Trees, Money, and Rights at Copenhagen Climate Talks
As part of the League of Women Voters - US delegation to Copenhagen in December 2009, I investigated REDD; Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation
, a mechanism originally conceived to reward “custodians” to keep the remaining tropical forests instead of cutting them down. Carbon dioxide is released when trees are cut and burned and the soil is exposed to oxidation. Living trees, on the other hand, convert CO2 to oxygen and sequestered carbon. So protecting forests reduces atmospheric greenhouse gases.Efforts to write a strong and effective draft text for the REDD proposal were stalled in Copenhagen and needed safeguards have not been adopted.
The funding mechanism is a very big issue. Different methods have been proposed: carbon trading; a dedicated fund; or a mixture. Some assume that funding will come via “free market” processes such as carbon offsets or some tradable emission unit. REDD is a component of carbon markets whereby carbon credits are assigned to a forest to quantify the environmental “services” the forest provides to the climate. A big part of a nation’s carbon reduction targets could be sourced internationally. If financed through trading of carbon credits, REDD will create the world’s biggest loophole - effectively allowing major polluters to continue burning fossil fuels in exchange for buying forests in other parts of the world in order to obtain “carbon offsets”.
The REDD definition of “sustainable forests” fails to differentiate between extensive monoculture plantations and healthy forest diversity with wildlife habitat and clean watersheds. Corporations and investors would, in effect, be subsidized to acquire native forests for carbon credits, and then replace these forests with commodity plantations that depend on fertilizer, herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, and genetically modified trees. The text does not address enforcement to control massive clear cutting, illegal logging, and large scale agribusiness practices. But, ironically, the definition of “degradation” could criminalize Indigenous forest dwellers for farming, medicinal plant collection, and traditional cultural practices.
REDD will be part of negotiations over the next months leading up to COP 16 in Mexico City. Missing safeguards must be put in place or REDD will have perverse consequences:
-
The destruction of natural forests could actually be accelerated;
-
Indigenous Peoples’ rights referenced in the text could be undermined, and Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and women are likely to be excluded from decision making;
-
Hedge-fund investors and derivatives speculators are eagerly anticipating this prospective trillion dollar market which could become the next financial bubble to burst upon the world economy and also crash efforts to arrest climate change.
Claire Vanderslice
President – League of Women Voters of Ozaukee County, Wisconsin
February 16, 2010