SD Briefing B and O page
Updated: 36 min 6 sec ago
This year’s global climate negotiations in Doha are particularly challenging. Parties to the UNFCCC must step out on a new path leading beyond 2020. But to do that they must first resolve unfinished business from the Bali Road Map, including the work of the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol and the Bali Action Plan for long term cooperative action. Decisions for the post-2020 regime must be guided by climate change science and impacts, the Convention’s principles and provisions and, most importantly, by the lessons learnt under the current regime. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.
Deforestation is a complex problem. Almost 50 countries are now working towards REDD+ programmes — new plans to reduce climate change from loss of forests — and they are running into difficult dilemmas. Should REDD+ be led by a forestry agency, or by a cross-sectoral institution that can deal with the many pressures on forested land? How can pilot projects be designed to capture the different sides of the issue in a coherent way? Neighbouring Mozambique and Tanzania have taken approaches that sometimes intersect, but often contrast. Comparing the two offers lessons in~how to design the process of getting ready for REDD+.
This briefing explains the concepts behind the Tracking Adaptation and Measuring Development (TAMD) framework. TAMD is a ‘twin track’~framework that evaluates adaptation success as a combination of how widely and how well countries or institutions manage climate risks (Track 1) and how successful adaptation interventions are in reducing climate vulnerability and in keeping development on course (Track 2). The aim is to generate bespoke frameworks for individual countries tailored to specific contexts. TAMD’s dual approach can track adaptation at all levels and from all sources,~from initiatives involving several countries, various interventions in a single country, and right down to local projects. It can assess whether climate change adaptation leads to effective development and also how development interventions can boost communities’ capacity to adapt to climate change. It does this by evaluating an intervention within and across the two tracks.
Wealthy nations are still not meeting their Copenhagen climate finance pledges. While we await the final numbers from a few contributors, reports submitted to the UNFCCC in May 2012 show that only two of the ten contributors committed their ‘fair share’ of fast-start climate finance, assessed on their capability and their responsibility for the problem. The United States, European Union and Iceland committed half or less than half of their fair share. The result is that only $23.6 billion has been committed, short of the $30 billion pledged. Only one-fifth of climate finance supports adaptation in developing countries, in spite of promises to ‘balance’ it with mitigation funding. Only Switzerland received a ‘pass’ grade in this year’s transparency scorecard. Less than half of committed funds are grants and only two per cent are flowing through the UN, where they could strengthen trust between contributor and recipient nations. It is past time to meet the long-agreed principles: new and additional, predictable, and adequate climate finance.
Understanding how land use and its changes affect forest cover and carbon stocks is fundamental to developing sound REDD+ delivery options. A study in Manica Province, a REDD+ pilot area for Mozambique, suggests biomass and forest carbon fell substantially between 2007 and 2010. The study combined radar remote sensing information (to measure changes in biomass and carbon stocks) with field investigations (to establish land use and land cover changes, and their causes). Small-scale agriculture is responsible for nearly half of the loss. Charcoal production and logging~account for around a quarter. Large-scale commercial agriculture’s small role (around 3 per cent) will increase as allocated land is cleared. The remaining carbon loss comes from diverse smaller causes. Recording and mapping land use rights is crucial for identifying the underlying causes of deforestation and forest degradation, who is involved in those causes, and potential interventions.
A wealth of traditional crop varieties, medicinal plants and other genetic resources are under the care of indigenous people and local communities — who need legal rights to manage them. New legal backing comes from the 2010 Nagoya Protocol to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, which requires prior informed consent for access to traditional knowledge and genetic resources, and calls for support of ‘community protocols’ that set out rules for access and benefit sharing. Community protocols are not just about indigenous rights: they clarify expectations for business and government, preserve irreplaceable biological resources, and support climate change adaptation and sustainable development. But to get these benefits, governments must back up the Nagoya Protocol with national laws and institutions, and support community-led participatory processes.
Local organisations can be powerful engines driving conservation and development — but only if the policy environment lets them. Global agendas depend on local action, and under the right conditions community-based NGOs will mobilise local knowledge and resources to improve environmental management. Unfavourable policies, however, will stifle these groups and allow the loss of natural heritage and economic opportunities. From land rights to grant deadlines, many variables make a difference. This briefing describes eight key factors that governments, development agencies and donors should get right if we want local organisations to thrive.
Debates globais sobre a redução de emissões por desmatamento e degradação florestal, e promoção da conservação, gestão florestal sustentável e aumento dos estoques de carbono florestal (REDD+) enfatizam a necessidade de as estratégias serem construídas com base no conhecimento existente. Num exemplo de colaboração Sul-Sul para fazer exactamente isso, o IIED ajudou a facilitar uma parceria entre Moçambique-Brasil para compartilhar conhecimento e criar um grupo de trabalho REDD+ único. A iniciativa oferece lições para outros países que estão a considerar uma colaboração Sul-Sul sobre REDD+, incluindo a necessidade e importância de líderes carismáticos, a continuidade da representação do governo, e a integração e coordenação entre os sectores.
To change the ways people use forested land, we need to ask questions about the roles of men, women and children. Nearly fifty countries have begun preparing for readiness to reduce emissions from land use and land use changes under the UN-REDD and Forest Carbon Partnership Facility processes. Because gender disparities profoundly shape agriculture and other land use, REDD+ readiness plans should not only avoid harming women and other marginalised groups, but actively seek to address their needs and harness their strengths. Different genders and generations play different roles in value chains for products that use — or conserve — forest resources. Analysing these value chains provides the data to improve interventions. But planners also need to consider gender differences in control of resources, knowledge, decision-making structures and distribution of benefits.
A perspectiva de ganhar créditos de carbono através da aquisição de terras para implementar o REDD+ atraiu o interesse do sector privado. Em muitos países, incluindo a Papua Nova Guiné e a República do Congo, há relatos de uma corrida para carbono. Em Moçambique, os investidores privados tem manifestado interesse em adquirir mais de 22 por cento da superfície do país — uma área maior que os 16 por cento de áreas protegidas e que cobre 42 por cento das florestas — para REDD+. Mas Moçambique, como muitos países em desenvolvimento, ainda está no estágio inicial de preparação de uma estratégia do REDD+. Consultas às partes interessadas estão em curso e o Grupo de Nacional do REDD+ , ainda está a avaliar as capacidades sociais, técnicas e institucionais disponíveis para a implementação do REDD+ de modo que este ajude a reduzir as emissões, e ao mesmo tempo, sirva as necessidades de desenvolvimento social e ambiental. Incentivar o envolvimento do sector privado antes do país ter políticas e instituições à altura para salvaguardar o ambiente local e as pessoas, é um risco que pode diminuir o potencial do REDD+ para o desenvolvimento sustentável.