EGS1003: Section on International Environmental Justice and the Climate Change Challenge Mary Lawhon This work by Mary Lawhon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
In the 1980s, 20-40% of GHG emissions attributed to tropical deforestation Stopping this seemed logically to be part of addressing climate change Conservation Reforestation (These slides are based on Backstrand and Lovbrand, 2006) FOREST FIRE © Aleksandr Klimashin, Dreamstime
As of 1995, includes all sinks and sources of carbon, including forests/plantations “most developing countries strongly opposed the idea that carbon storage on their territory would allow industrialized countries to continue emitting greenhouse gases domestically.” (Backstrand and Lovbrand, 2006: 59) By 2002, represented 35% of carbon benefits through AIJ. No projects in Africa
From Kyoto to 2001, South fights to keep forests/plantations out of the market mechanisms After US walks out, concede to “save the Protocol” Limited to 1% of countries’ 1990 emissions
Proponents of EM say: Flexibility and cost-effectiveness through tree planting in the South A win-win scenario for North and South
Participation and stakeholder involvement are central to sustainable development Bottom-up Include marginalized voices “Reform” and “radical” versions
Proponents say: Principled objection: “represents a ‘loophole’ i.e. an instruent for rich countries to evade their historical responsibility” (Backstrand and Lovbrand, 2006: 64) But also, detracts from the need for long-term, systemic change in GN
“If the carbon uptake in terrestrial ecosystems is inadequately measured or accidentally re-emitted to the atmosphere as a result of fire, pest attacks, illegal logging or climate change itself, sink projects may result in ‘fake credits’” (Backstrand and Lovbrand, 2006:64) By Sean Wilson for SEI
NOT (inherently) a win-win Tree planting through CDM has ecological risks Creation of monoculture/plantations Loss of biodiversity Intensified use of chemicals and pesticides Disturb water cycles
NOT (inherently) a win-win Tree planting through CDM has social risks Displacement of communities Loss of access to land Reinforce/exacerbate existing inequalities Ecologically- sometimes these communities move and cause deforestation elsewhere
CDM can be beneficial, but isn’t always Profit comes at the expense of justice Need to “design participatory projects that can meet social development goals in the South” (Backstrand and Lovbrand, 2006: 66) Explicitly consider trade-offs between environment, development, and climate