Successfully reported this slideshow.
You’ve unlocked unlimited downloads on SlideShare!
An essay on UN- REDD+ Programme 2011-2015 Strategy
Maryam S. Abbasi
● Concept of REDD+
REDD+ is, as mentioned in the shared document, is Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and
Forest Degradation. This is a tool or effort to provide incentive to local communities of
developing countries to reduce carbon emissions. REDD+ develop strategies to lower carbon
emissions and adopt sustainable methods which can be beneficial to both local communities
and local stakeholders. Since local communities are very close to forests so they are more
vulnerable to any policy of REDD+. Policies are developed by Policy Board and different
institutes including UN-REDD+ and World Bank provides incentives to developing countries.
This was initiated in 2008. Nine pilot countries had quick start with REDD+ including Congo,
Tanzania, Zambia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Viet Nam, Bolivia, Panama and Paraguay. UN-
REDD+ programme developed strategies for developing countries to help reduce carbon
emissions. REDD+ donor’s institutes focus on land tenures and land ownership of local
communities. It emphasizes on the dialogue with local communities and local stakeholders at
national and international level. Since these communities are directly dependent on forests so
they should be involved in policy making which should also benefit them as well as
environment. It is initially five years plan from 2011-2015 and it aims to review its progress
● RelationshipofREDD+ with conceptof Property Rights
REDD+ programme aim to provide incentives to local communities, under UN-REDD+
programme, dependent on forest land use. These incentives are in terms of their capacity
building and to provide them with alternative land. Main objective of UN REDD+, in relation
with property right, is to make policies and involve indigenous people in the process of policy
making to reduce carbon emissions of developing countries from 2011-2015.
Since local communities have direct contact/relation with forests which they use for their
livelihoods and earning purposes. In any decision making process they can play a vital role as
they might be vulnerable in case of non-suitable REDD+ policies.
According to UN REDD+ land rights to local communities, stakeholders dependent on forests
and other people dependent on these must be provided according to UN Declaration of the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) approach. According to given document, article 19 of
UNDRIP is best suitable for providing incentives to forest dependent communities and to
ensure their participation at national and international level.
“Article 19 says that states shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous
Peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free,
prior, and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative
measures that may affect them.”
Basically REDD+ relation with property rights is quite complicated as it’s very uncertain to
explain that who has carbon rights and who doesn’t. It’s quite challenging for REDD+ policy
making board to ensure for the distribution of incentives. For the distribution of incentives and
payments high influence agencies can cause monopoly where land tenures and land rights are
weak. REDD+ requires seeing all aspects of governance and forest laws enforcements in addition
to land tenure. Only land tenure cannot be efficient but land ownership can ensure, somehow,
When a local community is provided with property rights he takes care of its belonging and uses
it with great care. In case of forests if REDD+ provides with property rights, it will reduce
carbon emissions as land owner will use it sustainably. Making public resource to private makes
its working efficient.
● The relationship between REDD+ and non-market valuation of ecological services
Since ecological services are natural resources which are also called common pool resources.
REDD+ deals with reduction in carbon emissions from developing countries through reduction
in deforestation and degradation. Since there are many sources which contributes to increase
carbon emissions apart from forest degradation and deforestation but REDD+ is only concerned
with carbon from forests of developing countries. But vision of UN-REDD+ is broader in its
mission in comparison to REDD+.
When resources are common then it leads to characteristic of jointness in terms of its use.
Everyone can come and use it according to his/her needs and a resource can be depleted and
contribute to environmental degradation, if it is over used. When this is situation, we need to
analyze cost and benefit of any environmental services to make its use sustainable.
When ownership is ensured under REDD+ then it’s quite easy to take steps for capacity building
of local communities to use natural resources as “market”. Local communities and stakeholders
can be trained to use forests in such a way that lead to green economy and conservation of
forests. Therefore REDD+ provides such policies which contributes to green economy and
sustainable development. Thus, pricing of any natural resource can benefit local communities
and reduces global warming. If REDD+ strategy of green economy is properly implemented then
it can also alleviate poverty.
REDD+ funds for ES (Environmental Services) are provided to governments of developing
countries. This is government responsibility to provide fund for carbon markets and adopt such
policies which should be sustainable in nature for the usage of natural resources.
In my opinion, Government should start form Tehsil level to develop strategies for carbon
markets. Then it should also involve district and province as local communities living there can
better tell their conditions and providing fund for green economy will also help them to
overcome poverty. If policies are not in favor of forest dependent communities they will be
vulnerable in terms of its impacts. REDD+ cell and donor agencies must also directly coordinate
with local communities to keep check on government that whether they are using funds at right
place or not. (See cyclic figure below)
Two Way- Cyclic Strategy
Forests Reservoirs Government
Services /incentives REDD+ Cell Donor
Community reservations Policy and Strategy