Plenary 4_Kathryn Michie

www.panda.org/greatermekong

ADB Country Safeguard Systems Regional Workshop

NGO role in Strengthening REDD+ SafeguardsREDD Safeguards

by Kathryn Michie19 April 2012

The views in this presentation are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the AsianThe views in this presentation are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the AsianDevelopment Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the government they represent. ADB does not guarantee theaccuracy of the data included in this presentation and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. Terminologyused may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.


OverviewOverview

• Importance of SafeguardsImportance of Safeguards for REDD+

• WWF Principles for• WWF Principles for REDD+R l f NGO• Role of NGOs

• Case study: FPIC in Laos


What is REDD+What is REDD+Reducing emissions from deforestation gand forest degradation

• Sustainable forest management• Enhancement of forest carbon stocks• Enhancement of forest carbon stocks• Conservation of forest carbon stocks

What is REDD++Focus on co-benefits

S i l b fit P t d ti• Social co-benefits eg. Poverty reduction • Biodiversity co-benefits eg. Habitat

conservation


REDD+ will have ani t iti dimpact on communities andthe environmentthe environment

Why Safeguards are important for REDD+



• Ensure that these• Ensure that these impacts are positive A id / iti t• Avoid / mitigate any negative impacts

• Safeguards create a framework for doing this




• The “right” thing to do• The right thing to do. • Help avoid and resolve conflicts.• Important for projects’ sustainabilityImportant for projects sustainability• Improve companies’ corporate

imageg• Potentially improve return on

investment (eg. Biodiversity )premiums)

Why Social Safeguards are important for www.panda.org/greatermekong

y g pREDD+: Examples of risks

• Loss of customary land rights / loss ofLoss of customary land rights / loss of access to forests for subsistence and income generation. U l b i i iti l di t• Unequal bargaining positions leading to exploitative carbon contracts

• Elite capture of REDD+ benefitsElite capture of REDD benefits • Lack of formal land rights preventing

communities or individuals participating / f fbenefitting from REDD+

Why Environmental Safeguards are www.panda.org/greatermekong

y gimportant for REDD+: Examples of risks

• Conversion of natural forest to plantationsConversion of natural forest to plantations – especially in those contexts where the formal definition of forest includes l t tiplantations.

• Displacing deforestation / development to low-carbon, but high-biodiversitylow carbon, but high biodiversity landscapes

• Use of non-native species in reforestation • Environmental impact of agricultural

intensification eg. Pollution from fertilizers

Climate

REDD+ demonstrably contributes to greenhouse gas emission reductions with national goals working toward a global objective

Biodiversity yREDD+ maintains and/orREDD+ maintains and/or

enhances forest biodiversity and ecosystem servicesecosystem services

Over 1000 new species over ten years

LivelihoodsLivelihoods

REDD+ contributes to sustainable and equitable development by strengthening the livelihoods of forest-dependent communities

RightsRightsREDD+ recognizes and respects the rights of indigenousrights of indigenous peoples and local communities

Fair and effective fundingFair and effective funding

REDD+ mobilizes immediate, adequate and predictable resources for action in priority forest areas in an equitable, transparent, participatory and coordinated manner. p p p y

At the project level, ensure that fair, transparent and effective benefit sharing distribution mechanisms are in place. g p


NGO Roles in Strengthening g gREDD+ Safeguards

• Engagement in UNFCCC negotiationsEngagement in UNFCCC negotiations• Engagement in the development of

multilateral safeguard policies• Engagement in the development of national• Engagement in the development of national

REDD+ frameworks• Educating communities

M it i th i l t ti f f d• Monitoring the implementation of safeguards • Applying safeguards in NGO demonstration

projects• Implementation partner for larger projects• Ensuring this experience is used to inform

policy development

Engagement in UNFCCC negotiations



REDD+ Safeguards adopted at COP 16, COP Report – Appendix 1REDD Safeguards adopted at COP 16, COP Report Appendix 1

(a) actions consistent with national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements;

(b) Transparent and effective national forest governance structures;

(c) Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities noting that the United Nations General Assembly has adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;

(d) The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities;



Continued:


Continued:

(e) That actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity; are not used for the conversion of

t l f t b t i t d d t i ti i th t tinatural forests, but are instead used to incentivize the protection and conservation of natural forests and their ecosystem services, and to enhance other social and environmental benefits;

(f) Actions to address the risks of reversals (permanence);

(g) Actions to reduce displacement of emissions (leakage = d f t ti / d d ti hift d l h )deforestation / degradation shifted else where).


Engagement in development of g g pmultilateral safeguard policies

Engagement in development of national g g pREDD+ frameworks

WWF C l biConstrucción WWF Colombia

Participativa de la estrategia REDD+ d l bde Colombia


Educating and empowering g gcommunities


Monitoring implementation of gsafeguards


Applying and testing safeguards y g g gin NGO demonstration projects

Implementation partner in larger REDD+ p p gprojects

Ensuring this experience is used to inform policy developmentinform policy development

REDD+ Policy

On-the-ground implementation

Case studyCase study

Lao Biodiversity Association (LBA)Association (LBA)

Pil ti f FPIC iPiloting of FPIC in Nam Phui NPA, Sayaboury Province, Laos PDR

“If you talk about drivers of deforestation in REDD+, local people have to be involved – they spend all of their lives p p y pwith the forest.”

OupakoneOupakone Alounsavath, Director of the Planningof the Planning Division, Lao Department of ForestryDepartment of Forestry

Lao Biodiversity Association (LBA)Lao Biodiversity Association (LBA)• Local non-profit organization. p g• Created in 2003 with more than 20 members comprising

volunteers from different occupations and backgrounds

Mission• Active contribution to the sustainable conservation and development of the biodiversity, and the natural and social environment of Laos• Active contribution to the reduction of poverty especially in Active contribution to the reduction of poverty especially in remote areas among and ethnic minorities• Active participation in processes to alleviate climate change and to activate oxygen emission into the atmosphere

CliPAD (Climate Protection through A id d D f t ti ) P j tAvoided Deforestation) Project

• Implemented by GIZ• National level activities include:• National level activities include:

• Capacity building, • Coordinating a revised national land cover classification system, • Introducing possibilities for a national ‘nested’ approach to REDD+, g p pp ,• Developing social safeguards based on FPIC (Free, Prior and

Informed Consent), • Beginning a process to revise national forestry law, • Supporting delegates to COP17• Supporting delegates to COP17.

• Also engaging sub-nationally in Nam Phoui and Nam Et PhouLouey NPAs, • Technical feasibility studies completedTechnical feasibility studies completed• Assessments of drivers of deforestation for both sites. I• In Nam Phui pioneering a PLUP (Participatory Land Use Planning)

system.

Piloting FPICg

• Piloting FPIC in 8 villages in 3 districts in and around Nam Phui NPA

• First in the country to formally give consent on whether or not to participate in a development project carried out in their p p p p jarea.

• LBA provides a team of external facilitators who will conduct consultations in the villages on behalf of CliPAD – importantconsultations in the villages on behalf of CliPAD. – important that this process is conducted by an independent organisationsuch as LBA. LBA k l di ti ti b t “ t” d• LBA makes a clear distinction between “consent” and “consultation”- advocates for consent, not just consultation.

FPIC process p

• 4 visits to each village: Stage 1 Meeting ith the Village Committee (LBA onl )• Stage 1: Meeting with the Village Committee (LBA only)

• Stage 2: Information sessions for the village population, explaining climate change; REDD+; villagers’ rights; and how to establish grievance and recourse mechanisms (LBA only)and recourse mechanisms. (LBA only)

• Stage 3: CliPAD staff visit the village to explain details project activities• Stage 4: Communities decided whether to give or withhold their consent.

If consent is provided, representative of the community is invited to sign a conservation agreement / consent certificate.

NOTE: This is only the first level of consent to begin cooperation. Consent at other times in the project will also be needed.

Final Endorsement of Laos FPIC Guidelines

Community Consultation 1

L FPICCommunity

Consultation 2Community C lt ti 4

Laos FPIC Guidelines

Development Consultation 4

pProcess

CommunityCommunity Consultation

3

Important to remember that consent needs to beImportant to remember that consent needs to be sought during and at the end of the project planning stage; as well as throughout implementation.

FPIC is a process not a one-off eventFPIC is a process, not a one-off event

Lessons learnt – Ensuring broad participationp p

• In villages with several different ethnic groups and large l ti it i t ibl t t lk tpopulations, it is not possible to talk to every person.

• Ensure that facilitators engage with a range of villagers that represent different opinions in the community – not just speaking to representatives such as village development or political committees.p g p p

• Important to work with village development committees• The LBA team is supported by a team of so-called internal

community facilitators who are recruited from the villages and t LBA th h i i d t il f th i it ’can support LBA through giving details of their community’s

customs and traditions as well as natural resource use, decision making and grievance mechanisms.

• Important to ensure that there is a gender balance across the• Important to ensure that there is a gender balance across the teams of facilitators and the villagers consulted.

“In Laos it is mostly women who collect forest“In Laos, it is mostly women who collect forest products – so they are the ones that will potentially be most affected by REDD+ Also ifpotentially be most affected by REDD+. Also, if women are involved in FPIC it is more likely to succeed because women are better at disseminating knowledge.”

Mr Bounthiang, Lao Women’s Union

Lessons learnt – Resources required

• Challenging to access remote and dispersed villages. • The LBA team consists of:• The LBA team consists of:

• 2 facilitators• 1 assistant• 1 independent volunteer facilitator in each village was trained by1 independent volunteer facilitator in each village was trained by

LBA• This team of internal community facilitators are recruited from

the villages and support LBA through giving details of their g pp g g gcommunity’s customs and traditions as well as natural resource use, decision making and grievance mechanisms.

• It is critical to time and space the village meetings p g gappropriately (seasonal and in between visits should not be more then 2-3 weeks).

Lessons learnt - others

• The term “FPIC” is difficult to translate literally into Lao – it might be better to adapt the meaning, but not translate the concept word for word.

• Complex aspects of REDD+ that are difficult to convey to villagers, for example the idea of carbon emissions.

• A regulatory framework for FPIC is still missing in Laos. g y g• If FPIC will be carried out at a larger scale in the future, there will be a need

for legal reform in this field• It is hoped that FPIC will be integrated into existing regulations.

Important to keep government informed they are also concerned• Important to keep government informed – they are also concerned about project implementation.

• FPIC should take place prior to any project activities commencing• Some Participatory Land Use Planning started before the FPIC processSome Participatory Land Use Planning started before the FPIC process

commenced. This “missed first step” created some conflict in the communities in Nam Phui.

FPIC is a new approach for Laos- Learning by doingSharing experiences- Sharing experiences

Practical methodologies for FPIC are still evolving and need to be specific to localevolving, and need to be specific to local cultures and contexts.

Th k !Th k !Thank you!Thank you!

Kathryn MichieKathryn MichieRegional Forest Carbon Coordinator

WWF Greater Mekong [email protected]

Plenary 4_Kathryn Michie

Documents

Transcript of Plenary 4_Kathryn Michie