fonds, Switzerland
BSR, France
BUND - Friends of the Earth Germany
Center of Economic and Law Studies (CELIOS), Indonesia
Centre pour l'Environnement et le Développement (CED), Cameroon
Centre pour la Justice Environnementale Togo
CESTA Amigos de la Tierra, El Salvador
Climate Communications Coalition, USA
Colectivo VientoSur, Chile
Community of Arran Seabed Trust Scotland
Cooperativa Laguna El Manzano, Chile
COSOPA, Chile
Dogwood Alliance, USA
Earth Thrive, UK / Servia
Earthsight, UK
ECOMUNIDADES, Red Ecologista Autonoma de la Cuenca de México
EDEN center, Albania
Environmental Paper Network (EPN) International
Environmental Paper Network (EPN) North America
Environmental Paper Network (EPN) China
Fair Finance Pakistan
Fern, Belgium
Focus Association for Sustainable Development, Slovenia
Forest NOW, Poland
Forests & Finance Coalition, International
Forum Ökologie & Papier, Germany
Friends of the Earth Canada
Friends of the Earth England, Wales & Northern Ireland
Friends of the Earth International
Friends of the Earth US
Fundación Pongo, Chile
GRAIN, Spain
Green Advocates International, Liberia
Green Longjiang, China
Green Squad, Croatia
Instituto amaivos - contém amor, Brazil
Instituto para el Futuro Común Amerindio (IFCA), Honduras
Justica Ambiental (JA), Mozambique
Kentucky Environmental Foundation, USA
Leave it in the Ground Initiative (LINGO), Germany
Leefmilieu, Netherlands
Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center - Friends of the Earth Philippines
Les Amis de la Terre Togo
Milieudefensie – Friends of the Earth Netherlands
Mouvement Ecologique, Luxembourg
National Society of Conservationists - Friends of the Earth Hungary
Nenhuma, Brazil
Ong Impacta positivo, Chile
Otros Mundos Chiapas - Amigos de la Tierra México
Pastoral da Ecologia Integral, Brazil
Pro Natura - FoE Switzerland
Profundo, Netherlands
Protect the Forest Sweden
Quartzo Comunicação, Brazil
Radboud University, Netherlands
Save Estonia's Forests - Päästame Eesti Metsad, Estonia
Socio-ecological Union International, Russia
SOMO, Netherlands
SOS-FORÊTS, Ivory Coast
Tamil Nadu Land Rights Federation - Member Organization of FoE India
Tierra Nativa - Amigos de la Tierra Argentina
WALHI PAPUA, Indonesia
WALHI - Friends of the Earth Indonesia
Water Justice and Gender, Netherlands
Werkgroep Biodiversiteit van Goed Volk, Netherlands
Women's Earth and Climate Action Network, USAANNEX
Examples of documented concerns and adverse impacts from FMO investments in monoculture tree plantations
Arbaro Fund:
https://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin-articles/arbaro-fund-a-strategy-to-expand-industrial-tree-plantations-in-the-global-south https://www.groene.nl/artikel/het-vergif-dringt-overal-binnenBTG Pactual – Timberland Investment Group: https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/uk-dutch-banks-invest-55-million-in-controversial-cerrado-tree-farms/
Green Resources:
https://africanpeoplestribunal.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/APT_FOE_6Pager-min.pdfSuzano:
https://en.milieudefensie.nl/news/pulp-fiction-fact-check-about-suzano.pdfYork Timbers:
https://www.gov.za/news/media-statements/court-grants-confiscation-order-against-york-timbers-failing-obtainNew Forests Company:
https://reddmonitor.substack.com/p/longer-prison-sentences-for-carbon
https://www.wrm.org.uy/bulletin-articles/the-new-forests-company-in-uganda-villages-evicted-deceived-and-dumped-into-poverty
Cossalter, C. And Pye-Smith, C. (2003) Fast-Wood Forestry, Myths and Realities. CIFOR Forest Perspectives.
Malkamäki, A., D’Amato, D., Hogarth, N. J., Kanninen, M., Pirard, R., Toppinen, A., & Zhou, W. (2018). A systematic review of the socio-economic impacts of large-scale tree plantations, worldwide. Global environmental change, 53, 90-103.
Lewis, S.L., Wheeler, C.E.(2019) Regenerate natural forests to store carbon. Nature, Vol 568.
Del Rio, D. D. F., Sovacool, B. K., Griffiths, S., Bazilian, M., Kim, J., Foley, A. M., & Rooney, D. (2022) Decarbonizing the pulp and paper industry: A critical and systematic review of sociotechnical developments and policy options. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 167, 112706.
Gerber, J. F. (2011) Conflicts over industrial tree plantations in the South: Who, how and why? Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 165-176. & Wang, C., Zhang, W., Li, X.
Wu, J. (2022) A global meta‐analysis of the impacts of tree plantations on biodiversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 31(3), 576-587.
Braun, A.Ch, Troeger, D., Garcia, R., Aguayo, M., Barra, R., Vogt, J. (2017) Assessing the impact of plantation forestry on plant biodiversity. Global Ecology and Conservation 10, 159-172.
Del Rio et al., 2022 & Van Dijk, A. I., & Keenan, R. J. (2007) Planted forests and water in perspective. Forest ecology and management, 251(1-2), 1-9.
Barguin, J., Concostrina-Zubiri, L., Pérez-Silos I., Hernández-Romero, g., Vélez-Martín, A., Álvarez-Martinez, J.M. (2022) Mono-culture plantations fuel fires amid heat waves. Science, Vol377, Issue 6614.
McFadden, K. (2021) Understory vegetation composition and small mammal abundance in an exotic Eucalyptus forest vs adjacent native habitat.
Gerber, 2011 & Wang et al., 2021.
Holl, K. D., & Brancalion, P. H. (2020) Tree planting is not a simple solution. Science, 368(6491), 580-581.
https://www.somo.nl/facing-the-facts-carbon-offsets-unmasked/
Malkamäki et al., 2018.
Montague, B (2019) Forestry sector failing to combat forced labour. The Ecologist.
Gerber, 2010 & Malkamäki et al., 2018.
FAO (2021) The state of the worlds land and water resources for food and agriculture.
https://www.landcoalition.org/en/whats-at-stake/issues/landgrabbing/
Global Forest Coalition (2020) The impacts of tree plantations on women and women-led resistance to monocultures.
Del Rio et al., 2022.
University of Antwerp (2022) Mediating land rights. The frustrating bottom-up account of the ongoing experience of nine communities in DRC
https://www.wrm.org.uy/node/20634
Brilliant article, let's make it viral. we should not leave the future of the health of our plannet in the hand of banks, such as FMO. These kind of investments only destroy the rights of our children to a just future.
I see similar dynamics here with the previous article about the Tropical Forests Forever Facility. The proposition that forest conservation can be done in a neoliberal financial system favoring fossil fuel, extraction, profitability and efficiency, is nothing more than the arrogant path dependency of western capitalistic mindset. It's stunning how they could just ignore the impacts over indigenous groups and local communities.