Redd alert linking global climate to local behavior


Published on

  • 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

Redd alert linking global climate to local behavior

  1. 1. REDD-ALERT: Linking global climate arrangements to local land-use behaviour Robin Matthews James Hutton Institute Aberdeen AB15 8QHUNFCCC COP-18, Doha, Qatar, 29 Nov 2012
  2. 2. Issue-attention cycle theory of Downs1. Pre-problem phase, the problem exists but is not the subject of public discussion2. Alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm: The public is alarmed and constructively aims to deal with the problem thinking that this is possible ‘without any fundamental reordering of society itself’ (Copenhagen)3. Social actors become aware of the costs of dealing with the problem (currently)4. Public attention declines as the problem is seen as too complex or expensive to address, or requiring major structural overhaul of societies5. Post problem - twilight realm of lesser attention or spasmodic recurrences of interest (Downs, 1972)
  3. 3. Is the window of opportunity closing? Forest-related emissions declining as % of total emissions : 20%  17%  10% due to increase in fossil fuel emissions Cap-and-trade system in developed countries slow – no demand for credits Hostage to vagaries of international finance and variations in commodity prices (food) Supply of credits from big players (e.g. Brazil) may swamp the market Realisation of costs  Transaction costs high – 80-90% of total?  Use of ODA funds at expense of other devt objectives – also declining due to recession – payments moving from definite to conditional  Seen as unfair – license for northern countries to continue to emit  Too complicated
  4. 4. Forest Carbon Partnership Facility World Bank Independent Evaluation Group (IEG): “REDD+ is a more expensive, complex, and protracted undertaking than was anticipated at the time of the FCPF’s launch”
  5. 5. Drivers of the Forest Transition curve Around 80% of deforestation from clearing for agriculture (Gupta et al., 2012)
  6. 6. Food demand  Global demand by 2050:  Calories: +100%  Protein: +110% (Tilman et al., 2011, PNAS)
  7. 7. Competition between global land uses  Some countries have increased forest area and food production – Costa Rica, El Salvador, Bhutan, Vietnam  agricultural intensification  land use zoning  forest protection  creation of off-farm jobs  foreign capital investments  remittances  But - 39% of regrowth of Vietnam’s forests through increasing food & wood imports  Factors influencing global land use change:  Displacement and cascade effects  Rebound effect  Remittance effect Lambin & Meyfroidt (2011), PNAS 108:3465
  8. 8. Drivers and REDD+ instruments  Regulatory instruments  Trade restrictions  Protected areas  Reporting  Land rights  Economic and market instruments  Trade liberalisation  Funds, grants & loans  Forest C offsetting  Forest certification  Suasive instruments  Concepts & principles  Targets  Information and education  Research
  9. 9. Economy-wide modelling Complex relationship between the 3Es (effectiveness, efficiency, equity) not evident in more aggregate analyses Landowners benefit but local subsistence demands would raise their opportunity costs Rent and wage changes create net costs for most private stakeholders REDD+ mechanisms should avoid general formulas by giving local authorities the necessary flexibility to address the trade-offs involved Dyer et al, 2012. PLoS (in press)
  10. 10. Encouraging behaviour change van Vugt’s 4Is framework  Incentives (self-improvement)  Information (understanding)  Identity (belonging, pride, shame)  Institutions (trust) Altruism index: A = c + w*(t-c) + e*(1 – (c + w*(t-c)))  c = communication  e = equity  w = welfare  t = threat from environmental damage
  11. 11. Systems thinking Socio-ecological systems:  Livelihoods, recreation, health Agriculture (arable,  Fluxes of carbon, water, grasslands) nutrients, energy, labour & capital  Organisation, governance, conflict resolution  Resilience to change Communities Forests Wetlands  Should REDD fund agricultural research and reduction in food chain waste?: 34% more GHGs since 1961 if Green Revolution had not occurred - cost around only $4/tCO2e (Burney et al, 2010) Matthews & De Pinto, 2012. Carb. Mgt 3:117-120
  12. 12. Agricultural intensification  Borlaug hypothesis: agricultural intensification relieves pressure on forests  Closed system – increased productivity decreases prices, no clearing  Open system – increased income incentivises further clearing  In/out-migration  Guinea rain forest - if fertiliser/ shade tree Pucallpa, Peru intensification of cocoa adopted in 1960s  21,000 km2 less deforestation  1.4 billion tCO2 savedLambin & Meyfroidt (2011); Gockowski & Sonwa (2011)
  13. 13. What has REDD+ achieved so far? Better understanding of the drivers of deforestation Progress in methodologies  Baselines  Monitoring, reporting, verification  Emissions from tropical peatlands Realisation that deforestation is a landscape problem – need to deal with underlying drivers – NAMAs It’s not all economics – range of solutions needed Has created awareness of importance of forests – concept of the ‘global forest’
  14. 14. A global forest transition? Supply - shift production to more productive lands  Expanding the area of natural forests managed sustainably  Supporting natural regeneration through land zoning, forest extraction regulations, and plantations on degraded land  Increasing production and productivity from tree plantations  Promoting agroforestry in areas unsuitable for large-scale intensive farming  Sparing land for forests through agricultural intensification combined with land zoning in high-potential agricultural areas Demand  Create a demand for carbon credits in cap-and-trade systems  Ecoconsumerism  Corporate environmentalism