REDD+ after Cancun: Moving from negotiation to implementation

The report details a workshop in Hanoi focused on the implementation of REDD+ (Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation). Key discussions centered on the need for flexible, country-based safeguard information systems, the integration of local and indigenous knowledge into Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) processes, and the strategic handling of agriculture as a driver of deforestation rather than a direct part of REDD+ at this stage. It emphasizes the importance of transparency, equitable benefit-sharing, and capacity building to bridge the gap between international policy and national action.

• Safeguard systems should be based on national circumstances and implemented by countries rather than being externally enforced. The workshop suggested that international guidelines could provide general principles that countries adapt, ensuring that safeguards are not viewed as an 'additionality'.
• Effective benefit-sharing in REDD+ requires the clarification of land tenure and property rights over carbon. To move beyond a 'do no harm' approach and achieve multiple benefits, activities must involve a wide range of stakeholders, including the private sector and indigenous peoples.
• MRV systems require a combination of 'top-down' technical measurements and 'bottom-up' participatory processes involving local communities and indigenous peoples to ensure accuracy. There is a critical need for capacity building in technology transfer, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems.
• Agriculture should be treated as a driver of deforestation rather than being integrated directly into REDD+ at this time. This approach prevents the stalling of REDD+ negotiations while allowing agriculture to be addressed through a lens that combines both mitigation and adaptation, particularly regarding food security and poverty alleviation.
• 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, some parties oppose a formal link in negotiations to avoid risking REDD+ progress due to the less developed nature of NAMA discussions.

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} }