Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTGreenhouse gas emissions from the forestry sector are estimated to be 8.4 GtCO2-eq./year or about 17% of the global emissions. We estimate that the cost for reducing deforestation is low in Africa and several times higher in Latin America and Southeast Asia. These cost estimates are sensitive to the uncertainties of how much unsustainable high-revenue logging occurs, little understood transaction and program implementation costs, and barriers to implementation including governance issues. Due to lack of capacity in the affected countries, achieving reduction or avoidance of carbon emissions will require extensive REDD-plus programs. Preliminary REDD-plus Readiness cost estimates and program descriptions for Indonesia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ghana, Guyana and Mexico show that roughly one-third of potential REDD-plus mitigation benefits might come from avoided deforestation and the rest from avoided forest degradation and other REDD-plus activities.

Any system to compensate countries for reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) requires a historical reference level against which future performance can be measured. Here we examine the possibilities Sri Lanka, a small forest country with limited data on forest carbon stocks, has to get ready for REDD+. We construct a historical reference level using available forest inventory data combined with updated 2008 and 2009 in situ carbon density data for Sri Lankan forests. Furthermore, we use a combination of qualitative and quantitative data to attribute the clearing of Sri Lankan forests in the latest years for which national forest inventory data are available, 1992-1996, to various proximate drivers and to estimate the opportunity cost of forest conservation. We estimate that baseline deforestation emissions in Sri Lanka amounted to 17 MtCO(2) yr(-1) in the 1992-1996 period, but conclude that it is challenging for Sri Lanka to produce a robust and accurate reference level due to the lack of nationally based inventories. We find that the majority of forest clearing (87%) is due to small-scale, rainfed farming, with the two other major drivers being rice and tea cultivation. Further, Sri Lankan revenues from REDD+ participation could be substantial, but they are sensitive to REDD+ policy transaction cost, highly uncertain timber revenues, and particularly the carbon price paid for emission reductions. The latter needs to be higher than $5-10/tCO(2) if there are to be substantial incentives for Sri Lanka to participate in REDD+. There is, however, a large gap in the knowledge of deforestation drivers that needs to be filled if Sri Lanka is to formulate an effective policy response to forest degradation in REDD+. For successful REDD+ implementation in Sri Lanka to happen, technological assistance, readiness assistance, and continued political momentum are crucial. ; Funding Agencies|Swedish Energy Agency||Swedish International Development and Cooperation Agency||Goteborg Energi||

REDD+ was designed globally as a results-based instrument to incentivize emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation. Over 50 countries have developed strategies for REDD+, implemented pilot activities and/or set up forest monitoring and reporting structures, safeguard systems and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), offering lessons on how particular ideas guide policy design. The implementation of REDD+ at national, sub-national and local levels required payments to filter through multiple governance structures and priorities. REDD+ was variously interpreted by different actors in different contexts to create legitimacy for certain policy agendas. Using an adapted 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy) lens, we examine four common narratives underlying REDD+ BSMs: (1) that results-based payment (RBP) is an effective and transparent approach to reducing deforestation and forest degradation; (2) that emphasis on co-benefits risks diluting carbon outcomes; (3) that directing REDD+ benefits predominantly to poor smallholders, forest communities and marginalized groups helps address equity; and (4) that social equity and gender concerns can be addressed by well-designed safeguards. This paper presents a structured examination of eleven BSMs from within and beyond the forest sector and analyses the evidence to variably support and challenge these narratives and their underlying assumptions to provide lessons for REDD+ BSM design. Our findings suggest that contextualizing the design of BSMs, and a reflexive approach to examining the underlying narratives justifying particular design features, is critical for achieving effectiveness, equity and legitimacy. Key policy insights A results-based payment approach does not guarantee an effective REDD+; the contexts in which results are defined and agreed, along with conditions enabling social and political acceptance, are critical. A flexible and reflexive approach to designing a benefit-sharing mechanism that delivers emissions reductions at the same time as co-benefits can increase perceptions of equity and participation. Targeting REDD+ to smallholder communities is not by default equitable, if wider rights and responsibilities are not taken into account Safeguards cannot protect communities or society without addressing underlying power and gendered relations. The narratives and their underlying generic assumptions, if not critically examined, can lead to repeated failure of REDD+ policies and practices. ; Peer reviewed

The core idea of REDD—reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation—is to reward individuals, communities, projects and countries that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from forests. Adopted under the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change), the mechanism aims to compensate tropical countries for the carbon benefits that their standing forests ('avoided emissions' + 'carbon stocks') contribute to mitigating climate change. The objective of the analysis contained in this working paper is to characterise the nature of the discourse related to REDD+ in the Brazilian press from 2005 to 2009, identifying the principal actors who led this debate in the media as well as their positions—as either advocates or adversaries of a particular view on REDD+ —as these positions evolved during this period. This study is part of CIFOR's Global Comparative Study (GCS) on REDD+, which analyses REDD+ policy, practice and implementation and disseminates lessons learned to a national and global audience. CIFOR's goal is to generate knowledge and practical tools to support efforts to reduce forest emissions in ways that are effective, efficient and equitable (3Es) and that generate co-benefits such as poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation (3Es+).