In Cancun, the REDD+ Partnership has managed to continue its spectacular record of sheer incompetence. At the beginning of its meeting in Cancun, the REDD+ Partnership had a draft Work Programme for 2011-2012. All it had to do was approve the Work Programme. Yet the REDD+ Partnership, or more specifically the Papua New Guinea co-chair Federica Bietta, has managed to screw up this apparently simple task.
The REDD+ Partnership met over the weekend before the official Cancun meeting started. At least one person received their invitation a week earlier, leaving no chance of changing their flight in order to attend.
After this meeting, on 1 December 2010, a revised draft Work Programme was issued. David Diaz of the Ecosystem Marketplace commented that
Although there are several additions and reformulations of text from the previous draft, the primary effect of the revisions was a substantial amount of cutting. Among the more noticeable redactions are many of the provisions on safeguards for monitoring, reporting, and verifying environmental, social, and governance issues associated with REDD+ activities.
The deadline for comments on this draft was 8pm on Sunday, 5 December 2010. David Diaz of Ecosystem Marketplace documented the major changes between the 26 November 2010 draft and that of 1 December 2010. There is no record of the comments received on the REDD+ Partnership website. There is no way of knowing whether the co-chairs ignored some comments in favour of others, or whether they even bothered to read the comments.
A final draft was released on 7 December 2020. The document was circulated by the Secretariat of the REDD+ Partnership, with the following email message:
Please find attached the revised Work Program of the REDD+ Partnership as prepared by the Secretariat (FMT/PT) under the guidance of the Co-chairs. Any comments should be provided to the Secretariat before Wednesday, December 8, 2010 at 20:00 Cancun time. Once approved, the Secretariat will incorporate the 2010 and 2011-2012 parts into a single Work Program.
UPDATE 1 (8 December 2010): The secretariat sent a slightly different message to partners:
Please find attached for approval on a no-objection basis the revised Work Program of the REDD+ Partnership as prepared by the Secretariat (FMT/PT) under the guidance of the Co-chairs. Any comments should be provided to the Secretariat before Wednesday, December 8, 2010 at 20:00 Cancun time. Once approved, the Secretariat will incorporate the 2010 and 2011-2012 parts into a single Work Program.
The final draft Work Programme can be downloaded here (pdf file 181 KB).
The point of this post is not necessarily to encourage people to comment to the REDD+ Partnership Work Programme. Of course you’re very welcome to do so, but what the hell would be the point? The process is so deeply flawed that to do so would be a waste of time. Comments are not made public. There will be no meeting of the REDD+ Partnership to discuss the comments and any amendments to be made. Steve Zwick of Ecosystem Marketplace notes that
sources close to the Partnership secretariat say the work program posted by co-chairs Federica Bietta of Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Junya Nakano of Japan on December 2 is not the one that the secretariat had written. …
“The secretariat did a revision of the work program by Wednesday, 2 December, and sent it to the co-chairs, and then the document disappeared for many hours and was then sent out by PNG with a number of changes to what the secretariat has provided,” said a source close to the secretariat, speaking on condition of anonymity. “[The document posted Wednesday] is not the product of the secretariat; it is the secretariat’s version plus changes.”
Zwick adds that the chairs are perfectly within their rights to edit the Work Programme, as the REDD+ Partnership has not yet agreed to any rules of procedure. Which illustrates yet another problem with the REDD+ Partnership.
Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, of Tebtebba, represents the Philippines in the Partnership. She told Zwick that “If these safeguards are not included, you have to ask yourself if the Interim REDD+ Partnership should even continue to exist.” There is no reference in the draft Work Programme to free, prior and informed consent. There is no reference to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Even the word “rights” does not appear in the draft Work Programme.
REDD-Monitor has a small piece of advice for the REDD+ Partnership: