“Are existing strategies for forest management and conservation suitable for REDD? A case study from Mexico". Charlotte Benneker ENDA

Content Proposed REDD payments Methodological concerns under REDD What does Mexico propose Research question Description of characteristics government programs Discussion of main concepts for REDD Conclusion

Proposed REDD payments: Reduced emissions from deforestation Reduced emissions from forest degradation Enhancement of carbon stocks in the forest due to forest conservation & sustainable forest management Enhancement of carbon stocks due to conversion of land to forest land (A/R)

Methodological concerns under REDD Leakage Additionality Non-permanence

What does Mexico propose? Sell carbon credits on the market Government responsible for ‘carbon accounting’ (measurements, monitoring and marketing) Private initiatives possible BUT: How do you reduce deforestation & forest degradation? Research question: Can existing forestry programs contribute? Programs considered: PES-water, PES-carbon, Community Forestry

Payment water services Payment carbon sequestration Community forestry Description  Conservation of communal forest for water provision Tree planting on individual plots for carbon sequestration Management of communal forest for variety of products and services Products / services  Water + tourism?  Carbon + future products? Multiple Perception  Concept easy, generates local awareness of value ES Concept difficult, it’s about planting trees, not carbon Based on common practices Requirements  Simple, majority approved Requirements complicated (CDM), a fraction approved Vary per activity, approval of timber logging plans low (political decision) Payments  PES payment for conservation activities  Payments for re- and afforestation activities Direct benefits from forest for use and sale. Who pays  Government Market Program implementation  Product oriented  (unless coupled with CF)  Product oriented  (unless coupled with CF)  Process oriented  Planning, decision making, training & implementation Contracts  5 years No contract Evaluation  Success FailureSuccess Future / permanence  Uncertain; future payments have to be found in innovative local / national markets. Results interesting but incipient  Very uncertain: not one community sells carbon on market, some withdraw. Hope on voluntary Mexican carbon market Relatively certain: based on local initiatives and markets. Flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances Comparison of government programs

REDDPayment for hydrological services Payment for carbon sequestration Community forestry Avoided deforestation  +/- -- +/- Reduced forest degradation ++  +/- + Increased carbon stock in forest ++  +/- +/- Increased carbon stock outside forest -- ++ - Can programs contribute to REDD?

Do programs comply with REDD concepts? REDDCommunity forestry Payments for Hydrological services Payments for carbon sequestration Additionality Reduced deforestation: LOW Reduced degradation and enhanced carbon Stock: MEDIUM Reduced deforestation: LOW Reduced degradation and enhanced carbon Stock: HIGH Reduced deforestation: LOW Reduced degradation and enhanced carbon Stock: HIGH Avoid Leakage NOSome contractual commitment NO Permanence YESNO

Conclusion Programs comply with REDD regulations for reduced degradation and forest enhancement, not for reduced deforestation Unilateral focus on carbon sequestration limits potential of REDD Problematic for communities is:  Reducing forest use for subsistence purposes  Low benefits after payment of transaction costs  Long term commitments reduce property rights and adaptability Governments should adapt international regulations to local conditions to balance trade-offs

Thank you for your attention Questions? Charlotte Benneker Post-doc researcher ITC ENDA