Lessons Learned on Co-benefits
and Safeguards in the UN-REDD
Programme
Timothy Boyle, UN-REDD Regional Coordinator,
UNDP Regional Centre for Asia/Pacific, Bangkok
Co-benefits in REDD+
 All benefits arising from forest land that are not related to
carbon or climate mitigation/adaptation
 Includes, for example, economic benefits from
timber/non-timber products; regulation of hydrological
processes; biodiversity conservation; soil conservation;
aesthetic values, etc.
Spatial analysis of multiple
benefits
Spatial analyses and mapping of multiple benefits, carbon
stock densities and other parameters can provide key
information to support planning and decision-making on
REDD+ at national and subnational scales.
Combined with economic parameters such as opportunity
costs, spatial analysis would also assist in identifying “low
hanging fruits.”
Exploring multiple benefits in
Cambodia
More than 3/4 of
the area that is
high in carbon
and an Important
Bird Area is either
inside protected
areas or in
Protection
Forests.
Exploring multiple benefits in
Cambodia
15% of the land
that is high in
carbon and an
Important Bird
Area is inside
forest
concessions.
Exploring multiple benefits in
Cambodia
The amount of
carbon within 5
kilometres of
forest cover loss
represents 66%
of Cambodia’s
total carbon
stock.
Exploring multiple benefits in
Cambodia
Almost 15 % of
the area of
Economic Land
Concessions
hold mediumhigh to high
carbon stocks.
Safeguards in REDD+
REDD+ can create new risks and opportunities for values of forests other
than carbon. Safeguards were agreed at UNFCCC COP 16 in Cancun to
address this issue.
Parties have agreed to “promote and support” these safeguards and to
provide information on how the safeguards are “addressed and respected”
throughout the implementation of REDD+ activities.
The UN-REDD Programme Social & Environmental Principles and Criteria
have been further developed in response to this decision.
Principles and Criteria for
Safeguards
The Principles and Criteria will:
• Provide the UN-REDD Programme with a framework to ensure that its
activities promote social & environmental benefits and reduce risks from
REDD+
• Support countries in operationalizing the Cancun agreement’s guidance
and safeguards for REDD+
• There are six Principles and 18 Criteria.
Principles
Principle 1 – Good governance: The program complies with
standards of good governance.
Principle 2 – Stakeholder livelihoods: The program carefully
assesses potential adverse impacts on stakeholders’ longterm livelihoods and mitigates effects where appropriate.
Principle 3 – Policy coherence: The program contributes to a
low-carbon, climate-resilient and environmentally sound
development policy, consistent with commitments under
international conventions and agreements.
Principles
Principle 4 – Protect and conserve natural forest: The
program protects natural forest from degradation or
conversion to other land uses, including plantation forest.
Principle 5 – Maintain and enhance multiple functions of
forest: The program increases benefits delivered through
ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation.
Principle 6 – Minimize indirect adverse impacts on
ecosystem services and biodiversity.
Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria
Principle 1
Democratic governance: The program complies with standards of
democratic governance
Criterion 1 – Ensure the integrity of fiduciary and fund management
systems
Criterion 2 – Implement activities in a transparent and accountable manner
Criterion 3 – Ensure broad stakeholder participation
Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria
Principle 2
Principle 2 – Stakeholder livelihoods: The program carefully assesses
potential adverse impacts on stakeholders’ long-term livelihoods and
mitigates effects where appropriate
Criterion 4 – Promote gender equality
Criterion 5 – Avoid involuntary resettlement
Criterion 6 – Respect traditional knowledge
Criterion 7 – Develop equitable benefit distribution systems
Relationship with UNFCCC LCA
decision
Principle
Relevant section of Cancun Agreement, Annex I
Principle 1 – Democratic
governance
2(b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into account national
legislation and sovereignty
2(d) The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular, indigenous peoples
and local communities (…)
Principle 2 – Stakeholder
livelihoods
2(c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities,
by taking into account relevant international obligations, national circumstances and laws, and
noting that the General Assembly has adopted the UNDRIP
Principle 3 – Policy coherence
2(a) Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and
relevant international conventions and agreements
2(f) Actions to address the risk of reversals
Principle 4 – Protect and
conserve natural forests
2(e) Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity, ensuring
that actions (…) are not used for the conversion of natural forests but are instead used to incentivize
the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services (…)
Principle 5 – Maintain and
enhance multiple functions of
forest
2(e) Actions (…) incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem
services (…)
2(e) Actions are (…) used to (…) enhance other social and environmental benefits
Principle 6 – Minimize adverse
impacts on ecosystem services
& biodiversity
2(e) Actions that are consistent with the conservation of (…) biological diversity (…)
2(g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions
Social Principles Risk Identification &
Mitigation Tool
Social risk identification and mitigation tool is designed to:
•
Support REDD+ countries to demonstrate how readiness activities meet social and
environmental safeguards under UNFCCC
•
Improve the overall social and environmental sustainability of readiness measures.
Based on a series of indicator questions that identify risks, organized under the UN-REDD
social principles and criteria. Where risks are identified, risk mitigation measures are
suggested.
Tool links to consultation process and risk-reporting mechanisms to allow program staff
and stakeholders to identify and track risks and mitigation measures.
Tool to undergo expert review and pilot application in interested UN-REDD countries.
Next steps
• Principles & Criteria and the Risk Tool have undergone initial
review, now wider review and comments are sought.
• Test and refine the Principles & Criteria and support their
operationalization.
• An interim report on the development of these Principles &
Criteria will be submitted to UN-REDD Policy Board in
October 2011
• The framework will be finalized after COP 17
UN-REDD Programming for anticorruption
• Implemented with UNDP Democratic Governance Group’s Programme
on Anti-Corruption for Development Effectiveness (PACDE)
• Joint programming on :
 Capacity development of civil society and other stakeholders
 Strengthening institutional capacity on anti-corruption (government
institutions, anti-corruption agencies, parliamentarians, judiciary, local
government authorities)
 Legal and judicial anti-corruption frameworks
 Awareness campaigns (started in 2010 with UNODC)
 Advisory and backstopping support on anti-corruption/governance
 Tools, methodologies and good practices on anti-corruption and REDD+
(Some) anti-corruption
safeguards for REDD+ financial
systems




Donor coordination
Transparent budget and procurement systems
Independent public funds
Appropriate budget oversight (parliamentarians, civil society, audit
agencies)
 Reconciliation of payments and revenues in audit systems,
disaggregated for more transparency
 Robust conflict resolution mechanisms
Building capacity of stakeholders
 Focus on indigenous peoples and other
forest-dependent communities
 Extensive and authentic civil society
engagement central to and prerequisite
for UN-REDD (at global and national
levels)
 Implementation of UN Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples & Free,
prior and informed consent are high
priority
 UN-REDD and FCPF harmonizing IP
Engagement Guidelines and
collaborating with FIP
Benefit distribution systems
Which institutional and legal frameworks?
Identifying beneficiaries
Number of hierarchical levels
Attribution of carbon/land rights
Shape and nature of benefits and resource allocations
Existence or absence of recourse and redress mechanisms
 Participatory decision-making, transparency and accountability
For more information
thomas.enters@unep.org (Regional center in Bangkok)
timothy.boyle@undp.org (Regional center in Bangkok)
petteri.vuorinen@fao.org (Regional center in Bangkok)
barney.dickson@unep-wcmc.org (UNEP-WCMC)
http://www.un-redd.org