Climate Governance and REDD+
Ensuring quality of governance and delivering
safeguards
for emissions trading schemes
Dr Tim...
Basic conceptual issues associated
with governance
origins and broader meaning of the term ‘governance’
• Governance: Gree...
Key elements of good governance
systems
• Democracy: Representative/participatory (I. Young, Held)
• Accountability & tran...
How to conceptualise ‘good’ governance
Institutional context
Inputs

Governance system
Structure
Participatory

Interactio...
Table 2: Normative model or evaluating governance quality (Cadman 2011)
Principle

Criterion

Indicator
Inclusiveness

Int...
What types of governance arrangements for
market based mechanisms?
• Global environmental policy provides one of the
best ...
Figure 2: The sustainable development regime complex: policy-related discourses, agreements,
governance arrangements, inst...
Governance Arrangements for REDD+ Readiness and
Market Implementation
• Ultimately, the success of REDD+ mechanism will
de...
Why governance matters for REDD+
• Cancun : “Transparent and effective national forest governance structures”
• SBSTA: “co...
Figure 5: REDD+ Trends in stakeholder perceptions of selected governance quality
indicators (Northern and Southern countri...
Organizations and social
movements associated with this
statement:
Aksyon Klima
Pilipinas
ActionAid
Bolivian
Platform on C...
Recommendations for REDD+ at the international,
national and sub-national levels
Institutions, policies and regulations ne...
Thank
you
lopezcasero@iges.or.jp
Maraseni@usq.edu.au
t.cadman@griffith.edu.au
13
Relevant publications
Quality-of-governance standards for carbon emissions
trading:
Developing REDD+ governance through a ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Climate Governance and REDD+

525 views

Published on

Ensuring quality of governance and delivering safeguards for emissions trading schemes

Published in: Economy & Finance, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
525
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
18
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Climate Governance and REDD+

  1. 1. Climate Governance and REDD+ Ensuring quality of governance and delivering safeguards for emissions trading schemes Dr Tim Cadman Institute for Ethics Governance and Law Griffith University Illegal logging researcher Chatham House Financing of Forestry, Agriculture and Climate Adaptation Multi-Disciplinary Workshop 22 November, 2013 QUT
  2. 2. Basic conceptual issues associated with governance origins and broader meaning of the term ‘governance’ • Governance: Greek κυβερνήτης - kybernetes, “steersman, pilot, guide” ) cf. cybernetics, but also Latin gubernator – tension/interplay between notions of ‘directing’ vs. ‘dictating’ the course of events: who is in control, and who has the power? • also there are various broad kinds of governance identified: • • • • Corporate governance (i.e. how businesses are run) Fiduciary governance (i.e. how money is managed) Public sector governance (i.e. how govt. agencies are run) Etc. • These are all inter-related - but the focus today is on global climate governance in international relations (IR), and the international political economy (IPE) of REDD+ 2
  3. 3. Key elements of good governance systems • Democracy: Representative/participatory (I. Young, Held) • Accountability & transparency: Horizontal Vs. vertical systems; transparency validates arrangements (Bäckstrand and Lövbrand) • Interest representation: Organisational vs. individual nature – access & inclusion (Arts, Koenig-Archibugi & Zürn) • Equality & resources (capacity): North-South divide – Developed/Developing countries (Okereke) • Decision-making: “Discursive consensus formation” (following Habermas – Dryzek, Susskind) • Implementation: Behaviour change, problem solving, durability (O. Young, Skjaerseth et al) – i.e. beyond compliance  Legitimacy: Input/output oriented: (procedures and and outcomes) [Scharpf - Kjaer, Biermann & Gupta] – the the means or the ends? 3
  4. 4. How to conceptualise ‘good’ governance Institutional context Inputs Governance system Structure Participatory Interaction (Collaborative) Process Deliberative Outputs Outcomes (Substantive and Behavioural; i.e. policies and/or programmes which solve problems and change behaviour) Legitimacy Figure 2: Model of Governance Quality (Cadman 2011) Evaluation of governance quality 4
  5. 5. Table 2: Normative model or evaluating governance quality (Cadman 2011) Principle Criterion Indicator Inclusiveness Interest representation “Meaningful participation” Equality Resources Organisational responsibility Accountability Transparency Democracy “Productive deliberation” Decision making Agreement Dispute settlement Behaviour change Implementation Problem solving Durability 5
  6. 6. What types of governance arrangements for market based mechanisms? • Global environmental policy provides one of the best spaces to study new modes of governance (Arts 2006) – State is no longer the sole venue of power • i.e. governance is non-spatial, non-territorial – State and non-state relations that are • Social-political in nature oriented towards • Collaborative approaches to problem solving (Kooiman 1993) – Decentralised networks made up of multiple actors functioning at all levels (Haas 2002) • Non-state Market-driven (NSMD – Cashore et al) • linked to sustainable development agenda of Rio/UNCED 1992 6
  7. 7. Figure 2: The sustainable development regime complex: policy-related discourses, agreements, governance arrangements, instruments, market mechanisms, programmes and standards. 7
  8. 8. Governance Arrangements for REDD+ Readiness and Market Implementation • Ultimately, the success of REDD+ mechanism will depend on governance arrangements that are: – – – – Broadly representative of interests and inclusiveness Verifiably responsible (transparency and accountability), Effective in terms of decision-making processes Capable of implementing programmes that deliver emission reductions at scale. (Charlotte Streck, Luis Gomez-Echeverri; Pablo Gutman; Cyril Loisel; Jacob Werksman, REDD+ Institutional Options Assessment: Developing an Efficient, Effective, and Equitable Institutional Framework for REDD+ under the UNFCCC, http://www.redd-oar.org/links/REDD+IOA_en.pdf, accessed 21/05/2010). 8
  9. 9. Why governance matters for REDD+ • Cancun : “Transparent and effective national forest governance structures” • SBSTA: “consistency, comprehensiveness and effectiveness” • Inconsistent norms of governance – “accessibility, …predictability, justice and sustainability” (CCBA/CARE 201 p. 9) – “equity, fairness, consensus, coordination, efficiency” (UN-REDD 2012, p 9) • Changing roles for rights/stakeholders – “Consultations should facilitate meaningful participation at all levels.” (FCPF 2009, p. 2) • “‘Full and effective participation’ means meaningful influence of all relevant rights holders and stakeholders who want to be involved throughout the process” (CCBA/CARE 2010 (2.2. and footnote 26 1 p. 7) • The difference between degrees of tokenism or citizen power (Arnstein 1969) ➡ Are ‘safeguards’ in REDD+ a surrogate for (lack of) good governance? 9 9
  10. 10. Figure 5: REDD+ Trends in stakeholder perceptions of selected governance quality indicators (Northern and Southern countries, State and Non-state actors- Nov. ‘09 – Dec. 11) 10
  11. 11. Organizations and social movements associated with this statement: Aksyon Klima Pilipinas
ActionAid
Bolivian Platform on Climate Change
Construyendo Puentes (Latin America)
Friends of the Earth (Europe)
Greenpeace
Ibon International
International Trade Union Confederation
LDC Watch
Oxfam International
Pan African Climate Justice Alliance
Peoples’ Movement on Climate Change (Philippines)
WWF ‘This week saw a “finance ministerial” with almost no actual finance…Warsaw has not seen any increase in emission reductions nor increased support for adaptation before 2020 – on these things it has actually taken us backward’ http://www.oxfam.org/en/grow/pressroom/pressrelease/2013-11-21/ngos-social-movementswalk-out-warsaw-climate-talks
  12. 12. Recommendations for REDD+ at the international, national and sub-national levels Institutions, policies and regulations need to be: • Inter-linked • Trans-boundary (cross border) • Multi-sectoral (environment, society, economy) • Multi-level (macro, meso, micro) • Comprehensive regulatory approach • Reforms in forest governance issues: – ‘Soft’ law • voluntary market mechanisms (e.g. emissions trading) – Hard Law: • • • • Halting new forest concessions Addressing tenure and rights issues (e.g. Indigenous people) Responsible/sustainable/ethical finance and investment: not public funding as ‘aid’, NOT private philanthropy as ‘investment’ (toxic finance/carbon bubble?) Consistent governance standards across jurisdictions & countries to provide quality, legitimacy and market certainty 12
  13. 13. Thank you lopezcasero@iges.or.jp Maraseni@usq.edu.au t.cadman@griffith.edu.au 13
  14. 14. Relevant publications Quality-of-governance standards for carbon emissions trading: Developing REDD+ governance through a multi-stage, multilevel and multi-stakeholder approach IGES, USQ, Griffith University – IEGL Governing the Forests: An Institutional Analysis of REDD+ and CommunityBased Forest Management in Asia UNU-IAS, ITTO, Griffith University – IEGL NEW: Climate Change and Global Policy Regimes: Towards Institutional Legitimacy www.globalclimatechangepolicy.org Palgrave-Macmillan – IPE Series (April 2013) 14

×