Institutional Mechanisms for REDD+ - Case Studies Working Paper

2.2.1 WHAT ARE THE FORMS OF REDD+ BENEFITS IDENTIFIED?
In a technical note circulated in March, 2011, the NC-REDD+ proposed a typology of REDD+
interventions, which highlighted the distinctions between different forms of REDD+ revenues (Box 2.1).
The government has so far focused its attention on how to invest Readiness funds ($28 million expected),
Investment funds ($40–60 million from Forest Investment Program [FIP], and $22.5 million from the Congo
Basin Forest Fund [CBFF] for pilot projects). There is no revenue flowing from market sales of carbon
credits to date.
BOX 2.1: TYPOLOGY OF REDD+ INTERVENTIONS AND REVENUES
ESTABLISHED BY THE NC-REDD
� “REDD+ initiatives”: Programs and policies to create the enabling conditions for REDD+ to
succeed (part of the Investment Phase). Two sub-categories are identified: enabling activities
(institutional support, technology transfer, and training of administrative staff) and sectoral
activities (field activities with direct impact on carbon emissions, such as support to sustainable
forest management). These investments will not be supported by carbon-sequestration
performance-based payments, but rather by financial partners such as the FIP, Forest Carbon
Partnership Facility (FCPF), United Nations Programme on REDD+(UN-REDD), and bilateral
agencies.
� “REDD+ projects”: Local projects that aim to reduce carbon emissions and/or increase
carbon stocks, will measure emission reductions or carbon sequestered, and will be financed
through payments conditional on carbon-sequestration results. These payments will originate
from carbon markets, international donor agencies, or through a national REDD+ fund.
The NC-REDD+ considers that the funds allocated to REDD+ initiatives (as defined in Box 2.1) cannot be
qualified as ―REDD+ benefits.‖ Rather, these funds are investments similar to other public or foreign aid
investments. The NC-REDD+ considers that REDD+ benefits will, flow exclusively from REDD+ projects
until REDD+ reaches Phase 3 (Figure 2.1), if an agreement is reached under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
REDD+ benefits are defined in the R-PP as any form of service, compensation, payment, or positive change
resulting from REDD+ projects, according to the following four categories:
� Economic benefits (job creations, compensation for reduced use of forest resources, access to funding
and cash, etc.);
� Environmental benefits (ecosystem services provided by forests, improved landscape management, etc.);
� Socio-cultural benefits (better access to health and education, quality of public services, nutrition, etc.);
and
� Governance benefits (transparency, accountability, improved procedures and rule of law, etc.).
Under the terminology used in other countries, many of these benefits are generally identified as co-benefits
(especially environmental and governance benefits). In addition, it should be noted that, per the definition of
REDD+ benefits provided by the NC-REDD+ (Box 2.1), all REDD+ funds reaching the DRC until 2015
will be qualified as REDD+ investments, not benefits (including revenues flowing from REDD+ pilot
projects). The DRC strategy on REDD+ benefit-sharing is understood by the government as relevant only to
REDD+ projects (after 2015).
What specific benefit will flow to local communities through REDD+ projects is not clear yet, nor is it clear
if the government will want to regulate project-level benefits. While some countries (e.g., México) already take
for granted that REDD+ benefits will materialize in cash payments to communities, DRC government
24 PRRGP INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS FOR REDD: CASE STUDIES – WORKING PAPER