Operationalizing safeguards in national REDD+ architectures remains a major challenge in most REDD+ countries, particularly in the area of benefit sharing. Effective, efficient and equitable outcomes of REDD+ require effective, efficient and equitable implementation of safeguards.
Results-based financing of REDD+ is conditional on the implementation of national Safeguard Information Systems (SIS) to address social and environmental criteria that go beyond carbon. The briefs in this packet discuss the challenges of operationalizing safeguards from various perspectives governance, benefit sharing, tenure, gender, biodiversity, technical monitoring and highlight opportunities and strategies for dealing with these challenges.
Vietnam is acknowledged to be REDD+ pioneer country, having adopted REDD+ in 2009. This paper is an updated version of Vietnam’s REDD+ Country Profile which was first published by CIFOR in 2012. Our findings show that forest cover has increased since 2012, but enhancing, or even maintaining, forest quality remains a challenge. Drivers of deforestation and degradation in Vietnam, including legal and illegal logging, conversion of forest for national development goals and commercial agriculture, weak law enforcement and weak governance, have persisted since 2012 up to 2017. However, with strong political commitment, the government has made significant progress in addressing major drivers, such as the expansion of hydropower plants and rubber plantations.Since 2012, Vietnam has also signed important international treaties and agreements on trade, such as Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) through the European Union’s (EU) Forest Law Enforcement. These new policies have enhanced the role of the forestry sector within the overall national economy and provided a strong legal framework and incentives for forestuser groups and government agencies to take part in forest protection and development. Nevertheless, new market rules and international trade patterns also pose significant challenges for Vietnam, where the domestic forestry sector is characterized by state-owned companies and a large number of domestic firms that struggle to comply with these new rules.The climate change policies, national REDD+ strategy and REDD+ institutional setting has been refined and revised over time. However, uncertain and complex international requirements on REDD+ and limited funding have weakened the government’s interest in and political commitment to REDD+. REDD+ policies in Vietnam have shown significant progress in terms of its monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems, forest reference emission levels (FREL), and performance-based and benefit-sharing mechanisms by taking into account lessons learnt from its national Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) Scheme. Evidence also shows increasing efforts of government and international communities to ground forestry policies in a participatory decision-making processes and the progress on developing safeguarding policies in Vietnam between 2012 and 2017 affirms the government’s interest in pursuing an equitable REDD+ implementation. Policy documents have fully recognized the need to give civil society organizations (CSOs) and ethnic groups political space and include them in decision making. Yet, participation remains token. Government provision for tenure security and carbon rights for local households are still being developed, with little progress since 2012.The effectiveness of REDD+ policies in addressing drivers of deforestation and degradation has not be proven, even though the revised NRAP has recently been approved. However, the fact that drivers of deforestation and degradation are outside of the forestry sector and have a strong link to national economic development goals points to an uneasy pathway for REDD+. The business case for REDD+ in Vietnam has not been proven, due to an uncertain carbon market, increasing requirements from donors and developed countries, and high transaction and implementation costs. Current efforts toward 3Es outcomes of REDD+ could be enhanced by stronger political commitment to addressing the drivers of deforestation from all sectors, broader changes in policy framework that create both incentives and disincentives for avoiding deforestation and degradation, cross-sectoral collaboration, and committed funding from both the government and developed countries.
Constructive critique. This book provides a critical, evidence-based analysis of REDD+ implementation so far, without losing sight of the urgent need to reduce forest-based emissions to prevent catastrophic climate change. REDD+ as envisioned
REDD+ (Reducing Emissions of greenhouse gases from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) is an important tool under the UNFCCC for incentivizing developing countries to adopt and scale up climate mitigation actions in the forest sector and for capturing and channeling the financial resources to do so. This Handbook eloquently examines the methodological guidance and emerging governance arrangements for REDD+, analysing how and to what extent it is embedded in the international legal framework. Organized coherently into five parts, contributions from legal experts, international relations scholars, climate change negotiators and activists explore the history and design of REDD+ in the UN climate regime, as well as linkages between REDD+ and other international agreements. The book also considers global governance for REDD+, its financial dimensions including markets and investment and future developments and legal challenges. Detailed analysis from a range of angles illustrates the interplay of international norms and institutions and maps out a legal research agenda for identifying best practice solutions. Shedding light on one of the most vibrant and fast-moving fields in international law, this comprehensive Handbook is essential reading for scholars of international law and international relations, policy makers in the area of climate change, REDD+ and land sector experts and NGOs.
REDD+ is one of the leading near-term options for global climate change mitigation. More than 300 subnational REDD+ initiatives have been launched across the tropics, responding to both the call for demonstration activities in the Bali Action Plan and the market for voluntary carbon offset credits.
How can REDD credits be included in a future global carbon market, and what are the impacts of inclusion? We analyze ten different scenarios through 2020, varying the global emission caps and the REDD rules. An inclusion of REDD credits without any adjustments in the global cap will lower carbon prices significantly and cause crowding out. The cap must move towards the 2 degrees climate target if REDD inclusion is to maintain high carbon prices and strong incentives for emissions reductions in other sectors. At the same time, reaching the 2 degree target without full REDD inclusion will increase global mitigation costs by more than 50%.
"This document builds on the brief paper presented at the 7th Meeting of the UN-REDD Programme Policy Board, held in Berlin, October 2011 (UNREDD/PB7/2011/13), which lays out ways to consider the REDD+ monitoring and information provision needs in the broader context of national development and environmental strategies, at the implementation level. The purpose of this document is to describe the elements in National Forest Monitoring Systems (NFMSs) as they relate to REDD+ under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and to describe the UN-REDD Programme approach to Monitoring and Measurement, Reporting and Verification (M & MRV) requirements."--Page v.
This working paper gives an overview of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), a method that enables systematic cross-case comparison of an intermediate number of case studies. It presents an overview of QCA and detailed descriptions of different versions of the method. Based on the experience applying QCA to CIFORs Global Comparative Study on REDD+, the paper shows how QCA can help produce parsimonious and stringent research results from a multitude of in-depth case studies developed by numerous researchers. QCA can be used as a structuring tool that allows researchers to share understanding and produce coherent data, as well as a tool for making inferences usable for policy advice. REDD+ is still a young policy domain, and it is a very dynamic one. Currently, the benefits of QCA result mainly from the fact that it helps researchers to organize the evidence generated. However, with further and more differentiated case knowledge, and more countries achieving desired outcomes, QCA has the potential to deliver robust analysis that allows the provision of information, guidance and recommendations to ensure carbon-effective, cost-efficient and equitable REDD+ policy design and implementation