REDD Development Dividend Task Force Meeting

REDD Development Dividend Task Force Meeting

25 – 26 January 2011

Richmonde Hotel

Manila, Philippines

With support from the Norwegian Development Agency

Building REDD Policy Capacity for Developing Country Negotiators

and Land Managers

IISD – ASB-ICRAF Project

2010-2011

With support from the Norwegian Development Agency

Background and Project Objectives

Project Background:•Overall aim of building and strengthening policy capacity in developing countries engaged in REDD negotiations under the UNFCCC•Builds on series of workshops held in Asia and Africa in 2009-10 •Funded by NORAD under the Climate and Forest Initiative 2010 civil society support programme

Project Goals:•The international REDD framework/mechanism is designed to meet development dividend needs of developing countries•National REDD processes include development dividend considerations

The Development DividendAn important element will be ensuring that REDD activities are designed in a way that accounts for the Development Dividend, which includes:

•Quality – ensuring sustainable development benefits, e.g., poverty alleviation, indigenous rights, community livelihoods, technology transfer, biodiversity conservation; •Quantity – ensuring robust GHG reductions; and •Equity – ensuring that all countries, including small and vulnerable countries, are able to benefit from REDD.

2010-2011 Activities

• REDD-DD Task Force Meetingo Explore salient issues in the development of REDD

modalities and processes o Help develop processes and modalities for REDD at the

national, regional and international level that effectively account for development dividend considerations; and

o Identify key research areas and research partners.


• Regional Workshopso Research priorities and key issues as determined by Task

Force will feed into regional workshops in Africa (Cameroon) and Asia (Vietnam)

o Focus on helping negotiators and stakeholders develop REDD in a way that effectively accounts for development dividend considerations

o Workshops will support the negotiating process, and produce a policy brief to be delivered to negotiators.


• Policy Paperso To be developed as inputs to the regional workshops with

guidance from Task Forceo Developed by IISD and ASB-ICRAF in collaboration with

Southern organizations in Asia and Africao Final papers will be developed after review by workshop

participants and Task Force members


• Web Platform for South-South Learningo Complement to other project activities, interactive

platform for gathering, sharing and disseminating information on REDD

o Facilitating the exchange of experiences between participants from different countries and regions

o Public area and sign-in only section for Task Force members and workshop participants

Discussion Session #1Striking a Balance in REDD

Deborah Murphy, IISD

REDD Task Force Meeting

Manila, Philippines

25-26 January 2011

REDD and Co-BenefitsREDD guidance encourages consistency with sustainable development – economic, environmental and social benefits. Potential co-benefits include:•Poverty alleviation•Improved livelihoods of local and Indigenous communities•Biodiversity conservation •Improved forest governance•Technology transfer

Development Dividend• Quality – generating sustainable development, co-benefits

• Quantity – ensuring robust REDD investments, and that REDD credits are affordable and accessible

• Broad participation – encouraging wide participation in REDD and that smaller countries are able to participate

Critical Issues (1)• Understanding the demand for co-benefits – What are

investor and project developer concerns regarding co-benefits? What are the concerns of host and donor countries? Is there a need for research to better understand the range of attitudes and concerns?

• The trade-offs in generating co-benefits – What are the trade-offs in REDD initiatives? How can countries understand the trade-offs between difference initiatives?

Critical Issues (2)• Designing a financial mechanism – What options for

financing REDD could be considered by the AWG-LCA? Are there ways for a market mechanism to consider co-benefits? Are there other options to generate co-benefits that are complementary to a market mechanism?

• Measuring co-benefits – Is there a need for internationally accepted indicators of co-benefits? Or should host countries be responsible for determining the level of co-benefits? Can existing work help in the assessment of co-benefits?

Critical Issues (3)• Broadening the REDD mechanism in future years – How can

REDD modalities and processes be designed to ensure that broader land-use sectors can be brought into the mechanism at a later date?

Discussion Session #2Strengthening MRV for REDD

Florence Bernard and Peter A Minang,

ASB Partnership at ICRAFWorld Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)


Manila, Philippines

25-26 January 2011

MRV Definition

• Measurement - The process of data collection over time, providing basic datasets, including associated accuracy and precision, for the range of relevant variables

• Reporting - The process of formal reporting of assessment results to the UNFCCC, according to predetermined formats and according to established standards (IPCC Guidelines and GPG)

• Verification - The process of formal verification of reports

COP 16 Outcomes for MRV

• Parties agree that a robust MRV system is necessary for REDD

• The Cancun agreement calls for national forest reference emission levels (REL) and/or forest reference levels (RL), and robust and transparent national forest monitoring systems

• Annex II of the COP 16 AWG-LCA decision: SBSTA to provide methodological guidance on MRV

IPCC Guidelines• Measurement and estimation of two variables : forest area change and

carbon density• RL/RELs established and verified, taking national circumstances into

account• MRV based on robust national forest inventories and subject to periodic

external review• The IPCC GPG provides “3 tier” framework for estimating emissions, with

respect to the level of detail and accuracy required. • Five reporting principles: consistency, comparability, transparency,

accuracy, and completeness.

Country Actions on MRV



Critical Issues (1)

• The basis for carbon accounting in MRV systems Gross carbon emissions from deforestation or net accounting? How to address degradation? How to address conversion?

• The level of accuracy required –Could a set of simple interim indicators, or verifiable proxies, be used to assess the performance of REDD actions in the early stages? What MRV thresholds are acceptable for donors and investors?

• RL/REL levels – What types of RL/REL levels should be set up?

Critical Issues (2)

• Linking national and local MRV, and involving local stakeholders in MRV – How effective are the subnational activities for accounting for national leakage and for additionality? Can the involvement of local stakeholders help to verify permanence?

• Cost of MRV – How can developing countries raise funds for MRV given that costs are still poorly known?

• REDD and NAMAs – Should REDD MRV be consistent with the MRV approaches for NAMAs and in a broader future climate change agreement?

Critical Issues (3)• Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) – Is there a

need for an inventory agency responsible for coordinating QA/QC for MRV activities?

• Capacity Building – Most developing countries lack capacity to implement effective MRV. What are priority capacity building areas? Could regional approaches help to address capacity issues?

• Non-carbon performance-based MRV – Should countries be required to report on and monitor safeguards? On co-benefits? What is the link between MRV of emission reductions and MRV of safeguards?

Discussion Session #3Addressing Safeguards

Jessica Boyle, IISD


Manila, Philippines

25-26 January 2011

What are Safeguards?

• Broadly understood as policies and procedures that aim to address both direct and indirect impacts to communities and ecosystems

• Identify, analyze and ultimately work to mitigate risks• Have become contentious topic in the REDD debate

Safeguards in the Cancun Agreement on REDD

• Calls for a system to provide information on how safeguards are being addressed and respected

• Range of safeguards covered in Annex 1 • Policies and mechanisms to ensure these safeguards are

effectively addressed not yet fully developed• SBSTA work programme to develop guidance on a system for

providing information on how safeguards are being addressed and respected, while respecting national sovereignty

Existing Policies and Procedures to Consider

• UN-REDD Programme• Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and the Forest

Investment Program (FIP) • Bilateral programs and Initiatives• Certification Schemes• Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)• International Agreements• Informal local, customary and traditional governance

Critical Issues• Establishing safeguards in REDD processes – Should safeguards be

developed at the international or national level? Is there a need to establish minimum standards for safeguards? Can existing work, such as the CCB Standards, help in the process?

• Translating safeguards into action – Are there lessons learned from other institutions and related instruments that may help inform the REDD safeguard process, anticipate challenges, and provide potential solutions to ensure effective implementation?

• Monitoring safeguards – What international requirements for monitoring safeguards are needed? Should the monitoring of safeguards be linked to MRV requirements, and if so, how?

Documents

REDD Development Dividend Task Force Meeting