Who Owns REDD+? Carbon Markets, Carbon Rights and Entitlements to REDD+ Finance

Abstract

The question of who is entitled to benefit from transactions under the United Nations framework to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) remains one of the most controversial issues surrounding cooperative efforts to reduce deforestation in developing countries. REDD+ has been conceived as an international framework to encourage voluntary efforts in developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon removals from forest activities. It was designed as an international framework under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to enable the generation of emission reductions and removals (ERRs) at the national—and, provisionally, the subnational—level and is, thus, primarily a creature of international law. However, in defining forest carbon ERRs, the international framework competes with national emission trading systems and domestic REDD+ legislation as well as private standards that define units traded on the voluntary carbon market. As results-based and carbon market systems emerge, the question remains: Who can claim participation in REDD+ and voluntary carbon market projects? The existence of different international, national and private standards that value ERRs poses a challenge to countries that participate in REDD+ as well as to communities and private actors participating in voluntary carbon market projects. This paper seeks to clarify the nature and limitation of rights pertaining to REDD+ market transactions. It also links the notion of carbon rights to both carbon markets and government’s decision on benefit sharing. Applying a legal lens, this paper helps to understand the various claims and underlying rights to participate in REDD+ transactions and addresses ambiguities that can lead to conflict around REDD+ implementation. The definition of carbon rights and the legal nature of carbon credits depend on local law and differ between countries. However, by categorizing carbon rights, the paper summarizes several legal considerations that are relevant for regulating REDD+ and sharing the financial benefits of transacting ERRs.

Rural Community Agency in Cameroon: Interactions with Forest Policies and the REDD+ Climate Change Regime

“…Another frame of obstacles to REDD+ comes from the large amounts of money at stake, as the funding mechanism for REDD+ is tied in with the international market for carbon [66,67]. Given the contentious nature of disputes over commodified land in the two communities, it is important to look at concerns about REDD+ as it functions as a market for carbon credits.…”

The Good Is Never Perfect: Why the Current Flaws of Voluntary Carbon Markets Are Services, Not Barriers to Successful Climate Change Action

“…Moreover, clear regulation on rights and ownership of credits needs to be developed at national and sub-national levels. This is a process currently taking place, but in need of further support (Streck, 2020). Continued adaptation of VCM standards and mechanisms to correct inequities is essential to durable VCM outcomes and requires wide community engagement in the design and management of a projects.…”

Discourse and Practice of REDD+ in Ghana and the Expansion of State Power

“…Designed to address the linkage between environmental degradation, greenhouse gas emissions and climate mitigation in so-called developing countries, the REDD+ narrative advances the idea of bringing together a diversity of stakeholders to create "a financial value for the carbon stored in forests by offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development" [14]. However, since the beginning, REDD+ has been highly contested for the way it frames both the issue and the solution for deforestation [15][16][17].…”