Durban a step backwards for the world’s rainforests
The climate change negotiations in Durban ended with an agreement early Sunday morning. Guidance on how to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) is included in the final agreement, but points in the wrong direction.

Foto: Jørgen Braastad, VG
Press release from Rainforest Foundation Norway – 11 Dec 2011:
- Durban has failed to deliver progress on fundamental issues like social and environmental safeguards, and on strict rules to ensure that global deforestation is reduced. Despite this, countries still feel it is appropriate to give a signal that carbon markets could be a suitable funding for REDD in the future. This is unfortunate for the world’s rainforests and the climate, says Lars Løvold, Director of Rainforest Foundation Norway.
The final agreements in Durban include decisions on three fundamental issues for REDD+: the social, environmental and governance safeguards agreed in Cancun, how to measure if deforestation is reduced, and on financing for REDD+.
- The safeguards are a crucial part of REDD+. They are constructed to ensure that REDD+ not only avoids doing harm, but that it delivers wider social and environmental benefits like protecting indigenous peoples’ rights and biodiversity. The Durban decision is a step backwards from what countries agreed to in Cancun, as they failed to agree on a robust reporting system for how the safeguards are being implemented, says Løvold.
Nor did the countries agree on a framework that ensures that global deforestation is reduced. Each country can propose what level of deforestation they expect in the future, as a basis for future payments from REDD+.
- There is no process for adding up the estimated future deforestation levels from each country, to see if they make collective sense at the global level. We risk paying for “hot air” and for “results” measured against an imaginary deforestation level that would never have happened in the real world, says Løvold.
The last days of the negotiations saw huge battles over financing for REDD+. All parties agree that public and private financing is needed, but the big fight concerned a possible reference to the inclusion of rainforests in carbon markets. The final text says that market-based financing for REDD+ could be developed.
- Reducing deforestation and forest degradation must be additional to significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions in the North. A carbon offset market for REDD+ is the opposite, says Løvold, since the tons of carbon which are not emitted as a consequence of reduced deforestation are allowed to be emitted by the buyer in the North.
- The lack of progress on fundamental issues to reduce deforestation makes it even worse that Durban raises expectations for future forest carbon markets. We fear that local communities may increasingly become the victims of carbon cowboys and rent seekers, without adequate mechanisms to ensure that the rights of indigenous peoples are respected, says Løvold.
According to Rainforest Foundation Norway, the reason for the lack of progress during the Durban negotiations is that countries are more concerned with protecting their own narrow interests than protecting rainforests and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
- The disappointing outcome concerning rainforest protection in Durban is the result of giving priority to selfish national interests, both among Northern and Southern countries. Several good proposals were on the table during the negotiations, but they were blocked by other countries, says Løvold.
For comments:
- Lars Løvold, Director of Rainforest Foundation Norway. Mobile: +47-48 18 81 48
- Nils Hermann Ranum, Head of policy in Rainforest Foundation Norway. Mobile: +47-99 00 10 32
