Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Carrots and sticks in REDD+ implementation: Implications for social safeguards

405 views

Published on

Presentation given by Amy E. Duchelle at COP22 on 9 November 2016 in Marrakesh, Morocco.

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Carrots and sticks in REDD+ implementation: Implications for social safeguards

  1. 1. Carrots and sticks in REDD+ implementation: Implications for social safeguards Amy E. Duchelle, Claudio de Sassi, Pamela Jagger, Marina Cromberg, Anne M. Larson, William D. Sunderlin, Stibniati S. Atmadja, Ida Aju Pradnja Resosudarmo, Christy Desta Pratama a.duchelle@cgiar.org
  2. 2. THINKING beyond the canopy Emergence of subnational REDD+ initiatives  Since 2007, hundreds of subnational REDD+ initiatives have emerged in the tropics  On-the-ground evidence for how local people could benefit or lose from REDD+, particularly in relation to respect for local rights, participation and enhancement of livelihoods => UNFCCC Cancun Safeguards
  3. 3. THINKING beyond the canopy UNFCCC Cancun Safeguards When undertaking REDD+ activities, the following safeguards should be promoted and supported: a) Complement or consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities d) Full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders e) Consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity • not used for conversion of natural forests • protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services • enhance other social and environmental benefits f) Address the risks of reversals g) Reduce displacement of emissions
  4. 4. THINKING beyond the canopy REDD+ as mix of interventions  Regulatory and incentive-based mechanisms with primary aim of reducing forest-based emissions  How do different intervention strategies affect local tenure security, participation, subjective well-being, and forest clearing?
  5. 5. THINKING beyond the canopy Subnational REDD+ Initiatives in GCS Comparison (Control) REDD+ site (Intervention) Before After IMPACT Intervention After Control After Intervention Before Control Before 2010 / 2011 2013 / 2014 • 6 countries • 23 initiatives • 150 villages • 4,000 households
  6. 6. THINKING beyond the canopy Interventions at GCS sites 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Householdstargeted(n=2,007) Incentives Both Regulations
  7. 7. THINKING beyond the canopy Participation in local REDD+ initiatives 0 20 40 60 80 100 Villages (n=87) Women (n=87) Households (n=2120) %respondents Knowledge (Phase 2) Participation (Phase 2)
  8. 8. THINKING beyond the canopy Changes in tenure security and subjective well-being • Decrease in tenure security and overall perceived well- being over time for households exposed to regulations alone • Addition of incentives into the mix helped alleviate negative effects on well- being
  9. 9. THINKING beyond the canopy Perceived effects of specific interventions on household wellbeing Regulations Both Incentives BR CM ID PE TZ VN 5=very positive 1=very negative
  10. 10. THINKING beyond the canopy Reported forest clearing In Brazil, notable distribution bias with households clearing more forests (in phase 1) subjected to regulations; clearing significantly less forest (in phase 2) than other groups
  11. 11. THINKING beyond the canopy Concluding remarks  Regulations driving the patterns observed, yet incentives important in helping alleviate burdens  Trade-off between effectiveness of regulations and effects on well-being (Brazil); unanticipated positive effects of regulations on well-being (Tanzania, Indonesia)  Inherent tensions between carbon and non-carbon goals in REDD+ - who decides what level of trade-offs is acceptable?  Social safeguards monitoring relies on leveraging and improving on ongoing data collection efforts; and being grounded in local perceptions and processes
  12. 12. Financial support for GCS-REDD+: Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, Australian Agency for International Development, European Commission, UK Department for International Development, German International Climate Initiative, CGIAR Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (FTA) Programme. www.cifor.org/gcs www.cifor.org/gcs

×