This presentation by Maria Fernanda Gebara from CIFOR shows how exactly REDD+ financing in Brazil works, focusing on the National Strategy Objectives, national and sub-national financing mechanisms, the Green Climate Fund, the monitoring & reporting aspect and how verification & performance works. Also she explains how benefits can be shared and what conclusions can be drawn from all of this.

1. Social and political
dimensions of REDD+
financing, MRV and
benefit distribution
across levels in Brazil
Maria Fernanda Gebara
Phd Candidate
Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro
mfgebara@gmail.com

2. REDD+ in Brazil
Brazil and REDD+ - Timeline
Bolsa Floresta
Program
2003
PPCDAM
2006
States Task
Force
JUMA
EN-REDD+
1st draft
Forest
Code
2009
Amazon Fund
Bolsa Verde
Program
2010
2011
REDD+
and PES
Bills
WGs
NAMAs
“Principle and
Criteria”
Bonn Proposal
PPCerrado
Sub-national
Initiatives
FIP
Safeguard
System
ABC Plan
2013
2012
FIP
Investment
Plan
National Policy for
Climate Change
2008
2007
Voluntary
Regime
Governors
Forum
National
Plan for
Climate
Change
Zero
Deforestation
Pact
“Compensated
Reduction”
Interministerial
WG for REDD+
More than 50
projects
THINKING beyond the canopy

3. National Strategy
Objectives:
 Reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation by
2020, according to the actions established in PNMC;
 Achieve zero net deforestation in 2020;
 Maintain and restore ecosystem services and other functions
of forest ecosystems; and
 Promote the sustainable development of the regions with
predominance of forests.
THINKING beyond the canopy

4. Financial Mechanisms
Sub- National Level
National Level
States Climate Funds
Norway
Amazon Fund
Decree 6527/2008
E.g.: State of Amazonas Fund
Petrobrás
KFW
Coca-Cola
Bradesco
State level Agreements
National Climate Fund
Law 12.114/2009
Marriot
Petrobrás
E.g.: Acre and California
Surui and SFX Funds
Other: FUNBIO (1996)
GEF
Amazon Fund
etc.
+ Public Budget
THINKING beyond the canopy

5. Financial Mechanisms
Green Climate Fund
a. Ex ante financing: to national governments;
a. Ex ante financing: to other actors subject to a no-objection
procedure by national designated authorities;
a. Ex post payments: to be disbursed according to mitigation
results.
 Neither preclude, nor exclude others. It does not exclude market
based approaches. However, “these discussions are not yet
mature and need common understanding”.
THINKING beyond the canopy

6. Financial Mechanisms
National Authority
 Designation of a national authority to recommend proposals
to the GCF and be consulted on other proposals;
 Responsible for presenting proposals under modality a);
applying for grants under modality c); as for the nonobjection procedure referred to in modality b).
 Work in close coordination with the national authorities
responsible for REDD+ activities (it may be the same authority,
if appropriate).
THINKING beyond the canopy

7. Monitoring
 One of the most advanced countries in the world in capacity to
monitor its forest resources using remote sensing and GIS
technologies.
National Level
Sub-national Level
INPE
 Partnerships MMA and
states
1971
PRODES DETER
1980s
2004
EM
IBAMA
1989
DEGRAD
2009
DETEX
2009
CEMAM
2004
 Surui and Google
 Other: Imazon, IPAM
and Federal University
of Minas Gerais
THINKING beyond the canopy

8. Reporting
RL
Focal Point
(national)
UNFCCC decisions
(international approval)
tCO2e
Projected emissions for 2020
Amazon: 1996-2005
ADR
Cerrado: 1994-2005
Formula: Projected DR X Average emissions/area
X CO2 equivalent factor
 Results are approved at national level first and after
international;
 Consultation process and analysis national but greater
detailing at international level (“technical Annex” with results
calculation).
THINKING beyond the canopy

9. Verification and Performance
 Verification: transparency ("ensure that carbon reduction is
generated, according to a reference level") and funding.
 Verification is therefore domestic.
“ No developing country will have international verification of its
actions.” “It could cause disadvantages against other sectors and
also add additional obligations.” (Brazil)
“We are willing to pay as long as we can be sure we are paying for
actual emissions reductions (credible figures)”. (Norway)
 Indicator would be the tCO2e maintained/reduced  Technical
Scientific Committee.
 Other possible indicators, but still lacks a wider global debate.
THINKING beyond the canopy

10. Verification and Performance
International Verification Tool
 Not centralized;
Results endorsed by
COP
Published by
UNFCCC
Country
Year
RL
Been paid?
etc.
 International level results-based payments can best occur using
a national jurisdiction scale as reference (on an interim basis,
subnational references could also be adopted)  ensure
transparency and accountability, as well as avoid double
counting of results.
THINKING beyond the canopy

11. Investors
Financing
MRV
Other Agents
Executive
Authority
UREDD
Amazon Fund
Investors
MRV and Financing
THINKING beyond the canopy
B
E
N
E
F
I
C
I
A
R
I
E
S

12. Benefit Sharing
International
Level
 To be determined
independently

recognize the role of
different sectors in
achieving results at
national level;
National
Level
 It does not yet have a
clear position on how
it will work;
 Amazon Fund as main
instrument;
 GCF: total results
 Use
of
economic
instruments;
over a period of time,
rather than a fixed
monetary value per
tCO2e/year.
 Descentralization 
new instruments and
types of financing.
THINKING beyond the canopy

13. Benefit Sharing
Some Initiatives
BF Family
Juma Project – AM
BF Income
Bolsa Floresta
Program
BF Social
Law 3135/2007
FAS
(2008)
BF Association
MRV
Institutional Arrangements
Sustainable Production + Areas of high forest cover
+ Enhancement of carbon
SISA – AC
Law 2308/2010
(2009)
Elaboration of Territorial and Rural
Property Management Instruments
+
stocks
Services for Priority Areas
Private Properties
SFX Pilot Program – PA
TNC/SEMA
(2009)
Conservation Strategies
Indigenous Territories
Conservation Units
Carbon
Accounting
Program
+
System for monitoring and + Engagement and Capacitymanaging information
Building of Stakeholders
THINKING beyond the canopy

14. Safeguards
 MMA meetings for SIS: (i) legal regulation, (ii) guarantee of
rights; (iii) economic sustainability and poverty reduction; (iv)
biodiversity conservation and recovery; (v) governance; (vi)
benefit sharing; (vii) monitoring and transparency;
(viii)permanence and leakage; and (ix) participation.
 Amazon Fund: established safeguards in accordance to UNFCCC
decisions.
BUT, no monitoring!
THINKING beyond the canopy

15. Challenges
Conclusions
 Nesting activities from sub-national/local to national level
(accountability);
 Attribution of results – how to link MRV, performance and
benefit-sharing?  results-based payments;
 Improve monitoring and measurement of AF results;
 Monitoring safeguards.
Key Lessons
 Advanced monitoring systems are not enough;
 Performance indicators are critical;
 Think about the “Policyscape”.
THINKING beyond the canopy

16. OBRIGADA!
Maria Fernanda Gebara
Phd Candidate
Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro
mfgebara@gmail.com
THINKING beyond the canopy