Comment Log Display
Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 101 for Cap & Trade PDR (dec-14-pdr-ws) - 1st Workshop.
First Name: Joanna
Last Name: Durbin
Email Address: jdurbin@climate-standards.org
Affiliation: Climate, Community & Biodiversity Allian
Subject: comments on preliminary draft regulations
Comment:
California has shown impressive leadership in the development of legislation to mitigate climate change and it is good to see the progress that is being made through the development of these Draft Regulations for a California Cap-and-Trade Program. It is now understood that the forest sector contributes more than 17% of global greenhouse gas emissions and that activities to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) and to contribute to conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) are an essential component of effective climate change mitigation. The greatest potential for REDD+ emissions reductions and removals is in tropical regions of the world, mostly in developing countries where these activities also have tremendous potential to generate significant benefits for some of the poorest communities in the world who rely on forests and healthy ecosystems for their livelihoods and also to conserve biodiversity. The Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance provides a mechanism through the Climate, Community & Biodiversity (CCB) Standards to identify projects that deliver robust emissions reductions and removals as well as significant community and biodiversity benefits through a set of objective and comprehensive criteria and an independent auditing system. There are now 17 projects that have completed the audit process and over 85 projects that are under development, each of which represents a real multiple-benefit initiative, verified by a third party. Our experience of REDD+ projects in developing countries shows that REDD+ can be, and is being, implemented in a way that respects the rights and interests of vulnerable people such as Indigenous Peoples and the world’s poor, enabling their participation as partners rather than targets of the project to conserve and restore forests and enabling them to achieve their own development goals. REDD+ projects are diversifying and improving long-term livelihood security for rural communities for example by increasing agricultural yields, protecting soil and water resources and generating employment and also conserving biodiversity by restoring and protecting natural ecosystems. These positive social and environmental outcomes are a tremendous additional potential benefit from REDD+ that cannot be delivered at the same scale from any other climate change project type. There is strong support for the inclusion of REDD+ in UNFCCC and US Federal climate change frameworks currently under discussions and, for the reasons outlined above, REDD+ should be included as an approved offset type in the California and Western Climate Initiative cap-and-trade program. It is good to see that international forestry offsets are included in the concept description for offsets and I look forward to seeing further development of the regulations for this offset type. California is well positioned to lead the way on defining how REDD+ can be integrated into a cap-and-trade program by providing effective and robust offsets, building on California’s pioneering work with other states and provinces in the US, Brazil and Indonesia as part of the Governors’ Climate and Forests Task Force. While there is an opportunity for leadership, it will also be important to ensure consistency with emerging consensus and the developing architecture for REDD+ at the national (US Federal) and international (UNFCCC) levels. While REDD+ has potential to deliver robust emission reductions and to deliver significant social and environmental benefits, there are also risks particularly for Indigenous Peoples and other vulnerable groups, so ARB should ensure effective social and environmental standards and safeguards. I note that the PDR mentions (p.63) that ARB would only approve offset quantification methodologies for project types that address any public health, welfare, social, economic and energy effects and urge clearer guidance on this issue with adoption of effective social and environmental standards for REDD+ activities.
Attachment:
Original File Name:
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2010-01-11 18:56:29
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.