Institutional Mechanisms for REDD+ - Case Studies Working Paper

Benefit sharing functions:
Carbon is offered to buyers at a rate of US$10 per ton of carbon. 24 From each payment, up to US$ 1 per ton
of carbon sold is kept by SAO and up to US$1 per ton is kept by Pronatura to support their operations. The
rest of the money is channeled to the communities. There is usually a symbolic handing over the money to
the community authorities at an assembly meeting. This event is broadcasted on the local public radio
stations. Often, the entire ejidal assembly (or agrarian authority) cashes the check together. Neither SAO nor
Pronatura are involved in the way the communities use or share the funds and more research is needed to
study internal community decision-making process.
Consultation of local communities:
Securing community support for the project has required extensive community consultations and dialogue
through meetings with the assemblies, community leaders, and community authorities. It was important to
secure buy-in from key community leaders first, who then played a critical role convincing and securing the
buy-in from the rest of the members of the communities.
Strengthening the project‘s social, legal, and technical bases involved building the knowledge base and
technical capacities of the communities on various themes, such as the impacts of deforestation in the
communities, ―business as usual‖ scenarios, ecosystem services, pollution, reforestation, forest carbon,
carbon markets, and potential benefits for the communities of the carbon sequestration project for the
medium and long terms.
Grievance and conflict resolution mechanisms:
Issues related to the project are addressed in the community assembly. From interviews with members of the
community, it appears that the sense of duty to the community is very strong and individuals accept the
decisions of the assembly without major issues. For example, the SAO community technician was living and
working in México City when the assembly appointed him to serve as the community liaison with SAO (an
unpaid position). He was informed of the decision by his family, and he returned to the community to
serve. 25 After serving as the community liaison for a couple years, he was hired by SAO to become SAO‘s
community technician working in the community. Also, interviews with two of the four women serving as
assistants in the Agrarian Authority show that they accepted their appointments even though the work
interferes with their daily activities.
Evaluation of past performance:
The first carbon sale was conducted in 2008 and included three communities. Since then, there have been
seven additional sales involving the ten communities. As of March 2011, the project had sold 84,984 tons of
carbon, including sales to offset emissions in the 2010 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change
Conference of the Parties (COP).
Based on SAO surveys, the communities invested an average of 62 percent of the revenues in forest
management, reforestation, or agro-forestry activities; 28 percent into social services within the community;
and 10 percent to cover administrative expenses and/or salaries of the agrarian authorities. The surveys
indicated that private land owners re-invested the revenues in their operations, incorporated it to the family
income, or donated it to support the activities and expenses of the community authorities. In Tlahuitoltepec,
the community invested funds in forest operations (greenhouses, equipment), temporary employment for
forest management activities, and in complementing salaries and expenses of the agrarian authority. 26
24 This price is above the international carbon market range (between $3–7 USD per ton).
25 Interview with Alejandro Pérez Vazquez (SAO).
26 Interview with Carlos Marcelo Perez (SAO).
PRRGP INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS FOR REDD: CASE STUDIES – WORKING PAPER 11