Indonesia NAMA success story
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Indonesia NAMA success story

on

  • 1,109 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,109
Views on SlideShare
867
Embed Views
242

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0

6 Embeds 242

http://acadcienciasplantas.blogspot.com.es 94
http://unjobs.org 88
https://twitter.com 55
http://acadcienciasplantas.blogspot.com 2
http://kred.com 2
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1

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

Indonesia NAMA success story Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Is the window of opportunity for REDD+ closing? COP-18, Doha, Qatar (EU Pavilion): 29 November 2012, 18:00-20:00Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions forthe Forests and Other Land Uses of Indonesia: Complementarity of Policy Instruments, Funding Streams and MotivationMeine van Noordwijk Co-authors: Fahmuddin Agus, Sonya Dewi & Herry Purnomo
  • 2. Hope / Hype / Crash / Reality?Expected Path-dependence?effectpositiveneutralnegative0. Igno- I. Initial excitement, II. Reality III. Real negotiations can start torance of supported by positive checks, define a net positive outcome ofissues and feedback reinforcement, disappoint- unavoidable tradeoffs (‘loose less’ –po-tential effective ‘public re- ment, ‘loose less’, or ‘win’-‘win’?), or tosolution lations’, grading into confusion, abandon the framing and seek a new ‘hype’ ‘crash’ solution (repeating the cycle?)Figure 1. Stages in typical ‘issue cycle’ of environmental policy
  • 3. Regulate and/or rewardΣ people * influence * concern Who will monitor Who’ll have to pay? compliance? Litigation Political prominence What will it cost? Implement & monitor What can be done to stop, mitigate, undo or adapt? Evaluate, re- assess How much and where? Who’s to blame? Is it a Cause-effect problem? mechanisms Scoping Stakeholder Negotiation Implemen- Re-eva- analysis response tation luation Stage of the issue cycle Tomich et al., 2004
  • 4. The REDD futureseemed bright in 2007
  • 5. Nov 2007 – ahead of Bali COP: Five challenges: 1.Scope,definitions 2.Peat outside ‘forest’ 3.Rights, legality4.Interlinkage and leakage 5.Fairness & efficiency
  • 6. Fairness: the real conservation costC-stocks Market Efficiency: the mostt/ha real impact Depend on definition Emission outside the REDD scheme Sink outside A/R CDM scheme Forest Conservation Production Conversion  Time
  • 7. I. Awareness II. Readiness III. Implementation at scale UNFCCC negotiations of rules of the game Core ER-performance based finance, with some international ER additionality reduce C footrpitns in trade Self-regulatoory response to identity Self-articulated ns We care… NAMA sio Knowledge, Environmental e ci td awareness quality, health en rn m ve Branding as basis for market share go EET Our exports are threatened… ng Ecological & social Global trade and investment i riv relations safeguards dd Rent- REDD rents compete with forest rents REDD+ mi seeking Economic growth with acceptable yra elites distributional effects lp na tio Food sufficiency as prerequisite for political va stability in cities and supportive electorates ti Mo Territorial integrity and security of the state, international independence, domestic bounded local autonomy
  • 8. 1. Scope & definitions conservation protection ‘deforestation’ natural forest production Agroforestry ve te nsi ex integrated, Tree plan- multifunctional tations landscape: crops, trees, Agriculture inte meadows and forest Forestry nsiv e patches ‘loss of forest intensive functions’ agriculture Segregate Integrate functionsCurrent legal, institutional Current reality& educational paradigm
  • 9. Signs of deforestation? ….are included under forest, as are areas normally forming part of the forest area which are temporarily unstocked as a result of human intervention such as harvesting or natural causes but which are expected to revert to forest; [FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1]
  • 10. Forest definition based Forest definition based on X% canopy cover on institutions & intent Non-forest without trees Trees Forest Forest outside with trees without forest trees Clearfelling/ re- plant is accep-ted Including e.g. as forest; no time- agroforests, oil limit on ‘replant’ palm plantation
  • 11. If we cannot define it, we cannot save it:forest definitions and REDD Forest definitions are ambiguous so often forest loss is not officially counted as deforestation. As well, ground-level implications of REDD+ will depend on the operational definition. Application of AFOLU accounting rules can bypass the need for clear definitions, reduce leakage and promote multifunctional landscapes in an equitable, efficient and effective way
  • 12. Stakeholder:1. Undisturbed natural forest Rainforest foundation2. Undisturbed + sust. logged natural forest Conservation agency3. Closed canopy undisturbed + logged forest4A. as 3 + agroforest Forest ecologist4B. as 3 + timber plantations Ministry of Forestry4C. as 3 + agroforest + timber plant’s + estate crops UNFCCC definition4D as 4C + shrub Modis data
  • 13. http://www.as
  • 14. REDD_ALERT synthesis and re-analysis of 5 carbon-pool data for Jambi
  • 15. RED = Reducing emissions from (gross)deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’to ‘non-forest’ land cover types areincluded, and details very much dependon the operational definition of ‘forest’
  • 16. RED = Reducing emissions from (gross)deforestation: only changes from ‘forest’to ‘non-forest’ land cover types areincluded, and details very much dependon the operational definition of ‘forest’REDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, orthe shifts to lower C-stock densitieswithin the forest; details very muchdepend on the operational definition of‘forest’
  • 17. RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) REDD+ = idem, + restocking within anddeforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ towards ‘forest’ ; in some versions RED+to ‘non-forest’ land cover types are will also include peatlands, regardless ofincluded, and details very much depend their forest status ; details still depend onon the operational definition of ‘forest’ the operational definition of ‘forest’REDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, orthe shifts to lower C-stock densitieswithin the forest; details very muchdepend on the operational definition of‘forest’
  • 18. RED = Reducing emissions from (gross) REDD+ = idem, + restocking within anddeforestation: only changes from ‘forest’ towards ‘forest’ ; in some versions RED+ willto ‘non-forest’ land cover types are also include peatlands, regardless of theirincluded, and details very much depend forest status ; details still depend on theon the operational definition of ‘forest’ operational definition of ‘forest’ REDD++ = REALU = idem, + all transitions in landREDD = idem, + (forest) degradation, or cover that affect C storage, whether peatlandthe shifts to lower C-stock densities or mineral soil, trees-outside-forest,within the forest; details very much agroforest, plantations or natural forest. Itdepend on the operational definition of does not depend on the operational definition‘forest’ of ‘forest’
  • 19. “Forest transition” as spatial pattern. ‘chronosequence’? Spatial analysis: classification of 450 districts in Indonesiaaccording to 7 tree cover transition stages (Dewi et al., in prep.) 20
  • 20. 1. Scope & definitions conservation protection ‘deforestation’ natural forest production AgroforestryThis issue can be/has been resolved by nesting REDD+ e nsi ve e xt integrated,within a broader land-basedmultifunctional NAMA (REALU) framework Tree plan-in Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans tations landscape: crops, trees, Agriculture inte meadows and forest Forestry nsiv e patches ‘loss of forest intensive functions’ agriculture Segregate Integrate functionsCurrent legal, institutional Current reality& educational paradigm
  • 21. 2. Rights & legality• In 2012 the Indonesian constitutional court ruled in a case initiated by local governments in Central Kali- mantan province, that the ambiguity that the 1999 Forestry Law 41 had created in allowing either ‘designation’ or ‘gazettement’ to be the basis for inclusion of land areas in the permanent forest es- tate in its article 1(3), should be resolved by relying on ‘gazettement’ only. Only 14.2 Mha (10.9%) out of the 130.7 Mha of Kawasan Hutan (68.4% of Indo- nesia’s land) has to date been gazetted in complian-ce with the law => legal vacuum around all govern-ment rules and permits for >50% of
  • 22. http://ww
  • 23. 2. Rights & legality• In 2012 the Indonesian constitutional court ruled in a case initiated by local governments in Central Kali- mantan province, that the ambiguity that the 1999 Forestry Law 41 had created in allowing either This issue can be/has been partially resolved by nesting REDD+ within orbroader land-based NAMA (REALU) ‘designation’ a ‘gazettement’ to be the basis for inclusion of in Indonesia’s the permanent forest es- framework land areas in national & regional GHG tate in its article 1(3),regencies/provinces as major reduction plans, with should be resolved by relyingactors; at national scale new efforts have only just started on ‘gazettement’ only. Only 14.2 Mha (10.9%) out of the 130.7 Mha of Kawasan Hutan (68.4% of Indo- nesia’s land) has to date been gazetted in complian-ce with the law => legal vacuum around all govern-ment rules and permits for >50% of
  • 24. 3. Interlinkage &change Drivers of tree cover leakage Low intensity swiddening Economic maintains forest Fallow => opportunity of oil Logging & mining agroforest palm, rubber,concessions harvest Swiddening coffee attractslarge trees & create intensifies, large- & small-scale road access fire cycle planters Post-logging starts institutional Industrial vacuum allows timber settlers plantations Over-capacity of wood-based industry => Forest tenure reform Van demand for creates incentives for Noordwijk et al., ‘illegal logging’ tree planting 2011
  • 25. Forest and tree cover transitions: a unifying concept 1 Choice of Y-axis 6Core 2 3 4 5Temporal Spatial Institutional X-linkage of pattern, pattern, challenge at actions in turning point landscape
  • 26. Tree cover transitionWidening: area planted < area cleared Contracting: area planted > cleared
  • 27. In the 1990’s loss of natural cover increased the amount of ‘low C- stock’/low economic value land; tree (crop) planting was 28% of the loss of natural forest areaAfter 2000 planting oftree (crop)s equals 90%of concurrent loss ofnatural forest; theamount of low C-stock/low economicvalue land decreases
  • 28. National Agrarian and Current ABCD interaction drivesgovernment forest laws, ‘business as usual’ development development and emission trajectories Local policiesgovernment Conces- Business plans sionairs and expecta- tions on land Labour tenure force Local elites Local norms and rules on Local com- land tenure Migrant munities Migrant norms pioneers Alternate ABCD interactions with Free and expecta-and Prior Informed Consent are needed tions on land Migrant for High-C-Stock Development tenure pathways followers Galudra et al., submitted
  • 29. Tradeoff at land use system level Opportunity cost at landcape scale opportunity cost, $/t CO2e, Slope indicates Emission reduction poten- emissions per Carbon stock, tC/Ha tial for given C price gain in $/ha I II e.g. ADSB e.g. ASB-II reports  Cumulative emissions reports of 2007/8 1990’s NPV, $/HaFour levels of analyzing opportunity costs Dynamic land use scenario modelAgents with C stockvariation in (increasing)resourcebase, moti- IIIvation, live-lihood stra- IV Rural income  Rural incometegies. (declining) (increasing)interactingwith rules C stock e.g. FALLOW& policies Agent-based land use change model (decreasing) scenarios
  • 30. 3. Interlinkage &change Drivers of tree cover leakage Low intensity swiddening Economic maintains forest Fallow => opportunity of oil Logging & mining agroforest palm, rubber, concessions harvest Swiddening coffee attracts intensifies,This issue&can be/has been resolved by nestingsmall-scale large trees create large- & REDD+ road access fire cyclewithin a broader land-based NAMA (REALU) planters framework starts Post-logging national & regional GHG reduction plansin Indonesia’s institutional Industrial vacuum allows timber settlers plantations Over-capacity of wood-based industry => Forest tenure reform Van demand for creates incentives for Noordwijk et al., ‘illegal logging’ tree planting 2011
  • 31. 4. Peat outside ‘forest’ Huge percentage of emissions from LUC are associated with low economic benefit Opportunity costs vary from place to place ADSB 2007 results for Indonesia
  • 32. 4. Peat outside ‘forest’ De facto REDD pilot projects have included peatland issues regardless of international scope and definitions; in Durban peatland restoration was recognized as potential CDM activityThis issue can be/has been resolved by nesting REDD+within a broader land-based NAMA (REALU) frameworkin Indonesia’s national & regional GHG reduction plans
  • 33. 5. Fairness & efficiency Value chain
  • 34. Fairness argument:
  • 35. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B11kASPfYxY
  • 36. Expected to be on-line by August 15 Payments for environmental services They can interfere with or comple- PES concepts (PES), or non-provisioning ecosystem ment social norms and rights-based need to adapt. services, target alignment of micro- approach-es at generic (land use plan- Multiple para-economic incentives for land users with ning) and in-dividual (tenure, use digms have meso- and macro-economic societal rights) levels, and with macro-econo- emerged within costs and benefits of their choices mic policies influencing the drivers to the broad PES across stakeholders and scales which individual agents respond. domain. Forms of “co-investment in stewardship” alongside rights are the preferred entry point
  • 37. Providers,Beneficiaries,‘Sellers’‘Buyers’ Intermediary, Broker MvN Fig3A
  • 38. Providers, Beneficiaries,‘Sellers’ ‘Buyers’‘Co-investors’ ‘Co-investors’ Intermediary, Broker MvN Fig3B
  • 39. Fairness/Transparency Efficiency/Clarity International rules, fund/market International border payment relations value chain Nested baselines, certi- fied emission reduction Legend: Subnational sectors/areas  private sector Respect, Image, Investment/ Trust/threat Knowledge CREDD Additionality ~ baseline Leakage/displacement Free and Prior Informed Consent Local sectors/areas  private sector of sovereign decision makers Monitoring C stocks & project cycle aspects Finance: invest- ment, payment Local sectors/areas: communities, households Certified Emission Sustainable livelihood Reducing direct drivers Reduction support of emissions
  • 40. I. Awareness II. Readiness III. Implementation at scale UNFCCC negotiations of rules of the game Core ER-performance based finance, with some international ER additionality reduce C footrpitns in trade Self-regulatoory response to identity Self-articulated ns We care… NAMA si o Knowledge, Environmental eci td awareness quality, health en rn m ve Branding as basis for market share go EET Our exports are threatened… ing Ecological & social Global trade and investment riv relations safeguards dd Rent- REDD rents compete with forest rents REDD+ mi seeking Economic growth with acceptable y ra elites distributional effects lp nao Food sufficiency as prerequisite for political ati stability in cities and supportive electorates tiv Mo Territorial integrity and security of the state, international independence, domestic bounded local autonomy
  • 41. Nov 2007 – ahead of Bali COP: Issue 1,2 & 4 can Five challenges: be/has been resolved 1.Scope,definitions by nesting REDD+ 2.Peat outside ‘forest’ within a broader land- 3.Rights, legalitybased NAMA (REALU) framework in Indone- 4.Interlinkage and leakagesia’s national & regional 5.Fairness & efficiency GHG reduction plans Issue 3 & 5 have progressed in recognition, moving beyond denial and defensiveness, but there is a considerable way to go
  • 42. Tony La Vina – this morning at IETA/ASB/IISD event “The stronger emission reduction commitmentsneeded to make REDD work through private sector involvement in regulated markets is not going to come from this COP, not until 2015”“I’ve personally shifted attention and hope to a more integrated approach that combines REDD+, agriculture and all land-based activities”
  • 43. Is the window of opportunity for REDD+ closing? COP-18, Doha, Qatar (EU Pavilion): 29 November 2012, 18:00-20:00 Reducing Emissions fromDeforestation and Vietnam Degradation Southern through Cameroon Jambi, Indonesia Alternative Ucayali, Peru Landuses Macaulay Land Use Research Institute, UK Embracing Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, NetherlandsRainforests of Georg August University of Göttingen, Germany ICRAF, IITA, CIAT, CIFOR, ASB-partners in the Tropics Indonesia, Vietnam, Cameroon, Peru