Reducing forest emissions

 
Bookmark 
           and Share
10 July 2009
 

Hannah Chalmers argues the need for developing a cost effective methodology supported by sustainable financing options to mitigate carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

Hannah Chalmers

According to the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, more than 1.6 billion people worldwide depend on forest resources for their livelihoods. Forests also provide a range of ecosystem services, such as water storage, increased rainfall, nutrient recycling, biodiversity and soil stabilisation,and can help with flood control and boost agricultural productivity.

forest emissions.jpg
Deforestation accounts for around 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions/ Photo credit: Flickr

But as populations increase and countries develop, many forests have come under increasing stress — particularly in the developing world, where many countries are suffering from rapid deforestation

Deforestation in global climate negotiations

The value of afforestation (planting forests) was internationally recognised in 1997, when it was included in the Kyoto Protocol agreement on global action to reduce the risk of dangerous climate change. But decreasing deforestation and forest degradation has historically been absent from international negotiations because it is difficult to achieve.

In recent years, as negotiators work towards a new global deal to succeed the Kyoto Protocol when its first commitment period ends in 2012, tackling deforestation — particularly in the tropics — is back on the table as it is increasingly thought to be crucial for mitigating future climate change.

Proposals for integrating it into a post-2012 global climate deal have evolved over time. Initially the focus was on reducing emissions from deforestation (RED), but current negotiations are focusing on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD). More recent suggestions include considering deforestation, degradation and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD-plus).

One size doesn't fit all

But the success of such projects does not guarantee that REDD can be quickly or easily applied elsewhere. The basic principle of REDD — that countries should be compensated for reducing emissions from deforestation — may be simple, but developing robust and equitable methodologies for implementing it is not.

A major hurdle is the wide variation between countries eligible for REDD, ranging from high forest cover combined with high deforestation, as is the case in much of South-East Asia, to low forest cover and low deforestation, as seen in South Asia and some areas of Sub-Saharan Africa.

These varying circumstances mean that individual countries have very different views on what attributes would make a REDD support mechanism successful. Countries with historically high deforestation rates, for example, would gain most from a REDD mechanism that uses historical baselines instead of projected ones. In contrast, countries with low forest cover and low deforestation rates may not benefit from any REDD mechanism unless it also includes activities that enhance carbon stocks.

An emerging consensus

There is a wide range of opinions on how REDD could and should work.In addition to the countries that are eligible for REDD, other stakeholders are submitting proposals to the UNFCCC or otherwise contributing to the debate, including developed countries signed up to the Kyoto Protocol who may wish to trade REDD credits, and many nongovernmental organisations.

Any global framework must be flexible enough to accommodate different countries' needs. This includes recognising countries' different stages of development and their capacity to monitor, report on and verify REDD activities.

The road to Copenhagen

Although REDD is not yet formally established in the UNFCCC framework, some REDD credits are already being sold in voluntary markets and some initial finance is provided for pilot projects. The World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility includes a readiness mechanism to help governments participate in REDD. In particular, it helps developing countries estimate their forest carbon stocks, establish national reference scenarios, calculate opportunity costs, and design monitoring, reporting and verification systems. By September 2008, 14 tropical and subtropical countries were making use of the facility.

The formal UN-REDD programme has also been established with six projects and a total approved budget of more than US$25 million and commitments to date (May 2009) of US$52 million. This programme will initially fund pilot projects to assess whether "carefully structured payment structures and capacity support can create the incentives to ensure actual, lasting, achievable, reliable and measurable emission reductions while maintaining and improving the other ecosystem services forests provide."

Despite this, the future of REDD remains uncertain. As the period for delivering the Bali Action Plan draws to a close, it is not yet clear what will be agreed when future global action on the response to the risk of dangerous climate change is discussed in Copenhagen.

The importance of identifying approaches to mitigate carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation is firmly on the agenda. But it is not yet clear whether it will be possible to develop a robust REDD methodology that can provide effective emissions reductions that are cost effective, equitable and supported by sustainable financing options.

The contribution of scientists and engineers in developing robust technical solutions, implementing pilot projects and informing the political debate could — and should — play a critical role in shaping the eventual outcome.

Click on the link below to read the full article.

Source : SciDev.Net

 

Grassroots | Global | Newsfeed | Knowledge | Resources