cross-sectorial coordination to support REDD+ and sustainable

January 5, 2018 | Author: Anonymous | Category: Science, Environmental Science
Share Embed Donate


Short Description

Download cross-sectorial coordination to support REDD+ and sustainable...

Description

Unlocking progress: cross-sectoral coordination to support REDD+ and sustainable energy access Emily Brickell, Senior Research Officer Improving energy access through climate finance: picking the winners University of Twente, 26th March 2013

Overview • Focus on case study on Uganda and drawing on previous ODI research on REDD+ and energy • Relationship between forests and energy in Uganda – Trade-offs and synergies

• Cross-sectoral coordination – Challenges – Potential influence of REDD+ • Implications for the conference questions 2

Unlocking progress on REDD+: sector coordination in Uganda • Sector coordination in Uganda – Cross-sectoral – Vertical • Political economy analysis • Challenges to sector coordination • Paper is framed from a ‘REDD+ perspective’ • Here, consider implications for both REDD+ and energy 3

Forests and energy in Uganda • >90% households rely on woodfuel for energy • 2% deforestation per year • RPP lists woodfuel as the main driver of deforestation in northern and eastern Uganda • Deforestation is increasing poverty – e.g. higher woodfuel costs

Trade-offs and synergies •

Potential trade-offs – If woodfuel continues to drive deforestation, will hamper REDD+ efforts – If REDD+ restricts access to forests or target woodfuel use without addressing energy need, will affect energy access



Opportunities for synergies – Deforestation affecting both REDD+ and energy access  Certain policies and measures could contribute to both secure energy access and REDD+ − sustainable management of woodfuel resources − improving energy efficiency − establish plantations − alternative energy sources



5

Promoting synergies relies on cross-sectoral coordination

Cross-sectoral coordination in Uganda Efforts made but, to date, not fully effective

Challenges to cross-sectoral coordination • Policy conflicts and gaps exist – Regulation of woodfuel and charcoal is “inadequate and unclear” • Multiple institutions regulating the same resource – Confusing and prone to abuse by both producers and government officials

• Various coordination mechanisms but challenges remain – Formal responsibility but lack resources or power to exercise 7

Underlying challenge: low priority •

Competing interests in the national government – Government policy promotes fast economic growth and rural transformation



Forests and environment are low priority – Few perceived interests – Inadequate funding for forests and environment sector – Undervalue contributing of forests to development and economy • Often in the informal and non-cash economy • FAO study

– Fuelwood accounts for 40% of the local economy – Non-cash component 3 times the value of the cash component



Infrastructure development, including energy, is a key area in 2012/13 national budget – Main focus on oil and hydro, often for export (informally)



Few incentives to − Strengthen cross-sector coordination − Address deforestation and implications for energy access and REDD+

8

How might REDD+ influence crosssectoral coordination? • RPP recognises the need to address cross-sectoral coordination • Establishes coordination structures including energy ministry – Too early to assess effectiveness – Risk of further complicating policy space? • Potential for policy conflicts highlighted – But RPP does not review energy policies • Identify potential measures relating to energy – e.g. regulating charcoal production and trade, enforcement, energy efficiency, woodfuel production • A potential opportunity for ring-fenced budgets? – To help address capacity gap

9

Further research areas • Analyse informal rules and incentives affecting crosssectoral coordination • Role of non-state actors in influencing incentives

• Better understanding of the role of forests for energy (and other development priorities) • Explore policy options that result in trade-offs and synergies

10

Implications for the questions – –

Are REDD+ programmes likely to lead to increases in energy access? Will restrictions on forest use simply make access to sources of traditional energy and other ecosystem services more difficult?



In the case of Uganda, potential trade-offs and synergies – Depends on policies and measures implemented • REDD+ could provide a potential incentive to support energy access • Will need to contribute to energy access priorities – Needs to be an explicit effort to balance objectives and minimise trade-offs • REDD+ needs to not just be in the hands of environment and forests ministries



Strengthen cross-sectoral coordination – Need to overcome political and technical barriers – Balance different objectives, interests and cultures – Political and financial support and incentives offered by REDD+ provide a potential opportunity



A forgotten issue? – Low priority could undermine both objectives

11

Thank you Emily Brickell [email protected] Overseas Development Institute 203 Blackfriars Road, London, SE1 8NJ T: +44 207 9220 300

www.odi.org.uk

View more...

Comments

Copyright � 2017 NANOPDF Inc.
SUPPORT NANOPDF