Carbon rights in REDD plus : exploring the implications for poor and vulnerable people

Policies to control greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from tropical deforestation and degradation have become a major focus of the international climate change negotiations over the last five years. Much of the debate has centered on the potential for developing new international financial systems through which countries, or the actors within countries, are rewarded for reducing GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation compared to a reference emissions level (REDD plus). This paper focuses mainly on questions surrounding the interpretation of rights to emissions reductions in project based and market based REDD plus systems, and national systems where governments link the distribution of REDD plus finance to local level ownership of emissions reductions. It also consider some of the implications that all national REDD plus systems may raise in terms of how governments transfer responsibilities to their citizens and the incentive effects that potentially large financial flows may have on existing rights regimes. The paper aims to address some of the confusion in understanding legal issues surrounding carbon rights. It also considers the implications for the rural poor in different contexts, given that they often have weak rights, an inability to enforce their rights and that REDD plus legal systems could add a new layer of complexity to an already complicated legal landscape in many countries.

[1]  K. Schreckenberg,et al.  Institutional approaches for carbon financing in the forest sector: learning lessons for REDD+ from forest carbon projects in Uganda , 2011 .

[2]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest Governance? , 2010, Science.

[3]  D. Disch,et al.  A comparative analysis of the ‘development dividend’ of Clean Development Mechanism projects in six host countries , 2010 .

[4]  E. M. Madeira REDD in Design: Assessment of Planned First-Generation Activities in Indonesia , 2009 .

[5]  D. Takács Forest Carbon: Law and Property Rights , 2009 .

[6]  Lorenzo Cotula,et al.  Tenure in Redd: Start-Point or Afterthought? , 2009 .

[7]  Samantha Hepburn Carbon rights as new property: the benefits of statutory verification , 2009 .

[8]  M. McDermott Equity First or Later? How US Community-Based Forestry Distributes Benefits , 2009 .

[9]  K. Schreckenberg,et al.  Equity in Community Forestry: Insights from North and South , 2009 .

[10]  Karen Holm Olsen,et al.  Sustainable development benefits of clean development mechanism projects: A new methodology for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design documents submitted for validation , 2008 .

[11]  P. May,et al.  Exploring socioeconomic impacts of forest based mitigation projects: Lessons from Brazil and Bolivia , 2007 .

[12]  P. J. Daugherty,et al.  What Makes Community Forest Management Successful: A Meta-Study From Community Forests Throughout the World , 2006 .

[13]  Andrew G. Thompson,et al.  Carbon Rights—Development of the Legal Framework for a Trading Market , 2004 .

[14]  P. Sellers,et al.  Expected Failures and Unexpected Successes of Land Titling in Africa , 1999 .

[15]  C. Colfer,et al.  Adaptive collaborative management , 2021, Adaptive Collaborative Management in Forest Landscapes.

[16]  L. Peskett,et al.  Commodifying carbon to reduce deforestation: lessons from New Zealand Background Note , 2010 .

[17]  K. Schreckenberg,et al.  Carbon offsets for forestry and bioenergy: researching opportunities for poor rural communities: final report, May 2010. , 2010 .

[18]  R. Asare Implications of the legal and policy framework for tree and forest carbon in Ghana: REDD opportunities scoping exercise. , 2010 .

[19]  J. Costenbader Legal frameworks for REDD : design and implementation at the national level , 2009 .

[20]  J. Mcneely,et al.  Local Rights and Tenure for Forests: opportunity or threat for conservation? , 2008 .

[21]  R. Meinzen-Dick,et al.  Pro-poor land tenure and democratic governance. Discussion paper No. 3.Oslo: Oslo Governance Centre. , 2008 .

[22]  W. Sunderlin,et al.  From Exclusion to Ownership?: Challenges and Opportunities in Advancing Forest Tenure Reform , 2008 .

[23]  F. Seymour,et al.  How do we achieve REDD co-benefits and avoid doing harm? , 2008 .

[24]  GR Milner-White The Legal Implications of Climate Change in New Zealand for the Forestry Industry , 2007 .

[25]  C. Luttrell,et al.  Can standards for voluntary carbon offsets ensure development benefits , 2007 .

[26]  Arlene J. Kwasniak,et al.  Property Rights and the Legal Framework for Carbon Sequestration on Agricultural Land , 2006 .

[27]  M. Colchester,et al.  Promised land : palm oil and land acquisition in Indonesia : implications for local communities and indigenous peoples , 2006 .

[28]  J. Mayers,et al.  Forest Governance and Social Justice: Practical Tactics from a Learning Group Approach in Africa , 2006 .