Linkages between REDD+ readiness and the Forest … · 1 Linkages between REDD+ readiness and the...

1

Linkages between REDD+ readiness and the Forest Investment Program Charlie Parker: [email protected]

CIF Partnership Forum

23-25th June 2014

2

Overview

- Report objective and methodology

- Progress of Pilot countries under FCPF and FIP

- Implications of REDD+ Readiness for FIP progress

- Implications for existing and future REDD+ finance

3

Landscape of international finance

Phase I: Readiness Phase 2:

Implementation

Phase 3: Performance-

based payments

FCPF Readiness Fund UN-REDD Programme Congo Basin Forest Fund

Forest Investment Programme

FCPF Carbon Fund BioCarbon Fund

Mu

ltilateral

Finan

ce

Bilate

ral Fin

ance

REDD Early Movers

Norway Indonesia LoI Amazon Fund

Guyana REDD Investment Fund

4

Report objectives and methodology

5

Objective

- Understand the role of REDD+

readiness in FIP pilot countries in

progressing through the FIP

programming process

- FIP pilot countries have a range of

levels of REDD+ readiness

- Different levels of progress

through FIP programming process

- Clarify the factors important to

country progress and guidance

for future phase 2 climate

finance.

8

Readiness Framework

• Political will • Accountability • Transparency • Coordination • Capacity • Consultation/participation • Feedback/grievance mechanism

Governance

• REDD+ strategy or equivalent policies

• Policies & Measures on drivers

• Policies & Measures on resource rights and tenure

• Policies & Measures on social and environmental safeguards

• Benefit sharing mechanism

Strategy or Equivalent

• RLs and MRV

• Registry and accounting

• Non-carbon (safeguards) monitoring system

Monitoring and Evaluation

Systems

• UNFCCC Decisions

• FCPF and UN-REDD R-PP

• FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework

• UN-REDD and FCPF Country Needs Assessment

• Governance of Forests Indicators

• WRI Readiness Needs

• Additional Literature review

9

Progress of pilot countries under FCPF and Forest Investment Programme

10

FCPF programming process

Pre-programming

•R-PIN Submitted

•FCPF Participation Agreement Signed

R-PP Formulation

•R-PP Formulation Grant Approved

•R-PP Formulation and Assessment Process

•Final R-PP Submitted

R-PP Implementation

•R-PP Preparation Grant Signed

•R-PP Implementation Process

•Mid-term Progress Report

Carbon Fund •ER-PIN Presented to Carbon Fund

11

Overview of FCPF progress

Country Process 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

BURKINA

FASO

R-PP Formulation Scheduled

R-PP Implementation

DRC R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

GHANA R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

INDONESIA R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

LAO PDR R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

MEXICO R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

PERU R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

Pre-programming

R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

Carbon Fund

R-PIN Submitted R-PP Formulation Grant Approved R-PP Preparation Grant Signed ER-PIN submitted to CF

FCPF Participation Agreement Signed R-PP Formulation and Assessment Process R-PP Implementation Process

Final R-PP Submitted Mid-term Progress Report

12


Country Process 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014


BURKINA

FASO


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

- DRC, Ghana, and Indonesia have progressed more than others under the

FCPF readiness process.

- All three countries have been implementing Readiness plans since 2011.

Pre-programming

R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

Carbon Fund




13


Country Process 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014


BURKINA

FASO


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation


R-PP Implementation

ER-PIN Formulation

- Four countries, DRC, Ghana, Mexico and Peru have submitted ER-PINs to

the FCPF Carbon Fund. This signals an intention to move to Phase 3

performance based payments

Pre-programming

R-PP Formulation

R-PP Implementation

Carbon Fund




14

FIP programming process

Pre-programming

•Selection as FIP Pilot Country

•Scoping Mission

Investment Plan development

•IP Preparation Grant approved

•IP development process

•IP Draft(s) submitted

•IP Endorsement

Project development

•Project Preparation Grant approved

•Project development process

•Subcommittee Project Approval

Project implementation

•MDB Project Approval

•Project implementation

15

Progress of FIP pilot countries Country Investment Plans and Projects MDB 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

BRAZIL

Investment Plan Scheduled

1. Environmental Regularization of Rural Lands IBRD

2. Sustainable production in agricultural areas IBRD

3. Implementation of Early Warning System IBRD

4. Forest Information - public/private sectors IDB

BURKINA FASO Investment Plan

1. Participatory Management (PGFC/REDD+) AfDB

2. Decentralized management (PGDDF) IBRD

DRC Investment Plan

1. Deforestation Mbuji Mayi/Kananga/Kisangani AfDB

2. DRC Forest Investment Program IBRD

GHANA

Investment Plan

1. Engaging Local Communities - REDD+/Carbon AfDB

2. Reducing Pressure on Natural Forests IBRD

3. Engaging Private Sector in REDD+ IFC

INDONESIA

Investment Plan

1. Promoting Sustainable CBNRM IBRD

2. Strengthening Forest Enterprises IFC

3. CFI-ADD+ ADB

LAO PDR

Investment Plan

1. Scaling-up Participatory Sus. Forest Mgmt. IBRD

2. Smallholder forestry IFC

3. Protecting forests for sus. ecosystem services ADB

MEXICO

Investment Plan

1. Capacity building for SF landscape mgmt. IBRD

2. Mit resilience/sus prof. in forested landscapes IBRD

3. Financing low carbon strategies in forest landscapes IDB

4. Support for MSMEs in Ejidos IDB

PERU

Investment Plan

1. ILM - Atalaya Ucayali Region IBRD

2. IFLM - Tarapoto Yurimaguas, San Martin IDB

3. ILM Puerto Maldonado/Iñapari/Amarakaeri IDB

4. National Forest Governance and Innovation IDB

Pre-programming IP Development Project development Project implementation

Selection as FIP Pilot Country IP Preparation Grant approved Project Preparation Grant approved MDB Project Approval

Scoping Mission IP development process Project development process Project implementation

IP Draft(s) submitted Subcommittee Project Approval

IP Endorsement

16



BRAZIL









DRC Investment Plan



GHANA

Investment Plan




INDONESIA

Investment Plan



3. CFI-ADD+ ADB

LAO PDR

Investment Plan




MEXICO

Investment Plan





PERU

Investment Plan









IP Endorsement

17



BRAZIL









DRC Investment Plan



GHANA

Investment Plan




INDONESIA

Investment Plan



3. CFI-ADD+ ADB

LAO PDR

Investment Plan




MEXICO

Investment Plan





PERU

Investment Plan









IP Endorsement

18

Summary of Implications of REDD+ Readiness for FIP Progress

19

Readiness Framework


Governance







• RLs and MRV




Systems

1. UNFCCC Decisions

2. FCPF and UN-REDD R-PP

3. FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework

4. UN-REDD and FCPF Country Needs Assessment

5. Governance of Forests Indicators

6. WRI Readiness Needs

7. Additional Literature review

20

Readiness Framework


Governance







• RLs and MRV




Systems

1. UNFCCC Decisions

2. FCPF and UN-REDD R-PP

3. FCPF Readiness Assessment Framework

4. UN-REDD and FCPF Country Needs Assessment

5. Governance of Forests Indicators

6. WRI Readiness Needs

7. Additional Literature review

21

High political will and institutional capacity are important criteria for developing and implementing FIP Investment Plans.

- 82% of respondents stated their country has high or very high political will

and 88% of respondents stated that political will has been helpful or very

helpful to FIP progress.

- Brazil’s national government passed a National Policy on Climate Change

in 2007 with goals to reduce deforestation by 80% by 2020

- Mexico published its National Strategy on Climate Change in 2007, passed

the General Law on Climate Change in 2012, and published its national

vision for REDD+ in 2010.

22

Countries that have effective coordination processes and clear accountability across government ministries have been better equipped to progress through the FIP

- In countries where the responsible FIP focal point is different from the

primary REDD+ agency, or there are overlapping mandates or

uncertainties about the scope of authority, progress was more difficult

due to unclear lines of responsibility and consensus between the relevant

ministries.

23

How would you rate the effectiveness of coordination between the country's national REDD+ strategy and other land use-related institutions and sectors?

Respondents’ evaluation of effectiveness of coordination between REDD+ strategy and other sectors of the government.

24

The existence of REDD+ strategies or equivalent and relevant policies and measures to address the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation were major contributing factors for progression within the FIP

- In some countries (e.g. Burkina Faso, Peru and DRC) FIP has also played a

role in developing capacity and propelling progress in the FCPF and other

REDD+ initiatives.

25

While all 15 readiness-criteria were helpful in one way or another to assess progress with the FIP programming process, some were not as important as others

- Registries and carbon accounting systems and non-carbon monitoring

systems are currently being developed, generally for performance-based

payments (Phase 3), and therefore do not tend to impede progress in

Phase 2.

26

Implications for Existing and Future REDD+ Financing Mechanisms

27

Phase 2 funding is an important bridge between REDD+ readiness and results-based payments. The continuation of Phase 2 funding will be an important component of an international REDD+ mechanism.

- Phase 2 funding can provide a pull mechanism for REDD+ countries by incentivizing them to progress under their grants from REDD+ readiness funds.

- Phase 2 finance can also provide a push mechanism, by developing relevant capacity and experience for countries aiming to progress to phase 3 and receive results-based payments.

- In the future, the FIP may choose to define entry and exit criteria to ensure that this push and pull is harmonized with other sources of international finance for REDD+.

28

Country selection and investment criteria determine the types of FIP investments for meeting goals and objectives, and may dictate the pace of adoption.

- To improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Phase 2 finance, future programs should more closely consider which countries have the necessary enabling conditions in place to carry out its desired objective of reducing GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation through transformative measures.

- The selection criteria, and potentially the investment criteria would then need to reflect those conditions.

29

The scope and objectives of REDD+ have shifted over time and have increased the complexity of national planning processes. A greater emphasis should be placed on planning rather than a plan to help countries account for changes in programmatic strategies and measures.

- Ongoing management of IPs, projects and programs can be a useful tool to

address these changes and refocus and reprioritize plans and activities in a

changing environment.

- Future FIP funding could be directed towards gaps or weaknesses

identified through adaptive management approaches.

30

Donor coordination is important to ensure efficiency and overall success of achieving REDD+ objectives in a country. Collaboration between REDD+ finance initiatives should be mainstreamed at the international and national levels.

- Uncoordinated finance can create competing priorities within recipient countries

- A reliance on in-country systems can help to avoid duplication of efforts.

- A more formal link between the phases of REDD+ finance would increase bureaucracy but it could help to improve country ownership and donor efficiency in achieving REDD+ outcomes

31

Charlie Parker [email protected]

CIF Partnership Forum

23-25th June 2014

Thank You.

Date post:	28-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	buidiep
View:	232 times
Download:	5 times

Linkages between REDD+ readiness and the Forest … · 1 Linkages between REDD+ readiness and the...

Documents