**2. The origins of REDD and the ongoing process**

Multilateral agreements and conventions under the auspices of the United Nations are largely responsible for the resolution of many environmental problems that are of the global magnitude. This includes the convention on the Law of the sea protecting the open seas from various forms of abuses, the convention on trade on endangered species, the Montreal Protocol dealing with the elimination of substances that deplete the ozone layer,

biodiversity" (Huberman, 2007). In this regard, sustainable forest management (SFM) in developing countries must be emphasized as an essential element for the attainment of the goals of REDD. Of the three major tropical forests regions in the world – Amazonia, Congo Basin and South-east Asia – the Congo Basin in Central Africa is the most impoverished. The implementation of REDD scheme in this region through SFM could create incentives for poverty alleviation while at the same time limiting deforestation and forest degradation thus making meaningful contribution to the fight against climate change. Although some countries in this region, since the conception of the scheme in 2007, have made significant progress in the preparedness process for a post-2012 REDD mechanism, it should be noted that mostly pilot projects have been carried out so far, with most of them marred by many difficult and controversial issues that need to be addressed before actual implementation can begin. Among the issues to be addressed are: 1) the problem of leakage. That is, the ability to control emissions beyond project and country boundaries, 2) the problem of determining the base-line. That is, how much deforestation has been avoided and how much deforestation is too much deforestation, 3) the problem of potential non-permanence. That is, how to deal with emissions resulting from natural and human causes at a later date, 4) the problem of price. That is, how the demand for carbon credits influences supply by REDD, and 5) the problem of tenure and usage rights (ownership of the land, and illegal logging control), weak economic, political and legal structures, and poor industrial practices

Efforts to address these problems have been largely focused on technical issues (problems 1- 4), while not much attention has been given to the socio-economic and development needs (problem 5) of forest-dependent communities. With millions of people in the Congo Basin depending on the forest for their livelihoods, the importance of fully integrating the socioeconomic and development needs of forest communities into REDD's agenda in this region cannot be undermined. As David Huberman of International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) observes "the success of REDD will ultimately depend on how well it contributes to the development needs of forest-dependent communities" (Huberman, 2007). In this regard, this chapter is aim at explaining the challenges of REDD beyond the technical problem area. It focuses on the socio-economic, political and legal challenges of implementing the REDD scheme in two countries in the Congo Basin in Central Africa – Cameroon and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The chapter critically reviews different factors leading to deforestation in these countries and explore potential pathways towards SFM under REDD. We argue that an architecture based on socio-economic structure that is incentive driven (financial incentive), is more likely to achieve the goals of REDD in the Congo Basin than a technical-base architecture driven by market instruments. The methodological approach to this chapter is narrative, descriptive, and analytic review of documents and empirical data from various sources inspired by debates and events related

to REDD in the Congo Basin in general and in Cameroon and DRC in particular.

Multilateral agreements and conventions under the auspices of the United Nations are largely responsible for the resolution of many environmental problems that are of the global magnitude. This includes the convention on the Law of the sea protecting the open seas from various forms of abuses, the convention on trade on endangered species, the Montreal Protocol dealing with the elimination of substances that deplete the ozone layer,

**2. The origins of REDD and the ongoing process** 

in the forestry and agricultural sectors.

etc. The Montreal Protocol is described by many as the most successful international environmental agreement this far. It is a fairly accurate description, especially when compared with the challenge of the global climate change problem in the wake of the failing Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol was crafted in Kyoto, Japan in December of 1997 by the international community under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in an effort to cut back on global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, known to be the major cause of global warming and resulting climate change. The IPCC was formed by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 after the global community began noticing signs of climate change in the early 1980s. After its first and second conferences in the early 1990s, the IPCC presented a draft treaty during the second World Summit on the environment in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992, called the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC became a binding agreement three years later in 1995 after 128 nations ratified the agreement. Every year since its ratification in 1995 the UNFCCC holds a conference of Parties of the convention (COP). It was during the 3rd COP in 1997 that the Kyoto Protocol was reached. A crucial element of the UNFCCC under the Kyoto Protocol is the undertaking by some developed countries to reduce emission of six greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, sulfur hexafluoride, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorinated hydrocarbons) to at least 5% below 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2012. This was in recognition that the developed countries have a greater responsibility to emissions reductions than other Parties of the convention. Accordingly, all Parties of the convention are "classified [on the bases of] their levels of development and their commitments for GHG emission reduction and reporting [as follows]" (Randolph & Masters, 2008):


In efforts to facilitate emissions reduction COP at its 6th meeting at The Hague in 2000, developed three flexible mechanisms to give more options to Parties of the convention in meeting their required reduction targets. These include: (1) the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)2, (2) the Joint Implementation (JI)3, and (3) Emissions Trading (ET)4. However, in spite allowing greater flexibility in meeting emissions reduction targets, these three mechanisms considered forests only for their carbon sequestration function, leaving out their potential of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation. The question

<sup>2</sup> The CDM mechanism allows industrialized countries to invest in clean energy projects in developing countries that are related to carbon emissions reduction and carbon sequestration in exchange for credit toward meeting their required reduction targets.

<sup>3</sup> The JI mechanism allows for collaborative efforts between two or more industrialized countries in meeting their respective reduction targets.

<sup>4</sup> The ET mechanism establishes modalities for selling and buying emissions right. It regulates the carbon market.

Obstacles to a Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Forest

**4. Deforestation and climate change** 

5 Most of the loss was registered in the Amazonia forest in South America.

al., 2008).

Management Under REDD in Central Africa: A Two-Country Analysis 31

incentives and financial flows from carbon markets, developing countries (mainly in the tropical forests regions) are encouraged to reduce carbon emissions by adopting strategies that would improve their capacity to reduce deforestation and forest degradation. Although financial flows from carbon markets have the potential to motivate emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries, the greatest potential is in direct financial incentives from the global community. According to the UN-REDD strategy program, direct financial incentives of US\$22-38 billion between 2010 and 2015 would lead to an estimated 25 percent reduction in annual global deforestation rates by 2015 (United Nations- Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forests Degradation [UN-REDD], 2010). Although the financial incentives approach is more likely to be favored for a post-Kyoto implementation, "the majority of country proposals to the UNFCCC are in favor of a mixed [market mechanisms and financial incentives mechanisms] approach" (Parker et

The world's total forests area is estimated just over 4 billion hectares (Global Forest Resource Assessment [GFRA], 2010), covering more than one-quarter (31%) of the world's total land area. However, the world's forests cover varies in distribution with less than 2% in the land area in some regions like North Africa, and up to 25% in others like Europe (GFRA, 2010). Global forests also vary in cover types including the boreal forests (~ 1.3 billion hectares), the temperate forests (~ 1.0 billion hectares), and the tropical forests (~ 1.7 billion hectares) (Gorte & Sheikh, 2010). These forests play an important, but unequal role in global carbon budget as they are sinks – sequester carbon thus contribute to climate change mitigation – and sources of carbon – emits GHG, especially CO2 through deforestation. While the total carbon content of the global forests in 2005 was estimated at about 638 Gt, tropical forests store, on average, about 50% more carbon per unit area, than temperate and boreal forests. For example, with a total area of about 1.7 billion hectares, tropical forests store about 442 metric tons of CO2 per hectare of plant carbon compared to temperate and boreal forests which store only about 208 and 236 respectively (Gorte & Sheikh, 2010). Although the current rate of tropical deforestation (2010) shows an overall decrease of about 3 million hectares in the last ten years (GFRA, 2010), it is still unacceptably high given the important role forests play as sinks and sources of carbon. More so, in terms of net loss, South America and Africa which are home to two of the world's three major tropical forests regions registered the highest net loss5 of forests between 2000 and 2010 – approximately 7.3 million hectares per year (GFRA, 2010). Given that tropical forests store on average, 50% more carbon per unit area than the two other major forests types (temperate and boreal), the global decrease of carbon stock in forests (at an estimated 0.5 Gt per year between 2005 and 2010) can be attributed to the net loss in tropical forests. The release of soil carbon into the earth's atmosphere is also linked to deforestation as deforestation leads to soil exposure and disturbance (tilling), increase dead matter, and increase soil temperature and rate of soil carbon oxidation (Gorte & Sheikh, 2010). The boreal forests soils contain about 471 GtC per hectares of land, which is more than twice the amount (216 GtC) in tropical forests soils (Alvarado & Wertz-Kanounnikoff, 2008). Although tropical forests soils contain less than half the amount of

arises as to why reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation was excluded. Alvarado & Wertz-Kanounnikoff (2008) argue that it is not unrelated to the techno-scientific, political and methodological complexities. We will examine these obstacles later in the chapter.

Nevertheless, at The Hague meeting in 2000, the issue of avoided deforestation was brought up during deliberations on the eligibility of land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities under the CDM. This issue was raised when Annex I Parties reported emissions from deforestation in annual GHG inventories. The concern over emissions from deforestation prompted COP to reach two compromises at The Hague as outlined in the following excerpt from Karsenty (2008):

The compromise position proposed by President Pronk (Decision 1/CP.6) prior to the suspension of COP6 was to (1) designate avoided deforestation and combating land degradation and desertification in non-Annex I countries as adaptation activities eligible for funding through the Adaptation Fund but not through the sale of carbon credits; (2) allow only afforestation and reforestation projects in the CDM, with measures to address non-permanence, social and environmental effects, leakage, additionality and uncertainty (Karsenty, 2008).

This was evidently the first step toward the development of the REDD mechanism. This was followed by a series of behind-the-scenes meetings between some Annex I Parties and non-Annex I Parties. Collaborations between the two Parties led to the submission of a proposal by governments of Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Costa Rica (with the support of the Coalition for Rainforest Nations), to COP11 in Montreal in 2005, calling for COP to consider possible approaches to address the issue of avoided deforestation. This initiative by PNG and Costa Rica prompted COP to urge Parties to engage in a two year study of the technical, scientific, methodological, and policy and positive incentives approaches related to the issue of avoided deforestation. Hence after two deliberative workshops in Rome and Cairns, COP at its 13th meeting in 2007 in Bali, Indonesia, adopted a decision creating the REDD mechanism.
