Safeguard Information Systems for REDD+: Lessons from Participatory Forest Management

1. Safeguard Information Systems for REDD+: Lessons from Participatory Forest Management GirmaAmente (PhD) Oromia Forest & Wildlife Enterprise, Ethiopia

2. Contents • Background Information • Cancun agreement and Safeguards • Guidance from COP 17 on SIS • Existing processes in Ethiopia • Concluding Remarks

3. 1. Background information • Total Area of 1.1 mill km2 • 80 million population • 12.3 million ha of forests (high forests, high wood lands and plantations) • 9 % of the total area • Climate Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) programme launched in Durban • REDD+ is one of the pillars of the CRGE

4. 2. Cancun Agreement • A system for providing information on how the safeguards referred to in annex I to this decision are being addressed and respected throughout the implementation of the activities

5. Annex I: Cancun agreement • The following safeguards should be promoted and supported: • Actions complement or are consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes & relevant international conventions and agreements; • Transparent and effective national forest governance structures, taking into account national legislation and sovereignty; • Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities, • The full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, in particular, indigenous peoples and local communities, in actions referred to in paragraphs 70 and 72 of this decision; • Actions are consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity, ensuring that actions referred to in paragraph 70 of this decision 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, and to enhance other social and environmental benefits;

6. 3. Guidance from COP 17 on how to operationalizeSIS • How the information is collected? -consistency, regularly updated • How it is provided? -transparent, accessible to stakeholders • Country driven and implemented at national level • Building up on existing processes

7. 4. Existing processes in Ethiopia • Participatory Forest management approaches • Forest certification • FCPF-R-PP development process • UN REDD programme (observer status)

8. 4.1 People and Forests • Communities have lived with forests harmoniously using their traditional management systems in d/t parts of the world • Over emphasis on centralized modern management and social change within communities weakened/put out of play the traditional systems • Exclusion of local communities from forest management resulted in increased deforestation. • The need to revitalize and build on these traditional systems where they still exist • The need to combine modern approaches with local knowledge and systems

9. 4.2 Shift to Participatory Forest management (PFM) • Government alone unable to safeguard the forest resources • Exclusion of local communities from forest conservation was barely feasible. • The need to develop shared vision and objectives among the stakeholders about forest conservation • Active participation of communities in making decisions about the forests in their surroundings

10. Boundary Demarcation: Forest and Homestead Boundaries

11. Boundary Demarcation using GPS

12. Periodical Joint Forest Monitoring by WaBuB members

13. Meeting with WaBuB Representatives and Forestry Experts

14. Impact on forest condition • Forest condition considerably improved (by 15 %). • Significant reduction in illegal logging due to regular patrolling by user groups. • Controlled grazing. • Increased quality of natural regeneration. • Re-appearance of wildlife.

15. ---controlled grazing and improved regeneration

16. Impacts on Livelihood • Recognized access to the forests. • Increased off-farm income through sale of forest products and grazing rights. • Local employment and increased income through ecotourism. • Income from ecotourism contributed to construction and running cost of village primary schools.

17. Bee keeping

18. Impact on policy and good governance • Experiences gained from the approaches contributed to forest policy reforms. • PFM institutionalized within the government structure • Contributed to improved local governance, -formation of organized public, -Community based conflict management. -Improved participation of woman in decision making • Participatory decision making, increased local responsibility, improved use rights, increased bargaining power of communities

19. Forest Dwellers Association

20. 4.3 Elements of PFM Process that can be used to develop SIS • Participatory processes and decision making • Recognized access and rights to the forest • Organized communities (user groups, cooperatives, unions, federations, etc) • Clearly defined roles and responsibilities • Benefit sharing mechanisms negotiated and agreed • Participatory forest resource assessment methods that are simple and understandable by the communities, which is regularly conducted • Community bylaws and sanctions in the case of non-compliance

21. 4.4 Forest Certification • Most of the forest certification processes take in to account social and environmental safeguards. • Rainforest Alliance forest coffee certification programme in Ethiopia

23. Internal Inspection for Certification Audit by WaBuB members

24. Certification Audit by Rainforest Alliance

25. 4.5 FCPF REDD+ Readiness Process • Stakeholder consultation and participation component is included to ensure the voice of the communities heard in REDD+ decision making process • Consultations made at National, regional, district and community level • PFM considered as a vehicle to implement REDD+ • Innovative participatory monitoring combined with the conventional MRV methodologies to engage forest dependent communities in MRV

26. 5. Concluding remarks • Implementation of SIS at the national level is not enough, and should be cascaded to the local level • The SIS should be simple and understandable by communities as a tool to secure their rights and livelihoods • Participatory forest management process can be used as entry point