Kelly Levin

The Climate Regime as Global Forest Governance: Can Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) Initiatives Pass a ‘Dual Effectiveness’ Test?

SUMMARY For two generations, policy makers, environmental groups, industry associations and other stakeholders have given global forest deterioration concerted and sustained attention. Widespread disappointment over the failure to achieve a binding global forest convention at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit has been followed by frustration over the relatively limited impact to date of post-Rio forest-related global policy initiatives, including intergovernmental and non-state efforts. This paper argues that “reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation” (REDD) initiatives will yield significant impacts only if decision makers are committed to a results-based “dual effectiveness” test, addressing both forest degradation and global emissions reductions, and involving significant and measurable global-scale targets. While the importance of such a commitment may appear obvious, lessons from past forest and climate efforts suggest that greater results-based accountability is needed to overcome short-term and narrowly defined organizational and national self-interest.

Building the Forest-Climate Bandwagon: REDD+ and the Logic of Problem Amelioration

For those championing an international institutional solution to climate change, the forest-climate linkage through reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and forest enhancement (REDD+) may be one of the most promising strategic linkages to date. Following a series of forest-focused interventions that did not live up to their promise, global forest politics have now, through REDD+ deliberations, been institutionally subsumed into the climate regime. We argue that to realize its potential, REDD+ policy mechanisms must be careful to move away from the commodification of forest stewardship that reinforces short-term strategic positions of powerful producing and consuming interests whose current activities are the culprits of global forest decline. To achieve such an outcome, we argue that institutions must develop on the basis of a “logic of problem amelioration” in which the rationale for achieving clearly defined environmental and social goals is rendered transparent. This could be achieved through the formalization of a “dual effectiveness test” in which interventions are evaluated for their potential to simultaneously ameliorate both global climate change and forest degradation.

National GHG emissions reduction pledges and 2°C: comparison of studies

This article provides further detail on expected global GHG emission levels in 2020, based on the Emissions Gap Report (United Nations Environment Programme, December 2010), assuming the emission reduction proposals in the Copenhagen Accord and Cancun Agreements are met. Large differences are found in the results of individual groups owing to uncertainties in current and projected emission estimates and in the interpretation of the reduction proposals. Regardless of these uncertainties, the pledges for 2020 are expected to deliver emission levels above those that are consistent with a 2°C limit. This emissions gap could be narrowed through implementing the more stringent conditional pledges, minimizing the use of ‘lenient’ credits from forests and surplus emission units, avoiding double-counting of offsets and implementing measures beyond current pledges. Conversely, emission reduction gains from countries moving from their low to high ambition pledges could be more than offset by the use of ‘lenient’ land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) credits and surplus emissions units, if these were used to the maximum. Laying the groundwork for faster emission reduction rates after 2020 appears to be crucial in any case.

Tradeoffs in the Policy Process in Advancing Climate Change Adaptation: The Case of Australia's Great Eastern Ranges Initiative

Abstract The first continental-scale climate change adaptation strategy for biodiversity conservation has been adopted in Australia. The Great Eastern Ranges Initiative (GERI), aims to bolster the resilience of biodiversity by enhancing connectivity in eastern Australia for species migration in a changing climate. The Initiative is now being carried out on the ground, and is among the earliest national-level adaptation strategies for biodiversity conservation advanced by policymakers. In this paper we explore the implications of the rapid progression of the Initiative through the policy process, providing insights useful for decision makers advancing adaptation policies elsewhere in the future.