Ivar Jørgensen NORAD


Published on

Presentation from the conference Not Seeing the Forest and People for the Carbon

  • 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

Ivar Jørgensen NORAD

  1. 1. How to ensure that REDD+delivers social and environmental co-benefits Ivar Jørgensen, NoradCopenhagen, November 8th 2012
  2. 2. Roles in Norwegian REDD+ assistance• MFA is responsible for the development budget• Our embassies are involved in implementation of many of the REDD+ programmes• Ministry of Environment is responsible for the strategic management of the Government of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI)• Norad is an advisory body to MFA and NICFI – providing technical advice and quality assurance• Norad manages funds to research institutions and NGOs for REDD+ programmes• Norwegian NGOs are active and influential in Norwegian REDD+ policy
  3. 3. Norwegian investments in REDD+• Active contributor to the UNFCCC negotiations• Major source of funding for UN- REDD, FCPF, FIP• Bilateral programmes with e.g. Brazil, Indonesia, Guyana, Tanzania, Ethiopia• Major contribution to Congo Basin Forest Fund (with UK)• REDD+ research• Civil Society programmes globally and in around 25 countries• Total available budget NOK 3 bill/year
  4. 4. Official position on safeguards• Norway see safeguards to be a critical part of REDD+ architecture to ensure social and environmental integrity of REDD+ results and raise financing to pay for these results• Summary of information of how safeguards are addressed should be in national communication and biennial updates• Further guidance is needed on types and characteristics of information reported, and how information is collected and reviewed• UNFCCC guidance is needed on content of summary to define a core set of information
  5. 5. REDD+ and co-benefits• Conserving biodiversity• Protecting ecosystem services• Synergies with adaptation needs• Economic benefits• Community benefits (livelihoods and social capital)• Benefits to governance and rights agenda
  6. 6. National policy options to enhance co- benefits• Include forest co-benefits in low carbon development strategies• Include forest co-benefits in national monitoring systems• Require spatial planning as basis for land use decision• Promote FPIC• Clarify land tenure and user rights to forest• Develop REDD standards and safeguard information systems - and include them in national reporting (The last bullet will be key for funding agencies)
  7. 7. What should be the basis for funding?• In Phase 3 we will pay for documented reduction of emissions• Policies and measures (PAMs) may be agreed as basis for payment in Phase 1 and 2• The international community should agree on requirements to safeguard systems for payments to be released• Some national funds have defined safeguard systems (e.g. FREDDI/Indonesia has an elaborate safeguard system)
  8. 8. How to make progress on safeguards?• Safeguards have been a sensitive element in negotiations• Both COP 16 and 17 made positive steps, including Cancun decision on safeguards• Durban did not reach a comprehensive result on reporting systems• We see development of Safeguard Information Systems as an opportunity to make progress: - SIS can improve overall REDD+ implementation - SIS can build confidence in REDD+ at local and international levels - SIS can facilitate the flow of finance 09.11.20 Side/Page 8 12
  9. 9. How to make progress on safeguards – contd.• REDD+ countries should implements SIS – this will enhance funding opportunities and it will inform the global process• Global processes should learn from national experiences• Consistent international guidance will lead to efficiency and reduce confusion of multiple initiatives• SIS development processes will enhance quality of national REDD+ policies• Safeguards should be included in reporting from countries 09.11.20 Side/Page 9 12
  10. 10. Safeguards are more than just standards • Capacity and willingness to implement and monitor safeguards • Resources put aside to make sure safeguards are followed • Ability to communicate safeguards and interact with relevant stakeholdersWhat is the role of indigenous peoples and other forest dependent communities in REDD?
  11. 11. Final comments• Co-benefits are only ensured through national policy processes – REDD+ cannot solve all problems. The international community can not dictate national policy• A global REDD+ system will put pressure on parties to adopt and implement safeguards• Countries with good SIS will attract funding• Countries with good SIS will be more successful in sustainable reduction of deforestation• REDD+ nay-sayers increase the risk of REDD+ failure and loss of opportunities for REDD+ funding streams
  12. 12. Thank you.Ivar Jørgensen ivjo@norad.nowww.norad.no