|
|||||
|
For those who have been to previous UN Climate Conferences, the following will be of no surprise. This afternoon, both the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA) and the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) failed to discuss REDD, although it was on the agenda for both groups. REDD is going to be one of the key discussion points at the UN Climate Change Conference at Poznan. REDD-Monitor will be following the events here and reporting on anything interesting that happens. In particular I’ll be attending some of the side events on REDD and noting what actors involved in REDD discussions are saying. Here’s a list of the side events related to REDD at Poznan: From November 18-20, 2008, over 30 indigenous peoples and civil society representatives from throughout the Congo Basin gathered in Kinshasa to discuss forests, climate change, and proposed mechanisms for reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD). We report below on the outcomes. “For many the term ‘REDD’ has become synonymous with a carbon financing approach where reducing emissions from forests by developign country actors is supported by developed country actors buying carbon credits, potentially to meet their own emissions reduction obligations.” This quotation comes from a World Resources Institute (WRI) briefing sheet titled, “Beyond Carbon Financing: The Role of Sustainable Development Policies and Measures in REDD”. The briefing sheet notes that under the Bali Action Plan, agreed in Bali in December 2007, REDD “is defined more broadly to include a range of actions by both developing and developed countries to address the drivers of deforestation”. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reached record highs in 2007, according to the World Meteorological Organisation. The price of European carbon emissions permits remains low. Meanwhile, the carbon market could be swamped by credits from carbon offsets, leading to a price collapse, according to a forthcoming report by Carbon Trust. Friends of the Earth International, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the World Agroforestry Centre and the Global Canopy Coalition released statements ahead of the climate summit in Poznan next week. A report by CIFOR looks at the potential impacts of climate change on forests, while insurance companies look at the difficulties of insuring forests against fire. On the eve of the Poznan UNFCCC Conference of Parties, even pro-market and cautious expert groups are starting to sound alarm bells about the possible impacts of cheap ‘offsets’ on existing carbon markets. The widely respected and UK government-backed London-based Carbon Trust, which provides advice on carbon reductions to industry and governmental agencies, has warned that carbon offsets could swamp the European Emissions Trading Scheme, with “strong implications” for the price of carbon (see full article below). A new report by Friends of the Earth International published today takes a critical look at REDD. The report concludes that “The REDD proposals currently on the table are intended to generate profits for polluters, not to stop climate change. They must be replaced with a commitment to stop deforestation once and for all.” The way in which forests are defined will be a crucial factor in determining whether REDD serves a truly useful purpose in helping to protect the world’s forests or, alternatively, is simply used as a means of supplementing the incomes of logging and industrial plantation companies. It is widely agreed that the existing definition of “forest”, as agreed under the Marrakesh Accords, and which allows for any areas as small as 0.05 hectare and with as little as 10% tree cover, is woefully inadequate in terms of recognising the wider roles and functions that true forests fulfil. In this piece, Sean Cadman of the Wilderness Society, who has been involved in recent UNFCCC discussions on forest definitions, considers some of the issues.
The latest issue of Down to Earth‘s newsletter includes a detailed overview of REDD in Indonesia. The danger, Down to Earth points out, is that in the rush to get REDD pilot schemes up and running before the Copenhagen climate summit in December 2009, important issues such as land and resource rights in forests are sidestepped. In the run up to the UN’s climate change conference in Poznan next week, Friends of the Earth International will publish a report looking at some of the possible implications of REDD. In the report, FoEI will argue that the plans for REDD are open to abuse by corrupt politicians or even illegal logging companies. An article in today’s Guardian based on FoEI’s upcoming report includes an interview with Joseph Zacune, climate and energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth International. Zacune points out some of the key problems with REDD as it is currently developing, including the risks that Indigenous Peoples and other forest dwelling communities will be impacted by REDD, in the absence of secure land rights, not least because increasing the value of forests will increase the incentive for states and corporations to take over control of the forests. Two important developments this week: Voluntary Carbon Standard developed a new standard for carbon accounting in forests; and three US Governors signed a carbon trade agreement with states in Brazil and Indonesia. The reporting is uniformally optimistic. REDD-Monitor provides another view. The Coalition for Rainforest Nations wants the UN to establish a single body to coordinate forest carbon trading and at a meeting in Vienna the UNFF discussed financing mechanisms for REDD.
Reuters has reported that the state of California has signed an agreement with the Indonesian Province of Aceh to purchase carbon credits from the Ulu Masen forest ‘offset’ scheme. World Rainforest Movement released the following statement earlier this month. The statement challenges some of the assumptions underlying the current negotiations on REDD. It can be downloaded as a pdf file (1 MB) by clicking on the image below. In a new response to the ‘Eliasch Review’, the London-based Overseas Development Institute has warned that ‘capacity strengthening’ of long-neglected forestry institutions in order to undertake REDD programmes could take ‘decades’. ODI states that the challenge of overcoming bad forest governance in the tropics has been understated, as ”recent attempts by the international community to support sustainable forest management do not give much cause for optimism. Twenty years of experience shows that international funding does not necessarily secure improved, sustainable outcomes”. ODI has also warned that the review is “over-optimistic” concerning the problem of measuring and monitoring ‘avoided deforestation’. As this short article concisely covers many of the key issues at stake in the current REDD debate, we include it here in full. This week, International Tropical Timber Council failed to reach a decision on forests and climate. The “Global Indigenous Peoples Consultation on REDD” took place in the Philippines. Australia referred in gushing terms to Indonesia’s efforts to address climate change and tensions were reported between landowners and the government in PNG. Nicholas Stern praised the Prince’s Rainforest Project in The Times. |
    
|
||||
|
|
|||||
