Global Comparative Study on REDD: An overview

Transcription

1 Global Comparative Study on REDD: An overview

2 Module 1: Analysis of National REDD+ Policies and Processes

3 GCS REDD+ research designed Modules: 1. National REDD process and strategies 2. REDD demonstration activities 3. Monitoring and reference levels 4. Knowledge sharing

4 Flexible Element: Specific Policy Studies to capture emerging or country specific issues and questions, focus on political economy studies M1: National strategy and processes Country case studies Discourse Media Analysis Why: To determine what kinds of actors are shaping public debate. How: mediabased analysis Country profile Why: To reveal contextual conditions (drivers of deforestation, institutions, political economy, REDD architecture as discussed) How: literature review, expert interviews Strategy Assessment Why: To assess the adequacy of proposed response measures to secure 3E outcomes? How: situational analysis, R-PP scoring Policy Network Analysis Why: To analyse structural conditions in the policy arena, Actors, Perception, Power, Position How: survey and in-depth interviews Cross-country comparative analysis Comparative analysis Why: to identify structural and governance barriers for 3E REDD outcomes, and options for improvements How: comparative analysis of individual research elements (country profile etc), qualitative comparative analysis (QCA)

5 The involvement of actors in shaping the discourse of REDD+ process (%) Actor group Bolivia n=60 Brazil n=113 Cameroon n=12 Indonesia n=219 Nepal n=17 Peru n=8 Vietnam n=32 State (national) State (sub-national) Corporate Intergovernmental Research (international) NGO+ENGO (international) Research (national) Civil society actors (national) Source: Di Gregorio and Brockhaus, forthcoming

6 Ownership (Inclusive/Exclusive) Convergence of discourse High Indonesia Vietnam Brazil Nepal Peru Cameroon Low Convergence of discourse High Source: Di Gregorio and Brockhaus, forthcoming

7 M2: REDD demonstration activities

8 Research mode Number of project sites The BACI method Intervention Control Total Villages HHs Villages HHs villages Total households Intensive , , ,120 Extensive Non-BACI Total , , ,498 Comparison (Control) Project site (Intervention) Control Before Intervention Before Before Control After Intervention After After IMPACT

9 M3: Monitoring and reference levels Forest C-stocks C-emission Gt CO2-eq Base period Or Historical reference Crediting period = 35 years? With REDD+ With REDD 5 or 10 yrs? Without REDD Base Period Or Historical reference Without REDD With REDD With REDD+ 5 or 10 yrs? Crediting period = 35 years?

10 Capacity gap of 99 non-annex 1 Source: Romijn et al Category 1: national engagement in REDD+ processes Category 2: existing monitoring capacity Category 3: REDD+ challenges Category 4: remote sensing technical challenges

11 MRV capacity Reporting of REDD+ activities requires national forest monitoring systems (NFMSs) remote sensing and ground-based and national inventory approaches An NFMS may use the default (Tier 1) information provided in the IPCC guidelines MRV process could take stepwise approach with continuous improvements The most recently agreed or adopted IPCC methods should be used, as decided by the UNFCCC

12 Lessons learned Transformational change at the national level needs economic interests, discursive practices and shifts in power relations among the actors At subnational level, tenure security is an ultimate prerequisite to achieve 3Es in REDD+ implementation Level of capacity to monitor REDD+ depends on the exposure of countries to basic forest inventory and the advancement of remote sensing technologies

13 Step-wise approach for RL/RELs Modules 1 & 3

14 How we came to the step-wise approach CIFOR GCS and DECC/DEFRA side project (2011) Idea of a tiered approach for establishing RL/RELs (Aug. 11, initially by Huettner et al., 2009) Presented to SBSTA expert workshop (mid Nov. 11) Mentioned of tiered approach in conclusions UNFCCC COP17 side event hosted by UK to present approaches Adoption of stepwise approach in UNFCCC LCA decision on RL/RELs CIFOR policy brief to describe details for a proposed stepwise approach

15 Criteria for comparing country circumstances and strategies

16 Criteria for comparing country circumstances and strategies

17 Setting benchmark for result based payments Modules 1 &3 School of Economics and Business Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB)

18 A proposal for setting benchmark for result based payments 1. Business as Usual (BAU) deforestation Historical deforestation National circumstances, e.g. forest cover Adjusted BAU 2. Costs, based on arguments of effectiveness and efficiency; set such that transfer = costs 3. Fair sharing, rich (> USD1 000/capita) countries pay some share of costs, poor countries are overcompensated 4. Tier approach, high uncertainty of underlying data impose a conservativeness factor

19 Element Variables Historic al Hist.de for rate (FIB I) Forest cover BAU Costs Fair sharing Uncertainty BAU defor (forest cover) (FIB II) Defor after REDD+ Emissio n reducti ons Opp. costs per tco2 Cost FIB III adjust. factor FS FIB IV Cons. factor factor (based on GDP) Example I: Poor, low deforetation, forest rich country Parameter value (treshold) 50% ,000 Area (1000 ha) , Relative to forest or land area 0.19% 72.00% 0.41% 0.17% 0.25% 0.29% % % Emission MtCO2 (100tC/ha) Value (USD million) REDD transfers (USD million) Example II: Rich, high deforestation, low forest cover country Parameter value 50% ,000 Area (1000 ha) 1,000 70, Relative to forest or land area 1.43% 28.00% 1.21% 0.48% 0.73% 0.85% (0.35) 0.72% % Emission MtCO2 (100tC/ha) Value (USD million) ,000 REDD transfers (USD million) FIB V

20 What we are doing now Tasks Return of results Publications based on early research Biophysical baseline & MRV workshops Set-up, implementation, opportunity costs Benefit sharing REDD+ and biodiversity 3Es and co-benefits Equity & social co-benefits Effectiveness Efficiency & equity Efficiency & equity Environmental co-benefits

21 More ground work Postdocs 1. Oliver van Straaten Soil C in mineral soils 2. Etik Handayani Effects of fertlilzation on soil GHG emissions in oil palm on peat 3. Ervan Rutishauser Effects of land use change on C stocks 4. Joko Purbupuspito C dynamics in mangroves 5. Arief Wijaya Drivers of deforestation 6. Shijo Joseph Reference level 7. Anita Kamalakumari Emission factors 8. Matthew Warren C peat swamp forests 9. Rupesh Bhomia C dynamics in mangroves

22 More ground work PhD and MSc students 1. Jenny Farmer Heterotrphic respiration (OP) 2. Louis-Pierre Comeu Heterotrophic respiration (Acacia) 3. Sebastian Persch Roots and LUC on peat 4. Jodie Hartill LUC on non-co 2 GHGs (min) 5. Fitri Aini LUC on non-co 2 GHGs (peat) 6. Nisa Novita LUC on GHG emissions from peat and upland systems 7. Sofyan Kurnianto Modeling C accumltn 8. Oktarita Satria N oxides on mineral soils 9. Veronique De Sy Drivers of deforestation 10. Jose Gonzalez de Tanago REL/RL 11. Sarah Carter

23 Exploring EFs Stock-change approach

24 Exploring EFs Flux difference approach

25 Global wetlands map basic data

26

27 IPCC Guidelines 2006 Source: IPCC (2006)

28 Thank you..