Linking UNFCC with Local Processes: Implications of REDD+ for forest - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Linking UNFCC with Local Processes: Implications of REDD+ for forest Implications of REDD for forest peoples livelihoods in Asia Presentation by Henry Scheyvens at UNU-IAS panel discussion on Climate Change Legal Negotiations:
Presentation by Henry Scheyvens at UNU-IAS panel discussion on “Climate Change Legal Negotiations: discussion on Climate Change Legal Negotiations: Implications for forest governance, equity and livelihoods”, 9 March 2011, Yokohama
1
1.
2.
3.
3.
4.
1.
Workshop in Papua New Guinea
2.
IGES Project on Community Carbon Accounting
5.
5.
Respect for knowledge
Full participation of Full participation of
Conservation of natural
Sub International National
National REDD-
Sub- national
Demonstration Bali Action Plan Decisions National REDD- plus strategies REL Demonstration activities REDD-plus strategies, RELs, it i 2/CP.13, 4/CP.15 Copenhagen Accord REL MRV monitoring, reporting Accord Cancun REDD+ Decision Payment distribution Decision distribution
Basic principles and safeguards
P i i l
Scope
needs and goals
degradation
Adequate & predictable financing & technical support
forests
Points of
Phased approach REDD+ readiness activities
Points of agreement
Phased approach
plans, policies, measures, capacity building
capacity building, technology
REDD+ readiness activities
monitoring system
p y g, gy development & transfer, & demo. activities
verified results-based actions
safeguards
Financing: Will markets be allowed to finance REDD+, or
Definitions: Most of the REDD+ activities are still to be
Safeguards: More direction from the UNFCCC on how
Definitions
Rights: Human rights are fundamental moral and legal entitlements that pertain to basic llb i d di it (Lj C M 2004) Th f d t d t i bl wellbeing and dignity (Ljungman, C.M. 2004). Therefore, an adequate and sustainable livelihood is a right of all people
Livelihoods: A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (stores, resources, claims and access) and activities required for a means of living (Chambers, R., and G. Conway. 1992).
Sustainable livelihoods framework (DFID 1999)
Livelihood assets: H =Human capital S=Social capital N=Natural capital P Ph i l i l P=Physical capital F=Financial capital
1.
Over 1 billion people who live in extreme poverty depend on forests for their livelihoods
livelihoods
Forest-based activities in developing countries provide about 30 million jobs in the informal sector, as well as up to one- thi d f ll l f l t
1.
Subsistence
third of all rural nonfarm employment.
Hunting and fishing provide over 20 percent of household protein requirements in 62 developing countries, much of it
2.
Cash income through sales and employment
2.
forest-based.
In developing countries, forest-based enterprises provide 13–35% of rural non- farm employment
p y
Legislation favors large-scale forestry enterprises; small
Often insecure due to uncertain tenure Often insecure due to uncertain tenure Volume of trade and income generally low and seasonal Without external support, capacity to add value through
Market knowledge beyond local level poor
Middlemen play an important role
REDD+ will provide local communities with a new source of income through payments for certified emissions reductions
Alternative livelihood strategies that are non-destructive to forests will be generated
Communities will benefit through enhanced and protected g p environmental services
Communities will be employed for REDD+, e.g. as forest wardens
Communities will benefit through governance reform and better
Communities will benefit through governance reform and better forest policies that REDD+ will require
Communities will receive awareness and capacity building on climate change climate change
Denial of access to forests and forest resources = Denial of access to forests and forest resources =
Exclusion from decision-making: Circumvention of
Further entrenchment of weak governance and
Elite capture
Financial mismanagement
Workshop message 1: REDD+ must
Forests under increasing threats with no
Forests under increasing threats, with no sustained benefits for communities and loss
Why? Corruption incompetence and Why? Corruption, incompetence and
negligence in public sector
Developers gaining community agreement for
land development without a proper “free prior p p p p informed consent process”
~5 million hectares of community land issued
as leases for agricultural projects to d l t 5 developers over past 5 years
Communities do not realize that under
agricultural leases they lose rights to their land for up to 99 years for up to 99 years
Workshop message 2: Awareness, capacity
Have a pool of climate/forest resource and PES/REDD+ specialists readily available to advise communities impartially
Conduct continued Awareness Campaigns and Road shows
Workshop message 3: Clarify the ownership of carbon
Who owns the carbon? Views expressed at the workshop included:
Communities own the carbon The concession holders own the carbon The Forestry Act 1991 should not apply as carbon is an entirely
new concept
Workshop message 4:
Link REDD+ with adaptation and national development strategies
Take a no regrets approach in which forests will continue to serve the livelihoods of iti if REDD communities, even if REDD+ revenues fail to materialize
Map their forest area and stratify forest according to management types and carbon stocks
Establish sample plots to measure biomass
Estimate carbon stocks
Estimate carbon stocks
Prepare monitoring plans for continued periodic monitoring and measurement
Communities have knowledge of ecosystems tree species and age
Communities have knowledge of ecosystems, tree species and age distribution, removals from forests, etc. that can benefit carbon accounting.
CCA can strengthen local institutions empowering communities
CCA can strengthen local institutions, empowering communities through data and skills to negotiate with outsiders (carbon professionals, etc.)
Community involvement in carbon accounting will increase local
Community involvement in carbon accounting will increase local understanding and ownership of REDD+
Providing communities with roles and responsibilities for REDD+ implementation and rewarding them is likely to result in more implementation and rewarding them is likely to result in more sustainable outcomes than distributing REDD+ benefits freely (i.e. paying people for what they do, rather than what they have)
Partners: Partners: RECOFTC, WCS Partner: FPCD Partners: DKN, Arupa
Villages can use a range of instruments to measure
Approaches must be tailored to each context for Approaches must be tailored to each context for
Approaches must not lead to inflated expectations of
Ongoing external expert support will be required.
Enable communities to be central actors (not just beneficiaries) in REDD+ activities. Build their capacity to take on important roles in REDD+ and reward them for these roles REDD and reward them for these roles.
Take no regret options in which communities will have secure livelihoods, with or without REDD+.
Do not focus climate change activities only on REDD+ Invest in
Do not focus climate change activities only on REDD+. Invest in community-based adaptation strategies.
Provide communities with secure forest/land tenure. M k f i i f d t i it f REDD+
Make free prior informed consent a prerequisite for REDD+.
Develop and implement rigorous social and environmental standards for REDD+ activities.
Ensure that communities are properly represented in the national processes to formulate REDD+ strategies.