Readings on REDD and Co-benefits

Reducing deforestation and forest degradation are likely to generate other benefits besides the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Social benefits and poverty alleviation; protection of human rights and better forest governance; and the protection of biodiversity and other environmental services are all potential co-benefits of REDD. While it is widely recognised that co-benefits are likely to occur, there is considerable debate over how and whether they should be factored into REDD design. There are strong arguments for keeping REDD simple, as an overemphasis on co-benefits could overload the negotiation agenda, and discourage investment.

The debate is particularly intense in the case of social co-benefits. On the one hand is the argument that, because the main aim of REDD is to tackle climate change not poverty, the appropriate stance is to 'do no harm' to the poor. On the other hand, those favouring a pro-poor approach argue that REDD will not succeed unless social co-benefits are actively delivered.

REDD also has great potential to generate important co-benefits for biodiversity and other environmental services. Financial flows associated with REDD offer new scope for funding tropical forest conservation on an unprecedented scale. A study by CIFOR scientists and partners [link to Carbon Payments could preserve habitat for endangered mammal species story] has shown the potential for using carbon markets to save threatened mammal species from extinction. Even at a relatively low price, sales of carbon credits could provide benefits for both climate change and biodiversity.

The readings in this section discuss the wide range of co-benefits that REDD could provide, and some of the design issues that affect how they would occur.