Lessons Learned on Co-benefits and Safeguards in the UN-REDD Programme

Lessons Learned on Co-benefits and Safeguards in the UN-REDD ProgrammeTimothy Boyle, UN-REDD Regional Coordinator, UNDP Regional Centre for Asia/Pacific, Bangkok

All benefits arising from forest land that are not related to carbon or climate mitigation/adaptation

Includes, for example, economic benefits from timber/non-timber products; regulation of hydrological processes; biodiversity conservation; soil conservation; aesthetic values, etc.

Co-benefits in REDD+

Spatial analyses and mapping of multiple benefits, carbon stock densities and other parameters can provide key information to support planning and decision-making on REDD+ at national and subnational scales.

Combined with economic parameters such as opportunity costs, spatial analysis would also assist in identifying “low hanging fruits.”

Spatial analysis of multiple benefits

Exploring multiple benefits in Cambodia

More than 3/4 of the area that is high in carbon and an Important Bird Area is either inside protected areas or in Protection Forests.


15% of the land that is high in carbon and an Important Bird Area is inside forest concessions.


The amount of carbon within 5 kilometres of forest cover loss represents 66% of Cambodia’s total carbon stock.


Almost 15 % of the area of Economic Land Concessions hold medium-high to high carbon stocks.

Safeguards in REDD+

REDD+ can create new risks and opportunities for values of forests other than carbon. Safeguards were agreed at UNFCCC COP 16 in Cancun to address this issue.

Parties have agreed to “promote and support” these safeguards and to provide information on how the safeguards are “addressed and respected” throughout the implementation of REDD+ activities.

The UN-REDD Programme Social & Environmental Principles and Criteria have been further developed in response to this decision.

Principles and Criteria for Safeguards

The Principles and Criteria will:• Provide the UN-REDD Programme with a framework to ensure that its

activities promote social & environmental benefits and reduce risks from REDD+

• Support countries in operationalizing the Cancun agreement’s guidance and safeguards for REDD+

• There are six Principles and 18 Criteria.

PrinciplesPrinciple 1 – Good governance: The program complies with standards of good governance.

Principle 2 – Stakeholder livelihoods: The program carefully assesses potential adverse impacts on stakeholders’ long-term livelihoods and mitigates effects where appropriate.

Principle 3 – Policy coherence: The program contributes to a low-carbon, climate-resilient and environmentally sound development policy, consistent with commitments under international conventions and agreements.

Principles

Principle 4 – Protect and conserve natural forest: The program protects natural forest from degradation or conversion to other land uses, including plantation forest.

Principle 5 – Maintain and enhance multiple functions of forest: The program increases benefits delivered through ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation.

Principle 6 – Minimize indirect adverse impacts on ecosystem services and biodiversity.

Principle 1

Democratic governance: The program complies with standards of democratic governance

Criterion 1 – Ensure the integrity of fiduciary and fund management systems

Criterion 2 – Implement activities in a transparent and accountable manner

Criterion 3 – Ensure broad stakeholder participation

Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria

Principle 2Principle 2 – Stakeholder livelihoods: The program carefully assesses potential adverse impacts on stakeholders’ long-term livelihoods and mitigates effects where appropriate

Criterion 4 – Promote gender equality

Criterion 5 – Avoid involuntary resettlement

Criterion 6 – Respect traditional knowledge

Criterion 7 – Develop equitable benefit distribution systems

Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria

Relationship with UNFCCC LCA decision

Principle Relevant section of Cancun Agreement, Annex I

Principle 1 – Democratic governance

2(b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into account national legislation and sovereignty 2(d) The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular, indigenous peoples and local communities (…)

Principle 2 – Stakeholder livelihoods

2(c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities, by taking into account relevant international obligations, national circumstances and laws, and noting that the General Assembly has adopted the UNDRIP

Principle 3 – Policy coherence 2(a) Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements 2(f) Actions to address the risk of reversals

Principle 4 – Protect and conserve natural forests

2(e) Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity, ensuring that actions (…) are not used for the conversion of natural forests but are instead used to incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services (…)

Principle 5 – Maintain and enhance multiple functions of forest

2(e) Actions (…) incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services (…)2(e) Actions are (…) used to (…) enhance other social and environmental benefits

Principle 6 – Minimize adverse impacts on ecosystem services & biodiversity

2(e) Actions that are consistent with the conservation of (…) biological diversity (…)2(g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions

Social Principles Risk Identification & Mitigation Tool

Social risk identification and mitigation tool is designed to: • Support REDD+ countries to demonstrate how readiness activities meet social and

environmental safeguards under UNFCCC

• Improve the overall social and environmental sustainability of readiness measures.

Based on a series of indicator questions that identify risks, organized under the UN-REDD social principles and criteria. Where risks are identified, risk mitigation measures are suggested.

Tool links to consultation process and risk-reporting mechanisms to allow program staff and stakeholders to identify and track risks and mitigation measures.

Tool to undergo expert review and pilot application in interested UN-REDD countries.

• Principles & Criteria and the Risk Tool have undergone initial review, now wider review and comments are sought.

• Test and refine the Principles & Criteria and support their operationalization.

• An interim report on the development of these Principles & Criteria will be submitted to UN-REDD Policy Board in October 2011

• The framework will be finalized after COP 17

Next steps

• Implemented with UNDP Democratic Governance Group’s Programme on Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness (PACDE)

• Joint programming on : Capacity development of civil society and other stakeholders Strengthening institutional capacity on anti-corruption (government

institutions, anti-corruption agencies, parliamentarians, judiciary, local government authorities)

Legal and judicial anti-corruption frameworks Awareness campaigns (started in 2010 with UNODC) Advisory and backstopping support on anti-corruption/governance Tools, methodologies and good practices on anti-corruption and REDD+

UN-REDD Programming for anti-corruption

Donor coordination Transparent budget and procurement systems Independent public funds Appropriate budget oversight (parliamentarians, civil society, audit

agencies) Reconciliation of payments and revenues in audit systems,

disaggregated for more transparency Robust conflict resolution mechanisms

(Some) anti-corruption safeguards for REDD+

financial systems

Building capacity of stakeholders

Focus on indigenous peoples and other forest-dependent communities

Extensive and authentic civil society engagement central to and prerequisite for UN-REDD (at global and national levels)

Implementation of UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples & Free, prior and informed consent are high priority

UN-REDD and FCPF harmonizing IP Engagement Guidelines and collaborating with FIP

Which institutional and legal frameworks? Identifying beneficiariesNumber of hierarchical levelsAttribution of carbon/land rightsShape and nature of benefits and resource allocationsExistence or absence of recourse and redress mechanisms

Participatory decision-making, transparency and accountability

Benefit distribution systems

For more [email protected] (Regional center in Bangkok)[email protected] (Regional center in Bangkok)[email protected] (Regional center in Bangkok)[email protected] (UNEP-WCMC)

http://www.un-redd.org

Lessons Learned on Co-benefits and Safeguards in the UN-REDD Programme

Documents

Transcript of Lessons Learned on Co-benefits and Safeguards in the UN-REDD Programme