duncan marsh redd_partnership_18_june_2011
TRANSCRIPT
Characteriza*on of Funding Needs for REDD+
Duncan Marsh The Nature Conservancy
June 18, 2010 REDD+ Partnership mee*ng
Funding Needs -‐ Overview
• Priori*es for Immediate Funding – Readiness – Early Implementa*on and Focused Demonstra*on Programs
• Catalyst Funds • Stabiliza*on Facility
– Based on stock/flow approach to reference levels – Would re-‐allocate payments to countries based on forest carbon stocks.
– Combats leakage and maximizes par*cipa*on
Readiness & Early Implementa*on
The future success of REDD+ will depend both on the readiness of a porUolio of countries to par*cipate in REDD+ programs but also, cri*cally, on proven demonstra*ons of the concept at large scale.
To go beyond readiness, however, countries would need up-‐front capital to fund the ac*vi*es that would actually begin to reduce emissions—the period between readiness and sale of ex-‐post tons of emissions reduc*ons (some*mes called the “missing middle”).
Create a bridge to pay-‐for-‐performance and private investment – funding that will be needed beyond public funding sources in the future to reach the goal of halving deforesta*on by 2020
Insights from Early Implementa*on • How to fundamentally change forest sector dynamics
– important component of low carbon development strategies
• How to measure and verify emissions reduc*ons with high environmental integrity
• Involving communi*es and equitably sharing incen*ves and benefits with key stakeholders
• Inclusion of social and environmental safeguards
• Crea*ng the necessary legal and ins*tu*onal arrangements for carbon ownership and delivery
• Leadership and management structures of REDD+ programs
• Effec*ve financing structures
• Build confidence on all sides
Elements of Readiness & Implementa*on
Stabiliza*on Facility
Based on Stock/Flow Approach:
1. Countries that reduce their flow of emissions from deforesta*on and degrada*on would be eligible for payments as part of the results-‐based (or “third”) phase of REDD+. – Might include market, market-‐linked, and non-‐market sources.
2. A por*on of payments for emissions reduc*ons would be put into a “stabiliza*on fund” that would re-‐allocate payments to countries based on forest carbon stocks.
Stabiliza*on Facility (cont.) • Investment in na*onal plans based on forest carbon stocks: • forest protec*on • sustainable development
• Funding • Secng aside a por*on of payments for REDD+ Ers
o Should reflect: a) poten*al scale of interna*onal leakage; and b) the goal to maximize par*cipa*on
• Could be complemented by support from public sources
• While the quan9ty of stabiliza*on funds would be base on stocks, eligibility to receive those funds would be based on stabilizing emissions below designated levels
Funding Needs over Time
Different ac*vi*es need different funding sources at different *mes
• Readiness: Capacity building, na*onal strategies, reference levels, monitoring systems, stakeholder engagement
• Early Implementa2on: Up-‐front funding for ac*vi*es that reduce emissions
• Stabiliza2on: Funding for conserving forests without historical threats
• Full Implementa2on: Measurable, reportable and verifiable emissions reduc*ons
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60 (US$ Billions)
Poten2al REDD Implementa2on Costs
Full Implementa*on
Stabiliza*on Early Implementa*on
Readiness
Funding flows over *me
For more informa*on on the Stabiliza*on Facility proposal, please refer to: hgp://www.theredddesk.org/resources/reports/establishing_efficient_equitable_and_environmentally_sound_reference_emission_leve
