International payments for ecosystem   services: a governance strategy          for sustainability?     International Sust...
Outline• Introduction• Four cases:  • Forest carbon trading under CDM (Kyoto Protocol)  • Forest carbon trading/ payments ...
Introduction: Definitions• Ecosystem services: “the benefits people obtain  from ecosystems” (MA 2005)• Payments for ecosy...
Introduction• Diffusion of incentive-based instruments   ... from theory to practice   ... from domestic level to internat...
Diffusion of PES at int‘l level       Dev Aid/ Sustain.             Biodiv                            Climate        Dept1...
Diffusion of PES at int‘l level       Dev Aid/ Sustain.             Biodiv                            Climate        Dept1...
Four casesCase                          Type of instrument      Ecosystem serviceI. Afforestation/ Reforest.   Market for ...
Case I: A/R Projects under the CDM
Case I: A/R Projects under the CDM• Background• Functioning   – Annex I parties can offset part of their ER     commitment...
Case II: REDD+“Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest  degradation in developing countries” (REDD)   (“and the r...
Case II: REDD+• Background• Functioning  – national policies & measures  – performance to be measured, reported & verified...
Case III: ABS under the CBD & NP
Case III: ABS under CBD & Nagoya Protocol• Background• Functioning  – national sovereignty over GR; country of origin  – b...
Case IV: ABS under the ITPGR
Case IV: ABS under the Int‘l Treaty on PGRFA• Background• Functioning  – national sovereignty over GR; but: no country of ...
Comparison of cases• Functioning  – different ESS  – different product types  – different degrees of & mechanisms for ESS ...
Conclusions• Despite similarities: a ‘mixed bag’ of  instruments   limited potential of ‘learning’ from each other•    .....
Thank you for your attention!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

International payments for ecosystem services: a governance strategy for sustainability?

445 views

Published on

Lecture by Franziska Wolff (Oeko-Institut) at the International Sustainability Conference in Basel (CH), 30 August 2012.

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
445
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

International payments for ecosystem services: a governance strategy for sustainability?

  1. 1. International payments for ecosystem services: a governance strategy for sustainability? International Sustainability Conference Basel, 30 August 2012 Franziska Wolff, Öko-Institut
  2. 2. Outline• Introduction• Four cases: • Forest carbon trading under CDM (Kyoto Protocol) • Forest carbon trading/ payments under REDD+ (post-Kyoto regime?) • ABS under the CBD & Nagoya Protocol • ABS under the IPTGR• Comparison• Conclusions
  3. 3. Introduction: Definitions• Ecosystem services: “the benefits people obtain from ecosystems” (MA 2005)• Payments for ecosystem services (PES): (above al monetary) incentives to foster the provision of ecosystem services – state-driven & private-driven; intermediaries – different degrees of conditionality – different levels of ESS commodification/ tradability: subsidies ... cap-and-trade systems... at international level
  4. 4. Introduction• Diffusion of incentive-based instruments ... from theory to practice ... from domestic level to international level ... from industrial pollution to land-use (“PES”)• Not uncontested!• Are (int’l) PES an effective governance strategy for sustainability? – effectiveness: ‘relative improvement’; side eff. – analytical assessment
  5. 5. Diffusion of PES at int‘l level Dev Aid/ Sustain. Biodiv Climate Dept1980 for- nature- swaps Brundt- land Bericht Rio- CBD GEF1990 Declarat‘n: (ABS Principle rules) 16 Kyoto Protocol: LULUCF in CDM & ITPGRFA JI2000 (ABS rules) MEA Stern Report Nagoya- TEEB2010 Rio+20: Green Initiative Protocol to CBD Economy REDD+
  6. 6. Diffusion of PES at int‘l level Dev Aid/ Sustain. Biodiv Climate Dept1980 for- nature- swaps Brundt- land Bericht Rio- CBD GEF1990 Declarat‘n: (ABS Principle rules) 16 Kyoto Protocol: LULUCF in CDM & ITPGRFA JI2000 (ABS rules) MEA Stern Report Nagoya- TEEB2010 Rio+20: Green Initiative Protocol to CBD Economy REDD+
  7. 7. Four casesCase Type of instrument Ecosystem serviceI. Afforestation/ Reforest. Market for forest Carbon sequestration;projects under the CDM carbon climate regulation (regulating ESS)II. Countering Market or payment fordeforestation: REDD+ forest carbon dittoIII. “Access and Benefit- Market for GR Genetic resourcesSharing” under CBD & NP (provisioning ESS); indirectly other ESSIV. “Access and Benefit- Compensation forSharing” under ITPGR PGRFA ditto
  8. 8. Case I: A/R Projects under the CDM
  9. 9. Case I: A/R Projects under the CDM• Background• Functioning – Annex I parties can offset part of their ER commitments through A/R projects in DCs – temporary carbon credits (t-/l-CERs) are awarded in accordance with the removal of GHG beyond the baseline; can be traded – project requirements• Effectiveness? – mechanism – size of (primary) market
  10. 10. Case II: REDD+“Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries” (REDD) (“and the role of conservation, sustainablemanagement of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries”) (+)
  11. 11. Case II: REDD+• Background• Functioning – national policies & measures – performance to be measured, reported & verified against national baselines – results-based compensation through fund or market – safeguards to avoid harmful effects• Expected effectiveness? – mechanism – market perspectives
  12. 12. Case III: ABS under the CBD & NP
  13. 13. Case III: ABS under CBD & Nagoya Protocol• Background• Functioning – national sovereignty over GR; country of origin – benefit-sharing based on bilateral contracts between users & provider country, requirement of PIC & MAT – supportive user country measures• Effectiveness? – mechanism – market size & amount of benefit-sharing
  14. 14. Case IV: ABS under the ITPGR
  15. 15. Case IV: ABS under the Int‘l Treaty on PGRFA• Background• Functioning – national sovereignty over GR; but: no country of origin – Annex I: Multilateral, contractual ABS system between recipients & providers (mostly gene banks), no requirement of PIC & MAT – SMTA regulates monetary BS• Effectiveness – mechanism – volume of transactions & amount of benefit-sharing
  16. 16. Comparison of cases• Functioning – different ESS – different product types – different degrees of & mechanisms for ESS commercialisation• Effectiveness – mechanisms: partly problematic assumptions – institutional safeguards: potential for improvement (will mitigate side effects) – size of markets/ schemes: still relatively small
  17. 17. Conclusions• Despite similarities: a ‘mixed bag’ of instruments  limited potential of ‘learning’ from each other• ... with strengths & weaknesses   case-based analysis  challenges with regard to generalisation• Need to remain open for alternative instruments (regulation, planning...)!
  18. 18. Thank you for your attention!

×