An essay on UN- REDD+ Programme 2011-2015 Strategy

Maryam S. Abbasi

E.mail: maryamshabbir08@gmail.com

● Concept of REDD+

REDD+ is, as mentioned in the shared document, is Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and

Forest Degradation. This is a tool or effort to provide incentive to local communities of

developing countries to reduce carbon emissions. REDD+ develop strategies to lower carbon

emissions and adopt sustainable methods which can be beneficial to both local communities

and local stakeholders. Since local communities are very close to forests so they are more

vulnerable to any policy of REDD+. Policies are developed by Policy Board and different

institutes including UN-REDD+ and World Bank provides incentives to developing countries.

This was initiated in 2008. Nine pilot countries had quick start with REDD+ including Congo,

Tanzania, Zambia, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Viet Nam, Bolivia, Panama and Paraguay. UN-

REDD+ programme developed strategies for developing countries to help reduce carbon

emissions. REDD+ donor’s institutes focus on land tenures and land ownership of local

communities. It emphasizes on the dialogue with local communities and local stakeholders at

national and international level. Since these communities are directly dependent on forests so

they should be involved in policy making which should also benefit them as well as

environment. It is initially five years plan from 2011-2015 and it aims to review its progress

annually.

● Relationship of REDD+ with concept of Property Rights

REDD+ programme aim to provide incentives to local communities, under UN-REDD+

programme, dependent on forest land use. These incentives are in terms of their capacity

building and to provide them with alternative land. Main objective of UN REDD+, in relation

with property right, is to make policies and involve indigenous people in the process of policy

making to reduce carbon emissions of developing countries from 2011-2015.

Since local communities have direct contact/relation with forests which they use for their

livelihoods and earning purposes. In any decision making process they can play a vital role as

they might be vulnerable in case of non-suitable REDD+ policies.

According to UN REDD+ land rights to local communities, stakeholders dependent on forests

and other people dependent on these must be provided according to UN Declaration of the

Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) approach. According to given document, article 19 of

UNDRIP is best suitable for providing incentives to forest dependent communities and to

ensure their participation at national and international level.

“Article 19 says that states shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous

Peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free,

prior, and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative

measures that may affect them.”

Basically REDD+ relation with property rights is quite complicated as it’s very uncertain to

explain that who has carbon rights and who doesn’t. It’s quite challenging for REDD+ policy

making board to ensure for the distribution of incentives. For the distribution of incentives and

payments high influence agencies can cause monopoly where land tenures and land rights are

weak. REDD+ requires seeing all aspects of governance and forest laws enforcements in addition

to land tenure. Only land tenure cannot be efficient but land ownership can ensure, somehow,

REDD+ benefits.

When a local community is provided with property rights he takes care of its belonging and uses

it with great care. In case of forests if REDD+ provides with property rights, it will reduce

carbon emissions as land owner will use it sustainably. Making public resource to private makes

its working efficient.

● The relationship between REDD+ and non-market valuation of ecological services

Since ecological services are natural resources which are also called common pool resources.

REDD+ deals with reduction in carbon emissions from developing countries through reduction

in deforestation and degradation. Since there are many sources which contributes to increase

carbon emissions apart from forest degradation and deforestation but REDD+ is only concerned

with carbon from forests of developing countries. But vision of UN-REDD+ is broader in its

mission in comparison to REDD+.

When resources are common then it leads to characteristic of jointness in terms of its use.

Everyone can come and use it according to his/her needs and a resource can be depleted and

contribute to environmental degradation, if it is over used. When this is situation, we need to

analyze cost and benefit of any environmental services to make its use sustainable.

When ownership is ensured under REDD+ then it’s quite easy to take steps for capacity building

of local communities to use natural resources as “market”. Local communities and stakeholders

can be trained to use forests in such a way that lead to green economy and conservation of

forests. Therefore REDD+ provides such policies which contributes to green economy and

sustainable development. Thus, pricing of any natural resource can benefit local communities

and reduces global warming. If REDD+ strategy of green economy is properly implemented then

it can also alleviate poverty.

REDD+ funds for ES (Environmental Services) are provided to governments of developing

countries. This is government responsibility to provide fund for carbon markets and adopt such

policies which should be sustainable in nature for the usage of natural resources.

In my opinion, Government should start form Tehsil level to develop strategies for carbon

markets. Then it should also involve district and province as local communities living there can

better tell their conditions and providing fund for green economy will also help them to

overcome poverty. If policies are not in favor of forest dependent communities they will be

vulnerable in terms of its impacts. REDD+ cell and donor agencies must also directly coordinate

with local communities to keep check on government that whether they are using funds at right

place or not. (See cyclic figure below)

Two Way- Cyclic Strategy

Forests Reservoirs Government

Services /incentives REDD+ Cell Donor

Community reservations Policy and Strategy