COP16 provides a good opportunity to define the steps leading to a treaty on policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries  (aka ‘REDD+’).

 

UN-REDD Programme  hosts today a session where high-level representatives from REDD+ countries, the World Bank and the UN agencies discuss the meaningful partnership inroads being made to advance REDD+ efforts and what countries can learn from each other. [1]

 

REDD+ could contribute to the mitigation of climate change only if various methodological issues are resolved [2]. The very important of them now is how to set country-specific reference levels — that is, the levels below which the countries’ reduced emissions could be measured and credited.  Several articles published in CBM form a diversity of ideas which is essential for developing a set of options from which REDD+ countries may choose. Below is the list of papers organized in the form of a book content that might stimulate the authors of the cited articles to express their collective views in a book or in a position paper.

 

 

REDD+ national levels

Which is the best? – Umemya et al.

Which is biodiversity friendly? – Paoli et al.

Which is more operational? – Maniatis & Mollicone

Which is fair?  - Obersteiner et al.

Which is critical?  -  Kohl et al.

Which is less expensive? – Bottcher et al.

Which is more observable? – Goetz et al.

Which is more applicable? - Huettner et al.

Which is less risky? – Hurteau et al.

What is the purpose? – Gurney & Raymond  

 

—————–

[1] Delivering as One: Partnerships for REDD+ (CEB side event). UN-REDD Programme Newsletter 2010: 14

 

[2] Umemiya C, Amano M, Wilamart S: Assessing data availability for the development of REDD-plus national reference levels, Carbon Balance and Management 2010, 5:6