Abstract:Firmly incorporated into the Kyoto Protocol, market mechanisms offer an innovative and cost-effective means of controlling atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. However, as with markets for many other goods and services, a carbon market may generate negative environmental externalities. Possible interpretations and application of Kyoto provisions under COP-6bis and COP-7 raise concerns that rules governing forestry with respect to the Kyoto carbon market may increase pressure on native forests and their biodiversity in developing countries. In this paper, we assess the following two specific concerns with Kyoto provisions for forestry measures. First, whether, under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), by restricting allowable forestry measures to afforestation and reforestation, and explicitly excluding protection of threatened native forests, the Kyoto Protocol will enhance incentives for degradation and clearing of forests in developing countries; second, whether carbon crediting for forest management in Annex I (industrialized) regions under Article 3.4 creates a dynamic that can encourage displacement of timber harvests from Annex I countries to developing nations. Given current timber extraction patterns in developing regions, additional harvest pressure would certainly entail a considerable cost in terms of biodiversity loss. In both cases, we find that the concerns about deleterious impacts to forests and biodiversity are justified, although the scale of such impacts is difficult to predict. Both to ensure reliable progress in managing carbon concentrations and to avoid unintended consequences with respect to forest biodiversity, the further development of the Kyoto carbon market must explicitly correct these perverse incentives. We recommend several steps that climate policymakers can take to ensure that conservation and restoration of biodiversity-rich natural forests in developing countries are rewarded rather than penalized. To correct incentives to clear natural forests through CDM crediting for afforestation and reforestation, we recommend for the first commitment period that policymakers establish an early base year, such as 1990, such that lands cleared after that year would be ineligible for crediting. We further recommend an exception to this rule for CDM projects that are explicitly designed to promote natural forest restoration and that pass rigorous environmental impact review. Restoration efforts are typically most effective on lands that are adjacent to standing forests and hence likely to have been recently cleared. Thus, we recommend for these projects establishing a more recent base year, such as 2000. For the second and subsequent commitment periods, we recommend that climate policymakers act to restrain inter-annex leakage and its impacts by ensuring that crediting for forest management in industrialized countries is informed by modelling efforts to anticipate the scale of leakage associated with different Annex I 'Land use, land-use change and forestry' policy options, and coupled with effective measures to protect natural forests in developing countries. The latter should include expanding the options permitted under the CDM to carbon crediting for projects that protect threatened forests from deforestation and forest degradation. Ultimately, carbon market incentives for forest clearing can be reduced and incentives for forest conservation most effectively strengthened by fully capturing carbon emissions associated with deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries under a future emissions cap. Finally, we note that these recommendations have broader relevance to any forest-based measures to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions developed outside of the specific context of the Kyoto Protocol.

REDD+ at risk: Emerging ten questions that REDD+ must answer

Is there an ideal REDD+ program? An analysis of policy trade-offs at the local level

What drives policy change for REDD+? A qualitative comparative analysis of the interplay between institutional and policy arena factors

REDD+: analysis of its components through a systematic review of scientific literature from Brazil and Indonesia

Mapping national REDD+ initiatives in the Asia-Pacific region

REDD Mitigation

Global analysis of the proposed benefits from REDD+ projects

Responding to climate change and the global land crisis: REDD+, market transformation and low-emissions rural development

Ecological and Economic Impacts of REDD+ Implementation in Developing Countries

Who Owns REDD+? Carbon Markets, Carbon Rights and Entitlements to REDD+ Finance

REDD+ in Indonesia: An assessment of the international environmental program

Opportunities and Challenges for Ecological Restoration within REDD+

Generating carbon finance through avoided deforestation and its potential to create climatic, conservation and human development benefits

Heterogeneity of experts’ opinion regarding opportunities and challenges of tackling deforestation in the tropics: a Q methodology application

Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees: The Oversight of Defaunation in REDD+ and Global Forest Governance

Assessment of REDD+ MRV Capacity in Developing Countries and Implications under the Paris Regime

Forest governance and REDD+ in Central Africa: towards a participatory model to increase stakeholder involvement in carbon markets

REDD+ Strategy for forest carbon sequestration in India

Interactions of Reduced Deforestation and the Carbon Market: The Role of Market Regulations and Future Commitments

Designing a carbon market that protects forests in developing countries