The REDD Negotiations: Moving into Copenhagen

The document examines the technical and political challenges of integrating REDD into global climate policy, focusing on the scope of activities (from REDD to REDD++), financing mechanisms, measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) standards, and institutional governance. It highlights the diversity of national circumstances, particularly in Africa, and the need for a phased implementation approach that balances equity with efficiency.

• There is a lack of consensus on the scope of REDD, with options ranging from basic RED (reducing emissions from gross deforestation) to REDD++ (including all land cover transitions affecting carbon storage, such as agroforests and plantations).
• The definition of 'forest' remains a critical and unresolved issue; the UNFCCC's current definition allows for counter-intuitive outcomes, such as replacing natural forests with oil palm not being considered deforestation.
• A proposed three-phase implementation approach for REDD involves: 1) national action plans and capacity building, 2) implementation of policies and measures, and 3) results-based measures subject to MRV.
• Financing is a central point of contention, with debates over whether to use a fund-based approach, a market-based approach, or a combination. Developing countries generally prefer a COP-administered fund to ensure equity and support for early capacity building.
• Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) requires establishing reference emission levels (RELs), but there is disagreement over whether these should be based on historical emissions or futuristic baselines, and who should approve them.
• Institutional governance is divided between those favoring new UNFCCC-led institutions to avoid the perceived failures of the World Bank and GEF, and developed countries who prefer using existing multilateral agencies.
• The economic viability of REDD depends on addressing opportunity costs—the profits lost by not converting forests to agriculture—which can be volatile due to international commodity prices and food security issues.

APA

Minang, P. A., Jungcurt, S., Meadu, V., & Murphy, D. (2009). The REDD Negotiations: Moving into Copenhagen. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_negotiations.pdf

Chicago

Minang, Peter Akong, Stefan Jungcurt, Vanessa Meadu, and Deborah Murphy. The REDD Negotiations: Moving into Copenhagen. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2009. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_negotiations.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Minang |first1=Peter Akong |last2=Jungcurt |first2=Stefan |last3=Meadu |first3=Vanessa |last4=Murphy |first4=Deborah |title=The REDD Negotiations: Moving into Copenhagen |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=November 2009 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_negotiations.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{minang2009redd, author = {Minang, Peter Akong and Jungcurt, Stefan and Meadu, Vanessa and Murphy, Deborah}, title = {{The REDD Negotiations: Moving into Copenhagen}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2009}, month = nov, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/redd_negotiations.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }