| Session Title: Climate Change and Avoided Deforestation: Challenges of Evaluation |
| Multipaper Session 613 to be held in Wekiwa 9 on Friday, Nov 13, 3:35 PM to 4:20 PM |
| Sponsored by the Environmental Program Evaluation TIG |
| Chair(s): |
| Nancy MacPherson, Rockefeller Foundation, nmacpherson@rockfound.org |
| Discussant(s): |
| Aaron Zazuata, Global Environment Facility, azazueta@thegef.org |
| Abstract: The IPCCC and the Stern Report have placed strong emphasis on reducing rates of deforestation and degradation (REDD) in tropical countries as way to sequester carbon and mitigate climate change. Numerous schemes have emerged to pilot REDD in preparation for the COP 15 meetings to be held in Copenhagen in December 2009. Concurrent growth of Global Programs and Partnerships (GPPs) in the last decade to deliver Global Public Goods in environment and various other sectors (e.g. health, agriculture and finance among others) has resulted in the development of internationally recognized evaluation principles and standards to assess results. The papers in this session will discuss peculiar challenges in evaluating forest carbon sequestration programs as a way to deliver the Global Public Good of climate change. The session will outline steps needed to avoid past mistakes and design an evaluation framework to achieve credible measurement of outcomes. |
| Carbon Sequestration From Avoided Deforestation as a Complex Global Public Good |
| Uma Lele, Independent Consultant, uma@umalele.org |
| Alain Karsenty, CIRAD, akarsenty@free.fr |
| Benjamin Singer, CIRAD, benjamin.singer@gmail.com |
| Carbon Sequestration from Reducing Rates of Deforestation and Degradation REDD) faces a variety of design, implementation and evaluation issues: Contested property rights of public forest lands in developing countries, competing pressures on land use from population growth, food and agriculture, poverty, urbanization, transport and international trade in agriculture, forestry and energy products as well as governance issues of illegality, decentralization and voice of poor communities. The paper will illustrate the issues of property rights, policies, institutional choices as they relate to the measurement of baselines and subsequent changes in outcomes in deforestation as well as the attribution issues. It will contrast these challenges of public goods delivery of carbon sequestration from reduced deforestation, by comparing them with the challenges faced in other sectors, e.g. control of communicable diseases. It will explore its implications and lessons. |
| Critical Choices in Reductions of Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) Architecture, Their Design and Evaluation Implications |
| Alain Karsenty, CIRAD, akarsenty@free.fr |
| Benjamin Singer, CIRAD, benjamin.singer@smail.com |
| There are competing REDD architectures and philosophies including (a) Market-based and centralized scheme ("mainstream" approach), (b) International fund and centralized: countries rewarded with money ("Brazilian proposal"),(c) Market-based and decentralized: certified projects get directly carbon credits, along with countries ("nested" approach),(d) International fund for financing (sectoral and extra-sectoral) policies & measures, and country-broad Payments for Environmental Services (PES) schemes. Each faces different choices with regard to baselines and measurement, opportunity costs and benefits, issues of leakages, risks, their measurements, financing and outcomes and the challenges vary at the local, national and global levels. These will be discussed in this paper with implications for evaluation theory and practice. |