Posted by: on

From Wednesday 22 April 2020 onwards, you are invited to join the Online Dgroups Discussion on: Emissions Reduction Titling and Benefit-Sharing Arrangements

 

 

The Online Dgroups discussion, focusing this time on Emissions Reduction Titling and Benefit-Sharing Arrangements will build on a previous fruitful exchange on analyzing ownership rights on carbon some years ago. 

This time the topic will be expanded by taking a closer look at benefit-sharing arrangements and schemes that are needed to implement REDD+ at different scales,  while also keeping in mind the implications that ER rights might have in the identification of beneficiaries.     

As you know,  REDD+ is based on the right to benefit from (or to be compensated for) reducing forest-based GHG emissions, either through fund-based payments, carbon market payments, or a combination of these. However, who can claim this right? Should an entitlement to payment depend on the so-called "carbon rights" or ER title? It raises a number of legal issues, including how to define and allocate carbon rights or transfer emissions reduction title in line with the national REDD+ frameworks.

As a precondition to access payments, it is necessary to identify which party (government, regional entities, indigenous peoples, landowners, etc.) will receive what type of benefit (monetary, non-monetary), and to establish how these payments are to be transparently distributed.

So, clarity on carbon rights/ER titling and on how the benefits will be split is important to stimulate investment in REDD+ since investors require a stable enabling environment and national stakeholders will feel reassured if their rights and actions are duly rewarded.    

In light of this evolving context, FAO  and other partner organizations are aiming to support developing countries to comply with the essential requirements in order to access REDD+ finance opportunities under different modalities.  This support takes into consideration the REDD+ safeguards and the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups’ rights. 

To start the discussion, we will highly appreciate if based on your experience you could respond to one or more of the following questions: 

  • Can we say that there is a common understanding of who owns or administers ER titling in your country? If not, what are the major challenges related to this issue? Are the different parties in agreement on who should be entitled to ER?
  • What do you think can be the best measures/strategies to avoid any risk of potential claims by third parties or double counting, if ERs right is not defined?    
  • What do you think should be the eligibility criteria to be considered as a beneficiary, if the government owns ER and commits to redistribute the benefits to all relevant stakeholders?   
  • How to incentive the private sector to adhere to a  jurisdictional approach? What should be his role in the design and implementation of a benefit-sharing plan? 

To participate in the discussion you have to be a member of the Dgroups on Forest Governance and REDD+ - joining the groups is free and can be done through creating a profile with the following link: https://dgroups.org/fao/law-for-redd-plus/ 

Thank you in advance for your active participation, we hope that these exchanges and lessons learned can be useful for our community.

Last modified by: on