• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Reply from Norway’s Climate and Forest Initiative

Posted on 1 April 201012 March 2018

Last week, REDD-Monitor received a reply from Hans Brattskar, the Director of Norway’s Climate and Forest Initiative, to the post “Indigenous Peoples excluded from French-Norwegian partnership on forests”.

The reply is posted below in full, as requested. Brattskar seems keen to distance Norway from the Paris meeting.

“It is important to highlight that the Climate and Forest Conference in Oslo is the facilitative venue of a global process and must not be looked upon as a ‘French-Norwegian’ initiative,” Brattskar writes. He makes no attempt to defend the exclusion of Indigenous Peoples from the meeting in Paris.

But Brattskar’s reference to the Rights and Resources Dialogue on Forests, Governance and Climate Change that will take place in London on 6 April 2010 is somewhat disingenuous. The meeting is organised by the Rights and Resources Initiative and will discuss the latest developments in international REDD discussions. It is the fourth in an on-going series of meeting. “Concerns are growing,” notes RRI, “over the transparency of the process outside the UNFCCC, as well as over the fate of safeguards, standards and consultations.” The RRI meeting in London is not in any way part of the “interim REDD+ partnership”.

Reply from Hans Brattskar, Director of Norway’s Climate and Forest Initiative, to REDD-Monitor’s article “Indigenous Peoples excluded from French-Norwegian partnership on forests”

 
26 March 2010
 
The Norwegian Government underlines that full and effective participation of all relevant stakeholders, including indigenous peoples, in the interim REDD+ partnership and the process leading up to it, is a prerequisite for the legitimacy of the partnership. Only a transparent and inclusive multilateral process, leading up to the Climate and Forest Conference in Oslo on 27 May 2010 and beyond can grant such legitimacy. It is therefore a priority for the Norwegian Government to ensure such an open, inclusive and transparent process.
 
Important elements of this process with respect to the involvement of civil society are:

  • Regular telephone conferences with civil society representatives, including indigenous peoples’ organizations, taking part in the Forest Investment Programme (FIP), the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) and the UN-REDD Program to disseminate information and receive comments.
  • High‐level representation and active participation at the Fourth Rights and Resources (RRI) Dialogue on Forests, Governance and Climate Change in London, April 6th 2010. This RRI Dialogue is especially timed to provide an opportunity for Indigenous Peoples, community organizations, NGOs, and the private sector to review and share opinions on the Climate and Forest Conference, May 27th 2010 in Oslo. The Dialogue has outreach to a large network of indigenous peoples’ and civil society organizations worldwide. For those that cannot travel to London, real‐time coverage of the event will be provided.
  • Norway is the designated facilitator of a core group of countries, which is dedicated to moving the process forward. In this role, Norway strongly supports a transparent and inclusive process in which representatives of Indigenous Peoples groups and civil society networks will be consulted and will have the opportunity to submit written proposals and comments on the partnership process.
  • A partnership document will be drafted in a multilateral process over the course of the next few weeks. Norway will facilitate this process and, in this function, convene consultations on the draft text with network representatives of Indigenous Peoples groups and civil society organizations.
  • The Oslo Climate and Forest Conference on May 27th will be open to all countries that wish to support the partnership. In addition, representatives of Indigenous Peoples and civil society networks as well as multilateral organizations will be invited to participate at the conference.

It is important to highlight that the Climate and Forest Conference in Oslo is the facilitative venue of a global process and must not be looked upon as a “French-Norwegian” initiative. It is a multilateral initiative, which includes tropical forest countries and donors as well as Indigenous Peoples organizations, civil society, UN and other multilateral organizations.
 
In this context, it is important to highlight, that the partnership is intended to represent a quick start to implement REDD+ actions and to secure the necessary financial support for that. The REDD-plus Partnership will support the implementation of what is already agreed under the UNFCCC on REDD-plus, while being flexible enough to expand its scope as that agreement expands. It will therefore not create a negotiation track separate from the formal UNFCCC negotiations on REDD+. When a UNFCCC REDD+ mechanism is set up, it would replace or subsume the interim partnership.
 
The Norwegian Government is dedicated to a legitimate and successful partnership on climate and forests and welcomes all comments and questions in this regard.

 

2 thoughts on “Reply from Norway’s Climate and Forest Initiative”

  1. Tommy Mathew says:
    1 April 2010 at 6:15 pm

    There is a need to understand more about Non Wood Forest Products as defined BY FAO. Unless the initiative of climate change takes the basic economic needs of the local,rural people the question of Climate change would never be addressed on the long run. Products using local, rapid renewable and non forest products materials are brought as CDM. there is no way of improving the livelihood of the local people.

    More than 50% of the populations live in these areas.

  2. Natalie says:
    12 April 2010 at 1:16 am

    Pretty interesting that Norway considered the RRI Dialogue as part of the Paris-Oslo process. Did RRI communicate in advance to the participants of London meeting anything about it?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Recent Posts

  • Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Papua New Guinea Environmental Alliance letter to Pogio Ghate, Minister for Environment, Conservation and Climate Change
  • Ecomapuá Amazon REDD Project, Brazil: Pública investigation reveals Ecomapuá Conservação is selling “illegal” carbon offsets from land it does not own, without transferring the money to local communities
  • Response from Steve Zwick, Verra: “Verra will ask Kanaka Management Systems to cease and desist any actions that may mislead communities into thinking that Verra has not already rejected the project”
  • Response from Kanaka Management Services: “Please do not conduct legal trail or castigate REDD+ project developers on the website by writing text which shows the project developer in bad light”

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2022 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!