Countries prioritise agriculture in climate

plans, but is the funding there?

Sustainable forestry inseparable from

the question of Indigenous rights

a daily


magazine on

climate change

and sustainable



9 December 2015

Be PaperSmart: Read Outreach online


pic: Kate Evans for CIFOR www.cifor.org; Aerial view of agricultural land near Halimun Salak National Park, West Java, Indonesia


1 Countries prioritise agriculture in climate plans, but is the funding there?

2 Innovation, communities, food and commercial wood production in

southern Laos

3 Nature-based solutions: An underused toolbox for enhancing

climate resilience

4 Women’s empowerment and climate resilient agriculture

5 Navigating climate change mitigation and sustainable development

in the tropics

6 SOS Mata Atlantica: Protecting the Atlantic Rainforest

7 Carbon farming: To sequester carbon and reverse global warming

8 Sustainable forestry inseparable from the question of Indigenous rights

9 Concrete actions for effective transformation

10 Biomass energy and forests: finding the missing emissions

11 Regenerative strategies for climate justice

12 Feeding China

13 Side events calendar

14 Reflections from COP21, Tuesday 8 December




pic: Kate Evans for CIFOR www.cifor.org; Aerial view of agricultural land near Halimun Salak National Park, West Java, Indonesia


About Stakeholder Forum

Stakeholder Forum is an international

organisation working to advance sustainable

development and promote democracy at a

global level. Our work aims to enhance open,

accountable and participatory international

decision-making on sustainable development

through enhancing the involvement

of stakeholders in intergovernmental

processes. For more information, visit:


Outreach is a multi-stakeholder publication on

climate change and sustainable development.

It is the longest continually produced

stakeholder magazine in the sustainable

development arena, published at various

international meetings on the environment;

including the UNCSD meetings (since 1997),

UNEP Governing Council, UNFCCC Conference

of the Parties (COP) and World Water Week.

Published as a daily edition, in both print

and web form, Outreach provides a vehicle

for critical analysis on key thematic topics in

the sustainability arena, as well as a voice

of regional and local governments, women,

indigenous peoples, trade unions, industry,

youth and NGOs. To fully ensure a multistakeholder

perspective, we aim to engage

a wide range of stakeholders for article

contributions and project funding.

If you are interested in contributing to

Outreach, please contact the team


You can also follow us on Twitter:




Amy Cutter

Assistant Editor Jack Nicholls

Print Designer Faye Arrowsmith www.flogo-design.co.uk

Web Designer Tom Harrisson


Christino Áureo da Silva

State Government of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Luc Bas

IUCN European Regional Office

Duncan Brack

Chatham House

Bruce Campbell CGIAR Program on Climate Change, Agriculture & Food Security

May East

Gaia Education

Jeff Hayward

Rainforest Alliance

Connal Hughes

Friends of the Earth Scotland

Joy Hyvarinen


Anne Leidreiter

World Future Council

Mario Mantovanni

SOS Mata Atlantica

Sarah Mekjian

Climate Alliance

Stephen Midgley

Independent consultant

Rebecca Nadin

INTASAVE Asia-Pacific

Sarah Opitz-Stapleton


Claudia Stickler, Maria DiGiano & Charlotta Chan Earth Innovation Institute

Rob Wheeler

Global Ecovillage Network

UN Women

Countries prioritise agriculture in climate

plans, but is the funding there?

Bruce Campbell

CGIAR Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security

Most countries have now shown their cards on

how they intend to tackle climate change.

Research out this week shows that agriculture is marked as

a priority in the vast majority of national plans (known as

Intended Nationally Determined Commitments or INDCs)

– which should come as no surprise to UN negotiators.

Agriculture and climate experts have been highlighting the

sector’s huge potential to both adapt to and mitigate climate

change since 2009. Greenhouse gas emissions related to our

food systems are estimated to account for up to 29 per cent of

greenhouse gas emissions, and the sector run by the world’s

500 million farmers stands to be one of the worst hit by the

unpredictable weather patterns that a changing climate is

causing. Given that we will need to feed roughly 9.6 billion

people by 2050, this is a situation that demands action.

Yet progress on agriculture at the UN climate talks has been

excruciatingly slow. The Durban agreement in 2011 called for

technical discussions on agriculture to take place to inform

negotiators how agriculture could be brought into the main

climate negotiations, but these will now only be finalised in

2016. As a consequence, the idea that mitigating emissions

from agriculture and improving agricultural productivity are

mutually exclusive has remained. Agriculture is not explicitly

mentioned in the draft text of the new agreement, although

food security is proposed as a key objective.

However, a new concept that is taking root is proving that

many interventions that help farmers adapt to climate

change, can also reduce emissions, resulting in a win-win

for farmers and the planet. ‘Climate-smart agriculture’

seeks to deliver three interconnected goals: improving food

security, improving farmers’ resilience to climate change,

and minimising emissions, where possible. Climate-smart

agriculture also takes into account social goals, for example,

that many farmers in developing countries are women, and

that to advance agriculture means to tackle gender inequality

in access to resources and knowledge.

It seems that although the UN Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC) has missed the huge opportunity the

sector presents for taking action on climate change, individual

countries have not. Our analysis of the country level plans

submitted to the UNFCCC has revealed that there is a huge

appetite for technical and financial assistance to adopt this very

type of climate-smart agriculture, that will help them tackle

the challenge of feeding the world in the face of a warming

planet. 80 per cent of countries have included agriculture in

their climate mitigation target, and 64 per cent have noted

agriculture’s importance in climate adaptation strategies.

Perhaps most importantly, 30 per cent of countries, mainly

in the developing world, have included agriculture mitigation

targets that are conditional on international financial support.

This is a clear call to action for UN negotiators in Paris:

developing world nations need funds to support the reduction

of agriculture-related emissions. Costs range from USD 2.5

million for a programme to reduce slash and burn in the Central

pic: Endre Vestvik; Farmer in Zemio, Haut-Mbomou, Central African Republic

African Republic, to USD 1.8 billion to reduce emissions from

rice, implement biodigesters for recycling waste and expand

agroforestry systems in Senegal.

Climate-smart agriculture is already making a difference. Take

the example of dairy famers in Kenya. Currently, livestock

contributes to 47 – 55 per cent of agricultural greenhouse

gas emissions. Responding to this, the International Livestock

Research Institute and the World Agroforestry Center are testing

measures appropriate to smallholders, such as better feed

production and feeding practices, which can boost livestock

productivity levels while also reducing emissions per kilogram

protein of milk produced. In Kenya, researchers believe these

practices can mitigate 1.2 Million tonnes of CO2 by 2018.

Rice production is responsible for up to 10 per cent of global

manmade methane emissions. Southeast Asia is the world’s

largest rice producer, and so there is great potential for

reducing emissions from this sector. Using a technique called

Alternate Wetting and Drying, farmers can maintain or even

increase yields by using less water in rice production. Irrigated

fields are drained for short periods as crops grow, resulting

in up to 30-40 per cent reduction of methane emissions and

reducing water use by up to 30 per cent, helping farmers

cope during periods of water scarcity. The International Rice

Research Institute (IRRI) is working with the government of

Vietnam to map the suitability of these practices for different

regions to assist their scaling up.

The INDCs can serve as a roadmap to guide investment and

technical support from the UNFCCC. Countries have spoken,

and agriculture has featured highly on their agendas. Feeding

the planet in a sustainable way will simply not be possible

unless all nations are empowered to take action towards

climate-smart food systems. We hope this message is well

heeded in Paris.


Dr. Bruce Campbell is the Director of the CGIAR Program on

Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security.


Innovation, communities, food and

commercial wood production in southern Laos

Stephen Midgley

Independent consultant

The people and the government of Laos

face many challenges, but probably none

as great as poverty.

Poor people can make desperate decisions – especially in rural

areas when it comes to the use of land. Laos is fortunate to have

a significant natural forest cover and a relatively low population

density. However, there are large areas of underutilised,

degraded lands in Laos, such as former forestlands, which

were cleared for agriculture and areas impacted by war. This

is problematic for poverty alleviation, biodiversity and climate.

roles and provides a range of other social and community

development benefits.

The project is also increasing carbon stocks, assisting objectives

to reduce climate change. Experience demonstrates that the

Stora Enso agroforestry model is attractive and farmers prefer

it to cultivation of crops on distant swidden lands. This reduces

shifting cultivation and pressure on existing forests. Planting

degraded lands will increase carbon stocks in biomass and

soils in the plantations and adjacent natural forests.

The government of Laos is determined to “turn land into

capital” whilst protecting the rights and interests of its citizens.

The aim is to link opportunities for commercial land use with

communities, and contribute to the national goal of poverty

alleviation. But how can this combination of goals be realised?


Stora Enso, the renewable materials company producing

packaging, biomaterials, wood and paper identified

opportunities for tree growing in Laos over 10 years ago. The

company has taken a long-term approach to testing a new model

of plantation investment, acknowledging the distinct social,

political, environmental and historical settings in Lao PDR.

The project area is in some of the poorest districts in the

country, where social and economic conditions are well below

the Millennium Development Goals, with challenges for food

security, nutrition, education and literacy, clean water, health

and limited economic opportunities. The area was also subject

to the most intensive bombing campaign of the American

War in Vietnam and has many unexploded bombs that make

agricultural production and daily life dangerous.

The project starts by working directly with local villagers.

Common practice up until recently in Laos has been to work

with the government to identify land for tree plantations.

However, without the support of the local communities, the

long-term security of planted trees is at risk.

Along with government consultation, permits and approvals, an

intense process of community consultations identifies village

boundaries, intact native forest, areas of spiritual significance,

steep slopes and village agricultural lands. Potential planting

areas agreed by the company and the community are presented

to district officials for approval.

Malnutrition and food security are serious problems. Could a

commercial tree-planting project increase food availability? A

new kind of planting design (9 metre-wide tree spacing) was

tested, allowing the villagers to intercrop rice, cassava or

maize between the trees. In other situations, such agroforestry

systems are widely used. After nearly 10 years of testing this

system, it has been found to be supported by the community,

whilst producing timber and helping with food supply.

Development of new approaches of clearing unexploded

bombs from the farming and tree growing areas is making

the region safer for the community and the company workers.

The company trains and employs local people in a range of

pic: Stora Enso Laos

Responsible companies who see economic opportunities in

Laos seek to engage communities to ensure that they remain

an integral part of commercial investment. This approach can

offer win-win outcomes where communities and companies can

both benefit. For such responsible companies, this requires

balancing commercial realities, community aspirations and

government goals.

In a part of the world that is experiencing great transition

and economic development, change is inevitable. The

transformation of degraded forests and underutilised lands

into productive assets through new agroforestry models and

long-term private-sector partnerships offers benefits to local

people and to the broader Lao society. Commercial wood

production provides a sustainable land-use option and an

opportunity to improve livelihoods, develop skills and decrease

poverty, all while benefiting the climate.

The complex social and regulatory environment of Laos has

meant that progress has been slow. The government currently

prohibits new plantation establishments, which restricts new

investments. This has created considerable uncertainty for the

private sector. How long it will take for Stora Enso to build

a commercial wood resource in Laos is unclear, but there is

little doubt that their steady and socially inclusive approach

is beginning to bear fruit and provides a model that other

responsible investors might consider.


This article reflects the personal views and experience of the

author who is an independent consultant with over 40 years’

experience in Laos and Southeast Asia and has served a broad

array of clients from industry, NGOs, donor agencies, national

governments and international organisations. Author contact:


Nature-based solutions: An underused

toolbox for enhancing climate resilience

Luc Bas

IUCN European Regional Office

Although a positive momentum of action from

governments and stakeholders alike was

created during the past year in the run up

to the UNFCCC negotiations in Paris, the

original expectations for a fully-fledged,

legally binding deal with concrete targets

have turned into a long-term trajectory of

increased flexible action.

The original goal to keep the global average temperature rise

below 2°C from pre-industrial levels is far from being reached,

as the currently tabled Intended Nationally Determined

Contributions (INDCs) from the parties will clearly not get us

there according to the UNFCCC’s own assessment.

These nature-based solutions are ‘no-regret’ measures, and

they also offer concrete and cost effective options for adapting

to the effects of climate change that we have not yet fully

exploited. To push this concept further, IUCN has been working

on promoting the concept of ‘ecosystem-based adaptation’

(EbA), which uses the natural power of ecosystems to

increase resilience against climate change. For example, here

in Belgium, the Eastern Scheldt estuary is prone to erosion

and therefore flooding, particularly from extreme weather

events. To prevent this, oyster reefs were installed to fortify

the protective capacity of the flats, but they also created new

habitats and provided water filtration services.

We have to find new ways of tackling the climate issue, and

one of the answers might be to stop viewing the problem in

isolation, and instead integrate our mitigation and adaptation

approaches into broader sustainable development and nature

conservation efforts.

Currently, the climate change debate has a strong focus on the

important need to drastically reduce carbon emissions from

energy and transport through technological innovation, while

other complementary and existing options, such as using the

strong mitigation and adaptation potential that nature and

the natural functions of ecosystems can offer are hidden in

the background. Conservation, restoration and sustainable

ecosystem management generate significant and practical

solutions, while also yielding economic and social benefits.

A concrete step in this direction is the accelerated restoration

of forest landscapes. The Bonn Challenge was put forward

by the German Government and IUCN in 2011 and calls for

commitments to restore 150 million hectares of deforested

and degraded land by 2020. On its own, reaching this

commitment would remove 1 billion tons of carbon from the

atmosphere each year. In the context of the recent New York

Declaration on Forests, the target for the Bonn challenge has

ambitiously increased to 350 million hectares by 2030.

pic: Mark Fletcher; Eastern Scheldt storm surge barrier, Belgium

At the COP21 negotiations, IUCN is therefore asking the

international community to give the fullest consideration to

the appropriate integration of EbA approaches in the Paris

Agreement and to recognise the role of ecosystems in acting

as natural carbon sinks and alleviating the pressure of GHG

emissions. This includes asking parties to incorporate EbA

mitigation and adaptation measures into their INDCs.

It is almost certain now that 2015 will be (yet again!) the hottest

year on record, eclipsing 2014. The international community

clearly knows that there is no time for complacency, and

there certainly is considerable momentum for a meaningful

international climate agreement in Paris – but will this be

enough to reach the 2°C target?

Twenty years of international negotiations have not brought

about the urgent change we need if we are to avert the worst

consequences of climate change. It is imperative that we start

thinking outside of the box and deploy all the tools we have

at hand. Only then can we transition to genuine sustainable

development globally, striking a much-needed balance

between environmental, social and economic health. Naturebased

solutions are a key tool in our toolbox, and they are

much underused.

pic: European Environment Agency/John McConnico; England's Forest of Dean


Luc Bas is the Director of the International Union for

Conservation of Nature (IUCN) European Regional Office.


Women’s empowerment and climate

resilient agriculture

UN Women

There is a growing recognition of the

disproportionate impact that climate change

will have on women, as well as, conversely,

of the significant social, economic, and

climate resilient benefits that gender

equality and women’s empowerment can bring.

In agriculture, climate change will exacerbate the existing

barriers faced by women farmers. Women comprise 43 per

cent of the agricultural workforce, and play a critical role in

supporting household and community food security. However,

women farmers have less access than men to secure land

tenure, agricultural inputs, technologies, financing, and

information. An international comparison of agricultural

census data by the Food and Agriculture Organisation shows

that less than 20 per cent of landholders worldwide are

women. Similarly, across 97 countries, women farmers receive

only 5 per cent of agricultural extension services, only 15 per

cent of the world’s extension services are women, and only 10

per cent of total aid for agriculture, forestry and fisheries goes

to women. Perhaps the greatest stumbling block for women

farmers to pursue climate-resilient agriculture is the gender

gap in access to long-term affordable financing. Only 22 per

cent of women in low-income countries hold bank accounts in

rural areas, and commercial banks tend to work only with large

farmers who are already well positioned in value chains.


The pervasive gaps that women face in agriculture are due to

structural barriers that women farmers face in all parts of the

world. These include discriminatory statutory and customary

laws; harmful social norms; and the disproportionate burden

of domestic and care work. For example, of the 161 countries

examined in OECD’s 2014 Social Institutions and Gender Index

(SIGI), women and men have equal rights to land ownership,

use and control in only 37 of the assessed countries. Even

when their land rights are secured, their plots tend to be

insufficient in size and quality to qualify as collateral for a

bank loan or credit. The lack of appropriate financial products

and low financial literacy further constrain women’s ability to

access financing.

Most agricultural policies and investments still fail to consider

discrimination against women in agriculture, and how genderspecific

barriers are relevant to the proposed interventions.

It is often assumed that interventions to facilitate access to

finance, technology or markets will have the same impacts on

men and women; however, evidence indicates that this is not

the case.

Yet, gender-responsive investments and interventions in

agriculture that remove structural barriers represent a

huge opportunity for women’s empowerment, economic

development and societal resilience to climate change. It

has been estimated that such interventions could increase

agricultural outputs by up to 20 per cent in Africa.

At the same time, a changing climate means that the window

of opportunity to close these gender-based differences

pic: Asian Development Bank; Sumiyah, a farmer from Bojong

village near Yogyakarta, Indonesiawinnows newly threshed rice

in agriculture is closing. Climate change will require

greater upfront capital for investments in climate resilient

infrastructure, assets, and the adoption of new farming

practices. It will also require access to critical information to

anticipate variations in temperature and precipitation, choose

appropriate seeds and make informed decisions about when

and what to plant. Women’s full and equal participation and

leadership and access to opportunities is more urgent than

ever in this changing environment.

UN Women’s experience in this field has shown that

strengthening climate resilience requires integrated actions

from a coalition of partners in the following four priority

areas: increasing women’s land tenure security by eliminating

discriminatory legal, social and customary norms; improving

women’s productivity by ensuring equal access to information,

technologies, and inputs and reducing their unpaid care work;

removing financing barriers and eliminating discriminatory

lending practices of public and private financial institutions to

enable women farmers to invest in climate-resilient agriculture;

and increasing access of women farmers to higher-added

value markets.

Concerted efforts are therefore needed to ensure that

women farmers everywhere can contribute their expertise

and knowledge to solving the challenges in agriculture of a

changing climate.

Navigating climate change mitigation and

sustainable development in the tropics

Joy Hyvarinen


Claudia Stickler, Maria DiGiano and Charlotta Chan

Earth Innovation Institute

Whatever the final outcome of the Paris

climate conference may be, it is clear that

forests and land-use need to be part of the

transition to a low-emission future.

Deforestation and land-use change in the tropics are among

the most significant global drivers of climate change. At the

same time, conversion of native vegetation to pasture and

cropland is a way for millions of people to secure and improve

their livelihoods, across the tropics.

In a vicious cycle, deforestation and land use changes lead to

degradation of ecosystem services that communities depend

on, such as water, fish, game and soil resources, ultimately

undermining human wellbeing.

As studies show, tropical forests are crucial in tackling climate

change. Achieving a low-emission future predicates changing

the development patterns that drive climate change and

forest destruction in a way that also meets rural development

needs. It is challenging, but the Sustainable Tropics Alliance is

showing how it can be done.

The Alliance is a strategic partnership of independent, nongovernmental

organisations that draw on research, multistakeholder

engagement, and local knowledge to develop new

approaches to low-emission rural development (LED-R) in

tropical regions.

A transformational framework for large-scale, bottom-up


Low-emission rural development (LED-R) is one form of lowemission

development, with the added “R” denoting that its

emphasis is rural. LED-R can be described as sustainable

development focused on land-related activities, with an

emphasis on climate mitigation and adaptation. Hallmarks of

LED-R include:

• Bottom-up: top-down strategies for slowing deforestation

and reducing emissions are failing to penetrate regional

development strategies and improve human wellbeing.

• Regional: based on sub-national jurisdictions, embedding

climate goals in regional development strategies.

• Politically viable, empowering marginalised actors:

achieving LED-R requires genuine participation of diverse

stakeholders; securing rights to resources and increasing

governance capacity of local institutions.

• Compatibility with existing frameworks, including REDD+,

the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and major private

sector initiatives. LED-R harnesses climate mitigation and

adaptation strategies to work in concert with development

policies and alternative livelihood strategies.

The approach is tailored to local contexts: current development

paradigms are products of specific histories, and interacting

cultural, political, economic and biophysical processes.

The Sustainable Tropics Alliance has identified five

elements for defining progress towards low-emission rural

development: sustainable economic development, healthy

ecosystems, manageable climate, equitable social systems,

and human wellbeing.

Helping to implement international commitments

Countries are expected to implement increasingly complicated

international commitments related to climate change and

sustainable development. These include the SDGs and also

sub-national commitments, for example, in relation to benefit

sharing with forest-dependent communities, smallholders and

indigenous peoples, as in the Rio Branco Declaration.

LED-R approaches can help countries – through both

governmental and non-governmental stakeholders – to respond

in an integrated way to international expectations related

to climate change mitigation, social equity and sustainable

development, including sustainable sourcing of commodities.

REDD+ is one of the tools for achieving LED-R, but it should

not be treated in isolation. REDD+ needs to be part of a

transition to low-emission rural development, which works for

rural people and takes account of local development needs,

agricultural practices, cultural and political circumstances

and global economic drivers such a commodity prices.

Not easy, but the Sustainable Tropics Alliance is identifying

steps towards success

The role of tropical forests in climate stability is clear, and

the past decade has brought about important advances

through corporate and government commitments to reduce

deforestation, as well as a degree of political will and

institutional architecture for climate finance and benefitsharing.

However, many of these commitments are extremely

difficult to implement on the ground, and few rural communities

are receiving benefits.

Tropical regions face an increasingly complex and increasingly

urgent challenge: how can they advance rural development in

a way that improves local and regional well-being, while also

fulfilling an expanding global role in terms of climate change

and food security?

There are no ‘silver bullets’ – but empowering local stakeholders

is crucial. Governments, businesses, farmers, communities

and civil society must all be at the table to drive the transition

to low-emission rural development.

The Sustainable Tropics Alliance is helping to identify potential

solutions to these complex challenges, finding synergies

between climate mitigation, sustainable economic growth and

human wellbeing.


The supporting research and evidence are downloadable at

earthinnovation.org and sustainabletropics.org.


Joy Hyvarinen is Adviser to VERTIC. Claudia Stickler and

Maria DiGiano are Scientists with Earth Innovation Institute.

Charlotta Chan is Research Associate with Earth Innovation



SOS Mata Atlantica: Protecting the Atlantic


Mario Mantovanni

SOS Mata Atlantica

The Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest is located

alongside the Brazilian Atlantic coast. It

covers 17 of the 27 Brazilian States and

3429 of the 5500 Brazilian cities, but does

not have any connection with the Amazon

Rainforest. The Atlantic Rainforest has

suffered for a long time, as it has been

deforested by various economic cycles.

pic: Stora Enso Brazil

among other things, the creation of municipal reforestation

plans. These projects are structured in a non-punitive way.

Until recently, the deforestation laws focused only on what was

prohibited. Now they are structured to involve the whole society

in a dialogue on how to avoid deforestation and preserve the

existing forests.

pic: Stora Enso Brazil

Since the arrival of the Portuguese in the year 1500, the

Brazilian economy has been linked to its natural resources

(native tree logging, cattle, coffee, sugarcane, minerals),

causing severe deforestation, land degradation and

suppression of vegetation alongside riverbanks. Government

incentives supported deforestation until the 1980s. Intense

urbanisation – currently almost 90 per cent of the Brazilian

population lives in cities – has created additional pressure on

the forests. Overall, deforestation has caused notable microand

macroclimate changes in Brazil.

One important step in the process is the certification of tree

plantations. Brazilian companies such as Veracel – a joint

venture between Stora Enso and Fibria – as well as Klabin are

benchmarks in this area. As a unique example, Veracel has

extended certification to all its tree farmers.

What Veracel is doing as a company sets a good example on

how to proceed: transparency in its actions, dialogue with

stakeholders, public hearings, helping local small farmers

with new agricultural technologies – and last but not least,

rainforest restoration and landscape planning. This kind of

action is a good example – even on a global level – of what

can be achieved in a large country with a long history of

environmental challenges.

Currently the forests near the cities continue to be in peril

due to the expansion of the urban population. On the other

hand, various agricultural activities – plantations in particular

– are helping to restore the forests by complying with

environmental laws.


SOS Mata Atlantica is a non-governmental organisation (NGO)

that is active in the conservation of Brazil’s most threatened

forests and associated coastal and marine environments. The

organisation’s objectives are linked to the restoration and

renovation of the Atlantic Rainforest. The goal is to reforest 12

million hectares of forests, including plantations. SOS Mata

Atlantica operates without government incentives, surviving

with the help of private donations and specific programmes

linked to reforestation.

SOS Mata Atlantica collaborates in the development of federal

and local programmes. The organisation is intensely active in

the Brazilian Congress by lobbying and discussing new laws and

projects to avoid deforestation. Just recently it has influenced,

pic: Stora Enso Brazil


Mario Mantovanni is the Director of Public Affairs of SOS Mata

Atlantica, a NGO dedicated to the recovery and restoration

of the Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest (www.sosma.org.br and

www.facebook.com/SOSMataAtlantica/). Mario is active in the

environmental movement in Brazil and member of the Forest

Stewardship Council (FSC) Environmental Chamber.

Carbon farming: To sequester carbon and

reverse global warming

Rob Wheeler

Global Ecovillage Network

Many ecovillage communities have been

experimenting with different means of

carbon farming and have gone well beyond

carbon neutral to become net negative

carbon communities. These villages

provide many examples and best practices

for sequestering billions of tons of

carbon and reversing global warming.

While there’s no question that we need to reduce greenhouse

gas (GHG) emissions, over the last 25 years emissions have

actually accelerated. In 2013, there was roughly 50 parts per

million (ppm) more carbon pollution in the atmosphere than

in 1988. While we have to replace fossil fuels with renewables,

other measures are needed as well.

The alternative we propose is to net sequester – go beyond

zero – at the home, village and regional scale. We have many

tools for accomplishing this – carbon farming, agroforestry,

ecosystem restoration, and biochar, in everything from clothing

to buildings.

Humanity has actually released far more carbon to the

atmosphere from soil disruption, desertification, and

deforestation since the beginning of agriculture than from fossil

fuels. So now we have the opportunity to reverse the process

and rebuild and sequester megatons of carbon in our soils.

The safest and most effective approach is to capture it with

millions of species of green plants, animals, insects, fungi

and micro-organisms, burying it deep in soils in carbon-rich

molecules that are stable for centuries or longer. And because

complex organic carbon molecules retain many times their

weight in water, we can also restore vibrant life to billions of

acres of parched, desertified areas that were once healthy

forests or grasslands.

Unfortunately most of these carbon farming practices and

techniques are not yet a part of the mainstream climate

discussion. It is unspeakably ironic that the most effective,

most beneficial, least risky and least expensive approach to

reversing global warming is not yet on the table.

As years pass without strong global action on climate, the

threat of the Earth’s temperatures rising by more than 2 o C

has become increasingly likely and alarming. The ‘emissions

gap’ between what our governments are willing to do and what

is required is estimated to reach 8 to 10 billion tons of CO 2 in

2020 and 14 to 17 billion tons in 2030.

An article on the Global Ecovillage Network COP21 website

by Hans-Peter Schmidt entitled Humus or Famine states

that deforestation and degradation release an estimated 4.3

to 5.5 Gigatons of CO 2 equivalent (Gt CO 2eq) per year, with

agriculture producing 5.0 to 5.8 billion metric tons more. We

have lost between 55 and 320 billion tons of carbon or roughly

25 per cent to 75 per cent of the original humus content.

pic: Neil Palmer/CIAT for CIFOR www.cifor.org;

Aerial view of the Amazon rainforest and river, near Manaus, Brazil

Healthy soil has humus levels between 3.5 per cent and 6 per

cent. Our more intensively used soils are 2 per cent or below.

But when the Europeans arrived in the Amazon River basin

centuries ago, the native peoples had built the Terra Preta

soils to 10-15 per cent –resulting in incredibly rich farming

communities, in a region with naturally low carbon soils.

We can achieve the same by closing organic cycles, applying

organic matter (composts, green manure and mulch), mixed

cropping, continuous soil cover, minimising tillage, and

applying biochar to our fields.

By increasing the carbon content of the soil to just 10 per

cent worldwide over the next 100 years we could sequester the

equivalent of 900 billion tons of CO 2, reducing it by 110 ppm

in the atmosphere, thus returning to pre-industrial levels.

In another article on the GEN COP21 website, Albert Bates

states, “We could sequester 1 gigaton of carbon annually by

switching to carbon farming. And with biochar, increase this

to 4 to 10 GtC per year using biomass-to-energy pyrolysis

reactors.” And then add tree planting, wetland restoration

and bamboo stands. Reforestation, particularly at the edges

of deserts, provides the largest available wedge to combat

climate change, potentially contributing 80 GtC per year.

These things are not only do-able, but are already being

done in ecovillages around the world. We can sequester

more greenhouse gases than we emit. We can go back to

pre-industrial carbon levels while restoring ecosystem health

and replenishing our depleted soils. All we have to do is plant

trees, build terra preta soils, and organically store carbon in

our planet’s terrasphere as did indigenous peoples of South

America centuries ago.


You can read about Global Ecovillage Network success stories

at: www.ecovillage.org/COP21.

Contact: rob.wheeler@ecovillage.org


Sustainable forestry inseparable from the

question of Indigenous rights

Sarah Mekjian

Climate Alliance

While there is a tendency in climate

negotiations to talk about forests as

pawns to be traded for emissions caused

elsewhere or as mere ‘carbon sinks’ –

they are far more than this.

A forest’s value is hard to quantify. It goes over and above the

simple capacity to fix carbon, although this too is important.

Forests contribute to clean drinking water and air, provide

nutrition and medication, act as important habitats that

support an abundance of life, and contribute to key nutrient

cycles, in addition to their aesthetic and spiritual value. These

and a range of other ecosystem services are not only important

on a global context, they form the basis for the livelihoods of

many Indigenous Peoples, whose cultures and identities are

inseparable from their forest homelands. Who better, then, to

act as stewards of this precious resource than then those who

call it home?


In today’s world though, this would require legal recognition

of Indigenous territories, for how can one protect an area

that is not legally recognised as one’s own? Without such

legal recognition, these swaths of forest remain dangerously

vulnerable to deforestation by infrastructure projects, largescale

agriculture and extractive industries. This is a problem.

In the example of the Amazon Basin, some 1 million of the

total 2.4 million km2 of Indigenous rainforest territories, an

area almost eight times the size of Italy, have yet to be officially

recognised. An estimated 20 per cent is at risk of being lost

due to pressures including oil exploitation, infrastructure

projects and large-scale industrial farming. These territories

are not only home to entire populations, they are also of

disproportional importance in the fight against climate

change. A 2014 study entitled ‘Forest carbon in Amazonia’,

points to the fact that over half of all carbon stored in the

9-nation area of the Amazon Basin is found in Indigenous and

protected areas, more than that stored in all the forests of the

Democratic Republic of Congo and Indonesia combined.

While Prince Charles, in his opening speech for the Lima-

Paris Action Agenda Focus Event on Forests during this year’s

Climate Summit, emphasised the importance of Indigenous

Peoples and Indigenous rights for forest protection, it is the

UN Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation

and Forest Degradation (REDD+) that is getting the bulk of

the attention. The initiative, though, will not necessarily give

Indigenous Peoples the legal recognition they need to protect

their territories. Should the REDD+ mechanisms be built into

emissions trading schemes in the form of carbon offsets, there

could also be a real danger that governments of the Global

North will water down their emissions reductions at home and

buy offsets instead. This won’t bring us any further in the global

climate agenda, since offsets essentially amount to a license

to emit and could lead to a reduced emphasis on local climate

action in areas such as transport and buildings, among others.

REDD+ mechanisms are also hard to monitor and – by placing

a narrow focus on emissions – fail to address deforestation via

pic: Neil Palmer/CIAT for CIFOR www.cifor.org; Paddling on the Amazon river, Brazil.

mega-projects. While REDD+ is often hailed as an instrument

for forest protection, this is not necessarily the main focus;

forest plantations and monocultures, both destructive in their

own right, are also very much part of the REDD+ strategy.

Despite all this, it seems that many governments with tropical

rainforests are looking to fulfil a large part of their carbon

reduction duties via such mechanisms.

A socially acceptable alternative that would unite both climate

action and sustainable development goals goes by the name of

the Indigenous REDD+ or RIA, the REDD Indigena Amazónico.

Originally conceived by COICA , the Coordinator of the

Indigenous Organisations of the Amazon Basin, for their area

of influence but very much applicable to other forested areas,

RIA is an approach to climate action based on the sustainable

maintenance of Indigenous territories. The idea is as simple

as it is cost effective: grant legal recognition to Indigenous

territories and support the inhabitants of the land in doing

what they have been doing for millennia – taking care of their

forests. The plan not only averts greenhouse gas emissions, it

brings widespread social and ecological benefits, safeguarding

both Indigenous livelihoods and complex forest ecosystems.


For more than 25 years, Climate Alliance member

municipalities have been acting in partnership with indigenous

rainforest peoples for the benefit of the global climate. With

over 1,700 members spread across 26 European countries,

Climate Alliance is the world’s largest city network dedicated

to climate action. climatealliance.org

Concrete actions for effective transformation

Christino Áureo da Silva

State Government of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Paris is the centre of discussions in

2015 about global efforts to tackle

climate change. The Cities and Regions

Pavilion of the United Nations Conference

of Parties – COP 21 – brings together

subnational governments committed to

dealing with the climate change.

On the top of the agenda is the importance of local engagement

to increase the effectiveness of the global climate treaties

signed and revised each year by Heads of State. This year the

State of Rio de Janeiro was selected to present its experience,

which focused on farmers’ leadership in transitioning to a

rural development model based on low carbon agriculture

integrated with sustainable management of natural resources

in micro-watersheds.

For a decade, sustainable development has been a core

principle of the State Secretariat of Agriculture of Rio de

Janeiro. Through the Rio Rural Programme, smallholders of the

state have been stimulated to adopt more efficient production

techniques, reconciling income generation and environmental

preservation and improving living conditions in the countryside.

pic: JPBR-1512-3-B World Bank

As well as being a significant source of greenhouse gases

emissions, agriculture is also a sector that is extremely

vulnerable to effects of climate change, like extended droughts,

floods and disruption of production cycles. Rio Rural breaks

the logic of degradation in order to foster environmental and

economic sustainability, and consequently lead to better

practices being adopted by farmers.

By 2018 USD 233 million will be invested in sustainable

development activities, with financial support from the World

Bank. It is expected that 48,000 farmers will benefit from

such intervention programmes, improving land management

over 2 million hectares, conserving 45 thousand kilometres of

watercourses and putting in place 6 thousand kilometers of

rural roads upgrades.

Furthermore, positive impacts of sustainable agriculture can

also be seen from a qualitative perspective: along with water

preservation and the systemic neutralisation of greenhouse

gases, changing behaviours and priorities of rural actors is

a significant achievement. In this regard, the United Nations

have already acknowledged the concrete results of Rio Rural

as a successful experience of water resources management

and sustainable development, as the Food and Agriculture

Organization (FAO) reported in March, 2015.

What would be the basic premise for achieving the climate

goals, if not individual and group behavioural transformation?

It is not a coincidence that Rio Rural’s approach, focused on

awareness raising and participation, was chosen to feature in

the climate conference.

pic: Icaro Cooke Vieira for CIFOR www.cifor.org

In order to achieve this, Rio Rural carries out a strategy aligned

with COP21’s objectives including: promoting technological

transfer and capacity building, adaptation of production

systems for mitigation of environmental impacts, financing

mechanisms for sustainable projects, and transparency and

participation processes.

The programme’s activities are also consistent with the recently

adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including those

on water and sanitation, agriculture and soil protection, gender

equality, eradication of poverty, and infrastructure enhancement.

In addition to strong political commitment at the global level,

the support of regional leaders in building and implementing

technical solutions for a sustainable model of development

is also critical to foster transformation of common practices

to face climate challenges. In Paris, the State of Rio de

Janeiro reinforces its engagement to cooperate with other

governments, enhancing partnerships with multilateral

development agencies in order to integrate resources and

strengthen a vision of global sustainability.


Christino Áureo da Silva is the Secretary of Agriculture and

Livestock of the State Government of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.


Biomass energy and forests: finding the

missing emissions

Duncan Brack

Chatham House

Many countries are currently expanding

their use of biomass for electricity

and heat as part of their efforts to

reduce carbon emissions. But the current

greenhouse gas accounting framework fails

to account for a significant quantity of

the real emissions from biomass use.

In 2011, biomass accounted for about eight per cent of total

renewable electricity generation; International Energy Agency

projections suggest this could triple over the next twenty

years. Wood, and particularly wood pellets, is the biomass fuel

of choice. EU member states are the main source of demand,

and their consumption exceeds EU production; in recent years

imports have grown substantially, mainly from the US and also

from Canada and Russia.


Policy frameworks generally treat biomass energy as zerocarbon,

in the same way as other renewables like solar or wind.

This is thanks to the greenhouse gas inventory and reporting

guidance developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change. In order to avoid double counting emissions

from forest biomass – within both the energy sector, when the

biomass is burned, and the land-use sector, when the biomass

is harvested – the rules provide that emissions should be

reported within the land-use sector only. This was a rational

decision, but problems arise because of the different ways in

which emissions are counted in the land-use sector. In practice,

accounting of biomass emissions in the energy sector are not

being fully balanced by accounting in the land-use sector.

Kyoto Protocol parties were given a choice of baselines for

forest management. Three chose to use historic baselines

(as in other sectors, e.g. energy), and 34 business-as-usual

baselines, where only changes in emissions compared to what

was expected to occur are accounted for. And the problem is

that a number of countries included significant increases in

biomass energy use in their projections, which will therefore

not be counted against their national emissions targets. And

they won’t be counted against the emissions targets of the

country in which the biomass is used for energy. Effectively,

they are ‘missing’ emissions.

Another problem arises if the source of the biomass lies

outside the control framework – as is now the case with the US,

a Kyoto non-party; EU emissions from US-sourced biomass

are currently completely unaccounted for. Hopefully this won’t

be a problem with any new agreement.

What is the volume of missing emissions? Unfortunately it is

not possible to tell, because national data isn’t complete. We

do know, however, that in 2012 Annex I countries in aggregate

emitted almost 900 MtCO2 from biomass combustion, about

five per cent of total Annex I greenhouse gas emissions. Some

of that will have been accounted for in the land-use sector; a

significant proportion of it won’t.

pic: Marcus Kauffman; A newly cut hybrid poplar stump, the cut base will sprout many new

shoots – known as coppicing, this increases the amount of biomass. hardwoodbiofuels.org

Under the right conditions, biomass energy has a future in

efforts to combat climate change. But at the moment a quirk

of the accounting rules has created a perverse incentive for

countries to invest in biomass energy, counting it as a carbonneutral

source even when a proportion of the associated

emissions in the land-use sector are going unaccounted for.

The focus of the arguments in Paris this week is whether to

include land-use and forest emissions in reporting at all. There

are clearly good arguments to include it – but if that is the

decision made, parties need to fix the loophole that can allow

biomass energy emissions to go unreported. We need more

detail on the type, source and country of origin of the biomass

used, full reporting of emissions from the land-use sector, and

consistency in national reporting from the land-use and from

the energy sectors. In this way we can move towards a system

that accurately reflects the atmospheric impacts of forestbased

biomass energy.


For more detail on this issue, including a series of national

case studies, see the paper ‘Forest-based biomass energy

accounting under the UNFCCC: finding the “missing”

carbon emissions’, from Chatham House (Royal Institute of

International Affairs, UK). For a copy, please email Jens Hein

(jhein@chathamhouse.org). The paper will be published as

part of a broader study on the impacts of biomass energy on

forests and the climate in 2016.


Duncan Brack is an Associate Fellow at Chatham House.

Regenerative strategies for climate justice

May East

Gaia Education

Rice has been cultivated in the East

Indian state of Odisha since ancient

times, its fertile land and running

rivers supporting paddy cultivation

as the mainstay of its people. Odisha

is similar to the Latin word for rice

(Oryza) and some believe the name of the

State derives from the crop known as

Oryza Sativa, also known as Asian rice.

Koraput is a district of Odisha known for its abundance of

paddy fields as well as many varieties of millets, yam, and tuber

crops, which are gradually vanishing due to the introduction

of cash crops and genetically modified (GM) seeds, and the

increasing impact of climate change.

pic: May East; Sabitri Sawnta

In Odisha, 70 per cent of the population is dependent on

agriculture. Although endowed with rich natural resources,

66.2 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line,

earning just 28,400 Rupees per capita a year, the fourth

lowest income of the 17 major Indian states according to the

Economic Report Survey 2014-2015.

In partnership with the NGO THREAD and the women’s

federation Orissa Nari Samaj, and funded by the Scottish

Government, we have been supporting tribal communities

from the Koraput District to strengthen their agro-ecological

production, whilst attempting to address the deeper structural

changes needed to tackle the root causes of poverty and

climate change.

The project aims to break the cycle of food insecurity,

strengthen social linkages and improve the status of women.

Through permaculture and sustainable farming practices, the

project is improving the health of the soils, diversifying the

crops, enhancing the villagers’ livelihoods and wellbeing. This

is exemplified by Sabitri Sawnta from Dangapaiguda Village

who sustains 33 types of vegetables, fruit trees, herbs and

flowers in her kitchen garden of 45 m 2 .

Tragically it is those who have contributed the least to

greenhouse gas emissions that are suffering the worst

effects of climate change. We are constantly developing new

climate resilient agriculture approaches which are very close

to the traditional ways of food growing. Drought tolerant

plants combined with mulching, fortified composting, vermicomposting

vermiculture, herbal pesticides, green manures

have so far significantly improved the productivity of their soils

and the nutrition of their meals.

The heart of the project is the campaign ‘Grow your own

Food’ to counteract so called ‘Climate-Smart Agriculture’

(CSA) techniques. CSA encourages the use of modified seeds,

chemical pesticides, and synthetic fertilisers, as well as highrisk

technologies, such as synthetic biology, nano-technology

and geo-engineering. This imposition of new biotechnology

has been particularly damaging for farmers in India. As one

leading expert put it: “For the world’s small farmers, there

is nothing smart about this. It is just another way to push

pic: May East; Seedlings distribution

corporate controlled technologies into their fields and rob

them of their land”.

The Grow your Own Food campaign has two key components:

a community learning element incorporating ecovillage and

permaculture approaches, combined with seed preservation

and distribution of seedlings of various fruits and vegetables.

The monsoon is the real Minister of Agriculture of India as it

controls the course of farming. This year, a late and insufficient

monsoon has created difficulties for the kitchen gardens of the

villagers. Instead of the usual two and half months of rain,

the region received only 15 days. The women still managed

to plant their saplings but the harvest was small. New wateruse

efficiency techniques for vegetable cultivation have been

introduced through our training programmes and next year,

biochar techniques will also be taught to keep up the moisture

in the soil when there is no rain.

The constant change in the environment of our partners in

the Global South creates an imperative for constant learning.

However, learning is an organic, internal process and ultimately

our role can only be to support the emergence of locally

adapted learning responses.

Gaia Education is one voice amongst thousands calling and

acting for climate justice. As world leaders consider their next

steps, we join in solidarity with the women of Odisha who, in

the face of looming crisis, are tackling climate change in their

own dignified manner.


May East is Chief International Officer of Gaia Education.


Feeding China

Rebecca Nadin

Sarah Opitz-Stapleton


Climate change is likely to impact food

security at multiple dimensions of the

global, national and local food chains.

Food production, processing, distribution,

purchasing, consumption and disposal are

vulnerable in an uncertain climate. At the

same time, all stages of the food chain

contribute towards global warming. Policies

and actions are needed to synergise

adaptation and mitigation in food chains.

How China adapts to these shifts will have broad impacts –

not only on the livelihoods and business ventures of farmers,

but also far beyond China’s borders in terms of its influence

on regional and global agricultural markets and international

water negotiations. To date, China is not a net importer of

grain. Any significant reductions in China’s grain yields will

have important implications for global food prices and

commodity markets, as well as regional food security.

The solutions to building resilience and reducing emissions

in food production do not just rest with a Paris treaty at

COP but closer to home. Climate change is not the only

stressor on China’s agriculture. Rather, it enhances the

existing issues already in play. Socio-economic, environmental

and political change processes – a growing population;

increasing demand for meat, dairy and wheat; pollution;

urbanisation – all act synergistically with climate change to

negatively impact agriculture.

The challenges are significant. Building agricultural resilience

to climate change and other socioeconomic shocks and

shifts will require a range of policies, as well as shifts in

cropping practices and natural resource management, better

coordination between policy making and implementing bodies,

and a stronger integration of science and policy. Behavioural

and socio-economic shifts on a national and local level are just

as key to adapting to the new challenges facing China’s sector.


pic: UN Photo/John Isaac www.unmultimedia.org/photo/

A woman works in a rice field near Chengdu, Sichuan

In China, climate change is projected to have largely negative

effects on farming and presents real risks for China’s ability

to feed its population. Extreme weather events are becoming

more frequent, intense and varied throughout the country.

Droughts are covering increasing expanses of Northern

China and exacerbating rates of desertification and soil loss;

by contrast, in southern and south-western areas, extreme

precipitation events have contributed to more intense floods,

mudslides and significant crop losses. These shifts, combined

with significant warming across most of China in recent

decades, have generated a number of impacts on crops and

cropping patterns.

The main impacts posed by these changes are a possible

decline in crop yield, as well as increased risk of crop loss

from extreme weather events, and a growth in pests, plant

diseases and weeds. Take rice for example. It is estimated

that 35 per cent of the world’s rice is grown in China; rice

crops cover a quarter of all the country’s cultivated land.

However, if no adaptation measures are taken, the country’s

total rice output may see strong declines by 2050, of greater

than 40 per cent.

The government of China has been undertaking reforms in

a few key areas. Since the 1970s, it has been investing in

agricultural research and productivity-enhancing techniques

and technologies, such as high-yield seeds and agricultural

equipment. These activities have been key drivers in increasing

agricultural yields, as well as large-scale investments to improve

water efficiency and limit arable land conversion. Important

steps are also being taken to integrate and coordinate water

resource management with agricultural policy.

Tackling climate-related food insecurity also requires

reframing that to link adaptation and mitigation, and look at

areas of synergy between the two distinctions. Adaptation

and mitigation measures within the food systems can reduce

climate risk and increase resilience. China is prepared to

share its knowledge and experience in various sustainable

agricultural management practices through the growing

South-South Cooperation initiatives. The adaptation choices

and decisions China makes will also bring valuable insights to

climate change adaptation in other parts of the world.


The above was adapted for use in Outreach magazine from

‘Climate Risk and Resilience in China’, a detailed study in how

China has been working to understand and respond to climatic

risk. For more information, see: http://www.intasave.org/Who-



Rebecca Nadin is Regional Director of INTASAVE Asia-Pacific.

Sarah Opitz-Stapleton is a Senior Scientist and Head of

Climate Resilience with the INTASAVE-CARIBSAVE Group.

Side events calendar



11:30—13:00 Observer rm 04

11:30—13:00 Observer rm 12

11:30—13:00 Observer rm 03

11:30—13:00 Observer rm 01

12.30 - 13.15

Workshop Forum, La Galerie

des Solutions, Musée de l'Air

et de l'Espace - Le Bourget

13:15—14:45 Observer rm 03

13:15—14:45 Observer rm 04

Risks of Irreversible Climate Impacts from Cryosphere:

Permanent Changes to the Earth System

The IPCC at a Crossroads: Enhancing the Usefulness of IPCC to

the UNFCCC Process

Low carbon/emission development and growth: Towards New

Regime from Paris

Keeping Fossil Fuels in the Ground: the International Movement

to Ban Fracking

Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiative: The cost of inaction -

recognising the value at risk from climate change.

Succeeding INDCs implementation in the Maghreb region –

identifying opportunities and challenges

National and Regional Adaptation to Mediterranean Climate

Change: Forests, Landscape and Beyond

International Cryosphere Climate Initiative (ICCI), Climate Policy Center

(CPC), The Woods Hole Research Center (WHRC)

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Stanford University

Keidanren, Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute

(GISPRI), Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ), New Energy and

Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO)

Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Franciscans International (FI), Mercy

International Association (MIA), Society of Catholic Medical Missionaries



Tunisia, ClimateNet

13:15—14:45 Observer rm 12 Levering co-benefits: the role of markets and trade United Nations (UN)

15:00—16:30 Observer rm 08

15:00—16:30 Observer rm 04

Multi-Level Climate Governance: An integrated analysis of

National, Regional and Local Policies

Meat: the big omission from the talks on emissions. Public

understanding and policy options

15:00—16:30 Observer rm 10 Pathways to a low-carbon economy

15:00—16:30 Observer rm 03

16:45—18:15 Observer rm 01

16:45—18:15 Observer rm 04

Planet at the Crossroads: Advancing Nature Based Solutions to

Climate Change after Paris

Building a resilient Pacific through effective weather climate

and early warning systems

The Global Assessment of Bamboo and Rattan (GABAR)

Programme: A new green growth initiative

16:45—18:15 Observer rm 12 Scaling-up investment in clean energy in developing countries

16:45—18:15 Observer rm 02

18:30—20:00 Observer rm 01

How Can the 2015 Agreement Drive Energy Sector

Transformation and Climate Tech Transfer/Development?

Translating ambition into action: Developing the German

Climate Action Plan 2050

18:30—20:00 Observer rm 12 Addressing Near-term Climate Change with Multiple Benefits

Montenegro, Keren Kayemet LeIsrael/The Jewish National Fund (KKL-JNF)

Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), University Luigi Bocconi, Institute

of Energy and Environment Economics and Policy (IEFE), University of


Humane Society International (HSI), Brighter Green, Chatham House

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),

University of Cambridge

IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature, Conservation

International (CI), The Nature Conservancy (TNC)

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP),

Samoa, Vanuatu

International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (INBAR), Jamaica

Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP), Institute

of Development Studies (IDS), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH


International Energy Agency (IEA), Asian Development Bank (ADB)

Germany, Oeko-Institut (Institute for Applied Ecology e.V.), Berlin

Netherlands, Bangladesh, Côte d'Ivoire, Institute for Advanced Sustainability

Studies (IASS), Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development

(IGSD), Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development (IGSD), Peru

18:30—20:00 Observer rm 03 Health central to Climate Change action Monaco, Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), WHO Europe

18:30—20:00 Observer rm 10

Mobilising Resources at Scale for the Green Climate Fund:

"Looking Beyond Paris"

Green Climate Fund (GCF)

Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiative: The cost of inaction – recognising the value

at risk from climate change.

Date and Time: Wednesday 9th Dec @12.30pm

Venue: Workshop Forum, La Galerie des Solutions, Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace – Le Bourget


• Joakim Reiter – Deputy Secretary-General, UNCTAD (tbc)

• Fiona Reynolds – Managing Director, UN-supported Principles for Responsible Investment

• Steve Waygood – Chief Responsible Investment Officer, Aviva Investors

• Monica Woodley – Editorial Director, Economist Intelligence Unit

Background: Financial markets have a key role to play in tackling climate change. However

a lack of available data means that markets all too often undermine, rather than support,

environmental sustainability. In 2008 UNCTAD, the UN Global Compact, the United Nations

Environment Programme and the UN supported Principles for Responsible Investment

teamed up to establish the Sustainable Stock Exchanges (SSE) Initiative with the aim of

improving sustainability disclosure amongst listed companies. The initiative has been

hugely successful with over 40 stock exchanges across the world now seeking to encourage

companies to disclose environmental data. However given the scale of the climate

challenge, more still needs to be done.


Reflections from COP21, Tuesday 8 December

Anne Leidreiter

World Future Council

Jeff Hayward

Rainforest Alliance

Connal Hughes

Friends of the Earth Scotland

While national negotiators work on

a climate deal, mayors from around

the world are showing that a global

movement of local climate action is

already underway. Cities from around the

world have set 100 per cent renewable

energy (100% RE) targets and are

proving that this transition is not only an

environmental requirement, but a tool

for social and economic development.

What they urgently need now is national

governments to leverage their action.

Cities are uniquely positioned to combat

climate change in a way that it serves

the need of the people. However, mayors

can only act in the context of the broader

national framework. This was one of the

outcomes of a policy dialogue with 13

cities from Europe, North America, South

America, Africa, Asia and Australia hosted

by World Future Council, Renewable Cities

and ICLEI on Monday in the Transformative

Actions Program (TAP) Pavilion.

By sharing their experiences on

successes and failures, local policymakers

from cities including Vancouver,

Cape Town, Medellin, Paris, Byron Shire

and Kaoshiung outlined how national

frameworks can either empower or slow

down city-level action.

The dialogue showed that with the 100%

RE movement gaining momentum, new

questions arise: What does 100% RE

actually mean? How do we measure

success? And, how do we ensure that the

transition to 100% RE is an instrument

towards wealth redistribution, creation of

social wellbeing and the protection of our


With around 1000 mayors signing a

declaration last Friday at the Climate

Summit for Local Leaders in Paris, the

global 100% RE movement of local

governments has reached a stage that

national governments cannot ignore

anymore. It is highly encouraging to see

this dialogue among city governments

taking place at COP21. One can be

hopeful that policy-makers from different

governance levels start talking to each

other. Because only then, can we actually

achieve our common goal – to limit global

warming to 1.5oC and save the lives of

millions of people across the planet.

An exceptional number of pledges have

been made to eliminate deforestation

from places of raw material supply.

Yesterday, the Rainforest Alliance and

partners discussed the critical needs

for companies and governments to

halt deforestation due to agricultural

expansion. As reducing emissions caused

from forest loss is vital in addressing

climate change, the Rainforest Alliance is

pushing for robust ambition in the land

sector, primarily by halting deforestation.

In Paris, we identified several

implementation gaps that impede

corporate actions to stop deforestation.

These problems include lack of

consistency in monitoring, verification,

reporting, and communicating about

progress. We noted that there is no

existing international framework to bring

credibility to these actions. Rainforest

Alliance introduced an Accountability

Framework that provides common

principles to approaches that can level

the playing field.

Importantly, an Accountability

Framework will foster agreement on best

practice guidance for means to monitor,

document, and report on sustainability

outcomes. This harmonisation is essential

for furnishing comparable, credible

information on key indicators that track

progress towards targets related to

deforestation, restoration, equitable

development, and the fulfillment of future

commodity demand.

In developing this harmonised framework,

the project will work closely with existing

and incipient monitoring, verification,

and reporting initiatives. By defining

a clear normative and operational

guidance for such mechanisms, the

Accountability Framework will help ensure

that the diversity of solutions devised to

address commodity-related sustainability

challenges all meet basic standards

of rigor and credibility, contributing

to the ultimate goal of safeguarding

natural ecosystems, fostering equitable

development, and sustainably producing

food and fibre.

On Monday, environmental and

development justice groups held the event,

‘Deal with it! People, Rights, Justice’, to

look at the potential consequences of a

bad deal in Paris.

Invoking the event title ‘Deal With it’, Asad

Rehman from Friends of the Earth spoke

of how the poorest around the world were

already dealing with the impact of climate

change. 10 per cent of the richest people

are responsible for 50 per cent of global

emissions. He said that every citizen has

the right to clean energy, the right to food

and the right to life and any deal that fails

to meet these criteria and fails to meet

what the science demands is not a deal

worth having. He called on rich nations to

back up their warm words by doing their

fair share and guaranteeing support for

developing countries.

First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon

spoke of her pride at their own national

emission reduction targets and how she

wanted to see an ambitious and binding

deal here in Paris. She announced that

her Government has doubled their climate

justice fund supporting clean energy and

water projects in Malawi and Zambia.

This 12 million pound fund was ‘a small

step but an important statement from a

country determined to do the right thing’.

Many in the crowd were moved by

Julianne Hickey of Caritas New Zealand

who showed how the Paris agreement is

a matter of life and death for many in

the Oceania region. People on the islands

there who have had no part in creating

the climate crisis are fending off already

rising sea levels with little more than

sticks and stones. Many families there

have been forced from their homelands

and others were waiting on even basic

financial support to relocate them.

This powerful event brought the human

stories of climate change right into

the room and reinforced the point that

solutions must be just, centred in human

rights and ensure that those most

responsible do their fair share of the work

and provide finance.

Outreach is made possible by the support of

Similar magazines