REDD-plus and Biodiversity - Convention on Biological Diversity

<strong>REDD</strong>-<strong>plus</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Biodiversity</strong>
79. However, protected areas were also severely criticized for the displacement of indigenous <strong>and</strong> local
communities, which occurred both in the form of the forced removal of people from their homes <strong>and</strong>
the exclusion of people from particular areas in their pursuit of a livelihood (Brockington & Igoe, 2006;
Agrawal & Redford, 2009; van Oudenhoven et al., 2010). In reaction, delegates at the IUCN World Parks
Congress in Durban in 2003 highlighted their commitment “to involve local communities, indigenous <strong>and</strong>
mobile peoples in the creation, proclamation <strong>and</strong> management of protected areas.” One of the major goals
of the Action Plan negotiated at Durban was to ensure the rights of indigenous <strong>and</strong> local communities are
secured in relation to natural resources <strong>and</strong> biodiversity conservation.
80. Significantly, the Durban World Parks Congress also recognized the validity of applying a variety
of protected area governance structures to all IUCN categories of protected areas. The most distinctive
of these has been decentralized natural resource governance, including community conserved areas
(Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2004). At their most extensive, these decentralized approaches to conservation
have allowed indigenous <strong>and</strong> local communities to redefine ownership, use <strong>and</strong> management of natural resources.
The outcomes of these efforts vary, but when effective they have increased the rights <strong>and</strong> benefits
of indigenous <strong>and</strong> local communities in terms of natural resources (Agrawal & Ostrom, 2008) <strong>and</strong> provided
opportunities for biodiversity conservation at reduced cost (Chazdon, 2008; Somanathan et al., 2009).
81. The CBD COP recognizes the importance of community conserved areas <strong>and</strong> their role in the diversity
of governance types for protected areas. At its ninth meeting, in Bonn, Germany, in 2008, the
Conference of the Parties to CBD invited Parties to “improve <strong>and</strong>, where necessary, diversify <strong>and</strong> strengthen
protected-area governance types, leading to or in accordance with appropriate national legislation including
recognizing <strong>and</strong> taking into account, where appropriate, indigenous, local <strong>and</strong> other communitybased
organizations” (para. 6 (a), decision IX/18).
82. In the same decision, Parties are invited to “recognize the contribution of, where appropriate, comanaged
protected areas, private protected areas <strong>and</strong> indigenous <strong>and</strong> local community conserved areas
within the national protected area system through acknowledgement in national legislation or other effective
means” (para. 6 (b)).
83. Moreover, at its tenth meeting, held in Nagoya, Japan, in 2010, the Conference of the Parties adopted
decision X/31 on protected areas wherein the COP invited Parties to (i) “establish clear mechanisms <strong>and</strong>
processes for equitable cost <strong>and</strong> benefit-sharing <strong>and</strong> for full <strong>and</strong> effective participation of indigenous <strong>and</strong>
local communities;” (ii) “recognize the role of indigenous <strong>and</strong> local community conserved areas <strong>and</strong>
conserved areas of other stakeholders in biodiversity conservation, collaborative management <strong>and</strong> diversification
of governance types possibly through national legislation;” <strong>and</strong> (iii) “diversify <strong>and</strong> strengthen
protected-area governance types.”
4.1.3 <strong>REDD</strong>-<strong>plus</strong> as an opportunity to achieve synergies between mitigation <strong>and</strong> adaptation
84. <strong>REDD</strong>-<strong>plus</strong> is first <strong>and</strong> foremost a climate change mitigation effort. However, deforestation <strong>and</strong> forest
degradation are accompanied by the loss of numerous vital ecosystem services which provide a variety of
income possibilities, material welfare, livelihoods, security, resilience, social relations, health, <strong>and</strong> freedom
of choices <strong>and</strong> actions (MEA, 2005). These ecosystem services, <strong>and</strong> their continuous supply, are becoming
increasingly important in the context of adaptation to climate change.
85. The new GEF sustainable forest management strategy for 2010-2014 (GEF-5) is based on the underst<strong>and</strong>ing
that financial support to forest projects has to achieve multiple globally agreed environmental
objectives, such as climate change mitigation, climate change adaptation, <strong>and</strong> biodiversity conservation.
31