Exploring Opportunities for Promoting Synergies between Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Forest Carbon Initiatives
2. Synergy between Adaptation and Mitigation in Forestry Activities: Meaning and Rationale
3.1. Choice of Guidelines
3.3. Analytical Framework: Principles and Criteria
|The health of forests ecosystems should be maintained or enhanced||[4,9,14,15,16]|
|The adaptive capacity of forest-dependent communities should be ensured||[14,17,18]|
|Carbon and adaptation benefits should be monitored and verified||[19,20]|
|Initiatives should demonstrate the need to plan and expect adaptation outcomes|||
Principle 1: The Health Condition of Forest Ecosystems Should Be Maintained or Enhanced
Principle 2: The Adaptive Capacity of Forest-Dependent Communities Should Be Ensured
Principle 3: Carbon and Adaptation Benefits Are Both Monitored and Verified
Principle 4: Initiatives Should Demonstrate the Need to Plan and Expect Adaptation Outcomes
4.1. Guiding Forest Carbon Initiatives to Deliver Adaptation Outcomes
4.1.1. The Health Condition of Forests Ecosystems Should Be Maintained or Enhanced
4.1.2. The Adaptive Capacity of Communities Should Be Ensured
4.1.3. Carbon and Adaptation Benefits are Both Monitored and Verified
4.1.4. Demonstrating the Need to Plan and Expect Adaptation Outcomes
4.2. Operationalizing the Criteria for Planning Synergy Outcomes: Case of the Envira Amazonia Project, Acre, Brazil
|Standards/Mechanism/Fund||Criteria to Guarantee Healthy Forest Ecosystems|
|The Exposure of Forest and Other Systems to Climate Change Should Be Assessed||The Sensitivity of Forest and Other Systems to Climate Change Should Be Assessed||Adaptation Strategies for Forests and Other Related Systems Are Designed||The Environmental Impact Assessment of Projects and Programs Should Be Done||Strategies to Reduce Impacts or Enhance Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Should Be Designed|
|CCBA||+ **||+ **||+ **||+||+|
|Standards/Mechanism/Fund||Criteria for Ensuring the Adaptive Capacity of Communities|
|The livelihood Resources/Assets in Project and Program Areas Should Be Assessed||The Impacts of Projects and Programs on Livelihood Resources Should Be Assessed||Strategies to Enhance the Livelihood Resources of Communities Should Be Designed|
|Standards/Mechanisms/Fund||Verification and Monitoring of Synergy Outcomes|
|Verification and Monitoring of Carbon Values and Benefits||Verification and Monitoring of Adaptation Benefits|
|SOCIAL CARBON||0 **||+|
|Criteria||Case of Envira Project||Explanation|
|The exposure and sensitivity of forest and other systems to climate change are assessed||Yes||Project proponents studied the regional climate change and climate variability scenarios for Acre, Brazil. Risks related to intense rainfall events, losses in natural systems including rainforest and biodiversity, favorable conditions for the spread of forest fires were identified. Intense rainfall could lead to soil erosion and nutrient depletion, which will in turn increase the conversion of primary forest to agriculture land by communities.|
|Adaptation strategies for forests and other systems should be designed||Yes||Project proponents have designed adaptation strategies for forest biodiversity.|
|The environmental impact assessment of projects and programs should be done||Yes||Environmental and biodiversity impact assessment was carried out in the project area including the assessment of vulnerable trees species and endemic bird species.|
|Strategies to reduce impacts or enhance biodiversity and ecosystem services should be designed||Yes||Project proponents provided a description of measures to maintain and enhance forest biodiversity.|
|The livelihood resources/assets in project areas should be assessed||Yes||The social conditions of communities were assessed, taking into consideration all the different social groups.|
|The impacts of projects and programs on livelihood resources should be assessed||Yes||The project proponents carried out social impact assessment studies in the project areas.|
|Strategies to enhance the livelihood resources of communities should be designed||Yes||Related programs have been designed to make contributions to community wellbeing, which equally targets marginalized and vulnerable groups e.g., livelihood diversification, agriculture and livestock intensification, increase in the delivery of agriculture extension services.|
|Carbon values and benefits should be monitored and verified||Yes||Project proponents have developed a monitoring plan to monitor deforestation and change in carbon stocks in project areas.|
|Adaptation benefits should be monitored and verified||Yes||Project proponents also developed a livelihood and biodiversity monitoring plan to demonstrate net positive social and biodiversity benefits. In addition, project proponents have developed indicators to monitor and demonstrate that project activities leads to net positive adaptation benefits.|
|The population or social group vulnerable to climate change and suitable to carry out carbon sequestration activities should overlap||Yes||Carbon emission reduction objectives will be achieved by changing the forest and land use patterns of the population in the project area, which depends on the socioeconomic condition in the project area. On the other hand, the same population are vulnerable e.g., food insecurity and decreasing income levels.|
|The location vulnerable to climate change and suitable for mitigation activities should overlap||Yes||Intense rainfall events, losses in natural systems including rainforest and biodiversity, favorable conditions for the spread of forest fires, soil erosion where identified as climatic threats, thus a need for adaptation planning. On the other hand, the rich tropical forest in the project area has potentials to avoid tons of carbon emission.|
|Mitigation activities should increase the resilience of production systems||Yes||Keeping trees standing for carbon will sustain the provision of ecosystem services e.g., reduce soil erosion and nutrient depletion resulting from intense rainfall.|
|Mitigation activities should increase the adaptive capacity of social systems||Yes||Project activities e.g., training from agriculture extension services will reduce pressure on forest resources and as well increase agriculture and livestock intensification, and livelihood diversification. For example, communities will be trained on the extraction and processing of medicinal plants, improving pasture management, alternative use of fire for land preparation, etc.|
5.1. Opportunities for Planning and Promoting M + A Synergy Outcomes in Existing Guidelines for Building Forest Carbon
5.2. Incentivizing the Planning and Promotion of Adaptation Outcomes in Forest Carbon Initiatives
Conflicts of Interest
- Murdiyarso, D.; Robledo, C.; Brown, S.; Coto, O.; Drexhage, J.; Forner, C.; Kanninen, M.; Lipper, L.; North, N.; Rondón, M. Linkages between mitigation and adaptation in land-use change and forestry activities. In Tropical Forests and Adaptation to Climate Change: In Search of Synergies; Robledo, C., Kanninen, M., Pedroni, L., Eds.; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Vermeulen, S.J.; Campbell, B.M.; Ingram, J.S. Climate change and food systems. Ann. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2012, 37, 195–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; A Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Guariguata, M.R.; Cornelius, J.P.; Locatelli, B.; Forner, C.; Sánchez-Azofeifa, G.A. Mitigation needs adaptation: Tropical forestry and climate change. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2008, 13, 793–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ravindranath, N. Mitigation and adaptation synergy in forest sector. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2007, 12, 843–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duguma, L.A.; Wambugu, S.W.; Minang, P.A.; van Noordwijk, M. A systematic analysis of enabling conditions for synergy between climate change mitigation and adaptation measures in developing countries. Environ. Sci. Policy 2014, 42, 138–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Illman, J.; Halonen, M.; Rinne, P.; Huq, S.; Tveitdal, S. Scoping Study on Financing Adaptation-Mitigation Synergy Activities; Working Paper Copenhagen NORDEN: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Locatelli, B.; Evans, V.; Wardell, A.; Andrade, A.; Vignola, R. Forests and climate change in Latin America: Linking adaptation and mitigation. Forests 2011, 2, 431–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Matocha, J.; Schroth, G.; Hills, T.; Hole, D. Integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation through agroforestry and ecosystem conservation. In Agroforestry-The Future of Global Land Use; Springer: Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Wollenberg, E.; Springate-Baginski, O. Incentives+: How Can REDD Improve Well-Being in Forest Communities? CIFOR Infobrief: Bogor, Indonesia, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Verchot, L.; Noordwijk, M.; Kandji, S.; Tomich, T.; Ong, C.; Albrecht, A.; Mackensen, J.; Bantilan, C.; Anupama, K.V.; Palm, C. Climate change: Linking adaptation and mitigation through agroforestry. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 2007, 12, 901–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duguma, L.A.; Minang, P.A.; van Noordwijk, M. Climate change mitigation and adaptation in the land use sector: From complementarity to synergy. Environ. Manag. 2014, 54, 420–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Scherr, S.J.; Shames, S.; Friedman, R. From climate-smart agriculture to climate-smart landscapes. Agric. Food Secur. 2012, 1, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chenost, C.; Gardette, Y.M.; Demenois, J.; Grondard, N.; Perrier, M.; Wemaere, M. Bringing Forest Carbon Projects to the Market; UNEP: Paris, France, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Pramova, E.; Locatelli, B. Guidebook on Integrating Community-Based Adaptation into REDD+ Projects: Lessons from Indonesia and the Philippines; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Locatelli, B. Mitigation-Adaptation Synergies. Brochure; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Munroe, R.; Mant, R. REDD+ and Adaptation: Identifying Complementary Responses to Climate Change; UN-REDD Programme Infobrief: Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Brooks, N.; Adger, W.N. Assessing and Enhancing Adaptive Capacity; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Yohe, G.W. Mitigative capacity—The mirror image of adaptive capacity on the emissions side. Clim. Chang. 2001, 49, 247–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Locatelli, B.; Kanninen, M.; Brockhaus, M.; Colfer, C.J.P.; Murdiyarso, D.; Santoso, H. Facing an Uncertain Future: How Forest and People Can Adapt to Climate Change; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Twery, M.J.; Gottschalk, K. Forest health: Another fuzzy concept. J. For. 1996, 94, 20. [Google Scholar]
- Merger, E.; Dutschke, M.; Verchot, L. Options for REDD+ voluntary certification to ensure net GHG benefits, poverty alleviation, sustainable management of forests and biodiversity conservation. Forests 2011, 2, 550–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reyer, C.; Guericke, M.; Ibisch, P.L. Climate change mitigation via afforestation, reforestation and deforestation avoidance: And what about adaptation to environmental change? New For. 2009, 38, 15–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Climate Community Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA). Climate, Community; Biodiversity Standards, 3rd ed.; CCBA: Arlington, VA, USA, 2013; Available online: www.climate-standards.org (accessed on 15 May 2015).
- Plan Vivo. The Plan Vivo Standards for Community Payments for Ecosystems Services Programs; 2013 Version; The Plan Vivo Foundation: Edinburgh, UK, 2013; Available online: www.planvivo.org (accessed on 15 May 2015).
- Forest Carbon Partnership Facility. Carbon Fund Methodological Framework. Available online: www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/carbon-fund (accessed on 10 May 2015).
- REDD+ Social and Environmental Standard. REDD+ Social and Environmental Standard; Version 2; CCBA: Arlington, VA, USA, 2012; Available online: www.redd-standards.org (accessed on 14 May 2015).
- Richards, M.; Panfil, S.N. Social and Biodiversity Impact Assessment (SBIA) Manual for REDD+ Projects: Part 1—Core Guidance for Project Proponents. Climate, Community; Biodiversity Alliance; Forest Trends; Fauna; Flora International; Rainforest Alliance: Washington, DC, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- SOCIAL CARBON. SOCIAL CARBON Standard; Version 5.0; SOCIAL CARBON: Sao Paolo, Brazil, 2013; Available online: www.socialcarbon.org (accessed on 13 July 2015.).
- The Gold Standard Foundation. The Gold Standard Afforestation and Reforestation Requirements; Version 9.0; The Gold Standard Foundation: Geneva, Switzerland, 2013; Available online: www.goldstandard.org (accessed on 3 August 2015).
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Clean Development Mechanism Project Standard; Version 9.0; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2015; Available online: https://cdm.unfccc.int/ (accessed on 21 May 2015 ).
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Clean Development Mechanism A/R Large-Scale Consolidated Methodology: Afforestation and Reforestation of Lands Except Wetlands; Version 0.2; UNFCCC: Bonn, Germany, 2015; Available online: https://cdm.unfccc.int/methodologies/ARmethodologies/approved (accessed on 13 May 2015).
- Verified Carbon Standards (VCS). Verified Carbon Standard; Version 3.5; VCS: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; Available online: www.v-c-s.org (accessed on 14 May 2015).
- Verified Carbon Standards (VCS). Verified Carbon Standard Agriculture, Forestry and other Land Use Requirements; Version 3.4; VCS: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; Available online: http://www.v-c-s.org/sites/v-c-s.org/files/AFOLU%20Requirements,%20v3.4.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2015).
- Climate Community Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA). Project Design Document for the Enviria Amazonia Project. 2015. Available online: http://www.climate-standards.org/category/projects/ (accessed on 12 February 2015).
- Watkiss, P.; Benzie, M.; Klein, R.J. The complementarity and comparability of climate change adaptation and mitigation. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Chang. 2015, 6, 541–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kongsager, R.; Locatelli, B.; Chazarin, F. Addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation together: A global assessment of agriculture and forestry projects. Environ. Manag. 2015, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Thomas, S.; Dargusch, P.; Harrison, S.; Herbohn, J. Why are there so few afforestation and reforestation Clean Development Mechanism projects? Land Use Policy 2010, 27, 880–887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robledo, C.; Kanninen, M.; Pedroni, L. Tropical Forests and Adaptation to Climate Change: In Search of Synergies; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Previous Submissions from Parties to SBSTA. 2012. Available online: http://unfccc.int/documentation/submissions_from_parties/items/8017.php (accessed on 15 May 2015).
- United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Submissions JMA. 2014. Available online: http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/Lists/OSPSubmissionUpload/39_97_130566389085107524-SUBMISSION%20JMA%2026.09.2014.pdF (accessed on 21 May 2015).
- Elias, P.; Leonard, S.; Cando, L.; Fedele, G.; Gaveau, D.; Locatelli, B.; Martius, C.; Murdiyarso, D.; Sunderlin, W.; Verchot, L. Synergies Across A REDD+ Landscape: Non-Carbon Benefits, Joint Mitigation and Adaptation, and an Analysis of Submissions to the SBSTA; CIFOR: Bogor, Indonesia, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Katerere, Y.; Fobissie, K.; Annies, A. Non-Carbon Benefits of REDD+: Options for Assessment and Incentives; A Technical Paper Prepared for the African Group of Negotiators; CDKN and ACPC-UNECA: London, UK, 2015; In Press. [Google Scholar]
- Forest Carbon Partnerships Facility. Update on Pricing Approach. 2014. Available online: https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/sites/fcp/files/2014/MArch/CF9%205.%20Update%20on%20pricing%20approach.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2105).
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Chia, E.L.; Fobissie, K.; Kanninen, M. Exploring Opportunities for Promoting Synergies between Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Forest Carbon Initiatives. Forests 2016, 7, 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7010024
Chia EL, Fobissie K, Kanninen M. Exploring Opportunities for Promoting Synergies between Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Forest Carbon Initiatives. Forests. 2016; 7(1):24. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7010024Chicago/Turabian Style
Chia, Eugene L., Kalame Fobissie, and Markku Kanninen. 2016. "Exploring Opportunities for Promoting Synergies between Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation in Forest Carbon Initiatives" Forests 7, no. 1: 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/f7010024