Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

A modular framework for management of complexity in international forest-carbon policy

Nature Climate Change volume 2, pages 155–160 (2012)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Complex and variable ecological and social settings make the programme on reducing emissions through avoided deforestation, forest degradation and other forestry activities in developing countries (REDD+) a challenging policy to design. The total value to society of each type of REDD+ outcome is dependent on the fundamentally different risk profiles of alternative forest-management approaches and their scope and potential for co-benefits. We suggest a modular policy framework for REDD+ that distinguishes and differentially compensates the distinct outcomes. This could represent an improved framework to promote and manage incentives for effective forest-carbon initiatives, offer better scope to find common ground in policy negotiations and allow faster adaptation of policy to an uncertain future.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: REDD+ conceptual design under present policy (left-hand side) and a proposed modular framework based on separation of REDD+ outcomes (right-hand side).

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. UNFCCC Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention Draft Decision -/CP.16 (2010); available at http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/cop_16/application/pdf/cop16_lca.pdf.

  2. Venter, O. et al. Carbon payments as a safeguard for threatened tropical mammals. Conserv. Lett. 2, 123–129 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Stickler, C. M. et al. The potential ecological costs and cobenefits of REDD: A critical review and case study from the Amazon region. Glob. Change Biol. 15, 2803–2824 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Asquith, N. M., Vargas Ríos, M. T. & Smith, J. Can forest-protection carbon projects improve rural livelihoods? Analysis of the Noel Kempff Mercado climate action project, Bolivia. Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob. Change 7, 323–337 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Clements, G. R. et al. Cautious optimism over Norway–Indonesia REDD Pact. Conserv. Biol. 24, 1437–1438 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Oslo Climate and Forest Conference Interim REDD+ Partnership Document as Adopted 27th May 2010 at the Oslo Climate and Forest Conference (OCFC, 2010).

  7. Kaimowitz, D. The prospects for reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) in mesoamerica. Int. For. Rev. 10, 485–495 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Harvey, C. A., Dickson, B. & Kormos, C. Opportunities for achieving biodiversity conservation through REDD. Conserv. Lett. 3, 53–61 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pistorius, T., Schmitt, C. B., Benick, D. & Entenmann, S. Greening REDD+: Challenges and Opportunities for Forest Biodiversity Conservation Policy Paper (Univ. Freiberg, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dickson, B., Dunning, E., Killen, S., Miles, L. & Pettorelli, N. Carbon Markets and Forest Conservation: A Review of the Environmental Benefits of REDD Mechanisms (UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Clements, T. Reduced expectations: the political and institutional challenges of REDD+. Oryx 44, 309–310 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Corbera, E. & Schroeder, H. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ. Sci. Policy 14, 89–99 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lambin, E. F., Geist, H. J. & Lepers, E. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 28, 205–241 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bekessy, S. A. & Wintle, B. A. Using carbon investment to grow the biodiversity bank. Conserv. Biol. 22, 510–513 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Boyd, E. et al. Reforming the CDM for sustainable development: Lessons learned and policy futures. Environ. Sci. Policy 12, 820–831 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Olsen, K. The Clean Development Mechanism's contribution to sustainable development: A review of the literature. Climatic Change 84, 59–73 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Andersson, K. & Gibson, C. C. Decentralized governance and environmental change: Local institutional moderation of deforestation in Bolivia. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 26, 99–123 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaimowitz, D. Forestry assistance and tropical deforestation: Why the public doesn't get what it pays for. Int. For. Rev. 2, 225–231 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  19. UNFCCC The Marrakesh Accords: Report of the Conference of the Parties on its seventh session, held at Marrakesh from 29 October to 10 November 2001 FCCC/CP/2001/13/Add.1. (UNFCCC, 2001).

  20. Moss, N. & Nussbaum, R. A Review of the Three REDD+ Safeguard Initiatives (UN-REDD Programme and the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Meijaard, E. et al. Report on Barriers and Constraints to Ecosystem Services Certification Occasional Paper 66, (CIFOR, 2011).

  22. Sovacool, B. K. The policy challenges of tradable credits: A critical review of eight markets. Energ. Policy 39, 575–585 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Olsen, K. H. & Fenhann, J. Sustainable development benefits of Clean Development Mechanism projects: A new methodology for sustainability assessment based on text analysis of the project design documents submitted for validation. Energ. Policy 36, 2819–2830 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hamilton, K., Sjardin, M., Peters-Stanley, M. & Marcello, T. Building Bridges: State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2010 (Ecosystem Marketplace and Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nussbaumer, P. On the contribution of labelled certified emission reductions to sustainable development: A multi-criteria evaluation of CDM projects. Energ. Policy 37, 91–101 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Auld, G., Gulbrandsen, L. H. & McDermott, C. L. Certification schemes and the impacts on forests and forestry. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 33, 187–211 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dinerstein, E., Varma, K., Wikramanayake, E. & Lumpkin, S. Wildlife Premium Market +REDD (Concept document floated at CBD COP 10, Nagaoya, October 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Xuemei, L. Rent extraction with a type-by-type scheme: An instrument to incorporate sustainable development into the CDM. Energ. Policy 36, 1873–1878 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Francois, M. & Hamaide, B. Certified emission reductions weights for improved CDM projects. Environ. Policy Governance 21, 31–41 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Australian Government, 2011).

  31. Marland, G., Fruit, K. & Sedjo, R. Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environ. Sci. Policy 4, 259–268 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Chan, M. Lessons learned from the financial crisis: Designing carbon markets for environmental effectiveness and financial stability. CCLR 3, 152–160 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pattanayak, S. K., Wunder, S. & Ferraro, P. J. Show me the money: Do payments supply environmental services in developing countries? Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 4, 254–274 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Barlow, J. et al. Quantifying the biodiversity value of tropical primary, secondary, and plantation forests. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 18555–18560 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Dent, D. H. Defining the conservation value of secondary tropical forests. Anim. Conserv. 13, 14–15 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Berry, N. J. et al. The high value of logged tropical forests: Lessons from northern Borneo. Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 985–997 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Martina, J. The role of forestry projects in the clean development mechanism. Environ. Sci. Policy 8, 87–104 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Schlamadinger, B. et al. A synopsis of land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) under the Kyoto Protocol and Marrakech Accords. Environ. Sci. Policy 10, 271–282 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lederer, M. From CDM to REDD+ — what do we know for setting up effective and legitimate carbon governance? Ecol. Econ. 70, 1900–1907 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Thomas, S., Dargusch, P., Harrison, S. & Herbohn, J. Why are there so few afforestation and reforestation clean development mechanism projects? Land Use Policy 27, 880–887 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Neeff, T. & Ascui, F. Lessons from carbon markets for designing an effective REDD architecture. Clim. Policy 9, 306–315 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Johns, T. et al. A three-fund approach to incorporating government, public and private forest stewards into a REDD funding mechanism. Int. For. Rev. 10, 458–464 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lindenmayer, D. B., Hunter, M. L., Burton, P. J. & Gibbons, P. Effects of logging on fire regimes in moist forests. Conserv. Lett. 2, 271–277 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Gibson, L. et al. Primary forests are irreplaceable for sustaining tropical biodiversity. Nature 478, 378–381 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Laurance, W. F. Forest–climate interactions in fragmented tropical landscapes. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 359, 345–352 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kauffman, J. B., Hughes, R. F. & Heider, C. Carbon pool and biomass dynamics associated with deforestation, land use, and agricultural abandonment in the neotropics. Ecol. Appl. 19, 1211–1222 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Dixon, R. K. et al. Carbon pools and flux of global forest ecosystems. Science 263, 185–190 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Chmura, G. L., Anisfeld, S. C., Cahoon, D. R. & Lynch, J. C. Global carbon sequestration in tidal, saline wetland soils. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 17, 1111–1123 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Page, S. E. et al. The amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420, 61–65 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Ronnback, P. The ecological basis for economic value of seafood production supported by mangrove ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 29, 235–252 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Keddy, P. A. Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Paoli, G. et al. Biodiversity conservation in the REDD. Carbon Bal. Manage. 5, 7–16 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Prins, G. et al. The Hartwell Paper: A New Direction for Climate Policy after the Crash of 2009 (Institute for Science, Innovation & Society, University of Oxford; LSE Mackinder Programme, London School of Economics and Political Science, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Guidon, P. Voluntary Carbon Markets: How Can They Serve Climate Change Policies OECD Environment Working Paper 19 (OECD, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wara, M. Is the global carbon market working? Nature 445, 595–596 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Ostrom, E. A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change (World Bank, 2009).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  57. McGrath, C. Does Environmental Law Work? How to Evaluate the Effectiveness of an Environmental Legal System (Lambert Academic, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Walker, W. E., Rahman, S. A. & Cave, J. Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 128, 282–289 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wunder, S. Moving Ahead with REDD+: Issues, Options, and Implications Ch. 7 (Centre for International Forestry Research, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Luyssaert, S. et al. Old-growth forests as global carbon sinks. Nature 455, 213–215 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Hobbs, R. J. et al. Novel ecosystems: Theoretical and management aspects of the new ecological world order. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 15, 1–7 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their respective institutions. We thank L. Hovani for providing critical review and A. Riedel for graphic design.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia

    Elizabeth A. Law, Erik Meijaard & Kerrie A. Wilson

  2. School of Business, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia

    Sebastian Thomas

  3. People and Nature Consulting International, Country Woods House 306, JL. WR Supratman, Pondok Ranji-Rengas, Ciputat, Jakarta, Indonesia

    Erik Meijaard

  4. Global Change Institute, C/- S517 Hartley Teakle, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, 4072, Australia

    Paul J. Dargusch

Authors
  1. Elizabeth A. Law
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sebastian Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erik Meijaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul J. Dargusch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kerrie A. Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth A. Law.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Law, E., Thomas, S., Meijaard, E. et al. A modular framework for management of complexity in international forest-carbon policy. Nature Clim Change 2, 155–160 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1376

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1376

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing