Given the negotiations over in Mexico about climate change right now, here’s a link to an interesting blog post, entitled: “The Top 10: What’s wrong with REDD?“.
REDD is, according to Wikipedia: “…a set of steps designed to use market/financial incentives in order to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases from deforestation and forest degradation.”
Here’s the first five objections to the current plans, from the Climate Justice Research Project at Dartmouth College:
1. Calculation of offsets is highly sensitive to choice of baseline methods and data availability, raising the potential for fraudulent “hot air” resulting from corruption
2. There is a severe lack of environmental safeguards in place to protect affected communities or to avoid biodiversity loss beyond project boundaries
3. REDD forest definitions can encourage plantation forestry, leading to mono-cropping and food insecurity
4.There is a severe lack of genuine community participation in project planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation
5. A lack of consultation with people affected by REDD projects means individuals affected often do not receive benefits and are further impoverished
The other five are here.
I’m not really sure what I think about REDD so far. Like a lot of these big picture ideas, I suppose it’s all about how REDD is monitored and is accountable and transparent, to use the same old cliches.
From what I gather about the Clean Development Mechanism, it’s always struggled a bit with those notions in places.
(Google has just released a new environmental mapping/data tool that is worth a look)