REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation

This report summarizes a capacity-building workshop held in Hanoi, Vietnam, from May 18–20, 2011, focused on transitioning REDD+ from international negotiation to national implementation. The workshop, delivered by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the ASB Partnership for the Tropical Forest Margins, brought together negotiators and stakeholders from 13 Asian countries to discuss safeguards, measurement reporting and verification (MRV), the role of agriculture as a driver of deforestation, and financing mechanisms following the Cancun Agreements.

• Safeguard systems for REDD+ should be based on transparency and accountability, with information and reports made publicly available via the Internet. Implementation should be country-based and flexible to reflect national circumstances rather than being enforced externally or viewed as an additionality.
• To achieve multiple benefits beyond the 'do no harm' principle, REDD+ requires equitable benefits sharing, which necessitates the clarification of land tenure and property rights over carbon. Forests should be valued for ecosystem services, water, and biodiversity to leverage higher credit prices and additional funding.
• Effective MRV systems require technical definitions and procedures for reference levels (RL) and reference emissions levels (REL). There is a critical need for capacity building in technology transfer (such as remote sensing and GIS) and the involvement of indigenous peoples and local communities to 'ground truth' top-down measurements.
• Agriculture should be addressed as a driver of deforestation rather than being integrated into REDD+ at present. It should be approached through a lens that links mitigation and adaptation, specifically considering its role in food security and poverty alleviation for smallholder farmers.
• There is a tension regarding the linkage between REDD+ and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs). While synergies exist and many developing countries include REDD activities in NAMA submissions, many countries oppose a formal link in negotiations to avoid risking REDD progress due to the less developed nature of NAMA discussions.
• Financing for REDD+ must be transparent, equitable, and accessible, utilizing a mix of public and private sources and both market and non-market mechanisms. Funding should specifically facilitate the use of local domestic consultants and national experts.

APA

Boyle, J., Murphy, D., & Bernard, F. (2011). REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_hanoi_2011_workshop_report.pdf

Chicago

Boyle, Jessica, Deborah Murphy, and Florence Bernard. REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2011. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_hanoi_2011_workshop_report.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Boyle |first1=Jessica |last2=Murphy |first2=Deborah |last3=Bernard |first3=Florence |title=REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=2011 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_hanoi_2011_workshop_report.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{boyle2011redd, author = {Boyle, Jessica and Murphy, Deborah and Bernard, Florence}, title = {{REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2011}, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_hanoi_2011_workshop_report.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }