REDD myths

This executive summary by Friends of the Earth International critiques the proposed Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing countries (REDD) mechanisms. The document argues that REDD focuses on reducing emissions rather than stopping deforestation, potentially rewarding polluters and industrial agriculture while marginalizing Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities. It warns that funding REDD through carbon offsetting undermines global climate mitigation efforts and risks creating social and environmental harm, such as the replacement of natural forests with monoculture plantations.

• REDD is not designed to stop deforestation entirely, but rather to reduce emissions from it. This approach allows for the possibility that deforestation could return to unacceptable levels after a period of deferment, which undermines claims that REDD benefits biodiversity.
• The inclusion of plantations in the definition of forests within REDD is problematic because monoculture tree plantations store only 20% of the carbon found in intact natural forests and cause significant social, economic, and environmental issues.
• Funding REDD through international carbon offsetting may negate climate change mitigation by allowing industrialized nations to avoid reducing their own fossil fuel consumption and diverting attention from the root causes of deforestation.
• REDD poses significant risks to Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities, including the potential for forced displacement, the loss of customary land rights as forests become commodified, and the exclusion of those who already maintain low deforestation rates from receiving incentives.
• The 'opportunity cost' approach used to calculate REDD costs may result in public funds, such as those from the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, being used to pay those currently engaged in deforestation (the polluters).
• There are significant methodological challenges in implementing REDD, specifically regarding 'leakage' (where deforestation shifts to other areas) and the difficulty of measuring forest degradation, which is particularly high in the Congo Basin.
• Friends of the Earth International proposes replacing REDD with a mechanism to stop deforestation entirely, funded by grants rather than loans or carbon markets. Suggested funding sources include taxing fossil fuel use and diverting fossil fuel energy subsidies in industrialized countries.

APA

rawles, S. (2009). REDD myths. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/25-foei-climate-redd-ex-summ-eng-lr.pdf

Chicago

rawles, simon. REDD myths. Friends of the Earth International, 2009. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/25-foei-climate-redd-ex-summ-eng-lr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=rawles |first1=simon |title=REDD myths |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=December 2009 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/25-foei-climate-redd-ex-summ-eng-lr.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{rawles2009redd, author = {rawles, simon}, title = {{REDD myths}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2009}, month = dec, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/25-foei-climate-redd-ex-summ-eng-lr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }