Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP) Design ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Potential Risk 1. Land use disputes or uncertainty over classification (including allocation of land for other economic purposes such as oil palm and timber plantations) 2. Parts of Block E are designated as protected area 3. Failure to agree and/or accept proposed payment distribution mechanisms or approaches to supporting alternative livelihoods 4. Inconsistent or conflicting policies between different levels of government or lack of coordination by/with government at different levels 5. Lack of community support/engagement, including failure to address Potential Impact Land use disputes could limit the ability to either rehabilitate land that is deforested or degraded, or to conserve intact forest areas. Given the hydrological characteristics of peat domes, this may reduce the effectiveness of work to re-flood (and therefore revegetate degraded areas). Should the proposed demonstration area within Block E be designated as a protected area, questions may be raised as the additionality of any emission reductions achieved. If any level of government (national, provincial or district) does not agree with the payment distribution mechanism proposed, they may withdraw their support. This could, for example, lead to alternative land uses being proposed. If communities are not provided with an incentive to participate in the proposed interventions, the effectiveness of the interventions, and/or their sustainability will be diminished. Reduced scope for implementing desired interventions, possibly risking the ability to reduce emission levels, and probably reducing the benefits derived from the REDD demonstration. Potential implementation delays, and potential for reducing the interventions trialled, possibly risking the ability to reduce emission levels, and probably reducing the benefits derived from the REDD demonstration. Potential to limit the scale of desired interventions, or the longevity of any actual emission reductions. Assessment L C R Preliminary Mitigation Strategy 4 4 E The proposed REDD demonstration site is an area that has been zoned for protection under INPRES 2/2007, and was previously zoned as a protected area under the provincial land use plan. Despite this, it will be critical to confirm land use plans for the proposed demonstration area with both provincial and district authorities, and seek their support for the location of the proposed REDD demonstration site. 2 3 M It will be important to confirm land use plans for the proposed demonstration site with both provincial and district authorities. 3 4 H As a preliminary step, raise awareness on REDD and what an internationally acceptable REDD demonstration must include. In addition, clarify the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, and using this as a basis, develop payment mechanisms that reflect (i) the likely value of actual emission reductions and (ii) the effort required by different stakeholders to achieve these reductions. 4 3 H Working in the EMRP area should reduce the scope for conflicting government policies, but it will be important to liaise with a wide range of government agencies at national, provincial and district level and seek unilateral support for the REDD demonstration site, the proposed interventions, and the payment mechanisms. 3 4 H Ensure the role of communities in achieving emission reductions are outlined clearly, and develop payment mechanisms that reflect their role and help address their basic 11-2 KALIMANTAN FORESTS AND CLIMATE PARTNERSHIP (KFCP) DESIGN DOCUMENT
Potential Risk the social and economic needs of communities as part of a REDD system 6. Communities and/or IPs have insufficient capacity to undertake rehabilitation interventions at the required scale. 7. Inability to meet $100 million funding target through raising up to additional $70 million in external funding 8. Interventions are not effective in achieving expected levels of emissions reductions 9. Lack of capacity to implement interventions on a large-scale to international standards 10. UNFCCC meetings make limited progress on, or provide little support for, the inclusion of REDD in a post- 2012 framework to address climate change. Potential Impact It may not be possible to undertake the desired scope of works, limiting the effectiveness of the interventions and the REDD demonstration activity Project activities will not be scaled up and the initial targets (discussed by the two Governments) will not be reached. However, current targets (based on the initial A$30 million contribution) should not be jeopardised. If the proposed interventions do not lead to a measurable and sustainable decrease in emissions the REDD demonstration will be of limited use. It may not be possible to undertake the desired scope of works, limiting the effectiveness of the interventions and REDD demonstration. Failure to reach agreement on how REDD might be included in a future international climate framework, may reduce the incentive to proceed with the REDD demonstration (although there may still be sufficient incentive to proceed on the basis of environmental and poverty alleviation objectives). Assessment L C R Preliminary Mitigation Strategy needs. Also need to ensure that interventions are designed in a way that doesn’t adversely affect communities’ livelihoods, e.g., ensuring dams are constructed in a way that doesn’t unnecessarily limit ability to use waterways for transport. 2 3 M Consult with communities and IPs during the early implementation phase to gauge their interest in the proposed interventions, and the labour available, and develop interventions and/or work programs that reflect available resources or plan to augment with other resources, such as contractors. 4 2 L Identify a range of appropriate and realistic options for external contributions, and maintain the flexibility so that the KFCP can still operate effectively even if it does not reach the $100m target. 2 4 H Assess existing interventions, conduct research as appropriate, and trial a range of interventions. Thoroughly study, monitor, and evaluate all interventions to capture knowledge of value regardless of outcomes. 3 4 H Identify roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, identify the capacities needed to implement or support the implementation of the REDD demonstration, and provide capacity building as required. Manage expectations about the geographic scope that the KFCP can cover with limited resources. 2 4 H Ensure the KFCP has a direct link to national and international organisations working on REDD and ensure a two-way flow of information. KALIMANTAN FORESTS AND CLIMATE PARTNERSHIP (KFCP) DESIGN DOCUMENT 11-3
Page 1 and 2:
2009 KALIMANTAN FORESTS AND CLIMATE
Page 3 and 4:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents
Page 5 and 6:
Establishing a REL ................
Page 7 and 8:
GIS GoA GoI GTZ Handil IAFCP ICRAF
Page 9 and 10:
LIST OF FIGURES Map 1. Location Map
Page 11 and 12:
MAP 1. LOCATION MAP KALIMANTAN FORE
Page 13 and 14:
MAP 3. LAND COVER MAP OF KFCP DEMON
Page 15:
MAP 5. FIRE FREQUENCY IN KFCP DEMON
Page 18 and 19:
which government-to-government acti
Page 20 and 21:
1.3 IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH The KFC
Page 22 and 23:
There is currently no international
Page 24 and 25:
2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE OF THI
Page 26 and 27:
Text Box 2.1. The following GoI Pla
Page 28 and 29:
Issues relating to additionality, l
Page 30 and 31:
2.4 OVERVIEW OF THE DEMONSTRATION A
Page 32 and 33:
TABLE 2. CO-BENEFITS OF KFCP’S IN
Page 34 and 35:
2.5.2 Location The KFCP field demon
Page 36 and 37:
2.6.1 Preparatory Activities Partne
Page 38 and 39:
3.0 IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND COM
Page 40 and 41:
Incentives to encourage sustainable
Page 42 and 43:
The KFCP will identify potential co
Page 44 and 45:
FIGURE 3. FLOW CHART OF STEPS TO EN
Page 46 and 47:
Peatland Rehabilitation Plan for Bl
Page 48 and 49:
GHG Emissions Estimation and Monito
Page 50 and 51:
emote sensing products to use will
Page 52 and 53:
take the form of a trust fund, whic
Page 54 and 55:
Implementation Process Early Implem
Page 56 and 57:
Capacity for Effective Governance S
Page 58 and 59:
4.1 MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE AND COORDI
Page 60 and 61:
Text Box 4.2. Roles of Groups withi
Page 62 and 63:
(ii) develop a strategic plan for R
Page 64 and 65:
Information Feedback for Management
Page 66 and 67:
Screen KFCP interventions and payme
Page 68 and 69:
6.0 RISK MANAGEMENT AND SUSTAINABIL
Page 70 and 71:
. A review of the program logic and
Page 72 and 73:
8.0 ESTIMATED BUDGET AND STRATEGY F
Page 75: ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1. Livelihoo
Page 78 and 79: cause conflict between forestry, co
Page 80 and 81: Health Key human health issues are
Page 83 and 84: ATTACHMENT 2. VILLAGE ENGAGEMENT PR
Page 85 and 86: . Bring land tenure and land use to
Page 87 and 88: FIGURE 2-2. CONDENSED VILLAGE PROCE
Page 89: INTERNATIONAL FOREST CARBON INITIAT
Page 92 and 93: Papua New Guinea-Australia Forest C
Page 94 and 95: Hydrological Rehabilitation Hydrolo
Page 97 and 98: ATTACHMENT 5. PAYMENT MECHANISMS DI
Page 99 and 100: What types of in-kind payments woul
Page 101 and 102: ATTACHMENT 6. GHG EMISSIONS REL AND
Page 103 and 104: Present Methodologies for Assessing
Page 105: ο The efficacy of canal blocking a
Page 108 and 109: What makes the area so vulnerable t
Page 110 and 111: The 2006 fire episode underlines th
Page 112 and 113: — Intensive agriculture on levees
Page 115 and 116: ATTACHMENT 9. INDICATIVE PERFORMANC
Page 117 and 118: Objective statements Potential Indi
Page 119 and 120: ATTACHMENT 10. PRELIMINARY IMPLEMEN
Page 121: KALIMANTAN FORESTS AND CLIMATE PART
Page 126 and 127: Potential Risk 11. Carbon prices ar
Page 128 and 129: INDONESIA AND AUSTRALIA Reducing em
Page 130 and 131: Attachment A The Kalimantan Forests
Page 132 and 133: Australia is also offering Indonesi
show all

Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership (KFCP) Design ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?