reducing emissions from deforestation under the unfccc. a ...20savaresi.pdfcover and withdrawal of...

Det Juridiske Fakultet

Reducing emissions from deforestation under the UNFCCC. A new opportunity

for forest governance?

ANNALISA SAVARESIPhD Fellow

Faculty of LawUniversity of Copenhagen


Summary

1. Deforestation and climate change

2. The theoretical background

3. The debate on reducing emissions from deforestation (REDD) under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

4. After COP15

Deforestation and climate change

Deforestation is a major source of CO2 emissions



What is deforestation?

Deforestation is the ―permanent removal of forest cover and withdrawal of land from forest use, whether deliberately or circumstantially‖

Forest degradation occurs when changes in the forest negatively affect its production capacity. While deforestation refers to the loss of entire patches of forest due to clearing, degradation refers to the gradual thinning of forests.

IPCC (2000) Special Report on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry. R. T. Watson, I. R. Noble, B. Bolin et al. Cambridge, IPCC: 377.

Deforestation is concentrated in the Tropics

Tropical Deforestation Rates


Top 10 Emitting Countries

Drivers of deforestation

•Commercial logging

•Energy production (firewood, charcoal)

•Clearance for commercial agriculture

•Cattle ranching

•Clearance for subsistence agriculture

•Infrastructure works (e.g. roads, dams)

•Mining

•Fire


The Drivers of Deforestation in the Amazon

Mongabay, 2009


Forests are not just sticks of carbon: collateral damages

• Tropical Forests host half of the world's biodiversity

• Tropical Forests provide watershed regulation and a natural defense against soil erosion

• Tropical Forests contribute to local climate regulationand greatly influence global precipitation patterns


Social and Economic Consequences of Deforestation

Forests and Humans

• 1.4 billion people depend on the forests for their fuel, food, medicines and shelter

• Forests are home to particularly vulnerable forest-dependent communities and indigenous peoples

Although deforestation may be a source of revenue for some, in tropical countries it often has a negative impact on forest dependent segments of the population.

In the long run deforestation may lead to soil erosion, watershed depletion and severe environmental degradation, with high costs for society (e.g. droughts in Australia? Deo et al., 2009)

Theoretical Background

Deforestation as a market failure

‖Deforestation takes place because the public goodsthat forests provide are undervalued in markets.‖ (Humphrey, 2008)

―The hypothesis that people benefit from the forest, and would conserve it if they controlled it, may not hold when alternative land uses provide higher benefits than forests.‖ (Tacconi, 2007)

One way of improving the protection of forests is to remunerate the ecosystem (environmental) services provided by forests


Costa Rica – Forestry Law 7575 (1996)

• ―Forests, forest plantations and other ecosystems offer services essential to the citizens and to economic activities, at the local, national and global levels‖.

• Environmental Services Payment Program: a financial mechanism created to recognize the environmental services provided by forests to the society.

• Economic compensation to land owners to guarantee the conservation and sustainable management of forest resources.


Forests in International Law

• The Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All Types of Forest (UNGA, 2007)

• EU Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT, initiated in 2003)

• UN Convention to Combat Desertification(1996)

• Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)

Forests in International Law (2)

• Forests are natural resources subject to State’s sovereignty

• Some services and benefits forests provide (e.g. climate regulation, carbon storage, biodiversity conservation) may be viewed as public goods


Forests as public goods

―The environmental services that forests ecosystems provide to the atmosphere by sequestering and fixing GHG must be recognized by the international community and valued‖

(Government of Bolivia, submission to the UNFCCC, 2006)

"Forests are a planetary asset and no longer the concern of individual countries"

(Martin Mabala, Environment Minister, Gabon, 11 March 2010)

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) and the UNFCCC. A new opportunity to halt deforestation?



•―Stabilization of greenhouse-gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous atmospheric interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change.‖ (Art.2)

•Policies and measures to deal with climate change should ―be comprehensive, cover all relevant sources, sinks and reservoirs of greenhouse gases and adaptation, and comprise all economic sectors‖ (Art. 3.3)

Forests and the UNFCCC. The Story so Far


Forests under the UNFCCCArticle 4.1

All Parties, taking into account their common but differentiated responsibilities and their specific national and regional development priorities, objectives and circumstances, shall:

(c) control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (..) in all relevant sectors, including the energy, transport, industry, agriculture, forestry and waste management sectors;

(d) Promote sustainable management, and promote and cooperate in the conservation and enhancement, (..) of sinks and reservoirs of all greenhouse gases (..) including biomass, forests and oceans as well as other terrestrial, coastal and marine ecosystems.

So far, this mandate has only been partially fulfilled in connection with forests

Forests under the Kyoto ProtocolArticle 3.3 KP

The net changes in greenhouse gas emissions by sources and removals by sinks resulting from direct human-induced land-use change and forestry activities (LULUCF), limited to afforestation, reforestation and deforestation since 1990, measured as verifiable changes in carbon stocks in each commitment period, shall be used to meet the commitments under this Article of each Party included in Annex I.

Certain activities — namely, afforestation and reforestation since 1990 — are accounted for in meeting the Kyoto Protocol’s emission targets. Conversely, emissions from deforestation activities will be subtracted from the amount of emissions that an Annex I Party may emit over its commitment period.


Clean Development MechanismArticle 12 KP

• The CDM stimulates sustainable development and emission reductions by allowing Annex B Parties to implement emission-reduction projects indeveloping countries

• Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction credits, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto Protocol targets.

• CDM projects must qualify through a public registration and issuance process designed to ensure real, measurable and verifiable emission reductions that are additional to what would have occurred without the project.



Forests and the CDMReforestation: direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land through planting, seeding, and/or human-induced promotion of natural seed sources, on land that was forested but that has been converted to non-forested land.

Afforestation: direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period of at least 50 years

rules for accounting of these activities were resolved and agreed on as part of the Marrakesh Accords in 2001, after lenghty negotiations

Emission-reduction projects in developing countries under the CDM



Avoided deforestation and the UNFCCC: The beginnings

In 2005 a group of tropical forest countries (the so-called Rainforest Coalition) suggested to incentivise the reduction of tropical deforestation under the UNFCCC, either by inserting them in the Kyoto Protocol or through an additional Protocol to the UNFCCC

Rationale for REDD

―Curbing deforestation is a highly cost-effective wayof reducing greenhouse gas emissions and has the potential to offer significant reductions fairly quickly‖ (Stern Review, 2006)

REDD makes economic sense, as a relatively cheap option to mitigate climate change quickly

―Reduced deforestation and degradation is the forest mitigation option with the largest and most immediate carbon stock impact in the short term per ha and per year globally‖ (IPPC III WG. 2007, 14).

REDD is a way of ―buying time‖ while measures to reduce emissions in other sectors are being devised.


Rationale for REDD (2)

• ―Stabilization of GHG in the atmosphere (…) will be more difficult and costly unless both industrialized and developing countries actively contribute to emissions reductions‖ (PNG and Costa Rica, Submission to the UNFCCC, 2005).

REDD is a way to get developing countries to contribute directly to climate change mitigation– and perhaps even accept caps on their emissions?

But how?

Reducing emissions from deforestation (REDD) under the UNFCCC. Research Questions

• Identify the legal space for REDD – why do we need it?

• Progress achieved so far on REDD under the UNFCCC.

• How should an international regime for REDD look? Working out the details

International LawReview and analyse existing international law instruments addressing forest governance and proposals for REDD

Domestic LawReview and comment selected early domestic experiments to realise REDD at the domestic level.

Investigate REDD’s potential to partially bridge the existing gap in international law concerning forest governance

REDD and PES

• Reducing emissions and biodiversity loss in forests requires particular efforts from forest-rich developing countries, many of which cannot afford the investments required

Principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBD, UNFCCC): developed countries should provide funding for undertaking biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation endeavours

REDD+ as opportunity for establishing an international system for the payment of the ecosystem services provided by tropical forests?


Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES)

Conservation with payment for services,

e.g. climate regulation,

flood defense, water quality, carbon storage

Benefits to land users

• Biodiversity loss• Carbon emissions• Soil erosion

Costs to broader society

Deforestation and use of land

for pasture - crops

Adapted from Pagiola (2009)

Payments for ecosystem services, i.e., ―benefits people obtain from ecosystems”

PES

REDD+ as PES. The advantages

• REDD+ could provide funding for the conservation of tropical forests far greater than existing international conservation funding

• Funding would be performance-based and only accrue to Parties that demonstrate their success in maintaining forests


REDD+ as PES. The challenges

•Not all PES protect or conserve biodiversity. A focus on maximising the provision of just one service (e.g. carbon storage) may have negative impacts on the provision of other ecosystem services

While REDD+ may bring about positive gains for tropical forest and biodiversity conservation, the extent of these gains will depend on its design and implementation

REDD Mechanism under the UNFCCC. Some design and implementation

challenges

1.Integrity

2.Scope

3.Scale

4.Governance

5.Funding

6.Impact on Vulnerable Subjects


1. Defining Integrity

Permanence, i.e. how to prevent loss of carbon sequestered by forests though tree felling, forest fires, etc.

Leakage i.e. how to prevent the displacement of deforestation from an area credited for avoiding deforestation to another place or time.

Monitoring and Verifiability i.e. establishing internationally agreed methodologies to monitor and verify emission reductions

Additionality, i.e. ensuring that REDD produce actual emissions reduction, beyond business-as-usual.

Baselines, i.e. selecting reference deforestation levels against which to measure increases/decreases in emissions.

CDM as a model?

2. What scope for REDD?

Several activities may contribute to mitigation under a REDD+ mechanism :

a)Reducing emissions from deforestation;

b)Reducing emissions from forest degradation;

c)Conservation of forest carbon stocks;

d) Sustainable forest management;

e) Enhancement of forest carbon stockse.g. afforestation/reforestation.

Should REDD include all the above?


3. What is the right scale for REDD?

• Nation-based approach

• Project-based approach

• Hybrid approach


4. Governance. Readiness for REDD

A range of governance factors need to be in place, including:

•effective institutions, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities;

•clear and appropriate legislation;

•clear forest and land tenure arrangements;

•ability to enforce legislation;

•monitoring capabilities.


Existing initiatives to improve REDD readiness

Multilateral LevelUN-REDD ProgramForest Carbon Partnership FacilityInterim REDD+ Partnership

Bilateral LevelAustralian Government's Global Initiative on Forests and Carbon; Government of Norway's International Climate and Forest Initiative.

5.REDD’s impact on vulnerable subjects


Carbon cowboys?


CCBA Social and Environmental Standards

Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA)

• the REDD+ program ―maintains and enhances biodiversity and ecosystem services”

• ecosystem services potentially affected by the REDD+ program must be ―identified, prioritized and mapped‖

• the program must be aimed at ―making a significant contribution to maintaining and enhancing biodiversity and ecosystem services‖

• the program ―does not lead to the conversion of natural forests or other areas that important for maintaining and enhancing the identified biodiversity and ecosystem service priorities‖


REDD at COP15

How did REDD do at COP15?

• The negotiation text on REDD was one of the less contentious and better developed

However (and contrary to expectations) no resolution on REDD was adopted

Negotiators put together an advanced draft decision on REDD

What Parties agreed on:

• Scope of REDD+

(a) Reducing emissions from deforestation;(b) Reducing emissions from forest degradation;(c) Conservation of forest carbon stocks;(d) Sustainable management of forest;(e) Enhancement of forest carbon stocks.

REDD-plus benefits countries that are already effectively protecting their forests. Sustainable forestry practices may also be eligible for payments.

What Parties agreed on:

• Safeguards :

•Conservation of natural forests and biological diversity;

•references to the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities;

•Basic governance conditions including transparency and full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders;

•a phased approach to developing a fully fledged REDD regime.

What Parties did not agree on:

• Emission reduction goal for REDD

Previous versions of the negotiation text contained targets to reduce rates of deforestation (50% by 2020 and 100% by 2030)

• Scale (National vs subnational approach).

• Monitoring, reporting, verification.

• Finance

Previous versions of the negotiation text contained targets to provide finance (amounting to €15-25 billion, although no timeframe was specified). However, all figures disappeared in the final draft.

The Copenhagen Accord

REDD is specifically mentioned in the Copenhagen Accord:

‘We recognize the crucial role of reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation and the need to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emission by forests and agree on the need to provide positive incentives to such actions through the immediate establishment of a mechanism including REDD-plus, to enable the mobilization of financial resources from developed countries.’

REDD at COP15: A Balance

The draft REDD decision kicks a number of matters

to the SBSTA, including monitoring and reporting,

implementation of safeguards, how to do national

strategies, etc.

Much work still needs to be done and many uncertainties surround the adoption of a REDD mechanism under the UNFCCC


The Road Ahead

• It remains to be seen how the financial commitments on REDD+ will be fulfilled

• The mandate of the Bali Road map has been extended until COP16, to be held in Mexico in December 2010

• In the meantime, several initiatives to improve REDD readiness in developing countries are already fully operative→


Some Early Domestic Experiments

Brazilian State of Amazonas

• Amazonas Initiative

• Law of Climatic Changes (2007)

• State Parks Decree

• Amazonas Foundation For Sustainability

• $10m Bradesco Bank

• Bolsa Floresta

Case studies

•Brazil

•Indonesia

•Guyana


Conclusions

• If developing countries end up selling carbon offsets from reduced deforestation that do not correspond to actual emissions reductions, this would lead to an increase in global carbon emissions.

• However, the potential rewards from getting it right stretch beyond emission reductions and include the sustainable development of forest-dependent communities and conservation of some of the world's richest forest ecosystems

Triple win?


Conclusions (2)

• Fragmented responses would almost certainly fail to tackle perverse incentives to deforestation in the tropics.

• An international framework to address the problem is desirable.

• Whatever form REDD takes, international coordination is needed to establish a level playing ground, to prevent abuses and secure the achievement of actual emission reductions

• Such a mechanism should allow to adapt REDD to domestic circumstances.

• Given the standstill in negotiations, REDD is an opportunity to experiment with a piecemeal approach to solving the problem of climate change – coalition of the willing?

reducing emissions from deforestation under the unfccc. a ...20savaresi.pdfcover and withdrawal of...

Documents