- Email: [email protected]
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Daniel Murdiyarso1,2, Maria Brockhaus1, William D Sunderlin1 and Lou Verchot1
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) is a global mechanism being debated by the international community, aimed at mitigating dangerous climate change. It is a complex multilevel and multistakeholder process that tends to fulfill multiple goals beyond emission reduction. The lessons we are beginning to learn through a Global Comparative Study show that a cross-sectoral transformation is needed to change the course of sectoral drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Sufficient capacity of government at all levels is crucial to guide the policy processes, benefit sharing, and technical support. Uncertainties around tenure issues and property rights may generate new problems that undermine the interests of society at large. The first generation of REDD+ activities also exhibited varying levels of capacity for monitoring REDD+ in non-Annex I countries. Large capacity gaps are found for developing reference levels and establishing measurement, reporting and verification systems.
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Bali in December 2007, a number of countries developed national strategies for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), now known as REDD+ [1]. Since then, multilateral initiatives began to mobilize resources and provide assistance, including the World Bank-managed Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and the United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD).
Addresses 1 Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Jl. CIFOR, Situgede, Bogor 16115, Indonesia 2 Department of Geophysics and Meteorology, Bogor Agricultural University, Darmaga Campus, Bogor, Indonesia
The FCPF attracted 37 countries to participate in the development of project documents. Nine of them also participated in the UN-REDD Programme. Some of these countries also submitted a Readiness Plan for REDD+ implementation that is supported by the FCPF. An earlier study indicated that the number of pilot or subnational level activities generated in these countries are affected by key characteristics associated with deforestation, such as the rate of deforestation, remaining forest and carbon stocks, threatened species, and forest governance [2]. By grouping the rate of deforestation of REDD+ countries into high rate (>100 000 ha/year), medium rate (50 000–100 000 ha/year) and low rate (<50 000 ha/year), it is confirmed that there are more countries that belong to the first group, followed by the third and second groups. Some countries, however, increased their forest area in the past decade (Figure 1).
Corresponding author: Murdiyarso, Daniel ([email protected]) Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685 This review comes from a themed issue on Climate systems Edited by Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers, Aarti Gupta, Martin Herold, Marielos Pen˜a-Claros and Marjanneke J Vijge For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial Received 2 May 2012; Accepted 15 October 2012 Available online 4th November 2012 1877-3435/$ – see front matter, # 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.10.014
Introduction Following the Bali Action Plana agreed upon at the Thirteenth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP13) to the United Nations Framework Convention a Decision 1/CP.13, Bali Action Plan. Addendum to the Report of the Conference of the Parties, Bali, December 2007: 3. http://unfccc.int/ resource/docs/2007/cop13/eng/06a01.pdf#page=3.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
In addition, bilateral donors, notably the governments of Norway, Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom, also play active roles in various parts of the world. In this analysis we consider that REDD+ activities initiated soon after Bali COP13 are the first generation, regardless of the level and stage of implementation.
The aim of this article is to draw some lessons by assessing the outcome from a Global Comparative Study (GCS) of the first generation of REDD+ activities [3]. To arrive at this aim we organize the article under the following three themes: first, the policy processes at national level; second, the implementation of project at subnational level; and third, technical capacity in measuring REDD+ activities. For theme 1 we have used seven countries that are categorized as of high deforestation rate (Brazil, Indonesia, Tanzania, Democratic Republic of the Congo, www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 679
Figure 1
500
400
Medium rates of losses 50,000-100,000 ha/yr
High rates of losses >100,000 ha/yr
200
100
Chile
Viet Nam
Vanuatu
Costa Rica
Gabon
Guyana
Suriname
Thailand
Kenya
El Salvador
Congo
Panama
CAR
Nepal
Liberia
Guatemala
Madagascar
Nicaragua
Uganda
Lao PDR
Ghana
Colombia
Peru
Honduras
PNG
Ethiopia
Cambodia
Mexico
Paraguay
Mozambique
Argentina
Cameroon
DRC
Bolivia
100
Indonesia
0
UR of Tanzania
Area Deforested (1000 ha/yr)
300
Low rates of losses <50,000 ha/yr
200
300 Source: FAO 2010 Global Forest Assessment Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Deforestation rates in REDD+ countries for the period of 2000–2010, grouped into high (>100 000 ha/year), medium (50 000–100 000 ha/year) and low (<50 000 ha/year) rates. The rate of deforestation in Brazil for the same period was 2 642 000 ha/year [43].
Bolivia, Cameroon, and Peru), one country experienced a low rate (Nepal) and another one that expanded its forest area (Vietnam). In addition, a country profiling was also exercised in Mozambique and Papua New Guinea. The methods used the analysis of the political economy of deforestation and forest degradation, analysis of policy content, expert interviews, and a media-based discourse analysis. Six countries (Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brazil, and Peru) were included under theme 2. A literature review, questionnaire surveys of project proponents and local stakeholders were conducted to capture the baseline information, when REDD+ projects have not generated any type of incentives. For theme 3, we further analyze the nature of capacity gap in 99 non-Annex 1 countries [4] by assessing the capacity needed to develop Reference (Emission) Level (REL/RL) and to establish Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system. www.sciencedirect.com
In all themes, we also used the three Escriteria (carbonEffective, cost-Efficient and Equitable) proposed by Angelsen [5] to measure the effectiveness of REDD+ activities in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, cost efficiency in developing and running REDD+ projects, and equity in the distribution of costs and benefits among stakeholders. We conclude the article by drawing some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities, and provide recommendations to improve the design of subsequent REDD+ policies.
The national policy processes Even though we observe an increasing level of analysis, knowledge and early lessons from ongoing projects in REDD+ countries, there is still limited knowledge about how to achieve REDD+ regimes that fulfill the three Es. Transformational change beyond the forestry sector is required to fully realize the mitigation potential of REDD+, but this endeavor faces numerous challenges, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
680 Climate systems
among which are economic interests and power structures that reinforce the status quo. For example, based on an analysis of the political economy, deforestation in REDD+ countries (such as Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia, Vietnam, Bolivia, and Mozambique) is driven by agriculture and mining industries, which are often well connected to existing bureaucratic structures, and have high opportunity costs despite carbon assets contained in the forested landscape [6–11]. In addition, effective policy making towards REDD would require a review of current and planned policies that drive deforestation. But those revisions are often controversial, as they can challenge widely accepted national development paradigms and existing policy frameworks or policy objectives. In Indonesia and Vietnam, a gap between timber supply and demand puts pressure on natural forests, as the area of existing plantations cannot meet the actual demands [8,9,12,13]. In Brazil, the mining industry competes with the forestry sector in terms of land use availability [6]. In Indonesia, rapid development of the palm oil industry is coupled with the rapid decline of natural forests [8], and development plans such as the Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate case in Papua put additional pressure on forested areas [13]. In Vietnam, the national program for expansion of hydropower plants and infrastructure to meet national development goals is considered to contribute to a rapid increase of deforestation and forest degradation [9,14]. Other findings from East Africa suggest that deforestation and forest degradation are linked to a lack of sustainability measures in forest exploitation, particularly in charcoal production, even though decades of development projects, as well as recent policy programs, aim at reducing overall dependence on wood fuels and switching to other energy sources [15]. In all countries studied, supportive regulations and policies to achieve the objectives of a REDD+ mechanism in an effective, efficient and equitable manner were identified [16]. However, the existing legal framework needs major reform to meet new challenges such as the establishment of carbon rights. Whereas in Brazil there is growing consensus on how to legalize indigenous carbon rights [5], other countries (e.g. Vietnam, Mozambique, Nepal, Peru) have not seen this opportunity (Forest Action, CIFOR: The context of REDD+ in Nepal: Drivers, agents, and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research. Unpublished project document; 2011.) [9,11,17]. Such arrangements may be clarified when projects are implemented at the subnational level, as discussed in the next section. Lessons learned from previous reforestation/afforestation programs and existing pilot REDD+ projects suggest that actual implementation of REDD+ can be hampered by Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
limited local governance capacity (e.g. Vietnam, Nepal, Mozambique), weak vertical and horizontal coordination (e.g. Cameroon), limited involvement of vulnerable groups (e.g. Vietnam), and elite capture of land and benefits and corruption (e.g. Papua New Guinea). In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cameroon, Mozambique and Vietnam, forest lands are mainly controlled by the state, and households and communities are likely to receive a very small proportion of REDD+ payments [8]. In Papua New Guinea, powerful and politically well-established foreign logging companies have a significant influence on the timber logging industry (Babon A: The context of REDD+ in Papua New Guinea. Drivers, agents, and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research. Unpublished project document; 2011.). In most countries, high transaction costs in implementing policy can be anticipated, mostly because of poor coordination and overlapping functions among ministries, and lack of transparent financial monitoring [11,18]. To effectively design policies that address these drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and overcome barriers, a cross-sector approach is needed as well as harmonization of forest conservation objectives and national development strategies. Four enabling factors, in countries with governance systems that range from democratic to authoritarian, were identified [16]. These factors are: first, high autonomy of state actors from business interests linked to forest exploitation and conversion; second, national ownership; third, high degree of inclusiveness in policy processes; and fourth the presence of coalitions for transformational change. REDD+ can serve — and already does to some extent — as a game changer. New economic incentives, new information, growing public concern about climate change, and new actors and coalitions all have the potential to generate transformational change [16,19]. With the introduction of the REDD+ idea in forest-rich countries, new actors have entered the REDD+ policy arena. On the basis of an analysis of policy discourses in the researched countries, these actors spanning different organizational types (e.g. business actors focusing on carbon and ‘green’ investments, state agencies, parliaments, etc.), as well as often marginalized actors such as indigenous and forestdependent people groups, and have entered more prominently into the policy arena and compete with established actors to realize their diverse interests by influencing: the outcomes of the ongoing REDD+ policy process at all levels, the formulation of international and national REDD+ strategies, and implementation at national and subnational levels [20–26]. A new agency for the value of ‘standing forest’ is emerging, incorporating old and new actors as well as old and new interests [19,20,27]. In making effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ policy, countries struggle to identify lead actor(s) who www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 681
can facilitate a wide stakeholder consultation to ensure ownership and a considerably high level of convergence. Strong challenges to business-as-usual trajectories and national ownership over process are prerequisites for pro-active efforts to build strong domestic constituencies that are inclusive and able to tackle the powerful interests and discourses behind the key drivers of deforestation and associated institutions [28]. These constituencies for change will need the State, but also civil society organizations to achieve these objectives. However, to date, leadership has been very much shown by actors who are associated with the central or federal government, and who negotiate at global fora. Capacity for transformational change requires a capable government at different levels that is able to operate with some autonomy from the sectors driving deforestation and forest degradation and that works in the interest of society at large [29]. There is the dilemma that ‘‘REDD+ is urgent . . . but cannot be rushed’’ [30], especially when there is strong need for national ownership [16] which requires that REDD+ is grounded in a legitimate domestic political process [28].
Implementation of subnational projects Research on subnational projectsb in the GCS on REDD+ is being carried out in six countries at 22 project sites encompassing more than 170 villages and 3900 households. Evaluation of the attainment of the three Es and cobenefits is being done through a counter-factual method called before–after/control-intervention [31]. The data gathering is being done in two stages: a baseline measurement before the introduction of performance-based conditional incentives (payments for environmental services), and then a measurement one year after the introduction of these incentives. At the time of writing we had reached the end of collecting baseline data. The findings reported here are clustered in two areas: description of the geography and characteristics of subnational projects; and ex ante (predictive) analysis of the capacity of projects to fulfill the three Es in the future. The ex ante research reported here concerns the combination of old and new approaches to forest management in REDD+ projects, tenure, social safeguards, and benefit-sharing arrangements. In compiling information on subnational REDD+ projects around the world (geography and basic characteristics), we aimed to fill an information gap on the location, b In this research we define a REDD+ project as an activity that: ‘‘i) intend(s) to quantify and report changes in forest carbon stocks, following the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and/or other broadly accepted guidelines, and possibly transact forest carbon credits; and ii) operate(s) in a geographically defined site or sites, with predetermined boundaries as decided in the UNFCCC Conference of Parties, including activities that aim to incorporate carbon into land use decisions and planning across heterogeneous landscapes at a subnational scale’’ [33].
www.sciencedirect.com
goals, and approaches of subnational projects. It was found that projects tend to be located where actual or imminent deforestation is significant that poor governance does not deter REDD+ investment, and that there is a risk of trade-offs between carbon effectiveness and cobenefits [32]. Indonesia had the most projects under development, and third party certification standards are a major influence on project development [33]. A web-based catalogue of all forest carbon projects in the nine key countries studied was developed [34]. An analysis of the locations of REDD+ projects found that countries with a high biodiversity index and protected areas are more likely to have REDD+ projects. In Brazil and Indonesia, jurisdictions with higher deforestation rates and forest carbon densities are more likely to have forest carbon projects, and villages inside project boundaries tend to depend on agriculture, emphasizing the challenge for REDD+ to protect agricultural livelihoods [35]. Almost all the sample projects in the study combine prior forest management approaches (integrated conservation and development projects or ICDPs — see e.g. [36]) and an intention to introduce performance-based conditional incentives (payments for environmental services or PES) — the distinctive new contribution of REDD+. This hybrid approach offers the advantage of being able to get underway early (via ICDPs) given policy and market obstacles to introducing PES in REDD+. Yet reliance on ICDPs is a liability given past problems with the model and its implementation [37]. The ex ante analysis on the capacity of projects to fulfill the three Es focused strongly on tenure. The reason for this focus is that effective, efficient, and equitable REDD+ implementation requires clear property rights over forests, trees, and forest carbon to motivate improved management of forests by local people and to determine who has the rights to the anticipated stream of benefits. Despite this, REDD+ projects are being developed in a tenure context where governments have often asserted control at the expense of local people, and where contestation and overlapping claims are rife [38]. There has been little progress on clarifying forest tenure, and governments must take proactive steps on tenure to lay the foundation for REDD+. Having drawn on forest tenure research by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in 2006–2008, which shows that communities face obstacles even after statutory forest rights have been won, it is suggested that there must be binding agreements in REDD+ to protect local rights [39]. The analysis on the adequacy of forest tenure arrangements using household samples at REDD+ project sites found that at four project sites in Brazil, tenure insecurity is pervasive even though it is allegedly well defined. Yet Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
682 Climate systems
the relatively uniform approaches to tenure clarification across varied projects hold some promise to attain effective and equitable implementation of REDD+ (Duchelle AE, Cromberg M, Gebara MF, Guerra R, Melo T, Larson A, Cronkleton P, Bo¨rner J, Sills EO, Bauch S, et al.: Different contexts, similar strategies: learning from four incipient REDD+ Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.). Meanwhile, at five project sites in Indonesia, existing tenure conditions are inadequate for effective implementation of REDD+ (Resosudarmo IAP, Atmadja S, Ekaputri AD, Intarini DY, Indriatmoko Y, Pangestuti A: Can the existing tenure system foster effective implementation of REDD+ projects? Reflections from five emerging sites in Indonesia. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.). In analyzing 19 projects in five countries (Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, Vietnam), it was found that steps taken by proponents to date are insufficient to resolve tenure insecurity (Sunderlin WD, Larson A, Duchelle AE, Resosudarmo IAP, Huynh TB, Awono A, Dokken T: How are REDD+ proponents addressing tenure problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.); it is therefore necessary to implement REDD+ tenure readiness through national policies, to integrate national and local efforts to clarify tenure, to clarify international and national REDD+ policies, and to ensure conflict resolution mechanisms are in place given the likelihood of not resolving tenure challenges in advance of REDD+. By combining findings from national and subnational studies, it was found [40] that national and local integration of efforts are needed, yet national land registration institutions are often inadequate for addressing the crucial issue of customary rights. We argue for giving parallel advance attention to the drivers of deforestation seeing that they are linked to tenure insecurity.
incipient REDD+ Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.).
Research on REDD+ social safeguards at the national policy and project levels produced the following findings: policy makers, project personnel and investors value these safeguards as evidenced by their early adoption; national sovereignty must be recognized and competing safeguard policies should be harmonized to gain nationallevel buy-in for REDD+ safeguards; and the safeguards dialogue needs to move away from high-level international discussions towards action [41].
Following the desk study on two FRA reports, in the GCS, we surveyed 17 REDD+ demonstration sites across Latin America (7), Africa (7) and South East Asia (3). Fifty-three percent of the projects have site-specific or country-specific allometric equations for assessing aboveground biomass, as would be required for a Tier 2 approach; 47% of the projects use generalized equations for the tropics. Other carbon pools are usually less important in these projects, but can still represent a significant portion of net emissions. Not surprisingly, capacity to inventory these other pools was even lower.
Benefit-sharing mechanisms are at an early stage of development. Research on this topic focused on the challenges encountered in setting up systems that are equitable and efficient. The research found it is necessary to get greater clarity on what REDD+ is aiming to achieve, to recognize the nonfinancial benefits in REDD+, and to legitimize decision-making institutions through legal clarity and attention to procedural rights (Duchelle AE, Cromberg M, Gebara MF, Guerra R, Melo T, Larson A, Cronkleton P, Bo¨rner J, Sills EO, Bauch S, et al.: Different contexts, similar strategies: learning from four Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
Technical capacity for measuring REDD+ activities The capacity of countries to use forest inventory and remote sensing data for monitoring purposes was assessed in 99 non-Annex 1 countries in another study. The assessment [4] was based on Forest Resource Assessment (FRA) [42,43] data, the National Communications to the UNFCCC [44], and the Readiness Project Idea Notes submitted to the FCPF between 2008 and 2010. The study scored each country on several types of capacity (e.g. remote sensing, forest inventory, carbon stock assessment) and national engagement (e.g. completeness of national reporting, engagement in UNFCCC REDD technical negotiations). The study then scored the REDD+ challenges (e.g. fire incidence, presence of peat soils, high carbon densities) and remote sensing challenges (e.g. high cloud cover, mountainous terrain). Gaps were calculated using differences between scores for challenges and capacities; with countries being grouped into categories based on the magnitudes of these scores. The analysis showed that the majority of countries lack capacity to implement a complete and accurate national monitoring system to measure the performance of REDD+ implementation using the IPCC guidelines. The requirement is needed when payments will be based on quantified emissions reductions. Only 19 (out of 99) non-Annex 1 countries have good capacity, 48 of them have limited capacity, and the remaining 32 are only good in either forest inventory activities (12) or remote sensing data use (20). This suggests that there are capacity gaps and that the need for capacity development is high [4].
Only 24% of the project teams were familiar with the methods for below-ground biomass estimation. In the case of dead wood carbon measurements, 41% were familiar with these methods. For the litter and soil carbon pools, most of the respondents plan to use either IPCC default values or to ignore these pools. Among the projects we surveyed, most had inadequate information to deal with carbon estimation in several pools. One exception was a project from Brazil, which had www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 683
site-specific allometric equations to estimate aboveground biomass coefficient (Silva RP: Alometria, estoque e dinaˆmica da biomassa de florestasprima´rias e ecunda´rias na regia˜o de Manaus (AM). PhD Thesis. Federal University of Amazonas and National Institute of Amazon Research, Manaus, Brazil; 2007: 152.) [45], below-ground biomass and dead wood. In this project, litter was estimated using IPCC default values and this project does not intend to inventory the soil carbon pool. Developing the capacity of the top 19 countries in determining RL/REL may be prioritized as they already have a strong basis in inventory data and remote sensing techniques. The development of historical RL/REL using well-archived in-house datasets may be the right avenue to start, followed by more robust modeling approaches employing economic and demographic parameters. A stepwise development of RL/REL may be introduced to countries with greater challenges during the course of the readiness phase [46]. The idea of this approach is that countries with limited data and capacity can begin with simple methods using national statistics, and progress systematically to improve their RL/REL by generating better data and using more sophisticated methods. In countries with low monitoring capacity, like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, it is better to develop inclusive MRV (simple, robust, replicable, and responsive to actual change), which is more cost-efficient than accurate MRV [47]. Highly technical inventory approaches that rely heavily on remotely sensed data may offer tradeoffs in terms of local participation with community-based measurement approaches [48]. Capacity development may also be directed to better understand forest fragmentation that could be used as a proxy for degradation; for example, the use of tools that enable differentiation of drivers and link intact forest lands and nonintact forest lands [48,49]. Depending on the capacity and resources available, the decision to include or exclude forest degradation in the MRV system is driven by national circumstances. In certain circumstances degradation is not necessarily a precursor to deforestation; hence, forests can remain degraded for a long time, never becoming totally deforested. Therefore, addressing deforestation does not automatically reduce rates of degradation and accounting for forest degradation would make REDD+ more effective [50]. Common degrading activities in the tropics include selective logging; subcanopy fires; collection of fuel wood and nontimber forest products; and production of charcoal [51]. In the Brazilian Amazon, forest degradation is responsible for 20 per cent of total emissions [52]. In Indonesia, the forest stock is decreasing by a rate of six per cent a year, only one-third of which is due to deforestation [53]. In Africa, the annual emission rate of degradation is almost 50 per cent of the deforestation rate [54]. www.sciencedirect.com
Conclusions and recommendations On the basis of various methods and means used to collect and analyze data from both national and subnational sources we conclude that: Major policy reform is required for effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ mechanisms. However, transformational change at the national level is unlikely to come without changing economic interests, discursive practices and shifts in power relations among the actors involved in the REDD+ policy arenas. The ongoing study at subnational level already captured the baseline, but by comparing the controlled and intervened sites before REDD+ incentives are released, we found that tenure security is an ultimate prerequisite for effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ implementation at the subnational level. Property rights over land, forests, trees and carbon will motivate the management of the asset to avoid recurrent conflicts. Level of capacity to monitor REDD+ depends on the exposure of countries to basic forest inventory and the advancement of remote sensing technologies. A good handle on biomass equation and belowground carbon biomass are largely lacking and need consistent development. Accordingly we recommend: To speed up REDD+ decision-making processes, and in the implementation and operation of REDD+ projects, gaps in data availability and capacity to support the technical requirements of REDD+ should be narrowed. One key issue is to attract the voices of domestic constituencies that actively challenge existing business-as-usual trajectories, and that call strongly for major policy reform. To provide incentives for REDD+ participants at the local level, an ICDP type of reward may be initiated at the onset and then combined with a performancebased payment such as PES. The hybrid of these two approaches, with safeguards that recognize national sovereignty in place, may be widely acceptable as most stakeholders are familiar with the former. To develop capacity to establish RLs/RELs especially those countries with a low capacity gap in the monitoring field. This will ensure the availability of inventory data and remote sensing capability which the national system must use in order to go beyond the basic historical RL/REL and explore a Tier 2 or higher approach in the accounting of emissions reduction.
It is expected that the lessons learned from the first REDD+ generation would encourage the interest groups (political, economy, social and environment) to converge to create enough consensus to move forward. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
684 Climate systems
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) for financial support during the course of the GCSREDD+, administered by CIFOR. Support and assistance provided by Monica Di Gregorio, Thuy Thu Pham, and Efrian Muharrom are gratefully acknowledged.
References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as: of special interest of outstanding interest 1.
Pistorius T: From RED to REDD+: the evolution of a forestbased mitigation approach for developing countries. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2012:4.
2.
Cerbu GA, Swallow BM, Thompson DY: Locating REDD: a global survey and analysis of REDD readiness and demonstration activities. Environ Sci Policy 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envsci.2010.09.007. This paper analyzed 100 REDD/REDD+ activities in 64 developing countries and largely employed statistical analysis to reveal a number of national characteristics that significantly affect REDD demonstration activities.
Ocasional No. 76. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012. 12. EIA, TelaPak: Borderlines: Vietnam’s Booming Furniture Industry and Timber Smuggling in the Mekong Region. Bogor, Indonesia: TelaPak; 2008. 13. Brockhaus M, Obidzinski K, Dermawan A, Laumonier Y, Luttrell C: An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+? Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:30-37. The paper analyzes forest land allocation policy in Indonesia from political economy perspectives. The questions around the global need for food and energy put forward are contested with the equal global need for carbon credits obtained from the REDD+ mechanism. 14. Hoang MH, Pham TT, Do TH, Thomas D: An Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions from All Land Uses in Vietnam — Ready for REDD. Hanoi, Vietnam: World Agroforestry Centre; 2010. 15. Hofstad O, Ko¨hlin G, Namaalwa J: How can emissions from woodfuel be reduced? In Realising REDD. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:237-248. 16. Di Gregorio M, Brockhaus M, Cronin T, Muharrom E: Politics and power in REDD+ national processes. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:69-90.
Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin W, Verchot LV: Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:. 426. The book describes numerous challenges that REDD+ projects would likely to face and yet offer several choices to go about them based on a number of similar experience, failure and success stories. It also indicates that perverse and costly subsidies in forestry sector is the common enemy; and strengthening tenure and governance are the common pathways to success across the REDD+ countries.
17. Alvarez J, Freundt-MonteroD, Burga-Barrantes E, PostigoTakahashi T, Menton MCS: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Peru. Libelula and Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
Romijn E, Herold M, Kooistra L, Murdiyarso D, Verchot L: Assessing capacities of non-Annex I countries for national forest monitoring in the context of REDD+. Environ Sci Policy 2012, 19–20:33-48. This paper outlines a desk study to assess the capacity gaps of 99 nonAnnex I countries, based on their profiles in the REDD readiness project documents submitted to the FCPF. Country reports found in the Food and Agriculture Organization’s forest resource assessments from 2005 and 2010 were also examined. Four indicators were derived and used to assess the gaps.
19. Brockhaus M, Angelsen A: Seeing REDD+ through 4Is: a political economy framework. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:15-30.
3.
4.
5.
Angelsen A: Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:. 262. This book is a collection of articles on topics ranging from political economy to technical issues around the development of REDD activities in the early stage. The articles adopted common criteria, known as the three Es, to evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency and equity of REDD activities.
18. Pham TT, Campbell MB, Garnett S: Lessons for pro-poor payment for environmental services: an analysis of the payment for environmental services projects in Vietnam. Asia Pacific Journal Public Administration 2009, 31:117-135.
20. Schroeder H: Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation. Int Environ Agreements Polit Law Econ 2010, 10:317-332. 21. Babon A, McIntyre D, Sofe R: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Papua New Guinea. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press. 22. Cronin T, Santoso L: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Indonesia. Working Paper No. 49. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2010. 23. Kengoum DF: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Cameroon. Working Paper 51. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
6.
May PH, Millikan B, Gebara MF: The context of REDD+ in Brazil: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 55. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
24. Khatri DB, Bhushal RP, Paudel NS, Gurung N: Politics of REDD+ in the media: the case of Nepal. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
7.
Dkamela GP: The context of REDD+ in Cameroon: drivers, agents and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 57. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
25. May PH, Calixto B, Gebara, MF: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Brazil. Working Paper 55. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
8.
Indrarto BG, Murharjanti P, Khatarina J, Pulungan I, Ivalerina F, Rahman J, Prana NM, Resosudarmo PAI, Muharrom E: The context of REDD+ in Indonesia: drivers, agents and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
26. Pham TT: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Vietnam. Working Paper 53. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
9.
Pham TT, Moeliono M, Nguyen TH, Nguyen HT, Vu TH: The Context of REDD+ in Vietnam: Drivers, Agents, and Institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012.
10. Mu¨ller R, Pistorius T, Rohde S, Gerold G, Pacheco P: Policy options to reduce deforestation based on a systematic analysis of drivers and agents in lowland Bolivia. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:895-907. 11. Sitoe A, Saloma˜o A, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S: O contexto de REDD+ em Moc¸ambique: causas, actores einstituic¸o˜es. Publicac¸a˜o Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
27. Corbera E, Schroeder H: Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 12:89-100. 28. Luttrell C, Resosudarmo, IAP, Muharrom E, Brockhaus M, Seymour F: The political context of REDD+ in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environ Sci Policy 2012, in press. 29. Karsenty A, Ongolo S: Can ‘fragile states’ decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism. Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:38-45. The paper describes different economic agents and their interests in REDD+ incentives despite the opportunity costs they have to www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 685
‘pay’. Governments at any level that behave like economic agents rather than regulators may be challenged by difficult choices, especially when their capacity is weak.
REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:129-152.
30. Seymour H, Angelsen A: REDD wine in old wineskins? In Realising REDD. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:293-304.
42. FAO: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 — progress towards sustainable forest management. FAO Forestry Paper 147. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2006.
31. Jagger P, Sills EO, Lawlor K, Sunderlin WD: A guide to learning about livelihood impacts of REDD+. Occasional Paper No. 56. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2010.
43. FAO: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. FAO Forestry Paper 163. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2010.
32. Wertz-Kanounnikoff S, Kongphan-Apirak M: Emerging REDD+: a preliminary survey of demonstration and readiness activities. Working Paper No. 46. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009. 33. Sills EO, Madeira EM, Sunderlin WD, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S: The evolving landscape of REDD+ projects. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:265-279. 34. Kshatriya M, Sills EO, Lin L: Global Database of REDD+ and Other Forest Carbon Projects. Interactive Map. CIFOR; 2011 http:// www.forestsclimatechange.org/redd-map/. 35. Lin L, Pattanayak SK, Sunderlin WD, Sills EO: Site selection for forest carbon projects. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:209-232. 36. Blom B, Sunderland T, Murdiyarso D: Getting REDD to work locally: lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects. Environ Sci Policy 2010 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.01.002. 37. SunderlinF W.D., Sills EO: REDD+ projects as a hybrid of old and new forest conservation approaches. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:177192. 38. Sunderlin WD, Larson AM, Cronkleton P: Forest tenure rights and REDD+: from inertia to policy solutions. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:139-149. 39. Larson A: Forest tenure reform in the age of climate change: lessons for REDD+. Global Environ Change 2010 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.008. The paper describes the importance of tenure and rights in the context of securing ownership of properties. Reform is needed but often even the authority is decentralized tenure and rights of indigenous groups are often neglected. 40. Larson AM, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin WD: Tenure matters in REDD+: lessons from the field. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:153176. 41. Luttrell C, Loft L, Gebara MF, Kweka D: Who should benefit and why? Discourses on REDD+ benefit sharing. In Analyzing
www.sciencedirect.com
44. UNFCCC: Financial support provided by the Global Environment Facility for the preparation of national communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention. FCCC/SBI/2008/INF.10. 2008: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2008/sbi/eng/inf10.pdf. 45. Higuchi N, Santos JD, Jardim FCS: Tamaho da parcelaamostral para inventa´riosflorestais. Acta Amazoˆn 1982, 12:91-103. 46. Herold M, Angelsen A, Verchot LV, Wijaya A, Ainembabazi JH: A stepwise framework for developing REDD+ reference levels. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:279-300. 47. Bucki M, Cuypers D, Mayaux P, Achard F, Estreguil C, Grassi G: Assessing REDD+ performance of countries with low monitoring capacities: the matrix approach. Environ Res Lett 2012:13 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/014031. A proposed transition matrix indicating that land cover change over a particular time period, monitored by remote sensing techniques, represents activity data. Combined with default carbon stocks values, the approach may be used by countries with low monitoring capacity to develop an initial MRV system. 48. Burgess ND, Bahane B, Clairs T: Getting ready for REDD+ in Tanzania: a case study of progress and challenges. Oryx 2010, 44:339-351. 49. Soille P, Vogt P: Morphological segmentation of binary patterns. Pattern Recognit Lett 2009, 30:456-459. 50. Murdiyarso D, Skutsch M, Guariguata M, Kanninen K, Luttrell C, Verweij O, Martins OS: How do we measure and monitor forest degradation? In Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2008:99-106. 51. GOFC-GOLD: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Developing Countries: A Sourcebook of Methods and Procedures for Monitoring, Measuring and Reporting. Alberta, Canada: GOFC-GOLD Project Office, Natural Resources Canada; 2008. 52. Asner GP, Knapp DE, Broadbent EN, Oliveira OJC, Keller M, Silva JN: Selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 2005, 310:480-482. 53. Marklund LG, Schoene D: Global assessment of growing stock, biomass and carbon stock. Forest Resources Assessment Programme Working Paper. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2006. 54. Lambin EF, Geist HJ, Lepers E: Dynamics of land-use and landcover change in tropical regions. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2003, 28:205-241.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Daniel Murdiyarso1,2, Maria Brockhaus1, William D Sunderlin1 and Lou Verchot1
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) is a global mechanism being debated by the international community, aimed at mitigating dangerous climate change. It is a complex multilevel and multistakeholder process that tends to fulfill multiple goals beyond emission reduction. The lessons we are beginning to learn through a Global Comparative Study show that a cross-sectoral transformation is needed to change the course of sectoral drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. Sufficient capacity of government at all levels is crucial to guide the policy processes, benefit sharing, and technical support. Uncertainties around tenure issues and property rights may generate new problems that undermine the interests of society at large. The first generation of REDD+ activities also exhibited varying levels of capacity for monitoring REDD+ in non-Annex I countries. Large capacity gaps are found for developing reference levels and establishing measurement, reporting and verification systems.
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Bali in December 2007, a number of countries developed national strategies for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), now known as REDD+ [1]. Since then, multilateral initiatives began to mobilize resources and provide assistance, including the World Bank-managed Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and the United Nations Collaborative Programme on Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (UN-REDD).
Addresses 1 Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Jl. CIFOR, Situgede, Bogor 16115, Indonesia 2 Department of Geophysics and Meteorology, Bogor Agricultural University, Darmaga Campus, Bogor, Indonesia
The FCPF attracted 37 countries to participate in the development of project documents. Nine of them also participated in the UN-REDD Programme. Some of these countries also submitted a Readiness Plan for REDD+ implementation that is supported by the FCPF. An earlier study indicated that the number of pilot or subnational level activities generated in these countries are affected by key characteristics associated with deforestation, such as the rate of deforestation, remaining forest and carbon stocks, threatened species, and forest governance [2]. By grouping the rate of deforestation of REDD+ countries into high rate (>100 000 ha/year), medium rate (50 000–100 000 ha/year) and low rate (<50 000 ha/year), it is confirmed that there are more countries that belong to the first group, followed by the third and second groups. Some countries, however, increased their forest area in the past decade (Figure 1).
Corresponding author: Murdiyarso, Daniel ([email protected]) Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685 This review comes from a themed issue on Climate systems Edited by Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers, Aarti Gupta, Martin Herold, Marielos Pen˜a-Claros and Marjanneke J Vijge For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial Received 2 May 2012; Accepted 15 October 2012 Available online 4th November 2012 1877-3435/$ – see front matter, # 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.10.014
Introduction Following the Bali Action Plana agreed upon at the Thirteenth Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP13) to the United Nations Framework Convention a Decision 1/CP.13, Bali Action Plan. Addendum to the Report of the Conference of the Parties, Bali, December 2007: 3. http://unfccc.int/ resource/docs/2007/cop13/eng/06a01.pdf#page=3.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
In addition, bilateral donors, notably the governments of Norway, Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom, also play active roles in various parts of the world. In this analysis we consider that REDD+ activities initiated soon after Bali COP13 are the first generation, regardless of the level and stage of implementation.
The aim of this article is to draw some lessons by assessing the outcome from a Global Comparative Study (GCS) of the first generation of REDD+ activities [3]. To arrive at this aim we organize the article under the following three themes: first, the policy processes at national level; second, the implementation of project at subnational level; and third, technical capacity in measuring REDD+ activities. For theme 1 we have used seven countries that are categorized as of high deforestation rate (Brazil, Indonesia, Tanzania, Democratic Republic of the Congo, www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 679
Figure 1
500
400
Medium rates of losses 50,000-100,000 ha/yr
High rates of losses >100,000 ha/yr
200
100
Chile
Viet Nam
Vanuatu
Costa Rica
Gabon
Guyana
Suriname
Thailand
Kenya
El Salvador
Congo
Panama
CAR
Nepal
Liberia
Guatemala
Madagascar
Nicaragua
Uganda
Lao PDR
Ghana
Colombia
Peru
Honduras
PNG
Ethiopia
Cambodia
Mexico
Paraguay
Mozambique
Argentina
Cameroon
DRC
Bolivia
100
Indonesia
0
UR of Tanzania
Area Deforested (1000 ha/yr)
300
Low rates of losses <50,000 ha/yr
200
300 Source: FAO 2010 Global Forest Assessment Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Deforestation rates in REDD+ countries for the period of 2000–2010, grouped into high (>100 000 ha/year), medium (50 000–100 000 ha/year) and low (<50 000 ha/year) rates. The rate of deforestation in Brazil for the same period was 2 642 000 ha/year [43].
Bolivia, Cameroon, and Peru), one country experienced a low rate (Nepal) and another one that expanded its forest area (Vietnam). In addition, a country profiling was also exercised in Mozambique and Papua New Guinea. The methods used the analysis of the political economy of deforestation and forest degradation, analysis of policy content, expert interviews, and a media-based discourse analysis. Six countries (Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brazil, and Peru) were included under theme 2. A literature review, questionnaire surveys of project proponents and local stakeholders were conducted to capture the baseline information, when REDD+ projects have not generated any type of incentives. For theme 3, we further analyze the nature of capacity gap in 99 non-Annex 1 countries [4] by assessing the capacity needed to develop Reference (Emission) Level (REL/RL) and to establish Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) system. www.sciencedirect.com
In all themes, we also used the three Escriteria (carbonEffective, cost-Efficient and Equitable) proposed by Angelsen [5] to measure the effectiveness of REDD+ activities in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, cost efficiency in developing and running REDD+ projects, and equity in the distribution of costs and benefits among stakeholders. We conclude the article by drawing some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities, and provide recommendations to improve the design of subsequent REDD+ policies.
The national policy processes Even though we observe an increasing level of analysis, knowledge and early lessons from ongoing projects in REDD+ countries, there is still limited knowledge about how to achieve REDD+ regimes that fulfill the three Es. Transformational change beyond the forestry sector is required to fully realize the mitigation potential of REDD+, but this endeavor faces numerous challenges, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
680 Climate systems
among which are economic interests and power structures that reinforce the status quo. For example, based on an analysis of the political economy, deforestation in REDD+ countries (such as Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia, Vietnam, Bolivia, and Mozambique) is driven by agriculture and mining industries, which are often well connected to existing bureaucratic structures, and have high opportunity costs despite carbon assets contained in the forested landscape [6–11]. In addition, effective policy making towards REDD would require a review of current and planned policies that drive deforestation. But those revisions are often controversial, as they can challenge widely accepted national development paradigms and existing policy frameworks or policy objectives. In Indonesia and Vietnam, a gap between timber supply and demand puts pressure on natural forests, as the area of existing plantations cannot meet the actual demands [8,9,12,13]. In Brazil, the mining industry competes with the forestry sector in terms of land use availability [6]. In Indonesia, rapid development of the palm oil industry is coupled with the rapid decline of natural forests [8], and development plans such as the Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate case in Papua put additional pressure on forested areas [13]. In Vietnam, the national program for expansion of hydropower plants and infrastructure to meet national development goals is considered to contribute to a rapid increase of deforestation and forest degradation [9,14]. Other findings from East Africa suggest that deforestation and forest degradation are linked to a lack of sustainability measures in forest exploitation, particularly in charcoal production, even though decades of development projects, as well as recent policy programs, aim at reducing overall dependence on wood fuels and switching to other energy sources [15]. In all countries studied, supportive regulations and policies to achieve the objectives of a REDD+ mechanism in an effective, efficient and equitable manner were identified [16]. However, the existing legal framework needs major reform to meet new challenges such as the establishment of carbon rights. Whereas in Brazil there is growing consensus on how to legalize indigenous carbon rights [5], other countries (e.g. Vietnam, Mozambique, Nepal, Peru) have not seen this opportunity (Forest Action, CIFOR: The context of REDD+ in Nepal: Drivers, agents, and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research. Unpublished project document; 2011.) [9,11,17]. Such arrangements may be clarified when projects are implemented at the subnational level, as discussed in the next section. Lessons learned from previous reforestation/afforestation programs and existing pilot REDD+ projects suggest that actual implementation of REDD+ can be hampered by Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
limited local governance capacity (e.g. Vietnam, Nepal, Mozambique), weak vertical and horizontal coordination (e.g. Cameroon), limited involvement of vulnerable groups (e.g. Vietnam), and elite capture of land and benefits and corruption (e.g. Papua New Guinea). In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Cameroon, Mozambique and Vietnam, forest lands are mainly controlled by the state, and households and communities are likely to receive a very small proportion of REDD+ payments [8]. In Papua New Guinea, powerful and politically well-established foreign logging companies have a significant influence on the timber logging industry (Babon A: The context of REDD+ in Papua New Guinea. Drivers, agents, and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research. Unpublished project document; 2011.). In most countries, high transaction costs in implementing policy can be anticipated, mostly because of poor coordination and overlapping functions among ministries, and lack of transparent financial monitoring [11,18]. To effectively design policies that address these drivers of deforestation and forest degradation and overcome barriers, a cross-sector approach is needed as well as harmonization of forest conservation objectives and national development strategies. Four enabling factors, in countries with governance systems that range from democratic to authoritarian, were identified [16]. These factors are: first, high autonomy of state actors from business interests linked to forest exploitation and conversion; second, national ownership; third, high degree of inclusiveness in policy processes; and fourth the presence of coalitions for transformational change. REDD+ can serve — and already does to some extent — as a game changer. New economic incentives, new information, growing public concern about climate change, and new actors and coalitions all have the potential to generate transformational change [16,19]. With the introduction of the REDD+ idea in forest-rich countries, new actors have entered the REDD+ policy arena. On the basis of an analysis of policy discourses in the researched countries, these actors spanning different organizational types (e.g. business actors focusing on carbon and ‘green’ investments, state agencies, parliaments, etc.), as well as often marginalized actors such as indigenous and forestdependent people groups, and have entered more prominently into the policy arena and compete with established actors to realize their diverse interests by influencing: the outcomes of the ongoing REDD+ policy process at all levels, the formulation of international and national REDD+ strategies, and implementation at national and subnational levels [20–26]. A new agency for the value of ‘standing forest’ is emerging, incorporating old and new actors as well as old and new interests [19,20,27]. In making effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ policy, countries struggle to identify lead actor(s) who www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 681
can facilitate a wide stakeholder consultation to ensure ownership and a considerably high level of convergence. Strong challenges to business-as-usual trajectories and national ownership over process are prerequisites for pro-active efforts to build strong domestic constituencies that are inclusive and able to tackle the powerful interests and discourses behind the key drivers of deforestation and associated institutions [28]. These constituencies for change will need the State, but also civil society organizations to achieve these objectives. However, to date, leadership has been very much shown by actors who are associated with the central or federal government, and who negotiate at global fora. Capacity for transformational change requires a capable government at different levels that is able to operate with some autonomy from the sectors driving deforestation and forest degradation and that works in the interest of society at large [29]. There is the dilemma that ‘‘REDD+ is urgent . . . but cannot be rushed’’ [30], especially when there is strong need for national ownership [16] which requires that REDD+ is grounded in a legitimate domestic political process [28].
Implementation of subnational projects Research on subnational projectsb in the GCS on REDD+ is being carried out in six countries at 22 project sites encompassing more than 170 villages and 3900 households. Evaluation of the attainment of the three Es and cobenefits is being done through a counter-factual method called before–after/control-intervention [31]. The data gathering is being done in two stages: a baseline measurement before the introduction of performance-based conditional incentives (payments for environmental services), and then a measurement one year after the introduction of these incentives. At the time of writing we had reached the end of collecting baseline data. The findings reported here are clustered in two areas: description of the geography and characteristics of subnational projects; and ex ante (predictive) analysis of the capacity of projects to fulfill the three Es in the future. The ex ante research reported here concerns the combination of old and new approaches to forest management in REDD+ projects, tenure, social safeguards, and benefit-sharing arrangements. In compiling information on subnational REDD+ projects around the world (geography and basic characteristics), we aimed to fill an information gap on the location, b In this research we define a REDD+ project as an activity that: ‘‘i) intend(s) to quantify and report changes in forest carbon stocks, following the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and/or other broadly accepted guidelines, and possibly transact forest carbon credits; and ii) operate(s) in a geographically defined site or sites, with predetermined boundaries as decided in the UNFCCC Conference of Parties, including activities that aim to incorporate carbon into land use decisions and planning across heterogeneous landscapes at a subnational scale’’ [33].
www.sciencedirect.com
goals, and approaches of subnational projects. It was found that projects tend to be located where actual or imminent deforestation is significant that poor governance does not deter REDD+ investment, and that there is a risk of trade-offs between carbon effectiveness and cobenefits [32]. Indonesia had the most projects under development, and third party certification standards are a major influence on project development [33]. A web-based catalogue of all forest carbon projects in the nine key countries studied was developed [34]. An analysis of the locations of REDD+ projects found that countries with a high biodiversity index and protected areas are more likely to have REDD+ projects. In Brazil and Indonesia, jurisdictions with higher deforestation rates and forest carbon densities are more likely to have forest carbon projects, and villages inside project boundaries tend to depend on agriculture, emphasizing the challenge for REDD+ to protect agricultural livelihoods [35]. Almost all the sample projects in the study combine prior forest management approaches (integrated conservation and development projects or ICDPs — see e.g. [36]) and an intention to introduce performance-based conditional incentives (payments for environmental services or PES) — the distinctive new contribution of REDD+. This hybrid approach offers the advantage of being able to get underway early (via ICDPs) given policy and market obstacles to introducing PES in REDD+. Yet reliance on ICDPs is a liability given past problems with the model and its implementation [37]. The ex ante analysis on the capacity of projects to fulfill the three Es focused strongly on tenure. The reason for this focus is that effective, efficient, and equitable REDD+ implementation requires clear property rights over forests, trees, and forest carbon to motivate improved management of forests by local people and to determine who has the rights to the anticipated stream of benefits. Despite this, REDD+ projects are being developed in a tenure context where governments have often asserted control at the expense of local people, and where contestation and overlapping claims are rife [38]. There has been little progress on clarifying forest tenure, and governments must take proactive steps on tenure to lay the foundation for REDD+. Having drawn on forest tenure research by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in 2006–2008, which shows that communities face obstacles even after statutory forest rights have been won, it is suggested that there must be binding agreements in REDD+ to protect local rights [39]. The analysis on the adequacy of forest tenure arrangements using household samples at REDD+ project sites found that at four project sites in Brazil, tenure insecurity is pervasive even though it is allegedly well defined. Yet Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
682 Climate systems
the relatively uniform approaches to tenure clarification across varied projects hold some promise to attain effective and equitable implementation of REDD+ (Duchelle AE, Cromberg M, Gebara MF, Guerra R, Melo T, Larson A, Cronkleton P, Bo¨rner J, Sills EO, Bauch S, et al.: Different contexts, similar strategies: learning from four incipient REDD+ Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.). Meanwhile, at five project sites in Indonesia, existing tenure conditions are inadequate for effective implementation of REDD+ (Resosudarmo IAP, Atmadja S, Ekaputri AD, Intarini DY, Indriatmoko Y, Pangestuti A: Can the existing tenure system foster effective implementation of REDD+ projects? Reflections from five emerging sites in Indonesia. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.). In analyzing 19 projects in five countries (Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, Vietnam), it was found that steps taken by proponents to date are insufficient to resolve tenure insecurity (Sunderlin WD, Larson A, Duchelle AE, Resosudarmo IAP, Huynh TB, Awono A, Dokken T: How are REDD+ proponents addressing tenure problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.); it is therefore necessary to implement REDD+ tenure readiness through national policies, to integrate national and local efforts to clarify tenure, to clarify international and national REDD+ policies, and to ensure conflict resolution mechanisms are in place given the likelihood of not resolving tenure challenges in advance of REDD+. By combining findings from national and subnational studies, it was found [40] that national and local integration of efforts are needed, yet national land registration institutions are often inadequate for addressing the crucial issue of customary rights. We argue for giving parallel advance attention to the drivers of deforestation seeing that they are linked to tenure insecurity.
incipient REDD+ Initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon. Unpublished manuscript; 2012.).
Research on REDD+ social safeguards at the national policy and project levels produced the following findings: policy makers, project personnel and investors value these safeguards as evidenced by their early adoption; national sovereignty must be recognized and competing safeguard policies should be harmonized to gain nationallevel buy-in for REDD+ safeguards; and the safeguards dialogue needs to move away from high-level international discussions towards action [41].
Following the desk study on two FRA reports, in the GCS, we surveyed 17 REDD+ demonstration sites across Latin America (7), Africa (7) and South East Asia (3). Fifty-three percent of the projects have site-specific or country-specific allometric equations for assessing aboveground biomass, as would be required for a Tier 2 approach; 47% of the projects use generalized equations for the tropics. Other carbon pools are usually less important in these projects, but can still represent a significant portion of net emissions. Not surprisingly, capacity to inventory these other pools was even lower.
Benefit-sharing mechanisms are at an early stage of development. Research on this topic focused on the challenges encountered in setting up systems that are equitable and efficient. The research found it is necessary to get greater clarity on what REDD+ is aiming to achieve, to recognize the nonfinancial benefits in REDD+, and to legitimize decision-making institutions through legal clarity and attention to procedural rights (Duchelle AE, Cromberg M, Gebara MF, Guerra R, Melo T, Larson A, Cronkleton P, Bo¨rner J, Sills EO, Bauch S, et al.: Different contexts, similar strategies: learning from four Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
Technical capacity for measuring REDD+ activities The capacity of countries to use forest inventory and remote sensing data for monitoring purposes was assessed in 99 non-Annex 1 countries in another study. The assessment [4] was based on Forest Resource Assessment (FRA) [42,43] data, the National Communications to the UNFCCC [44], and the Readiness Project Idea Notes submitted to the FCPF between 2008 and 2010. The study scored each country on several types of capacity (e.g. remote sensing, forest inventory, carbon stock assessment) and national engagement (e.g. completeness of national reporting, engagement in UNFCCC REDD technical negotiations). The study then scored the REDD+ challenges (e.g. fire incidence, presence of peat soils, high carbon densities) and remote sensing challenges (e.g. high cloud cover, mountainous terrain). Gaps were calculated using differences between scores for challenges and capacities; with countries being grouped into categories based on the magnitudes of these scores. The analysis showed that the majority of countries lack capacity to implement a complete and accurate national monitoring system to measure the performance of REDD+ implementation using the IPCC guidelines. The requirement is needed when payments will be based on quantified emissions reductions. Only 19 (out of 99) non-Annex 1 countries have good capacity, 48 of them have limited capacity, and the remaining 32 are only good in either forest inventory activities (12) or remote sensing data use (20). This suggests that there are capacity gaps and that the need for capacity development is high [4].
Only 24% of the project teams were familiar with the methods for below-ground biomass estimation. In the case of dead wood carbon measurements, 41% were familiar with these methods. For the litter and soil carbon pools, most of the respondents plan to use either IPCC default values or to ignore these pools. Among the projects we surveyed, most had inadequate information to deal with carbon estimation in several pools. One exception was a project from Brazil, which had www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 683
site-specific allometric equations to estimate aboveground biomass coefficient (Silva RP: Alometria, estoque e dinaˆmica da biomassa de florestasprima´rias e ecunda´rias na regia˜o de Manaus (AM). PhD Thesis. Federal University of Amazonas and National Institute of Amazon Research, Manaus, Brazil; 2007: 152.) [45], below-ground biomass and dead wood. In this project, litter was estimated using IPCC default values and this project does not intend to inventory the soil carbon pool. Developing the capacity of the top 19 countries in determining RL/REL may be prioritized as they already have a strong basis in inventory data and remote sensing techniques. The development of historical RL/REL using well-archived in-house datasets may be the right avenue to start, followed by more robust modeling approaches employing economic and demographic parameters. A stepwise development of RL/REL may be introduced to countries with greater challenges during the course of the readiness phase [46]. The idea of this approach is that countries with limited data and capacity can begin with simple methods using national statistics, and progress systematically to improve their RL/REL by generating better data and using more sophisticated methods. In countries with low monitoring capacity, like the Democratic Republic of the Congo, it is better to develop inclusive MRV (simple, robust, replicable, and responsive to actual change), which is more cost-efficient than accurate MRV [47]. Highly technical inventory approaches that rely heavily on remotely sensed data may offer tradeoffs in terms of local participation with community-based measurement approaches [48]. Capacity development may also be directed to better understand forest fragmentation that could be used as a proxy for degradation; for example, the use of tools that enable differentiation of drivers and link intact forest lands and nonintact forest lands [48,49]. Depending on the capacity and resources available, the decision to include or exclude forest degradation in the MRV system is driven by national circumstances. In certain circumstances degradation is not necessarily a precursor to deforestation; hence, forests can remain degraded for a long time, never becoming totally deforested. Therefore, addressing deforestation does not automatically reduce rates of degradation and accounting for forest degradation would make REDD+ more effective [50]. Common degrading activities in the tropics include selective logging; subcanopy fires; collection of fuel wood and nontimber forest products; and production of charcoal [51]. In the Brazilian Amazon, forest degradation is responsible for 20 per cent of total emissions [52]. In Indonesia, the forest stock is decreasing by a rate of six per cent a year, only one-third of which is due to deforestation [53]. In Africa, the annual emission rate of degradation is almost 50 per cent of the deforestation rate [54]. www.sciencedirect.com
Conclusions and recommendations On the basis of various methods and means used to collect and analyze data from both national and subnational sources we conclude that: Major policy reform is required for effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ mechanisms. However, transformational change at the national level is unlikely to come without changing economic interests, discursive practices and shifts in power relations among the actors involved in the REDD+ policy arenas. The ongoing study at subnational level already captured the baseline, but by comparing the controlled and intervened sites before REDD+ incentives are released, we found that tenure security is an ultimate prerequisite for effective, efficient and equitable REDD+ implementation at the subnational level. Property rights over land, forests, trees and carbon will motivate the management of the asset to avoid recurrent conflicts. Level of capacity to monitor REDD+ depends on the exposure of countries to basic forest inventory and the advancement of remote sensing technologies. A good handle on biomass equation and belowground carbon biomass are largely lacking and need consistent development. Accordingly we recommend: To speed up REDD+ decision-making processes, and in the implementation and operation of REDD+ projects, gaps in data availability and capacity to support the technical requirements of REDD+ should be narrowed. One key issue is to attract the voices of domestic constituencies that actively challenge existing business-as-usual trajectories, and that call strongly for major policy reform. To provide incentives for REDD+ participants at the local level, an ICDP type of reward may be initiated at the onset and then combined with a performancebased payment such as PES. The hybrid of these two approaches, with safeguards that recognize national sovereignty in place, may be widely acceptable as most stakeholders are familiar with the former. To develop capacity to establish RLs/RELs especially those countries with a low capacity gap in the monitoring field. This will ensure the availability of inventory data and remote sensing capability which the national system must use in order to go beyond the basic historical RL/REL and explore a Tier 2 or higher approach in the accounting of emissions reduction.
It is expected that the lessons learned from the first REDD+ generation would encourage the interest groups (political, economy, social and environment) to converge to create enough consensus to move forward. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
684 Climate systems
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) for financial support during the course of the GCSREDD+, administered by CIFOR. Support and assistance provided by Monica Di Gregorio, Thuy Thu Pham, and Efrian Muharrom are gratefully acknowledged.
References and recommended reading Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as: of special interest of outstanding interest 1.
Pistorius T: From RED to REDD+: the evolution of a forestbased mitigation approach for developing countries. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2012:4.
2.
Cerbu GA, Swallow BM, Thompson DY: Locating REDD: a global survey and analysis of REDD readiness and demonstration activities. Environ Sci Policy 2010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.envsci.2010.09.007. This paper analyzed 100 REDD/REDD+ activities in 64 developing countries and largely employed statistical analysis to reveal a number of national characteristics that significantly affect REDD demonstration activities.
Ocasional No. 76. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012. 12. EIA, TelaPak: Borderlines: Vietnam’s Booming Furniture Industry and Timber Smuggling in the Mekong Region. Bogor, Indonesia: TelaPak; 2008. 13. Brockhaus M, Obidzinski K, Dermawan A, Laumonier Y, Luttrell C: An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+? Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:30-37. The paper analyzes forest land allocation policy in Indonesia from political economy perspectives. The questions around the global need for food and energy put forward are contested with the equal global need for carbon credits obtained from the REDD+ mechanism. 14. Hoang MH, Pham TT, Do TH, Thomas D: An Assessment of Options for Reducing Emissions from All Land Uses in Vietnam — Ready for REDD. Hanoi, Vietnam: World Agroforestry Centre; 2010. 15. Hofstad O, Ko¨hlin G, Namaalwa J: How can emissions from woodfuel be reduced? In Realising REDD. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:237-248. 16. Di Gregorio M, Brockhaus M, Cronin T, Muharrom E: Politics and power in REDD+ national processes. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:69-90.
Angelsen A, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin W, Verchot LV: Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:. 426. The book describes numerous challenges that REDD+ projects would likely to face and yet offer several choices to go about them based on a number of similar experience, failure and success stories. It also indicates that perverse and costly subsidies in forestry sector is the common enemy; and strengthening tenure and governance are the common pathways to success across the REDD+ countries.
17. Alvarez J, Freundt-MonteroD, Burga-Barrantes E, PostigoTakahashi T, Menton MCS: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Peru. Libelula and Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
Romijn E, Herold M, Kooistra L, Murdiyarso D, Verchot L: Assessing capacities of non-Annex I countries for national forest monitoring in the context of REDD+. Environ Sci Policy 2012, 19–20:33-48. This paper outlines a desk study to assess the capacity gaps of 99 nonAnnex I countries, based on their profiles in the REDD readiness project documents submitted to the FCPF. Country reports found in the Food and Agriculture Organization’s forest resource assessments from 2005 and 2010 were also examined. Four indicators were derived and used to assess the gaps.
19. Brockhaus M, Angelsen A: Seeing REDD+ through 4Is: a political economy framework. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:15-30.
3.
4.
5.
Angelsen A: Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:. 262. This book is a collection of articles on topics ranging from political economy to technical issues around the development of REDD activities in the early stage. The articles adopted common criteria, known as the three Es, to evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency and equity of REDD activities.
18. Pham TT, Campbell MB, Garnett S: Lessons for pro-poor payment for environmental services: an analysis of the payment for environmental services projects in Vietnam. Asia Pacific Journal Public Administration 2009, 31:117-135.
20. Schroeder H: Agency in international climate negotiations: the case of indigenous peoples and avoided deforestation. Int Environ Agreements Polit Law Econ 2010, 10:317-332. 21. Babon A, McIntyre D, Sofe R: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Papua New Guinea. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press. 22. Cronin T, Santoso L: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Indonesia. Working Paper No. 49. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2010. 23. Kengoum DF: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Cameroon. Working Paper 51. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
6.
May PH, Millikan B, Gebara MF: The context of REDD+ in Brazil: drivers, agents, and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 55. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
24. Khatri DB, Bhushal RP, Paudel NS, Gurung N: Politics of REDD+ in the media: the case of Nepal. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
7.
Dkamela GP: The context of REDD+ in Cameroon: drivers, agents and institutions. Occasional Paper No. 57. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
25. May PH, Calixto B, Gebara, MF: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Brazil. Working Paper 55. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
8.
Indrarto BG, Murharjanti P, Khatarina J, Pulungan I, Ivalerina F, Rahman J, Prana NM, Resosudarmo PAI, Muharrom E: The context of REDD+ in Indonesia: drivers, agents and institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012, in press.
26. Pham TT: REDD+ politics in the media: a case study from Vietnam. Working Paper 53. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2011.
9.
Pham TT, Moeliono M, Nguyen TH, Nguyen HT, Vu TH: The Context of REDD+ in Vietnam: Drivers, Agents, and Institutions. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012.
10. Mu¨ller R, Pistorius T, Rohde S, Gerold G, Pacheco P: Policy options to reduce deforestation based on a systematic analysis of drivers and agents in lowland Bolivia. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:895-907. 11. Sitoe A, Saloma˜o A, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S: O contexto de REDD+ em Moc¸ambique: causas, actores einstituic¸o˜es. Publicac¸a˜o Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685
27. Corbera E, Schroeder H: Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ Sci Policy 2011, 12:89-100. 28. Luttrell C, Resosudarmo, IAP, Muharrom E, Brockhaus M, Seymour F: The political context of REDD+ in Indonesia: constituencies for change. Environ Sci Policy 2012, in press. 29. Karsenty A, Ongolo S: Can ‘fragile states’ decide to reduce their deforestation? The inappropriate use of the theory of incentives with respect to the REDD mechanism. Forest Policy Econ 2012, 18:38-45. The paper describes different economic agents and their interests in REDD+ incentives despite the opportunity costs they have to www.sciencedirect.com
Some lessons learned from the first generation of REDD+ activities Murdiyarso et al. 685
‘pay’. Governments at any level that behave like economic agents rather than regulators may be challenged by difficult choices, especially when their capacity is weak.
REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:129-152.
30. Seymour H, Angelsen A: REDD wine in old wineskins? In Realising REDD. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:293-304.
42. FAO: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2005 — progress towards sustainable forest management. FAO Forestry Paper 147. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2006.
31. Jagger P, Sills EO, Lawlor K, Sunderlin WD: A guide to learning about livelihood impacts of REDD+. Occasional Paper No. 56. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2010.
43. FAO: Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. FAO Forestry Paper 163. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization; 2010.
32. Wertz-Kanounnikoff S, Kongphan-Apirak M: Emerging REDD+: a preliminary survey of demonstration and readiness activities. Working Paper No. 46. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009. 33. Sills EO, Madeira EM, Sunderlin WD, Wertz-Kanounnikoff S: The evolving landscape of REDD+ projects. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:265-279. 34. Kshatriya M, Sills EO, Lin L: Global Database of REDD+ and Other Forest Carbon Projects. Interactive Map. CIFOR; 2011 http:// www.forestsclimatechange.org/redd-map/. 35. Lin L, Pattanayak SK, Sunderlin WD, Sills EO: Site selection for forest carbon projects. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:209-232. 36. Blom B, Sunderland T, Murdiyarso D: Getting REDD to work locally: lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects. Environ Sci Policy 2010 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.01.002. 37. SunderlinF W.D., Sills EO: REDD+ projects as a hybrid of old and new forest conservation approaches. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:177192. 38. Sunderlin WD, Larson AM, Cronkleton P: Forest tenure rights and REDD+: from inertia to policy solutions. In Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2009:139-149. 39. Larson A: Forest tenure reform in the age of climate change: lessons for REDD+. Global Environ Change 2010 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.008. The paper describes the importance of tenure and rights in the context of securing ownership of properties. Reform is needed but often even the authority is decentralized tenure and rights of indigenous groups are often neglected. 40. Larson AM, Brockhaus M, Sunderlin WD: Tenure matters in REDD+: lessons from the field. In Analysing REDD+: Challenges, Choices. Edited by Angelsen A et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:153176. 41. Luttrell C, Loft L, Gebara MF, Kweka D: Who should benefit and why? Discourses on REDD+ benefit sharing. In Analyzing
www.sciencedirect.com
44. UNFCCC: Financial support provided by the Global Environment Facility for the preparation of national communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention. FCCC/SBI/2008/INF.10. 2008: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2008/sbi/eng/inf10.pdf. 45. Higuchi N, Santos JD, Jardim FCS: Tamaho da parcelaamostral para inventa´riosflorestais. Acta Amazoˆn 1982, 12:91-103. 46. Herold M, Angelsen A, Verchot LV, Wijaya A, Ainembabazi JH: A stepwise framework for developing REDD+ reference levels. In Analyzing REDD+: Challenges and Choices. Edited by Angelsen et al.: Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2012:279-300. 47. Bucki M, Cuypers D, Mayaux P, Achard F, Estreguil C, Grassi G: Assessing REDD+ performance of countries with low monitoring capacities: the matrix approach. Environ Res Lett 2012:13 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/7/1/014031. A proposed transition matrix indicating that land cover change over a particular time period, monitored by remote sensing techniques, represents activity data. Combined with default carbon stocks values, the approach may be used by countries with low monitoring capacity to develop an initial MRV system. 48. Burgess ND, Bahane B, Clairs T: Getting ready for REDD+ in Tanzania: a case study of progress and challenges. Oryx 2010, 44:339-351. 49. Soille P, Vogt P: Morphological segmentation of binary patterns. Pattern Recognit Lett 2009, 30:456-459. 50. Murdiyarso D, Skutsch M, Guariguata M, Kanninen K, Luttrell C, Verweij O, Martins OS: How do we measure and monitor forest degradation? In Moving Ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications. Edited by Angelsen A. Bogor, Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research; 2008:99-106. 51. GOFC-GOLD: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Developing Countries: A Sourcebook of Methods and Procedures for Monitoring, Measuring and Reporting. Alberta, Canada: GOFC-GOLD Project Office, Natural Resources Canada; 2008. 52. Asner GP, Knapp DE, Broadbent EN, Oliveira OJC, Keller M, Silva JN: Selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 2005, 310:480-482. 53. Marklund LG, Schoene D: Global assessment of growing stock, biomass and carbon stock. Forest Resources Assessment Programme Working Paper. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2006. 54. Lambin EF, Geist HJ, Lepers E: Dynamics of land-use and landcover change in tropical regions. Annu Rev Environ Resour 2003, 28:205-241.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2012, 4:678–685