Human activities produce large amounts of greenhouse gases (GHGs), primarily carbon dioxide (CO₂), and thus contribute to global warming. The use of fossil fuels is the primary source of CO₂emissions, but the removal of trees from forested land has also contributed.

Mature forests, having absorbed CO₂ from the atmosphere while growing, store carbon in wood, leaves, and soil. That carbon is released when people clear forested land and destroy the wood. From 2000 to 2005, the loss of forests, primarily in tropical developing countries, accounted for approximately 12 percent of global GHG emissions.

Slowing or halting deforestation in developing countries is a potentially low-cost way to help reduce global GHG emissions. For that potential to be realized, however, substantial challenges would need to be addressed—by providing technical and financial assistance to governments, by creating demand from private markets, or both.

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has provided a platform to the international community to negotiate and take measures for climate change mitigation. REDD+ is emerged as an incentive based mitigation mechanism to address the potential role of forestry up to 17-25 % reported share towards GHG emissions reduction.

is a low forest cover country but has a significant potential for REDD+ for which it has a long list of endeavors to enter into the global mainstream in order to bring future REDD+ into its practice and for the benefit of local community together with global contribution towards mitigation response. This paper analyzes the global dynamics, existing national and international policies and local governance setup, and aims at providing policy recommendations through a framework of actions to meet all requirements of REDD+, especially for the setting up of good governance model moving from Readiness (2011-2012) to Mainstreaming phase from 2013 onward.

Global debates about reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and promoting conservation, sustainable forest management and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) emphasise the need for strategies to build on existing knowledge. This briefing describes an example of South-South collaboration in which IIED has helped facilitate a Mozambique-Brazil partnership to share expertise and create a unique REDD+ working group. The initiative provides key lessons for other countries contemplating South-South collaboration on REDD+, including the need for charismatic champions, continuity in government representation and integration across sectors.

REDD+ and the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) process are two forest related initiatives that can be mutually supportive. For example, FLEGT can support REDD+ by promoting improved forest governance and law enforcement, addressing some of the causes of deforestation and forest degradation, and by establishing effective multi-stakeholder processes. In turn, REDD+ can strengthen FLEGT through increased momentum to support forest sector reform, access to finance and increased political attention.

Policies to control greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from tropical deforestation and degradation have become a major focus of the international climate change negotiations over the last five years. Much of the debate has centered on the potential for developing new international financial systems through which countries, or the actors within countries, are rewarded for reducing GHG emissions from deforestation and forest degradation compared to a reference emissions level (REDD plus). These policies raise a number of new legal issues at international and national levels. One of the main debates surrounds the issue of 'carbon rights' an issue that has arisen because REDD plus leads to the consideration of carbon as potentially new form of property in tropical forests. Furthermore, some approaches to REDD plus may make it possible for different actors to benefit from the transfer of these rights, for example, through carbon trading. REDD plus could present new financial and other opportunities for poor and vulnerable people. However, they may also face new risks if more powerful actors move to secure rights to benefits from emissions reductions or if they are excluded from REDD plus systems because they are unable to meet the requirements of emissions trading systems. This policy note summarizes what carbon rights are, how they are relevant in REDD plus and the main implications that could arise for poor and vulnerable people.

The Jurisdictional and Nested REDD Initiative will develop rules and requirements for the integrated, jurisdiction-wide crediting of activities that Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD).

Under the JNRI initiative, global advisors and technical experts will draft guidelines that can be used by jurisdictions seeking to create integrated accounting frameworks for crediting REDD projects and programs across their territories. Currently, there are no regulatory or institutional frameworks for the integrated, or nested, accounting of REDD projects and programs across jurisdictions.

This new report from Earth Economics features a new modeling tools for quantifying ecosystem service benefits in the urban-built environment.

This document is published as a key part of the effort by the Forestry Department of FAO and the National Forest Programme Facility to assist countries address emerging policy issues related to forests and climate change through integrating climate change considerations into national forest programmes. It is the outcome of a thorough consultative process with active engagement of countries and experts. It seeks to provide a practical approach to the process of integrating climate change into national forest programmes. The aim is to assist senior officials in government administrations and the representatives of other stakeholders, including civil society organizations and the private sector, prepare the forest sector for the challenges and opportunities posed by climate change.

The United States needs many different types of forests: some managed for wood products plus other benefits, and some managed for nonconsumptive uses and benefits. The objective of reducing global greenhouse gases (GHG) requires increasing carbon storage in pools other than the atmosphere. Growing more forests and keeping forests as forests are only part of the solution, because focusing solely on the sequestration benefits of the forests misses the important (and substantial) carbon storage and substitution GHG benefits of harvested forest products, as well as other benefits of active forest management.

Forests and global climate are closely linked in terms of carbon storage and releases, water fluxes from the soil and into the atmosphere, and solar energy capture. Understanding how carbon dynamics are affected by stand age, density, and management and will evolve with climate change is fundamental to exploiting the capacity for sustainably managed forests to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. For example, even though temperate forests continue to be carbon sinks, in western North America forest fires and tree mortality from insects are converting some forests into net carbon sources.

Expanding forest biomass use for biofuels and energy generation will compete with traditional forest products, but it may also produce benefits through competition and market efficiency. Short-rotation woody crops, as well as landowners' preferences—based on investment-return expectations and environmental considerations, both of which will be affected by energy and environmental policies—have the potential to increase biomass supply.

Unlike metals, concrete, and plastic, forest products store atmospheric carbon and have low embodied energy (the amount of energy it takes to make products), so there is a substitution effect when wood is used in place of other building materials. Wood used for energy production also provides substitution benefits by reducing the flow of fossil fuel-based carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

The value of carbon credits generated by forest carbon offset projects differs dramatically, depending on the sets of carbon pools allowed by the protocol and baseline employed. The costs associated with establishing and maintaining offset projects depend largely on the protocols' specifics. Measurement challenges and relatively high transaction costs needed for forest carbon offsets warrant consideration of other policies that promote climate benefits from forests and forest products but do not require project-specific accounting.

Policies can foster changes in forest management and product manufacture that reduce carbon emissions over time while maintaining forests for environmental and societal benefits. US policymakers should take to heart the finding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its Fourth Assessment Report when it concluded that “In the long term, a sustainable forest management strategy aimed at maintaining or increasing forest carbon stocks, while producing an annual sustained yield of timber, fibre, or energy from the forest, will generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit.“ A rational energy and environmental policy framework must be based on the premise that atmospheric greenhouse gas levels are increasing primarily because of the addition of geologic fossil fuel-based carbon into the carbon cycle. Forest carbon policy that builds on the scientific information summarized in this article can be a significant and important part of a comprehensive energy policy that provides for energy independence and carbon benefits while simultaneously providing clean water, wildlife habitat, recreation, and other uses and values.