Tuesday, August 23, 2011

What do Carbon Opportunists Tell Us About REDD+

Since the emergence of REDD+ scheme as a new alternative for climate change mitigation effort on the land use, land use and forestry (LULUCF) sector, there are contentious discussions and debates about how the scheme should be implemented on the real situation. Up to present day, the concept and modalities of REDD+ are still being developed and not yet ready to be implemented on the ground.

In addition, understanding and perspective upon REDD+ concept in Indonesia are currently varied from one stakeholder to the other, hence, everyone seems come up with his or her own perspective and conclusion, which is sometimes not fit in with each others.
The situation above is utilised and caught by I called as Carbon Opportunists (or other referred as Carbon Cowboys) by spreading their sweet promises and words to the government (national and subnational) and local communities about REDD+ opportunities based on their misleading illusion and expectations. Carbon opportunists try to convince and setting up mind-set of both government officers and communities as if the REDD+ activity is golden opportunity to reap huge amount of money by doing less or nothing on the ground.

The following section tries to synthesize and sketch out misleading illusions and expectations that have been often spread out by carbon opportunities to win support from both government and communities upon their ideas on REDD+.

First illusion and expectation: REDD+ is simply just protecting forest and huge money will flow in into the pocket. This misleading simplification is often raised by Carbon Opportunists to illustrate that the REDD+ activities are just simply protect forest from logging, fires and conversion to other uses, then huge money will flow in from the developed countries (Annex-1) to the forest protectors (government and communities) in the developing forest countries where REDD+ activities are taken place. On the contrary, the REDD+ activities are not as simplest as protect forest and money will flow in to the pocket of the implementers, but rather it involves series of architecture elements and a bit take time in term of process. REDD+ activities entail procedures and activities such as setting up baseline; implementing emission reduction and sequestration activities; conducting MRV; registering the certified emission reduction unit (CERs) produced; delivering the CERS to buyer; and distribution of CERs payment to the REDD+ actors. Those above architecture elements and activities will of course have big implications in terms of resources (financial, human and technology) and time (lengthy process) needed.

Second illusion and expectation: REDD+ is simply selling a carbon stock. This conclusion is very illusory, as carbon buyers from developed countries including their corporates will not going to pay any carbon stock that have been previously deposited or sequestered in the standing forests including carbon sank in the peat soil through the REDD+ scheme. Carbon credit in REDD+ is valued on the basis of performance-based approach, meaning that payment is only be made upon positive reduction and sequestration. In simplest way the tons of carbon to be paid is the net carbon gain by calculating  the difference between the present carbon stock (Yt) compared to previous stock (Yt-1) after leakage is deducted. Hence, for example, if the current deposited stock is smaller then previous deposited stock, the positive emission is occurred, so no incentive payment will be made.

Third illusion and expectation: Cost of REDD+ is cheap and the profit is huge. The cost of REDD+ activities normally entails three types of costs namely opportunity, transaction and implementation. These three cost components are not trivial, but rather substantial amount of initial investment costs are required to establish the REDD+ project. The REDD+ is a market-based approach, meaning that the activities are taken on profit manner. Profit is calculated in accordance to total differences between revenue generated and outlays spent for the REDD+ activities. Cost calculation includes the repayment of initial investment disbursed to start up the REDD+ project. Hence, a conclusion which states that the REDD+ cost is cheap and profit is enormous considered as illogic and misleading.

Fourth illusion and expectation: REDD+ will provide widespread job opportunities to locals. These illusion and expectation are somewhat make sense, however, the job opportunity will mostly depend upon the nature and type of jobs that REDD+ activities will offer to the local communities. If as a field labour, again the numbers of job opportunity required will depend upon the scale and types on emission reduction activities on the ground. My prediction, if REDD+ activities to be implemented in the very good primary and secondary forests conditions, the demand for field labour would not big enough, as the ground activities would be very limited. In the meantime, it is understandable that the REDD+ activities will involve strong technical and scientific manners where these kinds of expertise and type of job are rarely available locally. From existing REDD+ initiatives happening in Indonesia, for instance, REDD+ initiators are mostly preferred using international and national experts rather than using local experts to expediting their activities on the ground. The situation is often exacerbated by the lack of transparency and lack of involvement of the local communities in the process of worker recruitment. Unless there is a viable mechanism developed as well as principles of transparency, participation and accountability are put in place by REDD+ initiators; the promise of great job opportunities for the locals is just another illusion.

Fifth illusion and expectation: REDD+ will improve the local economy. The positive impact that REDD+ activities can contribute to the local economy is depending upon the scale of its financial investment and field activities on the ground. If the scale of investment is very small and the field activities are very limited, thus, the impacts of those investment and activities are less meaningful to the local economy. Moreover, the financial benefit that local economy will accrue from REDD+ activity is very much depends upon the design of payment allocation and distribution mechanisms being developed. If the principles of effective, efficient and equity are not well reflected towards the main emission reduction actors, the impact ofd REDD+ on local economy will not strong enough. The situation is even worse if the distribution chains are very long, the trickle down effects of REDD+ financial benefit to the local economy will shrinkage.

Sixth illusion and expectation: REDD+ will facilitate transfer of knowledge, experience and technology to the locals. Carbon opportunists often spread sweet promises stated the REDD+ activities will viably transfer  the knowledge, experience and technology to the local communities. This jargon might happen in a very limited number and scale, but, generally, there is often lacking of strategy and method on how transfering these expertise, knowledge and experience to the locals on the ground. to some extent, however, it often happen where local knowledge and experience confiscated by those carbon opportunists for their own benefits. Unless a transparent and firm means of transferring knowledge, experience and technology available to the local, there would be just an illusion that REDD+ supports local knowledge, expertise and experience.

By developing a better understanding upon those illusions and expectations often raised by those carbon opportunists,  local stakeholders (local government and communities) may differentiate whether or not someone approach them is categorized as a Carbon Opportunist and  thus they can distance themselves from those kind of opportunists.

No comments:

Short Interview with a Tourist from Australia on Pulau Padar NTT

On 7th July 2022 I visited Pulau Padar (Padar Island), one of the Islands in the Komodo National Park in Nusa Tenggara Timur Province. Pulau...