TZ-REDD Newsletter
TZ-REDD Newsletter
About the newsletter
The TZ-REDD quarterly newsletter is a part of the TFCG/MJUMITA project funded by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway. The newsletters aim to keep practitioners, donors, universities and CSOs up-to-date about REDD projects in Tanzania, upcoming events, and REDD developments around the world.
Click here to download the PDF version of the newsletter.
Issue No. 2, August 2010
Contents:
1. News from the Secretariat of the REDD Task Force, Professor Yanda
2. Katoomba Incubator Project Clinic in Dar es Salaam
3. Understanding the Differences between General Lands and Village Lands
1. In the ‘REDD’light: Raja Jarrah from CARE International
2. Notes from the Field
III. REDD Highlights from Abroad
1. REDD at Bonn II
2. The Interim REDD+ Partnership
1. News from the Secretariat of the REDD Task Force, Professor Yanda:
Recently, Professor Yanda, Secretariat to the Tanzanian REDD Task Force and Director of the Institute of Resource Assessment at the University of Dar es Salaam, shared with TZ-REDD some current developments of the REDD Task Force.
The REDD Task Force is aiming to have a zero version of the National REDD Strategy completed in September. “The strategy will be an elaboration of what is in the framework,” Yanda explains, “but it will provide more concrete guidance for implementing REDD in Tanzania.” However, he says, “the framework is not a bible,” which is why the Task Force has commissioned various studies to investigate stakeholder opinions and options for REDD implementation. For example, there are studies that are looking into the possible legal and institutional arrangements for REDD and the idea of a carbon Trust Fund approach that is outlined in the framework.
Upon completion of the Strategy, Yanda says the Task Force will seek public consultations, through workshops, strategy sessions and open invitations for comments and feedback. Specifically, the Task Force intends to share the Strategy with NGO’s and the private sector. Yanda is cautious to point out, “even if we get a lot of input, it will not be final as it has to go through the government system, which can be quite a process.” He also encourages better coordination between CSOs and NGOs, which he believes have yet to demonstrate an, “organized undertaking of these issues.”
One area of interest for many involved on the implementation side of REDD in Tanzania, is whether the Strategy will adopt a national or ‘nested’ approach to REDD payments. Concern over this is due to the framework’s design of a national approach where “all REDD funds will be received by the national REDD scheme and channeled down to different stakeholders responsible for the emission reductions.” Experience in Tanzania has shown that centralizing funding mechanisms tend to result in unfair benefit sharing. “I would go for the nested approach,” Yanda says, but he also believes that it will be necessary to wait to see what happens at the international level. “We have to link to what they are doing as well,” he explains.
On the issue of safeguards Yanda is quite specific, “in order for REDD to be successful it has to have social, environmental and economic benefits.” REDD should not create more difficulties for people, which is why implementing safeguards is so important. In fact, Tanzania has an opportunity to become leaders on developing and implementing safeguards. The country has been invited to be one of seven countries to pilot the newly developed REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES), an initiative spearheaded by Climate Community & Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) and CARE International. Participating in this initiative would help to ensure that REDD implementation considers more than just carbon, and that there are social, environmental and economic benefits incentivising the process country-wide.
2. Katoomba Incubator Project Clinic in Dar es Salaam
Contributed by Sara Namirembe, Katoomba Coordinator of East & Southern Africa
The Katoomba Incubator Project Clinic was held on June 9-11, 2010 in Dar es Salaam, to facilitate the interface between leading experts in various aspects of carbon project development and implementers of REDD project initiatives. The clinic aimed at providing technical advisory support to projects on application of approved methodologies and ensuring that the experience generated from pilots on the ground fits in the national and global contexts. The clinic also sought to strengthen communication and cross learning among projects in the region and between projects and other support institutions including government, project developers and donor agencies.
It targeted the four REDD projects in the region with which the Katoomba Incubator was already interacting. These were, Tanzania Forest Conservation Group, Jane Goodall Institute Tanzania, Jane Goodall Institute Uganda and National Environment Management Authority, Uganda. Other participants included Tanzania government officials, the Royal Norwegian Embassy which is supporting REDD in Tanzania, Clinton Climate Initiatives, which is developing a REDD project in Liwale District and UNDP GEF, which supports the Katoomba Incubator. In total, there were 25 participants.
The first day of the Clinic was a public session aimed at presenting the broader global and national contexts within which REDD projects operate. This was followed by two days of in-depth project-working sessions divided into the following themes:
· Theme 1. Project design: Assessing drivers and developing REDD activities
· Theme 2. Methodological issues: Baselines and leakage
· Theme 3. Technical issues: Monitoring and carbon stock assessment – IPCC Guidance
· Theme 4. Social impacts and benefit sharing
After the three-day workshop, specific in-depth discussions were conducted in separate sessions with each of the projects. These face-to-face discussions between the experts and the project teams joint identification of solutions to specific challenges raised by projects supplemented by key early project-design advice from experts. Resources available were identified and next steps in implementing project activities were structured, highlighting potential roles for the Katoomba Incubator.
3. Understanding the Differences between General Lands and Village Lands
Contributed by Theron Morgan-Brown, MJUMITA
The National REDD Framework released in August, 2009, states that all forests outside of national parks, government forest reserves, and officially declared village forest reserves, are on general land and that this constitutes 49% of Tanzania's remaining forests. The framework also states that “The authority to demarcate and register villages lies with the Commissioner for Land,” and, “Most of the villages are not yet registered and their lands may be categorized as General Lands.” However, these statements are not consistent with the Land and Village Land Acts of 1999, or with the Ministry of Lands interpretation of these acts. This section attempts to provide for a better understanding of the legal definitions of General Land and Village Land in Tanzania. In the context of REDD, this issue matters to the extent that communities can expect to benefit from carbon revenues generated as a result of reduced deforestation on their land.
The REDD framework states that unreserved forests on village land are general lands. This is based on two common misconceptions about Village Land in Tanzania. It is important to correct these misconceptions because the interpretation presented by the REDD framework could be used as a justification to channel REDD revenues away from the communities on whose land deforestation is being reduced, or even possibly to transfer these forests areas from villages to investors. If the management right for these forests is seen as belonging to the national government, there is less guarantee that villagers will benefit from REDD. Furthermore, there are conceptual problems related to REDD and approaches to reducing deforestation in Tanzania that arise if all unreserved forests on village lands are classified as general lands.
First, the framework correctly cites the Land Act of 1999 when it says that General Lands include unoccupied and unused Village Lands. However, the authors then make an assumption that all forest land on Village Land (outside of village forest reserves) is unoccupied and unused, which leads them to the conclusion that 100% of unreserved forests (49% of all forests) in Tanzania are on General Land, which under the Forest Act of 2002 would make the government the managers of these forests.
The key issue here is to define ‘use’. A definition of use is provided by the Village Land Act, which describes three categories of village land based on their occupation and use. These definitions state that the legitimate categories of village land use include:
• communal land which is not occupied or used by any one individual within the community, but which is communally used (which includes forests used for sustainable forest resource extraction or grazing),
• reserved land which is set aside by a village for future use (which often includes forest areas).
The Village Land Act also recognizes long-term fallows (which are common in traditional Tanzanian agriculture and which may lead to reforestation) as a legitimate land use. Additionally, the Village Land Act empowers the village council as the managers of all village land, and specifically mentions their management of natural resources. Lastly, the Forest Act also states that unreserved forests on village land can be managed by village councils. Taken together, these statements suggest that the use of natural resources on village land is a legitimate use of village land. Thus, the chance of finding land without any legitimate use within the boundaries of a village is unlikely.
In the survey maps of Kilosa and Lindi Rural Districts, which both contain large areas of forest, there are no areas labeled as general land. According to the Ministry of Land's website, only 2% of Tanzania's land area is general land, 70% is village land and 28% is reserved land. There is no category of general land falling on village land (http://www.ardhi.go.tz/land-delivery-services.html).
The second misconception reflected in the REDD framework relates to the definition of village land. The framework incorrectly states, “the authority to demarcate villages lies with the Commissioner for Land”. However, under the Village Land Act, villages themselves are responsible for demarcating their boundaries (by agreeing on boundaries with their neighbors) and keeping a register of their lands. While the authority to issue Village Land certificates lies with the Commissioner for Land, under the Village Land Act, village land certificates are not required for the legal establishment of village land. The act lays out a wide variety of ways in which village land can come to existence. Most importantly, villages need only to agree on their mutual boundaries to legally establish village land. The experience of the TFCG/MJUMITA REDD pilot project has been that all the communities they work with in Kilosa and Lindi Rural Districts have established boundaries with neighboring communities.
Additionally, the belief that only a small portion of the country's villages have been surveyed as stated in the framework is erroneous. The Ministry of Lands has made substantial progress in surveying villages in the past decade and nearly all 10,000 villages have now been surveyed. Many villages that do not yet have land certificates have already been surveyed and have survey maps at the Ministry of Lands. For example, none of the villages in Lindi Rural or Kilosa Districts participating in the TFCG/MJUMITA REDD pilot project reported having Village Land certificates, but all of them have been surveyed.
Finally, a fundamental conceptual problem of defining parts of village land as general land is that deforestation can never occur on this type of general land, because by definition once a villager clears the land, it would no longer be general land as it is now used. In fact, the framework lists a large number of threats that exist in general lands (shifting cultivation, annual wild fires, harvesting of wood fuel, poles and timber, and heavy pressure for conversion to other competing land uses, such as agriculture, livestock grazing, settlements and industrial development). The majority of these threats are consistent with use by villagers. Thus, even if there are areas of forest on village land that are truly unused, these will not be eligible for REDD. Deforestation is synonymous with use. Deforestation as a result of human activities can only take place on land that is used and is therefore by definition Village Land.
Therefore, in order to avoid the land grabbing that the framework says the REDD policy must be designed to avoid and to design a REDD strategy that is more consistent with the drivers of deforestation on the ground, it may be advisable for future policy documents to avoid describing forest on village land as general land. Instead future policy documents could refer to these areas as unreserved forests on village land or some similar wording. For REDD policies to be effective in reducing deforestation in Tanzania, real benefits need to reach the communities whose livelihoods currently depend on forest clearance. A first step towards that is to recognize that most unreserved forest in Tanzania is on Village Land.
As REDD projects continue to gain momentum, their acquired knowledge will be important in shaping a national REDD strategy. We will learn from their experiences—successes and obstacles—and hope they will learn from, and with, others. The following are updates from the field:
1. In the ‘REDD’light: Raja Jarrah from CARE International
“My own personal goal is to see whether [REDD] can be done,” explains Raja Jarrah, REDD Technical Adviser for CARE International’s Hifadhi ya Misitu ya Asili (HIMA) project in Zanzibar. Jarrah, an agricultural economist by training, first encountered the concept of REDD while he was working with CARE in Brazil on the challenge of making carbon finance work for the poor. Since then he’s been involved in international advocacy on REDD, tracking the international negotiations at UNFCCC and supporting the work of the Accra Caucus. Recently, Raja shared with TZ-REDD some of his thoughts and opinions about REDD and about the CARE HIMA project.
On the CARE HIMA project…
“I think every REDD project is unique. What works in one place may not work in another—because of the nature of the forest, or of the culture, of the surrounding environment, or institutional framework…In HIMA’s case, some of the things that perhaps make us different [compared to other TZ pilot projects] are the coral rag forest; the Islamic culture; and the fact that we are working on an island (actually two, Unguja and Pemba).
The goal of the project is to generate carbon income that provides incentives for communities to conserve forests sustainably. This is to be achieved through promoting a pro-poor and gender-equitable approach to community forest management in Zanzibar. HIMA’s central concept is that community forest management is the best way to both conserve forests and enhance rural livelihoods. REDD is just another means to that end. Even if the REDD part doesn’t work, the real tests of HIMA’s success will be: Are there more trees? Are women better off?”
On effective funding mechanisms…
“Personally, I am very uncomfortable with the basic rationale of a market-based approach; i.e. that polluters can continue to pollute and pay someone else to absorb their carbon. Offsetting was supposed to be a temporary measure to get us all to adjust to our production systems and patterns of consumption and move towards a low-carbon economy. Instead it has become a permanent part of the climate change architecture, and a substitute of real emissions reductions.
Therefore, a fund-based approach is far better; but on a pragmatic level, one has to accept that this is not likely to happen, and market-based finance will be there whether we like it or not. So, the challenge is to try to make carbon markets work for the poor.”
On collaboration…
“Most of the projects have only started recently, and HIMA itself was only officially launched in June. We have not had much contact with the other REDD projects yet, and we would very much welcome this. I think once we have made some progress and start a dialogue between projects we will discover just how much we can learn from each other. It would be great to have an informal forum where project staff can talk frankly about the challenges they face, maybe as part of an event for exchanging experiences more formally.”
2. Notes from the Field:
African Wildlife Foundation: Carbon Accounting and Awareness Activities
The African Wildlife Foundation’s “Advancing REDD in the Kolo Hills Forests (ARKFor)” project has made a lot of progress over the past few months. Specifically, it has been working to address issues associated with key project outputs, such as “improved knowledge and scientific understanding of the target forests,” and “Enhanced understanding among villagers, local government, and civil society organizations in Kondoa District.”
AWF has identified the target forests, which cover approximately 18,000 ha. The carbon accounting forest type has been identified as Miombo woodlands, whereas bush lands, agricultural fields and underground/soil carbon will not be used to account for carbon. An initial carbon feasibility study was completed and indicative data of baseline carbon stock in the targeted forests established. The permanent sample plots for monitoring carbon in the long-term have been set. AWF also has began the task of developing the GIS based Land-Use and Land Cover (LULC) change analysis. It has carried out two initial steps for this analysis. So far, the overview of the situation is that, much of the deforestation in early years was in the lowland, but now deforestation is moving to the hills because most of forests in lowland have been cleared.
Another important output for AWF’s REDD project is to enhance understanding among villagers, local government, and civil society organizations in Kondoa District about REDD. So far, important REDD presentations were made during ARKFor’s inception workshop, which targeted leaders from the district to village levels. This was followed by a series of awareness and sensitization meetings in all of the 15 project villages. The project was well received and accepted in 11 villages.
Finally, another key project output, establishing 18,000 ha of forest land in Kondoa District under improved management by local government and community actors, has seen progress. Three government owned forests namely Salanga (8,336 ha), Isabe (4,249 ha) and Kome (4,046 ha) totaling 16,631 ha, have been earmarked for Joint Forest Management (JFM). Two community owned forests, namely Sauna (510 ha), and Mapinduzi (1,128 ha) totaling 1,638 total targeted forest area have been identified for participatory forest management (PFM).
Mpingo Conservation and Development Initiative (MCDI): Drivers of Deforestation Study:
Understanding the drivers of deforestation is essential for REDD project development in order to effectively combat leakage and to quantify accurate carbon reductions. Therefore, MCDI recently carried out a study to investigate the forest adjacent peoples’ various land-use activities that contribute to deforestation and forest degradation in Kilwa District. A social survey was conducted in a form of an informal discussion with focus groups in pre-selected villages. This primary research was coupled with an in-depth analysis of regional data and relevant reports.
Agriculture is the main socio-economic activity, 98% of all participants said they are engaged in agriculture production and agricultural related activities for food production and cash generation, such as charcoal production and timber trade. Ultimately, the study determined that the main threats to the forests come from population increases, improved accessibility to the district and forests, and the stimulation of socio-economic development. Generally, forest degradation in the district is rampant, dominated mostly by shifting agriculture, logging and fires. Shifting agriculture is the main cause of forest degradation, but the study also concludes that charcoal production could very quickly become one of the greatest threats as accessibility to Dar continues to improve.
TaTEDO: A Socio-economic Study in Shinyanga Region
Tanzania Traditional Energy Development and Environment Organization (TaTEDO), piloting a project on community-based REDD mechanisms for sustainable forest management in semi-arid areas, has carried out several activities over the last four months, including a socioeconomic and energy use survey. The survey was conducted in 11 target beneficiary villages and one control village in Shinyanga Region. The main objective of the study is to establish benchmark indicators against which achievements and impacts of the project will be measured at Ngitili (a traditional method of natural forest regeneration) and community levels.
Issues investigated include, household characteristics, economic activities, Land use (agriculture and food security, livestock), natural resource (forestry, agroforestry and Ngitilis), sustainable energy use, access to credit, gender issues, income and expenditure, governance and empowerment and access to water. Overall, the study found that the benefits derived from Ngitilis include decreased distances to sources of firewood, fodder for sale, and charcoal. Wood for fuel (firewood and charcoal for individual use and for sale) and wood for building, individual use and for sale were the main forest products used among respondents. Firewood and charcoal were mentioned by 79.2% of respondents as their main produce from Ngitilis. Additionally, 97.5% of respondents reported that firewood is their leading source of energy.
Income in the study areas mainly comes from agriculture, livestock and petty businesses. Agriculture (without livestock) and crop production combined with livestock keeping seemed to be the most dominant economic activities in the study area. Annual incomes from Ngitilis is not significant, with ten percent of survey participants reporting an earned income below 50,000 TShillings per year, and only two respondents reporting income of between 100,000 – 200,000. Annual incomes in both districts are quite significant for the average household, but were still found to be below the poverty line of a dollar a day.
TaTEDO is also undertaking an “Assessment of the existing Ngitili structures and management to explore options for REDD implementation,” and study results should be available by the end of July, 2010.
TFCG/MJUMITA: Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC):
The TFCG and MJUMITA REDD project is piloting a pro-poor approach to REDD. The project is working with 30 villages in Lindi and Kilosa Districts to demonstrate ways in which communities can participate in REDD in an effective, equitable and efficient way. An important principle that the project promotes is communities right to free, prior and informed consent. This principle is enshrined in the United National Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and is equally applicable in the context of communities rights with regard to REDD in Tanzania. Therefore, beginning in early June, TFCG and MJUMITA have been carrying out community meetings in each sub-village and village to ensure that all community members are informed about REDD and that they have an opportunity to discuss and debate the proposed project. These consultative meetings mark an important part of the process of gaining communities consent for REDD. The project team have been using a combination of approaches to include as many people as possible — flip chart presentations, performances by local artists, discussions, drummers, songs and dance. During the performances, songs and presentations, community members learn about and discuss climate change, community based forest management (CBFM), the impacts of deforestation and degradation, and payments for ecosystem services (PES). The purpose of these consultative meetings is not only to inform and generate dialogue, but also to entertain. TFCG and MJUMITA hope that by using entertaining means of communication it will increase overall participation, dialogue and understanding of REDD particularly amongst women and poorer households. In addition to engaging in dialogue with the communities, the project team have been carrying out a detailed stakeholder analysis in order to identify others who may affect or be affected by the implementation of REDD-related activities.
Wildlife Conservation Society: REDD Readiness in Southwest Tanzania
The most recent project to receive funding from the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, is the Wildlife Conservation Society’s (WCS) REDD Readiness in Southwest Tanzania project. The project will receive approximately $1,192,000 over the next four years to implement REDD activities on 52,680 ha of forestland in Southwest Tanzania, in Mbeya and Rukwa Regions. The main purpose of the project is to develop both the capacity and knowledge for Tanzania to participate actively and comprehensively in REDD activities.
The project emphasis will be placed in and around the threatened montane forests of Tanzania’s Southern Highlands, an area where WCS has years of experience working. The activities will include carrying out a rigorous baseline study and provide methods for estimating deforestation, carbon sequestration and emissions, as well as to develop participatory monitoring in the four most important southern forests. WCS plans to partner with Terra Global Capital (TGC) for certain aspects of carbon calculations and carbon marketing. The project will also implement economic incentives that will provide economic benefits to local communities, and environmental education and reforestation programs will address the drivers of local forest degradation. The project hopes to provide economic incentives to roughly 100,000 people.
III. REDD Highlights from Abroad
1. REDD at Bonn II
The Bonn II UNFCCC meeting was held in Bonn, Germany in early June. Following Copenhagen, there was much anticipation for Bonn II, especially in regards to REDD as many had hopes that Bonn II would iron out some of the unresolved issues left from the Copenhagen negotiations. Although there were discussions and focus on REDD at Bonn II, many issues remain unsolved, such as a national or sub-national approach, sources of funding, objectives of stopping deforestation, and Measuring Reporting and Verification (MRV) of safeguards.
The Ad hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA), which is tasked under the Bali Action Plan to investigate “Policy approaches and positive incentives on” REDD, held only a brief discussion on REDD at Bonn II. They made no changes to the text that the Chair had proposed prior to the meeting, but they did decide to leave the text, “promote and support” safeguards un-bracketed, which means it becomes a fixture in the text and it is not up for negotiation. However, no elaboration on safeguards was made. Another REDD discussion that took place under the LCA but that did not result in any resolutions, is the issue of funding mechanisms. Many of the Annex I countries are pushing for a market-based approach, where many developing countries are supporting a fund-based approach. Based on these discussions some experts believe that some sort of hybrid approach is the most likely to be adopted in the text.
One serious concern for many developing countries that arose during Bonn II was the issue of possibly converging REDD and Land Use, Land Use Change, and Foresty (LULUCF), which already exists under Kyoto. LULUCF only considers carbon and does not take into account biodiversity, communities, and other aspects that are incredibly important to implementing a fair and just REDD mechanism. This is seen as another attempt by Annex I countries to merge the two-track negotiating approach outlined in Kyoto and the Bali Action Plan to a one-track approach only.
According to a source who attended the Bonn meetings, Tanzania is still supporting the G77, which essentially means they are following China’s lead. Tanzania disagreed with the inclusion of REDD under LULCF, and on the issue of funding mechanisms, Tanzanian negotiators continue to advocate for a fund-based approach over a market-based approach.
Additional Reading:
Earth Change Climate Negotiations, Sumamry of the Bonn Climate Change Talk
2. The Interim REDD+ Partnership
Some key proponents of REDD are not letting the slow-moving UNFCCC process get in the way of REDD development and movement. Instead, what is known as the “REDD+ Partnership” is gearing up to act as an interim forum that will facilitate REDD developments and “fast-start” implementation until international negotiations catch up. The workings of the Partnership began with private government meetings in Paris in March, followed by a conference in Oslo where an official REDD+ Partnership document was adopted by 58 countries.
The REDD+ Partnership (a.k.a “Paris-Oslo Process”) has been highly criticized by civil society, NGOs and some developing countries for its lack of transparency and exclusivity. In April, a group of 40 NGOs released a statement on the Paris-Oslo process, asking for more transparency, participation and for “more time for genuine engagement with civil society and indigenous peoples’ organizations” as well as, assurance that a Partnership will “not undermine the UNFCCC negotiation process.”
The Norwegian government, host of the Oslo Climate and Forestry Conference where the REDD+ Partnership was adopted in May, responded to such criticisms by making Partnership documents available to public comment for two-weeks prior to the conference, expanding their civil society invitations, and making a public statement that the REDD+ Partnership was not intended to undermine or compete with UNFCCC processes.
The REDD+ Partnership, adopted May 27, 2010 by 58 countries, will draw upon “the knowledge and expertise of The Facility Management Team of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (World Bank) and the UN REDD Program Technical Secretariat,” which prior to the Oslo conference both UN REDD and FCPF had agreed to. The document outlines the principles of the partnership, which include: “support for developing countries’ REDD+ efforts;” “transparency around REDD+ financing, actions and results;” and “promote the safeguards provided by the AWG-LCA draft decision text on REDD+.” The document concludes with a statement that it will “promote inclusiveness through the participation of a representative group of stakeholders—including indigenous peoples and local communities.”
The signing of the Partnership marks the official start of the implementation work for the REDD+ Partnership. Additionally, the partnership plans to feed back into the UNFCCC negotiations at COP 16 in Cancun. Unfortunately, the most recent REDD+ Partnership meeting, which took place in Brasilia July 14-15, already does not seem to be guided by the Partnership principles agreed upon in the adopted text (mainly, that of inclusiveness). Civil Society received notice of the meeting on July 6, and was alerted that only 12 organizations total would be allowed to participate. The Climate Action Network International (a network of 500 NGOs), World Wildlife Fund, and a group of more than 39 organizations responded with letters, once again, criticizing the process and questioning it’s sincerity.
To date, Tanzania has not signed the REDD+ Partnership.
Additional Reading:
Civil Society Excluded from the Interim REDD Partnership Meeting in Brasilia
Men and women often have different roles with regard to forest resource management, yet current discussions on the social impacts of REDD+ is weak with respect to the gender dimension. Tanzania’s National REDD Task Force has posted a link to a great resource where you can learn more about gender and REDD.
2. “A Nested Approach to REDD”
Developing and implementing fair and effective financial mechanisms for REDD is challenging and highly contested. The Nature Conservancy and Baker & McKenzie recently published a paper advocating for a nested approach: “A Nested Approach to REDD: structuring effective and transparent incentive mechanisms for REDD+ Implementation at multiple scales.”
3. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) Publications on REDD
The costs of REDD: lessons from Amazonas
The Forests Dialogue (TFD) is a group of individuals from diverse interests and regions that are committed to the conservation and sustainable use of forests. The website offers great publications and other resources related to REDD.
5. Oryx Journal – Focus on REDD
The July issue of Oryx, the International Journal of Conservation, has a special focus on REDD. The issue includes articles such as, “Carbon, forests and the REDD paradox” and “Getting ready for REDD+ in Tanzania: a case study of progress and challenges.”