Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+)

The document provides a comprehensive overview of the safeguards and standards associated with Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+), focusing on the UNFCCC's Cancun Agreements and other frameworks like UN-REDD, REDD+ SES, and the World Bank's FCPF. It examines the risks REDD+ poses to forest-dependent communities—such as land grabbing and displacement—and the opportunities it offers for tenure reform and gender equality. The guide emphasizes the importance of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) and full stakeholder participation, while detailing the challenges of translating high-level international principles into enforceable national laws. It also provides practical advice for communities to engage in advocacy, monitor national processes, and utilize grievance mechanisms.

• The UNFCCC's Cancun Agreements establish seven safeguards that countries implementing REDD+ should 'promote and support', covering areas such as national forest governance, respect for Indigenous peoples' rights, and the prevention of emission displacement.
• While the UNFCCC safeguards are broad, other frameworks provide more specificity: REDD+ SES is described as the most detailed overall, while the World Bank's FCPF provides the most detailed guidance on displacement and Indigenous peoples, though it only requires consultation rather than consent.
• REDD+ creates a 'paradox' where the financial valuation of forest carbon may lead to the dispossession of communities, potentially causing economic, cultural, or physical displacement and exacerbating land grabbing.
• Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) is an internationally recognized right for Indigenous peoples and a best practice for local communities, but its implementation in REDD+ is often hindered by insufficient time for decision-making and a lack of accessible information.
• Carbon rights are a critical but poorly defined aspect of REDD+; there is no legal regime for their allocation under the UNFCCC, meaning they are determined by national legislation or individual contracts, which significantly impacts how benefits are shared.
• The integration of gender considerations is requested by the Cancun Agreements, but the mandate is considered weak because gender equality and equity are not explicitly stated in the UNFCCC REDD+ safeguards.
• National safeguards development processes are often slow and fraught with difficulty, as seen in Panama where the National Coordinating Body of Indigenous Peoples withdrew from the UN-REDD programme due to a lack of effective participation and non-recognition of representative institutions.
• In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, civil society groups withdrew from the national REDD+ process in 2012, citing dysfunctional governance and a lack of budget for community-level consultations.

APA

Natural Justice (n.d.). Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/REDD_SAFEGUARDS_English.pdf

Chicago

Natural Justice. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). n.d. https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/REDD_SAFEGUARDS_English.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Natural Justice |title=Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) |url=https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/REDD_SAFEGUARDS_English.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{naturaljusticendreducing, author = {{Natural Justice}}, title = {{Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+)}}, institution = {Natural Justice}, url = {https://naturaljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/REDD_SAFEGUARDS_English.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }