National Forest Monitoring Systems for REDD+ Inge Jonckheere
REDD+ AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT · REDD+ AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT NEENA KHANDEKAR,...
Transcript of REDD+ AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT · REDD+ AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT NEENA KHANDEKAR,...
REDD+ AND SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT
NEENA KHANDEKAR, IFS
Associate Dean
FRI (Deemed) University
Dehradun.
Abstract
Forests provide a variety of benefits but are facing multiple threats ranging from
impacts of climate change to competing land uses leading to its degradation and
deforestation. To overcome these threats, the concept of REDD was introduced on 2005 and
officially recognised and developed in 2007 at the UNFCCC COP 13 meet in Bali where the
Bali Action Plan was formulated. This was expanded in the next two years in the form of an
innovative concept of REDD+ that called for activities to address the issue of climate change
through reduction of emissions degradation and deforestation along with conservation of
carbon stocks, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
And those developing countries that undertake activities under REDD+, keyed to a reference
time, will receive financial compensation for their efforts.
For the implementation of REDD+, a three phased approach has been suggested
wherein the countries are allowed to prepare for REDD+ through capacity building in the first
phase. In the second phase, the national policy frameworks for the implementation of
REDD+ are to be set up. Finally, in the third phase, the full implementation of REDD+ is to
be accomplished along with payments that are based on performances.
Funds are already been made available for the readiness phase through bilateral and
multilateral arrangements such as FCPF of the World Bank and the UN-REDD programme.
For the second phase of policies and measures, it is expected that multilaterals will still be the
main source of funding and for the third phase, an increasing role of markets is envisaged
depending on whether or not the UNFCCC reaches a legally binding agreement.
As of now REDD+ is still being deliberated upon and there are several challenges that
it faces for example, how the local communities are to be involved in implementation of
REDD+ as an important role is foreseen for them, the issue of safeguards, distribution of
benefits, monitoring and evaluation among others.
Key words: REDD+, UNFCCC, Bali Action Plan, Readiness phase, Safeguards FCPF, UN
REDD programme
Introduction
Forest ecosystems offer a range of benefits at the global, sub-regional, national and
local levels. However, for a long time now the forest ecosystems are facing varied threats that
range from the impacts of climate change to all aspects of competing land uses that lead to
forest degradation and deforestation. Not only do these threats pose complex challenges to
managing existing forest ecosystems in a sustainable way but also protect them from being
substituted by other land uses or land cover.
Rapid population growth and the related need for farming and grazing land constitute
the main threat to tropical forests according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Along with this, the other potential reasons for the destruction and degradation of forests
include the over exploitation of timber, forest fires, mining, cattle ranching, road construction
and the production of biomass for bio-fuels. Moreover, degraded forest ecosystems have been
recognised as being at risk to effectively cope with the impacts of climate change. Evidently,
vigorous and un-fragmented forest ecosystems are much more resilient to the impacts of
climate change and are able to absorb better shocks induced by human activities or natural
disasters.
Forests are a big storehouse of carbon, storing about 638 Giga tonnes carbon
according to FAO. But deforestation and other land-use activities are emitting 1.6 Gt carbon
annually. On a global scale, it is estimated that deforestation contributes to 15-20% of
greenhouse gas emissions. Further, global GHG emissions due to human activities have
grown alarmingly since the pre industrial times with an increase of 70% between 1970 and
2004. Carbon dioxide annual emissions grew by about 80% between 1979 and 2004.
It goes without saying that the coverage of forest resources is the first indication of
sustainable forest management that aims at maintaining adequate forest resources that
includes the various forest types and their characteristics, including trees inside forest lands
and trees outside forests – to support the social, economic and environmental objectives
related to forests and forestry within a country or region. But the forests are facing continuous
reduction in area that is reflected in national report data published by FAO that measured
changes in global forest area and its average annual change rate from 1990 to 2010. As per
their report, during the ten year period from 1990 to 2000, there has been a reduction in forest
area measuring 8.3 million hectares (ha) annually all over the world, and forest area
continued to decrease by an average of 5.21 million ha every year from 2000 to 2010.
Table 1. Annual change in global forest area (units: ha, %)
Region
Forest Area (1,000 ha) Annual Change Rate
1990 2000 2005 2010
1990-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010
1,000
(ha/yr) %
1,000
(ha/yr) %
1,000
(ha/yr) %
Africa 749,238 708,564 691,468 674,419 -4,067 -0.56 -3419 -0.49 -3 410 -0.5
Asia 576,110 570,164 584,048 592,512 -595 -0.1 2,777 0.48 1,693 0.29
Europe 989,471 998,239 1,001,150 1,005,001 877 0.09 582 0.06 770 0.08
North America/
Latin America 708,383 705,497 705,296 705,393 -289 -0.04 -40 -0.01 19 n.s
Oceania 198,744 198,381 196,745 191,384 -36 -0.02 -327 -0.17 -1,072 -0.55
South America 946,454 904,322 882,258 864,351 -4,213 -0.45 -4,413 -0.49 -3,581 -0.41
Global 4,168,399 4,085,168 4,060,964 4,033,060 -8,323 -0.2 -4,841 -0.12 -5,581 -0.14
Source: FAO (2010) Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010
The South American region demonstrated the largest fall in forest area -an average of
4 million ha every year during 1990 to 2010, followed by the African region (an annual
decline in forest area of 3.6 million ha).
Annual change in forest area by region (1990-2010)
Source: FAO (2010) Global Forest Resources Assessment Report 2010
Now, the loss of forest cover is also reflected in the increase in CO2 emissions
globally caused by changes in land use including logging by forest industry that according to
4th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007 is
equivalent to 17% of total global emissions. This is the second-largest source of emissions
after fossil fuels emissions.
Percentage of GHG emissions by industrial sector
Percentage of GHG emissions by gas type
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) IPCC Fourth Assessment
Report: Climate Change 2007 Synthesis Report.
It is for the reason of combating these threats through an innovative mechanism that
REDD+ is now attracting immense attention as an important measure for prevention of
deforestation and degradation of forest lands and carbon sequestration, especially as far as the
measures to prevent climate change are concerned particularly in view of the fact that the
outcomes of forestry mitigation activities implemented under the Kyoto Protocol including
CDM, have been limited.
The concept of REDD was officially introduced into the UNFCCC agenda at the end
of 2005 after countries like Costa Rica and Papua New Guinea, both the members of the
Coalition for Rainforest Nations, made an official request to consider reducing emissions
from deforestation in developing countries.‟ At the UNFCC COP 13 meeting in Bali in 2007,
a roadmap for the implementation of REDD was officially recognised and the concept of
REDD was developed globally. Further in the next two years, the concept of REDD+
emerged, that called for actions and activities to address issues relating to the implementation
of REDD and implications for local communities, indigenous people and forests that relate to
decreasing emissions on account of deforestation and forest degradation.
In 2009 in Copenhagen at UNFCC COP -15, and drawing on the Bali Roadmap, the
nations recognized “the crucial role of reducing emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation [REDD] and the need to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emission by
forests” and agreed “on the need to provide positive incentives to such actions through the
immediate establishment of a mechanism including REDD+, to enable the mobilization of
gas (GHG) emissions, which is more than the entire transport sector.
REDD+ concept
REDD implies a set of steps intended to use market and financial incentives with the
aim of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases from deforestation and forest degradation.
It targets reduction in greenhouse gases. As mentioned above, it was in 2009 that the
definition of REDD was expanded to include mitigation measures from conservation,
sustainable management of forests and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks. It is
envisaged as an innovative mechanism for enhancing mitigation activities by taking up the
five types of activities eg. reducing emissions from deforestation and from degradation,
conservation of forest carbon stocks, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of
forest carbon stocks in the developing nations. In particular, REDD+ calls for activities with
implications directed towards the local communities, indigenous people and forests which
relate to reducing emissions on account of deforestation and forest degradation.
In 2007 the agreement formulated at the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC in
Bali (COP-13) is called the Bali Action Plan. Its objectives are directed toward forest
conservation, sustainable forest management and the enhancement of carbon stocks. At COP
– 15 in Copenhagen in 2009, the Copenhagen Accord was reached, recognizing the vital role
of REDD and REDD+ and the need to provide positive incentives for such activities by
facilitating the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries. By
strengthening the capacity of forests to conserve and enhance carbon stocks, REDD+ offers
cost-effective and immediate CO2 emissions reductions while generating strong co-benefits
for forest dependent communities and biodiversity conservation. Those developing countries
willing and able to reduce their deforestation rate keyed to a reference time period will
receive financial compensation for their efforts.
It is mentioned here that REDD is sometimes presented as an „offset‟ scheme of
carbon markets and thus, would produce carbon credits. Carbon offsets are „emissions saving
programmes‟ that theoretically would “compensate” for the polluters‟ emissions. The carbon
credits generated by these programmes could then be used by industrialised governments and
corporations to meet their targets and/or to be traded within the carbon markets. But this
angle of REDD+ is contested and a hotly debated subject among economists, scientists and
negotiators.
Sustainable Forest Management
The UN General Assembly adopted the following description of Sustainable forest
management, as communicated to UNFCCC by the Secretariat of the United Nations Forum
on Forests (UNFF) 3, in 2007- “Sustainable forest management as a dynamic and evolving
concept aims to maintain and enhance the economic, social and environmental value of all
types of forests, for the benefit of present and future generations.” SFM is an important goal
for the forestry sector, applicable at international and national levels, and, in many cases, at
landscape level. The notion of SFM was expressed in the Forest Principles adopted at the
Earth Summit in Rio in 1992. Since then SFM has been made operational through actions
identified in UNFF and its predecessors, regional processes to develop criteria and indicators
for sustainable forest management, and a range of guidelines and sound forest management
practices (for forests managed for production, conservation, protection or other purposes). In
short, SFM represents a broad goal for the forest sector, the achievement of which is
facilitated on the ground by the application of best practises for the sustainable management
of forests. It was with this meaning of SFM in mind that the 14 members of the Collaborative
Partnership on Forests (consisting of international organisations and secretariats) recognized
that “sustainable forest management provides an effective framework for forest-based climate
change mitigation and adaptation”.
Scope of sustainable forest management in REDD plus
SFM is recognised as a potential and powerful tool for REDD +, including protection,
restoration, afforestation and reforestation, to contribute to efforts to reverse deforestation
and prevent forest degradation. It is estimated by the Global Partnership on Forest Landscape
Restoration that 1 to 2 billion hectares of deforested or degraded land are suitable for forest
restoration.
In the Bali Action Plan, the concept of “Sustainable management of forests” refers to
the application of forest management practices for the prime purpose of maintaining constant
levels of carbon stocks over time. In other contexts, the sustainable management of forests
could refer to applying specific management practices to achieve diverse goals of biodiversity
conservation, poverty alleviation, watershed protection etc. Contained in the term sustainable
management of forests is the implication that, regardless of the primary objective of
management, the other values of the forest should not be disregarded. Sustainable
management of forests is one of the five broad activities recognised under REDD+ for
mitigation of emission.
Material and methods
The assignment basically analyses the evolution of the concept of REDD+, the way it
is being implemented all over the globe, the financing mechanism and its progress. The study
relies mainly on the available reports, literature and deliberations on the topic at various
forums and tries to trace the origin of the concept of REDD+ and its progression to its present
state. Though certain concepts and formalities under REDD+ are still in the process of being
finalised, it is definite that REDD+ will go a long way in achieving the goal of carbon
mitigation in more effective manner than other CDM mechanisms.
The available literature traces the progression of REDD+ along with the most relevant
REDD+ milestone that was the 13th Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UNFCCC (Bali,
2007) where the Bali Action Plan was adopted under which REDD+ was recognized as a
potential element of an expected new agreement. Further in COP 16 (Cancun, 2010) a
decision was adopted that defined REDD+ and agreed on a phased approach to its
implementation. The developed countries were urged to provide financial and technical
support to assist developing countries in order to engage the key stakeholders that included
communities and indigenous peoples to prepare national strategies, policies and measures to
implement REDD+ along with development of national forest reference emission levels,
national forest monitoring systems and a system for providing information on how REDD+
social and environmental safeguards are being addressed and respected
In addition, the technical methodologies and modalities for REDD+ related to forest
reference emission levels, forest reference levels and monitoring, reporting and verification
(MRV) were discussed at COP 17 (Durban, 2011). It also continued the development of
guidance on social and environmental safeguards. A decision was also adopted on financing
for the full implementation of results-based REDD+ actions. The launch of the REDD+
Partnership provided interim funds and a non-legally binding framework to scale up and fast-
track REDD+.
The World Bank‟s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility and Forest Investment
Programme, the UN-REDD Programme (UNDP–FAO–UNEP partnership) and the GEF
(Global Environment Facility) are collaborating to provide assistance to more than 40
developing countries in preparing REDD+ strategies by 2015. Additionally, ITTO
(International Tropical Timber Association) and other CPF members are providing technical
support to countries to undertake activities relevant to REDD+. However, it is estimated, that
approximately 17–40 US$ billion per year will be required to halve greenhouse gas emissions
from the forest sector. Work has therefore commenced to encourage private-sector financing
that would complement multilateral initiatives and official development assistance.
A three phased approach for the implementation of REDD plus has been suggested by
the Meridian Report in 2009 (Meridian Institute, a non-profit NGO internationally recognized
for convening and facilitating neutral and independent dialogues and assessments). And COP
16 (Cancun, 2010) agreed on a phased approach to its implementation. The phased approach
takes into account the diverse circumstances of different REDD+ countries and makes it
possible for REDD+ to make use of both fund-based and market-based financial recourses. It
is expected that the phased approach will allow the countries to adapt strategies to their
existing national circumstances and opportunities and develop portfolios for funding.
However, it is to be noted that till now there is no blueprint for the way in which countries
will move from one phase to another or from phase to phase.
It is understood that the phased approach, the first phase foresees a preparatory or
„readiness‟ phase with a focus on capacity building and engagement of stakeholder as part of
a process based on learning. It will be during this first phase that a country is expected to
build a national strategy that tackles drivers of deforestation that are particular to the situation
of the country.
It is during the second phase when the national policy frameworks for the
implementation of REDD+ will be built and linked to other sectors such as agriculture,
energy and development.
In the third phase, the full implementation of REDD+ activities is to be accomplished
along with payments that are based on performance. Again, this linking of REDD+ activities
to compliance markets at this stage will depend up on the question whether the UNFCCC
process can attain a legally-binding post-2012 climate agreement with binding emissions
reductions.
Thus, the readiness phase is the first step in the phased approach and takes place
ahead of actual implementation of REDD+ policies. And as mentioned above, during the
readiness phase the countries focus on building capacity and preparations for governance
reforms that will be essential for later REDD+ implementation. In this respect, a national
REDD+ strategy has to be built, based on a detailed analysis of country-specific drivers of
deforestation. During the readiness phase as well as in the later phases of REDD+
implementation it is very essential to have an inclusive and meaningful consultation and
participation of stakeholders.
Funds are already being made available for the readiness phase through bilateral and
multilateral arrangements such as the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) of the World
Bank and the UN-REDD Programme. For the second phase of „policies and measures‟, it is
expected that multilaterals will still be one of the main sources of funding, as through the
Forest Investment Programme (FIP) of the World Bank and through other bilateral
arrangements.
As of now, 75 donor nations and developing countries have been brought together
under the REDD+ Partnership to provide a parallel method for funding until the UNFCCC
process concludes in a binding. In May 2010, this Partnership was formalised and it as
pledged over US$4 billion for expedited action on REDD+ as part the 'fast-start financing'
proposed in the Copenhagen Accord. For the third phase an increasing role for markets is
envisage which will depend on whether or not the UNFCC will reach a legally binding
agreement for the post-2012 period with obligatory emission reduction targets for the
industrialized nations.
Results and discussions
REDD+ is still being negotiated by UNFCCC. It is a fact that the activities coming
under the purview of REDD+ are being implemented for years now but these activities and
projects were earlier not being accounted against CO₂ offsetting. It is now that these activities
are to be accounted for as emission reductions. It is obvious that REDD+ would be
implemented in developing countries having forests. The industrialised countries are called
the „Annex I countries‟ while the developing countries are called „non-Annex I countries‟ in
the context of the UNFCCC.
Most of the developing countries having forests are at present engaged in readiness or
other preparatory processes and in this regard, many pilot projects are being implemented
across the countries in the tropical region. Though most nations in these readiness activities
are supported through multilateral and bilateral funding, the individual pilot projects are at
times linked to the voluntary carbon market. There are many other projects that are at a
relatively advanced stage of implementation with defined baseline scenarios, preliminary
quantifications of emission reductions and access to buyers of carbon credits. Further, in
many cases REDD+ pilots inform national readiness processes in the countries where the
projects take place.
Previously, the mitigation activities implemented under the Kyoto protocol including
CDM have been limited. It is REDD+ that will provide a new framework to break this trend.
Here, it is important that safeguards be developed to ensure rather than merely promoting
specific principles or actions, these safeguards provide the necessary building blocks for a
future climate deal. They should brace the potential for REDD-plus to contribute in a
significant manner to climate change mitigation and also ensure that specific social and
environmental levels are respected. It is in a phased approach adopted for implementation of
REDD+ that the safeguards can be operationalized as triggers that give incentives to
countries with the eligibility to progress from one phase to the next.
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has identified certain
requirements given below for the development of safeguards for post-2012 climate regime:
1. The principles and the safeguards can be applied specifically to actions taken
under the scope of REDD+ activities.
2. There is need for specific safeguards against possible conversion of natural
forests and other ecosystems into plantations.
3. The actions under REDD+ should also provide benefits for biodiversity,
ecosystem services as well as local communities.
4. REDD+ must make use of the past experiences with multiple stakeholder
platforms established in support of forest governance reform processes.
5. When ensuring the full and effective participation of all relevant stakeholders,
women must explicitly be included in REDD+ actions.
6. It is expected that the rights of the indigenous people will be recognised and
developed as per the UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Of late the REDD+ has received great support and push from international
organisations and International Financial Institutions (IFIs). Again the World Bank at present
plays a significant role in the progress of REDD+ activities. The WB has created a $300
million fund, the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) as one of the financial
contributors for the REDD+ programme. Till now small grants worth $200,000 have been
disbursed. The said fund is directed towards encouraging REDD+ activities in developing
nations. Moreover, the Carbon Partnership Facility (CPF), is likely to be used in sectors like
the power sector, transport, urban development and likewise other fields related to energy
efficiency to mitigate emissions.
The initial beneficiaries of this Partnership were nine countries- Bolivia, Democratic
Republic of Congo, Zambia, Paraguay, Indonesia, Vietnam, Panama, Papua New Guinea and
Tanzania. By the end of October 2012, this programme included 44 countries, 16 of them
implementing national UN REDD programmes and other 16 receiving small funds and
technical support to set up diverse REDD readiness activities. The programme is also
envisaged to give overall guidance through its global activities to support actions by countries
on Measuring, Verifying and Reporting (MRV) systems, engagement of local communities
and other forest dependent communities, good governance that is credible and transparent,
and safeguards.
Even though World Bank has declared its intention of fighting against climate change,
there are many civil society organisations all over the globe view the processes being
developed under these funds with scepticism. Few reasons for this are the almost non-existent
dialogue processes with the local communities, absence of any criteria to establish when a
country is ready to implement REDD+ projects, the negative impacts like loss of biodiversity
and deforestation due to fast agreements and absence of planning and lack of safeguards to
protect interests of local communities. It is in view of this that organisations like UNDP,
UNEP and FAO set up the UN-REDD Programme in 2008, jointly aiming at helping
developing countries in addressing certain measures needed in order to effectively participate
in the REDD mechanism. Some of these measures include capacity building, good
governance, establishing dialogue with local people and other technical needs.
However, there are still many things to be clarified. For instance, for a start, there is
lack of clarity in the definition of forests adopted currently by the United Nations climate
change conventions itself that fails to differentiate between natural forests and plantations
including eucalyptus, oil palm, acacias, pines and others. However, among other exclusions,
the definition of forests currently adopted by the UN climate change convention contains a
large loophole: it fails to distinguish between natural forests and plantations, including
eucalyptus, pines, acacias, oil palm, and others. Natural forests could therefore be replaced
with plantations but this will not be treated as deforestation because as per definition, the area
will still be covered by trees. This absence of clarity seems to be deliberate as defining forests
in terms of only tree cover while ignoring its complex ecosystems and livelihoods of people
interacting with them gas since long been used as an excuse for expanding industrial scale
plantations. Hence, it is a fact that commercial interests take precedence over social and
environmental concerns while shaping the REDD+ policy.
However, despite these hitches, REDD+ has been welcomed by both developed and
developing nations and many developing. Some of the developing nations have in fact
already formulated their REDD+ plans and strategies.
The Norwegian Government declared their International Climate and Forests
Initiative at the Bali Conference in 2007 that provided $1 billion towards the Brazilian REDD
scheme and $500 million towards the creation and implementation of REDD activities in
Tanzania. Furthermore, Norway and UK have contributed $200 million towards Congo Basin
Forest Fund to support forest conservation activities in Central Africa. Besides, in 2009 the
Finland Government and FAO have signed a $17 million partnership agreement for providing
tools and methods for multi-purpose inventories of forests, REDD+ monitoring and climate
change adaptation in five countries – Ecuador, Peru, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia, for
sustainable forest management practices. Under this programme, Tanzania will be completing
the country‟s first comprehensive forest inventory to evaluate its forest resources including
the size of the carbon stock stored within its forests. To estimate soil carbon stock too, a
forest soil carbon monitoring programme has been undertaken using survey and modelling
based methods.
Australia too has started efforts to promote REDD mechanisms. Their International
Forest Carbon Initiative worth $ 200 million focuses on developing REDD+ activities in
countries like Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. Countries like Spain and Denmark too have
become donors to the UN REDD programme. The developing and developed countries have
joined efforts in 2010 to create an Interim REDD+ Partnership to enhance implementation of
early action and forge fast start finance for REDD+ actions.
It is increasingly likely that REDD+ will be included in the post 2012 international
climate change agreement. Even then it is faced with several challenges like how the REDD+
mechanism be linked to existing national development strategies?; how can local
communities participate in the design, monitoring and evaluation of REDD+ programmes?;
how REDD+ will eventually be funded and how equitable distribution of benefits be ensured
by countries among stakeholders?; and last but not the least, how the amount of carbon stored
as a consequence of REDD+ be monitored?
However, the REDD mechanism including REDD+ has progressed significantly since
1995 with various capacity building and research activities with the set up of a UN
programme. Projects are also getting tried through government programmes in countries as
well as the private sector. And surely, in view of the positive outcome of REDD+ activities
the developing and developed countries both would want the challenges to be resolved for the
smooth progression of REDD+ that will among others be a step in the right direction for
sustainable management of forests.
Conclusion
It was stipulated in Marrakesh Accords in 2001 (The Marrakech Accords is a set of
agreements reached at the 7th Conference of the Parties (COP7) to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in 2001) that in the context of forest related
mitigation, only the reforestation and afforestation activities and related projects fall under
the CDM. REDD+ deviates from it in that it explores the possibilities to reduce emissions
from deforestation and forest degradation as also the capacity of forests to conserve carbon.
It goes beyond checking deforestation and forest degradation and includes incentives for any
positive intervention for conservation, enhancement of carbon stocks in the forests and
sustainable management of forests.
Now the activities under REDD are taken up by governments, private sector or
NGOs. The developing countries that are interested in REDD activities are supported by
number of development agencies, research institutes as well as international organisations.
Examples of such agencies are World Bank‟s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, the UN
REDD Programme and Norway‟s International Climate and Forest Initiative. However, it is
eventually the forest dependent communities that will be focal point of REDD+ and the
success of REDD+ programme will be dependent on the engagement of these forest
dependent communities and other indigenous people. It has been realised from the initial
stages of REDD+ implementation that equal involvement of the various stakeholder groups is
essential for developing successful REDD+ strategies that are responsive to the local needs
and concerns while targeting effectively the drivers of deforestation.
As REDD+ involves land use changes, it is expected to have an impact, both positive
and negative on a wide variety of groups. In this context, it will become indispensable to
involve the most vulnerable groups such as women and other forest dependent communities,
indigenous people to create REDD+ interventions that take into account the needs and
interest of these groups. REDD+ policies should aim at encouraging such forest users as well
as organisations, project developers, government agencies and investors government
agencies, project developers and investors to support activities that conserve forests, manage
forests sustainably and enhance forest carbon stocks and to reduce activities leading to
deforestation and degradation of forests.
Hence, the various government agencies all over the globe need to develop policy
frameworks that provide incentives for REDD+ actions as well as investment. Actions by any
group or individuals that result in deforestation or forest degradation will have to be restricted
or regulated. Communities that live in the forests and depend on it will have to be encouraged
to implement REDD+ activities on the ground. However, here again, fears are there that
REDD+ implementation could do harm to communities and ecological functions of forests.
Then again safeguards will have to be devised to prevent negative social and environmental
impacts and ensure full and effective participation of all relevant stakeholders, guaranteeing
their timely access to appropriate and accurate information. Safeguards should also be
stimulating equitable profit sharing, development of land and tenure rights, good governance
and other important issues. The CCB (Climate, Community and Biodiversity) Project Design
Standards are an example of safeguards developed to evaluate land based carbon mitigation
projects in the early stages of development.
However, the key issue will remain which is whether the incentives under REDD+,
MVR systems and adequate safeguard methods together could ensure management of
production forests so that carbon stocks are maintained, timber is produced and local
livelihoods, biodiversity etc are not hampered. There are several areas under REDD+ that are
still being deliberated upon. It is hoped that the ongoing substantive debate will hopefully
lead to consensus on the scope of REDD+ and make REDD+ a truly effective mechanism to
mitigate climate change through sequestration of carbon and sustainable development.
To conclude, though REDD+ is being developed primarily as a climate change
option, but it is also expected to generate considerable biodiversity benefits and ecosystem
services along with generating benefits for local and indigenous people. Optimising these so
called „co-benefits‟ will require close coordination between actors at the international,
national and local levels.
References
1. CBD (2009): Connecting Biodiversity and Climate Change Mitigation and
Adaptation: Report of the Second Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG) on
Biodiversity and Climate Change.
2. CBD (2009): Forest Resilience, Biodiversity, and Climate Change: A Synthesis of the
Biodiversity/Resilience/Stability Relationship in Forest Ecosystems. CBD Technical
Series
3. Da Fonseca, G., C.M. Rodriguez, G. Midgley, J. Busch, L. Hannah, R.A. Mittermeier.
2007. No Forest Left Behind.
4. FAO (2010). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 Report
5. Gardner,T. (2010) Monitoring Forest Biodiversity. Improving Conservation through
Ecologically- Responsible Management. Earthscan: London.
6. Global Environment Facility (2010) Sustainable Forest Management and REDD+.
Investment Programme.
7. GOFC-GOLD. 2007. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and
degradation in developing countries: a sourcebook of methods and procedures for
monitoring, measuring and reporting. GOFC-GOLD Project Office, hosted by Natural
Resources Canada, Alberta, Canada.
8. IPCC. 2001. Climate Change 2001. Impacts Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working
Group II Contribution to the Third Assessment report of the IPCC. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
9. IPCC (2007): Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. 4th
Assessment of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
10. ITTO/ IUCN (2009). Guidelines for the conservation and sustainable use of
biodiversity in tropical timber production forests. Second edition. ITTO Policy
Development Series 17.
11. Ministry of the Environment, Norway (2010). Norway and the Amazon Fund: Facts
about the rainforest and the Amazon Fund.
12. Nussbaum, R. Saunders, J., Ebeling, J. 2007. Reduced Emissions from Deforestation
and Forest Degradation (REDD): lessons from a forest governance perspective.
13. IUFRO (2008): Adaptations of Forests to Climate Change: A Multidisciplinary
Review. Occasional Paper 21. By C. Eastaugh.
14. IUFRO (2009): Adaptation of Forests and People to Climate Change – A Global
Assessment Report. Edited by R. Seppala / A.- Buck / P. Katila.
15. Kanninen M, Murdiyarso D, Seymour S, Angelsen A, Wunder S, German L. 2007.
Do trees grow on money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to
promote REDD, Bogor: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR).
16. Karsenty A. 2008. The architecture of REDD scheme after Bali: facing critical
choices, International Forestry Review 10(3):443-457.
17. UNFCCC. 2008. The REDD Framework: Framework to support coherent and
complementary actions on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation. Background paper by the UNFCCC Secretariat CPF, Rome, 17-April-
2008.
18. UN REDD Programme (2009). Operational Guidance: Engagement of Indigenous
Peoples and Other Forest Dependent Communities. Working document, June 25,
2009.