CIFOR: conservation, development, research and prospects for REDD
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

CIFOR: conservation, development, research and prospects for REDD

on

  • 806 views

This presentation by Terry Sunderland presents CIFOR and it's research agenda as well as the ICDP and REDD experiences.

This presentation by Terry Sunderland presents CIFOR and it's research agenda as well as the ICDP and REDD experiences.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
806
Views on SlideShare
795
Embed Views
11

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0

2 Embeds 11

https://twitter.com 9
http://localhost 2

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Photo by RasElased BorealisFrench Guianan tropical forest.
  • Photo by Eko PriantoCIFOR headquarters; Bogor, Indonesia
  • Photo:CIFOR Slide Library #12148 – by Daniel TiveauWomen collecting Piliostigmareticulatum pods for animal feed; Burkina Faso
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #13531 – by Kristen EvansMapajo tree; Pando, Bolivia
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #14096 – by Yayan IndriatmokoShared Learning on Conflict Management, CIFOR and PILI; IndonesiaAs a research institution, our independence is everything, so we have to be especially careful to ensure that our partnerships in no way interfere with the credibility and objectivity of our research.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12797-- by Yayan IndriatmokoDiscussing traditional land use; IndonesiaCIFOR fills a very specific niche in providing policy relevant research related to forest management. We employ around 200 full-time staff globally. To leverage the impact of this research we work closely with other organisations who do the things we don’t, such as advocate policy change or implement practical changes in forest management. We call ourselves a “centre without walls”, because our work involves many partners, from NGOs, to universities, to development agencies, media outlets and all levels of government.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #9001 – by YayatRuchiatInterpreting maps
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12089 – by Daniel TiveauParklands and trees on farmland are an important source of tree products; Burkina Faso, West AfricaCIFOR Slide Library #12466 -- by PetrusGunarsoEarly morning view along the Malinau river; Kalimantan, IndonesiaOur research is focused on tropical forests worldwide. This includes humid tropical forests (located throughout the Amazon Basin in South America, the Congo Basin in Central Africa and South East Asia) and dry tropical forests (located primarily in West Africa and parts of Central America)
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12829 – by Brian Belcher.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #5445 – by Carol ColferLog dump;Campo Maan, CameroonThere was a time when logging companies in Cameroon plundered the forest,all eyes on profit rather than the future. Forestry reforms introduced by the government over the past decade sought to change this and the 1994 Forest Law decreed, among other things, that logging companies must draw up management plans for sustainable harvesting. While things have improved since, with our research indicating that illegal logging has fallen significantly in recent years, our research also revealed a deep flaw in a key law governing these management plans.According to Decree 222, logging companies in Cameroon must select timber species to which precautionary harvesting techniques will be applied, and these must account for 75 per cent or more of the total volume in the inventory for each concession. However, after sifting through data on timber production, trade, forestry taxes and much more, CIFOR researchers discovered a loophole in the law: the companies are not obliged to select the actual species they intend to harvest. Thisresearch revealed that in 2006 almost a quarter of the total production in the concessions studied was made up of valuable species that were not listed for sustainable harvesting. This analysis was shared with the Ministry of Forests and Fauna (MINFOF), as well as with a broad range of development agencies and local NGOs.A working group was established and in June 2008, MINFOF proposed modifications of Decree 222 to address the deficiencies identified by CIFOR. By late 2008, the proposed modifications had expanded to address the entire legal framework for forestry in Cameroon. It’s anticipated that revision of the forestry law in Cameroon willhelp conserve forest resources by ensuring that the harvesting of valuable species is now more sustainably managed, and will improve government revenue flows, some of which can be expected to benefitpoor communities through investment in health and education.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #15190. Local villager in Guinea. Photographer: Terry Sunderland.In 2005, CIFOR and the World Agroforestry Centre launched the LAMIL project in Guinea – landscape management for improved livelihoods. The project looked at ways in which forest management institutions and regulations could be better aligned. It was about reducing transaction costs, improving community benefits, and conserving biodiversity. Research findings demonstrated that regulatory impediments prevented forest user groups from obtaining legal recognition, which thereby impeded the ability of communities to enforce forest management rules. Policy options were identified to strengthen community forests as viable legal entities and establish a national definition of community forestry. Options were also developedfor agricultural intensification, in order to reduce pressure on forests. In late 2006 the Government of Guinea designed a new strategy for participatory forest management. This strategy drew heavily on the LAMIL project’s findings. As a result, co-management agreements have been developed between local forest communities and the Directorate of Water and Forests.By increasing agricultural productivity and improving access to markets, the project has helped to raise incomes and promote the principle of joint forest management. Some of the beneficiaries have more than tripled their annual revenue and are helping to increase vegetation cover.As an example, the Community Forest Management Committees in Nyalama had generated around $US1,500 over 11 years, prior to LAMIL. Following support from the project to restructure their management and secure legal rights, they have since generated $US1,500 over the last 11 months.USAID recently approved funding for the second phase of the project, which will apply a similar approach to integrated landscape management inSierra Leone.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #14138 – by Yayan IndriatmokoFarmer at HKM Forest; KulonProgo District, Indonesia
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide library #13001. Bulldozer pulling log from inside harvesting block. Indonesia. Photographer: Haris Iskandar.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12319 – by Takeshi TomaPulp industry; Sao Paulo, BrazilIn 2003 international trade in timber, pulp and paper was estimated at over US $150 billion, more than 2 per cent of world trade then. The annual trade in non-timber forest products, known as NTFPs, has been estimated at over $10 billion. Around two-thirds of the production and consumption of these forest products occurs in developing countries, where forest-based enterprises provide at least one-third of all rural nonfarm employment. One study has estimated the global value of all the goods and services that forests provide—fromtimber to climate regulation, water supply, recreation, everything—to be some $4.7 trillion a year!
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #11940 – by AgungPrasetyoIndonesiaFor example, inIndonesiathe forestry sector generated US$8.9 billion in export earnings in 2006, accounting for 11% of the country’s revenue from exports. A further US$3 billion in revenue is estimated to be lost each year as a result of “undocumented” timber extraction. To give some indication of the scale of these losses, total development aid to Indonesia’s forestry sector over 20 years, between 1988 and 2008, amounts to around US$1 billion in total.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12890 – by Brian BelcherFuel wood seller; IndiaIt’s almost impossible to exaggerate the importance of forests to local communities. According to the World Bank, more than a billion of the world’s poorest people depend on forests for some part of their livelihood. This includes food, fuel, shelter and medicines, as well as income derived from collecting and selling forest products. For many households in Mozambique, for example, cash income from unprocessed products such as firewood, fruits, mushrooms, insects, honey and medicinal plants constitute 30% of total household income. Processed products such as charcoal, tools and crafts make up an additional 20%. Forests are especially important as a safety net when other sources of income disappear. For example, during the Asian financial crisis in 1997-98, many families in Indonesia survived by harvesting timber, collecting reptiles and gathering other valuable forest products for sale.
  • Photo by Nathalie van Vliet,December 2007: Bush pigs, duikers, and monkeys for sale; Makokou market; Gabon.Forests play a crucial role in maintaining health and nutrition. Research has revealed that in Sub-Saharan Africa, bushmeat – such as birds, reptiles and rodents hunted in the forest – provides much of the protein intake for rural households.Bushmeat is especially important for children orphaned by AIDS.Although tropical forest communities suffer from a range of diseases, such as malaria and hemorrhagic fevers, forests products also play a major role in treating and preventing illness, both within and beyond the forest. Many of the most commonly prescribed pharmaceuticals in the US, for example, contain natural compounds harvested from tropical forests.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #11094 – by Miriam Van HeistMLA training; Wena, Papua, Indonesia.In addition to sustaining the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people and underpinning the economies of many developing nations, forests also provide a range of ecosystem services that are fundamental to the planet’s wellbeing and to many sectors outside forestry. They help to stabilise soils and discourage erosion, which is particularly important to the transport sector as landslides often close roads, and haze from forest fires in Indonesia can be thick enough to close airports.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #4912 – by Mary MilneWaterfall; Noel Kempff Mercado National Park, BoliviaForests maintain a steady supply of clean, fresh water, which is crucial for municipal drinking water, agricultural production and hydroenergy.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #4422 – by Ronna DennisThe aftermath of forest fire; IndonesiaBecause trees lock up atmospheric carbon, forests reduce the main greenhouse gases that fuel climate change. Not only does deforestation and forest degradation account for around 20% of all global carbon emissions (IPCC) – more than the entire transport sector – but a 2009 study led by the University of Leedshas revealed just how effective tropical forests are in absorbing carbon already released into the atmosphere. In fact, they soak up just under 5 billion of the 32 billion tonnes of CO2 emitted through human activity each year. So, by keeping forests in the ground we’re doing the world a double service.
  • Tropical forestecosystems are rich in biological wealth. Theycover less than 15% of the planet’s land surface,yet contain over half of the world’s terrestrial species. That means the ones that don’t live in the water. In particular, Indonesia’s forests are among the most biologically diverse. They provide habitats for 17 percent of the world’s birds, 16 percent of reptiles and amphibians, 12 percent of mammals, and 10 percent of plants.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #12702 – by Kristen EvansPatricia Miranda is facilitating workshop; Latin America
  • In 2006 CIFOR’s Board and Management began a process of developing a new 10 year strategy, in order to better respond to current and future challenges, and remain a relevant source of timely analysis and knowledge on tropical forests and the people who depend on them. After two years of internal debate and external consultation we are confident that the new strategy has positioned CIFOR in such a way as to ensure our research is not only relevant, timely and accurate, but that it reaches the right people in order to have a genuine impact. The new strategy provides significant continuity with the past and retains our core purpose, which is to advance human well-being, environmental conservation, and equity. But in doing so it also addresses new challenges – such as climate change and the dramatic rise of forest-related trade and investment – that now characterize the literal and figurative landscape in which we work. Tomaximisethe likelihood of success in translating research into impact, the strategy focuses CIFOR’s research on six research “domains”.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #20332 – by Adrian AlbanoNepalGiven that most forest biodiversity occurs outside protected areas, it’s important that we find a balance between sustainable land use and conservation. In other words, we need to weigh up the needs of people and the need to protect tropical forests. Both are important, but neither can be the sole priority. In an ideal world, there are win-win situations, but more often that not we have to accept trade-offs between the two. For example, many people living in poor rural areas in Africa rely on bushmeat as a source of protein but certain mammal populations have become vulnerable because of the extent and scale of hunting. This situation presents a challenge to policy-makers at all levels: how can locals still gain access to important food sources and how can biodiversity be protected in these areas? A recent report from CIFOR and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity recommended developing policies to protect endangered species, while allowing sustainable hunting of so-called “common” game. This is what’s known as a “rights-based approach” to conservation; equipping locals with the knowledge and responsibility to use the land sustainably, without diminishing their livelihood and their capacity to source essential items. Our recommendations attracted criticism from hardline conservationists who advocate blanket-bans on hunting in the interests of biodiversity. One of the key components of this area of research is understanding payments for environmental services – or PES. This is a system where landowners are compensated for conserving forest areas, based on the premise that these forests provide crucial services for the broader community through things such as carbon sequestration, watershed protection, aesthetic landscape value and biodiversity. Our research in this area focuses on who’s benefiting from these payments; if the payments are actually stopping deforestation; the transparency of the transactions; and whether or not local communities are marginalised in the process.
  • Photo: CIFOR Slide Library #9050 – by Tony DjogoLandscape mosaic; Taman NasionalKerinciSeblat, Jambi, Indonesia.
  • The landscape mosaics project is the first project of the CIFOR-ICRAF Joint Biodiversity Platform. It uses participatory action research to develop mechanisms for integrating livelihood and biodiversity protection. A crucial aspect of the project is working with local communities to negotiate and clarify land rights, as well as investigating the potential for PES, or payments for environmental services. It’s funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).
  • The LAMIL project is a collaborative effort with ICRAF to strengthen community forests in Guinea as viable legal entities and intensify agricultural practice so as to reduce pressure on forests. The project has led to co-management agreements between local forest communities and the Directorate of Water and Forests. Improvements in agricultural productivity and access to markets has since helped to raise incomes and enhance vegetation, with some beneficiaries more than tripling their annual revenue. It’s funded by USAID, who in 2009 agreed to initiate a second phase of the project, which focuses on the border area between Guinea and Sierra Leone.
  • This project listed is exploring the conditions by which small-scale watershed protection projects can be applied at a larger scale, using payments for environmental services (PES). It looks at a range of current projects and analyses variables such as the size, the duration and the specific nature of the service provided.It’s funded by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR).
  • Photo: Forest Day 2, COP14; Poznan, Poland (2008)The 13th Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP13) in Bali, in December 2007, wasone of the most anticipated political gatherings in recent memory. The primary objective of the UN negotiators was to come up with a Bali Action Plan, which would outline a two-year process for negotiating a global climate strategy to succeed the Kyoto Protocol. Given the fact that deforestation and forest degradation account for around 20% of all global carbon emissions, and yet were omitted from the Kyoto Protocol, it was important for CIFOR that forests were not overlooked again. To coincide with the conference CIFOR launched a major publication, “Do Trees Grow on Money?”, which identified the need to address the underlying drivers of deforestation, many of which lie outside the forestry sector, if schemes for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) are to be successful. In addition, Forest Day was conceived as a way of highlighting the importance of forests to the climate change agenda. The event was organised by CIFOR, on behalf of the collaborative partnership on Forests (CPF), and attracted over 800 participants from government, NGO’s, civil society, corporate sector, media, universities and forest communities. A summary of the key points of discussion was presented to Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, who assured the gathering that the recommendations would feed into the official negotiating process. When the Bali Action Plan was finally announced less than a week later, forests were included prominently. At COP14, in Poznan in 2008, CIFOR launched two publications, one on mitigation, the other on adaptation. “Moving Ahead with REDD” looks at the issues, options and implications for REDD, specifically the trade-offs related to effectiveness, efficiency and equity of such schemes. “Facing an Uncertain Future” looks at the need to adapt forest management strategiesto reduce the impacts of climate change on the ecosystem (adaptation for forests), as well as at the role that forests can play in reducing the impacts of climate change on people (forests for adaptation). While the objective of Forest Day 1 was to help ensure that forests are included in the next global climate agreement, the objective of Forest Day 2 was to take this process a step further and discuss just how they should be included. Nearly 1000 people took part, and key stakeholders agreed on the importance of managing forests for livelihoods, biodiversity, and other benefits as well as carbon storage. At Forest Day 3, in Copenhagen,we are directing our energies towards ensuring that the design and implementation of forest-related climate mitigation and adaptation measures are effective, efficient and equitable. Efforts are focused on ensuring that: consensus within the forest sector reaches beyond the canopy, to the UN negotiators and beyond; discussions address the practical implementation of the Copenhagen outcomes at national and sub-national level; and theprogramme for the event is designed in such a way as to inform the process of further refining and defining these outcomes.

CIFOR: conservation, development, research and prospects for REDD Presentation Transcript

  • 1. CIFOR: conservation, development, research and prospects for REDD Terry Sunderland, PhD THINKING beyond the canopy FFPRI, Tsukuba, 9th November 2009
  • 2. Presentation outline       Who we are Where we work Impact Why forests matter Our research agenda ICDP experiences and REDD THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 3. Who we are: Centre for International Forestry Research THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 4. Purpose We advance human wellbeing, environmental conservation and equity by conducting research to inform policies and practices that affect forests in developing countries. THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 5. Vision We envision a world where:  Forests are high on the political agenda  People recognise the value of forests for maintaining livelihoods and ecosystems  Decisions that influence forests and the people that depend on them are based on solid science and principles of good governance, and reflect the perspectives of developing countries and forest-dependent people THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 6. How we work We are the only pro-poor policy orientated forestry institute in the world with a fully independent and global mandate that focuses primarily on creating International Public Goods. THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 7. How we work  200 staff globally  A „centre without walls‟, working in partnership with: • governments • non-governmental organisations • international organisations • development agencies • civil society • foresters • media • private sector THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 8. Where we work THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 9. Where we work Dry forest Humid forest Tropical forest THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 10. Where we work Bolivia Brazil Burkina Faso Zambia Guinea Cameroon Ethiopia Headquarters: 2 Regional offices 7 Research sites 37Project offices Bogor, Indonesia Laos Vietnam THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 11. Impact: policy, publications etc. THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 12. Sustaining Cameroon’s forests  CIFOR research identified a loophole in the 1994 Forest Law, which meant almost 25% of total timber production in 2006 was drawn from unlisted valuable species  Ministry of Forests and Fauna has since revised the law  Impacts are likely to include conservation of forest resources and improved revenue flows (including community welfare) THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 13. Co-management for co-benefits  Landscape Management for Improved Livelihoods  Research identified policy options for strengthening community forests as legal entities and practical options for agricultural intensification  Impacts have included up to threefold increases in local incomes, and significant growth in vegetation cover THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 14. Getting the message out… THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 15. Forests matter THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 16. Forests matter Economic value Forests underpin many developing economies and employ large numbers of rural people. THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 17. Forests matter Economic value Global  Timber, pulp, paper = more than $US150 billion  NTFPs = more than $US10 billion  Forests provide a third of rural, nonfarm employment in many developing countries THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 18. Forests matter Economic value Indonesia  $US8.9 billion forest-sector export earnings in 2006  $US3 billion annual loss from undocumented timber extraction  $US1 billion development aid to forestry sector, 1988-2008 THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 19. Forests matter Local livelihoods More than a billion people depend on forests for food, fuel, shelter and medicines THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 20. Forests matter Local livelihoods Health and nutrition  Bushmeat contributes 30 to 80% of rural protein in Cameroon  Medicinal plants play a major role in primary health care and treating and preventing illness THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 21. Forests matter Environmental services Forests stabilise soils and discourage erosion  So they‟re important for transport and infrastructure THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 22. Forests matter Environmental services Forests regulate water supply  So they‟re important for drinking water, agriculture and hydroenergy THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 23. Forests matter Environmental services Forests store atmospheric carbon  So they‟re important for stabilizing the Earth‟s climate  Forests absorb around15% of global emissions  Their destruction generates around 20% of global emissions THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 24. Forests matter Biodiversity 15% Make up of Earth’s surface 50% Home to of land-based species THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 25. Our research agenda THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 26. CIFOR’s strategic research agenda 1 2 Enhancing the role of forests in mitigating climate change Enhancing the role of forests in adapting to climate change 3 4 Improving livelihoods through smallholder and community forestry 5 6 Managing impacts of globalised trade and investment on forests and forest communities Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Sustainably managing tropical production forests THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 27. Domain 4: Conservation and development trade-offs at the landscape scale  “CIFOR‟s goal [within this domain] is to shift policy and practice toward conservation and development approaches that are more effective, efficient and THINKING beyond the canopy equitable in process and outcome”
  • 28. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale  Most forest biodiversity occurs outside protected areas  So trade-offs are often required between the needs of people and the need for forest conservation  Payments for Environmental Services (PES) • including carbon, watersheds, aesthetic value, biodiversity THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 29. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Research themes  Developing better methods for assessing environmental services  Establishing platforms for negotiating conservation and development trade-offs  Understanding the relative effectiveness of institutional frameworks and alternative conservation approaches THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 30. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Research projects Biodiversity in landscape mosaics • • Cameroon, Indonesia, Laos, Madagascar, Tanzania Funded by SDC THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 31. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Research projects Landscape management for improved livelihoods (LAMIL) • • Guinea, Sierra Leone Funded by USAID THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 32. Research domain 4 Managing trade-offs between conservation and development at the landscape scale Research projects Scaling up payments for watershed services (PWS) • • Bolivia, Ecuador, India, South Africa Funded by the CGIAR THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 33. What is REDD?  Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation  Forest conservation to compete with drivers of deforestation  Co-benefits include poverty alleviation, biodiversity protection and improved forest governance  3E’s: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Equity THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 34. ICDP’s and REDD: what relationship?  ICDP‟s = Integrated conservation and development projects       (traditional means of tropical forest conservation) REDD = post-Kyoto mechanism for funding carbon storage in tropical forests Masters study undertaken by Betsy Hill from Charles Darwin University: analysis of ICDP‟s in Lower Mekong Identified constraints to ICDP implementation and what constitutes “best practice” Much to learn from ICDP implementation for REDD Build upon experience to ensure that REDD projects comply to the “3 e‟s”: effective, efficient and equitable REDD conceptually linked closely with Payments for Environmental Services (PES) THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 35. Brief history of ICDP’s  Conservation projects that include elements of local        development Linking biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation Compensating for preservationist approaches However, ICDP‟s have poor track record and have been roundly criticised (“back to the barriers”) Accountability an issue (lack of monitoring) Yet remain pervasive approach to delivery of tropical conservation initiatives REDD initiatives expected to be incorporated into post Kyoto international climate change agreements But initial REDD examples resemble ICDP approach hence important to learn from experience THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 36. ICDP best practices of relevance to REDD  Have measurable and    clearly defined goals Project duration should reflect time commitment needed to achieve goals Markets must be available for participants goods and services Mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation should be in place THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 37. ICDP practices that require greater diligence for REDD  National policies should support project activities  Locally based conservation should be applied where        threats and solutions are local Recognise and negotiate for trade-offs Develop understanding of community heterogeneity and complexity Develop understanding of community needs Design projects to be adaptable Involve local stakeholders at all stages Collaborate with all potential partners Do what you are good at: get others to do the rest! THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 38. The key issues  We do not suggest that all REDD projects should always       follow the ICDP approach REDD implementation will be far more complex than ICDP implementation However, experience of ICDPs show that project design are important for overall project success Must be careful not to regard REDD as a new approach Have seen these before (NTFP development, CBNRM, ICDP‟s, forest certification…) MUST integrate a pluralistic approach learning from project experiences Or we will be reviewing REDD experiences in the same way as ICDPs THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 39. A silver bullet?… “REDD could provide us with the greatest opportunity for forest conservation and the equitable sharing of benefits for local communities or it could turn into yet another case of false promises, unrealistic expectations and diverted funds that will ultimately fail in slowing carbon emissions and conserving biodiversity, unless we learn from past experiences.” Editorial: The Guardian, 28th October, 2009 THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 40. Road to Copenhagen  COP13 (Bali, 2007), Forest Day 1 • Do Trees Grow on Money?  COP14 (Poznan, 2008), Forest Day 2 • Moving ahead with REDD; Facing an Uncertain Future  COP15 (Copenhagen, 2009), Forest Day 3 THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 41. Precedents  Climate change is the most pressing issue in our lifetime (Myers, 1988)  “What have we done to the Earth” (Jim Morrison, 1967) THINKING beyond the canopy
  • 42. www.cifor.cgiar.org Thank you!! Arigatou!! THINKING beyond the canopy