REDD+ Progress: UN-REDD Programme Julie Greenwalt UNEP, Nairobi Julie.greenwalt@unep.org

UN-REDD Programme  Supports countries to benefit from REDD+ National REDD+ Strategies and Readiness, capacity building  Established in 2008 by FAO, UNDP & UNEP Response to UNFCCC Bali Action Plan  Offers UN Joint Programme: Delivering as One UN  Agreed delivery platform with FCPF and FIP  Builds on wider UN agency roles E.g. National programs; GEF Implementing Agencies

National UN-REDD Programmes 16 partner countries currently receiving direct funding support, 40 partner countries total

National REDD+ Strategies UN-REDD Work Areas MRV and Monitoring REDD+ Governance Transparent Equitable Accountable Management of REDD+ Payments National REDD+ Strategies Stakeholder Engagement As per its 5 year strategy Multiple Benefits of forests and REDD+ REDD+ as Catalyst of Green Economy

UN-REDD National Programmes Original 9 pilots Africa: DRC, Tanzania, Zambia Asia: Indonesia, PNG, Viet Nam LAC: Bolivia, Panama, Paraguay In 2010, the Philippines, Solomon Islands and Cambodia initiated National Programmes In 2011, Ecuador and Nigeria had their National Programmes approved And last week, Republic of Congo and Sri Lanka became the latest to have approved National Programmes!

Beyond carbon Forests provide important ecosystem products (e.g. timber and medicines), regulating services, especially related to water and climate, and supporting services such as nutrient cycling and soil formation. These products and services are the basis for the livelihoods of people along production chains that extend from the forest through to distant continents Reshaping these economic systems around the sustainable, low-carbon use of these ecosystem services will be a key to the success of REDD+ Forests provide in addition to their carbon storage a number social and ecological service and products such as biodiversity, timber, non-timber forest products including food, fibre, soil protection, climate and water regulation. Decisions made in the design and implementation of REDD+ will influence the supply of multiple benefits from forests. The UN-REDD Programme has during 2009 undertaken a number of activities to support countries in order to maximize the accumulation of socio-economic and ecological co-benefits forests provide through REDD+. UNEP and especially WCMC under UNEP leads the work on co-benefits in the UN-REDD Programme.

Multiple benefits In the narrower sense: In the broader sense: The different products and services that come from forests, including carbon benefits In the broader sense: The multiple benefits of REDD+ for climate change mitigation Economic development, including poverty alleviation Conservation

Safeguard options and opportunities Develop and promote principles and criteria to safeguard the multiple benefits and development opportunities of forests under REDD+ Support countries to adopt, adapt and implement these safeguards, including through Appropriate monitoring systems that allow them to follow progress in a transparent, equitable and cost-effective manner

UNFCCC Safeguards and UN-REDD SEPC . 9

UNFCCC Safeguards and UN-REDD SEPC . 10

UN-REDD Prioritizes Stakeholder Engagement From Bali to today, full and authentic participation recognized to be crucial for REDD+ Strong support from the UN REDD Policy Board for guidance Demand from stakeholders during extensive consultations Led to development of “Joint Operational Guidance on Stakeholder Engagement” Also called for these “FPIC Guidelines” There is unequivocal and universal recognition that REDD+ cannot succeed without the full and effective participation of IPs and local communities that is reaffirmed in the UNFCCC negotiation text (e.g. Vicky’s work in Bali) Recognizing this, the Policy Board has requested guidance and guidelines in supporting stakeholder engagement from the beginning of the UN-REDD Programme (including the IP and CSO members of the PB) Additionally, there has been unanimous demand from IP and CSO stakeholders during the extensive consultations that UN-REDD has held with these stakeholders during global IP/CSO consultations As a result of these consultations, the UN-REDD Programme developed comprehensive Stakeholder Engagement Guidelines And this commitment to full and effective stakeholder participation has also lead to the preparation of these FPIC Guidelines

Significance of FPIC for REDD+ Value of FPIC has been recognized for years by range of actors, including private sector, governments, CSOs FPIC embedded in UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples FPIC activities undertaken in some UN-REDD countries Challenges in implementation, but recognition of significant benefits of FPIC and need to invest now in processes to support FPIC for REDD+ . Interest in FPIC has a long history, with the private sector embracing the concept voluntarily over the last few decades – there are numerous examples where not obtaining FPIC has resulted in expensive losses for companies and governments and, conversely, evidence that ensuring FPIC is respected can lead to more secure and successful outcomes. E.g. round table on sustainable palm oil has incorporated FPIC into their principles and criteria. Forest Stewardship Council requires FPIC. Governments are increasingly recognizing FPIC in national legislation, for instance the Philippines has specific legislation on implementing FPIC. Clear that respecting the rights of indigenous peoples and other forest dependent communities is vital for UNR to successfully carry out its activities. UNR follows a Human Rights Based Approach guided by the UNDRIP (Adopted by the GA in 2007) requires states to obtain FPIC with the indigenous peoples concerned before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them. Mandate to support UNDRIP and provisions on FPIC derive from Art 42 which states that: “The UN … and specialized agencies, including at the country level, and States shall promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.” In addition, we are responding to the clear demand from states and stakeholders for guidance on how to operationalize FPIC in the context of UN-REDD. Article 32 states that ”States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the IPs … to obtain FPIC …particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.” Countries are now embracing and showing high level commitment to FPIC in REDD+ with some notable examples: - Viet Nam has pioneered in this field with some of the first FPIC pilot activities in the field; Supported by UN-REDD Indonesia, a Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) Policy Recommendation was launched 17 March 2011 by the National Forestry Council (DKN). The Policy Recommendation had been developed through a multi-stakeholder consultation process. As a complex and relatively new field of practice, the application of FPIC to REDD+ still poses many challenges and needs for learning, but it is clear that this is an investment that will have huge benefits for the sustainability and effectiveness of forest management and it’s an investment that we need to make. Though it may seem that the issue of consent may be for later stages of readiness process, FPIC is not a one off event but a continuous process that requires intensive awareness raising and consultation and the need to build relationships with communities that require time; therefore it is important to begin integrating FPIC into National Programs early on. 12

FPIC Guidelines: Consultation Process So Far Jun 2010 – Jan 2011: 3 regional consultations with IPs & civil society in Vietnam (Jun 2010); Panama (Oct 2010); Tanzania (Jan 2011): Reps of 76 IP & civil society organizations from 32 countries Reps of 47 international & regional organizations UN-REDD country staff Feb – Jul 2011: Synthesis of input into draft Guidelines Aug – Nov 2011: Internal review by global & regional UN-REDD staff Dec 2011 – Jan 2012: Public comment period Feb 2012: This ‘Expert Workshop’ to review FPIC Guidelines Mar 2012: Presented update to UN-REDD Policy Board . In order to solicit input from a range of indigenous peoples and civil society, between June 2010 and January 2011, the UN-REDD Programme held three consultations in the three main regions where the UN-REDD Programme works. Following the synthesis of input, we consulted UN-REDD Programme staff, the UNDP legal department, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, James Anaya, and other independent experts. We are now finalizing the document in preparation for a global external consultation which we plan to launch in the first half of November this year. Following this consultation we will determine whether there will need to be further iterations and consultations or whether we will be able to finalize the guidance based on input received.   13

FPIC Guidelines: Content The Guidelines provide information on: The normative framework underpinning the UN’s obligation to support the right to FPIC Definitions of the elements of FPIC UN-REDD Programme Policy on applying FPIC Operational framework for seeking FPIC Grievance and accountability framework . 14

UN-REDD Programme … Recognises the unique opportunity that REDD+ presents for a green economy transformation by: Helping to make the case for the catalytic potential of REDD+ Assembling the knowledge and tools required Supporting the development of scenarios for realisation of the transformation Supporting integration of analyses, opportunities and tools into national development planning Providing capacity and technical support

Entry points Preparation of the investment phase of the REDD+ process Recognise the importance of the ‘inter-phase’ Implementing framework of the future REDD+ strategy Providing the knowledge, tools and strengthening the processes that ensure that institutional arrangements are not narrowly focused on a single ministry or sector and that there is a basis for reforms to be suitably broad based and integrative. Private sector needs to be part of the solution to reach scale

REDD+ and the private sector 1) Who are the private sector players, what is their type of intervention in the REDD+ value chain, and what are their motivations? Financial institutions are important but we can’t forget about the private sector companies involved in forests but not REDD+ i.e. timber, large-scale agriculture

REDD+ and the private sector 2) What strategies / best practices should be developed or promoted to incentivize private sector investments in REDD+ and to create demand for REDD+ emissions reductions credits? 3) What are the aspects of the overall regulatory, policy, and institutional environment that need to be addressed to enable greater collaboration between the public and private sectors on REDD+ initiatives?

REDD+ and the private sector

REDDy, Set, Grow Report findings Possible scenarios: 1: National crediting under a UNFCCC agreement 2: Subnational or project crediting under a UNFCCC agreement 3. Nested approach: hybrid solution combining 1 and 2 Scenario 3 seems most promising to promote private sector investment Need to tackle core driver of deforestation by changing behaviour of private sector Subnational and regional baselines coexist with all-encompassing national baseline Crediting mechanism beats international fund: make carbon emitters pay, not tax payers (at least not directly)

REDD+ as a catalyst for a green economy Views REDD+ as one of the incentives to bring about Green transformation “REDD+ is the new Green” Delivers methods and approaches for developing policies and investment options leading to transformed land and resource use through an enabling investment climate Changes the way forests are used and managed by assisting countries identify and align investments Linked to UNEP’s Green Economy Initiative

Opportunities Address REDD+ as an opportunity for growth and development; leverage and shape investments so that either efficiencies or transformational shifts (‘step changes’) take place in the economies of the forested landscapes and countries concerned support the capacity of decision makers to integrate information, while identifying and filling gaps where possible, across sectors, scales and stakeholders.

Thank you! For more information: http://www.un-redd.org FSSP - Forest Sector Support Partnership Secretariat for the National REDD Network is the FSSP Coordination Office.  Two reasons for this: (1) The PMU did not want to have the added burden of Secretariat functions – they (the NPD) are chairing the Network, after all; and (2) It was viewed as logical that the FSSP Coordination Office, a body created by donors to coordinate actions in the forest sector in VN, should be the Secretariat to the Network.   UN-REDD will only support initial operationalization of the Network – it is expected to become self-sustaining.  In this regard, if 1, 2, 3, or 12 new donors come in, that’s great … they can all join the Network and enjoy the fruits of coordination, under the char-person-ship of the NPD and Secretariat-ship of the FSSP CO.

UN-REDD Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria Principle 1 – Apply norms of democratic governance, as reflected in national commitments and Multilateral Agreements Criterion 1 – Ensure the transparency and accountability of fiduciary and fund management systems linked to REDD+ activities Criterion 2 – Ensure legitimacy and accountability of all bodies representing relevant stakeholders, including through establishing responsive feedback and grievance mechanisms Criterion 3 – Ensure transparency and accessibility of information related to REDD+, including active dissemination among relevant stakeholders Criterion 4 – Ensure the full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders in design, planning and implementation of REDD+ activities, with particular attention to indigenous peoples, local communities and other vulnerable and marginalized groups Criterion 5 – Promote coordination, efficiency and effectiveness among all agencies and implementing bodies relevant to REDD+ Criterion 6 – Promote and support the rule of law, access to justice and effective remedies . 24

UN-REDD Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria Principle 2 – Respect and protect stakeholder rights in accordance with international obligations Criterion 7 – Respect and promote the recognition and exercise of the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities and other vulnerable and marginalized groups to land, territories and resources, including carbon Criterion 8 – Promote and enhance gender equality, gender equity and women’s empowerment Criterion 9 – Seek free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples and respect and uphold the decision taken (whether consent is given or withheld) Criterion 10 – Ensure there is no involuntary resettlement as a result of REDD+ Criterion 11 – Respect and protect traditional knowledge, and cultural heritage and practices Principle 3 – Promote sustainable livelihoods and poverty reduction Criterion 12 – Ensure equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent benefit sharing among relevant stakeholders with special attention to the most vulnerable and marginalized groups Criterion 13 – Protect and enhance economic and social well-being of relevant stakeholders, with special attention to the most vulnerable and marginalized groups . 25

UN-REDD Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria Principle 4 – Contribute to low-carbon, climate-resilient sustainable development policy, consistent with national development strategies, national forest programmes, and commitments under international conventions and agreements Criterion 14 – Ensure consistency with and contribution to national climate policy objectives, including those of mitigation and adaptation strategies and international commitments on climate Criterion 15 – Address the risk of reversals of REDD+ achievements, including potential future risks to forest carbon stocks and other benefits to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of REDD+ Criterion 16 – Ensure consistency with and contribution to national poverty reduction strategies and other sustainable development goals (including those outlined under the Millennium Development Goals framework), including alignment with ministries’ and sub-national strategies and plans that may have an impact on, or be affected by the forest sector and/or land use change Criterion 17 – Ensure consistency with and contribution to national biodiversity conservation policies (including National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans), other environmental and natural resource management policy objectives, national forest programmes, and international commitments on the environment . 26

UN-REDD Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria Principle 5 – Protect natural forest from degradation and/or conversion Criterion 18 – Ensure that REDD+ activities do not cause the conversion of natural forest to planted forest, unless as part of forest restoration, and make reducing conversion of forests to other land uses (e.g. agriculture, infrastructure) a REDD+ priority Criterion 19 – Avoid or minimise degradation of natural forest by REDD+ activities and make reducing degradation due to other causes (e.g. agriculture, extractive activities, infrastructure) a REDD+ priority Criterion 20 – Avoid or minimise indirect land-use change impacts of REDD+ activities on forest carbon stocks, biodiversity and other ecosystem services . 27

UN-REDD Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria Principle 6 – Maintain and enhance multiple functions of forest including conservation of biodiversity conservation and provision of ecosystem services Criterion 21 – Ensure that land-use planning for REDD+ explicitly takes account of potential synergies and trade-offs between the multiple functions of forest and the benefits they provide, respecting local and other stakeholders’ values Criterion 22 – Ensure that planted and natural forests18 are managed to maintain and enhance ecosystem services and biodiversity important in both local and national contexts Principle 7 – Avoid or minimise adverse impacts on non-forest ecosystem services and biodiversity Criterion 23 – Avoid or minimise adverse impacts on carbon stocks, other ecosystem services and biodiversity of non-forest ecosystems resulting directly from REDD+ activities Criterion 24 – Avoid or minimise adverse impacts on carbon stocks, other ecosystem services and biodiversity of non-forest ecosystems resulting indirectly from REDD+ activities (including those of indirect land-use change impacts and intensification of land use) . The Guidelines were developed to assist the UN-REDD Programme in fulfilling its obligations to follow a humanrights based approach to programming , with the acknowledgement that the UN is obligated to promote the respect for and the application of the right to FPIC, as outlined in international instruments as well as UN policies. In order to do this, the guidelines present a normative, policy and operational framework for UN-REDD National Programmes to see FPIC. The primary users of these Guidelines will be UN-REDD National Programmes. The implementation of National Programmes is the responsibility of Governments with technical and financial backstopping from staff of the three founding UN partner agencies (FAO, UNDP, UNEP). The Guidelines apply to national level activities supported by the UN-REDD Programme. They also apply to activities supported by any of the three UN partner agencies to the UN-REDD Programme in their role as a Delivery Partner under FCPF. FPIC is most often outlined in the context of the rights of indigenous peoples because of their unique circumstances, notable marginalization and special status in international law. Recognizing that REDD+ activities may impact other forest-dependent communities that have customary and/or legal rights to the territory and/or resource in question (hereafter referred to as ‗local communities‘ or ‗other rights-holders‘), these Guidelines, in line with the human rights based approached outlined below, require National Programmes to seek consent from these groups, when relevant, as well. 28

Exploring co-benefits in Cambodia The amount of carbon within 1 kilometer of forest cover loss represents 22% of Cambodia’s total carbon stock. 29

Exploring co-benefits in Cambodia 15% of the land that is high in carbon and an Important Bird Area is inside forest concessions. 30

Endemic and endangered species For this carbon map, a provincial level forest cover map was combined with a map detailing non-forest areas. Biomass carbon estimates from a provincial forest inventory were then applied to the different vegetation types. The resulting biomass carbon map was combined with a soil carbon dataset from Shi et al. to arrive at a total carbon map for the province.