Advice on REDD+ Safeguards

Transcription

1 Position Paper Advice on REDD+ Safeguards Eleventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties, 8-19 October, 2012 Hyderabad, India Summary Conservation International calls on Parties to the UNCBD at COP 11 to: Approve the advice in Annex I as guidance for country-specific implementation of REDD+ safeguards (Annex I is based on document UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/16/8 and now presented in UNEP/CBD/COP/11/24). Emphasize that Periodically updated ecosystem coverage maps for all ecosystem types be utilized in order to monitor and help prevent impacts on all areas of biodiversity value from displacement of drivers of deforestation resulting from REDD+ activities. Strengthen coordination between UNFCCC and CBD national focal points to implement REDD+ safeguards effectively and efficiently. Continue to support that International standards for identifying priority biodiversity sites be utilized to ensure their protection when planning and undertaking REDD+ activities.

2 Introduction REDD+ will bring significant benefits to biodiversity if designed and implemented appropriately 1. By creating incentives for forest conservation and restoration, REDD+ will contribute to biodiversity conservation, by reducing the rates and extent of deforestation and forest degradation, particularly in natural ecosystems, and by increasing forest conservation and restoration efforts. Despite the potential for REDD+ to greatly enhance conservation efforts, as a mechanism restricted to forests, it does not adequately address biodiversity conservation issues. Indeed, if not appropriately designed, REDD+ can result in negative impacts to biodiversity by causing the displacement of deforestation and degradation from REDD+ target sites to ecosystems that are not currently threatened. For instance, land-use pressures such as agriculture, rather than moving into forests, could move into other high biodiversity ecosystems not addressed under the REDD+ mechanism, such as grasslands. Moreover, without robust standards protecting biodiversity, the carbon focus of REDD+ may inadvertently provide incentives for the conversion of high-biodiversity ecosystems with low carbon contents to low-biodiversity ecosystems with high-carbon contents. Metrics and monitoring to ensure achievement of Aichi Biodiversity Target 5 will complement and support safeguarding biodiversity under the REDD+ mechanism. Accordingly, it is vital to ensure and strengthen coordination between national focal points of UNFCCC/REDD+ and CBD in order to enhance the complementarity of these efforts. 1 Busch, J., F. Godoy, W. R. Turner and C. A. Harvey (2010) Biodiversity co-benefits of reducing emissions from deforestation under alternative reference levels and levels of finance. Conservation Letters, 4: Harvey, C. A., B. Dickson, C. Kormos (2010) Opportunities for achieving biodiversity conservation through REDD. Conservation Letters, 3: Strassburg, B. B. N., A. S. L. Rodrigues, M. Gusti, A. Balmford, S. Fritz, M. Obersteiner, R. K. Turner and T. M. Brooks (2012) Impacts of incentives to reduce emissions from deforestation on global species extinctions. Nature Climate Change, DOI: /NCLIMATE1375. Conservation International: Advice on REDD+ Safeguards 2

3 Positions on draft COP Decision (UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/REC/XVI/7) Coordination between national focal points of two conventions 1. Noting the potential for synergies in implementing efforts for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries (REDD+), and the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and its Aichi Biodiversity Targets, urges Parties, other Governments, and relevant organizations to ensure that they are implemented in a coherent and mutually supportive way, including strengthening coordination between UNFCCC and CBD focal points; Recognizing the potential impacts of REDD+ on the objectives of both UNFCCC and CBD, coordination between the national focal points of these conventions in-country should be ensured and strengthened for the effective implementation of biodiversity safeguards, as cited in Decision X/20 (Paragraph 5). The WGRI recommended that COP11 urges Parties to strengthen cooperation and synergy among convention focal points and other partners at the national level to enhance capacity for implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets to avoid duplication of activities and further enhance the effective use of resources (UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/REC/4/6, Paragraph 9). The present paragraph should operationalize this decision and recommendation at the COP, following the suggested text in the box above. Approval of the Annex [5. [Approves][Takes note of][welcomes] the advice on relevant country-specific biodiversity safeguards for REDD+ contained in annex I, ** as guidance focused on national implementation;] The Annex is a collection of knowledge and expert insight gathered through a series of workshops and meetings 2 and from submissions by Parties and NGOs. It provides sound principles for consideration in the application of biodiversity safeguards, while providing ample flexibility for country-specific development. As the only convention with specific objectives on biodiversity and as per Paragraph 9(g) of Decision X/33, the COP should approve the advice in the Annex and recommend its use for country-specific implementation. Furthermore, UNFCCC will be discussing this issue further at its COP 18 at the end of this year and is expected to provide further guidance on 2 A global expert workshop in Nairobi in September 2010 and regional capacity-building and consultation workshops for Asia-Pacific (Singapore; March 2011), for Latin America and the Caribbean (Quito; July 2011), and for Africa (Cape Town; September 2011); involving representatives from 63 Parties and from 55 international organizations, non-governmental organizations, private sector institutions and indigenous and local community organizations. Conservation International: Advice on REDD+ Safeguards 3

4 systems for providing information on how REDD+ safeguards are addressed and respected by Approval of the Annex at this COP11 will promote CBD s synergetic contribution to UNFCCC and serve the objectives of both Conventions most efficiently. Prioritization and monitoring 8. Invites Parties and other Governments, according to national circumstances and priorities, as well as relevant organizations and processes to reduce the risk of displacement of deforestation and forest degradation to areas of lower carbon value and/or higher biodiversity value, and other risks to biodiversity and to indigenous and local communities, including through: (a) Undertaking comprehensive land-use planning, applying the ecosystem approach and its operational guidance, and utilizing international standards for identifying key biodiversity areas to prioritize their conservation, when planning and undertaking REDD+ activities (decisions V/6 and VII/11); (c) Ensuring the monitoring of changes in biodiversity using periodically updated maps across all main terrestrial and inland water ecosystems, in the framework of monitoring achievement of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and its Aichi targets; and promote regional and sub-regional collaboration for monitoring and assessment, with technical and financial support to developing countries; We support Paragraph 8(a) that emphasizes the prioritization of conserving key biodiversity areas (KBAs) identified using international standards. Internationally standardized approaches to identify critical sites for high priority species and habitats have been tested and implemented for over 20 years under an IUCN process 3. Maps have been produced in many countries for priority conservation sites at the scale of practical management units. Such maps can inform REDD+ plans of key sites to protect and maintain, both through REDD+ activities and in the face of possible displacement or conversion due to REDD+ activities. As such, prioritizing KBA protection is the most effective and immediate way of safeguarding and conserving biodiversity and of reducing the risk of the displacement of deforestation and forest degradation to areas of high biodiversity. In sub-paragraph 8(c), we strongly support the reference to monitoring of changes in biodiversity across all terrestrial and inland water ecosystems, as an effective means to monitor and prevent negative impacts of to ecosystems that are not explicitly targeted under REDD+ activities. We further encourage systematic, periodic review of maps of all terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems; thus the 3 Eken,G. et al. (2004) Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience 54, Langhammer,P. et al.(2007) Identification and Gap Analysis of Key Biodiversity Areas: Targets for Comprehensive Protected Area Systems. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Conservation International: Advice on REDD+ Safeguards 4

5 suggested insertion. Periodically updated maps allow for the detection of gross changes 4 of forest and other important ecosystem types. Temporal comparison of maps, as opposed to tabular summary of ecosystem coverage by type, will allow detection of where the conversion of ecosystems occurs and facilitates identification of changes that are due to REDD+ activities. Since such maps will also be needed to monitor progress under the CBD, particularly Aichi Target 5, REDD+ safeguards adopting robust standards of measurement creates an opportunity for increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the Conventions. The displacement of deforestation and forest degradation can cross borders from one country with effective regulation under REDD+ to another with less effective land use regulation. Such international displacement will be manifest in discrete land-use changes. Accordingly, maps covering all terrestrial ecosystems will assist in detecting such changes and in efficiently targeting mitigation efforts. Under the UNFCCC, REDD+ will have strong and highly precise monitoring schemes for forests but monitoring for other ecosystem types is addressed by safeguard measures with much lower precision. Aichi Target 5 explicitly addresses changes in ecosystems and the proposed monitoring for this Target is of higher precision for non-forest ecosystems than what will likely be required for REDD+ safeguards. Measures under CBD Targets can complement REDD+ safeguards. Possible indicators to monitor the impacts of REDD+ on biodiversity and ILCs 13. Requests the Executive Secretary to further develop advice on issues included in paragraph 9 (h) of decision X/33, based on further views from Parties and in collaboration with the Collaborative Partnership on Forests, and report to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice prior to the [twelfth] [thirteenth] meeting of the Conference of the Parties. Monitoring the impacts of REDD+ on the matters relevant to CBD is highly relevant to achieving the CBD s Strategic Plan for Biodiversity The monitoring scheme should be established soonest to facilitate this. The UNFCCC will be discussing the guidance on systems for providing 4 To illustrate, Forest type A Other Forest/ecosystem type and Forest type A Other Forest/ecosystem type Forest type A will both be registered as loss of Forest type A under gross change. The latter will be registered as no loss under net change, and will miss the impact of ecosystem conversion on biodiversity. Conservation International: Advice on REDD+ Safeguards 5

6 information on how REDD+ safeguards are addressed and respected by Following this guidance, countries will develop national safeguard information systems. The CBD should provide relevant advice and information in a timely manner to inform these discussions. Thus, we recommend that this discussion take place concurrently and be concluded at COP12. In the determination of indicators, much can be learned from existing best practice to guide the effective implementation of safeguards. The REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+SES) 5 provide internationally applicable principles and criteria for biodiversity and social safeguards for REDD+. Indicators are developed at country-level to allow country-specific interpretation, ensuring relevance an adaptation to individual countries contexts. REDD+SES is already in use in Ecuador, the State of Acre in Brazil, Nepal and the Province of Central Kalimantan in Indonesia, and their lessons and experiences can benefit others. 5 REDD+ SES; Conservation International: Advice on REDD+ Safeguards 6