O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

CIFOR and Global Comparative study on REDD+

55 visualizações

Publicada em

Presented by Pham Thu Thuy (CIFOR) at "Knowledge Sharing Workshop: REDD+ Policy and Politics in DRC" on 16-17 Oct 2019

Publicada em: Meio ambiente
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

CIFOR and Global Comparative study on REDD+

  1. 1. CIFOR and Global Comparative study on REDD+ Pham Thu Thuy on behalf of GCS-REDD+ team
  2. 2. Outline  Who is CIFOR ?  Global comparative study on REDD+
  3. 3. WHAT IS CIFOR?  Established in 1993  a member of the CGIAR Consortium and leads the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry  Carry research on the most pressing challenges of forest and landscape management around the world and support policymakers, practitioners and communities make decisions based on solid science about how they use and manage their forests and landscapes. WHO IS CIFOR?
  4. 4. RESEARCH PRIORITIES AGENDA Forests & Human Well Being 6 Thematic Areas : Sustainable Landscapes & Food Equal Opportunities, Gender, Justice, & Tenure Climate change, Energy, & Low-carbon Development Value Chains, Finance, & Investments Forest Management Restoration
  5. 5. WHY GCS- REDD+ ?
  6. 6. As an idea, REDD+ is a successstory Significant result-based funding to address an urgent need for climate change mitigation, cheap, quick and easy!
  7. 7. In reality, REDD+ faces huge challenges • Powerful political and economic interests • Coordination across various government levels and agencies • Trade-off/Benefits to balance effectiveness and equity • Tenure insecurity and safeguards must be genuinely addressed • Transparent institutions, reliable carbon monitoring and realistic reference levels to build result-based systems
  8. 8. THINKING beyond the canopy CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study (GCS-REDD+) 2009- 2020 • To support REDD+ policy arenas and practitioner communities with - information - analysis - tools • so as to ensure 3E+ outcomes: - effectiveness - efficiency - equity and co-benefits
  9. 9. Thanks to
  10. 10. THINKING beyond the canopy CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study (GCS-REDD+) • Phase 1 (2009- 2012): focuses on overall REDD+ design issues and building strong research- based knowledge. • Phase 2 (2012- 2015): analyzing nascent and evolving policy processes and the actions of early starters in developing REDD+ policies and measures to inform and facilitate transformational change. • Phase 3 (2016 – 2020): focuses on the assessment of policy design and actual impacts of REDD+ policies and measures as a basis to achieving results in the broader context of landscape management, livelihood objectives and equity considerations.
  11. 11. THINKING beyond the canopy CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study (GCS-REDD+) new research countries phase III: Myanmar, Guyana
  12. 12.  M1 (REDD+ policies) focuses on effective, efficient and equitable (3E) REDD+ policies, and measures them at the national level.  M2 (REDD+ subnational initiatives) focuses on assessing the performance of REDD+ subnational initiatives.  M3 (Measuring carbon emissions) focuses on measuring carbon emissions and determining forest and carbon reference levels, and works on the Monitoring, Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MMRV) of forests and carbon.  M4 (Multilevel governance) focuses on understanding the synergies and trade-offs in joint mitigation and adaptation, and addresses the challenges of multilevel and multi-sector governance and carbon management.  M5 (Knowledge sharing) is dedicated to partner engagement and dissemination.
  13. 13. 1. Well, I thought REDD+ is already dead, isn’t it ? 2. What has REDD+ achieved on the ground? 3. How can REDD+ be transformed to enhance social and environmental resilience?
  14. 14. Q1: Is REDD+ dead ?
  15. 15. Progress at national level Over 50 countries have initiated national REDD+ strategies
  16. 16. Progress at subnational & local levels As of May 2018, there were 358 active REDD+ local programs and projects in 53 countries. http://www.reddprojectsdatabase.org/
  17. 17. But…  REDD+ as envisioned has not been tested at scale. Results-based payment, the novel feature of REDD+, has gone untested.  International funding (both public and private) remains scarce  Demand through carbon markets is lacking.
  18. 18. Q2. What has REDD+ achieved ?  forests gain prominence in international and national agenda  Improved countries’ monitoring capacities and understanding of drivers, providing transparent and accountable information and data  Increased stakeholder involvement, and platforms to secure indigenous and community land rights
  19. 19. Q2. What has REDD+ achieved ?  Some forest-rich countries have already made important financial contributions to REDD+ implementation (e.g Equador, Vietnam, Indonesia)  Well-being effects small, with mixed sign, but more likely to be positive when incentive components included  Land tenure and social safeguards highlighted as persistent challenge
  20. 20. Q2. What has REDD+ achieved ?  Major lack of data and solid impact studies  Studies on biodiversity and adaptation outcomes scarce  National REDD+ policies: most show some statistically significant reductions, but small effect size  Local REDD+ initiatives: modest but positive outcomes for forests
  21. 21. Q3: How can REDD+ be transformed to enhance social and environmental resilience?  REDD+ requires transformation so that it can be transformational  Diversifying and coordinating the cure: • Results-based payment with diversification • coordination and country ownership with bold policies • Being at the table  Finding the right dose: • International finance nudges but domestic incentives decide (e.g. Colombia and Indonesia with carbon tax and green bonds programmes, PFES in Vietnam)
  22. 22. Q3: How can REDD+ be transformed to enhance social and environmental resilience?  Nurturing optimism by stressing positive side effects: • New, positive national narratives that forests can play in support of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, not primarily as reservoirs of agricultural land, but as providers of key products and services for economic development. • A positive narrative of green/sustainable development can mobilise farmers and firms, voters and politicians (Nepstad 2018).  Shortening the long road to recovery: • Experience • Rigorous impact assessment
  23. 23. We acknowledge the support from: the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad), the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), the European Union (EU), the UK Government, USAID, the International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) and the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (CRP-FTA) with financial support from the CGIAR Fund. & all research partners and individuals that have contributed to the GCS research MANY THANKS Further information, please contact:  Christopher Martius (Project leader): c.martius@cgiar.org  Pham Thu Thuy : t.pham@cgiar.org  Amy Duchelle : a.duchelle@cgiar.org  Nikki De Sy : niki.desy@wur.nl  Anne Larson : a.larson@cgiar.org  Jeremy Van Loon : Jeremy.VanLoon@cgiar.org