1. CIFOR and REDD+ in Indonesia – Research approaches and early findings
NORAD Civil Society Meeting Bogor, May 20-21, 2010
CIFOR and REDD+ in Indonesia –
Research approaches and early findings
Markku Kanninen
Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR)
Bogor, Indonesia

2. CIFOR’s Strategy on REDD+: a Global Comparative Study

3. CIFOR’s Global Comparative REDD+ Study: Countries
Year 1
Year 2-3
Latin America
Bolivia
Brazil
Peru
Africa
Cameroon
Tanzania
DRC
Asia
Indonesia
Vietnam
Nepal

4. CIFOR’s Global Comparative REDD+ Study: Partners in Indonesia
Research partners, including
FORDA, IPB, ICRAF, Tropenbos International, Forest Wacth Indonesia, Lembaga Studi Pers dan Pembangunan (LSPP) (Centre for the Study of Press and Development), Indonesian Center for Environmental Law (ICEL), Flora Fauna International – Indonesia, The Center for Climate Risk and Opportunity Management (CCROM-IPB), Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership
Governmental and non-governmental organizations
Demonstration activity implementers at selected sites
Media, press

5. The landscape of emerging REDD+ projects
179 projects surveyed
Projects can inform national REDD+ strategies (”mini test case”), incl. reform priorities to enable local REDD
Landscape of REDD+ projects varies significantly
Third party certification has a major influence (CCBS, VCS)

6. Emerging REDD+ projects in Indonesia
Two main types:
Demonstration activities (based on official partnerships with GoI)
Projects for voluntary carbon market
Project proponents are usually governmental agencies, local governments, communities or corporations
Most projects are designed more like ICDPs than PES. PES is difficult to implement due to tenure and social concerns
Brazil
Indonesia
DRC
Planned projects 20 35 4
Operating projects 2 1
Activity
PES
Buy out concessions
Readiness
Proponents
Domestic actors
Int’l NGOs

8. CIFOR’s Site-specific REDD+ Research in Indonesia
Estimating carbon stocks: Aceh, Papua, East Java, Jambi, Central Kalimantan, West Kalimantan; Leakage: Central Kalimantan; Biomass/mangrove ecosystems: Sulawesi
REDD demonstration activities: Assessment of projects in Aceh, West, Central and Eastern Kalimantan

9. Deforestation estimates
Improve data and estimates to support decisions
By Stibniati Atmadja; Sources: Method 1: MoF: Penghitungan Deforestsi Indonesia 2008; Method 2: MoF Statistik Kehutanan 2004 and 2007

10. Deforestation estimates
Kalimantan
INDONESIA
REDD+ projects are in regions with high overall deforestation rates except Bali-Nasa Tgr, where there is only one project
By Stibniati Atmadja; Source: MoF Statistik Kehutanan 2004 and 2007

11. Drivers of deforestation
Area
Drivers of deforestation
Underlying causes of deforestation
Current REDD project modelsf
Productivity for Rice and Oil Palmb
% National Labour Force 2006c
% National construction 2006d
# Graft Cases e
Others
Kalimantan
Second highest oil palm productivity, 12.5tons/ha in 2007
6.0%
9.4%
90 – Almost all in S and E Kalimantan
Low population, Large areas with customary land rights; Oil palm expansion; Logging; Mining
Peatland conservation, Land swaps; Community carbon pooling; Reduced impact logging and oil palm; reduced encroachment into national parks; district-wide REDD
Papua
High forest cover, low deforestation, large peatland areas,
0.7%
2.6% 2
Ecosystem restoration concessions; Province-wide REDD
Sumatra
Highest oil palm productivity by far: 37 tons/ha.
19.2%
19.9% 42
Low population; Oil palm expansion
Peatland conservation; Ecosystem Restoration Concessions; Reduced impact logging and oil palm; Reduced encroachment into national parks;
Address adequately drivers of deforestation by REDD+ projects

12. Policy barriers Example: Revenue collection and distribution
Government regulation no. 62/1998 delegates authority to local government for revenue collection, and a number of functions including forest management and community forestry
Act no. 22/1999 gives local government increased authority
Government Regulation no. 6/1999 bestow regions with the authority to issue timber permits for areas less than 10,000 ha
Ministry of Forestry Decree No.310/kpts-II/1999 aims to give benefits to community groups, but in practice triggers large scale logging by companies.
Clarify authority over revenue collection and distribution

13. Policy barriers Example: Forest estate management
The Forest estate is managed under the Forestry Act while forests outside the forest estate are managed by Basic Agrarian Law
These two different regimes are accompanied by two different interpretations of the Constitution regarding customary rights
Under Agrarian law “controlled by the state” does not mean “owned” and defines customary land as a separate entity
Under the Forest law “controlled by the state” means “owned”
Align tenure policies
Establish clear rights in the forest estate

14. Reforestation Fund (RF): Main findings
Financial Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (F-MVR) are as important as monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon emissions
The use of RF funds to subsidize HTI plantation development, coupled with weak mechanisms for accountability encourages irresponsible practices and these could be replicated by REDD participants if recommendations are not addressed
Improve transparency;
Introduce Financial-MRV
“Tools” and “PSP” menus developed in CarboFor Website are available for partners and users to participate.

15. Policy networks – Example: REDD network of information Indonesia (preliminary)
Need analysis here
Some CSOs play a bridging role across different scales and actors in the REDD+ arena

16. Forest carbon studies in Sumatra: Main findings
Above-ground forest biomass (361 ± 7 Mg ha-1) in hill dipterocarp forests of Sumatra is 23% higher than IPCC default values for same types of forests
Large sample to cover landscape-scale variation
Protected areas do not cause leakage to adjacent areas
A study on the effectiveness of Sumatran protected areas in reducing deforestation
Use best C emissions calculation methods
No leakage found in protected areas: revise REDD+ project objectives to address real drivers

17. Carbon studies in peatlands and mangroves: preliminary results
Improve data and estimates of C emissions

18. Carbon emissions from peatlands
Our approach: combination of stock change and flux change methods
Flux change method applied to the peat before and after LUC
Stock change method applied to the trees before and after LUC
C loss from conversion of peat swamp forest to an oil palm plantation – much less than other authors estimate
C loss rate: 17.1 ± 3.6 Mg C ha-1 y-1 during 25 years

19. Knowledge sharing

20. Knowledge sharing: Global outreach – highlights of 2009
Forest Day 3 at Copenhagen
1579 persons registered attended
34 donors, 172 government representatives, roughly 250 climate change negotiators
Outstanding line-up of speakers and sessions
Congo Basin Forest Day
Realizing REDD+ book & other publications
CIFOR – REDD/climate change web page
REDD literacy among journalists and civil society
Regular media briefings
Journalist Forum on Climate Change
Briefing of Indonesian Parliament

21. Building REDD literacy in Indonesia: website, publications

22. Developing civil society capabilities for monitoring &measuring carbon pools
Involving:
REDD developers: local governments, private sector, civil society
National CC Council (DNPI)
UNFCCC Secretariat
50 participants
Increase information and dialogue
for literacy and engagement
“Tools” and “PSP” menus developed in CarboFor Website are available for partners and users to participate.