Land tenure and carbon rights constitute critical issues to take into account in achieving emission reductions, ensuring transparent benefit sharing and determining non-permanence (or non-compliance) liabilities in the context of REDD+ strategies and projects. This is so because tenure systems influence who becomes involved in efforts to avoid deforestation and improve forest management, and that land tenure, carbon rights and liabilities may be linked or divorced with implications for rural development. This paper explores these issues by looking at tenure regimes and carbon rights issues in Mexico, Brazil and Costa Rica. It is effectively shown that complex bundles of rights over forest resources have distinct implications for REDD+ design and implementation, and that REDD+ strategies in selected countries have to date failed in procedurally addressing land-use conflicts and carbon rights entitlements and liabilities. OPEN ACCESSForests 2011, 2 302

The United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC), at its thirteenth meeting in 2005 (COP-11), agreed to start a work program to explore a range of policy approaches and positive incentives for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD). This process was further encouraged in the 2007 COP-13 with the explicit consideration of REDD activities as a means to enhance mitigation action by developing countries in the future. This paper outlines the context of this ongoing political process by reviewing the science indicating that land-use change is a key contributor of greenhouse emissions globally and the assumptions that REDD activities may be competitive—in terms of cost effectiveness—in comparison to other mitigation options. The paper then examines REDD proposals submitted by Parties before COP-13 and identifies key economic, technological, methodological and institutional challenges associated with their implementation. These proposals are discussed in the light of major drivers of deforestation and ongoing efforts to address deforestation. This reveals another set of challenges which, if not taken into account, may undermine REDD effectiveness. The paper aims to aid the policy process and contribute to the best possible design of a REDD framework under the future climate regime

The Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has become a key instrument for climate change mitigation. Parties with emission targets are using it to buy greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions for compliance against the Protocol's emission reduction targets. In parallel, the purchase of emission reductions through a voluntary carbon market has become a mainstream practice across business and individuals who, although not having any regulatory mandate, aim to offset their emissions. This voluntary market relies on mitigation projects which may or may not follow the standards of the CDM. This review compares these two instruments and traces similarities and differences in terms of project types, offset quality and contribution to sustainable development. It is shown that both mechanisms support a wide range of mitigation options and technologies, and differ considerably in the contribution of forestry and industrial gas offsets to their markets. There is not enough empirical data to assess the actual additionality and quality of produced offsets and their contribution to national and local sustainable development also requires further empirical assessment. Large scale mitigation options provide a substantial percentage of GHG reductions in both markets, with methane-based mitigation and fuel switching dominating over renewable investments such as solar and tidal. Africa remains the least benefited continent in both schemes. The review supports proposals towards reforming the CDM so that the least developed countries can also participate in a transition towards a decarbonised global society. Voluntary markets, in turn, are likely to remain driven by investors' willingness to support projects which are in line with poor countries' demands and priorities.

Politics, Sinks, CDM, State actors,

No abstract