THINKING beyond the canopy

DRAFT

What would be the ideal solution?

Frances Seymour, Director General of CIFORRainforest Foundation, Oslo, June 18th, 2009

Forests in the new climate agreement

THINKING beyond the canopy

Who we are CIFOR is an independent, international

institute that conducts research to inform policies and practices that affect forests in developing countries

Enhancing the role of forests in mitigation of climate change is one of six priority research domains

The views expressed in this presentation are those of the presenter, and do not represent positions of CIFOR

THINKING beyond the canopy

Outline

Essential Effectiveness Efficiency Equity Expectations

THINKING beyond the canopy

GHG emissions by sector 2004

Source: adapted from Olivier et al, 2005

Deforestation is a significant source of CO2 emissions

Sources of global CO2 emissions, 1970-2004

Source: adapted from Olivier et al, 2005

Essential

THINKING beyond the canopy

2C target: can’t be reached without forests: no longer a question of either/or

Emissions reduction pathways to 2 degree C

Source: EDF, Getting REDD right, 2008

Essential

THINKING beyond the canopy

Risks of exceeding 2 degrees too great Impacts of warming on forests could remove mitigation option Important co-benefit of forests’ role in adaptation

Risk of action needs to be balanced against

risk of no action

Essential

THINKING beyond the canopy

Criteria for an ideal solution

Effectiveness – potential for significant emissions reductions soon

Efficiency – avoids wasting time and money

Equity – protects the poor and vulnerable, and if possible makes them better off

THINKING beyond the canopy

Must be combined with dramatic cuts from industrialized countries

GHG emissions by country, including LULUC

Source: WRI 2000

Effectiveness

But some fungibility to provide early incentives

THINKING beyond the canopy

Scope: Needs to be broad enough for political feasibility

Effectiveness

Top forest-based emitters

THINKING beyond the canopy

targeted action for critical ecosystems to reduce emissions.

But narrow enough to enable action on priority areas

• Ex: Peatland degradation causes 11% of global greenhouse gas emissions, mostly from Southeast Asia

Source: Wetlands International and Delft Hydraulics

Effectiveness

THINKING beyond the canopy

Implies phased approach

Effectiveness

RED REDD+

REDD All terrestrial carbon

Avoided emissions

Feasibility (cost + accuracy)

high

high

low

low

THINKING beyond the canopy

Volume of finance must be sufficient to overcome opportunity costs…

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 5000000 10000000 15000000 20000000

op

po

rtu

nit

y c

os

ts R

$/t

CO

2

Avoided deforestation(ha)

CCX temporario CCX permanente

Extensive cattle

Slash & burn ag

Intensive cattle

Intensive perennials

Precious timbers

Biomass+ -

Soy

Source: Wunder, 2008

THINKING beyond the canopy

Implies need to complement public funds with market-based sources

Effectiveness

Expected evolution of funding needsSource: The Little REDD book, 2008

THINKING beyond the canopy

Agreement should minimize scope for political manipulation: e.g. reference levels

crediting baselines must be set to minimize the danger of “hot air”

Efficiency

Source: Angelsen, 2008

THINKING beyond the canopy

Prospect of markets can help “Phase two” investment

vehicles (such as FIP) should require program effectiveness assessment

Ex-post crediting adjustments are attractive

Performance-based incentives

Efficiency

THINKING beyond the canopy

Efficiency and co-benefits Considerations of efficiency should include generation of co-benefits.

• Ex: cocoa agroforestry in Ghana allows livelihood generation, intact forest ecosystem functions and increased carbon storage due to species assemblage.

Efficiency

THINKING beyond the canopy

Finance mechanisms

Need for complementary mechanisms to generate sufficient alternative finance to service those needs and places where markets won’t go and in appropriate sequence

EquityEquity

THINKING beyond the canopy

Challenge remains matching funding sources to country needs,

situations and forest types

Equity

Public fundsPrivate funds Quickly mobilized Require investor confidence, low risk –

appropriate for high capacity, good governance countries

Likely for forest mosaic landscapes with strong tenure

Ex: Iwokrama Reserve in Guyana. Funded by Canopy Capital to measure, value and pay yearly for ecosystem services.

Necessary to enable REDD investments and create policy environment

Significant need from both international and domestic sources for capacity building costs

Best for forest frontiers and beyond, with weak governance and unclear tenure.

Ex: ODA – World Bank FCPF

THINKING beyond the canopy

Need common international standards – especially procedural approaches

Safeguards

Equity

THINKING beyond the canopy

Safeguards needed

MRV not just for carbon assessment, but also for use of funds

Equity

THINKING beyond the canopy

• Skepticism engendered by distance between capital city discussions of “ideal solutions” and realities on the ground

Expectations

Appropriate expectations

THINKING beyond the canopy

Implies pluralistic, evolutionary approach

No one-size fits all in foreseeable future

Phased approach, with careful attention to pace and sequencing

Expectations

THINKING beyond the canopy

www.cifor.cgiar.orgwww.cifor.cgiar.org