The Warsaw decision on summary of information on safeguards is staggeringly weak. Governments “should” provide a summary report every two years. Least developed countries don’t even have to do that if they don’t feel like it.
The Warsaw decision on national forest monitoring systems allows governments to decide for themselves how they define “forests”. A better way of undermining what little legitimacy REDD had is difficult to imagine.
Reactions to the Warsaw REDD deal are still coming in. Here are two very different reactions from two Indigenous Peoples organisations. The first, from the Indigenous Peoples Biocultural Climate Change Assessment Initiative (IPCCA), is critical. The second, from the Tebtebba Foundation, is optimistic.
The Warsaw decision on coordinating REDD finance is not an agreement to coordinate REDD finance. It’s an agreement to hold a series of meetings, starting in 12 months’ time, about coordinating REDD finance. No institutional arrangements are established under this decision (unless a series of meetings counts as an institutional arrangement).
Simone Lovera is co-founder and executive director of the Global Forest Coalition, an international coalition of NGOs and Indigenous Peoples’ Organisations. In this guest post, she describes the REDD deal that came out of COP19 in Warsaw as “the weakest text any international forest-related body has ever adopted”.
“Amid cheers and applause negotiators announced the completion of the REDD+ program design.” That’s Pipa Elias, REDD+ and agriculture expert for the Union of Concerned Scientists, responding to the Warsaw REDD decisions on Friday.
On 28 November 2009, Brazil, South Africa, India and China formed the BASIC block and agreed to act jointly at COP15, the UN climate negotiations in Copenhagen. The BASIC countries threatened to walk out of COP15 if rich countries attempted to force their agenda on the Global South.
The UN climate negotiations started this week in Warsaw. For the second year in a row, the negotiations coincide with a massive typhoon hitting the Philippines. Last year at Doha, Philippine negotiator Yeb Saño asked, “Please, let Doha be remembered as the place where we found the political will to turn things around.”
The carbon budget is a simple, but very important concept. It is based on the fact that what matters in addressing climate change is not what governments agree to do by 2050, but the total quantity of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
In an Open Letter, the Climate Change Round-table, a group of civil society organisations in El Salvador, demands that the government should do more on climate than “loss and damage and REDD+”.