Related Publications

Summary of the 15th RRI Dialogue on Forests, Governance, and Climate Change: Challenges of Carbon Rights and Implementing the New Warsaw Agreement on REDD+

The Fifteenth Rights and Resources Initiative (RRI) Dialogue on Forests, Governance, and Climate Change convened at the Newseum in Washington, DC, US, on 19 March 2014, under the theme of “Challenges of Carbon Rights and Implementing the New Warsaw Agreement on REDD+.” Approximately 100 participants attended the event, with over 500 more (from 65 countries) engaging virtually through a live webcast.

Download this file (RRI_Forest_CC_REDD.pdf)Summary[ ]2430 kB

English version of Indonesian Constitutional Court’s Decision regarding the 1999 Forestry Law

The English version of Indonesian Constitutional Court’s Decision regarding the 1999 Forestry Law is now avaible in English. Aliansi Masyarakat Adat Nusantara (AMAN) did the translation of the 1999 Forestry Law. The original Indonesian version is more than 180 pages.


It is widely accepted that REDD+ needs to provide social, environmental and governance benefits, both to make greenhouse gas emissions reductions/removals (ERRs) possible and to ensure permanence. Such benefits can be more broadly described as REDD+ Non-Carbon Benefits (NCBs).

The importance of NCBs as part of results-based payments and their relationship with REDD+ safeguards implementation was first recognised at the UNFCCC meeting in Bangkok in September 2012. This resulted in a decision at COP18 in Doha, which contains two relevant components: 

The inclusion of ways to incentivize NCBs in the 2013 work programme on scaling up and improving the effectiveness of REDD+ finance; and

A request to the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) at its 38th session (Bonn, June 2013) to initiate work on methodological issues related to NCBs resulting from the implementation of REDD+ activities, and to report on this matter to COP19 (Warsaw, November 2013).

The REDD+ work stream already has several issues that are either unresolved (i.e. Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV), National Forest Monitoring Systems (NFMS) and Reference Levels (RLs)/Reference Emission Levels (RELs), further guidance on Safeguards Information Systems (SIS), drivers of deforestation and market/non-market approaches to REDD+), or are new (i.e. institutional arrangements for REDD+, and co-ordinated results based finance for REDD+). To speed up progress in terms of efficiency and ensuring outcomes, discussion of these agenda items, particularly those linked to NCBs, would benefit from streamlining. Although many of the above issues are linked, they tend to be discussed in isolation from each other. This “siloed” approach to the negotiations is inefficient and prevents the effective incorporation of lessons learned from the other areas.

As this briefing paper by the REDD+ Safeguards Working Group (R-SWG) will demonstrate, NCBs are intrinsically linked to a number of important outstanding issues on REDD+ such as results- based finance, SIS, NFMS and drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The R-SWG considers it possible to make progress on all of these issues in a useful and practical way by advancing the NCB discussion in a streamlined manner, particularly by grounding it in demonstrated experience and lessons learned with the REDD+ safeguards.


In December 2012, the negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol were held in Doha, Qatar. The set of decisions adopted by the Parties, known as the Doha Gateway, do not explicitly reference human rights. However, the Parties discussed several rights-related issues that have real impacts on the lives and livelihoods of those most vulnerable to climate change. Integrating a human rights approach is critical in helping to ensure that governments take action to avoid the most devastating impacts of climate change, and that adaptation and mitigation measures do not cause further suffering. It also promotes the full and effective participation of affected individuals and peoples in decision-making processes.

Click here to download the paper

Source: The Center for International Environment Law

Assessment of REDD+ Training Needs and Supply in Six Countries in the Africa and Asia-Pacific Regions

Executive Summary

REDD+ capacity building is fundamental to achieving REDD+ readiness, recognized as a priority area by the UNFCCC since COP 13 in 2007. There is little data, however, that describe the type of capacity building and the number of people that are reached with these initiatives in REDD+ countries. The lack of information makes it difficult to determine where additional investments in capacity building are needed.

This report presents results from a study of REDD+ capacity building initiatives that were implemented in Cambodia, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Indonesia, Liberia, Madagascar and Papua New Guinea (PNG) between September 2010 and June 2012. It is intended to assist the organizations that fund and conduct capacity building for REDD+ to more efficiently target their efforts. The report describes training supply in the country, and the perceptions of key actors engaged in the REDD+ process about the priority capacity building needs.

Data were collected through a short online survey and detailed interviews carried out over the telephone and via email. The survey participants and interviewees were identified through Conservation International’s and RECOFTC – The Center for People and Forests’s networks in the study countries as well as through Readiness Preparation Plans (RPP’s) and other documents that describe the country’s REDD+ process.

In every country the overall verdict was that the supply of REDD+ training does not meet demand. However there has been important progress in REDD+ awareness raising, training for REDD+ policy development and planning, and community carbon accounting.

NGOs are most commonly targeted by REDD+ training service providers, followed closely by local communities, indicating a shift in focus for training providers from the ‘capital cities’ towards field-level activities.

Government departments were most frequently identified by service providers as the priority stakeholders to receive further REDD+ training. The little training attention paid to the general public and land-use industries is also a cause for concern, being two stakeholder groups with a sizeable influence on the success or failure of national REDD+ implementation.

The delivery of in-person training workshops was most frequently identified as a successful training format across the study countries. This is likely because it is a tried-and-tested method, and one of the more intensive forms of training delivery. Posters and flyers reached the highest audiences at an average of nearly 6,000 per country. The fact that Radio and TV wasn’t the most far-reaching format indicates that it is not being used to its potential, and is restricted to localized rather than national broadcasting.

The most common barrier to training supply reported was a lack of resources to organize trainings, indicating potential problems with distribution and access too REDD+ training funding at a national and sub-national level.

Overall this study reveals that though REDD+ training has achieved much during its limited lifespan, the bulk of the workload remains on the horizon.

You are here: Home Publications Related Publications