How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on   forest concessions have reduced emissions       from deforestation from 2000-20...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
Forest (ha), 2000                                            Deforestation (ha), 2000-2010         Total: 94.24 million ha...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
2.2x (3.4x) more deforestation INSIDE        oil palm (timber) concessions        than OUTSIDE concessions…               ...
2.2x (3.4x) more deforestation INSIDE                                         …but concession land is        oil palm (tim...
2.3x (1.3x) more deforestation AFTERoil palm (timber) concessionsthan BEFORE concessions…                      Average ann...
2.3x (1.3x) more deforestation AFTER                                                  …but deforestation wasoil palm (timb...
To attribute deforestation to thedesignation of oil palm concessions,we need fixed effects regression to…  -control for ye...
Designation               Average effect of concession designation                          on deforestation (ha/yr), cont...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
Oil Palm Concessions               Timber Concessions    Total: 10.6 mha                   Total: 8.6 mha                 ...
Aggregating impact to national levelScope of moratorium                               Reduction in   Reduction in         ...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
Comparing incentive structures for  REDD+ using OSIRIS-Indonesia   (Busch et al, PNAS, 2012)Click-of-a-button decision sup...
1. OBSERVED DEFORESTATION, 2000-2005                                                            (Hansen, 2008)            ...
Carbon price needed for equivalent reduction  (OSIRIS v1.5; Busch et al, PNAS, 2012)Scope of moratorium            Reducti...
1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation   occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timbe...
Conclusion:A moratorium on new oil palm concessions and timber concessions in high-carbon forests (>150 tC/ha) and peat la...
Terima kasih!Thank you!                         Thanks to:                  World Resources Institute               Woods ...
REDD+: an overview                  Payments ($)          Developed countries provide finance               through funds ...
Palm oil in stovePalm oil in foodPalm oil in car
Source: World Resources Institute
Data (~200,000 3km x 3km cells)Dependent variables:• Forest cover, 2000, 60m Landsat (Margono, Hansen et al, in prep)• Ann...
Well-structured voluntary REDD+              PES   Well-structured   CAT                                                  ...
Geographically prioritizing pilot programs:Expected abatement under REDD+ at $10/tCO2e                     KALIMANTAN     ...
Sensitivities•   Functional form•   Included variables•   Policy decisions•   Model parameters    -Carbon price    -Price ...
Economic incentives    are just oneimportant component    of a national  REDD+ strategy
The road ahead• Analysis in other regions:  Peru, Madagascar, Bolivia, Mexico• IDRISI GIS interface (w/ Clark Labs)• Agric...
Indonesia’s moratorium and emissions from deforestation
Indonesia’s moratorium and emissions from deforestation
Indonesia’s moratorium and emissions from deforestation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Indonesia’s moratorium and emissions from deforestation

2,156

Published on

Dr. Jonah Busch, Climate and Forest Economist from Conservation International, gave this presentation on 29 November 2012 at the World Resources Institute UNFCCC COP18 side-event in Doha, Qatar.

0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,156
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
52
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Indonesia’s moratorium and emissions from deforestation

  1. 1. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on forest concessions have reduced emissions from deforestation from 2000-2010?J Busch – R Lubowski – E Ashkenazi – K Austin – F Boltz – M Hansen – B Margono – M Steininger–F Stolle– A Baccini Jonah Busch, Ph.D. (Conservation International) World Resources Institute Side Event, UNFCCC COP 18 Millennium Hotel, Doha, Qatar Thursday, November 29, 2012
  2. 2. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)?2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession?3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010?4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction?
  3. 3. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)? 19% in oil palm concessions; 26% in timber concessions2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession? on average, oil palm concessions increased deforestation by 60%, and timber concessions increased deforestation by 110%, controlling for year- and site- specific effects3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010? by 578 MtCO2e/10 yrs (8.3%) assuming no leakage, extrapolating rates from dated to undated concessions4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction? a carbon price of $2.05 (mandatory) or $9.40 (voluntary)
  4. 4. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)?2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession?3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010?4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction?
  5. 5. Forest (ha), 2000 Deforestation (ha), 2000-2010 Total: 94.24 million ha Total: 8.78 million ha 7,835,348 Oil palm concession 1,442,462 10,830,952 Logging concession 566,778 6,509,198 Timber concession 61,859,374 4,718,690 7,207,299 Protected area 1,859,364 Unprotected, non- concession 190,202Palm oil conversion (ha), 2000-2010 Emissions (tCO2e), 2000-2010 Total: 1.28 million ha Total: 8.71 billion tCO2e 1,691,808,273 341,097 414,866,793 4,187,169,312 27,609 768,365 135,348 2,280,133,378 10,793 132,747,802
  6. 6. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)?2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession?3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010?4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction?
  7. 7. 2.2x (3.4x) more deforestation INSIDE oil palm (timber) concessions than OUTSIDE concessions… Indonesia forest loss, 2000-2010 180,000,000 160,000,000 140,000,000 120,000,000Area (ha) 100,000,000 Non-forest (+13%) Other forest (-8%) 80,000,000 Timber (-27%) Logging (-5%) 60,000,000 Oil palm (-17%) Protected (-3%) 40,000,000 20,000,000 - 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year
  8. 8. 2.2x (3.4x) more deforestation INSIDE …but concession land is oil palm (timber) concessions geographically different than OUTSIDE concessions… Indonesia forest loss, 2000-2010 180,000,000 Unprotected Oil palm Timber Non-concession Concession Concession (n=136,963) (n=22,285) (n=16,076) 160,000,000 Slope (%) 7.2 6.3 5.7 140,000,000 Elevation (m) 340 286 272 120,000,000 Distance to nearest highway (km) 65 56 46 Non-forest (+13%) Distance to nearestArea (ha) 100,000,000 provincial capital (km) 226 239 211 Other forest (-8%) Potential agricultural 80,000,000 Timber (-27%) revenue ($/ha/yr) $245 $212 $259 Logging (-5%) Above and below 60,000,000 Oil palm (-17%) ground biomass (tC/ha) 148 149 160 Protected (-3%) Peat extent (%) 15% 22% 66% 40,000,000 Forest cover, 2000 (%) 52% 48% 59% 20,000,000 Forest cover, 2010 (%) 48% 41% 45% - 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Deforestation (%/10 yr) 7.8% 17% 24% Year Palm oil cover, 2010 (%) 2.9% 9.0% 2.9%
  9. 9. 2.3x (1.3x) more deforestation AFTERoil palm (timber) concessionsthan BEFORE concessions… Average annual deforestation rate (%/yr) Before After 2000-2010 concession concessionOil palm, undated -1.62%Oil palm, dated -2.35% -1.1% -2.5%Logging, undated -Logging, dated -0.47% -0.38% -0.51%Timber, undated -0.28%Timber, dated -2.98% -2.6% -3.5%Protected, undated +1.46%Protected, dated -0.40% -1.4% -0.37%Other forest -0.77%Total forest -0.94%Non-forest +1.25%
  10. 10. 2.3x (1.3x) more deforestation AFTER …but deforestation wasoil palm (timber) concessions increasing nationwidethan BEFORE concessions… 1.4% Average annual deforestation rate (%/yr) 1.2% Before After 2000-2010 concession concession Deforestation rate (%/yr) 1.0%Oil palm, undated -1.62%Oil palm, dated -2.35% -1.1% -2.5% 0.8%Logging, undated - 0.6%Logging, dated -0.47% -0.38% -0.51%Timber, undated -0.28% 0.4%Timber, dated -2.98% -2.6% -3.5%Protected, undated +1.46% 0.2%Protected, dated -0.40% -1.4% -0.37%Other forest -0.77% 0.0%Total forest -0.94% YearNon-forest +1.25%
  11. 11. To attribute deforestation to thedesignation of oil palm concessions,we need fixed effects regression to… -control for year-specific effects -control for site-specific effectsmatching methods? -not necessary due to panel data
  12. 12. Designation Average effect of concession designation on deforestation (ha/yr), controlling for year fixed-effects and site fixed-effectsTimber concession +110% (109-111%)Oil palm concession +60% (57-64%)Logging concession +61% (59-63%)Protected area - 4.4% (1.2-7.5%) Poisson regression; number of 3km x 3km site-years = 1,268,690
  13. 13. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)?2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession?3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010?4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction?
  14. 14. Oil Palm Concessions Timber Concessions Total: 10.6 mha Total: 8.6 mha post-2000 pre-2000 undatedLogging Concessions Protected Areas Total: 13.2 mha Total: 14.8 mha
  15. 15. Aggregating impact to national levelScope of moratorium Reduction in Reduction in deforestation emissions from deforestationNew oil palm concessions 117,000 ha/10yrs 153 MT/10yrsin high-carbon forests (>150tC/ha) and (-1.3%) (-2.2%)peat landsNew oil palm + timber concessions 414,000 ha/10yrs 578 MT/10yrsin high-carbon forests (>150tC/ha) and (-4.7%) (-8.3%)peat landsNew oil palm + timber concessions 550,000 ha/10yrs 628 MT/10yrsin all forest (-6.3%) (-9.0%)New oil palm + timber + logging 628,000 ha/10yrs 676 MT/10yrsconcessions in all forest (-7.2%) (-9.6%)New + existing oil palm + timber + 1,486,000 ha/10yrs 1367 MT/10yrslogging concessions in all forest (-16.9%) (-19.5%)Uninformed extrapolation of concession dates to undated concessions; no leakageCaveats: No exemptions; no temporal shifting
  16. 16. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)?2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession?3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010?4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction?
  17. 17. Comparing incentive structures for REDD+ using OSIRIS-Indonesia (Busch et al, PNAS, 2012)Click-of-a-button decision support tool toestimate and map the impacts of alternativeREDD+ policy decisions on: -deforestation (ha/yr) -emission reductions (tCO2e/yr) -national and local revenue ($/yr)Benefits: -free -MS Excel interface -transparent -open-source -peer-reviewed, published, scientific -online: http://www.conservation.org/osiris
  18. 18. 1. OBSERVED DEFORESTATION, 2000-2005 (Hansen, 2008) Deforestation: 687,000 ha/yr Emissions: 860 million tCO2e/yr KALIMANTANSUMATRA SULAWESI PAPUA JAVA 2. LIKELY DEFORESTATION WITHOUT RED (unofficial “reference scenario”) Deforestation: 693,000 ha/yr Emissions: 803 million tCO2e/yr KALIMANTANSUMATRA SULAWESI PAPUA JAVA 3. LIKELY DEFORESTATION WITH RED ($10/tCO2e) KALIMANTAN KALIMANTAN Deforestation: 557,000 ha/yr SULAWESI Emissions: 581 million tCO2e/yrSUMATRA SULAWESI Revenue: $2.2 billion.yr PAPUA JAVASUMATRA SULAWESI PAPUA
  19. 19. Carbon price needed for equivalent reduction (OSIRIS v1.5; Busch et al, PNAS, 2012)Scope of moratorium Reduction in Voluntary Voluntary Mandatory emissions from incentives incentives incentives (e.g. deforestation (simple) (improved) cap-and-trade)New oil palm concessions in 153 MT/10yrs $2.60/tCO2e $1.10/tCO2e $0.50/tCO2ehigh-carbon forests (-2.2%)(>150tC/ha) and peat landsNew oil palm + timber 578 MT/10yrs $9.40/tCO2e $2.75/tCO2e $2.05/tCO2econcessions in (-8.3%)high-carbon forests(>150tC/ha) and peat landsNew oil palm + timber 628 MT/10yrs $10.20/tCO2e $2.95/tCO2e $2.25/tCO2econcessions in all forest (-9.0%)New oil palm + timber 676 MT/10yrs $11.00/tCO2e $3.15/tCO2e $2.45/tCO2e+ logging concessions in (-9.6%)all forestNew + existing oil palm + 1367 MT/10yrs $24.40/tCO2e $7.05/tCO2e $5.60/tCO2etimber + logging (-19.5%)concessions in all forest
  20. 20. 1. How much of Indonesia’s 2000-2010 emissions from deforestation occurred within oil palm concessions (kebun) and timber concessions (HTI)? 19% in oil palm concessions; 26% in timber concessions2. How much did the designation of a concession between 2000-2010 increase the annual deforestation rate at a particular site, relative to if that site hadn’t been designated a concession? on average, oil palm concessions increased deforestation by 60%, and timber concessions increased deforestation by 110%, controlling for year- and site- specific effects3. How much would Indonesia’s moratorium on new concessions have reduced emissions if applied from 2000-2010? by 578 MtCO2e/10 yrs (8.3%) assuming no leakage, extrapolating rates from dated to undated concessions4. What carbon price would have achieved an equivalent reduction? a carbon price of $2.05 (mandatory) or $9.40 (voluntary)
  21. 21. Conclusion:A moratorium on new oil palm concessions and timber concessions in high-carbon forests (>150 tC/ha) and peat lands would have had a substantial impact on reducing emissions from deforestation: 578 MtCO2e/10yrs (8.3%)Modest carbon gains could have been achieved by expanding the scope of the moratorium to include secondary forests and new logging concessionsFor Indonesia to achieve its 26-41% emission reduction target, it would have had to expand the scope of the moratorium to address conversion within existing concessions or non-concession areas, or have put price-based instruments in place
  22. 22. Terima kasih!Thank you! Thanks to: World Resources Institute Woods Hole Research Center David and Lucile Packard Foundation Comments and feedback welcome: http://www.conservation.org/osiris jbusch@conservation.org
  23. 23. REDD+: an overview Payments ($) Developed countries provide finance through funds or markets Emission reductions (tCO2e/yr) •Developing countries reduce 15% of global GHG emissions from deforestation, etc •Co-benefits: biodiversity, clean water…•UNFCCC sets basic rules•Timeline: agreement by 2015; implementation by 2020•Forest countries decide how to achieve reductions•Price-based mechanisms or place-based policies
  24. 24. Palm oil in stovePalm oil in foodPalm oil in car
  25. 25. Source: World Resources Institute
  26. 26. Data (~200,000 3km x 3km cells)Dependent variables:• Forest cover, 2000, 60m Landsat (Margono, Hansen et al, in prep)• Annual deforestation, 2000-2010, 60m Landsat (Margono, Hansen et al, in prep.)• Oil palm distribution, 2010, 250m Modis (Miettenen et al, 2011)Explanatory variables:• Oil palm concession boundaries and dates (Ministry of Forestry, WRI, 2009/2010)• Timber concession boundaries and dates (Ministry of Forestry, WRI, 2009/2010)• Logging concession boundaries and dates (Ministry of Forestry, WRI, 2009/2010)• Protected area boundaries (WRI) and dates (various)Emission factors:• Forest biomass, 463m (Baccini et al, 2012)• Soil carbon (FAO, 2008)• Peat distribution and emissions (Wetlands International; Hooijer, 2010)
  27. 27. Well-structured voluntary REDD+ PES Well-structured CAT Voluntarynearly as effective as cap-and-trade(1) Basic PES-style voluntary incentives Site-scale accounting; historical reference levels(2) District-scale accounting; historical reference levels(3) District-scale accounting; projected reference levels(4) District-scale accounting; projected reference levels +20% revenue sharing Shortfall(5) Well-structured voluntary incentives District-scale accounting; projected reference levels Surplus +20% revenue sharing +20% responsibility sharing(6) District-scale accounting projected reference levels minus 10% +20% revenue sharing +20% responsibility sharing(7) Mandatory incentives, e.g. Cap & Trade District-scale accounting; projected reference levels minus 10% 0% revenue sharing 100% responsibility sharing(8) District-scale accounting; projected reference levels minus 26% 0% revenue sharing 100% responsibility sharing
  28. 28. Geographically prioritizing pilot programs:Expected abatement under REDD+ at $10/tCO2e KALIMANTAN SULAWESI PAPUA SUMATRA JAVAWhere is forest carbon, AND where can money change behavior?
  29. 29. Sensitivities• Functional form• Included variables• Policy decisions• Model parameters -Carbon price -Price elasticity of demand for frontier agriculture (intranational leakage) -Exogenous agricultural price increase (international leakage) -Peat emission factor -Carbon data set -Social preference for agricultural revenue -National reference level -District level start-up costs -Per-hectare transaction costs
  30. 30. Economic incentives are just oneimportant component of a national REDD+ strategy
  31. 31. The road ahead• Analysis in other regions: Peru, Madagascar, Bolivia, Mexico• IDRISI GIS interface (w/ Clark Labs)• Agricultural concessions and policies• Degradation and reforestation• Safeguards for REDD+• Market integrity mechanisms: risk buffers, offset trade ratios, conservative accounting• Matching payments for biodiversity, water and other ecosystem services• Community conservation contracts and green economic development
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×