Dialogue on Forests: Talking the Talk

EKO ECO Guest Blogger on November 12, 2009 Comment

By: Kelly Moore Brands, Biodiversity Research Assistant for Ecosystem Marketplace

A few weeks ago, the second Dialogue on Forests, Governance & Climate Change hosted by Chatham House, the Rights and Resources Initiative and World Resources Institute was held in Washington, D.C. The conference focused on policies for improving forest governance, including lessons learned from the UNFCCC negotiations, and particularly on REDD initiatives and how they might be affected by US climate policy. Information on the event, including presentations, can be found here.

At the session entitled "Making it happen: learning from successful initiatives to slow deforestation, restore forests and promote the rights of forest communities," Yuba Raj Bhusal, Secretary of Nepal's Ministry of Forests, spoke about the good examples that exist for reducing deforestation - Nepal's forests have been well-managed for decades, if not centuries, with the result that almost 40% of its land is protected under a national forest scheme, and almost 25% of those forests are under community management. But is Nepal's situation replicable?
This question was posed, but I'm not sure it got answered. Nepal's landscape is notoriously inaccessible to markets - if the Himalaya were an easy place to get to, would those forests still exist? My guess is no. Without knocking Nepal too much (it has been my favorite place in the world to visit), its inaccessibility also keeps its people poor. Without the finances to bring in chainsaws and bulldozers, deforestation is kept to a minimum.

Nepal's example is interesting because although the traditional use rights of local communities are recognized by the government, a key to sustainable forest management, according to the Secretary, the government still technically owns the land. And what happens when REDD creates an incentive to "protect" those forests and gain funds from carbon revenue? The "traditional use rights" of those communities who depend on the forest could go right out the window. Those issues are being discussed now between Nepal's government and the communities.

But a new study from the World Bank, presented by Ken Chomitz at the conference, could provide evidence for keeping those rights in the hands of the people. The study looked at the effectiveness of protected areas in preventing deforestation. Because REDD is the Next New Thing that Will Save Us All (right?), it might help to take a look first at what actually works to reduce deforestation (and what doesn't). Although the data aren't perfect (they mapped only the incidence of fires in protected areas, multi-use, and indigenous reserves in tropical forests and weren't able to account for degradation), the results show that areas under indigenous control are much more effective at reducing or preventing deforestation than previously thought. In fact, according to the study, tropical forests are less likely to be deforested when they are under indigenous control than when they are under strict protection or sustainable use management.

So will REDD reduce deforestation more than putting forests in the hands of indigenous groups and traditional management? We'll never know until it happens. Let's just hope this study is fresh in the minds of the decision-makers in Copenhagen as they negotiate REDD's rules.