Safeguards and Co-benefits in a REDD+ Mechanism Garanties et co-bénéfices liés au mécanisme REDD+ With support from the Norwegian Development Agency

REDD+ Safeguards in the Cancun Agreements REDD+ programs to include a system for providing information on how safeguards are being addressed and respected, while respecting national sovereignty Annex I sets out the safeguards to be promoted and supported Annex II calls on SBSTA to develop guidance for the information system for reporting on safeguards, for consideration at COP 17 The Cancun agreements provided information and clarity on safeguards under REDD+. Safeguards – full list included in workshop package – include: Consistent with the objectives of national forest programmes and relevant international conventions and agreements; Transparent national forest governance structures, Respect for the knowledge and rights of indigenous peoples and members of local communities Full and effective participation of relevant stakeholders, Consistent with the conservation of natural forests and biological diversity Permanence and leakage ‘System for providing information’ for how safeguards are being addressed and respected. - Safeguards—no doubt that they are a national issue, because REDD will be implemented at national level. The question is whether or not there will be space within UNFCCC process to look at whether or not countries are actually doing what they said they would do with respect to safeguards.

Safeguards for REDD+ REDD+ Safeguards included in the Cancun Agreements: To ensure that REDD+ actions do not cause negative social or economic impacts conversion of natural forests to plantations, loss of biodiversity, displacement and relocation of forest-dependent communities, elite capture of benefits, leakage, lack of permanence If safeguards designed properly, can promote co-benefits biodiversity conservation, poverty alleviation, improved community livelihoods, technology transfer Safeguards can be viewed as the “do no harm” principle, and co-benefits are additional benefits beyond the status quo. Safeguards important to prevent and mitigate undue hard to the environment and people at the earliest possible planning stage. Address impacts of REDD activities – and manage the risks and opportunities. At a minimum, a safeguards system will identify negative opportunities. But, can go beyond this, to identify the positive impacts of activities – and how to increase or maximize the positive impacts.

Safeguards Standards UN-REDD Programme's Social and Environment Principles and Criteria World Bank Safeguards and Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES) Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Principles and Criteria Several standards, including definitions, scope and methodologies for measuring and/or monitoring safeguards, are similar to those set out for REDD+ in the Cancun Agreements. Some of these are being used by governments in their REDD+ readiness activities, while others have been used for forestry projects. These standards could influence how REDD+ safeguards are defined and measured Analysis shows that no one standard provides comprehensive coverage of the criteria set out in the safeguards portion of the Cancun decision; for example, some provide comprehensive assessments of the sustainable forest management criterion, while others better address biodiversity and poverty alleviation criteria.

System for Sharing Information What is the purpose of the safeguards information system? How will the system respect national sovereignty? What safeguards information should be shared? How often should countries report on safeguards? Are international minimum standards needed? What review and/or verification of safeguards is needed? How does the safeguards information system fit in the broader REDD+ institutional framework? Negotiators will need to consider several issues in the deliberations on a system for sharing information on how safeguards are respected and addressed. Issues to be addressed include: - The purpose of the information sharing system - Respecting national sovereignty - The need for international minimum standards - Sharing of information The need for verification and review Also important in the development of the information sharing system is synergies with other reporting requirements and developing a cost-effective system.  

Important Considerations Building synergies CBD, information gathered in SESAs, systems to MRV changes in carbon stocks Cost effectiveness Little information available about costs, but concerns that could make REDD+ more complex and more expensive Estimates of costs to set up system and undertake initial monitoring range from US$35,000 in Costa Rica to $600,000 in DRC in R-PPs submitted to FCPF Also important in the development of the information sharing system is synergies with other reporting requirements and developing a cost-effective system.   - Need to find a balance between safeguards standards that achieve public acceptance by minimizing social, environmental and governance risks; and that do not impose too high a cost on their implementation.

Outstanding Issues in the lead-up to COP 17 Design of system for providing information on how safeguards are being addressed and respected, while respecting national sovereignty Determining how this system will link to the MRV of REDD+ emissions and sinks How to encourage that REDD+ national activities go beyond “do no harm” to encourage co-benefits

Safeguards: Example Questions What lessons can be learned from activities in your country that can inform the negotiations? How can we encourage REDD+ activities that go beyond do no harm  and encourage multiple benefits? What safeguard information systems are needed for REDD+?