Designing Effective REDD+ Safeguards Information Systems Jessica Boyle IISD With support from the Norwegian Development Agency

Presentation Overview UNFCCC Background Contextualizing a “SIS” for REDD+ IISD Research Overview –Research Questions –Methodology –Initial Findings and Key Observations Discussion Questions

REDD+ Safeguards in the Cancun Agreements Action complements objectives of national forest programs and relevant international agreements Transparent and effective national forest governance (e.g., openness, information publicly available) Respect for knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities (e.g., signed UN-DRIP, have FPIC processes in national legislation) Full and effective participation of stakeholders (e.g., FPIC, procedures for stakeholder involvement) Consistent with conservation of natural forests and biodiversity Actions to deal with permanence Actions to deal with leakage

REDD+ SIS Guidance in Durban Decision Guidance on systems for providing information on how REDD+ safeguards are addressed and respected. Safeguards Information Systems should: Provide transparent and consistent information; Provide information that is accessible for all relevant stakeholders Update the information on a regular basis; Provide information on how the safeguards are addressed and respected; Be country-driven and implemented at the national level; and Build upon existing processes, as appropriate.

Contextualizing an SIS for REDD+ Can be understood as “the set of institutions and processes through which information is collected, verified, assessed, published and fed back to relevant institutions.” The systems should be developed in a way that strikes a balance between: Flexible and country-driven approaches: Useful and effective for stakeholders at the country level, respecting sovereignty, but also compatible with any international standards; and, Financial viability: Builds confidence to trigger substantial financial investment in REDD+ while not placing undue burden or transaction costs on the country/project implementers.

IISD-ICRAF Research Goal: An effective REDD+ Safeguard Information System (SIS). Outcome: Identification of lessons/characteristics from existing REDD+ process and other related processes that are applicable to REDD+, and how these lessons could be brought together to inform the development of a coherent and effective REDD+ Safeguards Information System. Output: A policy paper that sets out lessons for the design of an effective REDD+ information system at the national level. The paper will include case studies of a select number of processes that are identified as having the most pertinent lessons for the REDD+, and a number of countries in both Asia and Africa are working to link existing systems with the development of a REDD+ SIS.

Methodology Desk Research: Creation of research matrix to compare existing processes against each of the seven safeguard principles for REDD+, focus on reporting and verification elements. Case Studies: Conduct in-country interviews; how are SIS(s) being approached at national level? Expert Meeting: Review and additional input into research to date. Publication of Policy Paper: Research and analysis to be brought together in coherent policy paper, to be published and disseminated broadly.

Building on Existing Systems Many countries will likely build on current REDD+ processes related to safeguards: –The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s (FCPF) Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) and common approach; –UN‐REDD Programme’s Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria (P&C); and –Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA)’s REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES).

Building on Existing Systems (cont’d) Many countries will also look to build on national process with applicability REDD+ SIS, such as: –International Conventions and Agreements (e.g., UNDRIP, CBD) –National Legislation, Policies and Approaches (e.g., FPIC, Environmental Assessment Frameworks) –Bilateral and Multilateral Agreements (e.g., FLEGT) –Project-level approaches (i.e., donor safeguard requirements, and/or pilot approaches)

Research Questions What are the key elements/characteristics of Safeguard Information Systems currently being discussed/piloted within the three existing REDD+ safeguard frameworks? What other existing processes and systems for addressing, respecting safeguards and/or reporting systems could have lessons for a REDD+ SIS? How could the lessons and key elements be brought together to create a coherent and effective REDD+ SIS(s) at the national level?

Initial Findings and Key Observations Agreement on principles (guidance) at international and national level. Challenge comes in operationalizing systems of implementation and subsequent monitoring and reporting. There are opportunities for the further development, elaboration of national-level SISs: –Existing data collection and processes via CBD, FPIC –Project-level, pilot learning simultaneously with advancing national planning Specific safeguard systems implemented at project level Building on experiences on PFM/SFM, other sectors (mining) Many donors are also starting to look at how their approaches fit into a REDD+ SIS (ADB, USAID, etc.)

Initial Findings and Key Observations Most countries still very early in the process–“Sailing the ship while building it” Process will not be uniform across countries; very context- specific Stocktaking of existing mechanisms, approaches and their effectiveness/application to REDD+ –Clarification of roles, authority, stakeholders, etc. –Establish forums for SIS development; dependent on broader REDD policy development –Seek coherence where possible; establish “baseline” for elements of SIS Differences between policies on paper and in implementation

Discussion Questions What processes have countries established to develop systems for providing information on how safeguards are addressed and respected? How are the key elements of a Safeguards Information System as set out in the Durban decision being interpreted at the national level? Is there a need for an international standard or framework for a REDD+ Safeguards Information System? How does this align with the requirement that the information system be country-driven and implemented at the national level?

Discussion Questions What existing processes and systems are countries building on in developing REDD+ SIS(s)? Existing REDD+ frameworks? Other processes? How will activity level reporting on REDD+ safeguards be “rolled up” to the national level? What processes and/or tools have been developed? How best to ensure safeguards are addressed and respected, and reported on; while not overburdening project developers, local communities and governments?