Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Understanding the demand for REDD+ credits

  • TIMOTHY LAING (a1), LUCA TASCHINI (a1) and CHARLES PALMER (a2)
Abstract
SUMMARY

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) has emerged as a potentially important component of the global policy mix to mitigate climate change. Against a background of increasing engagement between private sector entities and conservation organizations, private sector investment has emerged in REDD+. Despite slow developments at the international scale, there continues to be private sector interest in REDD+ and continued voluntary investments in REDD+ projects and initiatives. In order to better understand possible models for private sector engagement in REDD+, this study analysed the motivation of private sector stakeholders to engage in REDD+, the perception of the potential of REDD+, the critical obstacles to making REDD+ functional and how actors perceive themselves as part of future REDD+ scenarios. Based on interviews and a workshop with private sector actors, this study found that few expect a regulatory market for REDD+ to emerge and that credits from the voluntary market have to be tailored to specific needs. As a carbon offset, REDD+ provides insufficient motivation for investment, particularly if cheaper alternatives exist. Co-benefits such as biodiversity conservation and community development are more important when traditional corporate social responsibility motivations play a role. Project scale remains important not only for the fact that smaller projects are viewed as offering more visible benefits to stakeholders but also as a means of having more control over risks on the ground, posing a challenge for the design of jurisdictional REDD+. Moving towards supply chains that are free from deforestation offers an opportunity to tackle commodity-driven deforestation. While questions remain about how such an approach might be integrated into REDD+, it could help address a perceived gap between private sector understanding of the values of REDD+ and the risks associated with these values not arising – termed here as a ‘missing middle’.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Timothy Laing e-mail: timlaing31@gmail.com
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

A.Angelsen (2010) Policies for reduced deforestation and their impact on agricultural production. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (46): 1963919644.

S.Atmadja & L.Verchot (2011) A review of the state of research, policies and strategies in addressing leakage from reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 17 (3): 311336.

D.Brockington & R.Duffy (2011) Capitalism and Conservation. London, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Climate Bonds Initiative (2015) Scaling up green bond markets for sustainable development [www document]. URL www.climatebonds.net/files/files/CBI-Guide-2015-final-web.pdf

CI (2013) REDD+ market: sending out an SOS [www document]. URL www.redd-monitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/REDD-Market-SOS.pdf

E.Corbera & H.Schroeder (2011) Governing and implementing REDD+. Environmental Science & Policy 14: 8999.

Earthwatch, IUCN & WBCSD (2002) Business and Biodiversity: a Handbook for Corporate Action. Geneva, Switzerland: ATAR.

R.Edwards , D.Tepper & S.Lowery (2014) Jurisdictional REDD+ bonds: leveraging private finance for forest protection, development and sustainable agriculture supply chains [www document]. URL www.forest-trends.org/documents/files/doc_4208.pdf

C.Fischer , F.Aguilar , P.Jawahar & R.Sedjo (2005) Forest Certification: Toward Common Standards? Washington, DC, USA: Resources for the Future.

Forest Trends (2014) Sharing the Stage: State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets 2014 [www document]. URL www.forest-trends.org/vcm2014.php

GCP, IPAM, FFI & FI (2014) Stimulating interim demand for REDD+ emission reductions: the need for a strategic intervention from 2015 to 2020 [www document]. URL http://globalcanopy.org/sites/default/files/documents/resources/IFF%20report%20Jan%202014-Stimulating%20Interim%20Demand%20for%20REDD%2B.pdf

Greenpeace (2013) Certifying destruction: why consumer companies need to go beyond the RSPO to stop forest destruction [www document]. URL www.greenpeace.de/files/publications/rspo-certifying-destruction.pdf

H.Gregersen , H.El Lakany , A.Karesnty & A.White (2010) Does the Opportunity Cost Approach Indicate the Real Cost of REDD+? Rights and Realities of Paying for REDD+. Washington, DC, USA: Rights and Resources Institute.

B.Guziana (2013) Corporate Greening: Product and Production Perspectives [www document]. URL www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:613401/FULLTEXT03.pdf

IGES (2013) REDD Project in Brazil Nut Concessions in Madre de Dios [www document]. URL http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/download/project?id=99

M.Kitzmuller & J.Shimshack (2012) Economic perspectives on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Economic Literature 50 (1): 5184.

A.Kolk & J.Pinkse (2004) Market strategies for climate change. European Management Journal 22 (3): 304314.

A.Larson (2011) Forest tenure reform in the age of climate change: lessons for REDD+. Global Environmental Change 21 (2): 540554.

D.Lee & T.Pistorius (2015) The impacts of international REDD+ finance [www document]. URL www.unique-forst.de/images/publications/vereinheitlicht/ImpactsofInternationalREDDFinance.pdf

S.Leonard (2015) The REDD+ Framework: finally complete after almost 10 years [www document]. URL http://blog.cifor.org/29000/the-redd-framework-finally-complete-after-almost-10-years?fnl=en

A.McWilliams & D.Siegel (2001) Corporate social responsibility: a theory of the firm perspective. The Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 117127.

C.Palmer (2011) Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: implications for ‘permanence’ in policy design. Ecological Economics 70 (4): 571576.

C.Palmer & S.Engel (2009) Avoided Deforestation: Prospects for Mitigating Climate Change. London, UK: Routledge.

PwC, Winrock International, Climate Focus & IUCN (2011) Funding for forests: UK Government support for REDD+ [www document]. URL www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/48074/1832-funding-for-forests-uk-government-support-for-red.pdf

J.Robinson (2012) Common and conflicting interests in the engagements between conservation organizations and corporations. Conservation Biology 26 (6): 967977.

M.Rose & M.Colchester (2004) Green corporate partnerships – are they an essential tool in achieving the conservation mission or just a ruse for covering up ecological crimes? The Ecologist July/August: 3033.

J.Ruggie (2008) Protect, respect and remedy: a framework for business and human rights. Innovations 3 (2): 189212.

J.Shankleman (2014) P&G pledges zero deforestation by 2020 [www document]. URL www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/04/10/pg-pledges-zero-deforestation-2020

TEEB (2010) The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity report for business – executive summary [www document]. URL www.teebweb.org/publication/teeb-for-business-executive-summary/

UN (2014) New York Declaration on Forests [www document]. URL www.un-redd.org/portals/15/documents/ForestsDeclarationText.pdf

G. R.Van der Werf , D. C.Morton , R. S.DeFries , J. G. J.Olivier , P. S.Kasibhatla , R. B.Jackson & J. T.Randerson (2009) CO2 emissions from forest loss. Nature Geoscience 2 (11): 737738.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Laing supplementary material
Laing supplementary material 1

 Word (34 KB)
34 KB