Lessons Learned for Lessons Learned for Implementing Large-Scale Implementing Large-Scale
REDD ProgramsREDD Programs
Lex Hovani, Forest Carbon Lex Hovani, Forest Carbon Advisor, TNC IndonesiaAdvisor, TNC Indonesia
REDD eXREDD eXJuly 13-16, 2010July 13-16, 2010
REDD“I wouldn’t give a fig for the simplicity on this side of complexity, but I would give my life for the simplicity on the far side of complexity.”
-Oliver Wendell Holmes (former U.S. Supreme Court Justice)
Outline
• Current situation• Overview of what needs to be
done• 3 key points
– Strong core teams– Smarter joint problem solving– Breakthrough knowledge
management
4
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
CO2e Tons Millions
The Goal: 3 billion tons REDD+ by 2020
3 G tons
Halving deforestation and degradation by 2020 is an ambitious yet achievable goal, as part of a comprehensive approach to reducing emissions from all sectors
Expected Results????
Opportunities
– Market forces taking hold (Lacey, European agreement, oil palm, etc.)
– Leadership from key countries (e.g. Indonesia, Brazil) not contingent on carbon finance—at least in short-term
– There are low-cost ways to increase the pace of development (even growth) while reducing exploitation of natural resources
Outline
• Current situation• What needs to be done• 3 key points
– Strong core teams– Smarter joint problem solving– Breakthrough knowledge
management
REDD+ Program
Management & Leadership
Forest Sector Dynamics
Conservation Strategies
Carbon Accounting/MRV
Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
Financing
Low Carbon Development
Plan
Legal and Institutional Frameworks
Stakeholder Involvement & Benefit Sharing
Bringing it all Together
Outline
• Current situation• Overview of what needs to be
done• 3 key points
– Strong core teams– Smarter joint problem solving– Breakthrough knowledge
management
REDDStrong core teams
Strong core teams
• Who needs them– Developing country governments—all levels– Donor agencies– Large-scale programs– International organizations – NGOs
• Why? Because REDD Programs: – Are complex—require expertise – Are intricate—pieces need to fit, phasing
important– Involve many partners—need a hub– Require adaptive management
• need to learn by doing • stay aligned with shifting context as uncertainties get
resolved
Main BFCP Implementation
Capacity Berau District Government
Seconded staff
Bupati
District Agencies
•Sekda•Bappeda•Kehutanan•Tata Ruang•Perkebunan•Pertanian•Pekerjaan umum•Pertanahan•Pertambangan
BFCP Technical Teams
•REL•DA•Planning
Berau Pokja REDD
Technical Assistance UnitManagement and Admin: (10)
Supervisory Council
REDD Site Activities
MRV
(3)
Land Use Planning
(3)
Governance & Enforcement
(3)
Stakeholder involvement
(3)
Timber Concessions
(2)
Protection Forest
(1)
Oil Palm
(1)
Secretariat
(4)
Communities
(3)
Sub-contract
Sub-contract
Sub-contract
BFCP collaborationPartners
• District Government REDD Working Group
• Ministry of Forestry• Provincial Government
REDD Working Group• ICRAF• Mulawarman University• Winrock International• World Resources Institute• Sekala• University of Queensland• U.S. Forest Service• Daemeter Consulting• World Education• Baker & McKenzie• Forest Carbon, Inc.• IHSA
TNC Operating Units
• Indonesia Terrestrial Program
• Responsible Asian Forest and Trade
• Global Climate Team• Global Science Team
(measures program)
REDDSmarter joint problem-solving
Types of problems
• Unresolved governance issues (land tenure, conflicting regulations, unclear roles)
• REDD Approach/REDD policy/REDD Institutions
• Low-carbon development strategy• Program/project implementation
Why joint problem solving?• When decision quality is
important and followers possess useful
information
• When the problem is unstructured and the
leader lacks information / skill to make the decision
alone,•
• When decision acceptance is important and followers
are unlikely to accept an autocratic decision,
• • When decision acceptance
is important but followers are likely to disagree
• Decision acceptance is critical
Autocratic
Consultative
– Individual
– Group
Group decision
Vroom, V.H. and Yetton, P.W. Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburg Press
Problem-solving
• Mechanisms– Institutions created for problem solving– Informal working groups – Workshops/conferences– Learning networks
• Actors– Central, provincial, district government– Private sector– NGOs– Communities/public
Coordination mechanisms
Ministry of Forestry Liason Officer
Secretariat
Secretariat
REDDBreak-through knowledge management
Don’t worry, guys, I downloaded a lessons learned document on
how to build a bivouac
Key areas of knowledge management
Examples of outputs to support implementation
• National laws and regulations clarified, organized
• Spatial data integrated
• BMP articulated and codified and effective assistance programs designed
• Model local institutions and regulations
•Integrated planning processes mapped out for large scale LCD programs
•Generic/adaptable project design documents for on the ground projects (e.g. community protected area project)
•TORs for various project elements that do have to be replicated (e.g. TOR for provincial field inventories or community baselines
Information to make good decisions for REDD
Decision-makers
Planning Process
Internal data management system
Data management system pilot
Reference scenario
Boundary maps
Village develop. plans
Threat assessment
Land use profitability
Carbon stocks
HCVF
Management unit plans
All data
Primary data
Data users/ integrators
Data management
Oil palm
Mining
Sector analysis
Timber
Pulp and paper
DECISIONS
•Spatial plan
•Allocation of permits and licenses
•Planning within license areas
•Development investments
•REDD investment decisions
•Stronger core teams
•Smarter joint problem-solving
•Breakthrough knowledge management
Questions?
Theme Topic Tools/ R&D Systems/ Institutions Individuals
Planning Multi-stakeholder decision-making on land use
FPIC
Planning data
Development planning
REDD
NRM
Community development HCVF
FPIC
Legal Law enforcement
REDD policy development
NRM policies and regulations
Best practices land management
Forestry
Agriculture
Protection
Mining
Measures Carbon inventory GIS/RSCrew leaders
Benefit sharing
Private sector development
Information for decision-making TYPES OF INFORMATION
• Biophysical• Forest cover• Carbon stocks• Land suitability
• Economic analysis• Opportunity costs of land
uses• Macroeconomic analysis• Fiscal Flows
• Social • Legal status/boundaries• Conservation priorities• Economic development
goals
• Biodiversity • High conservation values• Connectivity assessments• Orangutan Action Plan
Priorities
• Programmatic Focus
• Generating information
• Integrating information
• Refining processes for using information
Challenges
– Have not yet really grasped the scale of the implementation challenge
– Longstanding governance/decentralization issues• Weak institutions and weak linkages between institutions• Narrowly perceived incentives, institutions that are biased• Land tenure: uncertain now, and no easy solutions
– Financing • Mechanisms in countries are weak• Public and private donors aren’t ready to move large-
scale REDD funds effectively– Capacity
• Local NGO capacity weak• International NGOs not as strong as they need to be
– Project mentality• Carbon project• Donor projects
Phasing
PRIORITIZATION
• Pre-requisites – Real understanding of
drivers– Getting planned
deforestation under control
– Law enforcement – Data generation and
management – Policy process
• Most important– Moratorium on
conversion• No-regrets
– Pre-existing goals– Useful in different
scenarios
Phases
• Scoping• Design• Early
implementation• Demonstration• Full
implementation• Post-REDD
Programs, project types, sitesProgram area Project type Goals for sites
Industrial production forestry
Industrial natural forest production 11 concessions
** Industrial timber plantation production
1-3 concessions
Palm Oil Palm oil production 3-5 concessions
Conservation
Conservation in KBK 1 concession?
Protection Forest 3-5 areas
Protection in KBNK 3-5 areas
Governance KPH 1-2 KPH
Community production
Community Forestry 20-30 villages
Agroforestry
Small scale agriculture
Other industrial production
Coal production 1 company
Shrimp farming
Sectoral and site-strategies:
BFCP Management Challenge
Project Management Unit:
Joint team of government staff, consultants, NGOs leading program implementation and supporting natural resource governance and management
Supervisory Council• Multi-stakeholder• Strong secretariat
Timber Concessions
Oil Palm
Protection Forest
Mining
Advisory Groups
Joint working group
Create Enabling Conditions:
Integrated planning, effective governance, community involvement
HTI Other
Do now—no regrets
Limited scale Explore over time
•Community
•Technical
Financing
•Substantial upfront donor funds
•Invest in low-carbon development
•Sell emission reductions and reinvest in low carbon growth
Close work with main institutions of governance
•PMU is technical resource
•Will work closely with many government institutions
•Governement institutions are the decision-makers
Intensive focus on communities
•Involved in program governance and creating enabling conditions
•Involved in all sectoral and site strategies
Villages in the area of forest concessions
Villages in the area of Plantation concessions
Villages in the are of
Mining concession
s
Villages in the
coastal
Transmigrant villages
Traditional
Long Duhung, Long Pai (Pu nan Mah kam), Merabu, Lesan Dayak, Long Boy, Long Lanm cin, Long Sului
SamburakatSemanting, Matarintib
Transitional
Long Ayan,Merasak, Merapun
Tepian Buah, Long Lanuk
Kasai Melati Jaya
“Modern” Sido Bangen Bena Baru Tanjung BatuLabanan Makarti
UPPER KELAY• Most traditional Punan
Dayak people • High dependence on
forests• 20-30 families per village• All within timber
concessions • Destruction of burial
grounds, sago palms, fruit trees, honey trees by companies
• Recent road openings changing transportation access
35
UPPER SEGAH• Mixture Punan Dayak and
Gaai villages• Lower dependence on
forests; better transportation
• Shifting agriculture, gold mining primary economic activities
• Stronger village institution as a result of previous conflict resolution process
LOWER KELAY • Ambitious plans for
agricultural conversion
• Ethnic diversity and conflict, inter-group competition
• Diverse employment: plantations, logging, bird nest collection rotational agriculture
• Opportunistic and excessive land claims
LOWER SEGAH• Various Dayak groups,
transmigrants from Java, Lombok
• Agriculture important; • Oil palm expansion
communities divided; many conflicts
• Ineffective community development program led by oil palm companies
• Land speculation increasing
COASTAL • Fishing communities;
mostly recognize importance of mangroves
• Heterogeneous-various ethnic groups from Sulawesi (Bone, Makassar, Toraja, Banjar, Bugis)
• Significant infrastructure development plans
• Expected immigrants will likely put more pressure on mangroves
WORLD EDUCATION/ TNC