mitos en torno a REDD

The report critiques REDD, asserting that it is designed to reduce rather than stop deforestation and may incentivize the replacement of natural forests with carbon-poor plantations. It warns that financing REDD through carbon markets could allow industrialized nations to avoid reducing fossil fuel emissions, undermine national sovereignty in developing countries, and lead to the displacement of indigenous communities. The author argues that REDD's 'opportunity cost' calculations often benefit polluters and that the mechanism is susceptible to market volatility and corporate lobbying. The document advocates for a non-market, grant-based funding system managed by the UN, focused on ecosystem justice, the recognition of indigenous land rights, and the elimination of the underlying drivers of deforestation.

• REDD is designed to reduce the rate of deforestation rather than stop it entirely, which may allow deforestation to continue at unacceptable levels and risk forest dieback (acronecrosis).
• The inclusion of plantations in the definition of forests allows for the replacement of natural forests with monocultures, which store only 20% of the carbon found in intact natural forests.
• Financing REDD through carbon offsets may increase net atmospheric CO2 by allowing industrialized nations to continue using fossil fuels while claiming offsets from forests, which are part of a shorter-term surface carbon cycle.
• Market-based REDD mechanisms risk marginalizing indigenous peoples and local communities, potentially leading to the loss of ancestral lands and the denial of access to forest resources, particularly for women.
• The 'opportunity cost' methodology used to calculate REDD costs often includes profits from commodity exporters, effectively meaning that funds would be used to pay polluters.
• REDD faces significant methodological challenges, including 'leakage' (where deforestation simply moves to another region) and the difficulty of accurately monitoring and verifying forest degradation.
• The World Bank's involvement in carbon financing is criticized as contradictory given its continued and increasing funding for fossil fuel projects.
• The report proposes replacing REDD with a UN-managed, transparent, and participatory funding mechanism based on grants rather than loans or carbon markets.

APA

Hall, R. (2008). mitos en torno a REDD. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/17-foei-forest-full-esp-lr.pdf

Chicago

Hall, Ronnie. mitos en torno a REDD. Friends of the Earth International, 2008. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/17-foei-forest-full-esp-lr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Hall |first1=Ronnie |title=mitos en torno a REDD |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=December 2008 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/17-foei-forest-full-esp-lr.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{hall2008mitos, author = {Hall, Ronnie}, title = {{mitos en torno a REDD}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2008}, month = dec, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/17-foei-forest-full-esp-lr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }