Global warming

Reducing emissions from
deforestation and forest
degradation in developing
countries: A cautionary tale from
Australia
Policy Brief No. 12
April 2010
ISSN 1836-9014
Andrew Macintosh, Associate Director, ANU Centre for Climate Law and Policy
A cautionary tale
1
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Dr Phil Gibbons and Dr Richard Denniss for their comments on an earlier draft of
this paper. Anyerrors remain the responsibility of the author.
Abstract
If a binding agreement can be reached on a post-2012 international climate regime, it is likely
to include a market-based instrument for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest
degradation (REDD) and enhancing forest sinks in developing countries (collectively known
as ‘REDD-plus’). Under such a scheme, countries that reduce netREDD emissions below a
pre-set baseline would receive credits that could be sold in carbon markets and used by
purchasing nations to meet their international mitigation obligations. This paper draws on the
Australian experience with deforestation to identify some of the issues that might obstruct
progress on REDD. For the past 20 years, Australia has had the highest rate of deforestation
inthe developed world—370,000 ha of ‘Kyoto forests’ were cleared annually between 1990
and 2007, resulting in the emission of ~80 MtCO2-e/yr. It is also the only developed country
that will rely on reduced deforestation emissions as the primary way of meeting its quantified
emission reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol. Australia’s approach to deforestation
issues, both domestically andinternationally, provides valuable insights into the difficulties a
REDD-plus scheme might encounter in the future.
1 Introduction
The Copenhagen Climate Conference held in December 2009 was expected to produce a
binding legal agreement on a post-2012 international climate regime. This did not occur and
the only major output from the conference was a political agreement, the Copenhagen
Accord.1The failure to reach a binding legal outcome was primarily a result of differences
between the major emitting countries on mitigation commitments. But while these issues
could not be resolved, there were clear signs of progress on an international scheme to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) and
enhance forest sinks in developing countries(collectively known as ‘REDD-plus’).2
If an international REDD-plus scheme is introduced, it is likely to include a market-linked
component under which countries that reduce net REDD emissions below a pre-set baseline
(or reference level) would receive credits that could be sold in carbon markets and used by
purchasing nations to meet their international mitigation obligations. As offsets, REDDcredits
would not normally result in a net reduction in global emissions; they would merely redistribute
them. The primary aim of the scheme would be to lower abatement costs and promote
sustainable development in developing countries, not unlike the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM).
The pros and cons of market-linked REDD schemes have been extensively debated in theliterature.3 Supporters have focused on the potential for these schemes to lower abatement
1 UNFCCC Secretariat, Copenhagen Accord. Decision -/CP15, 2009.
http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/cop_15/application/pdf/cop15_cph_auv.pdf.
2 See Copenhagen Accord, paragraphs 6 and 8; FCCC/SBSTA/2009/L.19/Add.1; and
FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/L.7/Add.6.
3 K Karousakis and J Corfee-Morlot, Financing Mechanisms to ReduceEmissions from Deforestation:
Issues in Design and Implementation. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
Paris, France, 2007;
M Skutsch, N Bird, E Trines, M Dutschke, P Frumhoff, B de Jong, P van Laake, O Masera and D
Murdiyarso, ‘Clearing the way for reducing emissions from tropical deforestation’. Environmental Science
Policy 10: 2007, pp. 322–334;
J Eliasch, Climate...