Safeguards and Co-benefits in NepalPrepared by: Dil Raj Khanal, FECOFUN
Morten Fauerby Thomsen, CARE Denmark
Major initiatives in Nepal
1. Preparation of R-PP through FCPF (World Bank)2. Social & Environmental Strategic Assessment (SESA)3. Preparation of country specific REDD+ Social &
Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES)4. Forming a civil society alliance on REDD+5. Piloting REDD+ activities
• Capacity Building• Community based carbon monitoring• Benefit sharing mechanism
Safeguard mechanisms
• The R-PP includes 2 key safeguard mechanisms:• Social & Environmental Strategic Assessment – SESA
(comp. 2d)• Social & Environmental Standards - REDD+ SES (comp.
4b)• Coordination between the 2 processes is important – but
increase complexity
Design - Readiness Implementation
Strategic Environmental & Social Assessment (SESA)
An iterative process of analysis and consultation to improve designNo predefined content
Environmental & Social Management Framework
(ESMF)Framework for development of plans to mitigate and manage risks with respect to World Bank safeguards
Why: required for funding, improve design What: WB safeguards, negative impacts, rightsWho: government and delivery partner?
Why: improve design, build support What: governance, rights, positive/negative impacts,Who: multi-stakeholder, participatory
Design - Readiness Implementation
REDD+ Social & Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES)Inclusive multi-stakeholder process uses comprehensive framework
to define country-specific indicators, monitoring plan, review by stakeholders for ongoing monitoring and reporting of process and
impacts
Why: monitoring & reporting, build stakeholder support, improve designWhat: governance, rights, positive/negative impacts, adapted to country contextWho: multi-stakeholder, participatory identification indicators, assessment, review
Facilitation Team(REDD
cell/FECOFUN)
Technical Working Group
Standards Committee
Assessment report
(from 2013)
Equitable benefit sharing
• Established methods for monitoring carbon stocks in community forest
• Established an equitable benefit sharing mechanism:• The first years increase in carbon is only weighed 40%, the
remaining 60% is calculated based on social criteria such as poverty levels, number of indigenous people (Dalits).
• Payment based on plan from forest user groups specifying how they intend to use the funds.
• Funds are administered through a Forest Carbon Trust Fund to ensure transparency and participation.
• The system is based on national and district level advisory committees, who decides on how much money each watershed and forest user group should receive.
• A Watershed REDD Network, consisting of forest user groups, then act as a bridge between district level actors and local forest user groups, and also channel the funding.
Pilot project by FECOFUN, ICIMOD and ANSAB
Experiences and recommendations
• Clarity on land/forest rights is important. In Nepal government owns the land, but the communities own forest resources (or 50/50 in Collaborative systems). Who owns the carbon rights?
• Strategy to increase carbon stocks might conflict with local interests in forest products (firewood, construction material). How does this inflict on poor peoples income generation opportunities. How can REDD+ compensate?
• Empower communities to make their own management plans that consider the needs of the poor and marginalised (ownership)
• Ensure a transparent and equitable benefit sharing with, and also within, indigenous and local communities (avoid elite capture)
• Monitoring systems should be kept simple and prioritise local involvement, and reward mechanisms should consider social factors.
Communities:
Experiences and recommendations
• Participation of civil society is crucial, both in developing REDD strategies and safeguards (REDD working group), but also their involvement in implementation
• Build capacity of civil society/local communities to actively engage in REDD+ strategy development processes (REDD+ alliance in Nepal), and ensure wide consultation processes.
Civil society:
Thank you