The Partnership, recently established by close to 60 countries at the Oslo Climate and Forest Conference, aims to work bilaterally alongside the UN to provide quick-start financing for REDD in time for COP16 in Cancun. In May it pledged around USD 4.0 billion for the period 2010-2012 for measures to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries.
Since the meeting in Brazilia, there have been no official statements and no information has been released on the official website about the progress of the Partnership, other than some tweets from a Brazilian delegate who photographed a Japanese negotiator sleeping, claiming it ‘symbolized the spirit of the meeting.’ He later tweeted that nothing was decided at the meeting, except the need for further discussions.
Even when apparently dormant, the Partnership is still a source of concern for civil society organisations. “Respect for indigenous peoples' rights and support for the implementation of safeguards still under discussion at the UNFCCC are not among the Partnership's principles,” said the Forest People’s Programme, an NGO supporting Indigenous participation in UN-REDD. “The process so far has been evidently lacking in terms of transparency and participation.”
This month’s meeting in Brasilia saw an invite sent to a randomly selected list of 12 organisations only one week before the meeting itself. Three subsequent letters of complaint, signed by 40 organisations, Climate Action Network and WWF, were sent to the Partnership Chairs over the terms on which civil society was asked to participate.
Uproar was also caused at the first Partnership meeting in Paris when the doors were closed to Indigenous Peoples as 64 forest countries and donor governments met in Paris on March 11th to discuss prospects for the future funding of REDD.
The next official technical meeting of the REDD+ Partnership will be held in Nagoya, Japan, in October.
UNEP has released a report underlining the benefits of restoring natural ecosystems. The report advocates that far from being a tax on growth and development, the rehabilitation of nature-based assets will generate jobs, wealth and restoration of multi-trillion dollar services.
The report uses case studies to outline the benefits of forest restoration to biodiversity and conservation and the impacts on human livelihoods and wellbeing. The varied ecosystems of each case study outline the many different benefits which forest restoration could offer.
Instituto Terra, a non-profit organisation that establishes nurseries to replant denuded areas in the Mata Atlantica, is mentioned for its services to biodiversity, water regulation, carbon storage and preventing soil erosion.
Protecting already intact ecosystems is of course the most logical and cost effective strategy in climate change mitigation, yet more than 60 per cent of global ecosystems - from marshes and coral reefs to tropical forests and soils - are already degraded. On this basis, the report says that restoration must now gain an equal importance.
Some of the benefits of Forest Restoration:
·Increased and higher quality habitats for animals and plants;
·A secure and high-quality supply of water;
·Prevention and reduction of land degradation;
·A secure source of biomass and biofuel energy;
·Environmentally sound and socially acceptable carbon sequestration;
·Adequate and sustainable income and employment opportunities for rural communities;
·Sustainable source of timber for forest industries and local communities;
·Sound return on investment for forestry investors;
·Increased resilience and resistance to climate change;
·Additional sources of non-timber forest products such as medicinal plants and marketable goods;
·Recreation and tourism opportunities;
·Increased property values near restored areas;
·Enhanced economic and environmental security and mitigation of risk form global economic and environmental
Source: Global Partnership on Forest Landscape Restoration (GPFLR),
Londres - O UNEP divulgou um relatório que dá ênfase aos benefícios de se recuperar ecossistemas naturais. O relatório defende que, longe de ser um imposto sobre o crescimento e desenvolvimento, a recuperação de sistemas naturais vai gerar emprego, riqueza e restauração de serviços de trilhões de dólares.
O relatório utiliza estudos de caso para demonstrar os benefícios da restauração florestal para a biodiversidade e conservação e seus impactos para a vida e bem-estar humano. A variedade de ecossistemas apresentados em cada estudo de caso mostram muitos benefícios singulares que a restauração florestal pode oferecer.
Proteger ecossistemas intactos é, certamente, a forma mais lógica e com menos custos na estratégia de mitigação das mudanças climáticas, porém mais de 60% dos ecossistemas globais – de áreas pantanosas e recifes de coral até florestas tropicais e solos – já encontram-se degradados. Com base nisso, o relatório afirma que a restauração florestal deve ganhar igual importância para a conservação. (Patrick Bodenham)
Um estudo americano foi utilizado de forma distorcida na tentativa dos ruralistas de alterar o Código Florestal Brasileiro. Divulgado em maio, "Fazendas Aqui, Florestas Lá" trata da agricultura e indústria florestal dos EUA e de sua relação financeira benéfica com a redução do desmatamento em países tropicais. O relatório afirma que acabar com o desmatamento por meio de incentivos dos EUA iria aumentar a receita da agricultura norte americana de U$190 a U$ 270 bilhões de dólares no período de 2012 a 2030. É possível avaliar que a compensação florestal feita com países tropicais ajudariam os EUA a economizarem U$49 bilhões de dólares na redução de custos com energia e fertilizantes.
Glenn Horowitz, diretor Avoided Deforestation Partners (ADP), responsável pelo artigo, aponta que “alguns interesses em relação ao Brasil estão amplamente mal representados no relatório”, e concorda que interesses internacionais irão ferir a agricultura brasileira. O relatório foi escrito para leitores americanos e não deveria significar impactos para o Brasil.
Porém, ‘ruralistas’, grupo de legisladores que defendem interesses agropecuários, estão utilizando os interesses do agronegócio para iniciar disputas no congresso em relação ao Código Florestal Brasileiro que, em seus 45 anos já reportou proteção a 100 milhões de hectares de florestas. Dentro da lei vigente, proprietários de terra no Brasil são obrigados a manter 80% de sua terra intacta, podendo usufruir dos outros 20%. Mudanças na legislação poderiam encolher essa proporção, igualando em 50% áreas protegidas e áreas de uso intensivo.
Logo, interesses internacionais na redução do desmatamento não são relacionados diretamente à mudança do Código, evidenciando, mais uma vez, a distorção política. (Patrick Bodenham)
Organizações ligadas às questões ambientais estão lutando para impedir a implementação do projeto de lei. Veja tentativas de impedir mudanças no Código Florestal Brasileiro AQUI
A study released in May that looks at how U.S agriculture and forest industries will benefit financially from reduced deforestation in tropical countries is being used in the fight to water down the Brazilian Forest Code.
Glenn Horowitz, director of Avoided Deforestation Partners (ADP), responsible for the paper, told Solve Climate that “some interests in Brazil wildly misrepresented the report”, using it as an example of how the international interests will hurt the agricultural sector. The report was written for American readers and was not meant to represent impacts on Brazil.
The ‘ruralistas’, a group of right-wing legislatures in Brazilia are using agribusiness interests to ignite a firestorm in Congress over part of the 45 year-old Brazilian Forest Code which has reportedly protected over 100 million hectares of forest. Under the current law, Brazilian landowners are allowed to clear 20 percent of their forests but must keep 80 percent in tact. The new bill could shrink that proportion to 50-50.
The report claims that “ending deforestation through incentives in United States and international climate action would boost U.S. agricultural revenue by an estimated $190 to $270 billion between 2012 and 2030.” It goes on to say that forestry offsets would save U.S. industries $49 billion in compliance payments due to lower energy and fertilizer costs.
13 environmental organisations have appealed to their supporters to fight the bill.
No Brasil, aproximadamente 500.000 casos de malária são registrados todo ano, sendo 99% destes na região amazônica que apresenta altas taxas de desmatamento. Até agora era difícil encontrar a ligação entre a propagação de doenças epidêmicas e o desmatamento, pela quantidade e complexidade dos fatores envolvidos, porém, cientistas da Universidade de Wisconsin-Madison completaram sua pesquisa, na qual relacionaram incidências de malária no Acre com imagens de satélite de alta resolução do desmatamento na região.
Os resultados, publicados no artigo "Deforestation and Malaria in Mâncio Lima Country, Brazil" (clique aqui para baixar o artigo) mostram claramente que o aumento nas taxas de desmatamento causam surtos drásticos de malária, possivelmente desencadeando epidemias. A pesquisa encontrou que um aumento de 4% na taxa de desmatamento encontra um aumento de 48% para casos de malária. Em 2006 a área de estudo sofreu, segundo autores, “uma epidemia excepcional”, com pessoas contraindo a doença até quatro vezes por ano.
“A conservação das florestas tropicais pode ser mais benéfica à saúde humana do que se pensava”, aponta Sarah Olson responsável pelo estudo. No caso dessa pesquisa, dados do Ministério do Meio Ambiente que focavam o monitoramento da malária e o mapeamento espacial da saúde nos distritos da Amazônia, ajudaram a provar as associações ecológicas entre os altos índices de malária e de desmatamento: a paisagem desmatada apresenta clareiras e reservatórios de água expostos à luz, que constituem ambiente perfeito para reprodução do vetor transmissor da doença, o mosquito Anopheles Darlingi, também conhecido por deslocar outras espécies de mosquitos que preferem o ambiente florestal e não são propensos a transmitirem a doença.
Olson ressalta que “evidenciar o desmatamento como um risco principal nos mostra que devemos também olhar para o potencial dos fatores socioeconômicos”. Pobreza e demografia também são importantes na análise de distribuição e propagação da malaria. A pesquisa feita por Burton Singer e Marcia Castro aponta que a falta de informação e vulnerabilidade das pessoas que migram para áreas desmatadas aumenta a propensão dos riscos de disseminação da doença apenas iniciados pelo desmatamento. (Patrick Bodenham)
Pagamentos por serviços ambientais (PSA) são capazes de “comprar” mais da metade do desmatamento previsto na Amazônia. Porém as condições institucionais necessárias para um sistema eficiente e equitativo não são adequadas e reduzem este número em 75%.
Além disso, a maior fatia do dinheiro reservado para conservar as florestas iria para os fazendeiros mais ricos da região, que são responsáveis por 80% do desmatamento que ainda está em curso na Amazônia.
Os formuladores de políticas públicas precisam conhecer melhor onde e em quais circunstâncias os PSA contribuem para resultados eficazes e equitativos, conforme um novo relatório intitulado "Pagamentos diretos de conservação na Amazônia brasileira: implicações no escopo e equidade, encomendado pelo Centro Internacional de Pesquisa Florestal (CIFOR).
Várias preocupações têm sido levantadas ao longo dos anos sobre os riscos de um sistema de pagamento que seria mais favorável aos maiores proprietários de terras, especialmente aqueles envolvidos no desmatamento.
Pagar por serviços ambientais só faz sentido quando se trata de áreas de florestas sob direta ameaça de desmatamento. Como os pagamentos de compensação são vinculados à redução do desmatamento, os grandes proprietários, responsáveis por cerca de 80% de todo o desmatamento, receberiam a maior premiação. Os povos indígenas, cujos impactos em suas terras são geralmente pequenos não teriam como receber estes fundos de compensação.
Se você quer parar o desmatamento, então essas pessoas (grandes proprietários) quem precisam receber a maior parte do dinheiro", diz Sven Wunder, cientista do CIFOR no Brasil e autor principal do relatório, que descreve o processo como um "mal necessário" na luta para atingir a desejada redução das emissões.
Os problemas estruturais:
O estudo analisou as tendências e os lucros criados pelo uso da terra e mudanças do uso da terra no arco do desmatamento, considerando que 55% (12,5 milhões de hectares) de todas as florestas ameaçadas produzem um retorno líquido que pode ser compensado por pagamentos, refletidos no preço atual do mercado de carbono.
O que é o PSA:
O programa da ONU sobre a redução das emissões resultantes da desmatamento e degradação florestal (REDD) torna-se cada vez mais dominante no debate ambiental, todos os olhos estão voltados para a Amazônia, que detem a maior floresta tropical do mundo e também tem maior taxa mundial de desmatamento.
Muitos defensores do REDD abraçam a idéia de um sistema de pagamento por serviços ambientais das florestas em pé. O PSA é visto como uma maneira mais eficaz de alcançar os proprietários locais e persuadi-los a preservar suas florestas. Os agricultores são pagos uma mesma quantia ou até mais do que receberia pela conversão de suas florestas para a agricultura, em troca de manter suas florestas intactas.
Uma estrutura como essa oferece incentivos financeiros aos proprietários de terras, ao contrário de ações como “comando e controle" e outras políticas que dependem dos desincentivos, tais como mandatos ambientais contra o desmatamento.
A análise utilizou o valor médio dos créditos de carbono temporário do Chicago Climate Exchange. O principal foco são os criadores de gado de alto impacto e com baixa lucratividade e os pequenos produtores que utilizam queimada para cultivo. Porém, segundo o relatório, esse preço torna impossível remunerar agriculturas mais rentáveis, como o óleo de palma, a soja, a extração de madeira nobre ou mesmo culturas perenes como a pimenta do reino. Mesmo com um preço médio de carbono substancialmente mais elevado, como o oferecido pelo mercado europeu, uma quantidade significativa da terra teria custos de oportunidade maior do que a compensação.
Os regimes de PSA dependem de regularização fundiária e dos direitos legais dos proprietários para permitir ou negar o controle das atividades concorrentes aos ativos que propriedade oferece. Mas como observa o estudo, até 2050, o dois terços do desmatamento está previsto para ocorrer em áreas com precária estrutura fundiária. Outro um quarto de desmatamento futuro é projetado para ocorrer em áreas estritamente protegidas, terras indígenas, áreas de uso sustentável e assentamentos de reforma agrária.
"O governo brasileiro criou esquemas de pagamento por serviços ambientais, porém o pagamento não pode ser usado para deter o desmatamento em terras ilegalmente apropriadas, nem em áreas onde a posse privada é pacífica", diz Jan Börner, cientista do CIFOR e co-autor do relatório. "Caos fundiário representa o maior impedimento para a utilização de pagamentos para implementar o REDD no Brasil em grande escala."
Nos últimos anos há uma tendência mundial de reconhecer os direitos de posse e descentralizar a gestão das florestas às populações locais. Juntas, estas transições tem incentivado a reforma da posse em diversos países e muitas vezes com aumento no armazenamento de carbono e mais dinheiro para as nações em desenvolvimento.
PSA se baseia em medidas de centralização de comando e controle, o risco de não pagamento devido a falhas na gestão das florestas leva os governos centrais a aumentar o controle. CIFOR está atualmente realizando pesquisas para o IBAMA, para ver o quanto eles seriam obrigados a investir para aumentar sua presença em campo e melhorar a proteção sobre a floresta.
Como o financiamento para implementação de projetos de REDD flui através dos órgãos do governo, existem temores de que uma nova forma de governança florestal centralizadora possa prejudicar os direitos das comunidades locais.
Payments for environmental services (PES) are capable of ‘buying out’ more than half of predicted Amazonian deforestation. But the institutional conditions necessary for an efficient and equitable PES system are not adequate, reducing this figure by 75 percent.
Furthermore, the majority of the money set aside to conserve the forests would go to the region’s wealthiest landowners, who are responsible for 80% of deforestation still going on in the Amazon.
Policymakers need to be better informed about where and under which circumstances PES is likely to contribute to effective and equitable outcomes, says a new report entitled ‘Direct conservation payments in the Brazilian Amazon: Scope and equity implications’.
What is PES:
As the UN programme on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) becomes increasingly dominant in the environmental debate, all eyes are turned towards the Amazon, which holds the world’s largest tropical rainforest and is also suffering the world’s fastest rate of deforestation.
Many REDD proponents embrace the idea of a payment system in which forests left standing become a paid-for environmental service. A structure such as this – in comparison with ‘command-and-control’ and other policies used to confront deforestation – is seen as a more effective way of reaching local land users and persuading them to conserve their forests. Farmers are paid the same amount or more than they would make by converting their forests to agriculture, in return for keeping their forests intact.
Structural problems:
A scoping study looked at trends and profits created by land-use and land-use change across the arc of deforestation, finding that 55% (12.5million hectares) of all threatened forests produced net returns that could be compensated for by payments reflecting current carbon market prices.
The analysis used the average value of temporary carbon offsets in the Chicago Climate Exchange. High-impact, low profit cattle ranchers and small-scale landholders who use slash-and-burn farming techniques would be the primary source of focus. At this price, however, the report says it would be impossible buy out more lucrative agriculture such as palm oil, soy beans, land extraction of the high value, or perennial crops like black pepper. Even with an average carbon price substantially higher, such as that offered by the European market, a significant amount of land would have opportunity costs higher than could be compensated for by PES.
PES schemes rely on secure tenure and the legal right of the owners to permit or deny competitors control of the assets the property has to offer. But the study notes how two- thirds of deforestation between now and 2050 is predicted to take place in areas that have poorly defined or insecure tenure. Another quarter of future deforestation is projected to occur in strictly protected areas, indigenous territories, sustainable use areas and land reform settlements.
“The way the Brazilian government has devised payment schemes for environmental services, payment cannot be used to stop deforestation on illegally appropriated lands, nor on lands where private tenure is disputed,’ said Jan Börner, CIFOR scientist and a co-author of the report. ‘Land-tenure chaos represents the single largest impediment for using on-the-ground payments to implement REDD in Brazil on a large scale.’ He added.
Equity issues:
Concerns have been raised for several years regarding the moral hazards of a payment system that would accrue to larger landholders, particularly those who have been involved in deforestation.
PES only makes environmental sense when it addresses areas of forests already under threat from deforestation. As compensation payments are tied to reductions in deforestation, large landowners who are responsible for about 80% of all deforestation would reap the highest awards. Indigenous people, whose impacts on their surroundings are minimal, would have no way of accessing these funds.
“If you want to stop deforestation, then these people need to get a lion’s share of the money” said Sven Wunder, co-author of the report, describing the process as ‘a necessary evil’ in the scramble to achieve desired emissions reductions.
In recent years there has been a worldwide trend towards the recognition of tenure rights, devolving management over forests from governments to local people and communities. Together, these transitions have encouraged tenure reform in many countries and have often been proved to boost carbon storage, while resulting in better incomes in a number of developing nations.
PES relies on centralised command-and-control measures, as the risk of non-payment resulting from local failures in forest management prompts central governments to increase control. CIFOR is currently performing research for IBAMA, the Brazilian Ministry of the Environment’s enforcement agency, to see how much they would need to invest as they step up their field presence to achieve greater forest protection.
As funding for implementing REDD projects flowed through government departments, fears exist that a new, recentralised form of forest governance could undermine local communities’ rights.
Although monitored deforestation rates in the Amazon may be reduced, fires and the associated carbon emissions continue to increase because of cryptic land-use processes.
A satellite analysis of deforestation and forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon has showed that fire occurrences have increased by 59% in areas where deforestation has reportedly slowed. The report attributes these trends to the widespread use of slash-and-burn to clear secondary forest in Amazonia.
Reducing deforestation slows, but does not stop the continuous expansion of the cumulative deforested area. Forest landscapes are also becoming more fragmented, causing an increase in fire susceptibility and exposing it to leakage of accidental fires from adjacent farms.
This leads to a permanent enlargement of forest edges and secondary forest cover. Borders between forests and agriculture are more susceptible to fires lit by farmers who traditionally use fire to manage regrowth on agricultural land.
Burning secondary forest under the canopy allows farmers to plant pasture undetected by PRODES, the satellite system that monitors deforestation rates. This, the report suggests, could offer an explanation of the reverse trend observed between deforestation and fire.
Yet as the process releases huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the land in theory, still counts as forest eligible to generate REDD credits.
The report calls for sustainable, fire-free land management to be adopted in the REDD mechanism, to avoid negating carbon savings achieved by avoided deforestation.
A key objective of good forest governance is to establish effective forest management on the part of social organisations, as it is these organisations that attempt to align economic activities with the interests of a country’s citizens.
As one of a set of five governance principles seen as necessary for governments to design and implement public policies away from a framework of unrest, Transparency stands out as key.
Global Witness, the official NGO observer to the UN-REDD process, recently held a meeting to discuss the results of an annual ‘report card’ on forest transparency, with board members from Cameroon, Ghana, Liberia and Peru.
Over a four month investigation period, public forestry institutions in each country were probed for their openness in communicating information necessary for the full participation of civil society in forest decision-making. Key themes were transparent decision making, legal access to information and forest tenure and land use.
Of all four countries involved, Peru is the only to have an established legal framework that guarantees access to information. As a right recognised in article 2 numeral 5 of the Political Constitution of Peru, transparency is regulated by the Transparency and Access to Public Information Law approved by Law No.27806.
Yet research carried out by the sustainable development organisation Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (DAR) uncovered a worrying lack of compliance with this law. Laura Furones, Head of Latin American Development at Global Witness said “There is a clear gap between the theory and the practice. Yes, the instruments exist, but the real question is do they work?”
The investigation, which comprised two main approaches - monitoring transparency in relevant websites and submitting letter requests for information - found the average compliance with legal requirements for websites dedicated to transparency in the forest sector by the institutions in charge of management and conservation of forests to be only 49.5%, while in other non-forest-related institutions it reached 82.6%. Only 25% of requests for further information were responded to.
According to Furones, it is difficult to know whether the opacity around forest information is due to a lack of resources or a lack of will. Following the implementation of the US-Peru Free Trade Agreement in February last year, there has certainly been a focus on establishing a legal framework that places a more equal emphasis in the needs of the public sector.
In the shadow of violent confrontation and the death of more than 33 people in Bagua last year, a new law on forests and wildlife is currently being negotiated in the Peruvian Congress. It will separate forest resources into zones in the hopes of preventing disputes related to different economic activities. Within four working groups set up by the government, one looked at forest law and indigenous participation. The obvious ramifications of the bill on forest transparency have made it the focal point of meetings up until now. Suggestions from NGOs and experts closed on April 9th and the bill has been presented to Congress for a vote. Yet interests are polarised, and whether or not suggestions on forest transparency will be successfully incorporated into public policy, or even listened to, is currently point of tension.
Following the dissemination of the project’s actions, the General Directorate of Forestal y de Fauna Silvestre (FFS) under the national Ministerio de Agricultura announced a commitment to implement a webpage specifically dedicated to information sharing for the benefit of forest stakeholders and local actors.
The next forest transparency report card will be carried out again in the final months of 2010, and will continue yearly under the programme ends in three years time.
The programme hopes to incorporate a new country into its research each year and is currently undergoing discussions with Ecuador and Guyana.
The global mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) threatens to reverse positive forestry reforms in developing countries that were already tackling the problem, a new study finds.
The report - published in the journal Science by Edward Webb and Jacob Phelps - examines how the scheme could soon become too valuable and complex, increasing the likelihood of local communities being excluded.
On a national level, the rush to enter a competitive carbon market would undermine a pre-existing “decentralisation trend” in poorer countries, where cash-strapped governments have been giving local communities and administrations more rights and powers to manage their forests.
Decentralised forest management is seen to have improved forest carbon storage and resulted in better incomes in a number of developing nations. REDD, the report outlines, is performance-based mechanism that would dramatically increase the market value of forests. The risk of non-payment resulting from local failures in forest management would prompt central governments to increase control.
Webb and Phelps say a properly constituted REDD scheme is complex and risks poor outcomes if rushed.
The report appeared days after a joint statement of concern was released (http://bit.ly/dpE4sB) (http://bit.ly/9hAmqO) by 42 environmental organisations, which denounced the Paris-Oslo process for failing to properly consider the interests of local peoples.
The Fourth Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) Dialogue on Forests, Governance and Climate Change held in London last week, provided a well-timed opportunity to look at the current state of international negotiations on deforestation following COP15.
As a result of the general failure to achieve legal agreement, no binding decision was taken on REDD at COP15. It did however feature strongly in the Copenhagen accord and six countries pledged US$3.5 billion as a ‘fast-start’ interim finance to be paid between 2010 and 2012 when the Kyoto Protocol expires. This year, a number of other countries have announced contributions and the total amount pledged is now considered to be somewhere between 2.5 and 6 billion.
The Paris-Oslo initiative was the first ministerial level meeting on REDD, taking place on 11th March. The initiative aims to use the mandate established by Copenhagen to create a multilateral Interim REDD Partnership to secure coordination, transparency, progress and positive precedents with the available fast start interim funding. A second meeting is scheduled for 27th May in Oslo.
The Paris-Oslo initiative is currently a key dynamic in the global politics of deforestation. The RRI discussions highlighted various tensions associated with the process.
• Paul Watkinson of the French Ministry of Ecology, Environment and Sustainable Development spoke of the need for an operational text to move the process forward. • Per F.I Pharo from the Government of Norway emphasized that trying to establish the perfect mechanism covering everything is over-ambitious and unreasonable in the given timeframe. • A network of 40 civil society and indigenous peoples’ organisations had previously denounced the lack of transparency and participation in the Paris discussions in March: http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/64052/2010/03/14-101557-1.htm • Rosalind Reeve from Global Witness, the main NGO observer to REDD, described the Paris meeting as “an appalling start” to the Paris-Oslo process, advocating for more attention to safeguards, and measuring, reporting and verifying (MRV). She said efforts by Norway to improve transparency such as parallel workshops and online conferencing were “not enough”.
Brazil’s climate change plan was mentioned by Dan Nepstad of The Woods Hole Research Centre, who stressed that an interim partnership should aim at REDD+ compliance that is efficient and ensures meaningful participation. Nepstad referred to the example that Brazil’s climate change plan is incompatible with its agricultural agenda.
In March one year ago the UN-REDD programme launched its initial REDD readiness process in nine pilot countries. By the end of the year a total of US$24 million had been approved by the policy board to speedily prepare national REDD+ strategies.
Of three pilot countries in South America, Paraguay continues to develop its national REDD programme, Panama was approved US$5.3 million in funding in October and Bolivia was last week approved US$4.7 million.
There is an increasing demand for UN-REDD worldwide as the programme received formal requests from Costa Rica, Mexico, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, the Solomon Islands and Sudan. UN-REDD has so far granted observer status to every country which has formally applied to the programme.
UN-REDD sought to safeguard the programme’s development by making contributions in three key areas:
• Measurement, reporting and verification (MRV)
A notable UN contribution was a Memorandum of Understanding signed in December between FAO and Brazil’s space agency INPE for the joint development of a land monitoring system.
• Ensuring the engagement of Indigenous Peoples and Civil Society in REDD+ projects
UN-REDD developed an operational guidance: “Engagement of Indigenous Peoples and other Forest Dependent Communities.” http://bit.ly/bX9qde
• Examining the multiple uses and benefits of forests
A technical paper, “Multiple Benefits – Issues and Options for REDD” was released at the UN Policy Board meeting in June. http://bit.ly/dBAdg5
The O Eco Association was founded in 2004 by two well known journalists and a respected political scientist in Brazil. Journalists Marcos Sá Correa and Kiko Brito were for many years editors of one of the most important newspapers in the country, Jornal do Brasil. Scholar Sérgio Abranches was already known for his classes at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro and his compelling articles in large circulation magazines. The idea behind creating a non governmental organization was to put together a team of experts to write on environmental issues.The Association has set as its main aim to create a network of young journalists all over Brazil with enough skills to combine into unique coverage of environmental issues.
The effort of joining experienced scholars and young journalists has also given origin to the main project of the Association, the environmental news website O Eco (www.oeco.com.br). This project was only possible due to donations from important institutions such as the Avina Foundation and The Hewlett Foundation.
During the last five years, the website has grown into one of the most celebrated environmental news services in Brazil. O Eco was the first media outlet in the country to offer in-depth coverage of issues such as corruption on management of forest resources, monitoring deforestation in the Amazon and the impacts of climate change on biodiversity. Surveys have shown that the news provided by O Eco influences decision makers. For example, a questionnaire carried out in 2006 showed that, at that point, roughly 60% of frequent users were directly or indirectly involved with jobs in the environmental sector.
In 2009, the O Eco Association has decided to innovate once again in creating new projects which will strengthen our capacity of dealing with issues in the whole Latin American continent, including the translation of the website content to English and Spanish.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that O Eco has won important prizes domestically and internationally due to the quality and commitment with environmental information. In 2006, we received a mention of honour from the Interamerican Press Society (IPS) and in 2008, the website's project The Route Of Smoke (http://www.trajetoriadafumaca.com.br/ ) won a special grant from Avina Foundation for journalistic investigation. More recently this very same project won the highest prize of the Earth Journalism Awards, which was celebration at the UN Climate Change Conference, in Copenhagen December 2009.
Between 2003 and 2005, the Brazilian government created the unprecedented expanse of 600,000 km² of new protected areas. The World Bank estimates that 3.6 million square kilometers of tropical forests worldwide are designated asIndigenousLands and Protected Areas (ILPAs).These areas, as large as Argentina and Chile combined, amount to more than a quarter of the world’s tropical forest resources.
As a REDD framework is negotiated, it is important to recognise ILPAs as a cheap, easy and effective way governments can protect forests and local livelihoods. Establishing and protecting a network of ILPAs would cost an estimated 9-13% of the capital that could be mobilized annually by international REDD frameworks. On a national level, expenses would also be avoided because of pre-existing infrastructures such as governmental protected areas departments and indigenous people’s agencies.
Simulating future deforestation rates, a report published last week showed how ILPAs established between 2003-2007 could prevent 272,000km² deforestation between now and 2050, equal to 3.3 +-1.1 GtC, more than 1/3 of the world's annual CO2e emissions.
While forming barriers against frontier expansion, incorporating ILPAs in REDD also ensures that indigenous peoples are fully represented and can benefit from being part of the decision-making process.
