What is the potential for a climate, forest and community friendly REDD+ in Paris?

What is the potential for a climate, forest and community friendly REDD+ in Paris?

Download PDF 2.5 MB

Hein, Jonas / Karen Meijer / Jean Carlo Rodríguez de Francisco
Briefing Paper 3/2015

Bonn: German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE)

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) is a mitigation instrument that creates a financial value for the carbon stored in standing forests. The purpose of REDD+ is to provide incentives for developing countries to mitigate forest-related emissions and to foster conservation, sustainable management of forests and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks.
This instrument is still not fully operational under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) but, despite the large criticism it raises, its political traction is what is keeping it on the table.
In this Briefing Paper, we discuss the prospects for REDD+. We structure these on the basis of options included in the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) Negotiating Text of February 2015: (1) forests in a market-based mechanism, (2) result-based approaches for REDD+, and (3) non-result-based approaches. In addition, we discuss for each of these the likeliness of substantial international finance that they may raise, their mitigation potential, their contribution to forest conservation, and their social co-benefits.
We conclude that large sums for REDD+ can only be expected when REDD+ credits can be used to offset fossil-fuel based emissions, provided the carbon credit price is high enough.
Although funds could be large, and may contribute to forest protection, there is an important counterargument: only the emissions reductions that are realised through non-offsetting approaches are net emission reductions.
Integrated non-results-based approaches may offer more opportunities for local social and ecological co-benefits but it is difficult to raise funds for them. With the high stakes of protecting the global climate and important ecosystems, biodiversity and local cultures, a non-results-based mechanism seems too non-committal. But, without funds, non-offsetting approaches may not be realised at all, which may prove to be a missed opportunity for forest protection. Leakage (deforestation elsewhere) and non permanence (deforestation at a later point in time) may be an issue for all options, but form a climate risk particularly when forest credits are used to offset emissions.
We suggest a middle road that focuses on regulatory measures and results-based approaches, which ensure social co-benefits, and are financed through public funds specifically generated for the purpose of developed nations assisting developing nations in adaptation and mitigation projects. Under this type of solution the results-based approach should be separated from mechanisms to reduce emissions from fossil fuel use.


About the authors

Hein, Jonas

Geographer

Hein

Meijer, Karen

Social Scientist

Rodríguez de Francisco

Further experts

Altenburg, Tilman

Economic Geographer 

Bauer, Steffen

Political scientist 

Brandi, Clara

Economist and Political Scientist 

Brüntrup, Michael

Agricultural Economist 

Herrmann, Raoul

Economist 

Horstmann, Britta

Geographer 

Houdret, Annabelle

Political Scientist 

Never, Babette

Political Scientist 

Pegels, Anna

Economist 

Chan, Sander

Enviroment Policy 

Fuhrmann, Hanna

Economist 

Keil, Jonas

Economist 

Kuhn, Sascha

Social Psychologist 

Mathis, Okka Lou

Political Scientist 

Malerba, Daniele

Economist 

Bencini, Jacopo

Environmental Researcher 

Iacobuta, Gabriela

Environmental Researcher 

Weinsheimer, Felix

Political Scientist