Analyzing possible impacts of REDD+ initiatives on the ground: lessons from São Félix do Xingu, Brazil


Published on

This presentation gives an overview of research around the pilot REDD+ program in São Félix do Xingu, Brazil. It describes conventional land and forest use strategies of small and large landholders in the project area, and addresses how these behaviours could be affected by the introduction of a proposed municipality-wide REDD+ pilot project.

Maria Fernanda Gebara gave this presentation on 18 June 2012 at a panel discussion organised by CIFOR and partners at the ISEE 2012 Conference at Rio, which convened under the topic "Ecological Economics and Rio+20: Challenges and Contributions for a Green Economy". The panel was titled ‘A comparison of intervention strategies and impacts of four incipient REDD+ initiatives in the Brazilian Amazon’. For more information, visit

Published in: Education, Travel, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Analyzing possible impacts of REDD+ initiatives on the ground: lessons from São Félix do Xingu, Brazil

  1. 1. Analyzing  Possible  Impacts  of     REDD+  Ini9a9ves  on  the  Ground   Lessons  from  São  Félix  do  Xingu,  Brazil         Interna(onal  Society  for  Ecological  Economics  –  ISEE   Maria  Fernanda  Gebara,  Amy  Duchelle,     Giselle  Monteiro,  Leonala  Guimarães   June  2012  –  Rio  de  Janeiro    
  2. 2. REDD+ in Brazil Na(onal   Interagency   REDD+   Na(onal   Strategy   Task  Force   Zero   Plan  for  Compensated   Deforesta(on   Climate   Na(onal  Policy  for   Sub-­‐na(onal  Reduc(on   Pact   Change   Climate  Change   Ini(a(ves   2003 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Voluntary   JUMA   NAMAs   WGs   REDD+   Amazon  Fund  PPCDAM   Regime   and  PES   Principle  and   Bills     Criteria     PPCerrado   More  than  50   FIP   projects  Brazil and REDD+ - Timeline ABC  Plan   THINKING beyond the canopy
  3. 3. GCS ProjectsCredits:  Ahmeed   THINKING beyond the canopy
  4. 4. Methods §  Proponent  Appraisal   B-­‐A-­‐C-­‐I   São  Félix  do  Xingu   Humaitá   §  Survey  of  Project     Implementa(on  (SPI)   2010   2013   4  villages/each      §  Total  of  246  households  (124  interven(on/122  control)     3Es+  §  40  large-­‐landholders   §  Household/Village  Data   §  Land  and  Forest  Use   §  Income  Genera(on   §  Land  Tenure     §  Climate  Change  Percep(ons   §  REDD+  Percep(ons   THINKING beyond the canopy
  5. 5. Research Objective Structures     Social  Priori(es    Governance   Human  Coordina(on   Vatn  and  Vedeld,  2010     Processes   Conflicts  Main  ques9ons:    §  Are  interven(ons  in  line  with  the  site  context?    §  Which  process  and  structures  are  in  place  for  REDD+  implementa(on  in  SFX?    §  Who  are  the  main  actors?     THINKING beyond the canopy
  6. 6. Context Pará  §  Aug  2010  -­‐  July  2011  –  6.418km2  (Amazon)  /  3.008km2  (Pará)                50%  of  total  deforesta(on  in  the  Amazon  (INPE)  §  Aug  2009  –  July  2010  –  41%  of  total  deforesta(on  in  the  Amazon    (SAD/Imazon)   Main  Ac9ons:     Challenges  of  REDD+:      §  The  State  Plan  for  Preven(on,   §  Land  tenure     Control  and  Alterna(ves  to   §  Law  Enforcement     Deforesta(on  (PPCAD/2009)   §  Elite  capture    §  MoU  –  California  (2010)       §  Transac(on  and  transi(on  costs      §  More  than  10  pilot  REDD+  projects       THINKING beyond the canopy
  7. 7. THINKING beyond the canopy Source:  Imazon  
  8. 8. São Félix do Xingu General  Informa9on  §  Historically  high  rates  of  deforesta(on  (2001-­‐  2007:  1.70%/year,  INPE)    §  June  2011  –  7/10  most  deforested  municipali(es  were  located  in       Pará  –  SFX  in  first  place  (SAD/Imazon)  §  Total  area  deforested  (2009)  –  16.621km2  –  20%  (INPE)  §  CIAT  (2008):  REDD+  0.8  million  ha  in  10  years  -­‐  440  million  tons  of  CO2   Main  causes:   THINKING beyond the canopy
  9. 9. THINKING beyond the canopy
  10. 10. SFX REDD+ Pilot ProgramPartners:     Funders:     THINKING beyond the canopy
  11. 11. SFX REDD+ Pilot Program Goals:    §  Land  Management    §  Deforesta(on  Emissions  Reduc(on  (440  million  tones  CO2/10  years)  §  Sustainable  Income  Genera(on    §  Environmental  Co-­‐benefits    §  Program  Sustainability    §  Capacity  Building     THINKING beyond the canopy
  12. 12. Source:  TNC,  2010   THINKING beyond the canopy
  13. 13. ResultsSFX  Pilot  Program  Strategies     Private   SIMLAM   Improve   Large-­‐scale   SAFs   Proper9es   (CAR)   Produc(on   Reforesta(on             Models             Indigenous     Sustainable   Capacity   Improve   Improve   Lands   Income   Building   Border   Monitoring   Genera(on   Protec(on       Conserva9on   Management   Management   Improve   Improve   Units   Council  /APA   Plan  /  APA  do   Protec(on   Monitoring   Triunfo     Triunfo     Carbon   Determining   Establishing  a   Es(ma(ng   Monitoring   Accoun9ng   Appropriate   Reference   Expected   and   Program   Standards   Emissions   Emissions   Repor(ng     Level  (REL)       THINKING beyond the canopy
  14. 14. Results§  Main  causes  of  deforesta(on  in  all  villages  are:  slash/burn  agriculture,              fire  and  ranching     Land  and  Forest  Use   Subsistence   and  Income   Genera9on   What  is  wellbeing?    All  villages  are  beder-­‐off  than  2  years  ago   §  Educa(on       §  Health   Main  reasons:    Beler  roads  (2)     §  Energy                                                          Increase  on  income  (1)   §  Technical  Assistance                                                          Increase  on  animal  prices  (1)   §  Alterna(ves  for  Sustainable  Livelihoods     §  Security   THINKING beyond the canopy §  Communica(on  
  15. 15. ResultsOpportuni9es  to  Clear  the  Forest    Stayed   Stayed   Increa Increa Respo Stayed   Respo the   the   sed   sed   ndent   the   ndent   same   same   3%   10%   does   same   does   10%   Stayed   10%   not   23%   not   the   know   know   same   3%   3%   6%   Decre Decre Decre Decre ased   ased   ased   ased   90%   87%   81%   74%  Main  reason:  Government  restric(ons  Tenure  Security    §  2/4  villages  feel  insecure    Main  reasons:  Lack  of  (tle  and  land  conflicts       THINKING beyond the canopy
  16. 16. ResultsCauses  of  Deforesta9on  X  Interven9ons     Causes     Interven9ons     Ranching     Improvement  of  Produc(on   Models     Agriculture   SAFs   Fires   Monitoring     Land  Grabbing     SIMLAM  (CAR)   Illegal  Logging     Restora(on/SFM   THINKING beyond the canopy
  17. 17. Conclusions Early  to  say,  but…   §  Interven(ons  reflect  the  local  reality       §  Good  partnerships   §  No  investment  on  social  benefits  like  health,  educa(on  and  energy     §  No  interven(ons  on  market  access  and  prices     High  opportunity  and  transac9on  costs    Technology  Transfer,  Capacity  Building  and  Involvement  of  Local  Actors   THINKING beyond the canopy
  18. 18. “I  am  used  to  deforest  and  I  was  incen9vized  by  the  government  for   doing  it  for  more  than  40  years  and  at  that  9me  if  we  did  not  open   new  areas  we  would  be  excluded  from  our  lands.  I  need  to  learn  how   to  act  differently.”     Obrigada!Maria  Fernanda  Gebara,  Phd  Candidate    Fundação  Getulio  Vargas   THINKING beyond the canopy