Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Strategic Environmental and Social  Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) of REDD+ strategy, Nepal

399

Published on

The presentation of Barry Dalal-Clayton, senior fellow of IIED, to the IIED-hosted Moving ahead with Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) workshop on 9-10 April 2014. …

The presentation of Barry Dalal-Clayton, senior fellow of IIED, to the IIED-hosted Moving ahead with Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) workshop on 9-10 April 2014.

The presentation, made during the fifth session on social and environmental safeguards of REDD+, focused on Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) and safeguards, using issues and lessons from IIED's work in Nepal.

Read more on Dalal-Clayton's work: http://www.iied.org/users/barry-dalal-clayton.

Further details of the workshop and IIED's work on REDD+ are available via http://www.iied.org/coverage-moving-ahead-redd-prospects-challenges-workshop.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
399
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
21
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT (SESA) of REDD+ STRATEGY, NEPAL Barry Dalal-Clayton
  • 2. R-PP Draft REDD strategy REDD strategy SESA SESA needs a starting point to identify social and environmental risks Ideally, SESA should be ongoing process with strategy development Consultations Experience from REDD pilotsResearch, studies, etc. ESMF ESMF SESA Safeguards, SES, etc
  • 3. REDD+ STRATEGY SESA INTEGRATED PROCESSESMERGED PROCESSES OPTIONS FOR SESA SESA AFTER STRATEGY SESA BEFORE STRATEGY
  • 4. 1. REDD+ strategy options paper • Review of RPP and other key documents and approaches • Identification of Strategic options 2. Baseline Studies • Current environmental & social situation in forestry sector • Review of legislative, regulatory and policy regime • Analysis of climate change issues and links • Institutional needs and capacity 3. Stakeholder analysis 4. Consultations: • National-level: national workshop, meetings, interviews • District level: visit pilots, meetings 5. Assessment of environmental & social impacts 6. Reports: SESA & ESMF (drafts, public review, final) STEPS IN NEPAL REDD+ SESA
  • 5. National consultations • National – workshops, meetings (individuals, organisations) • Expert workshop – scoping impacts District visit (2 physiographic regions – Tarai & Mid Hills; group of districts) • Regional workshop (Chitwan, Makawanpur, Bara, Parsa districts) • Kayar khola REDD+ pilot sites • District consultations (Chitwan, Makawanpur, Bara) - meetings with CFUGs, CSO/IPOs
  • 6. Limitations of SESA • Dislocated from actual Strategy – so no linkage • Resource limitations • Limited consultations • Unable to undertake some important tasks (eg focus groups, experts workshops, linkage diagrams) • Lack of clarity on REDD+ institutional structures – makes difficult to design some ESMF elements (assessment & monitoring bodies, capacity building, costs, etc) • So SESA is still effectively initial • Misunderstanding what SESA is all about • Lack of information particularly documents, several studies in parallel – difficulty in getting documents
  • 7. Strategic options – in brief SO1 Land tenure, carbon rights and benefit sharing; SO2 Community-based forest management (formal and customary); S03 Promotion of private forestry; SO4 Government managed forests for conservation of biodiversity and maintenance of fragile ecosystems and land; SO5 Conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services outside Protected Areas; SO6 Payment for ecosystem services; SO7 Agriculture productivity and food security for small and marginalIsed farmers; SO8 Energy access and efficiency; SO9 Environmentally-friendly infrastructure planning, construction and maintenance; SO10 Forest and non-forest enterprises; SO10 Law enforcement; SO12 Good governance and anti-corruption; SO13 Land use planning for each of the physiographic regions; and SO14 Institutional architecture.
  • 8. 10: Promoting forest and non- forest enterprises Elite capture Illegal logging Forest degradation Conflicts over eligibility for finance Marginalised may not benefit Gender un- friendly enterprises Limited employment opportunities for poor Exclusion/token participation of women & vulnerable groups Women & marginalised lose access to forest products/NTFPs Technology displaces IK Local enterprises displaced Loss of livelihoods Toxic chemicals Increased pressure on forests Loss of ecosystems diversity Reduced income & livelihoods Impoverishment Malnutrition, he alth problems Limits child education Pressure on health services Loss of tourism Loss of employment Pollution (soil & water) Loss of groundwater Loss of carbon stocks Impedes irrigation & agric. production Forests devalued Loss of revenues to State Social conflict Negative impacts
  • 9. Social impacts – positive Improved Rights and Access • Improved rights & access to land / forests • Increased supply of , access to, & value of forest products • Improved benefit-sharing • Improved market access / surplus products for markets • Better access to forest products / NTFP Improved Livelihood and Poverty Reduction • Improved health • Poverty reduction • Investment in alternative livelihoods • Improved livelihoods, income, economic opportunities, enterprise development • Increased employment • Potential for cooperatives • Improved food security Social Inclusion and Gender Empowerment • Empowerment • Increased voice for women / powerless • Social inclusion (gender balance) • Reduced workload/drudgery (women) • Gender friendly technology introduced • Reduced social gaps
  • 10. Social impacts – positive (Cont.) Increased Participation, Knowledge and Ownership • Maintain/strengthened cultural norms/services • Increased knowledge / capacity for forest management • Increased use of local, indigenous/ & traditional knowledge & practices • Increased participation / ownership • Environmental & social awareness • Strengthened local organisations Enhanced Accountability • Reduced corruption / bribery • Reduced conflict • Reduced illegal activities
  • 11. Social impacts – negative Social Exclusion and Displacement • Exclusion of landless, poor & marginalised eviction, loss of land/property • Social exclusion • Exclusion/devaluation of women • Exclusion/elimination of cultural / spiritual values & traditional practices • Ignoring/displacing traditional/ indigenous knowledge • Small farmers & local enterprises out-competed, displaced Leading to Inequity • Inequity in benefit-sharing (loss of) • Elite capture (of resources, benefits, access, etc) • Inequitable/loss of access to forest resources/products • Increased costs (transaction, labour, time) • Land grabbing Loss of Livelihood • Reduced food production • Loss of/ limited access to, employment • Loss of livelihoods, income, economic opportunities
  • 12. Social impacts – negative (Cont.) Loss of Authority/Autonomy and Induced Risk and Dependency • Loss of user/traditional rights, or access to forest products & resources • Health risks • Lack of awareness / information • Not accessible to poor, marginalised (cant afford) • Dependence on external inputs • Monopolies setting prices (eg timber) • Token participation • Politicisation of community decisions Social Conflict and Violence • Violence against women • Conflict • Human-wildlife conflict
  • 13. Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) ESMF objective is to “provide GUIDING PRINCIPLES for management of strategic environmental and social issues of the REDD+ strategy”. [Not a management ‘plan’] Specifically • Outline process for identifying and assessing potential environmental and social impacts of REDD+ activities/projects; • Guidelines/measures for enhancing +ve impacts, mitigation of –ve impacts, and monitoring plans to address predicted impacts • Ensure that environmental and social issues are evaluated and necessary interventions are incorporated in planning, decision- making, and implementation; • Mechanism for consultation and disclosure of information • Ensure compliance and due diligence with GON’s environmental and social requirements and other safeguard policies (eg UNFCC Cancun, WBank)
  • 14. Limitation of the ESMF • Linkage with actually REDD+ Strategy is not established • ESMF is based on SESA carried out for REDD+ Strategic Options prepared by the SESA team • Formal institutional set up for REDD+ implementation is not in place, the structure proposed by ER-PIN (Emissions Reduction Programme Idea Note) has been adapted • ESMF is therefore “Indicative”
  • 15. Legislative & Policy Framework Laws/Policies/Plans ClimateChangePolicy, 2011 ForestAct1993 HydropowerPolicy,2001 Irrigation,Electricityand WaterResourcesActof 1967 LeaseholdForestryPolicy 2002 LocalSelf-Governance Act,1999 MasterPlanforthe ForestrySector,1989 MinesandMineralsAct, 1985 NationalParksand WildlifeConservationAct 1973 PublicRoadAct,1974 RevisedForestrySector Policy,2000 SoilandWatershed ConservationAct1982 NepalBiodiversity Strategy,2002 WaterResources Strategy,2002 Climate Change Policy, 2011 O N N N N O N N N N N O O Forest Act 1993 C C O C O C O C O O O C Hydropower Policy, 2001 O N C C C C N C C C O Irrigation, Electricity and Water Resources Act of 1967 N N C C C C C I C O Leasehold Forestry Policy 2002 C O C O C O C O C Local Self-Governance Act, 1999 C C C N C C C N Master Plan for the Forestry Sector, 1989 C O C O O O C Mines and Minerals Act, 1985 C C C C C C National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1973 C O O O C Public Road Act, 1974 C C C C Revised Forestry Sector Policy, 2000 O O C Soil and Watershed Conservation Act 1982 O C Nepal Biodiversity Strategy, 2002 C Water Resources Strategy, 2002 O- Overlaps C- direct contraction N- neutral
  • 16. KEY POINTS 1 IF REDD+ implemented effectively, efficiently & equitably – then +ve impacts: • Increased incomes, benefit-sharing, more empowerment & reduced conflicts. • Reduced workloads & drudgery for women – +ve health impacts, improved family well-being, time saved • Increased participation & sense of ownership
  • 17. KEY POINTS 2 • REDD+ strategy alone not enough. • Need to change governance & social behaviour to be effective, efficient or equitable. • Need coordination & integration with much broader legislative and policy reform, general awareness-raising, attitude changes and strengthened institutional capacity. • Needs to reach out – address externalities (eg agriculture, industries, infrastructure, trade) • Overall, REDD+ appears is positive concept, but likely environmental and social impacts (+ve and -ve) – some likely perverse feedbacks. • Forest loss with increased access • Climate change higher temperatures in lowlands, drier, - impact on forest distribution, composition and productivity over time, but no precise predictions possible. • Forest dependency will remain but types/amounts of forest products used will change – some –ve impacts, eg more biogas = more forest degradation. • Forestry-agriculture (intimate) link will continue (but -ve impacts of agric intensification - pollution),
  • 18. What more is needed • SESA has limitations: • dislocated from actual REDD+ Strategy, • resource limitations, • lack of clarity on REDD+ institutional structures • Needs more work, eg • more consultations at district/local level • More interaction with stakeholders • More analysis: eg impacts linkages, special studies (eg encroachment, PES, benefit-sharing) • Focus group work • Case studies • Public hearings • Develop indicative ESMF to fit actual REDD+ strategy elements • Integrate further work with real REDD+ strategy development process • Beyond SESA/ESMF: • Adapt ESMF into REDD+ implementation modalities (responsibility: REDD+ Coordinating Division)
  • 19. For your attention !

×