Over the next few weeks, REDD-Monitor will feature a series of posts about REDD safeguards. This post, which forms an introduction to the series, is written by Ivonne Yanez of Acción Ecológica in Ecuador and is cross-posted from the World Rainforest Movement.
“We are deeply disappointed at the lack of meaningful progress on REDD+ here in Peru, one of the countries with the most forests in the world, with many Indigenous Peoples. We expected at least SOME progress, but there has been no substantial outcome on REDD+.”
The Warsaw decision on summary of information on safeguards is staggeringly weak. Governments “should” provide a summary report every two years. Least developed countries don’t even have to do that if they don’t feel like it.
“Amid cheers and applause negotiators announced the completion of the REDD+ program design.” That’s Pipa Elias, REDD+ and agriculture expert for the Union of Concerned Scientists, responding to the Warsaw REDD decisions on Friday.
FERN has released its analysis of the UN climate negotiations in Cancun, COP 16, as part of the January 2011 issue of Forest Watch. A year ago, in its report on the REDD text from the Copenhagen meeting, FERN pointed out that “The safeguards are undermined … by the strong opposition of some countries to monitor and report on these. Without such reporting there would be, in effect, no safeguards.”