1. Topic 5, Section G
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD & REDD-plus)

2. Learning outcomes
In this presentation you will learn about th Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) programme. You will also learn about the latest developments of the REDD+ programme.
Narration: In this presentation you will learn about th Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) programme. You will also learn about the latest developments of the REDD+ programme.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 2 of 46

3. Outline Background and history of REDD Definitions Forest transitions
Why include REDD
Key issues and implications
Latest developments: REDD-plus
Narration: The presentation is divided into six main sections.
Topic 5, Section H, slide 3 of 46

4. Causes of deforestation
Direct causes
agricultural/ bioenergy expansion
wood extraction/ logging
infrastructure development
Underlying causes
macroeconomic factors
governance factors
political factors
technological factors
cultural factors
demographic factors
Narration: In order to address REDD, it is important to know the underlying causes of deforestation, which are often understated compared with the direct causes of deforestation.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 4 of 46

5. Global emissions ( )
Narration: Land use and land-use change has been reported to be one of the important sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions from tropical deforestation has contributed about 20 per cent of global emissions.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 5 of 46

6. Annual average deforestation rate (1000 hectares/year) in 2000-2005
Narration: There are 10 major forested countries in the tropics. The figures here indicate the annual rate of deforestation in thousands of hectares during , with a total rate of 11 million hectares per year or 1 per cent of the total global forest cover.
10 countries: 71% of total
Data: FAO
Topic 5, Section G, slide 6 of 46

7. Total CO2 emissions from land use and other sectors in selected countries (2000)
Narration: Most developing countries are undergoing extensive deforestation, causing CO2 emissions. There are a few exceptions, including India, China and Vietnam.
Data: WRI
Topic 5, Section G, slide 7 of 46

8. Background
The Kyoto Protocol only addresses afforestation and reforestation to enhance the sink of GHG emissions
Avoided deforestation was not included because countries have different circumstances in the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, hence equity was an issue
Afforestation and reforestation through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has not been very promising
In fact, addressing avoided deforestation would address 20% of the global emissions which is equivalent to 1.6 billion tons of carbon per year (1.6 gigatonnes of carbon a year)
SBSTA (Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice)
Narration: So far, afforestation and reforestation through the CDM has not been promising. However, there is the potential to address 20 per cent of global emissions through afforestation and reforestation projects.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 8 of 46

9. History of REDD
Submissions of the Governments of PNG and Costa Rica (FCCC/CP/2005/MISC.1)
COP11 initiated a 2-year process of reducing emissions from deforestation - RED (FCCC/CP/2005/L.2)
SBSTA invited submissions from Parties and Observers to stimulate actions
The second ‘’D’’ (forest Degradation) was considered in COP13
SBSTA organised workshops
Rome, September 2006
Cairns, March 2007
Tokyo, May 2008
Bonn, October 2008
REDD was broadened to REDD+ in early 2009
Narration: The REDD framework is a mechanism initially proposed at the 2005 COP 11 meeting of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Montreal, which aims to reduce the global greenhouse gas emissions resulting from deforestation and degradation of forests, by providing economic incentives to rainforest nations to keep their tropical forests intact. At the upcoming COP 15 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December of 2009 in Copenhagen (Denmark), nations will negotiate a new treaty to address international climate change that may include a REDD framework.
Source:
Topic 5, Section G, slide 9 of 46

10. Timeframe of processes of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
Full REDD
Implementation
Kyoto Marrakesh Bali Copenhagen |
Post 2012
Kyoto
Base year
1st Commitment Period
Under Kyoto Protocol
REDD Readiness
Phase
Narration: The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is an international treaty. 192 countries around the world have joined the treaty, which sets general goals and rules for confronting climate change. The Convention has the goal of preventing ‘dangerous’ human interference with the climate system. Before the Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, there is a lead time to get ready with REDD. Demonstration activities or REDD pilots are, therefore, very important as they will test and evaluate REDD before it is fully implemented.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 10 of 46

11. Bali road map: Indicative guidance (1/2)
Demonstration activities should be undertaken with the approval of the host Party
Estimates of reductions or increases of emissions should be results- based, demonstrable, transparent, and verifiable, and estimated consistently over time
The use of the methodologies is encouraged as a basis for estimating and monitoring emissions
Emission reductions from national demonstration activities should be assessed on the basis of national emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
Sub-national demonstration activities should be assessed within the boundary used for the demonstration, and for associated displacement of emissions
Narration: National governments are basically held responsible for implementing REDD. They are politically and technically involved in the initiation of REDD demonstration activities. Policy processes and choices of methodologies are equally important. Although sub-national approach is limited, it would provide the opportunity to evaluate displacement of emissions or leakage.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 11 of 46

12. Bali road map: Indicative guidance (2/2)
Reductions in emissions or increases resulting from the demonstration activity should be based on historical emissions, taking into account national circumstances
Sub-national approaches, where applied, should constitute a step towards the development of national approaches, reference levels and estimates
Demonstration activities should be consistent with sustainable forest management and considers the relevant provisions of the United Nations Forum on Forests, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the Convention on Biological Diversity
Narration: However, evolution from the sub-national to national approach is encouraged. The guidance also indicates the linkages with other Multilateral Environmental Agreements.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 12 of 46

13. Definitions
Forest is defined structurally on the basis of crown cover percentage, minimum height and minimum area of stand:
forest area between 0.05 and 1 hectare
potential to reach a minimum height at maturity in situ of 2 to 5 metres
Tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level): 10% to 30%
(Decision 19/CP9) - Kyoto Protocol definition
Deforestation is defined as the direct, human-induced conversion of forested land to non-forested land
(Decision 11/CP.7) - Kyoto Protocol definition
Degradation is defined as a direct, human-induced, long-term loss (persisting for X years or more) or at least Y% of forest carbon stocks [and forest values] since time T and not qualifying as deforestation. The parameters X,Y and T have not been defined (Penman et al., 2003) - IPCC definition
Note:
No definition has been approved to be used in REDD+ in current negotiations. The above definitions are from the Kyoto Protocol or from the IPCC
Narration: For the definition of forest, countries will have to choose a value within the ranges. The definition of forest degradation, however, is a framework definition suggested by Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change, or IPCC. It is recognised that it is difficult to operationalise the definition, especially when determining the thresholds.
Topic 5, Section E, slide 13 of 46

14. Deforestation and degradation
Land use change?
Yes No
Deforestation
Degradation
Loss of C?
Narration: Both deforestation and forest degradation contribute to the emissions of greenhouse gases. The difference between the two is that deforestation would lead to other land uses, while in forest degradation, the forest will remain as forest but with less carbon density.
Topic 5, Section E, slide 14 of 46

15. Forest/plantations/ agric. mosaics
Forest transition
Forest cover
Time
Papua New Guinea/
Democratic Republic of Congo
Indonesia/Brazil
India
China/Costa Rica
Undisturbed forests
Forest frontiers
Forest/agric. mosaics
Forest/plantations/ agric. mosaics
Narration: Not all countries are in the same phase of deforestation and forest degradation. They are in different stages of forest transition in terms of both forest cover and rate of deforestation. Countries such as Papua New Guinea and Democratic Republic of Congo would have high forest cover with lower deforestation rate compared with, for example, Indonesia and Brazil in terms of the rate. In contrast, in countries such as Costa Rica, although the forest cover is low they also experience low or even negative deforestation. This implies that these countries would have different interests in REDD with different political economy involved.
Source: Kanninen et al. (2007)
Topic 5, Section G, slide 15 of 46

16. Why include REDD in a global climate regime?
BIG:
1/5 of GHG emissions, but
not included in global climate regime
CHEAP: (Stern report)
negative - US$5/tonne
50% red: US$5-15 billion
but problems of implementation (transaction costs)
QUICK:
stroke-of-pen reforms
no deep restructuring of economy or new technoloigy
a wooden bridge to a clean energy future
WIN-WIN:
large transfer
good governance?
Narration: REDD has the potential to reduce a significant portion of the sources of emissions. It is CHEAPer than other sectors. The abetment cost through avoided deforestation is relatively low compared with other sectors in climate regime. It would even lower over time when other sectors turn out to be more efficient. Although it is not a QUICK fix to the problems it could possibly be quickly implemented, and that’s why developing country readiness is crucial. At the same time it can offer a WIN-WIN solution regarding financial benefits and improved forest governance.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 16 of 46

17. Why include … (cont.) Initiated by developing countries
Less resistance from environmental groups
Poor countries: an opportunity to receive large transfers by selling carbon credits
Rich countries: a cheap way to undertake mandatory reductions
Narration: There are trade-offs between negotiating parties and wide support from other concerned groups.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 17 of 46

18. The ‘ideal’ REDD scheme
Narration: The ideal REDD scheme should engage multi-level processes and multi-stakeholders involvement. Considering national circumstances, there is no such thing one size fits all. One thing that is common, however, is that the national government should play key role in facilitating national and sub-national processes while linking with the international processes and markets. If REDD is an objective rather than a process, then initial payment to compensate emission reductions may be linked with Payment for Environmental Services (see Topic 5 Section B).
Topic 5, Section G, slide 18 of 46

19. Key issues and implications
Narration: The following section examines 10 key issues about REDD and their implications.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 19 of 46

20. Key messages: Technical solutions exist, but Often trade-offs
Political issues
Flexibility needed:
country circumstances
learning process
Narration: A CIFOR report published in 2008 discusses a number of emerging REDD issues accompanied with options to resolve them and their respective implications. The report also discusses the technical and political dimensions of REDD while considering national circumstances.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 20 of 46

21. 1. Scope of REDD Changes in: Reduced negative change
Enhanced positive change
Forest area (hectare)
Avoided deforestation
Afforestation and reforestation
Carbon density (carbon per hectare)
Avoided degradation
Forest regeneration and rehabilitation (carbon stock enhancement)
Narration: REDD may be approached by reducing negative change, such as avoided deforestation and forest degradation, and by enhancing positive change through afforestation, reforestation, and enhancement of carbon stocks.
Forest carbon (C) = forest area (ha) * carbon density (t/ha)
Topic 5, Section G, slide 21 of 46

22. 2. What to credit? Strong arguments for emission-based approach:
Input
Output
Policies and
measures (PAM)
Emissions: Change in stocks
Stocks (level, or pct. of level)
Strong arguments for emission-based approach:
incentives should aim at the target
generate tradable REDD credits (tap into compliance market)
Problems with stock-based approach:
water out the mechanism, incentives at the margin
low additionality
Narration: Policies and measures dealing with REDD may generate ecosystem services other than carbon sequestration? Payment mechanisms that are directly targeted towards emission reduction credits would likely attract compliance markets. Voluntary markets could possibly accept other services with low additionality.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 22 of 46

23. 3. Finding the right scale Credit to countries, projects or both?
National approach
creates country ownership
addresses domestic leakage
susceptible to governance failures
less likely to mobilise private investment
Sub-national approach
allows early action and wide participation
susceptible to domestic leakage
cannot address wider driving forces of deforestation and forest degradation
Nested approach
allows early start with sub-national activities and gradually moves to a national approach
challenges to harmonise two levels
Narration: Although the choice will be very much guided by national circumstances, allowing an early start at sub-national level, which is likely less complicated, would buy time and increase confidence. The challenge of domestic leakage, however, would be very difficult to address unless a nested approach is initiated.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 23 of 46

24. 4. Finding the money (example: US$15 billion annually for 50% cut)
Development aid or public funds
Voluntary markets
Compliance markets
Selling REDD credits (fungibility)
Auctioning Emission Allowances
Tax on carbon trade
Narration: Where would the money come from? Who is going to buy REDD credits? Public funds are generally used to develop or build capacity of host countries before voluntary markets come into the stage. Such markets are usually not regulated, meaning that while following the general rules and procedures of compliance markets, they are less stringent in terms of policy and measures. Some examples of compliance markets can be seen in the table here. They mainly work in the energy sector under the Kyoto Protocol.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 24 of 46

25. 5. Setting the reference levels
Narration: The terms ‘baseline’ or ‘reference line/level’ refer to at least three different things. First, baseline can refer to the historical baseline, that is, the rate of deforestation and degradation and the resulting CO2e emissions over the past x years. Second, baseline can refer to the projected business-as-usual (BAU) scenario. In other words, how would emissions from deforestation and degradation evolve without the REDD activity? Third, baseline can refer to the crediting baseline, which is like an emissions quota.
A business-as-usual baseline is the benchmark for judging the impact of the REDD measures implemented and for ensuring additionality, while the crediting baseline is the benchmark for rewarding the country or project if emissions are below that level.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 25 of 46

26. Reference levels (cont.)
Business as usual (BAU):
national historical deforestation
national circumstances forest cover-stage in forest transition
GDP/capita
Crediting baselines:
BAU + common but differentiated responsibilities
no-lose systems (Crediting baseline < BAU):
who owns the REDD rent?
 In the end: a balance between the risk of ’tropical hot air’ and REDD participation and acceptability
Narration: The business-as-usual reference level may be projected from historical deforestation. But knowing a country’s circumstances, the trend would vary enormously. It is important to set the reference level based on the change in carbon stocks rather than on the forest area. We are interested in seeing emission reductions, not forest cover change.
Other factors, such as GDP per capita, would even provide a good proxy for what extent the trend would be. The crediting baseline, which is usually lower than the BAU, would introduce no-lose system.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 26 of 46

27. 6. Avoiding leakage (emission displacements)
Monitor: The Voluntary Carbon Standard for land-use projects and the BioCarbon Fund now recommend leakage-belt monitoring; 5 to 7 times the size of project areas greater than 100,000 hectares; 20 to 40 times the size of project areas less than100,000 hectares
Increase Scale: Move from sub-national to national levels. For international leakage, get broad participation
Discount: The various UNFCCC-proposed mechanisms, such as banking non-credited conservation reserves, insurances, discounted credits, or leakage-adjusted baselines and targets. Reward better monitoring
Redesign: How large are leakage risks for different on-the-ground REDD actions? Priority to less mobile deforesting agents?
Neutralise: Example: neutralizing ‘alternative livelihoods’ components, Integrated Conservation and Development Projects
Leakage a sign of a healthy economy
Must accept some leakage
Move to national level
Narration: Leakage or emission displacement is an issue when projects are implemented on a case-by-case basis. Sub-national level implementation may result in a similar problem. This issue can be overcome by increasing the scale of the project, adjusting the baseline regularly, and rewarding a good monitoring system. Leakage may also indicate a healthy economy, for example, because more lands are needed. This may have to be accepted while gradually moving to full national implementation.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 27 of 46

28. 7. Ensuring permanence and assigning liability
Is permanence a particular REDD problem?
difficult to control the carbon storage, for example fires
continued monitoring and incentives
But:
given the finiteness of fossil fuels, it is likely that they will end up in the atmosphere over the long run
even if terrestrial carbon sequestration was in fact temporary, it will still have a positive climate effect: “A wooden bridge to a clean energy future”
The real problem:
lack of national caps and targets (and liability for those)
liability management schemes needed as part of REDD
Narration: One of the main concerns related to the use of sinks as a greenhouse gas mitigation option is the question of ‘permanence’, the length of time under which carbon will remain stored after been fixed in vegetation. In reality, the concern is about lack of permanence, or ‘reversibility’ of the benefits of storage, as a result of the discontinuation of forestry activities, whether on purpose or as a result of undesirable events, such as forest fires and other natural disasters.
The treatment of permanence influences and is influenced by the choice of carbon accounting methodologies, the timeframes chosen for carbon accounting, and the approach chosen for dealing with liabilities.
Source:
Topic 5, Section G, slide 28 of 46

29. 8. Monitoring, reporting and verifying (MRV)
Stock-difference approach
Gain-loss approach
Narration: Monitoring is an important cycle, which will be followed by reporting and verification. In general, it may be conducted using the ‘stock-difference’ approach and the ‘gain-loss’ approach. Both approaches are suggested by IPCC. The difference is that the second one needs more rigorous annual information such as growth and harvest rates.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 29 of 46

30. MRV (cont.) The technologies are (almost) there
But they come at a cost, sometimes a very high cost
The more disaggregated data, the more expensive it is
MRV not an hindrance for moving ahead, but impose limitations for what we can do
IPCC guidelines are fairly good for deforestation, less developed for degradation
Conservativeness principle
A global REDD scheme flexible enough to avoid discriminating against countries with low MRV capacity
Reward better MRV
Topic 5, Section G, slide 30 of 46

31. 9. How to deal with degradation?
Should we include degradation (“second D”)?
Opposing views on whether or not it should be included
More complicated to define, measure and monitor than deforestation
With degradation, REDD would more effective in achieving the goals of the convention by accounting for a wider range of forest greenhouse gas emissions
Inclusion of degradation increases international equity of the REDD mechanism by encouraging participation by a wider range of countries, many of them in Africa
Inclusion allows for promotion of sustainable forest management, rehabilitation and restoration
Leaving degradation out can lead to increased leakage
Topic 5, Section G, slide 31 of 46

32. 10. Generating REDD co-benefits
Why Should REDD be pro-poor?
Moral arguments: legitimate rights
Practical considerations: forest users/managers are often poor, and need incentives
Risk reduction: risk of local rejection, social conflict
Attractiveness of REDD investments greater
Political considerations: REDD funds from international donors and development agencies
Procedural matters: the UNFCCC recognises the importance of social issues, including poverty, as global priorities (Decision 2/CP.13).
Topic 5, Section G, slide 32 of 46

33. REDD Co-benefits (cont.)
Opportunities of poor country participation:
nested approach, soft entry
readiness, ODA funding
‘national circumstances’: a challenge
Recognise other international conventions (CBD, Aarhus)
Some tradeoffs: carbon effectiveness and equity
Mainly determined by national REDD strategies
Topic 5, Section G, slide 33 of 46

34. FCPF and UN-REDD World Bank FCPF (37 countries) UN-REDD (9 countries)
Both FCPF and UN-RDDD (5 countries)
Narration: The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, or FCPF, assists developing countries in their efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation by providing value to standing forests. The FCPF is designed to set the stage for a large-scale system of incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, providing a fresh source of financing for the sustainable use of forest resources and biodiversity conservation, and for the more than 1.2 billion people who depend to varying degrees on forests for their livelihoods.
The United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries, or UN-REDD, is a collaboration between the Food and Agriculture Organization, the United Nations Development Programme, and the United Nations Environment Programme. A multi-donor trust fund was established in July 2008 that allows donors to pool resources and provides funding to activities towards this programme.
There are 37 countries that participate in FCPF. Nine of them also participate in UN-REDD.
FPCP Donors: Australia, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, UK, and USA
Topic 5, Section G, slide 34 of 46

35. FCPF Readiness Plan Idea Note (R-PIN) and R-Plan submissions
Africa (14)
Ghana
Liberia
DRC
Gabon
CAR
Cameroon
Eq. Guinea
Congo Rep.
Kenya
Ethiopia
Mozambique
Tanzania
Uganda
Madagascar
Tropical America (15)
Panama*
Guyana*
Costa Rica
Bolivia
Mexico
Argentina
Colombia
Nicaragua
Paraguay
Peru
Asia Pacific (8)
Indonesia*
Lao PDR
Nepal
Vietnam
Vanuatu
PNG
Thailand
Cambodia
Narration: These are the FCPF participating countries. Among the 37 FCPF countries, three of them - Guyana, Panama, and Indonesia - have been submitting more comprehensive Readiness Plans after they went through the R-PIN processes.
Note:
* = Country submitted R-Plan
Topic 5, Section G, slide 35 of 46

36. World Bank’s FCPF
A $100 million Readiness Mechanism to provide grants to 20 countries that would fund projects including:
measurement, monitoring and verification systems to enable countries to report on emissions
adopting a national REDD strategy that reflects each country’s priorities
developing a national reference scenario for REDD
A $200 million Carbon Finance Mechanism (to be spent over ~5 years, beginning in 2010) to allow some of these countries to run pilot programmes earning credits for deforestation
This is the FCPF launching photo taken from
Caption: December 12, World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick (4th from l.) launched a groundbreaking financing mechanism today to combat tropical deforestation and climate change. The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) was developed because forests are more important left standing than cut. (
WB press Release:
Topic 5, Section G, slide 36 of 46

37. UN-REDD
FAO, UNDP and UNEP - a joint UN Collaborative programme on REDD in developing countries
Two elements:
Assisting developing countries to prepare and implement national REDD strategies and mechanisms,
Supporting the development of normative solutions and standardised approaches for a REDD instrument linked with the UNFCCC
Readiness programme:
Development of monitoring and assessment capability and methodologies
Main donor: Norway
Unlike FCPF which enjoys multiple donor support, UN-REDD has been solely funded by the Govt. of Norway. The implementing agencies are three UN bodies (FAO, UNEP and UNDP) with their respective roles.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 37 of 46

38. Forest transition of FCPF and UN-REDD countries
Democratic Republic of Congo, Colombia, Guyana, Panama, Peru, Costa Rica
Nepal, Ethiopia, Ghana, Liberia, Tanzania, Uganda
Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Lao PDR, Bolivia, Paraguay, Nicaragua
Vietnam, Kenya, Madagascar, Mozambique
High Forest Cover
(> 40%)
Low Forest Cover
(<40%)
High Deforestation Rate (> 0.5% year)
Low Deforestation Rate (< 0.5% year)
Narration: Not all countries with high forest cover experience high deforestation rates.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 38 of 46

39. Outlook: REDD funding scheme
Total funding
Market-based
Fund-based
2012
2020
2016
Readiness
Pilot
Market
2008
Funding
Narration: The funding situation would change over time depending on the readiness of countries and maturity of markets.
Modified after Eliasch (2008)
Topic 5, Section G, slide 39 of 46

40. REDD+
There seems to be a general consensus that REDD activities should be broadened
New term – REDD+ – is launched
REDD+ relates to
reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries
and the role of conservation, sustainable forest management and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries
Narration: While the implications of various issues and challenges are being discussed, the negotiating parties came up with the idea of REDD-plus in early It is the same as REDD but includes forest conservation, sustainable forest management and carbon stock enhancement.
REDD+ refers to "Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation, conservation of existing carbon stocks and enhancement of carbon stocks."
The REDD+ proposed mechanism is a new development in the REDD strategizing process designed to support the voluntary efforts of developing country Parties to mitigate climate change by reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, [to promote] conservation and the sustainable management of forests, and [to enhance] forest carbon stocks."
Source:
Topic 5, Section G, slide 40 of 46

41. IPCC definitions
Narration: By definition, forest land use and other land uses may be represented in this diagram. Deforestation begins when forest lands begin to change into non-forest lands and forestation begins the other way around. Forest degradation, however, shows a decreasing stock in carbon but forest lands remain forest lands.
Topic 5, Section G, slide 41 of 46

42. REDD and REDD+ REDD Conservation SFM Enhancement of C-Stocks
Narration: REDD would address deforestation and forest degradation in the landscape but REDD+ encompasses a wider perspective ranging from protecting pristine forest to rehabilitating empty and degraded lands. In a sense REDD+ allows for the two extremes of avoiding deforestation to afforestation and reforestation.
Source: Pedroni (2009)
Topic 5, Section G, slide 42 of 46

43. Outlook Will REDD+ make it to the post 2012 agreement?
Several demonstration activities, or planned experiments, are starting
Start quickly to gain experience
Phased approach:
MRV  more precise methods (learning by doing)
projects  national level (but a different ball game)
funds  market-based mechanisms over a transition period
Topic 5, Section G, slide 43 of 46

44. References
Brown, S. and Gaston, G Use of forest inventories and geographic information systems to estimate biomass density of tropical forests: applications to tropical Africa. Environ. Monit. Assess. 38:
Brown, S., Hall, M., Andrasko, K., Ruiz, F., Marzoli, W., Guerrero, G., Masera, O., Dushku, A., de Jong, B. and Cornell, J Baselines for land-use change in the tropics: application to avoided deforestation projects. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 12:
CIFOR Infobrief What is the right scale for REDD? The implications of national, subnational and nested approaches” by Arild Angelsen, Charlotte Streck, Leo Peskett, Jessica Brown & Cecilia Luttrell (
CIFOR Infobrief Measuring and monitoring forest degradation for REDD: Implications of country circumstances” by Daniel Murdiyarso, Margaret Skutsch, Manuel Guariguata, Markku Kanninen & Cecilia Luttrell, Pita Verweij and Osvaldo Stella (
Kanninen, M., Murdiyarso, D., Seymour, F., Angelsen, A., Wunder, S. & German. L Do Trees Grow on Money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to promote REDD. Forest Perspectives No. 4, Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia. 61 p.. (
Meridian Institute Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD): An Options Assessment Report. Prepared for the Government of Norway, by Arild Angelsen, Sandra Brown, Cyril Loisel, Leo Peskett, Charlotte Streck, and Daniel Zarin. Available at:
Topic 5, Section G, slide 44 of 46

45. References (con’t)
Pearson, T., Walker, S. and Brown, S Sourcebook for land use, land-use change and forestry projects. Winrock International and the BioCarbon Fund of the World Bank. 57p.
Penman, J. et al Good practice guidance for land use, land-use change and forestry. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories programme and Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Kanagawa, Japan. nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gpglulucf/gpglulucf.htm
Angelsen. A. (Ed.). Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor, Indonesia. Pp
Topic 5, Section G, slide 45 of 46

46. Thank you for your attention