Transcript Module 6 - REDD - Global Climate Change Alliance

Global Climate Change Alliance:
Intra-ACP Programme
Training Module
Climate Change Finance
Module 6 – Introduction to REDD
Ms Isabelle Mamaty
Senior Expert
Climate Support Facility
An initiative of the ACP Group of States funded by the European Union
Module Structure
 REDD in international negotiations
 REDD implementation challenges
 REDD funding resources
2
Role of Forests in Climate
change
 Forests are causes of climate change through its
deforestation and sources of mitigation climate
change as sinks of GHGs.
 Forest destruction and land use change accounts
for 24% of GHG emissions and loss of biodiversity
 Forests are a natural store of CO2
 Activities reducing deforestation are cost effective
ways of reducing GHG emissions
3
Forests in international
negotiations
 Emissions from forest and (land use) not included in the Kyoto
Protocol
 COP 11 in Montreal in 2005: First discussion
 COP 13 -Bali Roadmap in 2007: agreement on a decision to
reduce emissions from deforestation during COP 15.
 COP15 Copenhagen: Accord 2009
 Cancun 2010: recognition on the need to halt (and not only
reduce) deforestation
 Next COP 2012: Issue still under discussion at international
level
4
REDD Concept Evolution
 Basic idea is to create a financial value for the carbon stored in
forest
 RED stands for Reduction emissions from Deforestation
(Montreal and Nairobi 2005-2006)
 REDD stands for Reducing emissions from Deforestation and
forest Degradation (Bali, 2007)
 REDD+ includes REDD + Forest conservation + Sustainable
management of forests + Enhancement of forest carbon stocks
(Bali & Poznan 2007-2008)
 REDD++is for REDD + + Land use for agricultural activity
 REDD “readiness" concerns efforts made by a country with the
support of multilateral or bilateral initiatives to build its capacity to
be ready for a REDD + mechanism (Copenhagen , 2009)
5
REDD key Challenges







Reference levels
Leakage
Permanence
Safeguards
Governance
Measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV)
Finance
6
Reference levels
 Reference levels issue raises the question of when (and
how) to start crediting emission reductions?
 There is no agreed formula for how to set reference
levels (baseline):
o Historical baseline : rate of deforestation and degradation (DD)
and the resulting CO2 emissions over the past years
o Business as usual (BAU) scenario: how would emissions from
DD evolve without the REDD activity
o Crediting baseline (i.e like an emissions quota)
7
Leakage
 Leakage is the phenomenon in which efforts for
reducing emissions in one place shifts them to another
location or sector where they are uncounted and
perhaps uncontrolled
 Many points are under consideration for dealing with
leakage such as:
 Monitoring impacts within and outside project boundaries
 Attribution of market leakage (estimate international leakage)
 National versus project-level: how large are the leakage risks?
8
Permanence
 Permanence generally addresses the extent to which
forest can permanently store carbon
 Ways of dealing with the permanence issue:
 Under CDM, the issue is currently resolved via the use of
temporary credits (t-CERs), that must be replaced at the end of
their certified period : This makes land-use based carbon credits
comparatively LESS attractive
 Joint implementation (JI) and many voluntary instruments do not
use this concept of tCERs but address permanence through
insurance, or requirements to set aside an amount of permanent
credits
9
Safeguards (1)
 7 safeguards have been listed under the Cancun
agreement for the REDD + implementation:
o consistency with existing forest programmes and international
agreement
o transparent and effective national forest governance structures;
o respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and
local communities;
o full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders;
o protection of natural forests and biodiversity;
o addressing the risk of reversals (‘permanence’);
o and addressing the risk of displacement of emissions
(‘leakage’)
10
Safeguards (2)
 New policies and approaches have been or are being
developed by institutions such as Forest Carbon
partnership facility, GEF and UNREDD based on world
Bank policies
 However, there is a need for harmonised and
strengthened standards based on:
o the effective protection of knowledge and rights of, and clear
benefits for, indigenous peoples and local communities, and the
implementation of the FPIC principle;
o the effective protection of natural forests and native biodiversity
o measurable progress towards transparent and effective
governance; and
o compliance with relevant international conventions and
agreements
11
Governance
 Governance raises the question: “How do you ensure that REDD will
not adversely impact the rights and livelihoods of the millions of
people who live in or around forests, especially in poorly governed
states? “
 Sound governance is highly linked to the successful implementation
of the safeguards
 Guidelines and frameworks for monitoring governance have been
developed by many institutions such as World Band, FAO, UNREDD
but there is a need for harmonisation of policies and common
indicators
 Experiences from other initiatives could be useful:
o EU FLEGT process has developed expertise in strengthening and
assessing forest governance and in promoting participatory approaches
o World Resources Institute developed indicators to monitor and
assess forest governance
12
Measuring, reporting and
verifying (MRV) (1)
 MRV raises the following questions:
o How do you measure, report and verify emission reductions from forests? This
is especially challenging for measuring reductions in forest degradation
o What mechanisms are needed – and who will operate them – to measure
changes in rates of deforestation, leakage, permanence, the implementation of
safeguards and the impacts on governance?
 Carbon emissions from deforestation and degradation are estimated
from changes in two important variables: (i) area of deforestation and
degradation; and (ii) carbon stock densities per unit area which needs
to:
o Use remote sensing technologies combined with ground measurements
o Establish a forest inventories
 Constraints in developing countries :
o Limited availability of technical equipment but also of know - how
o Limited knowledge of carbon stocks contained in alternative forest types
and forest uses
13
Finance
 The Eliasch Review estimated that $17–33 billion a year was required
by 2030 to halve emissions from the forest sector
 The general assumption is that finance of this magnitude could only be
generated through the inclusion of forest carbon credits in a global
carbon trading scheme, thus providing enterprises (or countries) with
the opportunity of offsetting their own emissions by purchasing
(cheaper) credits for forest carbon emission reductions
 it is virtually impossible to see a global forest carbon market emerging
before a new global climate agreement enters into force

Forest carbon markets currently in place, however – a mixture of
national and voluntary schemes – are growing, and provided an
estimated $178 million for REDD+ activities in 2010
14
Implementing REDD +
 The aim of REDD+ is a national programme addressing
forest sector emissions as a whole, thus minimising any
risk of leakage
 however, that in many cases it will be more practicable to
begin REDD+ in only part of the country (sub-national
actions) as an interim strategy.
 Given the complexity of developing programmes to
manage a country’s entire forest sector, a three-phase
approach has evolved, and was codified at the Cancun
UNFCCC conference in 2010
15
Steps for REDD Implementation
proposed in Cancun
 Three - phase approach agreed at Cancun:
o Phase 1: ‘development of national strategies or action plans,
policies and measures, and capacity-building’ (‘REDD readiness’)
o Phase 2: implementation of strategy, including further capacitybuilding, testing MRV, payments for ‘results-based demonstration
activities’
o Phase 3: fully implemented programme with a pay-for-performance
system
 Countries can start anywhere they like along the spectrum
 The steps should include local and national stakeholder consultations
and may require other measures such as the clarification of national
land, forest and carbon tenure rights
 All steps are likely to need institutional, technical and human capacitybuilding.
16
REDD funding sources
 A wide range of multilateral and bilateral
initiatives have been established to channel
finance to the REDD activities, mainly to
fund REDD readiness activities
17
Major multilateral
Initiatives
 World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility
(FCPF) Readiness Fund and Carbon Fund
 World Bank’s Forest Investment Programme (FIP)
 UN-REDD Programme (FAO, UNDP, UNEP)
 Congo Basin Forest Fund (CBFF)
 Amazon Fund
 Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund
 Global Environment Facility
18
Major bilateral
Initiatives
 Australia’s International Forest Carbon Initiative
 Norway’s International Climate and Forest
Initiative (also main donor to Amazon Fund,
UN-REDD)
 Other donor funds not only REDD+, including
Germany’s International Climate Initiative and
UK’s International Climate Fund*
19
REDD in practice (1): results
of assessments studies
 Number of assessments and comparative studies on
REDD initiatives came to the following conclusion:
 Proliferation of different initiatives and funds
 Lack of coordination, between the multilateral initiatives
 Long lead times and complicated procedures result in low
disbursement rate of the majority of these funds
 Difficulty in addressing the three-phase approach agreed
in Cancun: particularly there is a wide divergence of
opinion on when the country are likely to be “ready”.
 Safeguards and governance: improving standards of
forest governance should be considered as a process
that involved all stakeholders
20
REDD in practice (2): results of
assessments studies
 Stakeholders engagement: difficulty at national level in
identifying and coordinating civil society and forest
community representatives on the ground
 Knowledge transfer : beneficiary countries reported the
difficulty in identifying reliable and up-to-date sources of
information
 Low engagement of private sector
 National ownership: limited ownership of the REDD +
process to a very small staff within particular ministries in
many developing countries
21
REDD in practice (3):
summary funding
 All sources of REDD+ finance together from 2008
- November 2011 account for 13% total climate
finance with $446 million approved and $252
million disbursed (disbursement rate of 56.5%)
 Eliasch Review recommendations:
 ‘REDD readiness’ – $4 billion over five years for forty
forest nations ($20m / country / year)
 $17–33 billion a year by 2030 for fully fledged REDD+
mechanism achieving a 50% reduction in deforestation
22
REDD in practice (4): Multilateral
initiatives funding ($m)
Initiative
FCPF (RF)
FCPF (CF)
FIP
UN-REDD
Congo Basin Forest Fund
Amazon Fund
Indonesia CCTF
Total
Total % pledged
Pledged
Deposited
Approved
Disbursed
229.6
229.6
27.2
9.1
204.5
179.3
1.44
0.2
644
459
51.0
3.2
150.8
118.2
108.1
90.9
165
165
75.0
12.1
1032.2
57.5
141.6
42.5
18.6
8.9
6.3
5.5
2444.7
1217.5
410.6
163.5
49.8
16.8
6.7
23
100
REDD in practice (5):
regional distribution
Region
Approved
in US$
million
Disbursed
In US$
million
Asia
94
88 (93%)
– major recipient: Indonesia
42
40 (95%)
Latin America
178
73 (41%)
– major recipient: Brazil / Amazon Fund
143
49 (34%)
Sub-Saharan Africa
119
47 (39.5%)
– major recipient: DRC
66
16 (24%)
24
REDD in practice (6):
Lack of Coordination
 Lack of coordination between the multilateral initiatives in terms
of communication and developing common approaches on :
 safeguards
 MRV
 Administrative processes
 Few efforts of coordination are made such as:
 Establishment of the REDD+ Partnership in 2010 as a global
platform to improve effectiveness, efficiency, transparency and
coordination of REDD + initiatives and financial instruments (e.g. a
Voluntary REDD+ Database)
 FCPF and UN-REDD share a common template for national
proposals for funding but still follow different processes in many
cases
25
REDD in practice (7):
Market-based Instrument
 Forestry projects under CDM
o Forestry projects limited to afforestation or reforestation, REDD project
not eligible
o Time-limited credits due to concerns over permanence and given that
wood eventually decays and releases its carbon into atmosphere
o Less than 1% of CDM projects
o most of the CDM forestry credits have been generated (and
purchased by ) projects proposed by the BioCarbonFund (publicprivate initiative)
 Forestry projects under Voluntary Market
o REDD projects represented the highest volume of voluntary projects in 2010
with 29% of projects.
o Methodologies for REDD exist in the voluntary carbon market
o Forest-only standards made up one third of all active standards in
26
2010
Brief presentation of Major bilateral
Initiatives
27
Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF)
28
Forest Carbon Partnership
Facility (FCPF)
 World Bank programme, operational in 2008
 FCPF has dual objectives through
 Readiness Fund: FCPF aims to build capacity for REDD + in
developing countries
 Carbon Fund: FCPF aims to test a programme of performance –
based incentive payments in a small pilot performance-based
payments in a small number of pilot countries
 37 forest developing countries are participants to FCPF
 11 candidate countries
 Participants Committee: main decision-making body which
includes: 14 donors, 14 REDD+ countries, observers
29
FCPF Readiness Fund
 Main activity : REDD+ readiness
 Eligibility:
o IBRD/IDA member in tropics/sub-tropics
o Significant forest area / carbon stock
o High relevance of forests in economy
o High current/project deforestation
30
FCPF Readiness
Fund: activities
 FCPF readiness fund supports participating
country in:
o Developing national reference scenarios for REDD+.
o Adopting a national REDD+ strategy that reduces
emissions, conserves biodiversity and enhances the
livelihoods of forest-dependent indigenous peoples
and other forest dwellers.
o Designing and implementing accurate measurements
and MRV systems to enable reporting on emissions
from deforestation and forest degradation.
31
FCPF - Readiness fund Application process – Step 1
 Step 1- Preparation of the Readiness Plan
Idea Note (R-PIN) includes:
o Background information on forestry, deforestation,
current policies
o Potential further programmes: forest governance, land
tenure and land use regulations, building institutional
capacity for REDD+
o Other relevant cross-sectoral policies: poverty
reduction, agriculture
o Stakeholder consultation processes
o Challenges to implementation
o Potential monitoring and implementation systems
o Plan and tentative budget
32
Application process - Step 2:
Readiness Preparation Plan (R-PP)
Document template:
 Component 1: Organise and Consult
•
•
1a. National Readiness Management Arrangements
1b. Stakeholder Consultation and Participation
 Component 2: Prepare the REDD Strategy
•
•
•
•




2a. Assessment of Land Use, Forestry Policy and Governance
2b. REDD Strategy Options
2c. Arrangement for REDD Implementation
2d. Social and Environmental Impacts
Component 3: Develop a Reference Scenario
Component 4: Design a Monitoring System
Component 5: Schedule and Budget
Component 6: Design a Program Monitoring and Evaluation
33
Application process - Step 3:
Readiness Package
 Preparation of a country’s Readiness Package (R-Package) occurs
when the majority of activities proposed in the R-PP have been
implemented
 R-Package is designed to move the country on to phase 2 of REDD +
(e.g. implementation of strategy, including further capacity-building,
testing MRV, payments for ‘results-based demonstration activities’
based on Cancun three-phase approach)
 The scope of the R-Package is aimed to encompass the complete set o
activities performed in the context of readiness, not just FCPF -funded
ones.
 R-PPs have not been exclusively funded through the FCPF
 However in the context of FCPF, endorsement of the R-Package is
required before
 However the content and assessment of the R-Package is still
under development
34
FCPF carbon fund objectives
 Operational - May 2011
 Payments for verified emission reductions –
i.e. part of REDD+ phase 2 activities
 Aims to leverage private finance – though
difficult in lack of a compliance market that
accepts forest carbon or REDD credit
35
FCPF Carbon fund:
selection
 About five participants will be qualified initially, after the review
of the FCPF Participants Committee based on:
o
o
o
o
o
o
Potential for sustainable emissions reductions
Scale of implementation
Consistency with compliance standards
Potential to generate learning value
Benefit-sharing mechanisms, broad community support
Transparent stakeholder consultations
 30m – $40m / country over five years
 Procedures for the selection, of the participants and the
disbursement of funds are still being drawn up
 Endorsement of a country’s Readiness Package will be a
prerequisite for participation to the Carbon Fund
36
FCPF Carbon fund
activities
 Support in four main categories:
o General economic policies and regulations (taxation, subsidies,
rural credit, certification, law enforcement).
o Forest policies and regulations (taxation, subsidies, certification,
concession regimes, securing land tenure and land rights, forest
law, governance and enforcement, zoning, protected areas,
payments for environmental services (PES)).
o Forest management (forest fires, reduced impact logging,
reforestation).
o Rural development (community development, rural electrification,
community forestry).
37
FCPF Carbon fund:
applying for funds
 Country programme proposal will be assessed based on the following
criteria:
o Potential for generating high-quality sustainable emissions reductions and
social and environmental benefits;
o Scale of implementation;
o Consistency with emerging compliance standards under the UNFCCC and
other regimes;
o Potential to generate learning value for the FCPF and other participants;
o Clear and transparent benefit-sharing mechanisms with broad community
support; and
o Transparent stakeholder consultations.
 Process is still under way and will be similar to the Readiness Fund with
Emissions reductions Programme Idea Notes (ER-PINs) and Emission
Reduction Programme Documents leading to Emission reduction
Programme Agreements (ERPAs)
38
Forest Investment Programme (FIP)
39
Forest Investment Programme
(FIP): background
 One of World Bank’s Climate Investment
Funds (CIFs), operational July 2009
 Aim: financing to developing countries for
readiness reforms and public and private
investments; much larger sums than FCPF
 Will close when new UNFCCC financial
architecture is finalized
40
FIP membership and
governance
 FIP Sub-Committee is the main decision-making
body:
o 6 donor countries
o 6 eligible recipient countries
o Observers
 Eight pilot countries:
o Brazil, Burkina Faso, DRC, Ghana, Indonesia, Lao
PDR, Mexico, Peru
 Three potential further pilots:
o Philippines, Mozambique, Nepal
41
FIP: applying for Funds
 The FIP’s eight pilot countries were identified from 45
expressions of interest;
 Selection of pilot countries based on:
 Programme potential to contribute and adhere to FIP
objectives and principles
 Country preparedness and ability to undertake REDD
initiatives
 Existing pilot programme distribution across regions and
biomes, ensuring that pilot programmes generate lessons on
scaling up activities
 Five investment plans approved by FIP Sub-Committee –
for Brazil, Burkina-Faso, DRC, Lao PDR and Mexico
in 2011
42
UN-REDD
43
UN-REDD: Background
 FAO / UNDP / UNEP initiative, operational 2008
 42 partner countries :
 16 of them with national programmes: Bolivia, Cambodia, DRC,
Ecuador, Indonesia, Nigeria, Panama, Papua New Guinea,
Paraguay, Philippines, Republic of Congo, Solomon Islands, Sri
Lanka, Tanzania, Viet Nam and Zambia.
 The remaining are engaged with the programme in different
activities such as observers to the Programme’s Policy Board, and
through participation in regional workshops and knowledge sharing:
Argentina, Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Cameroon, Central African
Republic, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Ethiopia,
Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Kenya, Mexico,
Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, South Sudan, Sudan
and Suriname.
44
UN-REDD: Governance
and activities
 Programme Policy Board: main decision-making
body
o 3 full members from donor countries
o 3 full and 6 alternate from programme countries
o NGOs, indigenous peoples, UN agencies
 Global programme – common approaches,
analyses, methodologies, tools, data, best
practices
 National programmes available only to selected
countries
45
UN-REDD- National
programmes
 Aims:
o
o
o
o
Develop and implement MRV systems
Credible, inclusive national governance systems
Systems for management of REDD+ funding strengthened
Indigenous peoples, local communities, civil society
organisations and other stakeholders participate effectively
o Multiple benefits of forests promoted and realised
o REDD+ strategies and related investments catalyse shifts
to a green economy
o Knowledge is developed, managed, analysed and shared
46
UN-REDD –
Applying for Funds
 Must be UN-REDD partner country
 Regional balance of investment
 Prioritise according to:
o Contribution of UN-REDD to national readiness process
o Effective engagement of UN agencies at country level
o REDD+ potential of the country (forest cover, annual rate of change,
potential importance of forests to poor)
o Also must display commitment to UN-REDD principles:
o Human-rights based approach to development
o Engagement of indigenous peoples
o Social and environmental principles and criteria
o Consistency with REDD+ safeguards….
 Submission of the national program document: First review by
the Secretariat and final decision by the Policy Board
47
Application process –
the national programmes template
Document template of the national programmes template
(same as the FCPF Readiness Plan) :
 Component 1: Organise and Consult
o 1a. National Readiness Management Arrangements
o 1b. Stakeholder Consultation and Participation
 Component 2: Prepare the REDD Strategy
o
o
o
o




2a. Assessment of Land Use, Forestry Policy and Governance
2b. REDD Strategy Options
2c. Arrangement for REDD Implementation
2d. Social and Environmental Impacts
Component 3: Develop a Reference Scenario
Component 4: Design a Monitoring System
Component 5: Schedule and Budget
Component 6: Design a Program Monitoring and Evaluation
48
Turning words into action
49
Discussion
 Questions and answers
 Discussion and sharing of experiences
concerning REDD
Are you a REDD partner? Do your country
could benefit from REDD funding ? If yes
what are the institutional and capacity
needs in your organisation to do so?
50
Where to get the
information?
Getting information from the REDD websites
(e.g. UN-REDD )- visit of the website:
http://www.un-redd.org
UNFCC REDD
Platformhttp://unfccc.int/methods_science/redd/it
ems/4531.php
51
Case studies
 Presentation of a National programmes document
(under UN-REDD) or / a Readiness Plan (under FCPF)
submitted by a country
52
• Thank you
• Contact: Dr. Pendo MARO, ACP Secretariat
[email protected] or +32 495 281 494
www.gcca.eu/intra-acp