1. REDD+, SFM, development, markets and forests. Workshop on governance, decentralization and REDD+ in Latin America and the Caribbean 31 August-3 September 2010 Oaxaca, México Bastiaan Louman, Miguel Cifuentes, Mario Chacón

2. Qué es REDD? Como podría funcionar? Principales desafíos Evitar la deforestación Costos y beneficios para diferentes actores Efecto cambio climático sobre viabilidad bosques Contenido

3. Bosques 18% de emisiones (Stern 2006), Sobretodo en trópicos (Houghton 2003) Es forma más barata para reducir emisiones Funciona para dar tiempo para desarrollar tecnología para reducir emisiones en transporte y energía. Primeras propuestas en 2003 2005 por Papua Nueva Guinea y Costa Rica

4. Qué es? Mecanismo para incorporar la reducción de emisiones de gases con efecto invernadero (GEI) por deforestación y degradación dentro del convenio marco para el cambio climático Pagaría por evitar deforestación y degradación más allá que hacen actualmente. El +: incluye restaurar, mantener, aumentar stock de carbono (MFS, conservación, restauración forestal)

6. Introduction Much written on causes of deforestation and forest degradation Money appears to be key to change Distance to market used as proxy to determine land value

8. Does SFM contribute to REDD, rural development and conservation?

10. Cobertura forestal Costa Rica Fuente: Kleinn et al 2002, citado por Kanninen et al 2007

11. Línea base y adicionalidad Promedio línea base 2008

12. “Business as usual” Nepstad et al 2007

13. A pesar de esfuerzos mundiales en años 1980 a 2000, después reducción en tasa entre 2000 y 2005 hay aumento Como será diferente? Evitar deforestación

15. population dynamics: demand, migration

16. Technology Competitive land uses Demand Policies Fuentes y causas de deforestación

17. REDD+, SFM and landrent Land rent Normal situation NPVA = net present value of agriculture; NPVB = net present value of forest use, CM = transaction costs for sustainable land use;c

18. REDD+, SFM and landrent Land rent increased price for forest products from well-managed forests; NPVA = net present value of agriculture; NPVB = net present value of forest use, CM = transaction costs for sustainable land use; SFM = sustainable forest management.

19. REDD+, SFM and land rent Land rent combination of increased price and reduced transaction costs NPVA CM NPVB 0 Agriculture Forest use SFM Reduced deforestation Reduced degradation NPVA = net present value of agriculture; NPVB = net present value of forest use, CM = transaction costs for sustainable land use; SFM = sustainable forest management.

20. REDD+, SFM and land rent Markets & policies may influence land rent Policies addressing underlying causes of deforestation and degradation before compensatory payments May differ according to “development” characteristics of each country forest transition curve

21. REDD+ and development The forest transition curve (Kanninen et al. 2007, adapted from Angelsen 2007).

22. REDD+ and development Ignores local perceptions on benefits and costs, expectations and risk behavior, mistrust, conservation preference, institutional frameworks Is there a better indicator for “development” along the x-axis?

23. Governance vs. deforestation Governance important factor to be considered as part of “development” conditions in forest transition curve?

24. REDD+ and development Other factors that may determine deforestation rates: off-farm employment measures to reflect the level of agricultural prices, road density and the level of local wages Macro-economic factors Need more local scale and local perceptions on development and conservation; It is not just income that moves curve upward: How much of “reforestation” in Costa Rica can be explained by increased income?

25. REDD+ and carbon markets Carbon markets may raise land rent However, transition costs may be high for individual (small) producers, raising the CM curve for them (monitoring and base line) How may markets contribute to improving enabling conditions (lowering CM curve)? Will markets address the most problematic areas (center of graph)?

26. Effective Efficient REDD projects in Brasil

27. REDD+ and carbon markets Carbon markets (regulatory and voluntary) are not enough Also international funding (enabling conditions, FCPF, UN-REDD, Norway and Guyana for example) And bilateral transactions (small and medium forest users and owners, Plan Vivo for example)

28. SFM and REDD+ RIL techniques reduce loss of biomass, and up to 30% less loss of carbon Increased processing efficiency further reduces carbon losses SFM reduces unauthorized use of forests SFM and user rights may reduce deforestation SFM may contribute to local livelihoods But enabling conditions need to be in place for widespread implementation

29. SFM and REDD+

30. Main lesson learned Trees do not grow on money alone REDD+ will need to address the enabling conditions for any chance of successful implementation: not by markets alone. REDD+ will need to reconcile local knowledge, needs and expectations with national and international frameworks: local base connected to national and international policies. REDD+ is not forever; markets are still uncertain; as source of local income can only be complementary; invest in no-regret options (governance, monitoring, trees) Balance carbon with biodiversity and social issues

31. ManyThanks Forfurther discussions: blouman@catie.ac.cr