REDD AND REDD+
INTRODUCTION
REDD
is the acronym for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest
Degradation. It is a concept currently being developed and negotiated as part
of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The
negotiations for REDD centred on the provision of incentives that is financial
payments to developing countries to reduce level of their forest losses, and at
the same time to promote environmental, economic and social benefits, while
protecting the rights of indigenous peoples and other forest-dependent
communities. The main idea is that the payments are not for keeping forests,
but for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (Parker et
al, 2008).
Starting
as RED with a single D for deforestation, the second D for forest degradation
was added later. More recently, during the climate talks in Ghana in August
2008, the term ‘REDD plus’ was coined. This includes conservation, sustainable
management of forests, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks (Parker et
al, 2008).
REDD
was first discussed in 2005 by the UNFCCC at its 11th session of the
Conference of Parties to the Convention (COP) at the request of Costa Rica and
Papua New Guinea, on behalf of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, when they
submitted the document “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing
Countries”. This idea of REDD became formal at the UNFCCC 13th
Conference of the parties (COP 13) in Bali in 2007, the seeds for REDD were
planted in the Kyoto Protocol (IPCC, 2000). Also Tanzania is among the countries
that initiate the REDD project through UN REDD where by the contract was signed
between Norway and the Institute of Resource Assessment (IRA) in University of
Dar es Salaam in 2009.
REDD
offering new benefits such as increase income and employment opportunities,
improved local environmental assets and long-term stable benefit flows,
provides watershed services including reduce peak flows, landslide and water
erosion prevention, improve water quality and reduce sedimentation of
reservoirs and waterways. Also forest, particularly humid tropical forests,
they are extremely rich in biodiversity and provide a range of important
ecosystem services, on top of carbon storage cover such as biodiversity, hydrological
or scenic beauty as the result there is a need of protecting and preserving the
forest (UN REDD, 2009).
REDD
also facing some challenges including natural forests and trees are dispersed
in an agricultural landscapes, in a
global perspective Ghana illustrates an increasingly common scenario where
remaining natural forests and trees are dispersed in an agricultural landscape
with no single distinct forest frontier (Kanninen, 2007). There is no reliable
data which can be used to estimate present carbon stock. The study reveals that there is no reliable data which can be
used to estimate present carbon stock and the historic reduction rate in Ghana due
to the scattered distribution of closed canopy forests and trees farmland
(Diani, 2013). Agricultural
expansion, wood extraction and infrastructure extension. The study suggests the proximate (direct) causes of deforestation
and forest degradation in Ghana to include agricultural expansion, wood
extraction and infrastructure extension. With all three direct causes being at
play outside forest reserves and the latter two inside forest reserves,
underlying drivers include demographic, economic, technological and policy and
institutional factors that are frequently interacting.
The following are the differences
between REDD and REDD+
REDD
is the abbreviation of reducing emission from deforestation and forest
degradation, is an international mechanism aiming at reducing greenhouse gases
caused by deforestation and forest degradation
while REDD+ is a proposed policy mechanism under UN discussion
within the UNFCCC ( United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) Conference of
parties (COP) for reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation
as well as to foster conservation ,
sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing nations also REDD+ is seen as
an environmental mechanism for directing funds from the North (developed
nation) to the South (developing countries) to help expand low-carbon development
and poverty reduction (Brown &Seymour et al ,2008).
REDD+
is seen as a complement to land use, land use change and forestry projects that
also targets developing nations for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
while REDD is laid in land use, land use change and forestry (Eliasch, 2008 ).
Introduction
of concepts around financial mechanisms and equitable distribution of funds. REDD+
provides developing nations an economic alternative to the more destructive use
of forest lands thereby providing developing nations and their people a
financial to keep their forest intact while REDD was developed to award and to
persuade the people to change the use of their forests (MNRT, 2007a).
Inclusion
of the rights of Indigenous people and new social and environmental safeguards,
REDD considers much on the indigenous knowledge that has been used by the
community members in the protecting and managing the forest therefore it is
much including their rights in the reduction of emissions of deforestation and
forest degradation while the REDD+ is based on the adding of the new ways of
conserving and environment management of forest (Odgaard, 2005).
Generally
REDD was excluded from the Kyoto protocol because there were policies and
methodology issues that were considered too difficult to solve at the time then
decided to add plus that is REDD+ to reduce emissions from deforestation and
forest degradation while increasing the conservation, sustainable management of
forest, enhancement of forest carbon stocks so that to solve the problems that
was facing REDD.
REFERENCES
v The
Special Report of the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on Land
Use, Land Use Change and Forestry, 2000 (IPCC SR LULUCF) and Trines, Eveline,
P. (with contributions from Gert-Jan Nabuurs and Jan Verhagen) ‘Land-Use Change
and Forestry in future climate regimes:
An inventory of some options’ 9 November 2004 Commissioned by the
Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The Netherlands.
v Diani,
M. 2003 Leaders or brokers? Positions and influence in social movement
nrtworks. Pages 105-122 in M. Dian and D. Griffiths, T. 2008. Seeing REDD?
Forests, climate change mitigation and the rights of indigenous peoples and
local communities. Forest Peoples Programme, Moreton-in-Marsh, UK.
v Kanninen,
M., Murdiyarso, D., Seymour, F., Angelsen, A., Wunder, S., German, L. 2007. Do
trees grow on money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to
promote REDD. Forest Perspectives 4. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, 61p.s
v Brown
D., Seymour F. And Peskett L. (ed.)
(2008). Moving ahead with REDD: Issues, Options and Implications, CIFOR, Bogor
Indonesia.
v Eliasch
J. (2008). Eliasch Review: Climate Change _Financing Global forests.
v Parker
C., Mitchell A., Trivedi M and Mardas M. (2008). The Little REDD Book. Global
Canopy Foundation.
v MNRT,
2007a. Community Based Forest Management Guidelines, Ministry of Natural
Resource and Tourism. Dar es Salaam.
v National
Framework for Reduced Emissions from Defforestation and Forest Degradation
(REDD). First Draft. United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of Natural Resources
and Tourism, Forestry and Beekeeping Division. February 2009.
v R.
Odgaard: “The Struggle for Land Rights in the context of Multiple Normative
Orders in Tanzania”. In S. Ewers, M. Spierenburg and H. Wels: Competing
Jurisdictions: Settling Land Claims in Africa. Brill Publishers, Leiden, The
Netherlands. 2005.
Share This :
comment 0 Comments
more_vert