Readings on REDD and Benefits Sharing

REDD has the potential to bring significant new flows of money to developing countries in the tropics. How exactly that money should be paid, and to whom, is a central challenge in designing REDD, both at national and international levels. For example, who should benefit from the protection of a particular area of forest: the local people, indigenous forest communities, logging companies or national government? At the international level, the design of a REDD scheme will indirectly affect the way benefits are shared between countries. For instance, a regime that allows only national approaches to REDD (and therefore excludes project-based, sub-national initiatives) could exclude most low-income countries on the grounds that they have inadequate infrastructure for monitoring, reporting and verification, and poor governance. This would skew the international flow of money towards a few, middle-income countries, such as Brazil.

At the national level, a centralised approach could limit the participation of rural communities in the design and implementation of REDD. Forest carbon rights may be expropriated by government and effectively nationalised, subject to corruption or inequitably shared. This, of course, depends on national processes: with transparent and accountable design of REDD initiatives, funds could contribute positively to national development objectives, and may bring new finance opportunities to rural communities.

For more on the subject of REDD benefit sharing, see the readings in this section.