1 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme Briefing to the ACP Group of States July 19, 2012, ACP Secretariat, Brussels Duncan Brack, Consultant to the ACP GCCA Programme (LTS-Baastel-CAMCO)

1. REDD+ concept 2. Three multilateral initiatives in detail: a) Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) b) Forest Investment Programme (FIP) c) UN-REDD 3. Three initiatives more briefly: a) Congo Basin Forest Fund (CBFF) b) Australia’s International Forest Carbon Initiative c) Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 4. REDD+ funding in practice 5. The future 2 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Deforestation ~17% global emissions  Relatively cheap to reduce (in theory)  Not included in Kyoto – too difficult  Aim of seeing developing countries adopt targets meant had forests to be included  Bali Roadmap, 2007; Copenhagen Accord, 2009  Needs new treaty, so not imminent  But funding for ‘readiness’ activities available 3 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Basic idea: add value to standing forests  Development RED – REDD – REDD+  Reducing emissions from deforestation  Reducing emissions from forest degradation  Forest conservation  Sustainable management of forests  Enhancement of forest carbon stocks 4 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Reference levels  Leakage  Permanence  Safeguards  Governance  Measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV)  Finance 5 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Step-wise approach, codified 2010:  Phase 1: ‘development of national strategies or action plans, policies and measures, and capacity- building’ (‘REDD readiness’)  Phase 2: implementation of strategy, including further capacity-building, testing MRV, payments for ‘results-based demonstration activities’  Phase 3: fully implemented programme with a pay-for-performance system 6 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Preparation of national strategies to reduce emissions  Designing and implementing national forest carbon accounting, including baselines and reference emissions levels and MRV systems  Developing benefit-sharing mechanisms  Developing safeguards and grievance mechanisms to protect the interests of forest communities, indigenous people, biodiversity, etc. 7 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF): Readiness Fund and Carbon Fund  World Bank’s Forest Investment Programme (FIP)  UN-REDD Programme (FAO, UNDP, UNEP)  Congo Basin Forest Fund (CBFF)  Amazon Fund  Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund  Global Environment Facility  Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol 8 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Australia’s International Forest Carbon Initiative  Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (also main donor to Amazon Fund, UN-REDD)  Other donor funds not only REDD+, including Germany’s International Climate Initiative and UK’s International Climate Fund 9 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

InitiativePledgedDepositedApprovedDisbursed FCPF (RF) FCPF (CF) FIP UN-REDD Congo Basin Forest Fund Amazon Fund Indonesia CCTF Total Total % pledged See Table 3 in paper (page 12–13) for developing country participation in initiatives 10 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 All sources of REDD+ finance together, 2008 – November 2011:  $446 million approved, $252 million disbursed (13% total climate finance)  Eliasch Review recommendations:  ‘REDD readiness’ – $4 billion over five years for forty forest nations ($20m / country / year)  $17–33 billion a year by 2030 for fully fledged REDD+ mechanism achieving a 50% reduction in deforestation 11 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

RegionApprovedDisbursed Asia9488 – major recipient: Indonesia4240 Latin America17873 – major recipient: Brazil / Amazon Fund14349 Sub-Saharan Africa11947 – major recipient: DRC Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 REDD+ Partnership established 2010  Voluntary REDD+ Database  June 2012: 40 countries reported 652 ‘arrangements’  Total funding 2006–16: $5.74 billion (reported by funders) or $2.72 billion (reported by recipients)  Forest Trends project will track REDD+ funds  FCPF and UN-REDD collaborate, e.g. over funding application templates – but still follow different processes in many cases 13 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 World Bank programme, operational 2008  Readiness Fund – capacity-building  Carbon Fund – pilot performance-based payments  37 developing countries  11 candidate countries  Participants Committee main decision- making body  14 donors, 14 REDD+ countries, observers 14 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Eligibility:  IBRD/IDA member in tropics/sub-tropics  Significant forest area / carbon stock  High relevance of forests in economy  High current/project deforestation  Funding:  $229.6m pledged/deposited  $27.2m approved (11.8%)  $9.1m disbursed (4.0%) 15 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 R-PIN submitted to Participants Committee  Example, Ghana:  Submitted October 2007, approved July 2008  25-page document  Background information on forestry, deforestation, current policies  Potential further programmes: forest governance, land tenure and land use regulations, building institutional capacity for REDD+  Other relevant cross-sectoral policies: poverty reduction, agriculture  Stakeholder consultation processes  Challenges to implementation  Potential monitoring and implementation systems  Plan and tentative budget ($4.82 million) 16 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 April 2012  26 prepared  19 submitted  5 received grants (DRC, Ghana, Indonesia, Nepal, RoC)  Formulation grant of $200,000  Clear plan, budget, schedule 17 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Ghana:  Started work May 2009  Draft R-PP September 2009  Final R-PP submitted January 2010  Approved subject to revision March 2010  Final revised R-PP submitted December 2010  Formulation grant disbursed November Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 128-page document  Roadmap for readiness activities  Readiness phase 2009–11, implementation 2011–12, country ‘ready’ thereafter  Budget: $7.334 million  FCPF: $3.6 million (max)  Government: $1.7 million  Other donors 19 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Component 1: Organise and Consult  1a. National Readiness Management Arrangements  1b. Stakeholder Consultation and Participation  Component 2: Prepare the REDD Strategy  2a. Assessment of Land Use, Forestry Policy and Governance  2b. REDD Strategy Options  2c. Arrangement for REDD Implementation  2d. Social and Environmental Impacts  Component 3: Develop a Reference Scenario  Component 4: Design a Monitoring System  Component 5: Schedule and Budget  Component 6: Design a Program Monitoring and Evaluation 20 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Move country to Phase 2 of REDD+:  Activities are tested within a transparent framework, social and environmental risks mitigated  Should cover all REDD+ activities (not just FCPF)  Endorsement of R-Package necessary for participation in FCPF Carbon Fund  Content still under development 21 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Operational May 2011  Payments for verified emission reductions – i.e. part of REDD+ phase 2  Funding:  $204.5m pledged  $179.3m deposited  $1.44m approved (0.7%)  $0.2m disbursed (0.1%)  Aims to leverage private finance – though difficult in absence of global carbon market 22 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 About five participants qualify initially, based on:  Potential for sustainable emissions reductions  Scale of implementation  Consistency with compliance standards  Potential to generate learning value  Benefit-sharing mechanisms, broad community support  Transparent stakeholder consultations  $30m – $40m / country over five years  Still under development 23 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 One of World Bank’s Climate Investment Funds (CIFs), operational July 2009  Aim: financing to developing countries for readiness reforms and public and private investments; much larger sums than FCPF  Funding:  $644m pledged  $459m deposited  $51m approved (7.9%)  $3.2m disbursed (0.5%)  Will close on new UNFCCC financial architecture 24 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 FIP Sub-Committee main decision-making body:  6 donor countries  6 eligible recipient countries  Observers  Eight pilot countries:  Brazil, Burkina Faso, DRC, Ghana, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Mexico, Peru  Three potential further pilots:  Philippines, Mozambique, Nepal 25 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 45 expressions of interest; selection based on:  Programme potential to contribute and adhere to FIP objectives and principles  Country preparedness and ability to undertake REDD initiatives  Existing pilot programme distribution across regions and biomes, ensuring that pilot programmes generate lessons on scaling up activities  Investment plans approved by FIP Sub- Committee – 5 approved to date, aim for end 2012 for remaining 26 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 DRC: addressing deforestation and degradation in the Kinshasa supply area ($36.9 million, December 2012)  Mexico: strengthening financial inclusion of ejidos and communities through technical assistance and capacity-building for low-carbon strategies in forest landscapes ($2.9 million, July 2012)  Lao PDR: smallholder forestry project ($3.0 million, September 2012) 27 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Some countries not keen on World Bank  FAO / UNDP / UNEP initiative, operational 2008  42 partner countries 16 of them with national programmes  Funding:  $150.8m pledged  $118.2m deposited  $108.1m approved (71.7%)  $90.9m disbursed (60.3%) 28 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Programme Policy Board main decision- making body  3 full members from donor countries  3 full and 6 alternate from programme countries  NGOs, indigenous peoples, UN agencies  Global programme – common approaches, analyses, methodologies, tools, data, best practices (all countries can access)  National programmes 29 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Aim to achieve outcomes:  Develop and implement MRV and monitoring systems  Credible, inclusive national governance systems developed  Systems for management of REDD+ funding strengthened  Indigenous peoples, local communities, civil society organisations and other stakeholders participate effectively  Multiple benefits of forests promoted and realised  REDD+ strategies and related investments catalyse shifts to a green economy  Knowledge is developed, managed, analysed and shared 30 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Must be UN-REDD partner country  Regional balance of investment  Prioritise according to:  Contribution of UN-REDD to national readiness process  Effective engagement of UN agencies at country level  REDD+ potential of the country (forest cover, annual rate of change, potential importance of forests to poor)  Also must display commitment to UN-REDD principles:  Human-rights based approach to development  Engagement of indigenous peoples  Social and environmental principles and criteria  Consistency with REDD+ safeguards  Etc. 31 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Component 1: Organise and Consult  1a. National Readiness Management Arrangements  1b. Information Sharing and Early Dialogue with Key Stakeholder Groups  1c. Consultation and Participation Process  Component 2: Prepare the REDD-plus Strategy  2a. Assessment of Land Use, Land Use Change Drivers, Forest Law, Policy and Governance  2b. REDD-plus Strategy Options  2c. REDD-plus Implementation Framework  2d. Social and Environmental Impacts during Readiness Preparation and REDD-plus Implementation 32 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Component 3: Develop a National Forest Reference Emission Level and/or a Forest Reference Level  Component 4: Design Systems for National Forest Monitoring and Information on Safeguards  4a. National Forest Monitoring System  4b. Designing an Information System for Multiple Benefits, Other Impacts, Governance, and Safeguards  Component 5: Schedule and Budget  Component 6: Design a Program Monitoring and Evaluation Framework 33 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Ecuador: $4m for 2011–13. Expected outcomes include:  Design and implementation of: National Forest Monitoring System; consultation process; policies, instruments, operational framework for implementation; ensuring multiple environmental and social benefits; benefit-sharing system.  Viet Nam: $4.4 m for 2009–12. Expected outcomes include:  improved institutional, technical, management capacity; incorporation of economic incentives; approaches to reduce regional displacement of emissions.  Zambia: $4.5m for 2011–13. Expected outcomes include:  Capacity strengthened; stakeholder support established; national governance framework and institutional capacities strengthened; REDD+ strategies identified; MRV capacity strengthened; assessment of reference emission level and reference level. 34 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Established 2008  COMIFAC member countries:  Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, DRC, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Sao Tome & Principe  Funding:  $165m pledged / deposited (UK and Norway)  $75.0m approved (45.5%)  $12.1m disbursed (7.3%) 35 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Key thematic areas for grants:  Forest management and sustainable practice  Livelihoods and economic development  Monitoring, assessment and verification  Benefits from carbon markets and payment for ecosystem services  Capacity-building in REDD; monitoring, assessment and verification; SFM  Wide range of applicants 36 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Alternatives to mangrove destruction for women's livelihoods in Central Africa (Cameroon; $0.38m)  Civil society and government capacity-building within the REDD framework (DRC, $4.26m)  Improving beekeeping and reforestation around the Bagandou forest, CAR ($0.35m).  Promoting community land tenure rights in the Congo Basin (Cameroon, CAR, Gabon, RoC, DRC, $0.73m)  Quantifying carbon stocks and emissions in the forests of Cameroon and RoC ($1.74m)  Reconciling the needs of the logging industry with those of forest-dependent people (Cameroon, Gabon, DRC, $2.19m) 37 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Established 2007  Projects mainly based in Asia-Pacific, especially Indonesia, PNG  Funding:  $216.2m pledged  $185.5m approved (85.8%)  $31.7m disbursed (14.7%) 38 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership ($43m) – focus on 120,000ha of degraded and forested peatland in Central Kalimantan.  Sumatra Forest Carbon Partnership (($27.6m) – similar to the Kalimantan Partnership, on different forest type (mineral soils)  Papua New Guinea–Australia Forest Carbon Partnership ($3m initial) – support for government policy development on REDD+.  Roadmap for Access to International Carbon Markets – assisting Indonesia to develop prerequisites for participation in future international carbon markets  Partnership with the Clinton Climate Initiative on carbon monitoring – providing forest carbon data to developing countries (including Guyana, Tanzania, Kenya and Cambodia) 39 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Kyoto Protocol flexibility mechanism  Enables Annex I countries to earn credits by investing in emission reduction projects in developing countries  Forestry projects limited to afforestation or reforestation  Credits time-limited  <1% of CDM projects 40 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Chile: Restoration of Degraded Lands of Small and Medium Farmers through Afforestation and Reforestation  China: Facilitating Reforestation for Guangxi Watershed Management in Pearl River Basin  India: Improving Rural Livelihoods  Nicaragua: Precious Woods  Uganda: Nile Basin Reforestation  Most operating through BioCarbon Fund  Future depends on UNFCCC developments 41 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Role and structure of multilaterals  UN-REDD quicker to disburse funds, more flexible  FCPF better at standards, governance, safeguards; Carbon Fund valuable in long term  Still confusion over different bodies, selection criteria  Coordination, overlaps, gaps  Lack of coordination serious but improving  Common approaches, e.g. on safeguards, MRV, admin processes (but still different processes on safeguards) 42 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Finance  Very low disbursement rate (UN-REDD best – often has on-the-ground capacity)  When are countries ‘ready’?  No clear definition  But early estimates far too optimistic  Safeguards and governance  Streamlining process controversial  Governance initiatives (e.g. FLEGT) important 43 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Stakeholder engagement  Good participation at international level  More difficult at national level  Knowledge transfer  Too much information available; difficult to identify reliable and up-to-date  Private sector  Generally not engaged; FIP may help  Too uncertain for international carbon markets 44 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 National ownership  Initially often seen as imposed from outside; less problematic now, but still often limited buy-in  UN-REDD agencies benefit from on-the-ground capacity; but can sometimes take over process  Misperceptions and uncertainty  In early days, often unrealistic expectations  Link to livelihoods not well understood  Uncertainty over long-term future 45 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

‘REDD is moving ahead, but at a slower pace and in a different form than we expected when it was launched at Bali in 2007.’  Early expectations of global framework under new climate treaty, substantial performance- based funding  Now most REDD+ funding from development aid budgets  Readiness activities slow and expensive 46 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

 Funding will continue to be made available; will retain payments-for-results focus  Disbursement will speed up, but donors more likely to use bilateral arrangements  Readiness activities are slow – and should be  Forest governance initiatives important  Interest will grow in root causes of deforestation 47 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme

‘The litany of problems encountered by the first generation of REDD+ initiatives can make for discouraging reading. But despite adverse changes in the broader context, and hard lessons learned from early experience, the potential of REDD+ continues to capture the imagination and attract continuing investment at all levels … REDD+ as a worthy objective is still very much alive.’ 48 Intra-ACP GCCA Programme