Why Rights before REDD+? Opportunities and Dangers in REDD+ Justin Kenrick

Why Rights before REDD? 1. REDD is neither effective nor justifiable without respect for rights + 2. The best way of mitigating emissions is through securing communities' rights in the face of land grabs and untrammelled forest conversion.

Community forest protection can be more effective than PAs Community forest protection can be more effective than PAs Communities protect forests six times better than Protected Areas (CIFOR analysis of 16 countries 2011). ”In Latin America, where indigenous areas can be identified, they are found to have extremely large impacts on reducing deforestation” (World Bank IEG 2011: 9) “When local users... tenure rights are safe, they conserve the biomass and carbon in such forests” (Chhatre & Agrawal 2009: 17669)

OPPORTUNITY: Recognising and building on community commons Globally: 1 to 2 billion hold land in community ownership Common resource management systems require clear: (i) Demarcation of who is included, who excluded, (ii) Byelaws – Strong decision-making system/ rules Commons Under Ongoing threat from land grabs When communities are mistakenly blamed for forest loss, REDD+ becomes part of land grab process.

DANGER of REDD+ as being a land grab In R-PP plans there is “a worrying trend towards REDD- related legal reforms that would enable increased state control over forest resources” (Analysis of 8 countries R- PPs, Fern & FPP 2011) In R-PP plans there is “a worrying trend towards REDD- related legal reforms that would enable increased state control over forest resources” (Analysis of 8 countries R- PPs, Fern & FPP 2011) REDD+ driven by Governments who envisage it will be financed through offsets despite carbon market receding REDD+ driven by Governments who envisage it will be financed through offsets despite carbon market receding Securing rights is central to: REDD+ effectiveness, reducing risk to investments, countries’ legal obligations Securing rights is central to: REDD+ effectiveness, reducing risk to investments, countries’ legal obligations

FPIC key to a Rights based approach in a Rapidly Changing Global Context Human Rights stronger and more widely recognised Human Rights stronger and more widely recognised Self determination and collective rights gain recognition e.g. IUCN Resolution led to Whakatane Mechanism Self determination and collective rights gain recognition e.g. IUCN Resolution led to Whakatane Mechanism Communities stronger and pressing for direct control of their own affairs Communities stronger and pressing for direct control of their own affairs States weaker (liberalization and structural adjustment) Globalization has brought private sector into direct contact with communities Private sector wants clear rules vis-à-vis communities to secure their investments from risk

e.g. of FPIC absence: Chad-Cameroon Pipeline impact on forest people Marginalised by oil AND by conservation Mapping customary use to regain rights (Cameroon photo amd maps: John Nelson)

Community mapping key to regaining rights -Customary rights areas - Sacred sites - Sacred sites -Historical areas Left: Baka mapping in Cameroun Left: Baka mapping in Cameroun Right: Mboumba Bek & Nki Right: Mboumba Bek & Nki

Current REDD+ processes provide: Opportunity: for the recognition of Rights, and securing of community forests, through international scrutiny & national tenure reform Opportunity: for the recognition of Rights, and securing of community forests, through international scrutiny & national tenure reform Danger: of ‘fortress conservation’ through REDD+ excluding and marginalising forest peoples Danger: of ‘fortress conservation’ through REDD+ excluding and marginalising forest peoples Dynamic: Anticipation of REDD+ raises stakes Dynamic: Anticipation of REDD+ raises stakes

: e.g. Ogiek of Mt Elgon, Kenya : -Indigenous peoples or vulnerable marginalized communities? -Right holders or benefit recipients? (photos: Justin Kenrick and Emmanuel Freudenthal)