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

Is the REDD+ Partnership closing down? And should we care?

Posted on 18 July 201412 March 2018

In a recent message to REDD+ Partners and observers, the co-chairs of the REDD+ Partnership write, “We work under the assumption that the Partnership work program ends in Lima.” Will the REDD+ Partnership close down after its meeting in November 2014?

The REDD+ Partnership started in 2010. The first two meetings, in Paris and Oslo, raised concerns from civil society and indigenous peoples’ organisations that they were being excluded from the discussions.

In its first year, the REDD+ Partnership slipped from one blunder to the next. Since then, it has become a cosy talk shop, achieving little.

In 2012, Greenpeace’s David Ritter asked, “Whatever Happened to the REDD+ Partnership?” Ritter wrote that,

One delegate described the feeling of the gathering as ‘like a family’. Another privately cautioned on saying or asking anything too critical ‘because this is a partnership, it is meant to be friendly’. Politics, it seemed, was ostensibly to be left outside so REDD could be reduced to a seemingly technocratic and harmonious discussion among family and friends.

The REDD+ Partnership is supposed to serve “as an interim platform for its partner countries to scale up actions and finance for initiatives to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+)”.

The most recent meeting of the REDD+ Partnership took place in Bonn in June 2014. During the lunch break Global Canopy Programme held side event during which Matt Leggett gave a presentation on the financial challenges that REDD faces. The co-chairs’ summary of the meeting notes that,

At present, global demand for REDD+ emissions reductions is around 253 MtCO2e, a tiny fraction of the 3,300-9,900 MtCO2e in emissions reductions that is needed to reduce deforestation by 50% by 2020 and so help maintain a trajectory to limit global warming to 2°C.

So much for scaling up actions and finance for REDD.

The REDD+ Partnership has managed to set up a Voluntary REDD+ Database (VRD). Launched in October 2010, the VRD website provides information about REDD financing. By June 2014, the website had successfully run up a bill of US$1.5 million. “The yearly cost of the VRD seems high,” the co-chairs’ summary notes.

The database relies on information provided both by countries giving money and countries receiving money for REDD. One of the more interesting features of the database is the difference between the two. Indonesia, for example, reports having received US$189.2 million for REDD, but the funding countries report having given US$613.37 million to Indonesia.

The VRD explains that providing both figures “promotes transparency by allowing the figures to be compared”. This may be true, but it raises questions about Indonesia’s capacity to report incoming funding and how seriously it takes the REDD+ Partnership.

The co-chairs’ summary of the June 2014 meeting states,

Partners requested that information on financing provided by donors should be verified with REDD+ countries as one way to address discrepancies between what donor arrangements are reported in the database and those reported by recipient or REDD+ countries. This issue continues to be important for the Partnership…

The REDD+ Partnership has commissioned a Fast Start Financing Study which is being carried out by Kouami Kokou of the University of Lomé and Alain Karsenty from the Centre for Agriculture Research for Development (CIRAD). So far, only 11 recipient countries and nine funding countries have responded to the questionnaires sent out as part of the study.

The REDD+ Partnership has hired Donna Lee (ex-USA lead negotiator on REDD) and Tony La Viña (a lead negotiator for the Philippines) to carry out an assessment of the results of the REDD+ Partnership. At the meeting in Bonn, the consultants “clarified that the study will not give a recommendation on the future of the Partnership but the basis to inform such decision by Partners”. Their report is due in mid-October.

At their meeting in November 2014, the members of the REDD+ Partnership will decide, whether the Partnership will continue after 2014. I can hardly wait.
 

2 thoughts on “Is the REDD+ Partnership closing down? And should we care?”

  1. Sebastien Snoeck says:
    19 July 2014 at 6:14 pm

    The VRD mainly raises the question of how anything remotely related to forests is being reported by developed countries as REDD financing, including double counting of CBD financing and, believe it or not, loans to forest management companies…..

  2. Carolyn Pin says:
    21 July 2014 at 6:17 pm

    Please kill it! Done nothing more than wasting money and time “in the name of forests”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SUBSCRIBE!

Recent themes
30x30
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

Recent Posts

  • REDD-Monitor is moving to Substack
  • REDD Project in Brazil Nut concessions in Madre de Dios, Peru finally started paying communities a decade after the project started. “I’m still lacking money,” says one community member
  • REDD-Monitor’s top ten posts in 2022
  • The harsh reality of 30×30: The EU is keen to allow extractivism in the 30×30 target – but not Indigenous Peoples’ territories
  • Human rights abuses against Indigenous Peoples and the proposed “30×30” target

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • Chris Ibe on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow
  • Xindia on Bar Works: The return of Renwick Haddow

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 Cryptocurrency Deforestation EcoPlanet Bamboo Evictions FCPF Financing REDD Fossil fuels FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post Human rights ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC Verra 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 Gabon Germany Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Luxembourg Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Spain Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA West Papua
©2025 REDD-Monitor | Powered by SuperbThemes!