IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00413586.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Climate Change Mitigation: Should "Avoided Deforestation" (REDD) Be Rewarded?

Author

Listed:
  • Romain Pirard

    (CERDI - Centre d'Études et de Recherches sur le Développement International - UdA - Université d'Auvergne - Clermont-Ferrand I - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • A. Karsenty

    (Cirad-PERSYST - Département Performances des systèmes de production et de transformation tropicaux - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

Abstract

The widely debated mechanism "avoided deforestation" (REDD), would benefit developing countries that reduce their deforestation rates, thereby generating at least two positive impacts : (i) a greater effectiveness of the global climate change mitigation efforts, and (ii) expected positive side effects on, e.g., biodiversity conservation. Several proposals were designed for the mechanism, which implementation is challenging: firstly, sophisticated tools available to measure the reduction of emissions (e.g. remote sensing) might be ineffective when combined with national baselines; secondly, predictive baselines lack accuracy because of insufficient knowledge concerning the causes of deforestation, and the unpredictable evolution of key variables (e.g. agricultural commodity prices); thirdly, historical baselines lack legitimacy because they only refer to past trends; and fourthly, a reduction in deforestation rates is hardly connectable to specific public policies. Based on our analysis, we recommend not promoting any mechanism within the Kyoto Protocol based on financial rewards for assumed national emissions reductions from deforestation. Two reasons justify our perspective: not only would the mechanism probably generate fake reductions ("hot air"), but undesirable side effects would also appear. Instead, we encourage use of funds made available as carbon finance (broadly speaking) for reinforcing multi- and bilateral instruments that relate to forest management in developing countries, with a focus on the correction of governance deficiencies. In addition, we support any initiative that mitigates perverse incentives from public policies in tropical and industrialized countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Romain Pirard & A. Karsenty, 2009. "Climate Change Mitigation: Should "Avoided Deforestation" (REDD) Be Rewarded?," Post-Print hal-00413586, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00413586
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Doupe, Patrick, 2014. "The costs of error in setting reference rates for reduced deforestation," Working Papers 249497, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    2. Culas, Richard J., 2012. "REDD and forest transition: Tunneling through the environmental Kuznets curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 44-51.
    3. Richard Dudley, 2010. "A little REDD model to quickly compare possible baseline and policy scenarios for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 53-69, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00413586. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.