Drc er pin presentation vcs 13 june


Published on

This is one of the presentations at the 1st day of "Technical Exchange on Jurisdictional REDD". See more at: http://www.idesam.org.br/technical-exchange-on-jurisdictional-redd-presentations/

Published in: Technology
  • 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

Drc er pin presentation vcs 13 june

  1. 1. DRC ER-PIN An Emission Reduction Program Idea Note for the Democratic Republic of the Congo République Démocratique du Congo
  2. 2. REDD+ and the DRC A Turning Point • DRC is the world’s prime example of an HFLD country o 154M hectares of forest, 0.2% reported deforestation rate • 186th out of 186 on the Human Development Index o Stability returning, investment climate improving, but these advances intrinsically put forests under threat • Brazil’s forest estate is 3X as big as DRC, but it earns 100X the income from its forest sector • REDD+ has the potential to help DRC avoid the traditional route of deforestation for development
  3. 3. The increasing pressure on DRC to move from HFLD to HFHD…to LFHD… • National level and Regional Level • Population increase • Increasing political stability • Increased investment in extractives: forestry, mining, etc.
  4. 4. The Dilemma of HFLD • HFLD countries offer a vital opportunity for REDD+ mechanism – they still have a large % of intact forest, and deforestation has not yet become a force of development • Therefore REDD+ offers the possibility to protect intact forests, without having to displace entrenched massive deforestation • But there are 2 significant hurdles for DRC: • 1. The common historical approach in REDD+ to REL provides greater rewards to countries that have already achieved development progress through deforestation than to countries that have not, leaving a built-in disincentive for early action • 2. The past does not predict the future – a historical REL fails to capture the growing pressure on forest resources, thereby limiting REDD’s potential to succeed as an alternative financially viable development path
  5. 5. What is needed to make REDD+ work for DRC as an HFLD? • Leadership and Collaboration – strong govt commitment, civil society involvement, private sector partnerships • Ground-up meet top-down: initiate actions and test methods and approaches at subnational scale, incorporate lessons from pilot activities into national process • Reward performance against realistic projected threat due to changing national circumstances • Insure rewards reach actors on the ground and are equitably distributed based on performance • Program must represent viable financial alternative that allows DRC to use its forests as a means of development, the top priority for the People of the DRC
  6. 6. Program Approach • Goal: a model provincial green development program that provides alternatives and rewards performance to address the challenges of climate change, poverty reduction, natural resource conservation and protection of biodiversity • Serves as both a broad-scale Program with provincial-level enforcement and incentive programs, and an umbrella for projects targeting specific drivers and actors • Aligns with the activities financed in the FIP, and includes both enabling and emission-reducing activities • Planning to pilot the VCS Joint Nested REDD+ standard, and in discussions to pilot the REDD+ SES standard
  7. 7. Mai Ndombe REDD+ Program A world class public-private partnership • MECNT/CN-REDD – governing the second-largest tropical forest estate in the world, with the Mai Ndombe Program Area representing a frontier of deforestation/degradation • ERA/WWC – leading REDD+ developers, with VCS validated and verified REDD+ project in the Program area • WWF-DRC – global leader in conservation, with deep experience and engagement in the Program area
  8. 8. Cascade Deforestation
  9. 9. Why Mai Ndombe? • 75% forest • Closest forest estate to Kinshasa - under threat from growing charcoal, timber, food needs of nearly 8 million people • Pilot activities already existing – WWF, ERA-WWC, Novacel • Includes southern part of the Ramsar site Tumba-Ngiri Mai Ndombe • Salonga National Park – home to iconic but threatened species such as the bonobo and chimpanzee; also home to Elephant, buffalo, hippopotamus ,leopard • 1.8 million people within Program Area, many are agricultural households
  10. 10. Leadership and Implementation Section 3: Implementing Partners Role MECNT In charge of the national MRV system will be deployed at the level of the ER Program Province du Bandundu – Ministère de l’environnement Responsible for the coordination of deployment of the national REDD strategy at the provincial level and for guiding CN-REDD’s deployment in the province ERA-WWC Technical advice in thedevelopment of the program and implementation support for MRV WWF-DRC Technical advice in thedevelopment of the program and implementation of local land use plans Local government and Rural Committees (CARGs) Integration and approval of local land use plans and resolution of conflicts Customary authorities and legally recognized local community organizations (ASBL) Implementation of village level land use plans and adoption of alternative sustainable development strategies Agricultural companies (NOVACEL, SEBO) Implementation of alternative agricultural / agroforestery programs and control of wild fires Legal logging companies Forestry Certification and movement towards reduced impact logging Civil society: GTCR, RRN, CEDEN, ISCO Congo, Hans Seidel, Churches Information, education and communication. Surveillance and support for empowerment activities FIP, KfW, CBFF, USAID-CARPE, NORAD, AFD, JICA Lenders of funds supporting investments in empowerment and sectoral activities Section 1: Responsible management entity MECNT Section 2: National REDD+ Focal Point CN-REDD
  11. 11. Expected Program Lifetime 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Phase 1 Readiness Phase 2 Investment Phase 3 Implementation FIP + other APD & private sources ER-Program Readiness funding First ER Delivery The DRC Government considers this a permanent program for the Green Development of Mai Ndombe Province
  12. 12. Section 5: Drivers of Deforestation • Charcoal production to supply Kinshasa • Slash and burn agriculture (subsistence and commercial) • Cattle Ranching (large and small holder) • Bush Fires • Illegal logging • Industrial logging • Pop. Growth • Land degradation • Lack of alternatives • Lack of governance • Low productivity • Transport network rehabilitation DirectCausesIndirectCauses Major Barriers to REDD+ •Low level of local capacity •Corruption and lack of strong institutions •Land tenure conflicts •Illegal activities •Poor infrastructure for access to markets
  13. 13. Drivers of Emissions vs. Deforestation - Degradation in forest concessions doesn’t always result in deforestation but takes forest from primary to secondary and provides access - Deforestation from secondary forest to non- forest inside and outside forest concessions essentially the same drivers - This process of logging degradation followed by secondary agent deforestation is referred to as cascade deforestation
  14. 14. Cascade Deforestation
  15. 15. Cascade Deforestation
  16. 16. Alignment with National REDD+ and Development Strategy Enabling Activities Emission-reducing activities REDD+ requirements Cross-cutting Activities  Bush fire control  Community forestry  RIL and Forest certification  Agroforestry on degraded land  Agricultural intensification  Access to markets (contract planting)  Improved value chain  National Registry  Reference levels  Proxy MRV method for each program and stakeholder  MRV system coherent and integrated into national system  Piloting the program  Fiduciary management, benefits sharing mechanisms, legal and operational procedures  Capacity building  Basic infrastructure  Organization of local institutions and communities  Land use planning, micro- zoning and land tenure modernization and recognition Element 1 Element 2 Element 3 Element 5 Element 6 Element 9 Element 7 Element 8 Element 4
  17. 17. Enabling activities Community land management plans integrated to Territorial zoning Step 1. Assess customary land rights (internal and with neighboring communities) Step 2. Create a land cover map using satellite imagery Step 3. Create a baseline land use map Step 4. Make a simple management plan for the village • Validation of VLMP in Territorial level land use planning • PES contract for implementation of the VLMP Activities • PES payment based on results of implementing the VLMP
  18. 18. Emission-reducing Activities • Agroforestry on degraded land to sustainably produce food and fuelwood • Agricultural intensification where possible as a strategy to phase out slash & burn agriculture • Bush fire control (major regeneration of primary forest expected) • Reforestation • Community forestry and conservation concessions • Incentivize logging sector to reduce emissions through reduced-impact logging, forest certification, etc.
  19. 19. Institutional arrangements ER Program Management Entity (Bandundu Province, WWF-DRC, ERA-WWC ) Stakeholder Board of Direction Composed of CN-REDD and key stakeholders Provincial and local govt, Local communities NGOs, Private Sector, Provincial govt, Local communities, NGOs, Private Sector Emission-reducing activities Enabling activities MECNT
  20. 20. Section 7: Preliminary analysis in the area of SESA • State of advancement of SESA • Consideration of the elements of the SESA in the program activities
  21. 21. Section 8: Information sharing, communication and consultations • FPIC is essential • Indigenous Peoples engagement is crucial • The state of affairs today and engagement of stakeholders • Planned communication activities • Two forms of workshop • General information on ER Program and what it means to citizens of the province • Specific FPIC for communities being asked for direct participation • Mechanism for complaints and recourse
  22. 22. Section 9: Co-benefits Stakeholder actions - - - - Empowerment Activities Local communities Central and local Administration Local NGOs Project Development - - - - Alternative activities NGOs Local communities Private investors Local socio economic results Program results Capacity building Financial Results Pay for performance for REDD+
  23. 23. Section 10: Benefit Sharing • Up front Program investments in Community Projects to reduce pressure on forests • Fixed share of program revenues for communities • Additional Share of profits between community and government proposed • Payments for emissions reductions performance and by proxy • Full design will take place during Design Phase • Existing legal agreements provide guidance
  24. 24. Reference Emission Levels (REL) – An evolving Approach 1. average historical emissions (2000-2010) for area outside forest concessions – has weaknesses as basis for REL 1. FACET has significant temporal data issues 2. FACET has too broad definition of secondary forest – 30-900 tCO2 3. Ignores degradation emissions from logging concessions 4. Approach Ignores soil pool 5. Doesn’t account for avoid deforestation demonstrated in REDD+ early action programs 6. Doesn’t distinguish between variable threat by land use and forest type 2. DRC is HFLD country so adjustment to pure historical baseline is appropriate 3. Nested REL Modeling approach to be proposed to capture emissions projected into future by land use type but maintain envornmental integrity at jurisdictional level in REL. Section 11: REL and Deforestation Risk
  25. 25. Future Mai Ndombe Province Land-use Based REL Separate reference levels for each concession
  26. 26. Nested RELs
  27. 27. Monitoring, Reporting and Verification ER-Program Data will be fully integrated into the National Forest Monitoring system for REDD+ : 1. REDD+ Registry 2. Terra Congo (satelitte land monitoring system) ER-Program MRV system based on • National Forest Inventory • Greenhouse Gas Inventory • Baseline 2010 FACET forest cover map • Will be tightly integrated with REL • Proposed scope deforestation and degradation and all above and belowground biomass pools (soil very significant but not included yet in REL)
  28. 28. Section 13: Timetable • ER Program Design – 6-12 months • ER Program implementation 12-18 months 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 Calculate Baseline… Identify Deforestation… Construct Baseline Forest… Prepare Jurisdictional… Consult Stakeholders Obtain National Approval… Identify Leakage Mitigate Leakage Quantify Unmitigated… Design Monitoring Program Contract with Validator Interface with Validator Register Baseline Conduct Monitoring Resolve Stakeholder… Implement Safeguards &… Quantify Net Reductions… Reconcile Project &… Non-Permanence Risk… Write Monitoring Report Contract with Verifier Interface with Verifier Register Offsets (Optional) Supply Buffer Credits Future Mai Ndombe - Jurisdictional ER Program Timeline weeks
  29. 29. Section 14: Financing Plan • $20M Annual Fixed ER Program Cost Estimate • $Donor Funded Start Up Financing ? FCPF-CF FIP NORAD • Potential to Reduce Emissions to earn up to $120M per year in Revenues
  30. 30. Result Based Sustainable Financing Investment in Enabling and emission reducing Activities MRVed ERs FCPF and others buys ERs from National REDD+ Fund National REDD+ Fund: 1-PES to participants based on contribution to MRVed results 2-Cover program management costs 3-Covers National MRV system National REDD+ Fund: Assesses proposals for program expansion Proceeds from sale of ERs go to the ER-Program: - Core management costs (fixed %) - National MRV system (fixed %) - Program activities (enabling and emission-reducing in Program area) Performance based payments as MRVed (PES scheme) - Emission Reduction Impact (based on MRV) - Area of action (e.g. number of ha under agroforestry, under RIL, ) - Volume of activities implemented (no of improved cook-stoves, no of improved kilns) - Opportunity costs - Source of investments (public/private)
  31. 31. Key Messages • DRC is the most important HFLD country. Its needs are very different than those of Brazil or non HFLD countries. It should be treated differently. • DRC is committed to protecting its forests, and doesn’t want charity, it wants to earn ERs but it must have a realistic REL that allows it to earn enough revenue from REDD to make REDD a viable economic alternative to increasing logging to fuel development. • Mai Ndombe will provide a unique opportunity for the international community to explore how public and private financing can support a public private partnership to deliver large scale REDD+ in an HFLD country. • We are committed to developing this ER Program and hope the CF will be a cornerstone customer, but realize we have to find customers for the entire program to make it viable, so need to design it flexibly to support multiple revenue streams. • How to move quickly but not lock in early limitations – adaptive program.