Redd+

REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from deforestation and forest degradation)

Shimpei Wakiyama

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

1992: UNFCCC established

1988: IPCC established

2008: KP 1st commitment period begins

2012: KP 1st commitment period ends

1997: Kyoto Protocol adopted

2005:COP11 Kyoto entered into force; REDD Introduced

2001: Marrakesh Accords signed

1994: UNFCCC enter into force

2007: COP13

Bali Roadmap

Climate Policy Timeline

20122007

2010: COP 16

Cancun Agreements

出典；UNREDD

CDMJIETREDD+etc

・森林面積の年間あたりの増減 (1990年－ 2005年 )

- 10 - 8 - 6 - 4 - 2 0 2

アフリカ

アジア

ヨーロッパ

北中米

オセアニア

南米

世界計

00- '0590- '00

（出典）　 FAO　世界森林資源評価２００５

The World Forestry Area is 4 Billion Hector, which is one-thirds of Earth.

12.9 million ha/year reduction (The average between 2000-

2005)The reducing rate in tropical

forestry areas is so huge.

The World Forestry Area is 4 Billion Hector, which is one-thirds of Earth.

12.9 million ha/year reduction (The average between 2000-

2005)The reducing rate in tropical

forestry areas is so huge.

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) is an effort to

create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for

developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon

paths to sustainable development.

“REDD+” goes beyond deforestation and forest degradation, and includes the role of conservation,

sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks.

1. This programme is related to a lot of issues; governance, the structure of economic and society, the rights of indigenous people, biodiversity protection and so on.

2. Both developed and developing countries can commit to the program. The basic function of REDD+ is to give financial incentives to a developing country, which is aiming to protect its own forestry lands. On the other hand,

3. Though REDD+ is one of the most effective mitigation ways to use the ability to absorb carbon dioxide of tropical forestry, this method needs to be used for medium and long term.

4. It needs to overcome the difficulty in the fields of technology and methodology.

What is the difference between current forest projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the planned REDD-plus mechanism?

CDM

REDD+

Afforestation and Reforestation

Reduction of carbon emission

Conservation of forest

Enhancement of carbon stock capacity

• DeforestationDeforestation, as defined by the Marrakech Accords, is the direct human-induced conversion of forested land to non-forested land. A forest is defined as a minimum area of land of 0.05-1 hectares with tree crown cover (or equivalent stocking level) of more than 10-30 percent with trees with the potential to reach a minimum height of 2-5 metres at maturity in situ. Actual definitions can vary from country to country as the Kyoto Protocol permits countries to specify the precise definition within these parameters to be used for national accounting of emissions. In contrast, deforestation as defined by the FAO is "the conversion of forest to another land use or the long-term reduction of the tree canopy cover below the minimum 10 percent threshold."

• DegradationA definition for forest degradation has not yet been agreed upon. Forest degradation is the depletion of forest to tree crown cover at a level above 10 percent, however beyond this general statement, the IPCC has not provided a specific definition.

• AfforestationAfforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of land that has not been forested for a period of at least50 years to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources.

• ReforestationReforestation is the direct human-induced conversion of non-forested land to forested land through planting, seeding and/or the human-induced promotion of natural seed sources, on land that was forested but that has been converted to non-forested land. For the first commitment period, reforestation activities will be limited to reforestation occurring on those lands that did not contain forest on 31 December 1989.

1. ScopeScope refers to the activities that are considered to reduce the emissions under REDD

2. Reference LevelReference Level defines the reference period and scale against which the activities within scope are measured.

3. FinancingThe sources of financing

4. DistributionTo make the countries motivated to act under REDD+, how to distribute the financial incentives to them is very important.

Activities:1. Reducing emissions from deforestation (RED)2. Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) 3. Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+).

Carbon pools (see Figure 3):1.Above ground biomass2. below ground biomass 3. soil carbon and / or all terrestrial carbon.

Reference period: 1.Historical baseline 2.Current baseline3.Projected baseline

Reference levels define the business as usual scenario over a predefined scale and can therefore be used to determine the additionality of a given activity. Although the choice of reference level greatly impacts the types of country that generate ERs it need not necessarily influence which countries benefit from those ERs. The distribution or allocation of benefits to actors other than those generating the reductions is discussed in the distribution module. Reference levels, however, are often conflated with an adjustment factor or a negotiable element to account for differing country circumstances.It is worth noting that the science of forestry carbon accounting, and moreover the assessment of business as usual practices within forests is still imprecise and as such both historic and projected baselines have a large element of uncertainty. Much work has been done and continues to be done, however, to improve technical and methodological know-how in this area. Global Observation of Forest and Land Cover Dynamics (GOFC-GOLD) and the IPCC are recognised within the intergovernmental and scientific communities as sources of high quality scientific knowledge that is increasing certainty in the establishment of reference levels and monitoring methods.

The choice of how to distribute benefits has the potential to greatly influence the impact across countries (see Box 1). Emissions; Some proposals, for equity reasons or to address socioeconomic factors, have chosen a distribution mechanism which allocates funds to historically low emitters who may emit at some point into the future. Carbon Stocks; Other proposals, to avoid international leakage, have suggested that a proportion of funds generated through REDD should be distributed to countries with currently low rates of deforestation but high forest cover. The argument goes that if these countries are not rewarded to protect their current stocks there will be a perverse incentive to chop down their forests for more profitable ventures. The choice of methodology for distributing benefits can be scientific or negotiated.

A voluntary fund could operate at the national (i.e. uni- or multilateral) or international scale. Official Development Assistance (ODA) is an example of a funding mechanism. In general, however, non-Annex I Parties call for new and additional contributions from developed countries. It is important to note that credits purchased through a fund cannot be used for compliance in carbon markets. In a market-based mechanism REDD credits would be traded alongside existing certified emissions reductions (CERs), and could be used by companies to meet emissions targets in their national cap-andtrade systems. A market-linked mechanism generates finances through either an auction process, or by establishing a dual-market in which REDD credits are linked to but are not fungible with existing CERs. Norway’s proposal to auction Assigned Amount Units (AAUs), the Center for Clean Air Policy’s “Dual Markets” approach and Greenpeace’s TDERM are all examples of market-linked mechanisms.Each of these approaches has its strengths and weaknesses, however a growing consensus is emerging that a combination of these approaches will be needed to match the different stages of development and differing needs of tropical rainforest nations.

Phased Approach

Phased Approach of ＲＥＤＤ+Phased Approach of ＲＥＤＤ+

○資金メカニズムの議論は収束していないが、第１・第２フェーズにおいて公的資金中心の国家計画・制度構築、能力育成等を行い、第３フェーズは REDD+の取組の成果に応じた経済的インセンティブを付与し、民間主体の資金調達を原則とすることを想定。

取組

資金

課題

・国家戦略、行動計画、政策の策定・能力育成、技術協力、国内制度の　整備

・公的資金を通じた二国間支援・国際機関（ FCPF,UN-REDD）を 通じた支援・基金（コンゴ盆地基金、アマゾン　基金等）を通じた支援

・ REDD+の取組の前提となる基礎的な　環境整備。

・国家戦略、行動計画、政策の実施・パイロットプロジェクトの実施・モニタリングシステムの整備

・公的資金を通じた二国間支援・公的資金と民間資金の共用・国際機関（ FCPF, FIP)を通じた支 援

・ MRV実施のための参照レベル、排　出量算定方法の確立。・パイロットプロジェクト実施を通　　じ、第３フェーズに移行する上で　　課題を検証。

・結果に基づく (result-based)活動の　　実施

・民間資金による投資

・参照レベルからの削減について MRVを　確保し、 REDD+の取組を削減目標達成　にカウント（炭素市場に組み込むこ　とを含む）。・民間資金中心のメカニズムに移行。

REDD+の実施は、各国が多様な国内状況に応じ、段階的に取組を進めること（フェーズド・アプローチ）で概ねコンセンサスが存在 (AWG-LCA交渉テキスト FCCC/AWGLCA/2010/14, para.8)

16

1. ScopeDeforestation, Degradation, Enhancement

2. Reference LevelHistorical, Historical Adjusted, Projected

3. FinancingCarbon Market, Market-linked, Voluntary Fund, Phased Approach

4. DistributionRedistribution Mechanism, Additional Mechanism

Scope

REFERENCE LEVEL

REFERENCE LEVEL

DISTRIBUTION

FINANCING

Historical Baseline

Carbon Stock

Cancun AccordScope

Cancun Accord71 (b) A national forest reference emission level and/or forest reference level or, if appropriate, as an interim measure, subnational forest reference emission levels and/or forest reference levels, in accordance with national circumstances, and with provisions contained in decision 4/CP.15, and with any further elaboration of those provisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties;

Sub-National

National

Cancun Accord

77. Requests the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention to explore financing options for the full implementation of the results-based actions referred to in paragraph 73 above, and to report on progress made, including any recommendations for draft decisions on this matter, to the Conference of the Parties at its seventeenth session;

Cancun Accord

Annex 2

The Ongoing ProjectsUN-REDD

The UN-REDD Programme assists developing countries to prepare and implement national REDD+ strategies. Designed collaboratively by a broad range of stakeholders, national UN-REDD Programmes are informed by the technical expertise of FAO, UNDP and UNEP. Priority is given to developing sustainable national approaches that promote equitable outcomes and ensure that countries use reliable methodologies to assess emission reductions.

9 projects

In Africa: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Tanzania and ZambiaIn Asia and the Pacific: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and Viet NamIn Latin America and the Caribbean: Bolivia, Panama and Paraguay

The Ongoing Projects• Total Budget: 5.6 million USD

Timeframe: October 2009 – June 2012

Partner: Indonesian Ministry of Forestr

Indonesia hosts the third largest tropical rainforest in the world, with forests covering approximately 70 per cent of the country. The UN-REDD National Programme aims to facilitate the development of a REDD+ architecture in Indonesia that will allow a fair, equitable and transparent REDD+ implementation, significantly contributing to a sustainable reduction in forest-related GHGs. In March 2009, US$5.6 million was approved by the UN-REDD Programme Policy Board for the Indonesia National Programme.In March 2010, funds were released from the MPTF, marking the start of the Programme’s inception and implementation phase.

FINANCING

Monitoring, reporting and verification

Reference Levels

Reference

• The Little REDD Book• UN-REDD Programme• UNFCCC