REDD, Transfer Technology & Climate Change

1. REDD, Transfer Technology & Climate Change A. Feiral Rizky Batubara

3. Mitigation; exp: energy efficiency, Clean energy, REDD+, Adaptation; UNFCCC Capacity Building; Transfer technology; Financial Mechanism; Post Kyoto

4. Forests and Climate Change • Forest loss, primarily tropical deforestation and forest degradation, accounts for between 12 and 17 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions (Rogner et al., 2007; van derWerf et al., 2009). • Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) in tropical countries has become a priority for global climate change policy (IPCC, 2007; Stern, 2007) • Most popular approach to REDD is a form of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) that rewards reductions in forest loss and degradation(Bond et al., 2009) • Payments for REDD will increase the economic value of forest resources in tropical countries, and the incentives for conserving forests.

5. Payments for Environmental Services • What are we talking about? • A voluntary transaction • A well-defined environmental service or a land use likely to secure its provision • At least one buyer • At least one provider effectively controlling service provision • If and only if the environmental service provider secures service provision (conditionality) Wunder, S. 2007. “The Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services in Tropical Conservation,” Conservation Biology 21(1): 48–58.

6. From Forest Services to Carbon Payments Carbon / CO2 Water Biodiversity Beauty / Ecotourism

7. From Forest Services to Carbon Payments Quantification of the project impact - controlling& securing service provision: • Additionality – Would the project have happened anyway? • Baseline – What would have happened without the project? • Permanence– How to secure the service provision? • Leakage– How to control the service provision? REDD+ , REFORESTATION / RESTORATION

8. Static service scenario baseline – e.g. Reforestation Additionality is the incremental service delivered through PES vis-`a-vis the counterfactual baseline.

9. Deteriorating service scenario baseline – e.g. REDD+

10. From forest services to carbon payments MRV Monitoring, Reporting, Verification

11. Markets for Carbon Credits Compliance market VS voluntary carbon market • Regulated compliance market • UNFCCC under the Kyoto Protocol • Cap-and-trade systems (e.g. EU-ETS) • Voluntary carbon markets (freely, optional, by choice) • Retailer market – Over the counter → OTC (e.g. www.carbonfund.org, http://www.co2ol.de) • Sub-markets within the voluntary market • CCX (Chicago Climate Exchange) • NGO initiatives (TNC in Bolivia; CI, etc.)

12. Markets for Carbon Credits Comparison between different global carbon offset market segments

13. Forest Carbon Markets • Price range of forest carbon credits • From $0.65/tCO2 to more than $50/tCO2 • Volume-weighted average price over time • $7.88/tCO2

14. Forest Carbon Markets VCM all project types VCM Carbon forestry projects Sources: State of the Forest Carbon Markets 2009: http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/pages/dynamic/article.page.php?page_id=7415&section=home State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2009: http://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/pages/dynamic/resources.library.page.php?page_id=7082&section=carbon_market&eod=1 Forest carbon offsetting trends survey 2009: http://www.ecosecurities.com/Standalone/Forest_Carbon_Offsetting_Trends_Survey_2009/default.aspx

15. Forest Carbon Markets The regulatory framework on the VCM is set by standards. • Focus on verifying the carbon emissions • VCS – VoluntaryCarbon Standard (REDD, A/R) http://www.v-c-s.org/ • CFS – Carbon Fix Standard (A/R) http://www.carbonfix.info/ • Focus on verifying the positive project impacts • CCB – (REDD, A/R) http://www.climate-standards.org • REDD+ SE (REDD, REDD+) http://www.climate-standards.org/REDD+/index.html • PlanVivo(communitybased A/R)http://www.planvivo.org

16. Characteristics of VCM forestry projects • REDD and REDD+ basics • Tackling the drivers of Deforestation and Degradation, but how? • Some reasons for deforestation: • Poor land use policies • Inadequate legislation • Insecure property rights • Agriculture and logging expansion • Limited capacity to enforce forest protection and laws • Some reasons for degradation: • Illegal logging • Fire • Two types of deforestation exist → planned (licenses) and unplanned (illegal logging)

17. Characteristics of VCM forestry projects • Ongoing negotiations and discussion on the global forest policy level → large uncertainties • The plus in REDD+ under the UNFCCC not entirely clear • Reducing emissions from deforestation; • Reducing emissions from forest degradation; • Conservation of forest carbon stocks; • Sustainable management of forest; and • Enhancement of forest carbon stocks. Bleaney, A. et al., (2010). “REDD-plus after Copenhagen: what does it mean on the ground?”, REDD-NET COP15 Briefing, From: http://www.recoftc.org/site/fileadmin/docs/publications/The_Grey_Zone/2010/COP15Briefing.pdf Lawlor, K. et al. (2010). "Expanding the Scope of International Terrestrial Carbon Options: Implications of REDD+ and Beyond”, Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions: http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/about/pifs/symposia/fcfs/2010-fcfs-briefing-materials/redd+-final-web-1.pdf • Rules on the VCM are set by the standards → existing guidelines

18. Characteristics of VCM forestry projects • Example of existing projects • Reforestation • CO2OL Tropical Mix Reforestation Project (Panama) • Hardwood reforestation, mostly native species • Standards used CFS and CCB • Calculations per FMU (example Meteti II) • Future CO2 Fixation - 285 tCO2/ha • Leakage - 184 tCO2/ha • Baseline - 29 tCO2/ha • Accountable carbon credits per hectare: • 285 – 184 – 29 = 72 tCO2/ha All project documents available from: http://www.carbonfix.info/index.php?pagedef=popup&refererPageId=364&view=static%2Fcertification&instanceId=370&itemid=54 http://www.climate-standards.org/projects/index.html

19. VCM Projects in Indonesia The potential • In the year 2006, peatland fires in Indonesia released about 900 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. This amount is more than the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted in Germany in the year 2006, and it represents 16% of the emission related with deforestation worldwide. (Siegert, 2006: http://www.azocleantech.com/Details.asp?newsID=7182) • Carbon Planet REDDines Index Country’s preparedness to implement sustainable REDD projects combined with the chances of the successful outcome of a REDD project • Indonesia on the first rank Criteria used: • the rate of deforestation in each country • the OECD 'Country Risk Classification' for each country, and • whether the country is part of the World Bank's Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) Available from: http://www.carbonplanet.com/white_papers

20. VCM Projects in Indonesia The challenges • Despite the potential and the number of “projects” important things remain unclear under the current legal framework: • Carbon rights • Land tenure systems and indigenous rights • “Adat” • Open access resources • Encroachment • Benefit sharing arrangement • Law enforcement • Illegal logging • Power balance →decentralization vs. centralization • Overlapping responsibilities →MoF, Bappenas, …

21. VCM Projects in Indonesia Current Project List : • UluMasen – Aceh (Govt., FFI, Carbon Conservation) → CCB • APRIL - Riau • WWF - Riau • Harapan Rainforest – Jambi (RSPB, BirdLife) • Berbak NP – Jambi (ZSL, Environmental Resource) • GTZ - Merang REDD Pilot Project (MRPP) – South Sumatera • AusAid – Jambi • BOS Foundation, UNAS Jakarta, Museum of antropology in Zürich, Switzerland • Central Kalimantan Peat Project (BOS, WWF, CARE, Wetlands International → http://www.ckpp.org • West Kalimantan : FFI, Macquarie, PHKA • East Kalimantan : Global EcoRescue, Inhutani II, Winrock Intl., Malinau regency

22. The future of VCM projects in Indonesia • The VCM already provides opportunities for carbon forestry projects • Less uncertainties then under the UNFCCC → compliance market? • Regulations are tight, set by the standards and the PES conditionality has to be considered → controlling & securing service provision!!! • Hard work (e.g., land-use planning, law enforcement,…) instead of free gifts (promises from carbon cowboys!) • VCM projects are no NAMAs→ no contribution to national targets A greener future? The potential is great, if…!

24. Technology Transfer for Climate Change… What is all about?

25. Parties have taken decisions to promote the development and transferof environmentally sound technologiesat each session of the COP… Technology transfer is defined as: a broad set of processes covering the flows of know-how, experience and equipment for mitigating and adapting to climate changeamongst different stakeholders such as governments, private sector entities, financial institutions, NGOs and research/ education institutions… (source : methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer, IPCC 2000)

27. Technology Under the AWG-LCA:Relevant provisions of the UNFCCC Article 4.5 • “The developed countries and other developed countries included in Annex II shall take all practicable steps to promote, facilitate and finance, as appropriate, the transfer of or access to environmentally sound technologies and know-how to other Parties, particularly developing country Parties, to enable them to implement the provisions of the Convention.”… Article 4.7 • “The extent to which developing country Parties will effectively implement their commitments under the Convention will depend on the effective implementation by developed country Parties of their commitments related to financial resources and transfer of technology…” Also relevant: • Articles 4.1 (c), 4.3, 4.8, and 4.9, 11.5 • COP Decisions 4/CP.7 and decision 3/CP.13

28. CMPunder the Kyoto Protocol COPunder the UNFCCC Ad hoc working group on further commitments for Annex I Parties (AWG-KP) Specific mandate to agree targets for a 2nd commitment period Ad hoc working group on long-term cooperative action (AWG-LCA) Broad mandate to ensure long-termimplementation of the Convention Mandate

31. Some Key Result From CANCUN Talks… • Developing country actions to reduce emissions are officially recognized under the multilateral process. A registry is to be set up to record and match developing country mitigation actions to finance and technology support from by industrialized countries.Developing countries are to publish progress reports every two years. • The Kyoto Protocols' Clean Development Mechanisms has been strengthened to drive more major investments and technology into environmentally sound and sustainable emission reduction projects in the developing world. • Parties launched a set of initiatives and institutions to protect the vulnerable from climate change and todeploy the money and technology that developing countries need to plan and build their own sustainable futures.

32. Some Key Result From CANCUN Talks… • A new Cancun Adaptation Framework. is established to allow better planning and implementation of adaptation projects in developing countries through increased financial and technical support,including a clear process for continuing work on loss and damage. • Governments agree to boostaction to curb emissions from deforestation and forest degradationin developing countrieswith technological and financial support. • Parties have established a technology mechanism with a Technology Executive Committee and Climate Technology Centre and Networkto increase technology cooperation to support action on adaptation and mitigation.

33. Framework for effective actions to enhance the implementation of technology transfer: • Technology needs and needs assessments; • Technology information; • Enabling environment; • Capacity building; • Mechanisms for technology transfer.

34. See u in Durban, December 2011!