in Cambodia

Missing the point: A response from the World Bank’s Benoît Bosquet about Cambodia’s REDD Readiness Preparation Proposal

Missing the point: A response from the World Bank's Benoît Bosquet about Cambodia's REDD Readiness Preparation Proposal

Benoît Bosquet, Coordinator of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) at the World Bank, has responded to REDD-Monitor’s questions for Jürgen Blaser, a reviewer on the World Bank’s FCPF Technical Advisory Panel. Blaser had quoted REDD-Monitor in a presentation at the recent Participants Committee meeting in Vietnam, giving the impression that REDD-Monitor supported the REDD readiness process in Cambodia.

Bosquet’s response is only of interest in that he completely and utterly misses the point of the questions – which were very straightforward. One of the questions to Jürgen Blaser was whether he had bothered to read the whole article from which he extracted a quotation. A follow up question for Bosquet might be whether he read the questions that his email is supposed to be answering.

Bosquet did, perhaps inadvertently, answer one of my questions addressed to Blaser:

REDD-Monitor: Do you think that REDD can in fact protect Cambodia’s forests? I’d be grateful if you could explain how and when you anticipate that this will happen.

Benoît Bosquet: Note that each country’s R-PP is a proposed set of activities and studies to begin gradual movement towards REDD+ readiness over the next few years. As these activities are implemented, they should help the country conduct analytic and institutional work, information sharing, and consultations with stakeholders to advance the development of a REDD+ strategy tailored to meet the national conditions.

Which, when translated from World Bank-talk, means: “I wouldn’t hold your breath.”

REDD-Monitor’s questions to Jürgen Blaser are here: “Cherry-picking in Cambodia: Some questions for Jürgen Blaser about Cambodia’s REDD Readiness Proposal.”

The article from which Blaser took the quotation for his presentation in Vietnam is here: “Can REDD save Prey Long forest in Cambodia?.”

And Benoît Bosquet’s response is below (Blaser’s presentation in Vietnam has now been posted on the FCPF website. It was not available on 28 March 2011 when I wrote to Blaser.)

From: Benoît Bosquet
To: Chris Lang
Date: 2 April 2011 06:04
Subject: Your questions regarding TAP presentation on Cambodia R-PP

Dear Mr. Lang,

I write in reference to your REDD Monitor article titled “Cherry-picking in Cambodia: Some questions for Jürgen Blaser about Cambodia’s REDD Readiness Proposal,” in which you raised questions regarding the presentation by the ad hoc Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) on the Readiness Preparation Proposal (R-PP) of Cambodia, made on March 25, 2011 during the eighth FCPF Participants Committee (PC) meeting in Dalat, Vietnam.

The TAP review process generally involves about four to six individual international technical experts, plus two or three experts from the country being reviewed. The TAP synthesis review for each country is posted on the FCPF web site in advance of the meeting, and this review is presented by one or more TAP experts at a PC meeting like the one in Vietnam last week.

The TAP review is one input into the PC decision-making process, which also includes a review by some representatives of the PC (also posted on the FCPF web site), a discussion among PC members and observers, and the drafting of a PC resolution on an R-PP under formal assessment at a PC meeting.

The materials regarding Cambodia’s R-PP, including the Cambodian government’s presentation of its R-PP (which contains information on the historical rate of deforestation), the TAP review and Powerpoint presentation, a statement by Cambodian civil society organizations (CSOs) explaining their concerns about the Cambodian R-PP (which was distributed ahead of the adoption of the PC Resolution on the R-PP), the UN-REDD Programme’s comments on the R-PP, and the PC Resolution on the R-PP, are available at http://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/fcp/node/297.

As you will note, the PC Resolution (PC/8/2011/6), which was drafted by a group that included representatives of indigenous peoples and CSOs from Cambodia, requests Cambodia to submit a revised R-PP to the Facility Management Team, reflecting the key issues summarized in the annex of the Resolution, before entering into a Readiness Preparation grant agreement. One such issue is for Cambodia to “continue the progress to date on information sharing and consultations among the government and stakeholders, and enhancing capacity of all participants in the REDD+ process, based on the principles for consultation set out in R-PP.”

Note that each country’s R-PP is a proposed set of activities and studies to begin gradual movement towards REDD+ readiness over the next few years. As these activities are implemented, they should help the country conduct analytic and institutional work, information sharing, and consultations with stakeholders to advance the development of a REDD+ strategy tailored to meet the national conditions.

I hope this sheds some light on the FCPF process.

Sincerely,

Benoît Bosquet

Leave a Reply

  1. The World Bank’s FCPF has nothing to do with providing any certainty that REDD can be effective in protecting forests in countries like Cambodia – so it’s hardly surprising that Benoit Bosquet cannot answer REDD-Monitor’s straightforward questions.

    It’s really all just about pursuing an ideologically-driven approach to climate change (through carbon markets) and establishing a new commodity market (forest carbon) that the Bank itself (and its donors) can benefit from. Bank staff such as Bosquet are also no doubt envying the success that some of their former colleagues have had in using the Bank to establish such markets, then moving to lucrative jobs in the private sector to trade in them.

  2. A World Bank carbon bank will fail and is impossible to establish on a level playing field.
    It will also be impossible for the World Bank to manage it evenly all to say the least correctly if at all possible.
    The whole concept is not only stupid but egoistically selfish and with failed organisation’s as the World Bank and UN supposing managing the ‘Earth” , I would hate to observe the results of such a initiative in years to come.
    The global strategy ” G ” be it 8 to 88 is a perfect example of disgraceful economics and ‘ international advice ‘ that has not been corrected or accountable , the International UN management is another perfect example of failure. ( yesterday 7 UN officials murdered because of the UN management).
    COP climate change meetings are the next propaganda and false expectations delivered from this World Bank cartel of absolute corruption and uncertainty.
    REDD or REDD+ is a ambitious vehicle to acquire land of forest nations.The World Bank through REDD+ now wants to control the countries land……..
    Its similar to allowing the pigs to eat all the strawberries, this World Bank strategy ” idea” must not be allowed.