•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation has swiftly taken its place near the top of policy agendas in countries around the world. In Indonesia, the government has promised to slash its emissions between 26 and 41 percent, principally through the scheme.

Following the UN Climate Change Conference in Bonn in 2009, REDD activities covering conservation, sustainable forest management and the enhancement of carbon stocks in forests have become increasingly prominent.

REDD offers incentives for heavily forested developing countries to reduce forest carbon emissions by protecting and wisely managing their woodlands.

Numerous funds have been made available for the scheme, including those administered through the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility and UN-REDD, as well as through other bilateral arrangements.

Some developed countries whose historical emissions have led to their current wealth have shown commitments to funding these activities. N

orway has so far been one of the largest donors, shown in part in the recent announcement of $1 billion in aid to Indonesia to fund REDD projects.

All of this suggests money is there for the taking. But don’t be fooled. We must see results, and this will cost money.

In order to fully implement REDD, countries will generally need to follow three main phases.

In the first, they need to build capacities in monitoring, reporting and verification and create demonstration activities to show their readiness for REDD projects.

The second phase focuses on the creation of policies on emission reduction and their enforcement on the ground.

The most important phase is the third, creating financing instruments to reward performance.

The long-term financial inflows are only expected after the quantification of emission reduction, if such activity occurs.

Indonesia is currently far from this third phase, meaning that the country still has huge investments ahead of it to be able to conduct the necessary activities.

Our country faces daunting challenges in regards to land tenure reform, forest law enforcement, fire fighting and forest conversion. These are all expensive.

As an illustration, the Eliasch Review, an independent report on climate change and forest funding commissioned by Britain in 2008, suggests that improving capacity building and policy reform for REDD in 40 countries can lead to a staggering total cost of $4 billion over five years.

As there is yet to be a similar assessment of Indonesian’s case, an average from the report might come up short in providing us with a cost reference, given the magnitude of our forests and related problems.

After the completion of these three phases, payments are to be based on third-party verifiable emission reductions and carbon stock enhancements.

But it should be borne in mind that the three phases are conditional, meaning that countries will not move to the more advanced phases prior to showing meaningful outcomes in the running phase.

The message is clear that adopting REDD clearly requires evaluation of the promised benefits and the obvious costs. If this is overlooked, then interested parties might suffer.

REDD is often said to be a cost-effective approach to fighting climate change. But if it costs us substantially, we will obtain less benefit than we might expect.

This is not to discourage commitments and efforts in tackling climate change, but we need to carefully exercise the best possible to keep costs down.

To minimize the expense of full implementation of REDD, it will be important to exchange lessons learned with other countries that are engaging in similar activities.

Indonesia should also determine its basis for REDD policies: either national or project-based activities.

National-based projects would minimize startup costs, but they would require strong enforcement from the central government, lest deforestation and forest degradation continue.

The choice will also require fair distribution of benefits within the country, particularly to those stakeholders directly involved in ensuring emission reductions, be them local communities, companies or local governments.

Unjust transfers of benefits could disappoint actors, leading to their declining commitment in protecting forests.

The central government should not expect to get the largest slices of the pie if REDD is to have lasting effects.



Ahmad Maryudi is a lecturer at Gadjah Mada University and the executive director of the Institute for Forest Policy and Environmental Studies.