1. Bogor, 16 May 2023
Global Comparative Study on REDD+ Workshop
REDD+ social safeguards in Indonesia:
Opportunities and challenges

2. REDD+ safeguards
 Understand past experiences, the current state, and the
transformative potential of safeguards.
 Research and engagement through
 reviews of global standards;
 reviews and interviews regarding relevant legal frameworks in
project countries;
 fieldwork on early experiences and perspectives on more recent
standards.
 Increase clarity across safeguards under different standards and
examine implementation opportunities and challenges in different
contexts.
 Provide practical solutions to support safeguard design and
implementation by assessing existing experiences and setting context-
specific pathways to encourage proponents to ‘do better’.
https://www2.cifor.org/gcs/about-gcs-redd/

3. Introduction - Safeguards
 The need to understand experience with
safeguards as the framework for reducing
emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation and enhancing forest carbon
stocks (REDD+), and moves to RBAs
 Seven safeguards - the Cancun safeguards -
were agreed for REDD+ at the Conference of
the Parties to the UNFCCC in 2010.
We focuses on safeguards C and D.
 The introduction of voluntary standards
provided an opportunity for guidelines that
are more supportive of IPLC rights and there
is considerable variation in standards. Some
standards motivate countries to increase
their support for the rights of IPLCs.
Analysis and practical guidelines for different safeguard standards for REDD+ and other forest initiatives

4. Variable GCF FCPF Indonesia context based on the legal study
1) Cancun safeguards Yes Yes SIS was developed in 2011
There are 7 principles, 17 criteria and 32 indicators
2) Gender Yes
(GCF Gender policy)
Yes
(benefit sharing; WB
standards)
Signatory of CEDAW, guideline and regulation on gender
mainstreaming and gender budget tagging
3) IPLC’s rights under
international law
Yes
(GCF IP policy)
Yes
(per UNFCCC & WB
standards, criteria and
indicators)
Signatory of UNDRIP (but has not ratified ILO 169)
4) Land and resource
rights
Partial
(no specific
provisions)
Yes
(recognized or not)
Legal mechanism in place for recognition of customary
land rights; social forestry program
5) Community carbon
rights
No Partial
(carbon rights assessment,
no recognition of community
rights)
Based on Presidential Regulation No. 98/2021, carbon
rights will be held by the state, but communities will
access the benefits from carbon emission reductions.
Further regulations related to community participation in
carbon economic value activities are still to be introduced.
Comparing the state of IPLC rights in Indonesia legal frameworks

5. Variable GCF FCPF Indonesia context based on the legal study
6) FPIC Yes (including
description of how
stakeholders were
identified, involved and
consulted)
Partial (monitoring &
reporting; limited in
other circumstances)
There is no legal framework for FPIC in Indonesia. FPIC
has been implemented voluntarily in Indonesia following
sustainable certification standards (e.g., RSPO) or the
Timber Legality Assurance System
7) Formal benefit
sharing mechanism
No (Optional) Yes (transparent &
participatory design;
guidelines)
A formal benefit sharing mechanism has been designed
but is not yet in operation. A specific national-level
institution called the Environmental Fund Management
Agency (BLU-BPDLH) was established in 2019 to manage
funding for environmental and emissions reduction
programmes.
8) Formal grievance
mechanism
Yes (must report how
complaints were
received and resolved)
Yes (guidelines &
standards)
Grievance mechanism has been developed at national,
provincial and village level. Reporting of grievance
mechanism will be linked to SIS
9) MRV of social
rights/concerns
Partial (disbursements
not contingent on
safeguard
performance)
Yes(indicators;includes
requirementspriorto
implementation)
The monitoring, reporting and verification component of
REDD+ also covers safeguard implementation. However,
the reporting of safeguards does not require much
specificity or a qualitative assessment
Comparing the state of IPLC rights in Indonesia legal frameworks

6. Lesson learnt from national legal study
 Indonesia has been involved in REDD+ since its beginning, and has developed various instruments to
support its implementation, including a SIS which includes social safeguards that recognize the rights of
IPLCs.
 IPLC rights are mentioned in different implementing regulations in piecemeal fashion, e.g., aspects of Free,
Prior and Informed Consent in regulations on access to information or protection of human rights; in
contrast, the rights to land and forest tenure are much more comprehensive, e.g. through the Social
Forestry scheme.
 The implementation of safeguards for REDD+ and other forest-based initiatives must engage adat
communities, respecting their rights, knowledge, and participation as highlighted in the updated Indonesia
NDC.
 Despite progress, the legal framework on community rights in the context of REDD+ have not been fully
implemented, it will need to translate into action, and how it will address the political challenges given
other interests in forests and land use in Indonesia.
 Further research will analyze to understand perspective of implementers, REDD+ stakeholders, safeguards
interpretation processes on their experience on safeguards. Thus ensuring that safeguards are not just a
formality but rather are implemented to protect and respect the rights of communities and other
marginalized groups in this country.

7. • Subnational government commitment to low carbon development:
 Green growth compact declaration to support achievement of NDC (2016);
 Green Initiative Program (Green Kaltim) led by Provincial Council on Climate Change (DDPI);
 Pilot province for FCPF in 2015 ERPA for 22MtCO2 for USD110M [USD20.9M advanced in Nov 2022]
 Multi stakeholder collaboration (government, academia, development partners)
• FCPF readiness phase led by the DDPI & funded by WB;
• Implementation phase coordinated by the subnational PMU & funded through regional expenditure and
budget (APBD) and support from development partners
• PMU led by EK’s Economic and Development Administrative Assistant; 4 working groups: Benefit sharing
(Economic Bureau), Safeguards (Forestry Agency), Monitoring, measuring and reporting (Environmental
Agency), Planning and budgeting (Bappeda)
• FCPF comply with World Bank’s FCPF safeguard standard and SIS REDD+
REDD+ initiative in East Kalimantan

8. Summary of preliminary findings in East Kalimantan
Aspects Findings
General • Considered as a new concept by the government
• Government familiar with FPIC & FGRM; effort to mainstream safeguards (tagging system)
• High turnover rate of the government staff  knowledge transfer issue
• Development partners provide technical support and funding for implementing FCPF activities and safeguards
FPIC • Perceived as easiest aspect to comply; familiar approach for the implementer, e.g. NGOs working with communities
• 99/150 targeted villages, long process (carried out several times), information must be delivered that ensure clarity
(simple language, use of video), ensuring participation of all communities who will be impacted by the FCPF activities
Benefit sharing
mechanism
• Perceived as most challenging aspect to comply first scheme to provide high incentives for communities
• RBP incentives managed by BPDLH and an intermediary organization has been developed to disburse incentives
Land and resource
rights
• Limited information on land rights and project activities plan that was made open to public
• Tenure issue was managed directly under the government’s authority
• History of conflict between communities vs private sector led to high acceptance of social forestry
Grievance
mechanism
• Cross sectoral grievance mechanism (Aspirasi Etam) w/different channels will be monitored by different agencies
• Technical assistance will be provided to ensure communities understand the FGRM system and how to access it
Monitoring • Report submitted to WB, including information related to safeguard
• Some interviewees argued that no specific monitoring activity for safeguards

9. REDD+ initiative in Jambi
• WB’s Biocarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscape; 14 MtCO2e (2020-2025) & USD70M.
• The biocarbon fund in Jambi is divided into several stages: (1) preparation; (2) pre investment phase; (3) RBP.
• WB’s funding for readiness phase and for the implementation of programs (pre investment fund)
• Interventions focus on the performance areas (WPK/wilayah penilaian kinerja): 4 national parks (Bukit 30, Bukit
12, Kerinci and Berbak), 1 natural reserves (mangrove area) and 4 forest management units.
• Organization:
o Subnational PMU – Bappeda (planning and development agency) as the coordinator
o Safeguards – environmental agency (DLH)
o Measurement and reporting on carbon and benefit sharing – environmental agency (DLH)
o Monitoring and evaluation – Bappeda
o Key actors in the implementation phase: government agencies and individual consultants
Source: Science policy dialogue PPT, August 2022

10. Aspects Findings
General • Provincial bill for customary community recognition developed - individual PERDA for each customary groups are no longer needed and
instead decree by district head is sufficient for recognition process
• Provincial regulation for customary community recognition is the first important step for gaining recognition of customary forest
• Prioritized areas with no land conflicts subnat government has no authority to issue permits for mining and forestry sectors; migrants
FPIC • Village based approach (250 villages, 170 villages in 2022)
• Operational guideline for FPIC includes quota for participation of community members, how to collect consent, diversity of team who are
conducting FPIC to the villages, and number of visits to each village
Benefit sharing
mechanism
• Operational procedure for benefit distribution has not been developed but RBP disbursement scheduled for 2023 and 2026
• Proportion for beneficiaries : 14% operational, 68% performance, 18% for social economic aspects
• Benefits will be distributed through intermediary organizations (BPDLH – appointed intermediary organization)
• Safeguard team designed benefit proportion and socialization during FPIC
• Non-monetary benefits for communities, benefit sharing will be given through the village system
• Benefits for communities will be determined through measurement of emission reduction within village plot
Land and
resource rights
• 29 customary forests are legally recognized, including a semi-nomadic tribal group (Orang Rimba)
• No relocation or resettlement (e.g. conservation partnership, NTFPs extraction)
• Social forestry (other than customary forest) will be incorporated to address tenure problems (e.g. migrants or non-customary groups)
Grievance
mechanism
• Will be integrated with national monitoring system; temporary call center until the national portal is running
• Ongoing discussion on FGRM operational procedures, who can report, on what issues, how to access the portal)
• At local level, communities can also submit their grievances to forest management unit or village authorities
Monitoring • Environmental Agency will check plans in the environmental document with the actual implementation on the ground
Summary of preliminary findings in Jambi

11. Summary – comparative preliminary findings (EK & Jambi)
East Kalimantan (FCPF) Jambi (Biocarbon fund)
Period 2011-2025 (national – subnational level) 2019-2025 (national – subnational level)
Emission reduction target 22 MtCO2eq 14 MtCO2eq
Total RBP US$110 million US$70 million
Process 1. Readiness – 2. Implementation – 3. RBP 1. Readiness – 2. Pre-investment – 3. RBP
Funding for ERP
implementation
Regional expenditure and budget (APBD) as well as support
from the development partners (NGOs)
US$13.5M grant during pre-investment phase. This funding is
concentrated in designated performance area comprises of national
park, a nature reserve, and several forest management units
Main implementing
actors
MS collaboration – provincial government, supported by the
development partners (NGOs)
Provincial government, supported by individual consultants
Benefit sharing
arrangement
Local and customary communities  performance (65%)
and reward (10%) through village-based approach (benefit
will be transferred to the village institution based on
measurement of emission reductions)
Local and customary communities  performance (70%) and
economic and social aspect (18%) through village-based approach
(benefit will be transferred to the village institution based on
measurement of emission reduction)
Safeguard aspect For most participants, procedural aspects related to FPIC,
tenure, formal benefit sharing arrangement, FGRM and
monitoring have been met, although few respondents
commented on the need to strengthen implementation
For most participants, procedural requirements related to FPIC,
tenure and monitoring have been met. Formal benefit sharing plan
and FGRM incomplete. Gender requirements incorporated into FPIC
have faced challenges at the local level (social norms).
Safeguard framework WB required development of safeguards framework before signing ERPAs. While EK received their advance payment in 2022, Jambi
is currently in process of finalizing ERPD. WB has been overseeing the process in both provinces closely

12.  Awareness needed on the interrelation of aspects of the REDD+ process - benefit
sharing inseparable from safeguards (voluntary standards and multilateral guidelines
need to tie them).
 Grievance mechanisms still need to be more accessible to local contexts (and need a
budget)
 The pre-investment fund can ease the implementation of ER program which was
previously challenged by budget availability within government
 Implementing stringent and independent safeguards monitoring beyond checklists;
ensuring the suitability of safeguard planning and implementation as well as respect
and protection of community rights.
 Strengthening gender justice beyond nominal participation by hiring gender experts
to facilitate community engagement, increase participation of women and youth,
ensuring their access to benefit from emission reduction program
Governance - Preliminary lessons and recommendations

13.  Close follow up with clear and unchanging expectations – FCPF has been
accompanying the process in EK closely and adapting to its needs.
 Importance of clear guidelines from standards/multilaterals – local orgs had
experiences with consultations but different ideas of what FPIC meant.
 Donor requirements can make a difference - Indonesia included recognised AND
unrecognised villages/communities in the benefit sharing mechanism.
 WB safeguards could support change in procedural aspects to support community
rights
 Some administrative rules need to be adapted to improve effectiveness – e.g.,
requirements for intermediary organizations for RBP distribution.
Role of agencies/donors - Preliminary lessons and recommendations

14.  Gaps in financial and technical capacities to implement and monitor safeguards - more
support on financial and capdev.
 Support for awareness of role of gender-inclusiveness needed, esp at the subnational
level.
 BSM and FGRM have not been finalized - need to promote fair and transparent benefit
sharing arrangement
 Gender concerns better articulated in government activities – capdev needed for
stakeholders at different levels (provincial-district-village)
 Work towards safeguards can support discussion and recognition of customary
communities
 Best practices for inclusion of communities - conflict resolution and monitoring can be
developed to provide some guidelines for the implementers on the ground.
Capacity gaps/challenges - Preliminary lessons and recommendations

15.  Importance of multi-stakeholder coordination in well led and facilitated forums
 Intersector coordination needed – safeguards champions to develop and clarify
capacities (people were unsure of their roles within safeguards implementation).
 NGOs have been crucial to provide technical support as well as additional funding
for implementing FCPF activities and safeguards.
 Support for subnational universities to participate in the process.
 MS engagement focusing on community rights and fair benefit sharing should be
continued
 Continuous discussion on the progress of safeguard implementation, clarification
of each agency’s role.
 Safeguards should be mainstreamed into government planning, work, and
responsibilities.
MS collaboration - Preliminary lessons and recommendations

16. cifor-icraf.org | globallandscapesforum.org | resilient-landscapes.org
The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and World Agroforestry (ICRAF) envision a more equitable world
where trees in all landscapes, from drylands to the humid tropics, enhance the environment and well-being for all.
CIFOR and ICRAF are CGIAR Research Centers.
Thank you