indonesia nama success story
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions for the Forests and Other Land Uses of Indonesia:
Complementarity of Policy Instruments, Funding Streams and Motivation
Meine van Noordwijk
ICRAF
Co-authors:Fahmuddin Agus, Sonya Dewi &
Herry Purnomo
Is the window of opportunity for REDD+ closing? COP-18, Doha, Qatar (EU Pavilion): 29 November 2012, 18:00-20:00
Expected effect positive
neutral
negative
Path-dependence?
0. Igno-rance of issues and po-tential solution
I. Initial excitement, supported by positive feedback reinforcement, effective ‘public re-lations’, grading into ‘hype’
II. Reality checks, disappoint-ment, confusion, ‘crash’
III. Real negotiations can start to define a net positive outcome of unavoidable tradeoffs (‘loose less’ – ‘loose less’, or ‘win’-‘win’?), or to abandon the framing and seek a new solution (repeating the cycle?)
Figure 1. Stages in typical ‘issue cycle’ of environmental policy
Hope / Hype / Crash / Reality?
Politi
cal p
rom
inen
ce
pe
ople
* in
fluen
ce *
con
cern
Stage of the issue cycle
Scoping Stakeholder Negotiation Implemen- Re-eva-analysis response tation luation
Is it a problem?
Cause-effect mechanisms
Who’s to blame?
What will it cost?
Regulate and/or reward
Implement & monitor
Evaluate, re-assess
Who’ll have to pay?
What can be done to stop, mitigate, undo or adapt?
How much and where?
Who will monitor compliance? Litigation
Tomich et al., 2004
The REDD future seemed bright in 2007
Five challenges:1.Scope,definitions
2.Peat outside ‘forest’3.Rights, legality
4.Interlinkage and leakage5.Fairness & efficiency
Nov 2007 – ahead of Bali COP:
Time
Emission outside the
REDD scheme
Sink outside A/R CDM scheme
C-stocks
t/ha
Fairness: the real conservation cost
Market Efficiency: the most real impact
Depend on definition
Forest
Conservation Production Conversion
Coreidentity
Environmental quality, health
Branding as basis for market share
Global trade and investment relations
Economic growth with acceptable distributional effects
Food sufficiency as prerequisite for political stability in cities and supportive electorates
Territorial integrity and security of the state, international independence, domestic bounded local autonomy
Moti
vatio
nal p
yram
id d
rivin
g go
vern
men
t dec
ision
s
Knowledge, awareness
I. Awareness II. Readiness III. Implementation at scale
Self-articulated NAMA
REDD+ ER-p
erfo
rman
ce b
ased
fina
nce,
with
so
me
inte
rnati
onal
ER
addi
tiona
lity
EET Self-
regu
lato
ory
resp
onse
to
redu
ce C
foo
trpi
tns
in t
rade
UNFCCC negotiations of rules of the game
Rent-seeking elites
REDD rents compete with forest rents
Our exports are threatened…
We care…
Ecological & social safeguards
1. Scope & definitions
intensive agriculture
natural forest
integrated, multifunctional
landscape: crops, trees, meadows and forest
patches
Tree plan- tations
intensive
extensive
conservation
protection
production
Agr
ofor
estr
y
Agr
icu
ltu
re
F
ores
try
Segregate Integrate functions
Current legal, institutional & educational paradigm
Current reality
‘deforestation’
‘loss of forest functions’
….are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily
unstocked as a result of human intervention such as harvesting or
natural causes but which are expected to revert to forest;
[FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1]
Signs of deforestation?
Forest without
trees
Non-forest without trees
Trees outside forest
Forest with trees
Forest definition based on institutions & intent
Forest definition based on X% canopy cover
Including e.g. agroforests, oil palm plantation
Clearfelling/ re-plant is accep-ted as forest; no time-limit on ‘replant’
If we cannot define it, we cannot save it:
forest definitions and REDD
Forest definitions are ambiguous so often forest loss is not officially counted as deforestation. As well,
ground-level implications of REDD+ will depend on the
operational definition. Application of AFOLU accounting rules can
bypass the need for clear definitions, reduce leakage and
promote multifunctional landscapes in an equitable, efficient and effective way
1. Undisturbed natural forest 2. Undisturbed + sust. logged natural forest 3. Closed canopy undisturbed + logged forest 4A. as 3 + agroforest 4B. as 3 + timber plantations 4C. as 3 + agroforest + timber plant’s + estate crops 4D as 4C + shrub
Rainforest foundation
Conservation agency
Modis data
Ministry of ForestryForest ecologist
UNFCCC definition
Stakeholder:
REDD_ALERT synthesis and re-analysis of 5 carbon-pool data for Jambi
RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ to ‘non-forest’ land cover types are included, and details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ to ‘non-forest’ land cover types are included, and details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, or the shifts to lower C-stock densities within the forest; details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ to ‘non-forest’ land cover types are included, and details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, or the shifts to lower C-stock densities within the forest; details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD+ = idem, + restocking within and towards ‘forest’ ; in some versions RED+
will also include peatlands, regardless of their forest status ; details still depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ to ‘non-forest’ land cover types are included, and details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, or the shifts to lower C-stock densities within the forest; details very much depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD+ = idem, + restocking within and towards ‘forest’ ; in some versions RED+ will also include peatlands, regardless of their forest status ; details still depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
REDD++ = REALU = idem, + all transitions in land cover that affect C storage, whether peatland or mineral soil, trees-outside-forest, agroforest, plantations or natural forest. It does not depend on the operational definition of ‘forest’
20
Spatial analysis: classification of 450 districts in Indonesia according to 7 tree cover transition stages (Dewi et al., in prep.)
“Forest transition” as spatial pattern. ‘chronosequence’?
1. Scope & definitions
intensive agriculture
natural forest
integrated, multifunctional
landscape: crops, trees, meadows and forest
patches
Tree plan- tations
intensive
extensive
conservation
protection
production
Agr
ofor
estr
y
Agr
icu
ltu
re
F
ores
try
Segregate Integrate functions
Current legal, institutional & educational paradigm
Current reality
‘deforestation’
‘loss of forest functions’
This issue can be/has been resolved by nesting REDD+ within a broader land-based NAMA (REALU) framework in Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans
2. Rights & legality• In 2012 the Indonesian constitutional court ruled in a case
initiated by local governments in Central Kali-mantan province, that the ambiguity that the 1999 Forestry Law 41 had created in allowing either ‘designation’ or ‘gazettement’ to be the basis for inclusion of land areas in the permanent forest es-tate in its article 1(3), should be resolved by relying on ‘gazettement’ only. Only 14.2 Mha (10.9%) out of the 130.7 Mha of Kawasan Hutan (68.4% of Indo-nesia’s land) has to date been gazetted in complian-ce with the law => legal vacuum around all govern-ment rules and permits for >50% of Indonesia
http://www.asb.cgiar.org/
2. Rights & legality• In 2012 the Indonesian constitutional court ruled in a case
initiated by local governments in Central Kali-mantan province, that the ambiguity that the 1999 Forestry Law 41 had created in allowing either ‘designation’ or ‘gazettement’ to be the basis for inclusion of land areas in the permanent forest es-tate in its article 1(3), should be resolved by relying on ‘gazettement’ only. Only 14.2 Mha (10.9%) out of the 130.7 Mha of Kawasan Hutan (68.4% of Indo-nesia’s land) has to date been gazetted in complian-ce with the law => legal vacuum around all govern-ment rules and permits for >50% of Indonesia
This issue can be/has been partially resolved by nesting REDD+ within a broader land-based NAMA (REALU)
framework in Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans, with regencies/provinces as major
actors; at national scale new efforts have only just started
3. Interlinkage & leakageLow intensity swiddening
maintains forestLogging & mining
concessions harvest large trees & create
road accessPost-logging institutional
vacuum allows settlers
Over-capacity of wood-based industry => demand for
‘illegal logging’
Economic opportunity of oil
palm, rubber, coffee attracts
large- & small-scale planters
Forest tenure reform creates incentives for
tree planting
Fallow => agroforest
Swiddening intensifies, fire cycle
starts
Industrial timber
plantations
Drivers of tree cover change
Van Noordwijk
et al., 2011
Forest and tree cover transitions: a unifying concept
Temporal pattern, X-
axis
Spatial pattern, X-axis
Institutional challenge at turning point
X-linkage of actions in landscape
Core
Choice of Y-axis
1
2 3 4 5
6
Widening: area planted < area cleared Contracting: area planted > cleared
Tree cover transition
In the 1990’s loss of natural cover increased the amount of ‘low C-stock’/low economic value land; tree (crop) planting was 28% of the loss of natural forest area
After 2000 planting of tree (crop)s equals 90% of concurrent loss of natural forest; the amount of low C-stock/low economic value land decreases
Local elites
Local com-munities
Local norms and rules on land tenure
National government
Local government
Agrarian and forest laws, development policies
Migrant pioneers
Migrant followers
Migrant norms and expecta-tions on land tenure
Conces-sionairs
Labour force
Business plans and expecta-tions on land tenure
Current ABCD interaction drives ‘business as usual’ development
and emission trajectories
Alternate ABCD interactions with Free and Prior Informed Consent are needed
for High-C-Stock Development pathways
Galudra et al., submitted
e.g. ADSB reports 2007/8
NPV, $/Ha
Carb
on s
tock
, tC/
Ha
Slope indicates emissions per gain in $/ha
Tradeoff at land use system level
oppo
rtun
ity c
ost,
$/t C
O2e
,
Cumulative emissions
Emission reduction poten-tial for given C price
Opportunity cost at landcape scale
Rural income (increasing)
Rural income (declining)
C stock (increasing)
C stock (decreasing)
Dynamic land use scenario model
Agents with variation in resource base, moti-vation, live-lihood stra-tegies.interactingwith rules & policies Agent-based land use change model
e.g. ASB-II reports of 1990’s
e.g. FALLOW scenarios
I II
III
IV
Four levels of analyzing opportunity costs
3. Interlinkage & leakageLow intensity swiddening
maintains forestLogging & mining
concessions harvest large trees & create
road accessPost-logging institutional
vacuum allows settlers
Over-capacity of wood-based industry => demand for
‘illegal logging’
Economic opportunity of oil
palm, rubber, coffee attracts
large- & small-scale planters
Forest tenure reform creates incentives for
tree planting
Fallow => agroforest
Swiddening intensifies, fire cycle
starts
Industrial timber
plantations
Drivers of tree cover change
Van Noordwijk
et al., 2011
This issue can be/has been resolved by nesting REDD+ within a broader land-based NAMA (REALU) framework in Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans
4. Peat outside ‘forest’
Huge percentage of emissions from LUC areassociated with low economic benefit
Opportunity costs vary from place to place
ADSB 2007 results for Indonesia
4. Peat outside ‘forest’
This issue can be/has been resolved by nesting REDD+ within a broader land-based NAMA (REALU) framework in Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans
De facto REDD pilot projects have included peatland issues regardless of international scope and definitions; in Durban peatland restoration was recognized as potential CDM activity
5. Fairness & efficiency
Value chain
Fairness argument:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B11kASPfYxY
Payments for environmental services (PES), or non-provisioning ecosystem services, target alignment of micro-
economic incentives for land users with meso- and macro-economic societal costs and benefits of their choices
across stakeholders and scales
They can interfere with or comple-ment social norms and rights-based approach-es at generic (land use plan-ning) and in-dividual (tenure, use rights) levels, and with macro-econo-mic policies influencing the drivers to which individual agents respond.
PES concepts need to adapt. Multiple para-digms have emerged within the broad PES domain.
Forms of “co-investment in stewardship” alongside rights are the preferred entry point
Expected to be on-line by August 15
Providers, Beneficiaries, ‘Sellers’ ‘Buyers’
Intermediary, Broker
MvN Fig3A
Intermediary, Broker
Providers, Beneficiaries, ‘Sellers’ ‘Buyers’‘Co-investors’ ‘Co-investors’
MvN Fig3B
Respect, Image, Knowledge
Free and Prior Informed Consent of sovereign decision makers
Finance: invest-ment, payment
Certified Emission Reduction
Legend:
Local sectors/areas: communities, households
C RED
D
valu
e ch
ain
Inve
stm
ent/
pa
ymen
t
Sustainable livelihood Reducing direct drivers support of emissions
Additionality ~ baselineLeakage/displacement
Trus
t/th
reat
rel
ation
s
International rules, fund/market
Subnational sectors/areas private sector
Local sectors/areas private sector
Monitoring C stocks & project cycle aspects
Fairness/Transparency Efficiency/Clarity
International border
Nested baselines, certi-fied emission reduction
Coreidentity
Environmental quality, health
Branding as basis for market share
Global trade and investment relations
Economic growth with acceptable distributional effects
Food sufficiency as prerequisite for political stability in cities and supportive electorates
Territorial integrity and security of the state, international independence, domestic bounded local autonomy
Moti
vatio
nal p
yram
id d
rivin
g go
vern
men
t dec
ision
s
Knowledge, awareness
I. Awareness II. Readiness III. Implementation at scale
Self-articulated NAMA
REDD+ ER-p
erfo
rman
ce b
ased
fina
nce,
with
so
me
inte
rnati
onal
ER
addi
tiona
lity
EET Self-
regu
lato
ory
resp
onse
to
redu
ce C
foo
trpi
tns
in t
rade
UNFCCC negotiations of rules of the game
Rent-seeking elites
REDD rents compete with forest rents
Our exports are threatened…
We care…
Ecological & social safeguards
Nov 2007 – ahead of Bali COP:
Issue 1,2 & 4 can be/has been resolved
by nesting REDD+ within a broader land-
based NAMA (REALU) framework in Indone-
sia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans Issue 3 & 5 have progressed in
recognition, moving beyond denial and defensiveness, but there is a
considerable way to go
Five challenges:1.Scope,definitions
2.Peat outside ‘forest’3.Rights, legality
4.Interlinkage and leakage5.Fairness & efficiency
Tony La Vina – this morning at IETA/ASB/IISD event
“The stronger emission reduction commitments needed to make REDD work through private sector
involvement in regulated markets is not going to come from this COP, not until 2015”
“I’ve personally shifted attention and hope to a more integrated approach that combines REDD+,
agriculture and all land-based activities”
Is the window of opportunity for REDD+ closing? COP-18, Doha, Qatar (EU Pavilion): 29 November 2012, 18:00-20:00
Ucayali, Peru
Southern Cameroon Jambi,
Indonesia
Vietnam
Reducing Emissions
from Deforestation
and Degradation
through Alternative Landuses Embracing
Rainforests of the Tropics
Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, UKUniversité Catholique de Louvain, BelgiumVrije Universiteit Amsterdam, NetherlandsGeorg August University of Göttingen, GermanyICRAF, IITA, CIAT, CIFOR, ASB-partners in Indonesia, Vietnam, Cameroon, Peru