BY SIMON MAXWELL

WHY THE MANAGERS OF THE CLIMATE INVESTMENT FUNDS MUST CELEBRATE SUCCESS, WATCH THEIR BACKS AND RAISE THEIR SIGHTS

THE ROLE OF PARLIAMENTS IN REDD+BY CHRIS STEPHENS

OUTREACHPRODUCED DAILYCIF 2011 Partnership Forum Cape Town, South Africa• JUNE 24th, 2011

a multi-stakeholder magazine on climate change and sustainable development

The 2011 Climate Investment Funds Partnership Forum–

Simon Maxwell questions the Climate Investment Funds

Finance for climate resilience

The Role of Parliament in REDD+

Financing the Resilient City

The San adapting to climate impacts

Recognising children as essential stakeholders for

climate resilience and sustaina-ble development in the CIF

Profile:Bhawani Shanker Kusum

Fuel-Efficient Stoves Protect Women’s Health and Forests

Outreach is a multi-stakeholder Magazine which is published daily at the CIF 2011 Partnership Forum.The articles written are intended to reflect those of the authors alone or where indicated a coalition’s opinion. An individual’s article is the opinion of that author alone, and does not reflect the opinions of all stakeholders.

OUTREACH is produced by:

Contents OUTREACH

EDITORIAL TEAM

Co-EditorNicola Williams

Stakeholder Forum

Co-EditorSabrina Chesterman

DesignMichelle Schoon

Lighthouse Design

Thomas HarrissonStakeholder Forum

CONTRIBUTING WRITERS

Simon MaxwellExecutive Chair Climate

and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN)

Helena WrightYOUNGO

Chris StephensDirector of Forestry

and Ecosystems GLOBE

Richard Simpson ICLEI

Galefele P MaokengTOCADi Trust

Earth Child Institute

01

03

04

The AfDB, in collaboration with the CIF Administrative Unit, has worked hard planning the event, which will feature sessions on private sector engagement in mitigation and adaptation investments, scientific updates and guidance on prioritizing actions, climate modeling, and the development of local, clean energy manufacturing industries.

Climate change is a global challenge that requires a global response. The CIF Forum is an important opportunity to generate lessons and share experiences for all those working on these issues. The AfDB is proud to work alongside its sister multilateral development banks to help countries adapt to a changing climate and mitigate its risks. In Africa, by blending CIF financing with its own substantial co-financing and tailored financing instruments, the AfDB hopes to inspire investor confidence in the continent and generate even more funding for clean energy and climate compatible development.

This year’s Forum program is structured around plenary sessions engaging the voices of all stakeholders and open panel discussions exploring ways to maximize CIFs’ impact at the sectoral level. There will also be a learning symposium on the latest developments in climate science and technology, and a poster exhibit showcasing CIF pilot countries’ evolving CIF programs and projects. We wish you all a memorable event and look forward to making this edition a milestone for future CIF Forums.

The African Development Bank

08

Submitting stories to OutreachOutreach is a multi-stakeholder magazine on cllimate change and sustainable development produced by Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future at various intergovernmental meetings on environment. Outreach will be distributed at the CIF 2011 Partnership Forum and will also be distributed online to various mail lists to reach those unable to attend the conference. Your can submit articles for potential publication in Outreach at outreach@stakeholderforum.org Submissions should be between 650-750 words (+image if available). Shorter articles are also welcome.

The African Development Bank (AfDB) is honored to welcome you to the 2011 Climate Investment Funds Partnership Forum, in Cape Town,

South Africa, June 24-25, 2011.

01

0302

03

04

06

0707

08

09

10

A note from the OUTREACH Editorial Team

Welcome to the first edition of Outreach from the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) 2011 Partnership Forum. Outreach is a space for stakeholders to express their views on key issues being discussed or negotiated at international conferences on climate change or sustainable development.

At times the articles in Outreach are conflicting in opinion as the publication seeks to represent a diverse range of views. In this way, Outreach aims to actively contribute to the debates and discussions at the CIF 2011 Partnership Forum.

We hope that stakeholders who have descended upon Cape Town – representatives of governments, civil society, indigenous peoples, local communities, private sector, and others – take on South Africa’s ‘Ubuntu’ sprit of togetherness as they work to map out a path towards achieving climate-smart development.

You can view the web version of Outreach at www.outreachlive.org and sign up to receive updates via this website.

1

The Climate Investment Funds are a success. They have raised $US 6.4bn directly, and claim to leverage $US

8.4 for every dollar spent. That’s $US 60bn in total, to be spent on clean technology, renewable energy, forest investment, and a catch-all category of climate resilience. More than 40 countries have already benefited. A remarkable record in only two years, and one to celebrate.

Why then should CIF managers watch their backs? Partly because even $US 60 bn is relatively small beer, when hundreds of billions a year will probably need to be spent on climate mitigation and adaptation. The World Bank, for example, has estimated the incremental costs of financing climate mitigation and adaptation in developing countries at around $US 200 bn a year over the next 20 years. There are other sources of finance charging up the garden path, some purely private, many with public sector engagement. A recent report by UNDP charts the options.

The importance of effective national policy frameworks to the CIF

More important, effective use of finance requires a quality policy framework that is very unevenly available in developing countries. A recent report by the World Economic Forum on scaling up low carbon infrastructure in developing countries calls this ‘investment grade policy’.

In our work on green growth at the Climate and Development Knowledge Network, we have separated out two aspects of the policy framework. First, countries need to have the right policies in general to foster growth – openness to trade, macro-economic stability, consistent regulation,

and the right investment in education, health and social safety nets. These ideas are rooted in current thinking on growth, for example by the Commission on Growth and Development. One measure of country ‘capability’ is the WEF Competitiveness Index. CIF Managers should look carefully at the ranking of their 40 countries, and others in the pipeline. Leaving aside countries embroiled in the Arab Spring, there are few CIF countries in top 50 and only a handful in the top 100. Thailand is ranked 38, for example, South Africa 54, Mexico 66, Kazakhstan 72. CIF managers ought to be lying in bed at night worrying about the poor performance of some of their clients – or, better, engaging with them on how to improve.

The second element of an investment grade policy is the right mix of climate-related policies, whether feed-in tariffs for renewable energy or long-term measures to push up the price of fossil fuels. Here, work is just beginning to identify and rank policies which are appropriate to different countries. CDKN is running an e-discussion on the topic, and would welcome contributions. CIF Managers can help. Should they be advocating, for example, for all countries to have a Climate Act and independent committee to set long-term targets, as in the UK?

Measures taken to tackle climate change will transform the global economyOver and above climate policies, there is one more issue to disturb the rest of climate managers. That is the dislocation and restructuring of the world economy that climate change – and the policies taken to deal with climate change – will induce.

Some dislocations are predictable. The global distribution of agricultural production will shift, for example, probably in the direction of temperate rather than tropical lands. Temperature rise and water shortage may well shift agricultural jobs and rural livelihoods from the central belt of Africa closer to the poles. Similarly, carbon taxes might make export-oriented growth models more precarious, particularly if export production is based in coastal areas prone to flooding as waters rise.Other dislocations will result from the opening of new markets and the closing of others. Early movers in solar or wind are likely to reap long-term benefits, creating industrial clusters that will exclude new entrants. China seems to be well on the way to achieving this.

At CDKN, our preoccupation is to shape policy that will facilitate the right decisions that enable poor countries to deal with new dislocations, as well as with the climate-specific issues of mitigation and adaptation. In this arena, ‘investment-grade policy’ must deliver climate benefits, but also safeguard human welfare and human development. We call our approach ‘climate compatible development’. It is an ambition which keeps us awake at night, but also gets us up in the morning. Will CIF Managers join us?________

Simon Maxwell is Executive Chair of the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN).CDKN supports developing countries to deliver climate compatible development. We offer advice and technical assistance, cutting-edge research, strategic knowledge sharing and partnership building.

For more information: To contact CDKN directly, email enquiries@cdkn.org. Look for the CKDN display at the CIF Partnership Forum in Cape Town.

Why the managers of the Climate Investment Funds must celebrate success, watch their backs and raise their sights

Simon Maxwell, Executive Chairman of the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) poses some provocative questions to the managers of the Climate Investment Funds.

many places, scaling up additional finance is crucial for vulnerable communities.

Adaptation vs. MitigationIn the climate negotiations, statements are often delivered about adaptation and mitigation together, but it is crucial to remember the distinction. Adaptation and mitigation must be differentiated to ensure equity. Putting pressure on the most vulnerable communities to reduce emissions clearly contradicts the principle of common but differentiated responsibility.

This is particularly relevant and dangerous in terms of agriculture. As agriculture is one of the most vulnerable sectors to the impacts of climate change, adaptation will be the main priority in many places. The World Food Program estimates that around 75% of people in developing countries live in rural areas and are highly dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods.

At the UNFCCC negotiations, countries such as Canada and New Zealand have been pushing for agriculture to be included in carbon markets due to their national interests. However there are various examples where the priority of mitigation can conflict with the adaptive capacity of local communities.

The IPCC notes several examples where mitigation conflicts with adaptation in agriculture. For example, large-scale agro-forestry or biofuels for mitigation purposes may compete with food production or displace indigenous populations. Therefore, many NGOs are calling for agriculture to be excluded from carbon markets. Policy-makers must reflect on these issues and bear in mind the founding UNFCCC principles for climate finance to be effective.

There is clearly a gap emerging between the scientifically necessary action on climate change and what is

occurring, with the IEA recently recording the highest emissions on record. However there is a second crucial gap, the gap in finance for vulnerable communities to adapt to the impacts of climate change as well as for mitigation.

Although the Pilot Programme for Climate Resilience (PPCR) was established in 2008, only 2.7% has now been disbursed out of the amount pledged according to the Climate Funds Update ($27m out of the pledged sum of $986m). Of this, $14m was disbursed to projects whilst $13m has gone on administrative fees. Therefore almost half of the amount disbursed has gone to project administration.

At the UNFCCC Climate Change negotiations in Bonn last week, there was little progress on the key issue of long-term finance. Anyone familiar with the opacity and painstakingly slow negotiations on climate change will be familiar with a process that frequently puts national interests above the common global interest.

Aid EffectivenessSeveral developed countries claim that the absorptive capacity of recipients is limited. However, it is unclear how much this claim is based on reality. Guidance to direct funding is clearly crucial, yet there may be a tension between conditionality and accessibility of finance, which needs to reach the community level to make any impact. Policy-makers should note the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness.In order for finance for climate resilience to be effective it will have to empower local communities such as smallholder farmers, who remain most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Finance must not be absorbed by elites at the expense of local and indigenous communities; which has been a major concern with the CDM.

Unjustifiable LoansEnsuring cost-effectiveness of climate

Finance for Climate Resilience:GAPS BETWEEN PLEDGES AND REALITY

Helena Wright, a YOUNGO stakeholder, highlights the emerging disparity between finance for climate resilience pledged by the world’s industrialised nations and what vulnerable communities in developing counties are actually receiving.

finance is important to make funds go further at a time of austerity. However, there are major equity concerns about providing loans for adaptation. A recent report by Eurodad found that the PPCR will deliver more than one third of its funds as loans for adaptation, including seven (out of 18) countries that are at risk of debt distress.

Providing loans for adaptation is unjustified since adaptation activities such as coastal flood defence or crop-switching do not usually generate a return, but rather help communities cope with new climatic impacts such as drought or flooding. Clearly, providing loans for adaptation finance violates the ‘polluter pays’ principle and the principle of common but differentiated responsibility as articulated in Article 3 of the UNFCCC Convention. Moreover it has the potential to make heavily indebted countries more vulnerable, which would defeat the whole purpose.

Monitoring AdditionalityOne issue that keeps coming up is MRV – the Monitoring, Reporting and Verification requirements that Annex I countries are demanding to be included before climate finance becomes available. It is suggested this is a political tactic by certain countries, namely the United States, to stall negotiations and avoid progress.

Yet for finance, monitoring is important to ensure funds have made a valuable contribution. Tracking climate finance is important for stakeholders to ensure there are not unintended negative consequences; and to ensure funds can be measured to be “new and additional” to current development aid. With current development aid already insufficient to meet the Millennium Development Goals in

“Putting pressure on the most vulnerable communities to reduce emissions clearly contradicts the principle of common but differentiated responsibility.”

32

As the REDD+ agenda progresses and finance begins to flow through large bilateral agreements and the pilot countries of the Forest Investment Programme (FIP), parliaments will need to play a central role in revising legal frameworks, accounting for finance and ensuring the rights of indigenous people and forest-based communities are recognised, writes Chris Stephens, Director of Forestry and Ecosystems, GLOBE.

While the structures and functions of national legislatures vary, there are a number of

responsibilities that legislators share. In a similar way, national efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) are unique while sharing many characteristics with other countries. A recurring theme of REDD+ to date has been the limited engagement of legislators and, unless this changes, the global climate change mitigation strategy will struggle to deliver emission reductions in an effective, efficient and equitable manner.

The importance of national parliaments for REDD+ To date, the REDD+ agenda has been driven by the executive branch of government. As REDD+ begins to mature,

parliaments will play an increasingly important role. Legal frameworks will need to be revised, REDD+ finance will need to be accounted for and the rights of indigenous people and forest-based communities will need to be recognised.

Without achieving these aims, it will not be possible to achieve the multiple goals of carbon sequestration, poverty alleviation and biodiversity conservation.

Engaging legislators will bring together nascent REDD+ strategies and existing

rural poverty and is consistent with Brazil’s targets to reduce emissions from deforestation.

Indonesia is a country that has already advanced REDD+ regulations to create a legal framework for its national strategy. However, these laws resulted from Ministerial decrees and there was limited engagement with the Indonesian parliament, the Dewan Perwakilan Raykat (DPR). Encouragingly, since the last elections in 2009, the DPR is strengthening its role, and a growing number of bills are being initiated in parliament. This presents legislators with an opportunity to increase their involvement in developing a broader REDD+ legal framework and to create a better balance with the executive branch of government.

In addition, Hon Dr Akhmad Muqowam, the Chair of Commission IV in the DPR on Agriculture, Plantations, Maritime Affairs, Fisheries and Food pointed out that, “legislators can play a unique role in achieving an equitable and transparent national REDD+ strategy by providing greater parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s policies and budgets.” In particular, while he recognised the challenges faced by the Presidentially-appointed REDD+ Task Force, Dr Muqowam cited its lack of parliamentary oversight and limited engagement with legislators as an area to improve on.

A similar scenario exists in Mexico. Congressman José Ignacio Pichardo, the Chair of the Special Commission on Forests in the Mexican Congress said, “To date Mexico’s national REDD+ strategy has been developed without the involvement of the Mexican Congress. As legislators, we fully support the government’s objective of achieving zero emissions from deforestation by 2020. However, in order for this ambitious goal to be achieved, it will be essential to engage legislators in this process.”

Scrutinizing REDD+ finance and protecting the rights of Indigenous PeoplesWhile the examples outlined above focus primarily on the role that legislators can play in shaping and advancing legislation, as REDD+ finance begins to flow the parliamentary function of budgetary oversight is also critical. This will first be tested in REDD+ countries that are due to receive finance through the large bilateral agreements and the pilot countries of the Forest Investment Programme (FIP). While the institutional structures for receiving and distributing REDD+ finance are still being created in most countries, parliaments must play a role in providing robust financial oversight, especially if the

finance is being delivered to a national fund or directly to the state.

Beyond their legislative and scrutiny functions, legislators also play an important role in representing the rights of their constituents. Considering the challenges that REDD+ faces surrounding land tenure and carbon rights, legislators can help ensure that the rights of Indigenous Peoples and forest-based communities are recognised. Senator Vanessa Grazziotin, Member of the Special Joint

Committee on Climate Change in the Brazilian Congress, stated “As legislators, it is our responsibility to ensure that equitable legal systems are created that fairly reward local communities and indigenous people for their critical role as forest stewards.”

REDD+ is beginning to transition to a phase where greater emphasis is being placed on the legislative branch of government. The executive branch can only go so far in creating the necessary political conditions, legal frameworks and

institutional structures for a successful REDD+ mechanism. Parliaments may present one of the missing pieces of the REDD+ puzzle and their engagement in the process should be greatly encouraged.

About the GLOBE Legislators Forest Initiative The GLOBE Legislators’ Forest Initiative works directly with senior legislators by supporting their efforts to strengthen

legislation and parliamentary scrutiny structures to underpin national efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation. This initiative is coordinated by the Global Legislators Organisation (GLOBE) in collaboration with senior legislators from the four initiative countries; Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Indonesia and Mexico. GLOBE’s is very grateful to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and the UN-REDD Programme for supporting its work on REDD+ and forestry.

The Role of Parliaments in REDD+

“Engaging legislators will bring together nascent REDD+ strategies and existing political debates on forest protection and governance, encouraging a more holistic approach.”

“Encouragingly, since the last elections in 2009, the DPR is strengthening its role, and a growing number of bills are being initiated in parliament.”

political debates on forest protection and governance, encouraging a more holistic approach. For example, in Brazil the proposed revision of the Forest Code, is feared by some commentators to risk undermining the country’s commitment

to reduce deforestation by 80% and greenhouse gas emissions by 39% from a projected baseline by 2020. With the Senate now due to vote on these amendments, it is critical that Brazilian legislators understand REDD+ in order to develop a legal framework that combats

4 5

By Richard Simpson

Financing the resilient city:

Urban capacity and mainstreaming climate risks Taking India as an example, the 60 largest Indian cities will require an estimated investment of around USD 80 billion over the next five years. Overall, India is likely to invest USD 300 billion in urban infrastructure over the next 20 years. This investment will, however, still not match the rapidly expanding demand for urban services. Cities and local governments around the world need to respond to growth, urban sprawl, and demographic change in population, deteriorating infrastructures, crime and socio-economic polarization, informal settlements and unmanaged urbanization, as well as unforeseen costs from potential disasters and economic crisis.

Climate risks in particular increase due to poor planning, further sealing of surfaces, haphazardly built or badly maintained infrastructure, lack of awareness, and absent risk assessments and management. These risks are largely informed by our choices, voluntary and involuntary, on where to live and how to live.

Climate and disaster risk reduction needs to be mainstreamed into conventional planning processes, project design and development decisions. In order to get it right, cities and communities need to be able to identify problems, vulnerabilities

and systems’ sensitiveness, locally and regionally. Greater local institutional capacity is needed to prepare, structure and manage large scale (re-)development. Cities also need to pay for better, additional, smarter infrastructures, as well as soft measures like training, civil society involvement and raising awareness amongst their citizens.

Climate finance for urban areas and local adaptation 80 percent of the estimated global adaptation costs of USD 80-100 billion per year will need to be spent in urban areas alone. But the money to pay for these costs is scarcely available, especially to those least responsible for and most vulnerable to climate change. For example, the 24 related international climate funds, for both mitigation and adaptation, currently only total USD 13 billion out of the USD 31 billion pledged for the funds.

The gap between design of and access to international climate finance pots and the local reality is huge:• They are failing to provide sufficient

funds relative to the amount of finance required.

• From a local perspective international climate finance still means complex institutional, administrative and technical requirements. Timeframes to access funding typically exceed

political cycles, hindering political will and support.

• There is a lack of awareness of the diversity of funds available and how to use them.

• Private investment needs to be attracted into adaptation and other risk reduction projects by generating return opportunities.

An effective response to local adaptation requires more than pots of money at the end of a rainbow. International climate finance must be simpler and more catalytic, and must respond to local needs. Local actors also need to be made aware of funding opportunities, and encouraged to put forward their own proposals.

Projects need to be designed in an optimized way according to local criteria, building on stakeholder and civil society involvement. Local governments, fulfilling many functions at the local level, could play a key role. Together with other stakeholders, they could help shift the focus from individual projects towards bundling them together, and adjusting them to enhance the resilience of an entire area of a city or community.

International climate finance should focus on building capacity ‘bottom-up’, from the local level. The ICLEI white paper Financing the Resilient City, authored by Jeb Brugmann, sets out requirements for this: • Enable the local level to identify

vulnerabilities and risks, and design solutions that enhance the resilience of the entire area or system based on local needs.

• Develop local technical and institutional capacity to design and administer comprehensive projects.

• Improve local capacity to source and bundle finance from local, national, international, as well as private investors.

On this basis, financial service providers could be in a better position to bundle similar measures, across large numbers of projects, into portfolios. Specific financing instruments could be designed to create diversified, scaled pools for investment. Where climate risk cannot be mainstreamed into planning and projects, specialized financial instruments can be developed,

for example special insurance, value capture instruments, or securitization mechanisms among other, to make investments more attractive.

It is very clear; the right initial investments will avoid greater financial loss later on. The landscape of risk could then be transformed into a landscape of opportunity and greater resilience.

Beyond pots of money at the end of the rainbow

Urban capacity will need to double in the next 40 years as the urban population increases by 3 billion people globally. In this context, international climate finance must be simpler and more catalytic, and should respond to local needs, writes Richard Simpson from ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability.

As a San, Kcgao’s parents had never had to drill a borehole for water, or even to settle down in one place for

that matter. In 2005 Kcgao and members of his borehole group must have felt that God had finally noticed them and heard their plight. This was after the Trust for Okavango Cultural and Development Initiatives (TOCADI) drilled and equipped their borehole which assured a source of reliable water for Kcgao and his colleagues, as well as their small but highly valued herd of cattle.

To add icing on the cake, TOCADI Trust equipped the borehole with solar energy equipment. This meant that for the first time in ten years, Kcgao and his colleagues did not have to worry about diesel fuel or equipment maintenance costs.

The San are dealing with changes in lifestyle. As the indigenous people of southern Africa and the last true nomads in the region, the San have for a long while relied on naturally occurring water holes to meet all their water needs. As they followed the turning of seasons from one location to another there was almost always a convenient water hole nearby to quench their thirst and meet all their sanitary needs. When these water holes occasionally failed to provide water, wild melons and berries always came in handy to plug the gap.

However, with changes in lifestyles, competition for land resources and impacts of climate change the San have been compelled to lead more sedentary lives and settle in more or less permanent villages and settlements. They have also had to take up livestock farming and crop production as livelihood activities. In the Kalahari the only way to provide water for such a lifestyle is by sinking boreholes to access fresh waters deep below the sands. Unfortunately, the resources required for such a feat are beyond the reach for many San.

Scaling up the San’s renewable energy accessTOCADI Trust’s intervention therefore came as a relief to Kcgao and his colleagues. In fact, with the support of international partners, the NGO was able to drill Kcgao’s and four other boreholes for San groups. Of the five boreholes drilled, Kcgao’s group was the only one fitted with solar energy equipment while the other four received diesel engines for pumping water. This was due to the somewhat prohibitive initial costs of installing solar technology. For several years therefore, Kcgao and his group were the envy of many. They never had to buy diesel fuel as the Kalahari sun provided for all their needs twelve months in the year.

Then disaster struck. With changing climate patterns and longer dry spells, elephants found it harder to access water, resulting in them increasingly encroach on human settlements in search of this scarce resource. Unfortunately, in early 2009, Kcgao’s borehole was one of those visited by these giants of the African bush,leaving in their wake a trail of destruction including a broken water tank, shattered solar panels and broken pipes. Once again Kcgao and his group were desperate for help.

The San Adapting to Climate Impacts In an Indigenous Peoples’ community in Botswana, solar energy equipment is tested by giants of the African bush, writes Galefele P. Maokeng of the TOCADI Trust.

And once again the TOCADI Trust responded. With the assistance of the UK’s Redbush Tea company, the NGO replaced the broken equipment and started construction of a perimeter wall around the borehole to protect its installations from further elephant destruction. Construction involved using rocks collected around the borehole site, with members of the borehole group volunteering labour to assist the builder employed by the NGO.

The long term plan aims to do the same for all the five boreholes so that the San communities can once again live in harmony with their giant neighbours as they have done through the ages. With the wall still to be completed, Kcgao and his group will in the meantime have to call upon some human courage to keep the elephants out.

About TOCADITOCADI Trust works to empower communities in the Okavango sub-district to become self reliant and improve their standards of living. TOCADI serves over 21,000 people in the Okavango sub-district in Botswana, with particular attention to 21 villages and settlements.

 

76

lives can increase potential toward a just and sustainable future.

How CIF policies can include children as stakeholders

To be effective, CIF policy is compelled to recognise the importance of education in influencing human behaviour and improving environmental conditions. Conversely, planning of the education sector must take into account the complex environmental conditions and social settings in which children live, many of which are impacted by climate change.

Quality education stresses the importance of curriculum within the local context, which should account for differences in risks and priorities according to local environmental conditions. This approach calls for an integration of life-skills based knowledge with practical interaction in the natural world and school environmental facilities, such as gardens, indigenous

tree nurseries, WASH facilities, etc.

National policies and practices associated with the CIF are required to promote investment in human capital and an active citizenry which, in the long run, will boost sustainable economic growth, reduce poverty, and promote regional

peace and stability. Within this framework, school models, such as the Child Friendly School approach promoted by UNICEF, and Forest Community School approach promoted by ECI and Planet 2025, can cut across sectors toward sustainable and verifiable action both with and for children.

We assert that investment in the education of an informed and empowered citizenry

begins at a young age and can balance the scales of intergenerational equity within communities, nations and the world at large. CIF supported programmes are urged to include the participation of community schools and to recognise the rights and capacities of children to bring about sustainable change.

Environmental governance relies on the children of today, who will as the adults of tomorrow carry the fight to save our planet from further destruction. The engagement and inclusion of children and environmental education in the FIP and SCF will seek to bridge the gap between the present and the future.

The world’s children are particularly vulnerable to a degrading environment while simultaneously

being essential stakeholders to, and key beneficiaries of environmental governance. At this moment in time, as the Climate Investment Fund (CIF) invites the voices of stakeholders to be heard, the international community is compelled to recognise that within decades, this demographic is, in effect the very one who must travel the path presently being charted to ‘climate-smart development.’

The 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is a human rights instrument that binds signatories to acknowledge the rights of children and protect them. It defines and ensures children their right to participate in matters that impact their lives, thereby enabling them to influence local environmental conditions. Education is a key element toward granting the rights addressed in the CRC and fostering healthy and adequate development for children and communities.

The importance of education

Schooling is the most common means through which societies prepare their

young people for the future. The Forest Investment Programme (FIP) is considered to be “a learning tool that initiates and facilitates transformational change in forest related policies and practices in developing countries.” In direct correlation, a case study conducted by Ricardo Codoy in the Tawahka community in Honduras, found that each additional year of education reduces the amount of old growth forests cut by households by 12% each year.

Further, a REDD+ project evaluation by CIFOR, conducted by Maria Fernanda Gebara in Juma, Brazil affirmed that the most concrete benefit of the social components of the project to date has been for the provision of education and community-based behaviour change through the main school of the project. Paradoxically, however, CIF projects do not yet recognise the transformational capacity of the children who consist of around 50% of the population in most participating countries.

The urgent need for rights based, environmentally responsible citizens in future generations calls for investments in ‘environment-friendly’ education and outreach, with special attention to the rights

of girls, who are particularly impacted by climate change. Through empowerment and quality education, children of this generation, as the decision-makers of the future will be better equipped to adapt and mitigate the effects of climate change and environmental degradation.

Children’s health is dependent on environmental conditions for many reasons. Within the context of climate change, intensified storms are threatening school infrastructure, and droughts and floods are affecting children’s health and their families’ livelihoods – all of which affect children’s ability to go to school. The Strategic Climate Fund (SCF) seeks to “pilot new approaches with potential for scaled-up, transformational action aimed at a specific climate change challenge or sectoral response.”

This further substantiates the contention that the education of children and young people (formal and non-formal) offers a sustainable and cost-effective strategy for protecting children from the negative effects of climate change and environmental degradation. Children who understand their local environment, patterns of consumption and waste, and how these interact with other parts of their

Nationality: Indian Country of residence: India Organisation: Gram Bharati Samiti (GBS) which means

ProfileBhawani Shanker Kusum, Civil Society

Society for Rural DevelopmentCurrent Position: Secretary CIF Stakeholder: Civil Society Observer, Clean Technology Fund (CTF) Committee

How long have you been in this position? For the past 27 years

What prompted your early interest in environment?I love trees, and I, with support from some Gandhian friends, social activists and professionals, formed GBS in 1984 looking at the wide scale deforestation and its devastating affects including the march of desertification. Therefore, in order to protect the environment we need to plant trees extensively.

Describe your first attempt to ‘save the planet’:I, with support from a team of 7 dedicated colleagues, developed a model of ‘wastelands development’ on a small piece of 25 hectare barren, infertile, gullied, undulated sandy land by planting 80,000 trees of fruits, fuel, fodder and shadow species.

Favourite quote: M.K. Gandhi has very rightly said – “Nature

can fulfil the need of every one, but not the greed of any one”.

Where do you feel the CIF has been effective? And where is there opportunity for improvement?It is very effective at one side i.e. supporting renewable energy programs worldwide, but in my view lacking focus on forestation which is a great source of carbon reduction. Millions of hectares of wastelands are lying unused in developing countries, which should be undertaken for forestation on priority basis with active support of CS/NGOs engaged/want to engage in this challenging task.

What are the top 5 ways to maximize CIF impact at the country and sectoral level?• Millions of wastelands lying unused

in developing countries should be taken under forestation with specific contribution of CSO/NGOs

• There should be an advisory committee at regional and country level comprising key stakeholders including CSO/NGOs

to be involved in conceptualization, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the investment plans

• CSO/NGO observers should be nominated in the country delegations visiting the projects pre/post investments

• NGO observers should be engaged in training local NGO personnel and community people at country level to involve them in the investment projects

• Stringent monitoring of CIF investments should be undertaken in collaboration with CS/NGOs at regional/country level

What do you believe should be achieved at CIF 2011 Partnership Forum? • Active and useful involvement of CSO/

NGO observers should be ensured and adequate plan for future be drawn up.

• Proper opportunities should be given to issues and suggestions/inputs made by them should be included in the minutes and heeded upon properly

Recognising children as essential stakeholders for climate resilience and sustainable development in the CIF

Comprising almost half the population of the developing world and one-third of the overall global population, investment in the education of children is essential to combating the effects of climate change writes Donna Goodman, Joyce Lynn Njinga, Winnie Hagemeyer, Rebecca Berentsen and Manna Hara from Earth Child Institute.

 

Environmental governance relies on the children of today, who will as the adults of tomorrow carry the fight to save our planet from further destruction.

98

If women were more deliberately considered in REDD+ and similar development projects, the significant

potential of fuel-efficient stoves for improving their lives and reducing deforestation should be a high priority.

Biomass remains is a major contributor to deforestation

When considering underlying drivers of deforestation, there is an important — and gendered — factor that gets far less attention than it should. Biomass plays an enormously important role in the lives of the rural poor in developing countries, serving as the primary source of energy for cooking and household heating.

The collection of fuel wood is done primarily by women and children, with men’s involvement growing only when these activities are commercialised. As forests reduce or become degraded, women and children need to spend increasing amounts of time collecting firewood, leaving little time for other activities such as study for girls.

It is a mistaken assumption that fuel wood collection activities are too small in scale to have significant impacts on rates of deforestation. In Lao People’s Democratic Republic, for example, fuel wood consumption for household and industrial use is approximately 2.4 million tons per

year, compared to logging’s consumption of 600–1 million tons of timber annually.

In the ASEAN countries (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam), overall energy from biomass such as wood and agricultural residues represents about 40% of total energy consumption.

The benefit of fuel efficient stoves to deforestation programmes

A new study led by Princeton University argues that greater attention to fuel-efficient stoves could significantly improve REDD+ programming. According to Mongabay, for example, researchers in Tanzania found that ‘current economic assessments tend to undervalue the cost of meeting expected food and fuel demand by local farmers, who would be expected to curtail forest conversion under the country’s REDD program’. In order to reduce less recognised drivers of deforestation such as shortages of fuel for household purposes, the authors strongly recommend subsidising efficient stoves.

Low-quality energy supplies and inefficient conversion devices pose health risks due to indoor air pollution, particularly affecting women. Inefficient cooking stoves result in “black carbon” or soot which not only

has extremely damaging health impacts, its particles also absorb sunlight and contribute to climate change.

In addition, to circumvent the lack of fuel wood, women tend to prepare food that requires less heat for cooking. Consequently, nutritious food items such as pulses (lentils) are excluded from diets, leading to nutrient deficiencies and malnutrition, particularly among children. The introduction and promotion of fuel efficient stoves is therefore an initiative that has powerful impacts on the lives of women, as well as on the condition of forests.

Men and women have different experiences, knowledge, and strategies for how to manage forests. Failing to incorporate half of the population in forest management has significant implications for food security, poverty alleviation, and ultimately the well-being of forests. Women should be much more deliberately brought into the design and implementation of REDD+ and CIF Forest Investment Programmes (FIP), recognised as legitimate forest users and stakeholders – if not as an ethical imperative to recognize their rights, then because the success of these initiatives depend on it. Greater attention on efficient stoves is one place to start.

This article is expanded from REDD-Net Asia-Pacific Bulletin: Gender and REDD+.

Fuel-Efficient Stoves Protect Women’s Health and ForestsFocusing on something as small as a stove could make big changes for women in forests, writes Regan Suzuki from RECOFTC (The Centre for People and Forests).

To view previous and today’s issue of Outreach please go to outreachlive.org

OUTREACH is made possible through the generous support of:

The CIF 2011 Partnership Forum is hosted by

10