A Hope we can believe in REDD Implementation: Lessons Learned from Berau, Indonesia Dr. Dicky Simorangkir Forest Program Director TNC Indonesia
TNC s Global Climate Program evolved starting in to 1995 various with carbon Noel Kempff projects project under in different Bolivia schemes reforestation (Bayou Pierre and Tensas River Basin, Lousiana) conservation, sfm, community (Berau-Indonesia, Adelberts-PNG, Rio Bravo-Belize) sustainable forest management (Garcia River Forest-California) reforestation, community (Tengchong-Yunan/Cina andguaraquecaba-brasil) conservation, community (Noel Kempff, Bolivia) Berau
Indonesia ~ Mega serious Diversity threat to forest Second 11% The of highest eight world 1.3% largest rate plant of Earth s of species; deforestation land; area 10% 17,000 globally (1.1 of mammal Mio islands (88 ha/yr) Mio species; ha); globally; third largest 16% emitter of area bird of of species tropical GHG globally forest
REDD in Indonesia ~ progress field projects Indonesian Forest and Climate Alliance (IFCA) National Climate Change Council National REDD Readiness Plan Ministry of Forestry REDD Regulations Indonesia Climate Change Trust Fund Demonstration activities REDD Projects: site/unit, district, province, national
REDD in Indonesia ~ field BFCP projects REDD Indonesian Demonstration Projects: Government Activities: TNC: site/unit, Berau district, Forest province, Carbon Project national Indonesia TNC Indonesia Germany Indonesia Australia Indonesia ITTO
REDD BFCP in why Indonesia Berau? ~ BFCP Large sub-national Program Indonesia Government TNC: Berau Forest Carbon Project Integration across scales and sectors High forest cover; high threat Landscape approach better High biodiversity monitoring, less leakage Strong support from local Support from decentralized stakeholders, particularly government local government Probably all that is feasible Strong program to build on Could be a good example / test case for national implementation
BFCP what is REDD? REDD Program Berau Forest Carbon Project: improving management of various land uses / systems leading to reduced emission and ensuring sustainable financing mechanism
BFCP - forest cover change in Berau 2005 2000 1990 39% 12% 25% 24% Undisturbed forest Logged-over forest (high density) Logged-over forest (medium density)
BFCP challenges on the ground Total Area ~ 2.2 Millions ha 13 Timber concessions 32 Oil palm concessions 27 Mining concessions 3 Timber plantation 7 Protected forests Others 780,000 ha 189,000 ha 185,000 ha 229,000 ha 361,000 ha 456,000 ha
BFCP strategy implementation Production Forest: Plantations: Cross-Cutting: Improved spatial planning Improved governance (capacity building, policy and legal framework) Community empowerment and engagement, Protected areas: improved livelihood Historic REL Performance Period 1 Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3
BFCP partners Forests Land managers Government Other stakeholders Finance and technical support LAND MANAGERS Companies (timber concessions, plantations, mining) Communities GOVERNMENT District, Province, National Various agencies: Forestry, Environment, Agriculture, Mining, Planning, Finance, National Climate Change Council OTHER STAKEHOLDERS Wider society in Berau Nearby districts and communities FINANCE & SUPPORT Donors: USAID, AUSAid, NORAD, TNC,? Investors Technical: TNC, ICRAF, Winrock, Univ. Mulawarman, Sekala, World Education, Univ. Queensland, USFS, Daemeter, WRI, etc.
BFCP project phases Program will seek funding for a 5-year demonstration phase. It is expected that during that time, international finance mechanisms will be agreed to by countries enabling strategies to be scaled up and sustainable financing to be achieved Full Implementation??? (2013- ) Berau Forest Carbon Program Demonstration Phase (2010-2015) Scoping (Jan-Sep 08) Political support Situational analysis/drivers Rough program design hypothesis Identification of partners/contractors Development (Oct 08-Dec 09) Baseline scenario and monitoring approach Refine strategies for reducing deforestation Legal issues Stakeholder support Funding sources Business plan Pilot site-based strategies: Improved forest management Forest restoration Oil palm swap Land-use planning, policies, enforcement Monitoring and verification Adaptive management Strategies implemented across Berau Monitoring and verification Expansion to additional districts and provinces
56% Land cover Undisturbed forest Logged forest Tons C/ha 11% 30% + DEGRADATION: Undisturbed forest BFCP emissions Scope Supporting improved management of production forests key to reducing degradation and avoiding conversion + DEFORESTATION: NOT JUST FOREST SECTOR : Substantial forest area outside of the forest land Reduction in C if changed to plantation Logged-over forest (high density) Logged-over forest (medium density) Other CO2 Logging concessions cover about 40% of Berau District Timber Well-managed Oil Protection + ENHANCEMENT: palm plantation concessions forests concessions concessions cover cover about about can cover 16% store 9% of about 75% of Berau of 10% the District of carbon Berau 13 million tonsas an Enhancing stocks in degraded forests undisturbed Ca. 32% 44% can half of generate protection the of the forest concession significant forest areas C areas benefits is have degraded have undisturbed, (potential in protection high-density, forest) or medium density forest Potential annual for more emission than 13 reduction million tons 47,000 CO2 sequestered tons CO2 from a 50,000 through Emission ha enhancement from forest conversion concession of forest would be 250+ 500+ million tons per tons ha Ha Emissions 284 231 848 11,374 9,642,536 190 137 503 62,834 31,592,307 Total 74,208 41,234,843 65 million tons (RIL vs. conventional logging) 250+ million tons (forest conversion to oil palm)
BFCP ~ Some Lessons Learned
BFCP ~ Local Communities who, what for, and how to engage local communities?
BFCP ~ diverse communities UPPER KELAY Traditional Transitional Modern Villages in the area of forest concessions Long Duhung, Long Pai (Punan Mahakam), Merabu, Lesan Dayak, Long Boy, Long Lanmcin, Long Sului Long Ayan, Villages in the area of oil-palm plantations Merasak, Merapun Sido Bangen Villages in the area of mining concessions Samburakat Tepian Buah, Long Lanuk Bena Baru Villages in the coastal areas Transmigrant villages Mostly traditional Dayak UPPER SEGAH Punan people LOWER A mixture High dependency KELAY of Dayak Punan on forests and Gaai villages 20-30 families per village LOWER Ambitious Lower SEGAH plans for agricultural dependency conversion on forests; Various All within better Dayak timber transportation groups, concession COASTAL High areas Shifting transmigrants ethnic AREA diversity agriculture, from Java, and gold conflict, mining Lombok Destruction Fishing inter-group primary communities; of burial economic grounds, mostly competition Semanting activities Agriculture sago recognize palms, importance fruit trees, honey, Matarintib important of Diverse trees mangroves by employment: companies plantations, Strong Oil palm village expansion logging, institution bird as nest a result Road openings of previous led conflict to easier collection communities Heterogeneous-various rotational divided; many resolution access to forest agriculture conflicts ethnic groups process from Sulawesi (Bone, Makassar, Toraja, etc) Opportunistic Ineffective community and excessive land development Significant infrastructure Kasai claims program led by oil development palm companies plans Melati Jaya Land Expected Tanjung speculation immigrants Labanan increasing will likely put more pressure on Batu Makarti mangroves
BFCP ~ local communities position Institutions at village level are weak Lack of rights makes relations with companies conflict-prone Unequal power results in low compensation Local people often outcompeted by outsiders
BFCP ~ engaging local communities Strong village institutions, decision-making processes, and plans Increased flow of funding to villages from multiple sources Funds used for implementing high-leverage projects Transparency and community monitoring of financial management
BFCP Financing The case for early public funding The case for long-term private funding Substantial readiness investment required upfront High uncertainty will remain for several years Future emission predicted >100 mill. tons over 5 years 50% decrease in emissions may require $500 million Funding needed is beyond public finance Up-front financing is critical Mix of public/private sources
Questions?