Forests are a complex network of dependencies and inter-dependencies supporting the diversity of life. They are also our best shot at climate change mitigation as they are capable of sequestering and storing huge proportions of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
They are constantly at high risk due to the global demand for land and resources. Hence, the Parties at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change started designing and developing programs to save forests from deforestation and degradation.
As a result a program known as UN-REDD (United Nations Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) was adopted in collaboration with FAO, UNDP and UNEP to implement national REDD+ strategies in developing countries.
REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) strategies promote sustainable
management, conservation and enhancement of forest carbon stocks by encouraging public and private
investment in developing countries.
It basically remunerates the developing countries to
keep forests alive without cutting them down as a measure
to prevent greenhouse gas emissions associated with deforestation and forest
degradation from being released.
As a result,
the forest became a commodity storing carbon and REDD+ was introduced
to conserve that commodity by remunerating the conserver.
Reduce Deforestation
Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Promote Communally Maintained Indigenous Lands
According to FAO forest is a
minimum area of land of 0.5 hectares
with tree crown cover of more than 10%
The definition considers agricultural lands, rubberwood plantations, cork oak stands and industrial plantations as forests.
According to UNFCCC forest is a
minimum area of land of 0.05-1.0 hectares
with tree crown cover of more than 10-30%
In some cases industrial plantations and agricultural lands can be considered forest due to the loose definition.
According to research and suggestions of environmentalists and experts forest is a
minimum area of land of 1.0 hectares
with tree crown cover of more than 50%
Only some agroforestry landuse can be considered a forest.
There is a lack of consistency with the definitions of forests within the United Nations. Hence, the
participating countries can define their individual definitions within the pre-defined ranges.
The study visualizes the significant change in forest area and deforestation rates by altering
definitions provided by organizations such as UNFCCC and FAO and comparing it with the upper limit
of definition concluded through research by Nophea Sasaki1 & Francis E. Putz.
The choice of a forest definition can have a large impact on estimates of deforestation and forest
degradation areas, on the assessment of drivers of deforestation and on the development of a
Reference Emissions Level.
The definitions of the forest do not differentiate between natural forests and forest
plantations. The ambiguity is these definitions are one the main concerns as the loggers might keep
exploiting until they hit the national threshold leading to huge deforestation, forest degradation,
biodiversity loss and loss of carbon stocks leading to increased emissions.
Reduce Deforestation
Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Promote Communally Maintained Indigenous Lands
Forests are also known as Carbon Sinks as they are capable of sequestering huge proportions of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
It's value depends directly on its carbon storing capacity rather than the diversity it holds.
For example, there are two pieces of land. One is a biodiversity rich Boreal forest with low carbon accumulation, while the other is a Eucalyptus monoculture plantation with high carbon storage.
The concerning body would decide to sacrifice the forest instead of monoculture farms due to its carbon accumulation. It misuses equivalences of Carbon dioxide, saying that you can destroy one ecosystem but at the same time preserve the other.
= 10 tC/ha
The policy focuses on reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation.
The study further visualizes the trend of carbon dioxide emissions driven by
deforestation. It also aims to analyze the trends by previously discussed thresholds to
understand the impact of policy with different standards.
Programs such as REDD+ cannot be perceived as a permanent solution for emission reductions to
mitigate climate change as, by definition, the offset project does not reduce overall emissions. In
most cases, the emissions reductions at one location are claimed as a justification for excess
emission at another location.
Indigenous forest dwellers or peasants are often criminialized and dispalced for forest
degradation, while the corporations with industrials farms are incentivized for reducing emissions.
Reduce Deforestation
Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Promote Communally Maintained Indigenous Lands
Indigenous lands are usually managed by a community without individual legal proprietorship.
Due to industrial lobby and corruption, land rights are snatched from these
populations and transferred for so-called environmental projects.
As the land ownership is transferred, it often leads to biodiversity loss as the carbon stock is evidently just stored in trees and soil. It leads to degradation of forests and ultimately results in deforestation for industrial farming adding up to current emissions.
Total Population under the Study (in %)
Impacted Population under the Study (in %)
Heinrich Böll Foundation discusses the contradictions in a research stating, "They can only be
benefited under the program if they portray that they are a threat to their own forest lands
contributing to false perception smallholder land use in the forest is major causes of forest loss.
After all, without evidence of the threat of deforestation, there are no emissions from
deforestation that could be avoided - and there can be no REDD+ payment without proof that REDD+
measures have contributed to reducing emissions that would otherwise have been released."
Reduce Deforestation
Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation
Promote Communally Maintained Indigenous Lands
They have initiated a new phase of "green grabbing" where land and resource grabs are done with a private agenda in the name of environmental protection.
Programs such as REDD+ attempts to save the emissions to sell the saved emissions to corporations so they can continue polluting.It's a luring opportunity for a corporation to invest in forest conservation projects to offset their emissions.
The program has become a huge economic opportunity as the REDD+ permits are sold in voluntary Carbon Markets. According to a report by Ecosystem Marketplace, Forestry and Land Use activities were used to offset 50.7 MtCO²e in 2018 , creating a financial market of approximately 171.9 million USD in the voluntary carbon market.
Emissions trading was initiated with a simple goal: to promote a systemic and affordable transition from fossil fuel energy to clean energy using emission reduction targets. The trading consists of two major components: 'cap and trade' and 'offsetting'. The combination of this mechanism is also known as 'Carbon Market'.
Under the scheme, governing bodies begin by setting a limit (cap) on permissible emissions for an area.
It then distributes emission allowances that total the cap to the major polluters of that area.
The cap gradually reduces and the corporations that do not have sufficient allowances must either buy extra offsets from auctions, private markets or make reductions in their emissions.
The cap on permissible emissions of a particular state is 4 MTCO2e.
The government would then distribute the permits to the biggest polluters of the state i.e. two transnational corporations. Under the scheme, both of the corporations would receive permits to emit with strict compliance.
The emissions of A is and emissions of B is So A has to buy permit from B or goverment, or reduce its emssions by .
Under the scheme, emission reduction can also be achieved through emission/carbon offsetting.
An offset is a reduction of GHG emission achieved outside the capped area in order to compensate for emissions made inside the capped area.
It could be achieved by actual reductions, land-use reductions, joint implementation and clean development mechanisms.
Funding a REDD+ forest conservation project in the forests of developing economies such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Africa and Peru, South America could be used to offset emissions of a company in a developed economy such as Walt Disney Company, United States.
Hence, the company is technically carbon neutral as its' emissions are being offset from a forest on the other side of the world.
The world is just beginning to commodify complex natural systems into linear capitalist programs. The idea to privatizing natural resources by putting an economic value is a false solution. The consequences have been disastrous leading to increased emission, deforestation, resource grabs and human rights violations. The threats could amplify beyond magnitude if not restricted and stopped immediately.
The root causes of the problem is burning of fossil fuels and excessive consumption of food, timber and metals by developed countries. Hence, it has to be acknowledged that each community across the globe has unequal contributions.
The countries of the Global North have contributed the most to this crisis. Hence, now is a good time for them to take an initiative of system change promoting organized degrowth instead of passing the burden to Global South.
The other biggest limitation is the privatization of natural resources results in social and environmental stress. Hence, instead of privatizing forest land to individual stakeholders, government and international policies should encourage and assign forest conservation and management to indigenous and peasants communities.
Communities with community forest management systems in place have been found to have higher levels of biodiversity than those managed by the government or through conservation programs through non-profits or corporations.
The governments and international organizations should use the knowledge diversity of indigenous people in creating sustainable societies specifically for forest management and agroforestry.
Exploring different forest definitions and their impact on developing REDD+ reference emission levels: A case study for Indonesia.
REDD + The Carbon Market and California-Acre-Chiapas Cooperation : Legalizing Mechanisms of Dispossession
State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2017
License to pollute - Carbon markets and the new economy of nature
Market-compliant forest conservation (REDD+)
Learning From 'Actually Existing' REDD+: A Synthesis of Ethnographic Findings
A Climate of Injustice Global Inequality, North-South Politics, and Climate Policy
REDD: A Collection of Conflicts, Contradictions and Lies
Learning From 'Actually Existing' REDD+: A Synthesis of Ethnographic Findings
Climate Change and Society: Sociological Perspectives
The Role of Indigenous Peoples in Biodiversity Conservation The Natural but Often Forgotten Partners
The Road Through Paris: Climate Change, Carbon, and the Political Dynamics of Convergence
Comparative framework and Options for harmonization of definitions
Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)
Global Forest Watch
Land Matrix
Learning From 'Actually Existing' REDD+: A Synthesis of Ethnographic Findings
Carbon stock in agroforestry coffee plantations with different shade trees in Villa Rica, Peru
How Much Carbon Do Different Forests Store & What Size Offsets Your Driving For a Year?