section 1. introduction and background 1.4. guiding frameworks – sustainable development &...
TRANSCRIPT
Section 1. Introduction and Background1.4. Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics
USAID LEAF Regional Climate Change Curriculum DevelopmentModule: Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)
Name Affiliation Name AffiliationSurin Onprom; Co-Lead Kasetsart University,
ThailandTran Thi Thu Ha Vietnam Forestry University
Penporn Janekarnkij; Co-Lead Kasetsart University, Thailand
Nguyen Dinh Hai Vietnam Forestry University
Rejani Kunjappan; Co-Lead RECOFTCThailand
Vo Mai Anh Vietnam Forestry University
Claudia Radel; Co-Lead Utah State University Tran Tuan Viet Vietnam Forestry University
Sarah Hines; Co-Lead US Forest Service Cao Tien Trung Vinh University, Vietnam
Sidthinat Prabudhanitisarn Chiang Mai University, Thailand
Nguyen T. Trang Thanh Vinh University, Vietnam
Sharifah Zarina Syed Zakaria University Kebangsaan Malaysia Nguyen Thu Ha USAID Vietnam Forests & Deltas
Mohd Rusli Yacob University Putra Malaysia Maeve Nightingale IUCN MFF
Kaisone Phengspha National University of Laos Guada Lagrada PACT MPE
Phansamai Phengspha National University of Laos Le Van Trung DARD Lam Dong
Kethsa Nanthavongduangsy National University of Laos Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh AIT Thailand
Freddie Alei University of Papua New Guinea David Ganz USAID LEAF Bangkok
Chay Kongkruy Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia
Kalpana Giri USAID LEAF Bangkok
Soreivathanak Reasey Hoy Royal University of Phnom Penh, Cambodia
Chi PhamProject Coordinator
USAID LEAF Bangkok
AcknowledgementsSo
cial
and
Env
ironm
enta
l Sou
ndne
ss
(SES
) Mod
ule
Dev
elop
men
t Tea
m
Soci
al a
nd E
nviro
nmen
tal S
ound
ness
(S
ES) M
odul
e
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND1.1. Introduction to Climate Change1.2. The Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation Context 1.3. Introduction to Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)1.4. Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics
II. WHAT SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EXIST: STRENGHENING DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REDD2.1. Environmental Co-benefits: Introduction to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2.1.1. Carbon/REDD+ Project Accounting, Carbon Monitoring & MRV2.2. Governance 2.2.1. Regulatory Framework, Forest Tenure, and Carbon Rights2.3. Stakeholder Participation 2.3.1. FPIC2.4. Social Co-benefits2.5. Gender Equity and Women’s Empowerment 2.5.1. Gender Analysis Tools 2.5.2. Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index2.6. Indigenous Peoples and their Empowerment2.7. Local Livelihoods: An Introduction 2.7.1 Livelihoods impact Case Study: April Salumei, PNG2.8. REDD+ Benefits Sharing2.9. Economic and Financial Viability and Sustainability
III. STATE OF THE ART IN ACTION: BRINGING THE PIECES TOGETHER3.1. Safeguard Mechanisms in REDD+ Programs 3.2. Streamlining of Safeguards and Standards3.3. Developing National Level Safeguards
At the end of this section, learners will be able to: Identify the principles of sustainable development linked
to social, economic and environmental issues Describe the concept of environmental ethics and the
essential features of moral or ethical thinking Identify how a human-rights-based approach can arise
from an ethics framework Relate and develop the skills to recognize and apply moral
discourse for leadership in environmental fields, including in climate change mitigation
Learning Objectives
Outline
1. Introduction
2. Sustainable development concepts
3. Environmental ethics
4. Activities
Methodology
Lecture presentation of concepts and information
Class discussion decision making identifying issues
Pre-Class Preparation
Read: The concept of sustainable development published in “Our
Common Future” report in 1987 (The Brundtland Report) Kortenkamp, K & Moore, C. F. 2001. Ecocentrism and
Anthropocentrism: Moral Reasoning About Ecological Commons Dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21, 000-000. (http://www.idealibrary.com)
Introduction
This module section: Examines in detail the applicability of the sustainable
development concept as the framework for REDD+ Relates the use of ethical frameworks for decision
making
Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development (SD) Framework consists of three pillars:
Economic (Goal: Growth?) Environment (Goal: Conservation?) Social/Livelihood (Goal: Equity?)
We then also add a fourth consideration: Governance/Political (political process and how decisions
are made)
Economic
Commonly accepted considerations: Maximize human well-being. Ensure efficient use of all resources, natural and otherwise, by
maximizing rents. Seek to identify and internalize environmental and social
costs. Maintain and enhance the conditions for viable enterprise.
Environmental
Commonly accepted considerations: Promote responsible stewardship of natural resources and
the environment, including remediation of past damage. Minimize waste and environmental damage along the
whole of the supply chain. Exercise prudence where impacts are unknown or
uncertain. Operate within ecological limits and protect critical natural
capital.
Commonly accepted considerations: Ensure a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of
development for all those alive today. Respect and reinforce the fundamental rights of human
beings, including civil and political liberties, cultural autonomy, social and economic freedoms, and personal security.
Seek to sustain improvements over time; ensure that depletion of natural resources will not deprive future generations through replacement with other forms of capital.
Social
Governance / Political
Commonly accepted considerations:
Support representative democracy, including participatory decision-making.
Encourage free enterprise within a system of clear and fair rules and
incentives.
Avoid excessive concentration of power through appropriate checks and
balances.
Ensure transparency through providing all stakeholders with access to
relevant and accurate information.
Ensure accountability for decisions and actions, which are based on
comprehensive and reliable analysis.
Encourage cooperation in order to build trust and shared goals and values.
Ensure that decisions are made at the appropriate level, adhering to the
principle of subsidiarity where possible.
Framework for a National SD Strategy
SOCIAL human rights, equal opportunity, health, education, housing, security, families & villages
ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL
population, GDP, exports, employment, entrepreneurship, innovation
air quality, water quality, waste recycling, energy, forest renewal, biodiversity
Sustainable Development
(SD)
For Discussion:
1. Where, diagrammatically, does the governance / political element fit?
2. Can the three SD pillars be effectively balanced? Why or why not?
National Scorecard
National Strategy Scorecard
Vital indicator metrics Current value
Bench-mark country
Bench-mark country
Milestones2015
Goal Actual2016
Goal Actual 2017Goal Actual
Social: 1. Human rights
indicator2. Equal opportunity
indicator3. Etc.Economic:1. Population indicator2. Growth indicator (e.g.
GPD per capita)3. Etc.
Environmental:1. Air quality2. Water quality3. Etc.
Tools to Support Sustainable Development in REDD+
Is REDD+ “conservation as development”?
Can environmental conservation be economic development at the same time?
Environmental conservation
Economic development
Sustainable development
REDD+
Ethics
Ethical Standards
Environmental Ethics
the study of good and bad, right and wrong
criteria that help differentiate right from wrong
the study of ethical questions regarding human interactions with the environment
Ethics Basics: Meaning and Function
What is Environmental Ethics?
Environmental ethics: guides humans behavior and relations with nature and other
species on earth. deals with the moral relationships between humans, nature
and other species on earth. addresses the ethical dimensions of humans’ relations with
and behavior towards nature and other species on earth more generally.
Environmental Ethics Encompasses:
Understanding human ethical attitudes towards themselves and
nature.
Understanding how environmental exploitation affects livelihoods
(social/economic/political)
Understanding how conduct of social/economic/ political activities
affects the environment.
Understanding how technologies affect the environment, livelihood,
social well-being and nature.
In the context of this course: understanding, from an ethics
perspective, the role of REDD+ in addressing both conservation and
development.
Differing Environmental Ethics Perspectives
Environmental ethicists define three value systems that differ sharply with
regards to on whom the ethics are centered:
1. Anthropocentrism – Human-centered
considers the effects of environmental actions on humans only
humans as more important than any other species
2. Biocentrism – Life-centered
considers the effects of environmental actions on all living things
all species are important elements in a system of interdependence
3. Ecocentrism – Ecosystem-centered
considers the effects of environmental actions on all components of our
environment, both living and nonliving
totality is more important than individuality
What obligation do humans have…?
to other humans? to other living things? to other species? to non-living things? to future human generations?
The recognition of values or importance can strengthen relations within all living, non-living, humans and other species as a moral obligation and responsibility.
Human Rights and Ethics
One framework we use to consider our obligations to other humans is that of:
Human Rights
Different peoples and different countries may recognize different sets of human rights based on different collectively shared ethical principles.
International human rights debates and agreements are attempts to build a shared discourse of moral obligation and then to codify this discourse in law.
A Human-Rights-Based Approach
Four Fundamental Principles:
1. Participation
2. Non-discrimination
3. Transparency
4. Accountability
Ethical Principles
environmental benefits and co-benefits
governance, tenure, legal processes
participation and stakeholder engagement
social benefits and co-benefits
gender equity and women’s empowerment
indigenous empowermentlocal livelihoods
economic / financial viability and sustainability
Do we need ethical principles that
constrain and guide our actions?Do we need
guiding frameworks?
Activity A: Judging Actions
Consider the following:“A farmer has to clear land by cutting trees / forests to feed and support his or her
family“What do we need to include in our consideration of the farmer’s actions?1. Identify arguments for and against the farmer’s actions based on the SD
framework: conservation perspectives (environment) economic perspectives (economy) humanity perspectives (social / political)
2. Identify arguments for the “rightness” or “wrongness” of the farmer’s actions based on environmental ethics perspectives (anthropocentrism, biocentrism, ecocentrism).
3. Now consider the impact of processes at broader scales: Why might the farmer clear forest to farm? (consider the potential roles of national policies, legal frameworks, markets, etc. in shaping the farmer’s actions) Does this change our judgment of the farmer’s actions?
Activity B: Applying the SD framework to various human actions in the environment
Social Economic Environmental Political
Actions that can cause the extinction of other species for convenience of humanity
Cutting down of trees for the sake of human consumption
Performing animal testing for scientific research
Restoring lands that were destroyed
Protecting endangered species
TAKE HOME MESSAGE (1)
The sustainable development framework can be a tool to support decision-making to address multiple policy aspects: social, economic, environmental, and political.
Environmental ethics are the constraining and guiding value perspectives which shape the intention and purpose for conservation and development actions.
TAKE HOME MESSAGE (2)
The framework of human rights is a key system of ethical thinking that positions obligation to other humans in terms of “rights.” A human-rights-based approach can provide ethical guidance to projects design and implementation.
By providing frameworks for development of ethical decisions, these theories strengthen our ability to reach balanced and insightful judgments and to clarify and communicate the bases for those judgments.
References
1. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. London: Oxford University Press. (The Brundtland Report)
2. Corbera, E., Schroeder, H. 2010. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ. Sci. Policy, doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.11.002.
3. Clugston R. 2011. Ethical Framework for a Sustainable World. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development. 5, September: 173-176.
4. Gary W. Luck, Kai M. A . Chan, Uta Eser, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, Bettina Matzdorf, Bryan Norton, & Marion B. Potschin. 2012. Ethical Considerations in On-Ground Applications of the Ecosystem Services Concept. BioScience. Vol. 62, No. 12, December.
5. Jagger P., Sills E.O., Lawlor, K. and Sunderlin, W.D. 2010. A guide to learning about livelihood impacts of REDD+ projects. Occasional paper 56. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.
6. Rolston. H. 2003. Environmental Ethics. In The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy, 2nd ed. Bunnin. N and Tsui-James. E.P (eds), Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
7. Ulvin, Peter. 2007. From the right to development to the rights-based approach: how ‘human rights’ entered development. Development in Practice 17(4-5): 597-606.