Critical issues facing REDD+ CPA Conference. Global Mechanisms: Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), July 2010

Questions What are the debates surrounding REDD+? What issues are yet to be resolved? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be resolved? How do we maintain momentum behind the discussions? What opportunities does REDD+ offer parliamentarians and what should they do to support it?

What are the debates surrounding REDD+? Broad agreement that deforestation and degradation (DD) contributes 11-20% of global GHG emissions, so why is REDD+ contested? –Common but differentiated responsibilities: is it fair and will it distract from other mitigation measures? –‘Cost-effective’ way to reduce emissions (Stern 2006), or is it? –Can REDD+ solve underlying DD drivers? –Can national sovereignty be respected? –How can effective international policy instruments be created? Source: Flickr, pasipasi

What issues are yet to be resolved? Despite the debates, there is considerable interest in REDD+ from both developed and developing countries, but many political and technical issues are still under debate: –Where REDD+ fits within the broader UNFCCC framework –Scale at which REDD+ is implemented –Financing sources and mechanisms –Environmental and social safeguards –How to assess performance (‘reference levels’) –Capturing experience from early actions

DriversExamples of influence on actors’ positions on key REDD+ building blocks Economic benefits Drives some developing country governments on potential expansion of REDD+ Drives conservation NGO interest in inclusion of conservation areas in REDD+ Drives private sector positions REDD+ carbon markets and projects Cost efficiency Drives some developed country positions on use of REDD+ offsets and carbon markets Environmenta l integrity Drives opposition from environmental NGOs on market based REDD+ Drives positions of some developed country governments on use of REDD+ offsets and carbon markets National sovereignty Drives many developing country government positions on offsets, scale, safeguards relating to indigenous peoples and development of MRV systems involving third parties Fairness and social justice Drives pro-market NGO positions on the use of social safeguards for co-benefits in REDD+ Drives anti-market NGO opposition to offsets and market based approaches Drives local and indigenous peoples’ concerns for the development of social safeguards Political positioning and PR Drives some developed country government positions (e.g., desire to be seen as progressive) Positive public relations drives private sector interest in systems (e.g., standards) to demonstrate co-benefits some developed country government positions

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be resolved? Failing to address underlying DD drivers and demand side Perverse impacts on governance and local peoples Ensuring global additionality and avoiding leakage Uncertainty in financing sources and reducing investment risks

How do we maintain momentum behind the discussions? Paris-Oslo process: ‘Action track to supplement the UNFCCC negotiations track’ (Brattskar 2010) –Timely delivery on financial pledges Pushing through domestic legislation in key countries (especially the U.S.) Demonstrate and communicate early results (e.g. Brazil) Maintain flexibility in approach (e.g. ‘phased’ approach) Regional or bilateral approaches to enhance demand Engage with civil society organisations

What opportunities does REDD+ offer parliamentarians? Potential to assist with broader development goals, through new streams of finance Increased prominence of forest/environment issues in national policy processes (opportunity for sector reforms) Improved information on sector and better monitoring New policy instrument with strong performance element

What could parliamentarians do to support REDD+? Support activities to address demand side drivers: –Illegal logging (national legislation in importer countries; legality verification etc.) –Enhanced forest sector transparency (e.g. G8 Forest Transparency Initiative) –Supporting sustainable forest management –Support sustainable agriculture (e.g. sustainability criteria) National support in REDD+ countries: –Increasing the political profile of REDD+ –Promote appropriate legislative frameworks for REDD+ (monitoring systems; carbon rights definition; investment criteria; safeguards) –Promote policy coordination between forestry departments and other govt. departments –Promoting inclusive development of national REDD+ plans

Leo Peskett Research Fellow Overseas Development Institute