TEMPTATION IN EDEN

By Chrissie Wildwood

Is it naive of Britain's Eden Project to believe that the only way to change the ethics of the multinationals is to embrace them and preach the myth of 'sustainable' globalisation?

Conceived as homage to Earth, the UK’s prestigious £86 million Eden Project is regarded as an embarrassing contradiction to many environmentalists and others capable of seeing through the eco-hype. Located in a former clay pit near St Austell in Cornwall, the attraction is famed for its huge futuristic domes, called biomes, housing myriad plant species from around the world.

The gates of Eden were opened for the first time in March 2001, the site proving itself to be an instant hit with motorists. Each year hundreds of thousands of visitors continue to converge on Eden in their noisy, polluting, fossil-fuelled vehicles. Back in the summer of 2002, Maurice Spurway of Friends of the Earth in Exeter urged the Eden Project to close down its 3,500-space car park. While Cornwall’s Green Party declared itself against the attraction on principle. Even though shuttle buses are currently being used to help reduce the number of private vehicles, and a high-speed train link to Eden may eventually materialise, environmentalists warn that the planned expansion of the site, in order to take an extra one million visitors a year, is likely to exacerbate the situation.

Traffic pollution aside, there are ethical concerns. Although largely funded by the National Lottery, two years ago Eden signed a lucrative deal with the notorious global mining corporation Rio Tinto, agreeing to run a series of education projects on ‘sustainable development’ and the role metals play in society.

Rio Tinto has headquarters in Melbourne Australia and London UK, as well as operations on all continents except Antarctica. Accusations of corporate misdeeds include suppressing trade unions at their Australian operations, exposing workers to radiation in a uranium mine in Namibia, and negligence and complicity in the civil war in Papua New Guinea. The Indonesian government’s National Human Rights Commission investigated allegations of abuses at the Kelian mine. It was found that Rio Tinto’s security personnel were involved in forcibly evicting local people from their homes, depriving them of gardens, fruit trees, forest resources, family graves, and the right to pan for gold in the river.

Friends of the Earth remain deeply concerned about Rio Tinto's plans to develop their mining enterprise on the island of Madagascar, threatening a precious and unique ecosystem, which is home to a number of endangered animal and plant species.

Click here to learn more about Rio Tinto's environmental and human rights abuses

Click here for a report from Friends of the Earth on Rio Tinto's proposals for plundering Madagascar

With such a tarnished image, it’s hardly surprising that Rio Tinto have been trying extremely hard over the last few years to demonstrate that they can be a responsible mining company – partnering with the easily tempted Eden Project was one way to feign atonement. It would appear that Eden’s directors are ignorant of the insidious ploy known as ‘greenwash’, choosing instead to focus on the pot of gold.

Greenwash is the phenomenon of socially and environmentally destructive corporations attempting to preserve and expand their markets by posing as friends of the environment and leaders in the struggle to eradicate poverty. It also manifests as an attempt to hoodwink ethically-minded consumers or government policy makers into believing that polluting mega-corporations are the key to environmentally sound ‘sustainable development’.

Another shade of this practice is known as ‘bluewash’. This refers to corporations who, through voluntary association with the United Nations, ostensibly support UN themes of human rights and environmental protection - and yet, the UN does not require them to do anything new. Examples of corporate associates who wave the UN's blue flag, but whose actions run counter to UN interests, include Shell, Nike, Nestle - as well as Eden’s silver-tongued benefactor, Rio Tinto.

The Eden Project also receives funds from the GM giant, Syngenta Foundation which prides itself on promoting ‘sustainable agriculture’ and ‘contributing to food security for small-scale farmers’. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of the biotechnology industry and its vested interests will take this statement with a barrow load of salt. Indeed, as the renowed eco-activist Vandana Shiva has pointed out, under pressure of globalisation and the ban on seed-saving by multinational GM corporations like Syngenta and Monsanto, peasant farmers in India are in serious debt. Many are compelled to sell kidneys or even commit suicide.

Click here to read Vandana Shiva's article on globalisation and GM corporate control of India's farmers

Click here to learn more about Syngenta

Another of Eden’s benefactors is the benignly named Wellcome Trust, Britain’s leading medical charity. However, its interests are far from welcome to those opposed to both GM and animal testing. As part of its £400 million a year expenditure on biomedical research, the charity actively promotes vivisection and in 2003 had earmarked £22 million to help fund research at the controversial Cambridge University monkey laboratory, which is likely to be built on green belt land.

Click here for latest news on the Cambridge Primate Centre and other issues from Animal Aid

Eden's authentically eco-minded and socially responsible visitors are taken aback by the Coca-Cola vending machines on site - the company's usual garish red and white signature having been greenwashed with scenes of nature. This is cynicism to the extreme, not least because Eden's fizzy pal has a record of environmental crimes in India and is currently under investigation for human rights abuses in Colombia.

Click to read about the shocking activities of Coca-Cola in Colombia

Click to read Guardian newspaper report on Coca-Cola's environmental crimes in India

Then there’s Eden’s willingness to provide greenwash for the cosmetic giant, Estee Lauder. According to the international campaigning agency Third World Network (TWN), with the help of multinationals like Estee Lauder, a number of academic institutions have become conduits in biopiracy. Biopiracy is the colonial habit of plundering or 'bioprospecting' the biological resources of developing countries - and the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples that accompanies it - without fair and equitable compensation, resulting in ecological, economic and social detriment. Biopiracy commonly operates through the application of Intellectual Property Rights to genetic resources and traditional knowledge in order to patent that information.

For example, the University of California in Santa Barbara ‘discovered’ and patented an anti-inflammatory agent called pseudopterosin, extracted from a sea creature found in the Caribbean. The compound has already been incorporated into a skin cream currently being marketed by Estee Lauder in a product range called ‘Resilience’. The University studiously avoids identifying where exactly they collected their ‘samples’, or whose knowledge had led them to the highly lucrative patent. Certainly, the compound is generating many thousands of dollars a year in royalty income for the University.

Then, in June 2004, a lawsuit was brought against Estee Lauder (and several other companies) by the State Attorney General in New York City. Estee Lauder stands accused of dumping hazardous waste into a landfill site, resulting in contamination of underground water supplies. The company admits liability and expects to pay in excess of $16 million in legal costs and for the clean-up.

Moreover, Estee Lauder products are marketed as 'cruelty free'. Yet animal welfare groups such as Naturewatch (UK) will not endorse the company's claims. This is because Estee Lauder refuse to adopt a fixed cut-off date policy. Companies agreeing to this policy will not use any ingredient tested on animals after a specific date (e.g. 1986) and insist that their suppliers comply accordingly. This is the only way to discourage current or future animal testing. Estee Lauder, however, expect their customers to accept the 'trust us' policy.

With such a track record, it's astounding that Eden agreed to partner with Estee Lauder to help the company source rare aromatics for a new fragrance called ‘Beyond Paradise’. According to Estee Lauder’s marketing material, the perfume includes an extract from the wood of the Zebrano tree, presumably from Microberlinia bisulcata (syn. M. brazzavillensis), a critically endangered species from Cameroon in West Africa. Another alleged ingredient is extract of wild Laelia orchid – an endangered species from the mountains of Mexico. Since the vast majority of commercial perfumes are composed mainly of synthetic compounds, conservationists can only hope that the principal ingredient of ‘Beyond Paradise’ is eau de hype.


As well as the aforementioned blemished apples, the Eden project has launched its own range of exorbitantly priced skincare products containing exotic ingredients sourced from around the globe. Sandalwood essential oil is listed as an ingredient in some of these creams and lotions. As Eden’s cosmetic manufacturer should have known, sandalwood essential oil is captured from the roots and heartwood of Santalum album, an endangered tree native to India.

On behalf of the Green Pen campaign, I emailed Sue Minter, horticultural director of the Eden Project, pointing out the folly of using sandalwood oil as an ingredient in products aimed at Green consumers. Here’s the relevant part of her reply:

“I got onto this issue as soon as I came to Eden with the result that this range of cosmetics is not being further progressed. However, it was too late to do anything then as the stock had already been manufactured. We are still not sure of the source of the sandalwood – it may well be that it turns out to be synthetic.”

Whilst the use of a synthetic odorant saves trees, it's dishonest to market such products as 'natural'. At this time (August 2004) the remaining stock of the Eden Project skincare range is being marketed through retail outlets as 'eco-friendly', '100% natural' and 'cruelty free'. Considering that Eden accepts substantial donations from the pro-vivisection Wellcome Trust, we might question the 'cruelty free' claim too.

As the Green Pen campaign highlights, contrary to information given on labels and in marketing literature, it would appear that a significant number of manufacturers are not claiming the true origin of every ingredient used in their fancy packaged 'Green' cosmetics which often cost the Earth.

Much to the indignation of its staff, the Eden Project has been dubbed ‘a green theme park’. Perhaps they should be thankful for small mercies. In truth, Eden has lost the Green plot.

Click here for full list of Eden Project donors and sponsors

RESPONSE FROM EDEN

Thanks to Sue Minter, horticultural director at Eden, for taking the time to respond to the above article

13th August, 2004

Sue Minter:

The work that we are doing with Estee Lauder is via Quest, the wholesaler of fragrance analogues to commercial perfumers. Quest have produced synthetic headspace analogues from plants we already have in the biomes and no wild extracts are involved, nor do we source wild plants for them. Quest are not given access to any plants Eden regards as sensitive under our policy on the Convention on Biological Diversity and this is formally recorded in our Memorandum of Understanding with them. They are steered towards plants which are already clearly in the
public domain. We have formal written policies on the 'Collection of Wild Plants for the Eden Project' and a 'Policy Statement on benefit sharing genetic resources'.


Chrissie Wildwood:

I guessed that the Estee Lauder promotional material for the perfume, ‘Beyond Paradise’ was largely hype - as stated in the article. Nevertheless, even though the perfume is a synthetic headspace analogue, it’s irresponsible of Estee Lauder to draw attention to rare and endangered plants for use in perfumery. Attempts by Eden to steer Quest International and Estee Lauder towards plants already in the public domain appears to have failed on one level.

Indeed, making statements such as, ‘used for the first time in perfumery’ does nothing to save plants and trees. On the contrary, it makes the exploitation of rare botanicals all the more desirable to competitive companies, many of which are constantly seeking exotic ingredients to lure impressionable customers.

As pointed out by Tony Burfield, biochemist and consultant to the aromatics trade (UK), “There is little excuse for Estee Lauder to highlight a threatened species such as the Zebrano tree from Cameroon, even if it's just to determine the headspace profile of the sawdust. The tree may now be sought out because of this publicity and the essential oil commercially offered at some point...Threatened species are best left alone and unexploited.”

Estee Lauder’s promotional material is very misleading, which is another reason why Eden should be careful when partnering with multinationals. Without doubt, your organisation is being used as a source of greenwash by Estee Lauder, Rio Tinto, Syngenta et al.


Sue Minter:


There is a separate issue of the cosmetics industry needing to do more in the way of payback to countries of origin and this is to be the subject of a meeting we are having shortly with Quest. I would point out that Eden has been quite successful in payback on horticultural plants. We are the first botanic institution to form an agreement with a developing country (the Seychelles) to return a share of the profits of sale of Impatiens 'Ray of Hope', a plant bred from an endemic threatened parent, Impatiens gordonii. This was the subject of a display at the Chelsea Flower Show this year called 'Treasured Islands' and was the result of a Darwin Initiative project helping the islanders with propagation protocols for their endemic plants. We hope to be equally successful with other such initiatives as opportunities arise and this winter we are installing an exhibit of 'Herbal and Pharmaceutical Crops' which will highlight the related issues of wild harvesting.


Chrissie Wildwood:

Even though I’m deeply concerned about the ethics of allowing the patenting of life-forms and believe we must campaign to end this madness, I applaud Eden's efforts in making the best of a bad situation - by ensuring that countries of origin receive some payback from commercial bioprospecting. I’m especially pleased to hear that you intend to discuss this with Quest International. This is because Quest (in partnership with Minnesota University) have already been implicated in biopiracy – namely, in patenting a micro-organism isolated from Pozol, a traditional drink from South America made from fermented maize and having significant medicinal and nutritional properties.

Overall, the original court decision to allow the patenting of life-forms will come to be seen as the greatest folly of our era. Already it’s threatening food security, denying indigenous peoples access to their traditional medicines, and forcing them to pay royalties on seed and livestock derived from patented genetic material.

While it's unarguably just for the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity to ensure that companies allow indigenous peoples to benefit from the commercial exploitation of their resources, unfortunately this still does not address the underlying malaise. Patents are the invention of a Western industrialised mindset with its insatiable desire for private ownership and the unsustainable pursuit of ever increasing wealth. This is out of kilter with Nature's self-regulating systems and the traditional self-sufficient ways of indigenous peoples. In reality, legitimising a market where genes can be owned DIMINISHES biodiversity, the common inheritance of humanity. Plants and animal species are no longer revered as members of complex ecosystems, but are isolated and reduced to the level of commodities to be genetically manipulated, priced and sold by the corporate sector.

Returning to Eden, it’s a great pity that your organisation is unable to see the incongruity of getting involved with some very dodgy multinationals. It seems to me that it's naive to believe that you can change the ethics of multinationals by embracing them and preaching the myth of 'sustainable' globalisation. Consumer power is the superior way to help change things for the better - that is to say, by choosing what to buy and what not to buy, and choosing which organisations to support or boycott.

IS EDEN NOW CONDONING THE USE OF ENDANGERED SANDALWOOD OIL IN THEIR RANGE OF ECO SKINCARE PRODUCTS?

Sue Minter has requested that I remove from this website her original statement about the sandalwood used in the Eden Project skincare range. However, it seems more appropriate to include this detailed update.

As quoted in the above article, ‘Temptation in Eden’, initially Sue Minter was unable to confirm the exact nature of the sandalwood used in the Eden skincare products and suggested it might even turn out to be synthetic. In the same email (dated 9th July, 2004) she adds, ‘I got onto this issue as soon as I came to Eden with the result that this range of products will not be further progressed.’ Presumably, then, she has been aware of sandalwood’s entry in the IUCN Red Book of Threatened Species for some considerable time.

It’s also interesting to note that Sue Minter was appointed Eden’s horticultural director in November 2001. Considering that she began looking into the sandalwood issue straight away, we can only conclude that it’s taken nearly three years for Eden’s cosmetic manufacturer to confirm the exact nature of the sandalwood used in the products!

From this latest correspondence we learn that the Eden product range does after all contain natural sandalwood oil captured from trees destroyed for the purpose.


Here is a copy of Sue Minter’s email dated the 31st August, 2004.


I have now discussed the sourcing of sandalwood for the Eden bodycare range. As you know there is the issue where the use of synthetics is helpful in supporting species conservation and this is the approach we have taken with our work with Quest.

With the Eden bodycare range however, ONLY natural materials was used, as in Eden's advertising material/brochures. Our supplier can produce the HPLC and GLC traces which show the profile of the oil as supplied to show that it has no synthetics and this would be acceptable in a court of law. Sandalwood is not a CITES species so it is not possible to provide export certification/import licence that would prove 'non-detriment to the wild population'. Instead we must rely on due diligence in dealing with reliable suppliers. Anna Gwilt of Primavera Aromatherapy has dealt with this particular Indian supplier for 15 years and considers him reliable in completing the audit trails of numbered trees according to the requirements of the Indian government.

In view of this Anna and I request that you remove the section on your website which deals with my name and the possibility that the source was synthetic (which it isn't). Please do this by 10th September 2004.

Please be assured that we are dealing with the complicated issues of wild-harvesting /synthetic analogues/sustainable livelihoods. In this our sources are the Medicinal Plant Specialist Group of the IUCN, Alan Hamilton, Suzanne Schmitt and Sarah Laird of the WWF UK, plus people working directly in the field (e.g. on Hoodia and Devil's Claw).

Sue M.


CHRISSIE WILDWOOD’S REPLY

1st September, 2004

Even though the sandalwood oil is certified by the Indian government, the uprooting of slow-growing wild forest trees cannot possibly be regarded as sustainable. I've carried out a great deal of research into this issue. So has my colleague Tony Burfield, who will be lecturing on this very subject at an aromatherapy trade conference to be held in October 2004. Thankfully, I was successful in persuading the Soil Association not to certify a source of sandalwood oil, also rosewood oil from the Amazonian rainforest. Therefore, I do hope Eden will follow the Soil Association's lead and discontinue using the oil in products aimed at the Green market.

Your original decision regarding sandalwood was sensible. At that time, you realised the oil should not have been an ingredient in a range of skincare products aimed at eco-minded consumers. It's a pity you seem to have changed your mind. Just because it's legal to destroy endangered sandalwood trees, this does not make it right from the eco-ethical perspective. Governments everywhere make bad decisions, especially when it comes to the environment. Environmental destruction affects the lives of people. So it's certainly not a black or white issue of 'the environment or people', as some would have us believe. People can't survive indefinitely on dwindling resources. Sooner or later, the mature sandalwood will run out. The few newly established sandalwood plantations are decades from being of 'harvestable' age - if indeed, they ever reach maturity due to disease and the effects of over-grazing.

Sandalwood is not monitored by CITES, but it is widely recognised as meeting CITES criteria for protection, being listed in the IUCN Red Book of Threatened Species. The Indian government has chosen not to allow CITES to control the trade in sandalwood. Instead, they are strugglng to control and monitor harvesting and exports without such intervention.

Unfortunately, the government authorities have proved to be virtually powerless in preventing illicit cutting by the notorious sandalwood smugglers, who also control the illegal trade in tiger skins and ivory. Even murders have been committed in the name of sandalwood! Neither can the Indian government prevent the serious loss of many trees through spike disease, which is exacerbated by deliberate forest fires associated with poor land management.

Unless Primavera's supplier in India has signed up to a Fair Trade agreement, then his workers may well be earning a pittance. This is the reason why the smuggling gangs are so successful. Indeed, they pay local people relatively large amounts of money for stealing sandalwood from government controlled forests.

You mention the WWF. Sadly, the organisation is losing direction. As mentioned on this website’s Daily Environmental News Page, WWF Australia is under pressure from other conservationists concerned about the organisation’s outrageous plans to allow logging of old-growth forests in Tasmania. Without doubt, the WWF has come under the influence of their corporate donators. Once this news becomes widespread, the organisation will surely lose support from all quarters.


I note from Primavera’s website that they market so-called environmentally sound products containing rosewood essential oil.

Surely you don't need me to tell you that rosewood (Aniba rosaeodora) is an endangered Amazonian rainforest species? The tree is 'harvested' destructively - uprooted for the frivolous purposes of perfumery, cosmetics and ecologically unaware forms of aromatherapy. Despite assurances from the Brazilian government that deforestation is under control, satellite pictures revealed that in 2003 alone a chunk of Amazonian rainforest the size of Belgium was destroyed through illegal logging.

As well as destroying countless life-forms, it is often forgotten that deforestation has devastated the lives of many indigenous groups of people - and continues to threaten the ancestral homelands and self-sufficient ways of the few remaining hunter-gatherer tribes.

Therefore, as well as the sandalwood anomaly, I'd be most grateful if you would kindly try to persuade Primavera to stop selling products containing rosewood oil. Brazil desperately needs to keep its trees rooted, not only to save wildlife and prevent localised flooding and other disruptive weather patterns, but also to help regulate climate on a global scale. Should Primavera prefer to continue using rosewood, I only hope they will stop marketing their products as 'green'. This is an affront to authentically eco-minded people.

Common sense tells us that it's impossible to harvest ancient rainforest trees in a sustainable manner. As soon as the trees are uprooted, the top soil starts to erode. Barbara Schmal, supervisor of the Silves co-operative of women cosmetic makers in the Amazon, has confirmed to me that attempts at replanting rosewood have proved to be very disappointing.

For a start, rosewood seed is hard to find and is slow to germinate. Even when rosewood saplings are available, the trees struggle to grow in the degraded soil remaining after deforestation. The small number of replanted trees that are thriving against all odds will take the best part of a century to mature and produce sufficient quantities of essential oil. Moreover, we need to remember that tree plantations are usually associated with the use of herbicides and other agrochemicals, and thus lack the biodiversity of old-growth forests supporting myriad life forms.

Above all, there is NO scientific evidence whatsoever to support the idea that tropical forests can be harvested sustainably for a large commercial market.

After many years involvement with the essential oil industry, I've heard the same old stories over and over regarding the so-called sustainability of essential oils captured from felled wild trees. So I will continue to do my utmost to steer essential oil users away from aromatic products derived from sandalwood, rosewood and all other at-risk trees and plants.

OPEN LETTER TO SUE MINTER FROM TONY BURFIELD

1st September, 2004


Dear Sue Minter,

Allow me to introduce myself. I have been in the essential oil and perfumery industries for some 30 years and am one of the few independent technical experts in this trade. Latterley I have written detailed articles on the used of threatened and endangered species in the aroma trade and one of these has featured in the journal Endangered Species Update. It was with some disbelief that I have read the correspondence that Chrissie Wildwood has forwarded to me concerning the details of your company's involvement with the apparent commercialisation of commodities from rare & threatened species - it is the complete opposite, surely, of what the Eden Project is supposed to stand for, and if the evidence for this found to be substantive, and if widely broadcast, I imagine would enormously affect your popular support.

Accordingly, the Eden Project, Quest and Estee Lauder are the subject of an investigation by Cropwatch for a possible further edition of this series [Cropwatch is basically an occasional magazine feature which looks into ethical and ecological aspects of the aroma trade, and extracts from the magazine have featured in the specialist journals of aroma material end-users]. What we are looking at specifically at the moment is:

1. The apparent use of the threatened species - Zebrano wood - Microberlinia brazzavillensis which is listed in the 1997 IUCN Red Book- from an initiative by the Eden Project -in a perfume called "Beyond Paradise" by Estee Lauder, as featured on their website. A literature search has revealed that Quest are stated to be the manufacturers of the perfume compound.

Click here to see the Estee Lauder promotional material for 'Beyond Paradise'

I note that in the correspondence with Chrissie Wildwood you have not confirmed or denied the botanical name of the species employed, although you do give away the geographic origin, Cameroon, much of which is covered by the large area of the Karup National Park. There is a precedent for bioprospecting in the Cameroons with the plant Ancistrocladus korupensis and the involvement of Botanical Gardens (New York, Missouri etc) which is a somewhat unfortunate story, which has been written up in great detail. Hopefully this episode will not prove to be mirrored in the Eden Project's involvement with Microberlinia brazzavillensis, although obviously we shall be looking for any similarities.

I also note that you have not, as far as I'm aware, furnished botanical details for a further ingredient recommended by yourselves: 'Golden melaleuca bark' from Indonesia.

Further, the situation is exactly the same with regard to apparent use of extracts/oils from "wild Laelia orchid from the Mountains of Mexico", as claimed by Estee Lauder, which I also understand you (Eden Project) have sourced and so far declined so far to comment about to Chrissie Wildwood's enquiries. As you will be aware, true orchid oils cannot be used as perfume ingredients and this is the subject of immense concern.

I say "apparent use" twice above because it is not clear whether an extract or essential oil is physically present in the perfume - or if a reconstruction of the headspace aroma of the sawdust from the wood, or aroma from the named orchid is actually employed. However this qualification of "apparent use" is based on my perception of how perfume ingredients (which more specifically often actually refer to specific odour attributes) are often advertised. But, the casual browser taking a look at the Estee Lauder website feature, might well come away with the impression that the actual oil from the either the threatened tree or orchid species is being used. Therefore I am surprised that both Quest and the Eden Project have not made representations to Estee Lauder to clarify, or distance themselves from this impression, as I'm sure both concerns would not like to be seen as complicit in the commercial exploitation of a rare species.

I would ask you be straightforward and honest and indicate whether you condone the use of these raw materials in perfumes. I have written to Robin Clery at Quest by post for the same information, but have so far received no reply - I am copying this note to Ann Hardie at Quest in the hope of a such reply.

2. Secondly I would question the highlighting of rare & threatened species in perfume advertising anyway, by any reputable concern, for the purposes of profit. Whereas it is currently in vogue to employ exotic botanicals and extracts in many cosmetic items, this course of action is not in the best interests of the sustainability of those exploited species. As you will know, perfumes are matched as a matter of course in the trade, creating global demand for any rare ingredients. The use of zebrano wood therefore can only but create a demand for the oil, with unfortunate consequences - you must see that you have some responsibility in this, although I appreciate that may not have understand the workings of black-market trade for these types of goods when you entered into this promotional 'greenwash' advertising area with Estee Lauder.

3. With regard to sandalwood oil EI, much of the essential oil trade has been unfortunately unknowingly complicit in the marketing of smuggled sandalwood oil, illegally exported from India. Most traders "look the other way" over this issue. Shortages have presently forced the price up to $770/Kg on the international market, and mobile stills in Kerala and other districts are used to evade local government inspectors. The quality of the oil has gone down with frequent addition of East Africa sandalwood oil, Pacific sandalwood oil and fractions of Australian sandalwood oil. The seizing of sandalwood logs by the authorities in Tanzania recently which were destined for export to India for co-distillation with EI sandalwood is indicative of how desperate Indian distillers are for sandalwood raw material to distil. Since the GC's of rectified Pacific sandalwood oil and East African sandalwood oil fractions can appear very similar, they can easily fool the inexperienced analyst, and sometimes the trained analyst.

Many of these CITES restricted items do have a "let out clause" whereby the extracts from the threatened species are not specifically mentioned. However the spirit of the CITES restrictions is to protect the future existence of these species, and trading in these items is evading the responsibility we all have to ensure their continued existence.

Sadly I believe that the cosmetic industry is largely ignorant of these matters. Few buyers and formulators I have come across have any profound knowledge of ecological matters, and care even less. However their directors and shareholders do care when targeted by green activists, since their profits might be affected - it is a grim state of affairs that it is only the profit motive which makes companies start to adopt greener credentials in the way in which they do business.

I have kept this letter very general, and have not specifically addressed all the concerns that I have over this matter. I do believe the ball is in your court to answer the questions we have posed here in the spirit of absolute transparency, so that you (Eden Project/Quest/Estee Lauder) can be seen to have acted entirely ethically - at the moment I don't believe that this can be determined from the current information in the public domain for the reasons stated above.

Best regards,

Tony Burfield

REPLY FROM ROBIN CLERY OF QUEST INTERNATIONAL

3rd September, 2004


Dear Tony

I write in response to your open letter to Sue Minter, which you copied to Quest International. I am a Botanist employed by Quest, and am the person from Quest who has most closely worked with the Eden Project over the last four years. As such, I am probably best placed to respond to your letter. I apologise for not responding sooner, but I was on holiday.

1. Use of threatened species

Quest has a culture of being ethical and respecting the environment. This is supported by Quest’s “Policy on Sustainability”, which has been approved by the Quest Board and communicated to all Quest employees. The introduction to this policy states:-

“We believe that our activities should generate economic benefits, create opportunities for an enhanced quality of life, respect the environment and be a positive influence in the communities that we operate in”.

Quest does not simply pay lip service to this policy. What this means in practice is that Quest does not use extracts from any threatened species in its perfumes.

We can confirm that Beyond Paradise does not contain extracts from Zebrano Wood, Laelia orchid or Golden Melaleuca bark.


2. Quest work with the Eden Project

As Sue Minter of the Eden Project has already stated in her letter to Chrissie Wildwood, Quest’s work with the Eden Project is limited to plants that are not endangered. In particular, the Eden Project has not given Quest any access to Zebrano Wood, Laelia Orchid or Golden Melaleuca bark.

The work that Quest has carried out with the Eden Project relates to non-destructive headspace analysis of non-endangered species such as Crepe Jasmine, Mahonica Japonica, Natal Plum and the atmospheric environment within the Eden Project biomes. This headspace analysis involves the analysis of fragrance, which Quest’s perfumers then reconstruct from standard perfumery raw materials. The process does not damage any plants, and does not involve any extractions.

3. Inspiration for Perfumers

During the creation of a fragrance, Quest’s perfumers look for inspiration. This inspiration can come in many forms, a childhood memory of the smell of a fairground to the smell of a plant species. Quest does not damage any endangered species in this process.

4. Quest and the local community

In its search for inspiration Quest does seek to work with local communities where it can. For example, on a recent expedition to Sri Lanka, Quest worked closely with a local ecological organisation, Rainforest Rescue International, which is working to establish sustainable economic use of local resources, including cinnamon and other spices.

5. Use of Sandalwood

Quest has only approved Indian Sandalwood for use in its perfumes. Quest can tell the difference between Indian Sandalwood and Sandalwood from other regions. Quest only purchases Sandalwood from reputable suppliers that it has used for many years. These suppliers have the relevant export licences, which have been approved by the Indian Government. In addition, Quest has an ongoing program of auditing its suppliers to check that their products originate from sustainable sources.

Quest regrets that your open letter contains a number of aspersions that are misleading. I hope that this letter clarifies matters.

Yours sincerely

Dr Robin Clery
Natural Product Research
Quest International

CC: Sue Minter, Chrissie Wildwood

REPLY TO ROBIN CLERY FROM TONY BURFIELD AND CHRISSIE WILDWOOD

6th September, 2004


Dear Robin,

Thank you for volunteering to reply to the questions in my open letter to Sue Minter (her reply received by e-mail 3rd September, 2004), and for your comments on my general observations on sandalwood oil, which you took to relate to Quest's activities.

On this last point, as we have previous experience in dealing with the difficult position that botanists employed by government departments and NGO's sometimes find themselves in, we will not ask you personally, as both a botanist and Corporate employee, to defend Quest's policy of using Sandalwood from Santalum album which features in the 2003 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Rather, we will separately put the matter to the Quest Board.

I note that you say Quest only imports Indian Government licensed aliquots of Sandalwood oil. Cropwatch's view, however, is tempered by a knowledge of India and an understanding of the pressure individual Indian officials can often face from gangland.

As an example, a report on the threatened beheading of eight government officers if they did not co-operate with a local bandit intent on smuggling sandalwood was reported in the Sunday Telegraph (24th August, 1997) authored by Julian West. The situation on the ground amongst traditional sandalwood carvers might reflect better the true nature of the situation:

“Our artisans are so desperate with the non-availability of sandalwood that many of them had even threatened to commit suicide. They do not have work to eke out their livelihood'', according to Ravikishanis (2003).

Weighing up the total situation, we can only conclude that the sandalwood oil licensing process, in effect, only offers the thinnest veneer of respectability, and is driven by India's intense need for foreign currency at any price. It is our view that continuing to trade in this disappearing commodity is therefore unsupportable, and damaging to the long-term prospects for the ultimate survival of the species.

If you disagree with this view, kindly point us to any scientific research which proves without doubt that Santalum album is being harvested sustainably in India – that populations of the species are not dwindling and that current levels of harvesting can be maintained indefinitely.

Chrissie Wildwood and I have been successful in persuading a number of aromatherapists, aromatherapy oil distributors, small essential oil trade companies and small cosmetics enterprises not to use sandalwood oil. However, it is difficult to make progress across the board on this matter, since end-users can point to large companies such as Quest, and ask us "why pick on us when it is the corporates which are the real problem". Once we have put the matter to the Quest Board, we will be able to transmit their considered reply.

Secondly, regarding the "Beyond Paradise" matter, I quote the actual wording from the Estee Lauder website:

Dry down: the scent of freshly sawn Zebrano wood from Cameroon blends in a rich accord of other woods to lend Estee Lauder Beyond Paradise a sumptuous creamy warmth.

Middle notes: Laelia orchid: grown wild in the mountains of Mexico, Laelia orchids bloom in a dramatic explosion of scent and colour. The delicate floralcy of their fragrance brings vibrancy and lift to Estee Lauder Beyond Paradise.

http://www.esteelauder.co.uk/beyond_paradise/bp_notes.tmpl

Any lay-person reading this material would surely assume these ingredients are physically present in the perfume? The fact that you have confirmed that they are not present, is possibly more a matter, in our value judgements, for Trading Standards, than for us to pursue any further. But the concepts surrounding the perfume, as stated in the Quest Annual Report for 2003 on the Internet, is the result of a close collaboration between Quest and Estee Lauder.

Some weeks after Chrissie Wildwood's initial enquiries, Sue Minter stated in an e-mail (3rd September, 2004) that the Eden Project has never possessed Zebrano plants/trees as evidenced by its inventory. If we take it that the Eden Project had no involvement with the headspace determinations of Laelia orchids, golden Melaleuca wood and Zebrano wood, can we now determine if Quest (alone) has ever carried out a headspace analysis on Zebrano wood, golden Melaeuca wood and Laelia orchid?

No perfumer I have met has ever heard of Zebrano wood, golden Melaleuca or Laelia orchids. So, as a widely travelled botanist, I take it these materials are all your own suggestions for odour concepts in “Beyond Paradise”?

And in your letter explaining the non-destructive aspects of headspace technology, can you please explain how the headspace of sawdust from Zebrano wood is obtained non-destructively? Further, with the acute political sensitivity surrounding the subject of bio-prospecting by corporate concerns, can you assure us that if you did determine the headspace constituents of these materials, that you carried it out with the full knowledge and permission of the appropriate government departments of the countries concerned?

Finally, your ‘Policy on Sustainability’ pledges to respect the environment, generate income and generally enhance the lives of people within the communities in which your company operates. Yet Quest International has not escaped criticism from at least two human rights groups – Global Trade Watch (Australia) and Global Exchange (Mexico).

We understand from these agencies that Quest International, in partnership with Minnesota University, stand accused of biopiracy, specifically for patenting a micro-organism isolated from Pozol, a fermented maize drink associated with the indigenous peoples of Mexico. According to these reports, the communities from whom this knowledge was stolen have received nothing in return and continue to live in abject poverty. We would very much like to hear your response to this allegation.

Sincerely,

Tony Burfield & Chrissie Wildwood

A POSTCRIPT TO SUE MINTER FROM CHRISSIE WILDWOOD

If you still think it's ethical to continue incorporating sandalwood oil in the Eden Project's range of bodycare products, then may I remind you of the Ethical Consumer Association's endorsement of this website and its aims.

Finally, if you can't be persuaded by the ecological argument, please find it in your heart to consider the plight of the young children forced to work in Asian incense factories rolling joss sticks for 12 hours a day. In case you are wondering what this has to do with sandalwood oil, well the de-oiled material remaining after distillation is sold to Asian incense factories and used as a base for sticks and cones.

Ethical Consumer Boycotts Sept/Oct 2004 'Aromatherapy Troubles'

Sue Minter has a change of heart! Click and scroll down towards end of this page

PARTNERS IN PARADISE

"The Eden Project is a celebration of the world we live in, showing how the fabric of our lives connects us to nature and the most far-flung places. Eden is also about inspiring people to find ways to pay something back - to sustain the world that sustains us. We stand for the idea that people really can leave places better than we found them. That inspiration and respect, linked to creative action, can help build a better future"

- Dr Tony Kendle, Foundation Director, Eden Project

With powerful and influential friends like Rio Tinto, Syngenta, Coca-Cola, Estee Lauder and Quest International, Eden shall inherit the Earth - and the meek shall see that it's not so Green.

(c) Chrissie Wildwood 2004 - all rights reserved.