1. The document discusses lessons learned from REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) programs and ways to improve their effectiveness.
2. It summarizes findings from the Global Comparative Study on REDD+ which assessed REDD+ policies and projects in 6 countries and found modest impacts on reducing deforestation and mixed effects on community well-being.
3. It argues that for REDD+ to be more effective, programs need to support large-scale reforms that incentivize conservation, economic efficiency, and government budgets, rather than remain as small projects. Impact assessments also need to better evaluate REDD+ outcomes.
Top Call Girls in Bishnupur 9332606886 High Profile Call Girls You Can Get...
Transforming REDD+ lessons learned and way forward
1. TRANSFORMING REDD+
LESSONS LEARNED AND WAY FORWARD
Christopher Martius, Arild Angelsen, Stibniati Atmadja, Niki de Sy,
Thu Thuy Pham, Anne Larson, Amy Duchelle
c.martius@cgiar.org
Addis Ababa, 5 April 2019
2. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
3. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
5. Climate change context
• IPCC 1.5 degree report: immense and urgent
challenges and risks related to climate change
• a temperature rise of 2.0 °C is likely
Forestry:
• huge expectations globally - is the only carbon sink
• Bonn Challenge 350 million ha ecosystem restoration until 2030
• But costs and area demand are huge
• South Korea: restored 2 million ha of forest at cost of 3 billion $
• IPCC 1.5° report: For BECCS and afforestation together, land demand in 2100
is ca. 800-1800 million hectares, mainly converted from pasture land
What role can forestry realistically play?
6. Climate change mitigation role of afforestation
Relatively low potential but lowest costs
6
IPCC1.5degreereport,chapter4
Direct air capture and carbon storage
Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage
Afforestation
7. http://redd.unfccc.int/uploads/2_94_redd_20150804_unredd_technical_considerations_frel_under_unfccc_en.pdf
The four key elements of REDD+ and related UNFCCC DecisionsThe five activities that
comprise REDD+
1. Reducing emissions
from deforestation
2. Reducing emissions
from forest degradation
3. Conservation of forest
carbon stocks
4. Sustainable
management of forests
5. Enhancement of forest
carbon stocks
Decision 1/CP.16, par.
70
Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
8. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
9. CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study of REDD+
• To support REDD+ policy
arenas and practitioner
communities with
• information
• analysis
• tools
• to ensure 3E+ outcomes
for REDD+:
• effectiveness (to
reach C and non-C
benefits)
• (cost-) efficiency
• equity
• + co-benefits
• towards
transformational change
Effective REDD+ policy
National and global policies,
measures and commitments
REDD+ performance
Rigorous assessment in 6 countries, 23
sites, 150 villages, 4,000+ households;
global overview
Integrating REDD+ in the landscape
Multilevel governance, stakeholder
platforms, development
Monitoring, Measuring, Reporting
and Verification
Baslines, reference levels, drivers, capacity
development
Partnerengagementanddissemination
2009 - 2020
12. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
13. REDD+ as a Theory of Change
• A Theory of Change (ToC) is a roadmap for
change
o It outlines how to build a successful societal
transformation
o It explains how and why an initiative works
o It maps a pathway from a project’s activities, via
its outputs, to its outcomes and impact
o It tells you where the gaps are
14. One early definition of REDD+ was…
“A core idea underlying REDD+ is to make performance-based
payments, that is, to pay forest owners and users to reduce
emissions and increase removals.
Such payment for environmental (or ecosystem) services (PES)
… provides strong incentives directly to forest owners and
users to manage forests better and clear less forestland.
PES will fully compensate carbon rights holders that find
forest conservation more lucrative than the alternatives. They
simply sell forest carbon credits and less cattle, coffee, cocoa
or charcoal.”
Angelsen et al. (2009)
15. REDD+ as a Theory of Change I – the original idea
16. REDD+ as a Theory of Change II – the ‚official‘ set-up
17. REDD+ misses some elements of a functional ToC
• Missing components : “power” of incentives; nature
and level of compensation; who the beneficiaries
should be; and the extent to which offsetting should
be permitted
• REDD+ as practiced on the ground has evolved into a
broad basket of adaptive, non-conditional activities
• More clarity is needed for donor-side actions and
commitments, and their role as catalysts of change
through (conditional) financial support
• One confusion arises when not distinguishing clearly
between the objective of reduced emissions
(REDD+), and the framework to achieve REDD+
• REDD+ has laudable broad objectives, but is also
entangled by them, and its success depends on
broad policy reform
• Implementation must become more realistic and
pragmatic, based on diagnosis and through
evidence-based policy making
18. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
19. REDD+ policy (collaboration) networks: influence and
coalition building in times of change
Research question and hypothesis
Tenure has become a central element in Indonesia’s REDD+
policymaking
• But is this reflected in the REDD+ policy networks?
• Can the network structure explain how tenure got high on the agenda?
2 Hypotheses:
a) Actors with a rights-based approach to REDD+ gained more
influence over time (higher reputation)
b) Actors with a rights-based approach to REDD+ strategically
build coalition with diverse and influential actors (less
centrality in network)
20. Policy Network Analysis: Research Methods
• Data collection in 2012 and 2015
• Identification of core organizations and policy events
• expert panel (GO, Private Sector, ENGO, rights-CSO, University,
international and national research)
• Social organization survey
• standard questionnaire to identify coalitions and network
structures (stances, reputational power, info, collaboration,
disagreement and financing networks)
• In-depth interview with actors using open ended questions
• UCINET
Actors:
• 2012: 102 identified, 65 responded to network survey: 64%
• 2015: 130 identified, 83 responded to network survey: 62%
• Overlap of 84 actors between round 1 and 2
21. FINDINGS: Influence
The more often an actor is mentioned as influential, the larger the node size
Network of influence
2012 2015
- AMAN among most influential actors in phase 2
- fewer government actors highly influential
22. FINDINGS: Collaboration
Collaboration Network
2012 2015
- More actors in the center
- Central actor such as AMAN,
HUMA, FWI, Kemitraan are pushing
for rights and climate justice
including tenure reform
- Ministry of Forests central actor, and
government agencies recognizing this
- But MoF also needs other
organizations for REDD+
implementation
23. What is in
this talk?
1. Global role of forests in mitigating climate change
2. Global Comparative Study on REDD+
3. REDD+ as a Theory of Change: What is missing?
4. Policy Network Analysis - Indonesia example
5. Summarizing REDD+ at the global level
24. SUMMARISING REDD+
(I)
Finance and building
blocks
• International funding (public & private)
remains scarce, and demand through carbon
markets is lacking
• USD 1.1 – 2.7 billion/year in international
REDD+ funding
• Fact that REDD+ governments and
communities cover many of the costs
is not acknowledged
• Results-based payment -REDD+’s key
feature- largely untested at scale
• Funding
• Complex
• Anecdotal evidence on the impacts of
REDD+ finance on national policies
25. SUMMARISING REDD+ (II)
Shaping up
Positive intermediate outputs
& outcomes
• REDD+ helped forests gain prominence on
international and some national policy agendas
• 50+ countries put REDD+ in NDCs and have national
REDD+ strategies
• major coordination and implementation issues
remain
• National REDD+ initiatives improved countries’
monitoring capacities and understanding of drivers
• Increased stakeholder involvement, and platforms to
secure indigenous and community land rights
• 350 REDD+ projects, covering 43 million ha
• Jurisdictional approaches now covering 28% of tropical
forests
26. SUMMARISING REDD+ (III)
Modest impacts
• National REDD+ policies:
• most show some statistically significant reductions,
but small effect size
• Local REDD+ initiatives:
• modest but positive outcomes for forests
• Well-being impacts limited and mixed
• more likely positive when incentive components are
included
• Similar to the micro-macro paradox of development aid
• crowding out, leakage, too small
27. How can REDD+ be more effective? (I)
Big and bold initiatives needed
• International finance nudges ….
• … but domestic incentives decide
• Redesigning economics incentives for a triple win:
• conserve forests
• increase economic efficiency
• improve government budget balance
• Examples
• Brazil’s drastic deforestation reduction post-2004
• India’s ecological fiscal transfers (USD 7-12 billion annually)
• Ethiopia restoration plans
• How can we avoid project-ification, and make REDD+ support these reforms?
28. How can REDD+ be
more effective? (II)
A positive, exciting narrative
on forests
• The iron law of climate
policy (Arild Angelsen):
• If a conflict climate –
economic development,
climate loses
• Make forests part of a
green/sustainable economic
development strategy
• Examples:
• 1/5 of local income from
forests (PEN study)
• Forests as bio-pumps and
‘aerial rivers’
29. How can REDD+ be more effective? (III)
Be brave and assess impacts
• Few studies
• Impact assessment is not story-telling by donors, proponents or
beneficiaries … but a set of rigorous approaches; the main problem being
to estimate the counterfactual
• Impact assessment is not an afterthought; design and collect data from
day 1
• It is risky for proponents: no control of the result and hence, verdict on
your actions
We simply need to know more about what works and what doesn’t
30. Why are there not more
impact assessments?
3 hypotheses
People do not see the benefits?
• Proponents with strong faith in own
approach & success
• “One can easily see if it works or not”
Costs are high and the work, complex?
• Data collection: baselines, controls
• Need to hire experts
• Randomisation of treatments is ethically
problematic
Risks are high?
• No control of the result, and hence, the
verdict
• Negative assessment may jeopardize
future funding
31. REDD+ as a learning
experience
• The question is not:
“should we continue with REDD+
or not”?
• But rather:
“What have we learned that can
make our effort to reduce forest
emissions more effective,
efficient and equitable?”
• Both, dismissing REDD+,
and telling unfounded
success stories,
prevent that learning
• The writing of lessons
learned has just begun
The countries GCS works in, and some major outputs of CIFOR’s global comparative study
Read the lines
The data collection were conducted in 2012 for the first phase and 2015 for the second phase.
We are indentifying core organisations and policy events through expert panel that representing Government organizations, private sector, ENGO, and….)
Then we are conducting social organization survey to identify coalitions and networks structures.
Then the survey was supported by actor’s in depth interview with list of open ended questions.
We are using UCINET to draw to calculate and draw the network. Some calculation also done through R with help from our colleague. We identified 102 policy actors. However, due to confidentially issues and scheduling conflicts, we were only able to interview 65 included in our network analysis.
Comparing results from two surveys on policy networks, in 2012 and 2015, we identified changes in the actors networks related to influence, information exchange, and collaboration. We investigate how power relations have changed over time, and discuss what this means for the future of REDD+.
REDD+ is seen as involving inclusive, multisectoral and multidisciplinary policy processes. Although state agencies are perceived as the most influential, the Indonesian policy arena is populated by diverse actors. Figure 1 shows the number of times actors are named by other actors
as influential in national REDD+ policymaking. It shows that a group of government agencies is considered most influential (see the blue oval in Figure 1). Thus, while there is a trend towards a more open government, multistakeholder consultations and multilevel governance, the government,
understandably, is seen as ultimately responsible for public policy decisions. The Ministry of Forestry ( MoF) derives its power by virtue of controlling most forestland, bringing REDD+ under its jurisdiction. Recently, however, its central role in the policy arena has been challenged. Local governments are exerting their autonomy and pressuring the national government
to allow conversion of forest to other land uses. In response to a suit brought by four district heads in late 2011, the constitutional court declared that Article 1, Paragraph 3 of the Forestry Law of 1999, defining a forest area as ‘designated’ rather than gazetted by the Minister of Forestry, is unconstitutional. Although the forest areas delineated in the 1980s are still considered legally valid, most forest areas have not yet been gazetted and therefore can now be easily disputed (Arizona et al. 2012). Local communities, supported by NGOs, have also become more assertive in claiming land. Nevertheless, the MoF retains formal rights to control forest
areas and has issued regulations on the implementation of REDD+. Due to its long‑standing procedures, the MoF tends toward a business‑as‑usual paradigm, reflected in its appropriation of the concession model used for
timber extraction for conservation and eco‑tourism. REDD+, however, is a new approach requiring changes in attitudes, discourse and power relations, independent of the business‑as‑usual drivers of deforestation and forest degradation (Brockhaus and Angelsen 2012). The President established the National Council for Climate Change (DNPI) and the Task force on REDD+ to coordinate REDD+ policymaking and implementation, and these institutions clearly also have considerable influence on REDD+ in the country. They are, nevertheless, both outside the formal bureaucracy and therefore cannot operate without the support of more established agencies. As
a result of this institutional interdependence, effective REDD+ policymaking in Indonesia requires transparent and accountable cooperation among a diverse group of public and private organizations.
In 2015, the second figure shows the difference between the most influential and the lesser highly influential has decreased. The core of most influential actors now includes NORAD, AMAN and CIFOR replacing the disbanded UKP4 and DNPI.
in 2015, this prominence is shared among government organizations, a foreign donor organization, an NGO and an international research organization.
State agencies such as MOEF, Bappenas, KemenAgBn still the most influential power but other actors are gaining influential power. NORAD through their activity in fundings the redd+, cifor through their GCS REDD+ study. The most interesting is that AMAN, the Indigenous Peoples Alliance of the Archipelago, gaining influence pushing tenure agenda into the debate.
Such a shift could reflect a new openness of the State, to, among others, civil society calls for rights based approaches. REDD+ in Indonesia would then be one arena where this openness is applied. Alternatively, these results may indicate that REDD+ is no longer a priority and the state withdraws from efforts to tackle the political economy of deforestation to REDD+. To ensure progress on different agendas, tenure and avoided large-scale deforestation and hence realize emissions reductions, it will be important to flag the mutual benefits among the two (or more) agendas, that together might lead to the desired transformations in and beyond the forestry sector towards an effective, efficient, and equitable forest governance.
In phase 1, year 2011, the MoF (1), emerges as the central actor in mutually recognized collaboration among government agencies. As explained earlier, despite emerging challenges, the MoF holds the mandate to administer all forest areas. REDD+ can therefore only be implemented through collaboration or permit from the MoF, which does not
necessarily mean that MoF sees an organization as collaborator. Of course, REDD+ cannot be implemented by the MoF alone but requires collaborating with others, but despite this collaboration occurs mostly among same type of organizations.
Meanwhile in phase 2 year of 2015, collaboration is no longer between same type organization. Less homophily is observed in the network. However, does it means more coordination? Central actor such as AMAN, HUMA, FWI, Kemitraan are pushing for rights and climate justice including tenure reform. NGOS the new power, or REDD+ to unimportant.