A scientific assessment of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD+) policy finds that while REDD+ has provided a “convenient umbrella” for many forest and land use-related activities aimed at reducing deforestation and forest degradation, the interlinkages and complexities of relationships between forests, land use and climate are profound.

The report and policy brief delving into the REDD+ policy – prepared by the Global Forest Expert Panels (GFEP) programme led by the International Union of Forest Research Organisations (IUFRO) – published on May 4 analyses the past ten years of REDD+ implementation regarding forest governance, carbon measurements and effects on biodiversity and livelihoods.

REDD+ is a global action plan intended to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation primarily in tropical and sub-tropical regions, where the largest forest losses occur.

GFEP and IUFRO state that their report into REDD+ aims to inform ongoing policy discussions on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and comes at a pivotal time as human-induced climate change and increases in extreme weather events are impacting on nature and people faster and more severely than had been expected 20 years ago.

However, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there is still a chance to reverse this trend and avoid further global warming. Such an endeavour requires drastic reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂) – most of which stems from the burning of fossil fuels.

Nonetheless, forests play an important role in the global carbon cycle as they absorb CO₂ as they grow, but also emit carbon when they are destroyed.

Every year nearly one-third of the global carbon emissions produced by humans can be absorbed by forests, yet deforestation and forest degradation are responsible for up to 10% of the yearly human-made CO₂ emissions.
 
In addition, GFEP and IUFRO report that interest in forests as a “nature-based solution” has probably never been higher and the number of initiatives aimed at conserving, sustainably managing and restoring forests has increased considerably.

For example, lead report author and IUFRO task force deputy coordinator and environmental consultant Stephanie Mansourian says there has been growing interest in forest landscape restoration (FLR) since the launch of the Bonn Challenge in 2011.

“This and other initiatives contribute to REDD+ but also overlap with it and often create confusion among stakeholders.”

She adds that enhancing synergies with them and with other sectors is both a challenge and an opportunity.

In addition to promoting forest protection and carbon sink enhancement, a key focus of REDD+ is to move the scope of interventions beyond climate impacts and towards an integrated view of climate, biodiversity and livelihoods.

REDD+ can deliver numerous environmental benefits, including reduced soil erosion, enhanced water quality and quantity and increased resilience to drought and floods. It can potentially deliver important biodiversity benefits, although the availability of up-to-date biodiversity data remains a major challenge, the report suggests.

“Such benefits have significant economic importance and may increase both the value of REDD+ programmes and people’s willingness to engage with them. However, in the implementation of REDD+, greater attention to biodiversity and livelihood outcomes is needed,” says report lead author, US Department of Agriculture Forest Service representative and IUFRO president John Parrotta.
 
Evidence from social evaluations of REDD+ interventions indicates that, where direct and indirect benefits are clearly visible to local stakeholders, and have been delivered, community engagement is strong and projects have achieved positive CO₂ and social outcomes, at least in the short-term, according to the GFEP and IUFRO report.

Further, explicit attention to rights and tenure issues provides more transparent mechanisms for the reporting and monitoring of environmental and social co-benefits, as well as better, more equitable outcomes, particularly for more vulnerable communities.

Case studies from Indonesia show that insecure tenure can exacerbate distrust between resource users and the government, and can keep local people from further participating in REDD+ activities.

Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean suggests that deforestation is lower in areas where indigenous and tribal peoples’ collective land rights are recognised.

“Since 2012, implementation of REDD+ has advanced considerably in many countries; but ultimately it is REDD+ governance that determines its performance. Yet, governance is distributed across a complex landscape of institutions with different sources of authority and power dynamics that influence its outcomes,” says GFEP programme coordinator Christoph Wildburger.