With international concern escalating as a result of population growth, climate change, food price increases and land grabbing, the environmental challenges facing those living in the developing world become ever more complex, multifaceted and immediate. These challenges are encapsulated within the overarching concept of sustainable development. Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries, and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries (REDD+) are important elements of the international climate change regime. Global deforestation is estimated to be the source of 20 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions per year. At the same time, some argue that forestry has the highest potential of any sector to provide low-cost greenhouse gas reduction solutions between now and 2030.

3. Why forests matter? Why deforestation?

4. 31%
of the land is covered by forests
1.6 billion
people rely on forests
1/4
3.3 billion m3
of pharmaceutical drugs come from forests
of wood is generated in forests

5. 36
football fields are lost every minute
17%
of the Amazon forest has been lost
15%
of all greenhouse gases emissions
80%
of documented species is found in tropical forests

6. Other* Pasture
Logging
Small-scale
agriculture
Large-scale
agriculture
10
10
20
20
40
ILLEGAL LOGGING
FIRE
FUELWOOD HARVESTING
*

7. REDD or dead? What does + stand for?

8. ‘Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD)
is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests,
offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from
forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development.
"REDD+" goes beyond deforestation and forest degradation, and
includes the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and
enhancement of forest carbon stocks.’
UN definition

9. 1997 2005 2009
Adoption of Kyoto
REDD proposed
for negotiations
Reconfirmation on
REDD+
importance
2001 2007 2010
Protocol
Provision related
to forest-related
sinks
Montreal Copenhagen
Marrakesh
Accords
Bali Action Plan Cancun
Defined rules for land
use, land-use change,
and forestry (LULUCF)
Development
from REDD to
REDD+
Proposal on
specific work to
implement REDD+
2011
Durban
Guidance on providing
information regarding
forest related emissions
7 decisions on REDD+
incl. result-driven
finance, monitoring
system
Warsaw
Framework
2013
UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCES

10. A climate change mitigation solution that many initiatives
are currently developing
Most cost effective way of stabilising the atmospheric
concentration of GG emissions
Dualistic: Saving the planet & making money for
developing nations
Not a panacea for combating climate change and it must co-exist
with other significant emissions reductions

11. New future for carbon markets? Will it work?

12. 1. A country slows
down forest
destruction
2. Country receives
payment for reducing
carbon pollution
3. Country funds further
forest preservation and job
creation
Trees are
made of
carbon
Deforestation
raises carbon
into the
atmosphere
If tropical forest
countries slow
down forest
destruction (CO2
emissions), they
receive payments
Countries invest
that money to
conserve the
forests and create
jobs for local
people.

13. Industrialised countries will pay developing
countries to keep forests standing, in order for
them to act as a ‘carbon sink’.
To succeed, a number of stakeholders (government,
international institutions, NGOs, local representatives, local
farmers and labourers) must work together.
70,000 people directly benefiting
from projects
More than 4 milion tons reduced
since 2009
139 red list species habitat
protected
14 million hectares of forests
Around 73 REDD+ projects in 24 countries under protection
validated

14. CUMMULATIVE MARKET
VALUE OF FOREST CARBON
MARKETS (US$MM)
EU
50%
Other
20%
USA
30%
BUYERS
REDD+ projects are being included in national development programs by
developing and testing forest monitoring
Projects are seen as beneficial for numerous actors
Community consultation is believed to assure informed consent of impacted
people

15. Can we see forest from the trees?

16. DIFFICULT TO
IMPLEMENT
Vast and complex in
nature; Non functional
governance systems;
Inadequate
infrastructure.
OWNERSHIP
DISAGREEMENT
Unclear who owns the
forests.
DISRUPTING
LIVELIHOOD
Restricting access to
forests disrupts local
(often poor) people.

17. ALLOCATING
FUNDS
Who receives money
and how is it spent?
RE-CENTRALISING
FOREST
MANAGEMENT:
EXCLUDING LOCALS
New demands on
national forest
managers; Exclusion
of the local users that
need funds.
IGNORING OTHER
GG FACTORS
North is to continue
industrial growth
whilst developing
countries pay the
price.

18. IT IS NOT
PARTICIPATORY
No discussions with
local people.
COMMERCIALIZATION
IS NON ETHICAL
Equalizing
environmental
protection with
economic
transactions.
CONTRIBUTING
TO
URBANISATION
It will force local
people to migrate to
cities.

19. Can we see forest from the trees?

20. Deforestation and forest degradation need to be tackled and the mismanagement of forests is having
a detrimental effect on human induced climate change.
It is promising that global institutions such as the UN & World Bank agree that deforestation must be
addressed at the global policy level.
On paper and in theory, REDD+ definitely addresses pressing issues regarding climate change and
would certainly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions if implemented correctly.
REDD+ obscures the fundamental problem of climate change and its core roots in the north. Unless
the big industrialised nations in the north reduce their emissions, climate change will not abate. Because
REDD+ is such a vast and complex initiative, it lacks transparency and is corruptible at many
levels.
As opposed to being participatory, REDD+ is likely to exclude local and indigenous people from the
forests on which they rely to sustain their livelihoods, which will worsen poverty and deepen
inequality.
If REDD+ is to be a success for all, it is imperative that forests are not completely shut off from
indigenous peoples and preserved purely as ‘carbon sinks’. Agreements with local people must be
negotiated in regards to sustainable forest usage, to ensure that the forests are both protected and
available to be used to sustain the livelihoods of the local populace.

21. REFERENCES
Kühne, Kjell (2011) Why REDD+ is Dangerous (in its current form). [Online] Available from: http://www.redd-monitor.org/2011/02/05/why-redd-is-
dangerous-in-its-current-form/ [Accessed on 14th March 2014]
Laurence, William F. (2008) Can Carbon Trading Save Vanishing Forests? Bioscience, 58 (4): 286-287
Peters-Stanley, M., Hamilton, K., & Yin, D. (2012) Leveraging the landscape: State of the forest carbon markets 2012. Washington, DC:
Ecosystem Marketplace. [Online] Available from: http://www.forest-trends.org/documents/files/doc_3242.pdf [Accessed on 14th March 2014]
Phelps, Jacob, Webb, Edward L., and Agrawal, Arun (2010) Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest Governance? Science, New Series, 328 (5976):
312-313
Schneider, Gia, Thomas, William L., and Vitale, Benjamin (2009) Banking on the Environment: Profiting from Investment in REDD. Natural Resources
and Environment, 24 (1): 14-17
USEFUL WEBSITES
Centre For International Forestry Research: Youtube video ‘Getting REDD+ to work’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2ZlvTsA-UY
REDD-monitor.org: http://www.redd-monitor.org/redd-an-introduction/
Forest Carbon Partnership: https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org
Global Justice Ecology: Youtube video ‘A darker shade of green: REDD alert and the future of forests’ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPFPUhsWMaQ
UN-REDD programme: http://www.un-redd.org/aboutredd/tabid/102614/default.aspx
WWF: Deforestation https://worldwildlife.org/threats/deforestation
Forest Trends http://www.forest-trends.org/
Conservation International http://www.conservation.org/Pages/default.aspx