Climatic Change

, Volume 100, Issue 3–4, pp 355–388 | Cite as

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries: revisiting the assumptions

Article

Abstract

The United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC), at its thirteenth meeting in 2005 (COP-11), agreed to start a work program to explore a range of policy approaches and positive incentives for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD). This process was further encouraged in the 2007 COP-13 with the explicit consideration of REDD activities as a means to enhance mitigation action by developing countries in the future. This paper outlines the context of this ongoing political process by reviewing the science indicating that land-use change is a key contributor of greenhouse emissions globally and the assumptions that REDD activities may be competitive—in terms of cost effectiveness—in comparison to other mitigation options. The paper then examines REDD proposals submitted by Parties before COP-13 and identifies key economic, technological, methodological and institutional challenges associated with their implementation. These proposals are discussed in the light of major drivers of deforestation and ongoing efforts to address deforestation. This reveals another set of challenges which, if not taken into account, may undermine REDD effectiveness. The paper aims to aid the policy process and contribute to the best possible design of a REDD framework under the future climate regime.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Achard F, Eva HD, Mayaux P, Stibig HJ et al (2004) Improved estimates of net carbon emissions from land cover change in the tropics for the 1990s. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 18:GB2008. doi:10.1029/2003GB002142 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asner GP, Knapp DE, Broadbent E et al (2005) Selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Science 310:480–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benítez PC, McCallum I, Obersteiner M et al (2007) Global potential for carbon sequestration: geographical distribution, country risk and policy implications. Ecol Econ 60:572–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyd E, Hultman N, Timmons Roberts J, et al (2009) Reforming the CDM for sustainable development: lessons learned and policy futures. Environ Sci Policy 12(7):820–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown K, Pearce DW (eds) (1994) The causes of tropical deforestation. UCL, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown K, Boyd E, Corbera E et al (2004) How do CDM projects contribute to sustainable development? Technical report 16, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change ResearchGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruner AG, Gullison RE, Rice RE et al (2001) Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science 291(5501):125–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chomitz KM, Gray DA (1995) Roads, land use, and deforestation, a spatial model applied to Belize. World Bank Econ Rev 10(3):487–512Google Scholar
  9. Chomitz KM, Buys P, DeLuca G et al (2006) At loggerheads? Agricultural expansion, poverty reduction, and the environment in the tropics. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Corbera E (2008) Who owns forest carbon? Paper presented at the Rural Property and Inequality Workshop, University of East Anglia, 1–2 September 2008Google Scholar
  11. Corbera E, Brown K (2008) Building institutions to trade ecosystem services: marketing forest carbon in Mexico. World Dev 36(10):1956–1979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Corbera E, Kosoy N, Martínez Tuna M (2006) Equity implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas and rural communities: case studies from Meso-America. Glob Environ Change 17:365–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Corbera E, Brown K, Adger WN (2007) The equity and legitimacy of markets for ecosystem services. Dev Change 38(4):587–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corbera E, González Soberanis C, Brown K (2009) Institutional dimensions of payments for ecosystem services. An analysis of Mexico’s carbon forestry programme. Ecol Econ 68:743–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cowles PD, Rakotoarisoa S, Rasolonirinamanana H et al (2001) Facilitation, participation, and learning in an ecoregionbased planning process: The case of AGERAS in Toliara, Madagascar. In: Buck LE, Geisler CC, Schelhas J et al (eds) Biological diversity: balancing interests through adaptive collaborative management. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  16. Cox PM, Betts RA, Jones CD et al (2000) Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model. Nature 408:184–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cropper M, Puri J, Griffiths C (2001) Predicting the location of deforestation. Land Econ 77(2):172–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davis C, Daviet F, Nakhooda S et al (2009) A review of 25 readiness plan idea notes from the World Bank forest carbon partnership facility. WRI working paper. World Resources Institute, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  19. De Jong BHJ, Hellier A, Castillo-Santiago MA et al (2005) Application of the ‘CLIMAFOR’ approach to estimate baseline carbon emissions of a forest conservation project in the Selva Lacandona, Chiapas, Mexico. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 10:265–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. DeFries RS, Houghton RA, Hansen MC (2002) Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation and regrowth based on satellite observations for the 1980s and 90s. Proc Natl Acad Sci 99:14256–14261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. DeFries R, Asner GP, Achard F et al (2005) Monitoring tropical deforestation for emerging carbon markets. In: Mountinho P, Schwartzman S (eds) Tropical deforestation and climate change. IPAM and Environmental Defense, Belem, pp 35–44Google Scholar
  22. DeFries R, Achard F, Brown S et al (2006) Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation in developing countries: considerations for monitoring and measuring. Paper presented at the GOFC-GOLD workshop on monitoring tropical deforestation for compensated reductions, Jena, Germany, 21–22 March 2006Google Scholar
  23. Deininger K, Minten B (1996) Determinants of forest cover and the economics of protection: an application to Mexico. World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Dixon RK, Brown S, Houghton RA et al (1994) Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science 263:185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dudley NA, Belokurov O, Borodin L et al (2004) Are protected areas working? An analysis of protected areas. WWF International, GlandGoogle Scholar
  26. Ebeling J, Yasué M (2008) Generating carbon finance through avoided deforestation and its potential to create climatic, conservation and human development benefits. Philos Trans R Soc B 363:1917–1924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Espach R (2006) When is sustainable forestry sustainable? The forest stewardship council in Argentina and Brazil. Glob Environ Polit 6(2):55–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ewers R (2006) Interaction between economic development and forest cover determine deforestation rates. Glob Environ Change 16:161–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Faminow MD (1998) Cattle, deforestation, and development in the Amazon: an economic, agronomic, and environmental perspective. CAB International, UKGoogle Scholar
  30. FAO (2006) FAO global forest resource assessment 2005. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  31. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2001) Global forest resources assessment 2000. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  32. Ferraro PJ, Kiss A (2002) Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 298:1718–1719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Field CB, Behrenfeld MJ, Randerson JT et al (1998) Primary production of the biosphere: integrating terrestrial and oceanic components. Science 281:237–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Freestone D (2009) The international climate change legal and institutional framework: an overview. In: Freestone D, Streck C (eds) Legal aspects of carbon trading: Kyoto, Copenhagen and beyond. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  35. Fuchs D (2006) Private actors in tropical deforestation governance. Wittenberg-Zentrum Für Globale Ethik. Diskussionspapier Nr. 2006-2Google Scholar
  36. Geist H, Lambin E (2001) What drives tropical deforestation? A meta-analysis of proximate and underlying causes of deforestation based on subnational case study evidence. LUCC (Land Use and Land Use Cover Change), LouvainGoogle Scholar
  37. Grainger A (1993) Controlling tropical deforestation. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Grieg-Gran M (2006) The cost of avoiding deforestation: report prepared for the Stern review of the economics of climate change. International Institute for Environment and Development, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Haites E (2004) Estimating the market potential for the clean development mechanism: review of models and lessons learned. PCFplus report, Washington DC, 19 JuneGoogle Scholar
  40. Hansen MC, DeFries RS (2004) Detecting long-term global forest change using continuous fields of tree-cover maps from 8-km Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data for the years 1982-99. Ecosystems 7:695–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Herold M, Achard F, DeFries R et al (2006) Report of the workshop on monitoring tropical deforestation for compensated reductions. In: GOFC-GOLD symposium on forest and land cover observations, Jena, Germany, 21–22 March 2006Google Scholar
  42. Hoare AL (2006) Divided forests: towards fairer zoning of forest lands. The Rainforest FoundationGoogle Scholar
  43. Houghton RA (2003) Revised estimates of the annual net flux of carbon to the atmosphere from changes in land use and land management 1850–2000. Tellus 55:378–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Houghton RA (2005) Tropical deforestation as a source of greenhouse gas emissions. In: Moutinho P, Schwartzman S (eds) Tropical deforestation and climate change. IPAM and Environmental Defense, BelemGoogle Scholar
  45. Houghton RA, Hackler JL (2002) Carbon flux to the atmosphere from land-use changes. Oak Ridge, CDIAC. Online at: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/landuse/landuse.htm (July 25, 2005)
  46. Humphreys D (2006) Logjam. Deforestation and the crisis of global governance. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  47. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2000) Land use, land-use change and forestry. Special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2005) G8 climate change action plan and the investment framework the technology and financing context and issues. Montreal, CoP11 UK/IEA Side-event, 5 December 2005Google Scholar
  49. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2006) Energy technology perspectives in support of the gleneagles plan of action: scenarios & strategies to 2050. OECD/IEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  50. International Tropical Timber Organisation (ITTO) (2005) Status report of tropical forest management 2005. ITTO, YokohamaGoogle Scholar
  51. IPCC (2007) IPCC fourth assessment report, working group III. Chapter 9, Forestry. Available online at: www.ipcc.ch
  52. IUCN (2006) Working for conservation. Programme Report 2006. Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  53. Kaimowitz D, Angelsen A (1998) Economic models of tropical deforestation: a review. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), IndonesiaGoogle Scholar
  54. Lele U, Viana V, Veríssimo A, et al (2000) Brazil forests in the balance: challenges of conservation with development. TheWorld Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  55. Lescuyer G, Emerit A, Essiane Mendoula E et al (2001) Community involvement in forest management: a full-scale experiment in the South Cameroon Forest. Rural Development Forestry Network, Overseas Development InstituteGoogle Scholar
  56. Mamingi N, Chomitz KM, Gray DA et al (1996) Spatial patterns of deforestation in Cameroon and Zaire. World Bank, Washington, DC, Working paper 8, Research Project on Social and Environmental Consequences of Growth-Oriented Policies, Policy Research DepartmentGoogle Scholar
  57. Mayrand K, Paquin M (2004) Payments for environmental services: a survey and assessment of current schemes. Unisfera International Centre, Montreal, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  58. McKinsey&Company (2009) Pathways to a low-carbon economy: version 2 of the global greenhouse gas abatement cost curveGoogle Scholar
  59. Melillo JM, McGuire AD, Kicklighter DW et al (1993) Global climate change and terrestrial net primary production. Nature 363:234–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mertens B, Lambin EF (2000) Land cover-change trajectories in southern Cameroon. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 90(3):467–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mertens B, Poccard-Chapuis R, Piketty MG et al (2002) Crossing spatial analyses and livestock economics to understand deforestation processes in the Brazilian Amazon: the case of São Félix do Xingú in South Pará. Agriculturan Economics 27:269–294Google Scholar
  62. Mission Permanente de la France auprès de l’Office des Nations Unies à Genève (2006) Innovative ways to fund development: an international solidarity contribution. Embassy of France, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  63. Morton D, DeFries R, Shimabukuro Y et al (2005) Rapid assessment of annual deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon using MODIS data. Earth Interact 9:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Muñoz-Piña C, Guevara A, Torres JM et al (2008) Paying for the hydrological services of Mexico’s forests: analysis, negotiations and results. Ecol Econ 65:725–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Nelson G, Hellerstein D (1997) Do roads cause deforestation? Using satellite images in econometric analysis of land use. Am J Agric Econ 79:80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Nobre CA, Sellers P, Shukla J (1991) Regional climate change and Amazonian deforestation model. J Climate 4:957–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Pedroni L, Streck C, Dutschke M (2007) Mobilizing public and private resources for the protection of tropical forests. CATIE and BIOCONSULTGoogle Scholar
  68. Rudel T, Coomes O, Moran E et al (2005) Forest transitions: towards a global understanding of land use change. Glob Environ Change 15:23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Santilli M, Moutinho P, Schwartzman S et al (2005) Tropical deforestation and the Kyoto protocol: an editorial essay. Clim Change 71:267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sathaye JA, Makundi W, Dale L et al (2007) GHG mitigation potential, costs and benefits in global forests: a dynamic partial equilibrium approach. Energy J 3:127–172Google Scholar
  71. Schlamadinger B, Ciccarese L, Dutschke M et al (2005) Should we include avoidance of deforestation in the international response to climate change? In: Murdiyarso D, Herawati H (eds) Carbon forestry: who will benefit? Proceedings of workshop on carbon sequestration and sustainable livelihoods. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia, pp 26–41Google Scholar
  72. Schwarze R, Niles J, Olander J (2002) Understanding and managing leakage in forest-based greenhouse-gas-mitigation projects. Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci 360(1797):1685–1703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Silva-Dias MA, Rutledge F, Kabat S et al (2002) Cloud and rain processes in a biosphere-atmosphere interaction context in the Amazon Region. J Geophys Res (Atmospheres) 107(D20):1–39Google Scholar
  74. Skutsch M, Bird N, Trines E et al (2006) Clearing the way for reducing emissions from tropical deforestation. Environ Sci Policy 10(4):322–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Soares-Filho BS, Nepstad D, Curran L et al (2006) Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin. Nature 440:520–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sohngen B, Sedjo R (2006) Carbon sequestration costs in global forests. Energy J 27:109–126Google Scholar
  77. Stern N (2006) Stern review: the economics of climate change. HM Treasury UK Government, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  78. Stoll-Kleeman S, Bender S, Berghöfer A et al (2006) Linking governance and management perspectives with conservation success in protected areas and biosphere reserves. Discussion paper 01 of the Governance and Biodiversity Research Group, Humboldt-Universität zu BerlinGoogle Scholar
  79. Subak S (2000) Forest protection and reforestation in Costa Rica: evaluation of a clean development mechanism prototype. Environ Manag 26(3):283–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Timmermann A, Oberhuber J, Bacher A et al (1999) Increased El Niño frequency in a climate model forced by future greenhouse warming. Nature 398:694–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Trenberth K, Hoar TJ (1997) El Niño and climate change. Geophys Res Lett 24:3057–3060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Trines E, Höhne N, Jung M et al (2006) Integrating agriculture, forestry and other land use in future climate regimes: methodological issues and policy options. WAB report 500101002. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, BilthovenGoogle Scholar
  83. UNFCCC (2006b) Background paper for the workshop on reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries part II policy approaches and positive incentives, Rome, Italy, 30 August–1 September 2006Google Scholar
  84. UNFCCC (2007) Views on the range of topics and other relevant information relating to reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries: submissions from parties. FCCC/SBSTA/2007/MISC.2Google Scholar
  85. UNFCCC (2009) Ad Hoc working group on long-term cooperative group under the convention. Fourth Session Poznan, 1–11 December 2008. FCCC/AWGLCA/2008/16/Rev.1Google Scholar
  86. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2006a) Background paper for the workshop on reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries part I scientific, socio-economic, technical and methodological issues related to deforestation in developing countries, Rome, Italy, 30 August–1 September 2006Google Scholar
  87. Vera Diaz MC, Schwartzman S (2005) Carbon offsets and land use in the Brazilian Amazon. In: Moutinho P, Schwartzman S (eds) Tropical deforestation and climate change. IPAM and Environmental Defense, BelemGoogle Scholar
  88. von Amsberg J (1998) Economic parameters of deforestation. World Bank Econ Rev 12(1):133–153Google Scholar
  89. White A, Cannell MGR, Friend AD (1999) Climate change impacts on ecosystems and the terrestrial carbon sink: a new assessment. Glob Environ Change 9(S1):S21–S30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. World Bank (2007a) State and trends of the carbon market 2007. Washington DC. May 2007. In cooperation with the International Emissions Trading AssociationGoogle Scholar
  91. World Bank (2007b) Forest carbon partnership facility. A framework for piloting activities to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. World Bank, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  92. World Resources Institute (2005) Navigating the numbers greenhouse gas data and international climate policy. World Resources Institute, Washington DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Esteve Corbera
    • 1
    • 2
  • Manuel Estrada
    • 3
  • Katrina Brown
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of International DevelopmentUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  2. 2.Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental SciencesUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  3. 3.Overseas Development GroupUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations