The Context Of Redd In Brazil Drivers Agents And Institutions

This country profile contains an analysis of the causes of deforestation and forest degradation in Peru, and the economic, institutional and political context in which REDD is emerging in the country. Peru has a total forest area of approximately 73 million hectares, almost 60% of national territory. In the past few years, deforestation decreased from 150,000 ha/year to 106,000 ha/year but it still represents one of the biggest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the country. While it has decreased recently, an increase is expected during coming years due to development policies that support the expansion of road infrastructure in the Amazon, an increase in agricultural production and support for the extractive sectors. The government has declared a goal of reducing to zero the deforestation rate across 54 million hectares of primary forest by 2021, and has initiated the preparation process for REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation Plus) at a national and subnational level. While the pilot projects are already underway, with international and national funding, and even certification according to international standards, the national government is still in the process of developing REDD+ and MRV (Measuring, Reporting and Verification) strategies under the leadership of MINAM. Even if REDD has solid support within certain sectors of the government and civil society, it will face big challenges during the implementation phase due to a lack of intersectoral coordination and support to a socioeconomic development that would stimulate conservation and stop deforestation and degradation. In the process of preparation for REDD+, the country has advanced with the processes of safeguarding the participation of the civil society and the protection of native and local communities’ rights. At the same time, the challenges concerning weak governance at a national and regional level and conflicts of interest are threats to the effective, efficient and equitable implementation in the long-term.

This publication offers an overview of REDD+ strategy in Mozambique through a synthesis of the current knowledge about the causes of forest carbon changes, a review of the legal and institutional context, and a description of the current political process of REDD+. The objective of the study is to collate data and relevant information, and to offer a preliminary analysis of the fundamental aspects that can help promote efficiency, efficacy, and equity in REDD+ policy. Specifically, this study concludes that some of the major problems for REDD+ in Mozambique are the lack of data about deforestation and forest degradation, institutional weakness (regarding monitoring and propriety rights), and gaps in human and technical capacity to fulfil demands associated with REDD+. Therefore, efficient results will depend on the degree to which REDD+ policies are oriented toward real mitigation of the sources of forest carbon changes. In Mozambique, REDD+ policy tends to originate outside the timber sector. The cost-effectiveness of the results will depend on identifying and addressing the fundamental causes of forest carbon changes through more viable REDD+ policy options; government capacity to respond to REDD+ demands, especially at the sub-national level; the capacity of civil society and other institutions; and the strength of the institutional framework. The degree of success of equitable outcomes and the generation of co-benefits will depend on the inclusion and appropriateness of the processes at the national level; if those who support REDD+ costs are also being compensated; and on the general definition of carbon rights and environmental services.

This country profile for Tanzania provides an overview on the socioeconomic and political context within which REDD+ policies and processes emerge. It explores the Tanzanian REDD+ policy processes and strategies at the national level, identifying barriers, limits and opportunities in national REDD+ arenas to inform future REDD+ design by providing research-based options for achieving efficient, effective and equitable REDD+ (i.e. the 3Es of REDD+). Both direct and indirect drivers of deforestation and forest degradation are at work, including forest conversion to small-scale agriculture, timber extraction driven by demand from national and international markets, fuelwood and charcoal, and population growth. The prospects for REDD+ rest on improving a number of issues: tenure arrangements, forest governance, reliability of long-term funding, benefit-sharing mechanisms, and technical, human and financial capacity. We recommend the continuation of support towards decentralized sustainable forest management and utilization of the participatory forest management model as an entry point for REDD+ initiatives. Participatory land-use planning practices coupled with improved spatial planning and strengthening mechanisms against illegal activities entrenched in driving forest degradation are needed. In addition, for REDD+ to succeed it will need to challenge and overcome the powerful actors invested in and driving the business-as-usual model.

Guyana is a small country with 87.5% of its area covered with forest (GFC 2018b) and lies in the center of the Guiana Shield, one of the four largest remaining standing tropical rainforests in the world. In 2006, Guyana took advantage of the recognition of the value of standing forest to mitigate climate change and became actively engaged in REDD+. Subsequently, in 2009, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed with Norway to support implementation of a Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS). This was a national plan to reorient Guyana’s economy and move towards more sustainable extractive industries and forest management. The bilateral agreement with Norway established a framework for performance-related finance of up to USD 250 million from 2010 to 2015 for implementation of the LCDS. Three main pillars of the LCDS, linked to its REDD+ agenda, included maintaining historically low deforestation, endorsing low carbon development and adapting to climate change (Bellfield et al. 2015).More recently, and building on the LCDS, a new Green State Development Strategy: Vision 2040 has been developed for Guyana as a “twenty-year, national development policy that reflects the guiding vision and principles of the ‘green agenda’. The central objective is development that provides a better quality of life for all Guyanese derived from the country’s natural wealth – its diversity of people and abundant natural resources (land, water, forests, mineral and aggregates, biodiversity)” (GoG 2019b, p. 1).Since 2009, CIFOR has conducted the Global Comparative Study (GCS) in 13 countries, with Guyana as the final addition. Among the GCS-REDD+ case studies, Guyana is one of the most advanced REDD+ countries, alongside Brazil (KorhonenKurki et al. 2019), and the Norway–Guyana bilateral agreement is the world’s second largest national-level REDD+ scheme (Bade 2013). Yet, Guyana’s economy still largely depends on extractive resources, with mining remaining the main driver of deforestation and forest degradation. The potential revenue anticipated from offshore oil extraction might change the country’s landscape and outlook, putting the permanence of REDD+ under scrutiny. The Guyana case study, therefore, presents many lessons on how to balance development paths without jeopardizing national forest resources.

DRC has committed to reduce its emissions effectively, efficiently, and equitably from deforestation and degradation (REDD+). The country experiences complex relationships between drivers, agents, and institutions of deforestation nationally. The REDD+ policy arena is influenced by both governmental and non-governmental actors whose number have increased in the policy arena over the years; however, weak coordination among these actors remains an issue. Since 2009, the DRC has announced several reforms relating to land tenure, land-use planning and agricultural policy, to create an institutional environment that motivates the implementation of REDD+ in the DRC. By 2019, none of these reforms had materialized, due to both political changes and a lack of finance, capacity, and political will. Between 2013 and 2019, little progress has been made on REDD+ in the DRC, as a result of conflicting interests among actors both at national and decentralized levels; information asymmetry; elite capture and corruption; and the pre- and post-election situation. To date, the effectiveness of REDD+ activities in the DRC remain unclear, due to the absence of rigorous impact assessment. However, efforts can be observed on the field where there is increased number of participants to forest policy process compared to REDD+ early years; and several ongoing projects are testing policy options within and across levels. If these efforts are sustained, they can contribute in putting in place conditions to achieve REDD+ objectives.

The issue of REDD+ benefit sharing has captured the attention of policymakers and local communities because the success of REDD+ will depend greatly on the design and implementation of its benefit?sharing mechanism. Despite a large body of literature on potential benefit?sharing mechanisms for REDD+, the field has lacked global comparative analyses of national REDD+ policies and of the political?economic influences that can either enable or impede the mechanisms. Similarly, relatively few studies have investigated the political?economic principles underlying existing benefit?sharing policies and approaches. This working paper builds on a study of REDD+ policies in 13 countries to provide a global overview and up?to?date profile of benefit?sharing mechanisms for REDD+ and of the political?economic factors affecting their design and setting. Five types of benefit?sharing models relevant to REDD+ and natural resource management are used to create an organising framework for identifying what does and does not work and to examine the structure of rights under REDD+. The authors also consider the mechanisms in light of five prominent discourses on the question of who should benefit from REDD+ and, by viewing REDD+ through a 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity) lens, map out some of the associated risks for REDD+ outcomes. Existing benefit?sharing models and REDD+ projects have generated initial lessons for building REDD+ benefit?sharing mechanisms. However, the relevant policies in the 13 countries studied could lead to carbon ineffectiveness, cost inefficiency and inequity because of weak linkages to performance or results, unclear tenure and carbon rights, under?representation of certain actors, technical and financial issues related to the scope and scale of REDD+, potential elite capture and the possible negative side effects of the decentralisation of authority. Furthermore, the enabling factors for achieving 3E benefit?sharing mechanisms are largely absent from the study countries. Whether REDD+ can catalyse the necessary changes will depend in part on how the costs and benefits of REDD+ are shared, and whether the benefits are sufficient to affect a shift in entrenched behaviour and policies at all levels of government. The successful design and implementation of benefit?sharing mechanisms – and hence the legitimacy and acceptance of REDD+ – depend on having clear objectives, procedural equity and an inclusive process and on engaging in a rigorous analysis of the options for benefit sharing and their potential effects on beneficiaries and climate mitigation efforts.