The 13th Forest Governance Forum took place in Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo, from 23-24 May 2022. Following the forest commitments made in 2021 in Glasgow, UK, at 26th United Nations Climate Conference (COP 26), the Forum addressed the intersection of forest governance, the green economy, climate change and land-use planning. The EU REDD Facility engaged and delivered a presentation at a panel on COP26 and the climate action. The Facility also convened and chaired a parallel session on land-use planning and forests.
Fern convened a plenary session titled ‘Building on COP26 to Promote Inclusive and Ambitious Climate Action,’ which was moderated by the Central Africa Forest Initiative (CAFI) Secretary. It aimed to examine progress and gaps in commitments and actions to improve climate governance in the Congo Basin and beyond. It also formulated recommendations so that nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and just and transparent climate finance lead to greater protection of forests and forest peoples’ rights.
In a presentation on ‘Revised NDCs: What’s in it for forests, rights, and livelihoods?’ Jim Djontu and Alice Bisiaux of the EU REDD Facility underlined that the gap between emission reduction pledges and what is needed to achieve the goal of the Paris Agreement to limit temperature increase to 1,5 ºC above pre-industrial levels is still significant. In this context, they assessed the progress made in the revised NDCs of some Congo Basin countries, underlying the essential role nature-based solutions can play in addressing the climate challenge. In many cases, NDC pledges related to the forest and land-use sector can still be made more ambitious and specific. In particular, the national climate plans should better address forest governance issues and include quantified tenure and natural resource rights for indigenous peoples and local communities.
Furthermore, although the revision of the NDCs have been carried out through a greater engagement of civil society compared to the 2015 version of these national plans, their recommendations have only been very partially taken into account.
The EU REDD Facility also convened a parallel session on land-use planning and forests, which was chaired by Jim Djontu.
Panellists underlined that the progress made, and the approaches deployed in land-use planning are context-specific. These approaches may be top-down, bottom-up or combined. This influences the dynamics of the process, the achievement of the defined objectives, the emerging lessons and constraints encountered.
The Republic of the Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Cameroon have embarked on ambitious and multi-annual land-use planning processes following differentiated trajectories adapted to their local contexts and realities with the support of international and local partners, such EFI, the CAFI, Initiative Développement and Rainbow Consult.
Land-use planning, and associated tools have been recognised by the administration, development partners, civil society, and the private sector as an essential basis for better land governance, more coherent development planning and the reconciliation of divergent interests in land-use and allocation in the rapidly growing economies of the countries of the sub-region.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/opening-ceremony-forest-governance-forum-eu-redd-facility.jpg6281200EU REDD Facilityhttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgEU REDD Facility2022-06-09 14:55:002022-06-16 15:00:58The EU REDD Facility addresses climate action and land-use planning at the 13th Forest Governance Forum
In the lead up to the adoption of the Paris Agreement on climate change in 2015, each country was asked to outline its post-2020 climate plans, known as their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Taken collectively, the initial plans put forward by countries did not go far enough to reach the Agreement’s goal: to limit global average temperature rise to “well below” 2 ºC above pre-industrial levels, and to “pursue efforts” to limit it to 1.5 ºC.
However, the Paris Agreement gives countries the opportunity to increase their climate ambition, by updating their NDCs every five years. It’s now time to take stock: have countries’ revised climate plans matched the increase in ambition needed to effectively address climate change?
Nature-based solutions as an opportunity for raising climate ambition
For countries updating their plans to take more ambitious action on climate change, nature-based solutions offer essential tools and opportunities. Conserving, restoring and improving management of forests, wetlands, grasslands and agricultural lands can deliver a third of cuts in emissions needed by 2030 to help keep warming below 2 °C. These nature-based solutions also help countries and communities adapt to the impacts of climate change and contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
A large majority of the first round of NDCs included nature-based solutions in one form or another, but overall, these pledges were not quantified and did not outline coherent strategies for achieving them. Moreover, most didn’t consider the forest and land-use governance reforms that are essential to their implementation. The NDC revision process therefore provided an opportunity to strengthen the role of these natural solutions.
The EU REDD Facility has assessed the revised NDCs of several of its partner countries, and that of Brazil. Brazil, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Indonesia are home to four of the top five largest remaining tropical forests. Looking at these countries as well as Cameroon, Ghana, Laos, Liberia, the Republic of the Congo (RoC), Thailand and Vietnam, a very mixed picture emerges in terms of increased ambition generally, and of the treatment of nature-based solutions in particular.
Have countries ramped up their climate ambition?
On overall pledges to reduce emissions, the glass is half full. Some countries have ramped up ambition in varying degrees, such as Colombia, Cameroon, DRC, Laos or Vietnam. Others, such as Ghana, Indonesia or Thailand, have resubmitted their 2015 pledges, while RoC has reduced its mitigation ambition.
In terms of NDC scope, the revision process has led most countries, apart from Thailand and Ghana, to cover more sectors and greenhouse gases than in their initial contributions. For example, Liberia’s revised NDC covers emissions from the forest sector, which were excluded in its first NDC.
A missed opportunity for the forest and land-use sector
In their revised NDCs, countries have an opportunity to be clearer and more specific by adopting measurable targets and explaining how they were calculated. To help determine how they can be supported to achieve their climate targets, they can also be clearer about their financial needs. On these aspects, overall, the revised climate plans we analysed made progress. For example, Colombia, Liberia and Vietnam, which had not provided cost estimates in their first NDCs, did so in their revised submissions. Cameroon, Colombia and DRC also detailed the emission estimates for each sector and planned activity.
More countries have included an overall target for the agriculture, forest and land sector in their revised NDCs, including Colombia and Liberia. All countries assessed, other than Thailand, put forward at least one quantified target related to this sector:
All countries but Cameroon, Thailand and DRC have reduced deforestation targets.
Cameroon, Colombia, Liberia, Thailand, Laos, RoC, DRC and Indonesia mention restoration efforts.
Laos and Vietnam have quantified forest cover targets.
Cameroon, Colombia, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Liberia and DRC refer to protected areas.
Nonetheless, numerous forest-related targets are still unquantified. This is a missed opportunity to enhance understanding towards countries’ commitments, raise the profile of the agriculture, forest and land sector and attract more public and private support.
Giving forest governance efforts the place they deserve
Overall, forest governance is still insufficiently addressed in the revised NDCs. Few mention participatory processes, indigenous and local communities’ rights, land tenure or forest monitoring efforts. And when governance issues are mentioned, they are often not adequately articulated to ensure they will be integrated into the NDC’s implementation:
Conflicting interests and competition over land and resources have been major driving forces of deforestation, forest degradation, soil erosion and loss of soil fertility. However, only Cameroon, Colombia, Laos, Liberia and Indonesia make reference to land-use planning efforts.
While Cameroon, Colombia, RoC, DRC and Liberia refer to gender, Colombia, and to some extent, Cameroon, are the only countries to detail how such considerations will be taken into account in implementation.
Nine of the ten countries analysed are either negotiating or implementing a Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) with the EU. But DRC is the only country to refer to the gains achieved through its VPA negotiation.
All countries but Cameroon and Thailand mention REDD+. However, often, these are general mentions and the link with the implementation of the national REDD+ strategy is not clearly articulated.
Considering deforestation drivers and trade-offs among sectors
Most deforestation drivers, such as agricultural expansion, mining or the collection of fuelwood, come from outside the forest sector. A number of revised NDCs address them:
Cameroon, Colombia, Ghana, Laos, Liberia and DRC mention efficient cookstoves or efficient charcoal/clean cooking technology.
Liberia includes the goal to implement a net-zero deforestation mining policy by 2030.
Many countries refer to climate-smart agriculture, increased productivity and agroforestry.
However, only Colombia, Liberia and DRC clearly draw links among sectors.
Other countries, such as Laos and Indonesia, present renewable energy targets that rely heavily on biomass or hydropower, which carry the risk of driving deforestation. These countries do not analyse the potential impact of these energy or agricultural targets on achieving their forest and land-use objectives.
The small number of countries that analyse the trade-offs across sectors of their NDC pledges illustrates that inter-ministerial coordination is still often lagging.
Liberia is one of the few countries that mentions the creation of an inter-ministerial task force on land-use planning to ensure coherence in NDC implementation. However, this task force does not include the energy and mining sector stakeholders, although mining and charcoal and biofuels production could have significant impacts on the forest emissions of this country. RoC also envisages the creation of an institutional mechanism to ensure inter-ministerial coordination. However, its articulation with the existing relevant coordination mechanisms in the country is unclear.
Revised NDCs as strategic planning documents
Overall, many of the revised NDCs analysed do not read like strategic documents integrating existing and planned national policies. For example, revised NDCs should draw linkages with the SDGs to ensure and assess the alignment and integration of climate-related policies and measures with development needs and strategies. The alignment of these two agendas, as well as with other relevant processes, such as national adaptation plans or FLEGT processes, is imperative to increase efficiency and maximise resources, technical capacity and expertise sharing. While more countries have drawn links with the SDGs in their revised NDCs, in many cases, such as in Liberia, Ghana or RoC, only general references to the SDGs are made, without specific information on how synergies and coordination will be ensured.
Paving the way to partnerships
Achieving the objective of the Paris Agreement will depend on countries’ ability to turn their climate plans into action and work towards more ambition. By enhancing the forest sector components of their NDCs, Colombia, DRC, Liberia and Laos have paved the way to achieving their mitigation and adaptation goals. They have also raised the profile of the forest sector to attract the required investments and support to implement nature-based solutions. The increased granularity and ambition contained in these NDCs can provide the basis for future partnerships with national and international stakeholders to design and implement effective agricultural, forest and land sector policies. More countries would do well to follow suit.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/landscape-Colombia-coffee-producing-region-Jess-Kraft-featured.jpg419800Alice Bisiauxhttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgAlice Bisiaux2021-11-04 07:28:002022-06-16 08:02:25Taking stock of national climate plans: what’s in it for forests?
Over the past decade, the EU REDD Facility has worked with many partners across Africa, Asia and Latin America to understand the governance challenges driving deforestation and to develop pragmatic approaches and solutions to land-use governance and sustainable development. As we celebrate our 10-year anniversary, we are reflecting on lessons learnt and sharing our insights.
Since its inception a decade ago, the EU REDD Facility’s ambition has been to support dialogue and partnership between state and non-state actors to strengthen efforts to ensure tropical forests meet their potential to limit climate change.
As we celebrate the 10th anniversary of our Facility, we’re taking the opportunity to reflect on lessons learned over these years, as we worked towards empowering stakeholders to strengthen the rule of law, promoting sustainable land use and investment, and enhancing supply chain transparency.
It’s fitting that we share these insights as the 14th edition of the EU Development Days on the Green Deal for a Sustainable Future gets underway. The EU has a strong track record of global leadership in dealing with deforestation and forest degradation, and the European Green Deal commits to measures to support deforestation-free value chains. Our work is aligned with this ambitious response to the continued widespread destruction of the world’s forests.
Significant progress has been made over the past few years towards ending deforestation and understanding the drivers and solutions to this complex problem. Yet governments, the private sector and citizens all over the world need to urgently step up action to protect and restore the world’s forests. We hope that the lessons we have learned over the past decade help to shape and accelerate future action: Ending tropical deforestation: 10 lessons for laying the foundations
1. There must be clear and well-enforced legal frameworks for land use.
Unclear legal frameworks — and a lack of implementation and compliance with these frameworks — often lead to illegal land allocation and forest conversion, including for the expansion of commercial agriculture. Giving forest and agriculture sector actors incentives to comply with the law strengthens efforts to make commodity production and trade deforestation-free. It also promotes better land-use governance and helps achieve climate targets.
2. Participatory and informed land-use planning is key to reduce land conflicts and deforestation.
3. Partnership approaches build an enabling environment for sustainable land-use.
Clarifying definitions and responsibilities, sharing credible information for decision-makers, and fostering trust between partners builds transparency and accountability in the forest and land-use sectors. These efforts build an enabling environment for forest-friendly development and investment, and help countries put their climate change targets into action.
4. Open, reliable information on global forest-risk commodity supply chains is needed to build trust on both sides of the trade.
The complexity and opacity of global supply chains has made it difficult to tackle deforestation in mainstream markets. For most commodities with deforestation risks, there’s simply no information to support action and policy implementation. Improving supply-chain transparency helps to hold global supply chain players – including producing and consuming governments – accountable to their commitments to deal with deforestation and risks linked to products in their supply chains.
5. Consensus on definitions and data is needed to track progress towards sustainability.
Agreed sustainability definitions and monitoring systems help authorities improve their governance of land and forests. By developing these indicators through multistakeholder consultation, trust and legitimacy are entrenched. Using simple and objective ways to verify sustainability performance, grounded in national laws and regulations, is a mutually beneficial approach for producer and consumer countries.
6. Nationally Determined Contributions offer opportunities raise the profile of forest and land-use governance.
The majority of tropical countries have integrated forests and agriculture into their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Robust and participatory NDC processes offer opportunities to address the drivers of deforestation by combining climate, aid and trade-related interventions, and raising the profile of forest and land use governance. Failing to address underlying governance drivers of deforestation puts the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change at risk.
7. Community forestry can improve livelihoods and achieve climate commitments.
Communities protect, manage, and use their forests in many ways. Some rely on logging and the timber trade to make a living. This trade needs to be economically viable and support livelihoods, while at the same time supporting sustainable management and protecting against deforestation. Legal timber production can unlock livelihood opportunities for vulnerable groups, while also reducing illegality, deforestation, and forest degradation.
8. Tracking investments in land-use helps to deploy resources for supporting forest and climate objectives.
Tropical forest countries can get valuable support from international public finance sources to help achieve their climate and forest goals, but these funds can’t meet the scale of investment needed. By presenting a transparent analysis of land-use investments and plans to improve the coherence of forest and climate-friendly spending, countries can attract private finance and make the case for more international support. There are opportunities to redirect the hundreds of billions spent annually on land-use activities around the world towards low emissions, without sacrificing productivity or economic development.
9. Socio-economic factors driving smallholder land-use decisions must be considered.
Smallholder farmers are central to the transition towards sustainable production, but they can’t invest in sustainable practices when they live in poverty and have limited access to finance. For change to happen at scale, initiatives offering financial incentives to smallholders must not only support the initial costs of agroforestry and replantation, but also provide opportunities to diversify their incomes. Understanding the economy of smallholders and the potential profitability of new production models is a prerequisite for transitioning towards more sustainable land-use practices.
10. Commodity and trade approaches provide a powerful lever for governance reform.
To address forest and land-use governance challenges, it’s useful to look to commodity and trade approaches like the EU’s Voluntary Partnership Agreements. There are lessons from the timber sector for creating the basis for zero-deforestation production and related trade. It’s essential to capitalise on initiatives that are effectively bringing visibility, support and competence to forest and land-use governance.
In the years ahead, we’ll continue to support countries to find innovative approaches and solutions to their land-use governance and development goals, and to find opportunities for dialogue and partnership. We look forward to sharing new lessons along this journey.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Christophe-quote.jpg5131025Christophe Van Orshovenhttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgChristophe Van Orshoven2021-06-13 09:22:002022-06-16 09:27:45The EU REDD Facility’s 10 lessons for ending tropical deforestation
Climate change is a whole-economy problem. Tackling it will require looking at every financial decision through a climate lens. Does the decision result in greenhouse gas emissions or will it reduce them? Will it improve resilience to climatic shocks or worsen vulnerability?
As countries move to implement the Paris Agreement on climate change, they need to know the answers to such questions. They need to be able to track and understand domestic flows of finance so they can better align them with their climate goals, identify gaps and unlock the private investment needed for green, resilient development.
Setting the scene, Chavi Meattle from CPI gave an overview of the various ways dozens of countries are tracking climate finance and mainstreaming climate change into national and sectoral budgets. Padraig Oliver of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Secretariat explained how climate finance tracking can feed into countries’ national reporting under the Paris Agreement on climate change, as well as the Convention’s periodic global stocktake showing, “where we are, where we are going and what needs to be done”.
There has been considerable growth in climate finance tracking in recent years. While all of this data is great, how can we ensure it leads to policy action? As noted in the workshop, we need greater transparency, we need to ensure tracking approaches are tailored to each country’s context, and we need to better explain the benefits and opportunities for all stakeholders.
Impacts of finance tracking
To get an idea of how national climate finance tracking is helping to increase policy ambition, improve reporting and mobilise new resources, we heard from government representatives in Ecuador, Indonesia, Kenya and South Africa.
For example, Noor Syaifudin of Indonesia’s Fiscal Policy Agency said the country has used climate budget tagging for mitigation action since 2016, and recently included tagging for adaptation actions too. Indonesia used this data for the issuance of green bonds (called Green Sukuk) that have generated more than USD 2 billion for financing climate action.
Sarah McPhail from the National Treasury of South Africa said her country was “late to the party” but was taking a “big bang” approach. Having recently mapped out the landscape of climate finance with GreenCape and The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship, in partnership with CPI, South Africa is now piloting climate budget tagging, which it aims to roll out at national, provincial and local government levels. South Africa is also targeting its whole finance sector to improve climate-related financial disclosure.
In Ecuador, climate finance tracking is evolving to also consider the social justice aspects of spending. As Diego Teca of the Ministry of Environment and Water explained, the country is developing a gender-relevant climate index as part of an ongoing Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review.
In terms of building ambition, the speakers said it was necessary to provide the evidence base to inform ambition and implementation, build awareness and capacity at all levels of government, and strengthen climate finance institutional arrangements to increase private sector participation. They also highlighted the need to incorporate equity and ‘just transition’ considerations, extend tracking to adaptation and other sectors, and to strengthen budget effectiveness.
Aligning with Paris
The Paris Agreement calls for all financial flows to be consistent with low-carbon, climate-resilient development. The second half of the workshop focused on how to ensure that countries, institutions and companies are aligning their financial decisions with that goal, and whether climate finance tracking can accelerate progress by public and private actors.
Clifford Polycarp of the Green Climate Fund spoke about how the fund is driving systemic change through both its investments and by helping countries to put in place strategies and frameworks and investment plans and capacities. Francisco Dall’Orso from Chile’s Ministry of Energy explained how the country is using UNDP’s Investment and Financial Flows assessments to identify ways to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 cost-effectively.
Chris Dodwell of Impax Asset Management said that in many cases, national policy responses to climate change had not focused enough on financing requirements and so lacked baseline information from which to track progress. Citing the UK Committee on Climate Change’s 6th Carbon Budget report as a positive example, he also pointed to a need for credible sectoral roadmaps that clarify where private capital is needed and are supported by ‘investment-grade’ policies to attract that capital.
Dodwell highlighted strong growth in the amount of private capital coming into the climate solutions sector. There is a huge interest in investing in this sector, he said. What is lacking is knowledge about where that capital needs to be deployed.
Nathan Fabian of Principles for Responsible Investment added that private investors want to know their financial flows are, in fact, being invested in ways that make a substantial difference. He said a lack of alignment with climate goals is raising concerns in private markets about greenwashing. This highlighted the importance of harmonised approaches, common metrics and terms that can give private investors confidence that investments will align with stated climate goals.
Panellists also spoke a need to focus not only on decarbonisation of private investment portfolios but on increasing investment in climate solutions, including adaptation and resilience. They highlighted a need to measure both flows of finance and the effectiveness of those flows.
As CPI’s global managing director Barbara Buchner said in her closing remarks, it will not be possible to assess progress under the Paris Agreement without enhanced approaches to benchmark and measure the impact of commitments and finance on climate mitigation and adaptation goals. Enhanced approaches will also be needed to assess the contribution of public and private actors to sector transitions in the real economy across different geographies.
What’s more, the levels of finance currently available are trillions short of the sums needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
The workshop also highlighted the need for clear roadmaps for climate action and investment, greater transparency of financial data, harmonised approaches, and standardised criteria and benchmarks.
Fortunately, the number of organisations engaged in climate finance tracking is increasing every year, and they are digging ever deeper into this vital area. As this community of practice continues to grow, we look forward to more opportunities to develop and share methodologies, tools and best practices.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Sunrise-Amazon-rainforest.jpg6281200Adeline Dontenvillehttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgAdeline Dontenville2021-05-17 09:20:002022-07-20 09:38:07Climate finance tracking: From data to ambition to action
As climate change impacts grow ever more apparent, it becomes more urgent to stop carbon flowing into the atmosphere and increase resilience to rising threats. Much will depend on how and where finance flows. Countries are enacting plans for adapting to and mitigating climate change, so they need to know what money is available and — crucially — if any flows of finance are working against their climate objectives.
Monitoring past, present, and future spending and investment patterns is therefore essential. Such information can help countries to measure progress, identify gaps, and align flows and instruments for maximum impact and scale. It can optimize the deployment of public resources in a way that can effectively and efficiently unlock private investment at the transformational scales needed.
Different approaches and tools are already used by countries to map and track domestic climate finance. These include: climate budget tagging; land-use finance mapping; climate public expenditure and institutional reviews; private sector climate expenditure and institutional reviews; and investment and financial flows assessments. Countries like Nepal and Kenya have been at the forefront of developing such national systems and are now joined by many countries around the world following similar approaches.
There is also something called the ‘climate finance landscape approach,’ which CPI developed with partners in 2011. It tracks the life cycle of climate finance flows – from provider of finance, through intermediaries, instruments and disbursement channels to end uses. This approach has been key in helping policymakers understand who finances what, and the extent to which finance is aligned with policy objectives.
It also identifies barriers to investment, potential incentive mechanisms, and provides a baseline for monitoring progress in mobilising resources. CPI and the EU REDD Facility have since developed an open source tool that makes this methodology available to countries. Côte d’Ivoire is among the countries to have used it to map investments related to their climate and forests objectives.
During the event, a panel of country representatives, practitioners, and partners shared their experiences of monitoring and planning domestic climate and land-use finance. They gave examples of positive outcomes, but also raised a number of challenges. These ranged from the methodological —such as a lack of data gaps and a lack of clarity about definitions of climate finance in the national context — to the institutional, such as a lack of capacity and poor inter-ministerial coordination.
Taking it to the next level
Given the challenges, it is clear that simply quantifying financial flows is itself a big step. The next level is using those estimates to influence policy, plan investments and measure progress. Critically, mapping finance can also help to mobilize new money and redirect old towards climate objectives. So how do we move from producing nice reports to bringing systemic changes to budgeting and spending patterns at domestic level?
Participants spoke of a need to simplify information and present it visually to facilitate dialogue among stakeholders and garner support for proposals. They also raised the need for more transparency, better sharing of data and a greater understanding of best practices based on what has worked in different countries. To support this, governments would also need to improve coordination among ministries and ensure their staff have adequate capacity through training.
Summing up the event, Dr. Barbara Buchner, Global Managing Director at CPI, highlighted the need for improved coordination among technical partners to develop and share methodologies, tools and potentially data. One suggestion was that continued and regular exchanges among the participants and other interested parties would help start to create an informal community of practice enabling us to share experiences and best practices. With this in mind, CPI and the EU REDD Facility are planning to organise a follow-up and virtual half-day workshop at the end of 2020. If you want to know more about climate finance tracking and mapping, or if you have experiences to share, we hope to see you there.
– Dr. Angela Falconer, Associate Director in Climate Policy Initiative’s climate finance division, is also an author of this blog post. – The workshop was funded by the EU REDD Facility and International Climate Initiative (IKI) of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU). – This blog post was originally published on 14 February 2020.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/LUFT-Sankey-graphics-EN.jpg8831250Adeline Dontenvillehttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgAdeline Dontenville2020-08-21 17:45:002022-07-07 17:56:48Mapping climate finance to influence policy, plan investments, and measure progress
The EU REDD Facility, in collaboration with Inovasi Bumi and Climate Focus, is carrying out a study to determine how clarified and implemented legal frameworks could contribute to reducing deforestation in Indonesia. This reduced deforestation would help the country achieve the forest-related targets in its nationally determined contribution under the Paris Agreement on climate change.
The EU REDD Facility, Climate Policy Initiative and Climate Focus studied ways to shift investment in agriculture, forestry and other land uses towards practices to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The study identified financing opportunities and developed tools to support public sector financing for mitigation and adaptation strategies to lower emissions.
https://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/unlocking-finance-land-use-mitigation-adaptation.jpg6281200EU REDD Facilityhttps://euredd.efi.int/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/EU-REDD-Facility-logo-tagline.svgEU REDD Facility2015-11-17 09:07:002022-08-29 09:31:52Unlocking finance for land-use mitigation and adaptation
About the EU REDD Facility
The EU REDD Facility supports countries in improving land-use governance as part of their efforts to slow, halt and reverse deforestation. It also supports the overall EU effort to reduce its contribution to deforestation in developing countries. The Facility focuses on countries that are engaged in REDD+, an international mechanism that incentivises developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from their forest and land-use sectors. The Facility is hosted by the European Forest Institute and was established in 2010.
This website has been produced with the assistance of the European Union and the Governments Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands. The contents of this site are the sole responsibility of the European Forest Institute’s EU REDD Facility and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of funding organisations.
Essential website cookies
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Google Analytics cookies
These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our communication campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you to enhance your experience.
Other external services
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts and external Video providers.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
Embedded content from other websites
Articles on this site may include embedded content (e.g. videos, images, articles, etc.). Embedded content from other websites behaves in the exact same way as if the visitor has visited the other website.
You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy notice page.