The Role of Sustainable Land Management for Climate ... - CAADP

!
important to address, so that the ultimate impacts on sustainable natural resource management
and poverty reduction are as positive as possible. Given that they have comparable potential to
REDD to help mitigate climate change, and probably greater potential to help improve rural
livelihoods and facilitate adaptation, it is unfortunate and somewhat surprising that AFOLU
activities have not received the same support in the UNFCCC process as REDD or other
activities. Although there are difficult challenges and constraints that would affect the feasibility
of payments for AFOLU activities, the previous discussion illustrates that these challenges are
not likely to be any more difficult to address than those that face a REDD payment scheme (and
in many cases may be easier to address).
Active advocacy by African governments and other stakeholders concerned about SLM
in SSA, including the UNCCD, CAADP, and TerrAfrica partners, will be essential to raise the
profile of AFOLU payments so that they receive serious consideration. To the extent that such a
coalition contributes to acceptance of REDD payments, it may also receive greater cooperation
and support from other stakeholders that are more focused on promoting forestry activities but
haven’t yet supported including AFOLU payments in the post-Kyoto agreement. If these
overlapping but somewhat distinct groups of stakeholders join forces to effectively advocate both
REDD and AFOLU payments, the chances of success for both initiatives are likely be greater.
Agree to national GHG targets for developing countries and use national GHG accounting
One major way to increase the contribution to climate change mitigation of farmers and other
resource users in Africa and other developing regions would be for all countries, including
developing countries, to agree to national GHG emission targets that are used as the basis for
crediting emissions reductions. Such an approach is of course already applied to Annex I
countries under the Kyoto protocol. Including targets for developing countries in a post-Kyoto
agreement does not imply that developing countries would have to accept binding commitments
to reduce GHG emissions that could retard their development and would be unfair (considering
much higher GHG emissions per capita in developed countries). Targets could be based on
projected increases in GHG emissions needed to achieve sustainable development, considering
population and economic growth and available technologies and capacities of each country. A
“no lose” approach could be used in which developing countries are credited if they achieve
reductions in emissions below their target, but are not penalized if they fail to do so. A full
!
))!