1. USAID LEAF Regional Climate Change Curriculum Development Module: Social and Environmental Soundness (SES) Section 2. What Social And Environmental Issues Exist: Strengthening Design And Implementation of REDD+ 2.4. Social Co-benefits

2. NameAffiliationNameAffiliation Surin Onprom; Co-Lead Kasetsart University, Thailand Tran Thi Thu HaVietnam Forestry University Penporn Janekarnkij; Co-Lead Kasetsart University, Thailand Nguyen Dinh HaiVietnam Forestry University Rejani Kunjappan; Co-Lead RECOFTC Thailand Vo Mai AnhVietnam Forestry University Claudia Radel; Co-Lead Utah State University Tran Tuan VietVietnam Forestry University Sarah Hines; Co-Lead US Forest Service Cao Tien TrungVinh University, Vietnam Sidthinat Prabudhanitisarn Chiang Mai University, Thailand Nguyen T. Trang ThanhVinh University, Vietnam Sharifah Zarina Syed Zakaria University Kebangsaan Malaysia Nguyen Thu HaUSAID Vietnam Forests & Deltas Mohd Rusli Yacob University Putra Malaysia Maeve NightingaleIUCN MFF Kaisone Phengspha National University of Laos Guada LagradaPACT MPE Phansamai Phengspha National University of Laos Le Van Trung DARD Lam Dong Kethsa Nanthavongduangsy National University of Laos Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh AIT Thailand Freddie Alei University of Papua New Guinea David GanzUSAID LEAF Bangkok Chay Kongkruy Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia Kalpana GiriUSAID LEAF Bangkok Soreivathanak Reasey Hoy Royal University of Phnom Penh, Cambodia Chi Pham Project Coordinator USAID LEAF Bangkok

3. I.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1.1.Introduction to Climate Change 1.2.The Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation Context 1.3.Introduction to Social and Environmental Soundness (SES) 1.4.Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics II.WHAT SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EXIST: STRENGHENING DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REDD 2.1.Environmental Co-benefits: Introduction to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2.1.1.Carbon/REDD+ Project Accounting, Carbon Monitoring & MRV 2.2.Governance 2.2.1. Regulatory Framework, Forest Tenure, and Carbon Rights 2.3. Stakeholder Participation 2.3.1. FPIC 2.4. Social Co-benefits 2.5. Gender Equity and Women’s Empowerment 2.5.1. Gender Analysis Tools 2.5.2. Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index 2.6. Indigenous Peoples and their Empowerment 2.7. Local Livelihoods: An Introduction 2.7.1 Livelihoods impact Case Study: April Salumei, PNG 2.8. REDD+ Benefits Sharing 2.9. Economic and Financial Viability and Sustainability III.STATE OF THE ART IN ACTION: BRINGING THE PIECES TOGETHER 3.1.Safeguard Mechanisms in REDD+ Programs 3.2.Streamlining of Safeguards and Standards 3.3.Developing National Level Safeguards

4. At the end of this section, learners will be able to:  Explain the concept of co-benefits, within the REDD+ context  List a variety of different potential social co-benefits that could arise from the implementation of REDD+, PES, or other conservation programs or projects  Categorize social co-benefits under a variety of approaches  Analytically link the concepts of safeguards to co-benefits  Apply the concept of co-benefits, using a gender equity example, to assessing international and national funds design

5.  Introduction to and exploration of co-benefits as a concept  Co-benefit typologies  Activity: Brainstorming possible co-benefits in the context of REDD+ or PES and categorizing them  Linking co-benefits and safeguards  Activity: The Green Climate Fund (applying the co-benefit concept to fund design)

6.  In-class presentation of materials  Discussions  Small group activities

7. Students should read: Miyatsuka, A. and E. Zusman. Fact Sheet No.1 What are Co- benefits? Asian Co-benefits Partnership.

8. “Benefits that accrue as a side effect of a targeted policy” For Discussion:  Why use the term “co-benefits” and not simply “benefits”?  Should we instead use the term benefits?  What are the potential advantages and disadvantages of using each term? (Pearce, 2000)

9. In context of REDD+, we use co-benefits in reference to non- climate benefits that could accrue as an outcome of programs or projects: “All of the positive outcomes associated with multiple, simultaneous emissions reduction” “The potentially large and diverse range of collateral benefits that can be associated with climate change mitigation policies in addition to direct avoided climate impact benefits” (Fitzgerald and Villarin, 2005) (Bollen, Guay, Lamet, and Corfee-Morlot, 2009)

10.  The term “co-benefit” appeared in the 1990s and generated wide interest  Term published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2001.  Other terms have been used to connote similar ideas:  “side benefits”  “secondary benefits”  “collateral benefits”  “associated benefits”

11.  The primary concern with REDD + is whether it might negatively affect (do harm to) ecosystems and social systems particularly in:  Indigenous and forest-dependent communities;  High biodiversity or low carbon areas.  But securing co-benefits, or doing good (e.g. biodiversity conservation or poverty reduction) is also a key challenge in REDD+  Is it possible to “do no harm”, and furthermore, to “do good”?  Can doing good potentially offset doing harm?

12.  Desirable outcomes (co-benefits vs. co-impacts)  Intentional versus unintentional outcomes  Development-related, as co-benefits concept is used to link development and mitigation goals, under for example a sustainable development framework.

13. Explore the characteristics of desirable, intentional, & development-related: 1 What qualifies as development? Does everyone agree on what development goals should be? 2 Desirable to whom? Intentional by whom? Should the intentional co-benefit goals of project developers or designers always be transparently communicated to project beneficiaries? Why or why not?

14. Key examples of co-benefits in context of REDD+ projects:  Biological diversity is a conservation or environmental co- benefit  Gender empowerment, household income, generation of employment are social co-benefits In the remainder of this module section, we will focus on social co-benefits.

15.  What is an example of a development co-benefit?  Can these be the same as social co-benefits?  How do they relate to environmental co-benefits?

16. 1. Break into small groups. 2. In each group, brainstorm to generate a list of other possible co-benefits for REDD+ programs and projects. 3. Try to include in your group list both social co-benefits and conservation/environmental co-benefits.

17.  Social co-benefits add to the overall human wellbeing gains achieved by PES/REDD+  Human wellbeing is “synonymous with quality of life and distinguishes between personal and social wellbeing” (Dasgupta, 2004)  Personal wellbeing  Social wellbeing

18. Resource management activities Modified from Greiner and Stanley, 2013.

19. Type A: Income-related provider social co-benefit  Employment  Livelihood  Financial supports  Living standard of farmers  ….........

20. Type B: Non-income related provider social co-benefit  Behavior and life styles  Self-esteem and self-determination  Human capacity building: organizational and individual  Reinforcing culture and traditional skill and knowledge  ….........

21. Type C: Non-provider social co-benefits  The economic viability and stability of region  Reduced public expenditure  Fiscal benefits  Transfer of knowledge  ….........

22. Total social co-benefits = Type A + Type B + Type C

23. 1. In groups, categorize each social co-benefit on your list as type A, B, or C and briefly present. 2. As a group, choose one of your listed social co-benefits. 3. Identify the conditions under which this co-benefit could be realized: What would the project need to look like in order to generate this co-benefit?

24. 1. Effective REDD+ policy depends on nested institutional arrangements that connect local, national and global scales; 2. Safeguards and co-benefits are mutually constituted with serious implications for the design of REDD+ activities; 3. Safeguards are important to success of REDD+ in sequestering carbon while providing social co-benefit.

25. To make REDD+ work (creating social co-benefits), what must social safeguards do?

26. Social safeguards must do the following:  Respect and protect rights and access to lands/resources and the interests and livelihoods of indigenous peoples and forest-dependent communities;  Ensure full and effective participation of communities in all stages of REDD+;  Assure equitable sharing of REDD+ benefits with and within communities;  Promote women’s empowerment and gender equality;  Provide a mechanism for resolution of disputes. Social safeguards must do the following:  Respect and protect rights and access to lands/resources and the interests and livelihoods of indigenous peoples and forest-dependent communities;  Ensure full and effective participation of communities in all stages of REDD+;  Assure equitable sharing of REDD+ benefits with and within communities;  Promote women’s empowerment and gender equality;  Provide a mechanism for resolution of disputes.

27. Participation Twin Safeguards Social Co-benefits (Chhatre et al, 2012) Tenure Security

28. (Chhatre et al, 2012)

29. One Possible List of REDD+ Safeguards: Example Table for Use with Exercise: Safeguard Proximate Co- Benefit Long-term Co- Benefits Create a list of other REDD+ safeguards, or use the list below. For each safeguard, identify possible proximate and long-term co-benefits.

30. Safeguards can lead to co-benefits. But can safeguards be specifically designed in order to ensure desired (social) co-benefits and how? Safeguards can lead to co-benefits. But can safeguards be specifically designed in order to ensure desired (social) co-benefits and how?

31.  An example of an international fund, currently there are nine in total  Launched under COP17: Mechanism to transfer funds from developed to developing countries  Will seek a balance between funding adaptation and mitigation  Committed to “promoting environmental, social, economic and development co-benefits and taking a gender-sensitive approach” (GCF mandate statement)  Illustrates that funding mechanisms can be structured to result in social co-benefits, in this case through articulation in the fund mandate

32. For Discussion: Many women are already engaged in economic sectors related to climate adaptation and mitigation efforts – including agriculture, renewable energy, and forest management. How can the GCF promote gender equality and generate this social co-benefit? For Discussion: Many women are already engaged in economic sectors related to climate adaptation and mitigation efforts – including agriculture, renewable energy, and forest management. How can the GCF promote gender equality and generate this social co-benefit?

33.  Social co-benefits are intentional and desirable, which introduces the question of for or to whom?  Social co-benefits can be classified in various ways to help us organize how we conceptualize them.  Social co-benefits can arise from safeguards, and vice- versa, safeguards can be designed to ensure social co- benefits.

34. Short answer questions:  A REDD project unexpectedly results in a loss of charcoal cooking fuel, requiring household REDD income to be spent on an alternative fuel. The alternative results in cleaner indoor air. Is this an example of a co-benefit? Why or why not?  Give an example of a “type A” co-benefit, a “type B” co-benefit, and a “type C” co-benefit. Essay questions:  Discuss the normative nature of co-benefits. What does this imply for incorporating co-benefits into REDD+ project design?

35. 1. Bollen, J., Guay, B., Lamet, S., and Corfee- Morlot, J., 2009. Co-benefits of Climate Change Mitigation Policies. Economic Department Working Paper Nr. 693, OECD, Paris. 2. Chhatre, A., Lakhanpal, S., Larson, A. M., Nelson, F., Ojha, H., & Rao, J. 2012. Social safeguards and co-benefits in REDD+: a review of the adjacent possible. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 4: 654-660. 3. Dasgupta, P. 2004. Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment. Oxford University Press. 4. Greiner, R., & Stanley, O. 2012. More than money for conservation: Exploring social co-benefits from PES schemes. Land Use Policy 31: 4-10. 5. Schalatek, L., and Burns, K. 2013. Operationalizing a Gender-Sensitive Approach in the Green Climate Fund. Green Climate Fund Background Paper. 6. Miyatsuka, A. and E. Zusman. Fact Sheet No.1: What are Co-benefits? Asian Co- benefits Partnership.

36. 7. Pearce, D. 2000. Policy Framework for the Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Policies, CSERGE Working Paper GEC 2000-1. 8. Peng, Y. Fact Sheet No.3: Make Co-benefits Work: China Case. Asian Co-benefits Partnership. 9. Springate-Baginski, O., Wollenberg, E., (eds.) 2010. REDD, forest governance and rural livelihoods- The emerging agenda, CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia 10. WWF-CARE. Saving Forest & the Climate, Protecting Rights and Livelihoods. Policy Brief REDD+. 11. Zusman, E. Fact Sheet No.2: COP16 and Co-benefits. Asian Co-benefits Partnership.