In the run-up to the UNFCCC climate negotiations in Paris, World Rainforest Movement put out a statement. “Instead of spending time on real solutions like leaving fossil fuels underground, the climate talks have deliberately come up with mechanisms that enable corporations to continue doing business as usual,” WRM argues.
At the end of June 2015, President Barack Obama and President Dilma Rousseff put out a “U.S.-Brazil Joint Statement On Climate Change”. It’s good to see that the two Presidents put climate change at the top of their agenda when they met.
The UN climate negotiations that will take place in Paris are sponsored by a series of polluting companies. Among these companies are two that are also involved in REDD projects: Air France and BNP Paribas.
In March 2015, Bloomberg quoted Jens Frølich Holte, political adviser to Norway’s Minister for Climate and Environment, as saying that, “Carbon trading can speed up the global transition away from a fossil economy. Trade creates benefits and this is as true for carbon as it is for other commodities.”
Early in the morning of 14 December 2014, the COP20 President and Peruvian Minister of the Environment, Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, gavelled through a new Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action text, and announced the “Lima call for climate action“. “This is not perfect,” he said, “but it respects the positions of the parties.”
On Monday, 8 December 2014, at 6.30 am in Lima, the UNFCCC released two draft negotiating texts – “Elements for a draft negotiating text” and “Draft text v1”. These are the first drafts of texts that the UNFCCC hopes to negotiate into a protocol at COP21 in Paris in one year’s time.
At the end of last week, just before the start of this year’s United Nations climate negotiations (COP20) in Lima, Peru, World Rainforest Movement and other signatories put out a call to action “to reject REDD+ and extractive industries to confront capitalism and defend life and territories”.
“REDD is a risky and false solution to climate change, both in theory and in practice,” argues a new report by Friends of the Earth International. “Now it is time to ditch risky REDD for known community approaches that are effective, ethical and equitable.”
Last week, the New York Times published an article that argues that, “The science says that spending precious dollars for climate change mitigation on forestry is high-risk”. It is written by Nadine Unger, an assistant professor of atmospheric chemistry at the School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University.