Ensuring the poor or the most vulnerable sections of society benefit from REDD+ is key mainly to build both national and international legitimacy, and foster successful delivery of conservation and social objectives. 

Equitable benefit sharing issues at a community or household level are overlooked in both academic and non-academic literature compared to distributional issues at international level. Therefore, this paper aims to look at some of the issues related to benefit distribution at village and household level. Some of the very important factors that are very likely to affect benefit distribution from REDD+ at a village level are 

(1) whether payments are made directly to households or to communities as a whole; and 

(2) whether payments are made in cash or in-kind. 

In addition the paper looks at the following design issues closely related to the above two questions: what should the provision of benefits be based on? Land size, actual emission reductions, or demography of the community to ensure that equitable design criteria are met; how to ensure that more vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities, landless poor, women and children do not lose out? And what impact would the type of benefit transferred have on the wellbeing of the communities and local economy?

An edited set of case studies based on presentations at the LTC/Translinks sponsored Workshop in October 2011. The volume is 112 pages and contains 9 case studies, an introductory chapter and a preface by USAID's Michael Colby.

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.

Green economy has generally focused on the energy sector, but interest in the role of forests in emissions reduction and in forest carbon markets is growing. This has led to the emergence of the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, enhancement of carbon stock and sustainable management of forests in developing countries initiative (known collectively as REDD+) as a means through which individuals, projects and communities in developing countries can be financially rewarded for reducing emissions from deforestation, forest degradation and enhancement of carbon stock.

Country studies on Legal Preparedness for REDD+ in Mexico, Vietnam and Zambia, to advance legal knowledge and action for REDD+ development and climate change mitigation.

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.

This report makes the third yearof the implementation of the FCPF. The first three years have seen the development of the FCPF and REDD+ at the global and national levels. Remarkable progress was acheived in the UNFCCC , an international REDD+ Partnership was established, and global initiatives such as the FCPF, the UN-REDD Programme, the Forest Investment Program and the GEFs new SFM/REDD+ window were set up to assist forest countries in tackling the REDD+ challenge. Under this new international framework, dozens of forest countries have started formulating broad strategies and investing in activities on the ground.

Over the past ten months, the Property Rights and Resource Governance Program (PRRGP) at USAID has been analyzing the intersection of land tenure and property rights (LTPR) with the biophysical consequences of climate change and socioeconomic and political attempts to forestall further production of greenhouse gases. While a number of researchers and organizations in the US and internationally have highlighted the potential impacts of mitigation efforts on tenure, there remains minimal information and best practice on how to practically address these issues at the field level. Emerging interventions to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and enhance forest carbon stocks (REDD+) pose potential opportunities and risks for the rights of rural populations in developing countries. In many countries, the right of local populations to benefit from REDD+ activities requires further clarification. As a result, there are lessons to be learned from countries that are progressing on REDD+ or have experience with payment for environmental services (PES). PRRGP’s work on REDD+ over the past ten months has examined 1) trends and opportunities for the devolution of rights to local populations; 2) how tenure relates to the right to benefit from REDD+ revenues, and 3) early experiences with and best practices on governance systems for benefit distribution.

Over the past ten months, the Property Rights and Resource Governance Program (PRRGP) at USAID has been analyzing the intersection of land tenure and property rights (LTPR) with the biophysical consequences of climate change and socioeconomic and political attempts to forestall further production of greenhouse gases. While a number of researchers and organizations in the US and internationally have highlighted the potential impacts of mitigation efforts on tenure, there remains minimal information and best practice on how to practically address these issues at the field level. Emerging interventions to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, and enhance forest carbon stocks (REDD+) pose potential opportunities and risks for the rights of rural populations in developing countries. In many countries, the right of local populations to benefit from REDD+ activities requires further clarification. As a result, there are lessons to be learned from countries that are progressing on REDD+ or have experience with payment for environmental services (PES). PRRGP’s work on REDD+ over the past ten months has examined 1) trends and opportunities for the devolution of rights to local populations; 2) how tenure relates to the right to benefit from REDD+ revenues, and 3) early experiences with and best practices on governance systems for benefit distribution.

In recent years, the voluntary over-the-counter (OTC) carbon market has reached a significant market volume. It is particularly interesting for forest mitigation projects which are either ineligible in compliance markets or confronted with a plethora of technical and financial hurdles and lacking market demand. As the OTC market is not regulated, voluntary standards have been created to secure the social and environmental integrity of the traded mitigation projects and thus to ensure the quality of the resulting carbon credits. Building on a theoretical efficiency-legitimacy framework, this study aims to identify and analyse the characteristics and indicators that determine the efficiency and organisational legitimacy of standards for afforestation/reforestation carbon projects.