Biodiversity co‐benefits of reducing emissions from deforestation under alternative reference levels and levels of finance

The extent to which an international mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+) can also provide biodiversity co-benefits will depend on whether the mechanism results in the retention of forest in countries harboring substantial biodiversity. Countries’ decisions whether or not to participate in REDD+ will be influenced by their national reference level of emissions from deforestation, below which their verified emissions can be credited as reductions. In this article, we explore the reduction in extinctions of forest species achieved under four alternative national reference level designs and three alternative levels of finance for REDD+. We use an 85-country partial equilibrium model and species-area relationships to estimate extinction rates for 2,472 nationally endemic forest-dependent amphibian, bird and mammal species if a REDD+ mechanism had been in place during 2005–2010. Our results indicate that elements of REDD+ that are most effective for climate change mitigation—greater finance combined with reference levels which reduce leakage by promoting broad participation across countries with both high and low historical deforestation rates—also offer the greatest benefits for biodiversity conservation.

[1]  Benjamin S Halpern,et al.  Gaps and Mismatches between Global Conservation Priorities and Spending , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[2]  E. Davidson,et al.  The potential ecological costs and cobenefits of REDD: a critical review and case study from the Amazon region , 2009 .

[3]  S. Polasky,et al.  Efficiency of incentives to jointly increase carbon sequestration and species conservation on a landscape , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  Bruce M. Campbell,et al.  Beyond Copenhagen: REDD+, agriculture, adaptation strategies and poverty , 2009 .

[5]  H. Possingham,et al.  Harnessing Carbon Payments to Protect Biodiversity , 2009, Science.

[6]  Jonah Busch,et al.  Comparing climate and cost impacts of reference levels for reducing emissions from deforestation , 2009 .

[7]  Global Soil Data Task,et al.  Global Gridded Surfaces of Selected Soil Characteristics (IGBP-DIS) , 2000 .

[8]  E. Tjørve,et al.  Scale‐dependence in species‐area relationships , 2005 .

[9]  J. Swenson,et al.  Reference scenarios for deforestation and forest degradation in support of REDD: a review of data and methods , 2008 .

[10]  D. Huberman,et al.  Making REDD work for the poor : a poverty environment partnership (PEP) report , 2008 .

[11]  Bernardo B. N. Strassburg,et al.  Reducing emissions from deforestation - the "combined incentives" mechanism and empirical simulations. , 2009 .

[12]  Edward O. Wilson,et al.  Our Diminishing Tropical Forests , 1988 .

[13]  Bruce D. Patterson,et al.  The Status of the World's Land and Marine Mammals: Diversity, Threat, and Knowledge , 2008, Science.

[14]  Kasper Kok,et al.  A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation' , 2009, Carbon balance and management.

[15]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. , 2000, Science.

[16]  M. Nowak,et al.  Habitat destruction and the extinction debt , 1994, Nature.

[17]  J. Ragle,et al.  IUCN Red List of Threatened Species , 2010 .

[18]  C. Nobre,et al.  Tropical Deforestation and the Kyoto Protocol , 2005 .

[19]  F. Achard,et al.  An incentive mechanism for reducing emissions from conversion of intact and non-intact forests , 2007 .

[20]  Francis E. Putz,et al.  Critical need for new definitions of “forest” and “forest degradation” in global climate change agreements , 2009 .

[21]  Comparing REDD mechanism design options w ith an open source economic model Submitted for review, 20 February 2009 , 2011 .

[22]  J. Dutoit.  The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) , 2007 .

[23]  A. Caparrós,et al.  Conflicts between biodiversity and carbon sequestration programs: economic and legal implications , 2003 .

[24]  C. Orme,et al.  Global congruence of carbon storage and biodiversity in terrestrial ecosystems , 2010 .

[25]  J. Ebeling,et al.  Generating carbon finance through avoided deforestation and its potential to create climatic, conservation and human development benefits , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  C. Harvey,et al.  Opportunities for achieving biodiversity conservation through REDD , 2010 .

[27]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Balancing the Earth's accounts , 1999, Nature.

[28]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  CO 2 emissions from forest loss , 2009 .

[29]  Holly K. Gibbs,et al.  New IPCC Tier-1 Global Biomass Carbon Map for the Year 2000 , 2008 .

[30]  A. Mitchell,et al.  The little REDD book: a guide to governmental and non-governmental proposals for reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation. , 2008 .

[31]  G. Cowlishaw.  Predicting the Pattern of Decline of African Primate Diversity: an Extinction Debt from Historical Deforestation , 1999 .

[32]  Jonah Busch,et al.  On international equity in reducing emissions from deforestation , 2010 .

[33]  M. Steininger,et al.  Global analysis of the protection status of the world’s forests , 2009 .

[34]  T. Iwamura,et al.  Global-scale mapping of economic benefits from agricultural lands: Implications for conservation priorities , 2007 .

[35]  K. Gaston,et al.  Can We Afford to Conserve Biodiversity? , 2001 .

[36]  F. Putz,et al.  Dangers of carbon-based conservation , 2009 .

[37]  G. Powell,et al.  Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth , 2001 .

[38]  Michael L. Rosenzweig,et al.  Species Diversity in Space and Time , 1997 .

[39]  B. Griscom,et al.  Sensitivity of amounts and distribution of tropical forest carbon credits depending on baseline rules , 2009 .