• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Financing the World's Forests: integrating markets and stakeholders2
 

Financing the World's Forests: integrating markets and stakeholders2

on

  • 1,033 views

Second keynote speaker presentation by Graham Floater (Office of Climate Change, UK)

Second keynote speaker presentation by Graham Floater (Office of Climate Change, UK)

3rd August 2009 - Imperial College (CEP)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,033
Views on SlideShare
1,032
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
29
Comments
1

1 Embed 1

http://www.slideshare.net 1

Accessibility

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

11 of 1 previous next

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • good...................
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Every year, the world loses an area of forest the size of England
  • Every year, the world loses an area of forest the size of England
  • What was the consensus on modelling results from the Washington conference? Ask Bernardo Why is deforestation rate decreasing?? Because modelled on Houghton? Isn’t rate increasing under Met Office predictions?

Financing the World's Forests: integrating markets and stakeholders2 Financing the World's Forests: integrating markets and stakeholders2 Presentation Transcript

  • Climate Change: Financing Global Forests Graham Floater Deputy Director Office of Climate Change www.occ.gov.uk
  • The Eliasch Review
    • The Review was launched at No.10 in October 2008:
    • Commissioned by the Prime Minister
    • Delivered by the PM’s Special Representative
    • Supported by the Office of Climate Change
  • Emissions from forests are significant... Global GHG emissions by sector Sources: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (2007), IPCC GHG inventory (2007) and IEA World Energy Outlook (2007)
  • The main economic drivers of deforestation stem from agricultural and timber production
    • Key drivers include permanent agriculture, shifting agriculture, timber, infrastructure
    • Drivers differ from country to country and locality to locality:
      • Brazil: beef, dairy, soy
      • Indonesia: palm oil, rubber, rice, cassava
      • DR Congo: subsistence crops, cocoa
      • PNG: oil palm subsistence crops
    Drivers of deforestation
    • More efficient and sustainable agricultural production
    • Sustainable plantations and forest management
    • Infrastructure expansion properly managed
    • Alternative employment opportunities
    • Protected areas with full participation of communities
    • Payments for ecosystem services
    • Sustainable biofuels
    A step change in how land is used and commodities produced Forests more valuable standing than cut The vision: what needs to be done...
  • Getting there will involve overcoming some challenging obstacles...
    • The social and environmental costs of deforestation are not reflected in the price of timber and agricultural products (i.e. externalities )
    • Subsidies and other policies in producer countries further incentivise deforestation
    • Unsustainable purchasing practices in consumer countries provide yet more incentive to deforest
    Price of products from deforested land
  • Delivering the vision... How do we deliver this? The benefits A step change in how land is used and commodities produced Forests more valuable standing than cut Carbon finance Consumer awareness & regulation Policy incentives in forest nations Poverty reduction Protection of biodiversity & water systems Substantial emissions reductions Lower costs of tackling climate change
  • How much could it cost? On the basis of global land-use model results, the Eliasch Review estimates the cost of purchasing forest credits on the open market sufficient to halve deforestation to 2030 at $17-33 billion per year. Sources: Grieg-Gran (2008); Sathaye et al (2008); Gusti et al (2008); and Kindermann et al (2008) Marginal abatement cost curve
  • However the benefits of taking action far outweigh the costs... Effects of deforestation on climate change could lead to additional global damages of $1 trillion a year by 2100 Sources: Hope (2008); Hope and Castilla-Rubio (2008)
    • The benefits of reducing forest emissions
    • Reducing forest emissions by 50% gives a net benefit of around $4 trillion (NPV of climate change damages minus mitigation costs)
    • The net benefit increases to $6 trillion if forest emissions are reduced by 90%
  • In the long term, the forest sector should form part of a global cap and trade system
    • Including the global forest sector in a well-designed cap and trade system could make forestry carbon neutral by 2030 ( 3.5 GtCO 2 of abatement )
    • Including forests could reduce global costs of climate change mitigation by up to 50% in 2030
    • This could enable an extra 10% reduction in global CO 2 emissions in 2050.
    Sources: Modelling for the Eliasch Review
  • In the transition, four building blocks will be essential to access carbon finance... 1. Effective targets National baselines, inclusive of all countries 2. Robust measuring Forest credits based on real reductions in forest emissions 3. Linking to carbon finance Carbon markets and other funding initiatives 4. Good governance International standards and full participation of forest communities
  • 1. Effective targets should minimise leakage and maximise additionality National level Inclusive Additional
    • Prevents intra-national leakage
    • Activates government policy levers
    • Reduced transaction costs
    To reduce international leakage, targets should incentivise both high and low deforesting nations Should also be simple & transparent
    • Baselines should diminish over time:
    • Emissions are projected to decline as forests disappear
    • Forest nations to take on greater commitments
  • 2. Robust measuring and monitoring can be achieved with capacity building Measurement of forest emissions has been more variable than fossil fuel emissions in the past
    • Evidence shows accuracy of measuring forest emissions can increase up to 90%
    • with ground work and satellite data
    • The Review estimates that for
    • 25 forest nations,
    • around $50 million will be needed
    • in set-up costs and $7-18m/yr running costs
            • While capacity is developing, conservative estimates should be used
    Increasing accuracy Sources: Monni et al, 2007; 3 Brown et al 2000, Chave et al 2005, Brown et al 2008; work commissioned for the Eliasch Review from Hardcastle et al, 2008. Images: ESA and Forestry Commission (2008)
  • 3. Linking to carbon markets can leverage substantial funds... Cap and trade systems Forestry recognised Rules for trading EU ETS Not yet Domestic and international forestry credits also excluded – current EU proposal ambivalent. US – Waxman Markey Yes Domestic forestry included in trading. International forest credits included. New Zealand Yes Domestic forest sector fully included in trading. Anticipates access for international forest credits. Australia (New South Wales) Yes Includes domestic sequestration credits. Anticipates access for international forest credits.
  • ...however, carbon market finance alone will not be sufficient in the medium term Global cap and trade 2030 target: carbon market finance could make the sector carbon neutral Funds from partial access to carbon markets Funding gap: $11-19 billion per year in 2020 2020 projection: carbon market finance could be $7 billion per year and fund a 22% cut in deforestation emissions Source: Modelling for the Eliasch Review Short term Medium term Long term Funding 2012
  • 4. Good governance will be needed if reduced deforestation is to succeed Risks
    • Emissions reductions
    • Unsound measuring, monitoring and verification
    • Land rights fragmented and unclear
    • Inequitable and inefficient distribution of finance within forest nations
    • Poverty reduction, human rights and biodiversity
    • Poorest forest communities may not receive the benefits
    • Indigenous rights not addressed
    • Rainforest replaced by eucalypts
  • Success is achievable with the right political will and resources Good Governance
    • Emissions reductions
    • Reporting on policies and measures, as for developed countries
    • Land rights reform
    • Financial transparency, such as the Extractive industries Transparency Initiative
    • Poverty reduction, human rights and biodiversity
    • Full participation of forest communities to benefit the poor
    • Adherence to UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Art 18 & 19)
    • Low carbon development strategies
  • Immediate action: mobilising international funds for capacity building Investment in early action Policy reforms Research & analysis
    • National drivers of deforestation
    • Solutions and strategies
    • Development of baselines
    • Reform of policy and legal framework
    • Land tenure reform
    • Measuring and monitoring capability
    • Institutional strengthening
    • Demonstration activities
    • Major practical programmes
    Capacity-building costs estimated at up to $4 billion over 5 years Source: Hoare et al (2008) for the Eliasch Review UNREDD FIP FCPF carbon fund Mechanisms proposed
  • International coordination will be needed if support is to be efficient and effective...
  • Key recommendations of the Review
    • The international community should aim to support forest nations to halve deforestation by 2020 and make the global forest sector carbon neutral by 2030 , with emissions from forest loss balanced by new forest growth.
    • The global forest sector should be fully included in any post-2012 deal at Copenhagen.
    • Forest nations should develop their own strategies to combat deforestation, including establishing baselines, effective governance and distribution of finance with full participation of indigenous peoples and other forest communities.
    • Access to finance from carbon markets as well as funding from other initiatives will be required.
    • The international community should provide support for capacity building . Total capacity building costs are up to $4 billion over 5 years for 40 forest nations.
  • Supplementary analysis – impact of forest credits on the carbon price
    • The impact of forest credits on carbon markets will depend on four variables :
    • Modelling suggests that if supplementarity limits are set at 50% or lower in phase III of the EU ETS , then admitting forest credits to the international credit market will have little or no impact on the EU carbon market price.
    • There would, however, be an impact on the international credit market unless global emissions targets are tightened or supplementarity restrictions loosened on forest credits being admitted. Without such adjustment, forest credits would displace some more expensive abatement in other sectors.
    The stringency of emissions targets Supplementarity limits ...and the relative cost of supplying other credits The cost of supplying forest credits... Source: Modelling for the Eliasch Review
  • Supplementary analysis – distribution of finance within forest nations regions/ provinces National registry International forestry credits All units registered nationally to avoid ‘double counting’ State can opt to invest directly and keep the credits centrally... …or devolve credits to regional level …or allow investors and communities to certify projects and receive credits in return national fund