Forests, Climate Change and REDD+: A brief introduction

Forests, Climate Change and REDD+: A brief introduction

• 1.
  Forests, Climate Change andREDD+: a brief introduction Maria Brockhaus Myanmar – February 2017
• 2.
  Strategies for climatechange  Mitigation and adaptation: Different objectives Mitigation: To reduce emissions or enhance sinks Adaptation: To moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities
• 3.
  MITIGATION GhG concentrations Climate change Impacts Responses Globalecosystem service: Carbon sequestration. Instruments: CDM, REDD. Ecosystem-Based Mitigation ADAPTATION Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Local ecosystem services: Water regulation, provision of goods... Instruments: EBA.
• 4.
  Linkages between forestsand adaptation are twofold  Adaptation for forests • CC affect forests • Adaptation measures needed for forests New challenges -> understanding impacts, adapting management  Forests for adaptation • Forest ecosystems contribute to social adaptation • They provide ecosystem services that contribute to risk management, and reduce the vulnerability of local communities and of the broader society New challenges -> forests in adaptation of sectors outside of the forest sector (Locatelli et al., 2010)
• 5.
  Forest Ecosystem-Based Mitigation: Examples e.g.,Afforestation & Reforestation (CDM) Increasing carbon in ecosystems t With reforestation Carbon in ecosystem Baseline Avoiding loss of carbon from ecosystems Conservation Carbon in ecosystem t Baseline (deforestation) e.g., Avoided Deforestation (REDD+)
• 6.
  What is REDD+? …policy approaches and positive incentives for activities relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries UNFCCC Decision 2/CP.13–11
• 7.
  The core ideaof REDD
• 8.
  REDD+ architecture
• 9.
  A brief REDDhistory  Early 1990s: Deforestation 1/5 of GHG emissions  2001 - COP7: Avoided deforestation too difficult to include in CDM (+ no additionality). Only A/R  2005 - COP11: 2 year consultation period for RED ; 2006 –Stern report  2007 - COP13: RED(D) included in Bali Action Plan; Norway’s Climate-Forest initiative, NOK 15 billions  2008+: FCPF (World Bank), UNREDD, other initiatives  2009 - COP15: some progress for REDD+, interim financing  2010: COP 16 confirms earlier decisions on REDD+; safeguards and ref.levels; REDD+ partnership  2011: COP 17: REDD part of commitment for all parties? Financing to be explored. Pilots and national policy reforms  2012: COP 18 and SBSTA - not much new, a lot of bracket text for safeguards, MRV etc. - verification problem  2013: COP 19 Warsaw framework, results based finance, guidance – safeguards issue will need further guidance  2014: SBSTA and COP 20 – Safeguards guidance, JMA  2015: COP 21 and SBSTA concluded REDD+ negotiations -> national implementation arenas  2016: Green Climate Fund and REDD+ results based payments, transparency
• 10.
  Paris Agreement, forestsand REDD+  First time forests are explicitly mentioned (Art 5.1)  Encourages action for results based payments (e.g. REDD+) (Art 5.2)  keeping forests and trees standing and sustainably managed will be crucial for global efforts to reach the 1.5 temperature goal  especially in forest-rich countries avoided deforestation can provide major emission reductions contributions and REDD+ is explicitly mentioned in many (I)NDCs
• 11.
  The phased approach (adoptedfrom Meridian Report 2009, UNFCCC) 11 Phase 1: Readiness Phase 2 PAM implementation Phase 3 Results Activities - Institutional strengthening - Technical capacity building - .. - Governance, regulatory and economic reforms (including Land use planning, Law enforcement, Moratoria) - Forest sector reforms - Removal of perverse subsidies - … - Improved forest management - Improved commodity chains - …. Performance - Assessment completed - Consultations conducted - Capacity increased - … - Policies enacted - Measures enforced - Proxies identified and monitored for changes in emissions - ….. - Quantified emission reductions, removal and enhancements (tCO2-e) - Quantified co-benefits - …. Financing Immediately available (readiness funds) Predictable amounts over a defined period, including countries’ own upfront investments Large-scale funding (note-shift from market to public funds)
• 12.
  Performance in REDD+ Over past decades move towards output/outcome orientation based on incentives, cash-on-delivery approaches  Some problems of ‘’traditional aid’ : - High transaction costs due to donor requirements; National ownership; “The accountability problem”, in which countries are held accountable to the donors instead of their citizens; low incentive to perform (‘ritual dance’ between donor/receiver)  REDD+ to incentivize quantifiable results: Payments for performance Should allow for ownership over reform, integration of context, and for turning tables from aid receiver to service provider  REDD+ shifted away from market-based to public fund-based, performance element remains  Risks of ‘aidification’ of REDD+, but lessons available (Angelsen 2016)
• 13.
  Key trends Objectives: CO2Co-benefits Funding: Rich pay poor REDD+ countries Policies: PES Broad PAMs Forest policies Funding: Market Public (aid) Scale: National Local/projects
• 14.
  Challenges in nationalREDD+ Among others ...  Coordination across sectors and administrative levels (in decentralized systems)  Tenure, financing systems, benefit sharing and participation  MRV systems and capacity  Scope, scale, permanence, leakage  Sovereignty and ownership over process and reform(s)  Capacity and political will to address the drivers of forest carbon change (driven oftentimes by interests of powerful elites), access/availibility to data on sectorial contributions to DD, and identifying an effective policy mix
• 15.
  www.cifor.org/gcs