PNG_REDD+ Scheme for April Salumei Sustainable Forest- Biatus Bito

5/13/2018 PNG_REDD+ Scheme for April Salumei Sustainable Forest- Biatus Bito - slidepdf.com

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/pngredd-scheme-for-april-salumei-sustainable-forest-biatus-b

REDD+ Scheme for April Salumei Sustainable Forest

Management, Papua New Guinea

Presented by: Biatus Bito

(National Consultant, PNG)

TA 7302‐Capturing Economic Benefits From

Ecosystems Services (CEBES)

A. Overview of REDD+ In PNG



1. Existing Gov’t Regulators and laws of forest and landA. Regulators

• The Papua New Guinea Forest Authority works in partnership with both local and international organizations in achieving sustainable forest management.

• The DEC ensure environmental compliance, monitoring and guidelines are adhered or followed by

developers

• The Dept. of Lands & Physical Planning deals with land matters.

• The National Fisheries Authority deals with fisheries and marine matters

• Note: The OCCD was established to deal with climate change issues on mitigation and adaptation but yet to be formally enacted as a dept to fully implement its functions

B. Laws and Regulations governing terrestrial environment

• Environment Act 2000

• Forestry Act 1992 (amended 1996, 2000, 2005, 2007 & Forestry Regulation 1993)

• FCA (SABL) 2005

• Most land in PNG are customarily owned by landowners in clans and clan groups. The government and others owned the remainder

2. CDM, PES & REDD+ Policy Framework for PNG

• PNG is a signatory to many international and regional conventions and protocols on environment, conservation, biodiversity etc

• PNG is a signatory to UNFCCC in 1992 and has ratified the Kyoto protocol in 1997

• In terms of CDM, a global DNA process exists and the government is working to translate this process into the National Legislative Framework.

• PNG does not have a PES policy

• PNG does not have a REDD+ policy and legislative framework to implement REDD+ in PNG but it is

working towards developing one by 2012

• REDD+ policy developed will go through multi‐stakeholder consultation and review by the Technical Working Group

• PNG thru

OCCD

is

taking

time

(Step

by

step

approaches)

to

understand

the

science,

technical

issues

etc to develop a strategy for REDD+

• It has completed its phase 1 . The Institutional & Technical Design Phase of UN‐REDD National Development Programme. Trainings, operators (OCCD, PNGFA, WWF, TNC, WCS) and Reviewers (UPNG, DLPP of National Mapping Bureau, Unitech, PNGFA & DEC) were identified

• The Monitoring and Measurement Phase is ready for commencement in 2012 (Phase 2) in

conjunction with REDD+ Demonstration project.



3. PNG REDD+ Readiness progress• The National Climate Change Committee (NCCC) has

approved

the

PNG’s

REDD+

readiness

roadmap.

This

provides the

guide

for

the

formulation

of

the

national

REDD+ system, based on the international negotiations

• 1. In Phase 1, PNG has done the following

‐ Developed the REDD+ project Guidelines (Benefit Sharing & Distribution System and FPIC manual)

‐ REDD+ Readiness Pilot Initiatives Guidelines, Setting up

of a MRV system

‐ Developing a Conflict Resolution Mechanism

‐ Developing REDD+ Initiative Guidelines

‐

Ensuring

that

long‐

term

institutional

framework

is

in

place

‐ undertaking Alternative Livelihood study for forest dependent communities; and

‐ undertaking a Carbon Rights Study

4.

Forestry

and

REDD• Government (OCCD) is incorporating REDD into Timber Concession

Forest Governance by:

1‐ Investigating Forestry and REDD+: OCCD is coordinating with line

government agencies like DAL, DEC, DLPP & PNGFA to approve

REDD+ Criteria, Developing a Benefit sharing Model & ComplianceReview of SABLs

2. Investigating REDD+ initiatives: OCCD is coordinating with relevant agencies to implement several pilot projects next year (2012) covering four regions of the country. They are:

‐ Reduce impact Logging and secondary forest management (e.g.

Suau, Milne

Bay

province)

‐ Afforestation/Reforestation (Goroka, Eastern Highlands province)

‐ Forest Conservation (Kimbe, West New Britain province); and

‐ Community REDD+ scheme (April Salumei, East Sepik & West New

Britain provinces)



5. Type of Carbon Market in PNG

•

Compliance market.

In

the

past,

the

Lihir

Gold

Mine

geothermal

project was PNG’s first CDM project (2002‐2009?) but not now

(the agreement was done between LGM and buyer but not State

and landowner). Currently NBPOL is doing methane captured

CDM on oil palm waste).

• The PNG government through OCCD is working to develop a

compliance Carbon Market Mechanism.

• The government does not encourage Voluntary Carbon market because it is non‐compliant and there is no international legal framework (risky) as compared to Compliance Carbon market

•Project

such

as

April

Salumei

is

currently

under

Voluntary

Carbon

market and hopefully will transit to compliance market

6a. Payment for performance



6b. Government’s REDD fund disbursement

6c. How risks and responsibilities are distributed or

shared

• It is anticipated that PNG would move through a phased based

approach to the development of a fully functional REDD+

mechanism that will eventually linked performance based

payments to verify reductions

• Phase 1: Readiness Phase‐ Development of National Climate

Change Compatible Development Plan

• Phase 2: Implementation supported by Transitional Funding‐

‘More advance Readiness’ focusing on policy implementation and

measures to reduce carbon

• Phase 3:

Payment

for

Performance

‐PNG

is

compensated

for

verified reduced emissions and enhanced carbon stocks agreed to

reference level under a UNFCCC compliant system

Note: The government has made a commitment that by 2030 PNG’s GHG emissions would be halved and by 2050 PNG will be carbon neutral



7. MRV & Technical capacities for REDD• PNG needs proper technologies and skills to do reliable MRV and

for monitoring (e.g. constant cloud cover , variation of C in

different ecosystems

and

ruggedness

of

the

country)

• PNG needs reliable PSPs to do a reasonable national baseline andreference point for GHGs. It needs an independent system that can operate to integrate information from other systems

• Proper studies on deforestation drivers need to be conducted

and international accepted methodologies be developed because

of various data available

• Jica and FAO including India and others have been providing

technical assistance/advice and trainings to OCCD and other linegovernment agencies to equip them with skills relating to MRV

purposes. Skills

such

as

GIS

and

remote

sensing

are

promoted

&

encouraged.

B. April Salumei Sustainable Forest

Management Project, Pilot REDD

project



8. Study Site

There are four different vegetation types found in the area, which include the following: wetlands, small crowned forest, Open forest and medium crowned forest.

9. Background of project area

• Situated in Ambunti district, Abunti‐Drekikir Electorate, East Sepik province

• Area is least developed and isolated. Where average income is K20‐K100 per annum (US$10‐50/yr)

• Project area is currently subjected to FMA or logging

• Encompasses a total Gross Forest Area of 521,500 ha, with a total Production

Area of 177,200 ha and a Net Production Forest Area of 150,620 ha

• There are four different vegetation types found in the area, which include the

following: wetlands, small crowned forest, Open forest and medium crowned

forest.

• Project area has a population of approx. 7696 people (2000 census). It has a

population density of 4pers/km2. About 163 ILGs gave their consent

• 150 villages and hamlets and 30 language group (PNG has over 800 languages)



10. Background of project area. ..Cont..• The project area was in court and landowners were awarded K58million as

compensation for foregoing logging when government declared a Wildlife

Management Areas (WMA) in 1997. (LO continue to seek payment but from

sources some

individuals

have

received

certain

amount

without

the

knowledge of the villagers).

• Was approved by government as PNG first pilot REDD project in 2008

• Project was certified by the validator/Verifier, Scientific Certification Systems

(SCS) of USA on June 13th 2011 and will expire in 5 years time on June 12th

2016. Certification was based using the 14 criteria set by Climate Community

Biodiversity (CCB) standards. Note: Prior to this, South Pole was the validator .

• The project would avoid emissions of 98,441,367 tonnes of CO2e‐ over project lifespan of 25 years

• Carbon accounting area = 150 620ha. Deforestation and degradation

assumed to be conservative by year 21 at a rate of 6871ha/yr and yr 22 will claim remainder of 6329ha = 180 620ha. No claim for years 23‐25.

11. People and Culture (photos by WWF Sepik & Biatus)



12. Landscape (photos by WWF Sepik project)

13. Livelihood (photos by WWF project)



14. Biodiversity (photos by Biatus Bito and others)

15. Carbon baseline•

Using

Tier

1

of

IPCC

methodology

and

default

value

the

project

has

an

est.

AGB

of 350tonnes.d.m/ha (using Tropical rainforest of Asia data (Insular). The ratio of BGB is 1.37. The Carbon Fraction default Value is 0.47. Less the grassland strata, the area holds 114,612, 751 tonnes of C or 420,284,957 CO2e‐

• BGB = 350 tonnes d.m/ha X1.37 ratio = 479.5 tonnes d.m/ha. The applied carbon

factor of 0.47 = 225.365 tonnes C/ha

• Logged over forest = 59 tC/ha. Hence C content per logging = 225.365‐ 59tC/ha =

166.365 tC/ha is lost in selected logged /degraded areas. Therefore 25,147,310

tonnes of Carbon is that could be emitted is conserved.

• Initial harvesting‐ Volume is 5,831,705m3 (gross volume per ha = 55.312m3/ha

less 30% defects = 38.718m3). Hence, the emissions rate is 9.63kg/m3 could

produce 56,159,319 kg CO2 or 56 156 tCO2e‐

• Carbon stock

lost

(20%)

due

to

land

conversion

is

30

232

ha

would

release

1,844,164 tC (using global warming potential (3.66) of C = 6,762,550 tCO2e‐

• 1It is projected that 1.4 tC will be sequestrated/ha/ year from land conversion

such as logging



16. Possible Benefits from this REDD Project

REDD projects have five key benefits:

1. Reduction of GHG emissions.

2. Protection of global forest resources and

environments.

3. Protection of valuable biodiversity.

4. Preservation of forest communities’ cultures and

societies.

5. Investment of capital to alleviate poverty and create

social equity through sustainable development.

17. Economic benefits to landowners•

Crediting period

starting

date:

December

20

th

1996 (term

start

of

FMA

agreement). Duration: Until 19 December of 2046 but most likely for 35 years

according to FMA cutting cycle.

• Approx. 550,000 ha was demarcated for the April Salumei REDD+ project. Almost 300,000,000 Co2 e‐ was calculated . Landowners were told almost 200,000,000

tCo2 e‐ was sold and kept in the April Salumei Foundation. The amount of carbon

per ha is approx. 363.64 tCo2 e. ˜US$5 per ton of C, April Salumei expects to

generate approx. US$1billion per annum

• The proposed percentage for landowners hope for this project is:

1. Monetary: 70% to landowners, 10% to government & 20% to project developer

2. Development

(The

Developers

perspective)

a. Sustainable landuse activities‐ agriculture, NTFP, roads, health, schools etc

b. Future investment funds

c. Monetary (little and not everything to sustain local needs like school fees, food, basic services etc)

Note: The government’s benefit sharing mechanism is still under development to

determine the percentage



18. Who are the beneficiaries (landowner model)

19. Corporate Structure of Hunstein Range

Holdings



20. Who are the C buyers for PNG & April Salumei

Sustainable Forest Management Project?•

Private

companies

and

brokers

alike

have

shown

interests

in

developing Carbon projects in PNG. Companies such as Nuppon

PNG Limited, EarthSky, NBPOL, etc.

• Most potential C buyers are from developed nations in Australia

and Europe.

• Currently, Earthsky, an affiliate to the Swiss Bank registered in the

Cayman Island is the project developer for April Salumei

• Earthsky is working with Rainforest Management Alliance (an

international company) who is the project consultant to develop

the project and sell the C credits (at this stage the buyer is

unknown

in

this

study)

• At this stage, there is no knowledge who the Carbon Buyer is

according to this study (probably the Buyer is from Europe)

21. What’s working or not

• Almost 100%

of

contractual

agreement

by

landowner

company

(Hunstein

Range

Holdings) was attained. However, they claimed almost 80% of the contractual agreement by Earthsky is yet to be attained

• EarthSky is the developer but Rainforest Management Alliance wants to be the

project developer. Another developer, PNG Newband is also assisting

landowners in some way but is not so committed. There could be conflict of interest and leagl repercussions.

• Landowners are caught‐up in between different developers and this could cause

a serious repercussion on either of the parties involve

• Since ASSFM project was certified on June 13, 2011, the project developer and

now the developer and its agents went into hiding

•No

transaction

was

done

after

90

days

as

stipulated

in

the

contract

between

HRH

and Earthsky. (The developer may still be looking for the buyer?)

• The April Salumei project is yet to be legally recognised by the government (certified by DNA or OCCD) to become a compliance market oriented

• Expectations are already raised after the certification and recognition of the

project as government pilot project. Failure to receive benefits will affect the

landowners significantly



22. Developer’s proposed involvement with

stakeholders

23. MRV• Carbon

pools

to

be

monitored

include

AGB

and

BGB

excluding

soil carbon

and

dead

materials or litters (expected to be constant)

• Monitoring of carbon will be from a CDM A/R activity

• Preliminary measurement was done using stratification sampling of the main strata of project area (plus 30 temporal plots) to get standard deviations for each value

measured

• Values to be recorded include dbh, ht (>3m), no. of trees, species classification, assessment of abnormalities (logging, tree mortality etc)

• Plots center market permanently, GPS and of 10‐15m radius and cost calculated for final, permanent monitoring framework

• Ground truthing

of

remote

sensing

data

will

be

conducted

to

determine

baseline

vegetation strata

• Leakage monitoring will be conducted annually to build local capacity but for verification purposes, it will be done every 5 years

• Remote sensing data using available international standards will be used to do MRV

for carbon by the developer



24. Monitoring plan

•

A

monitoring

plan

include:‐Monitoring at local level by “forest stewards”

‐ Community reporting by forest stewards

• All reporting will be done according to the nature of the threats or impact occurring in the project site‐

immediate, quarterly and annual

• The stewards will be monitoring illegal logging, traditional landuses, any clearing, PSP

measurements, climate monitoring, reporting on

forest fires,

identify

any

soil

erosion

and

reporting

to

their superintendent and supervisors

25.Challenges• Cloud

cover

may

hinder

MRV

work,

especially

satellite

• High costs of doing MRV & ground truthing, and expertise & technology is

lacking etc

• Rugged terrain and variety of Carbon sink ecosystem (different from

lowland, hill forest, montane, karst etc). Need a very good system and

methodology

• Landownership issues and meeting landowners demands and

expectations

• Benefit sharing mechanisms must be developed fully to avoid stalling of project

• Meeting contractual obligations by all parties

(landowners are semi‐literate or illiterate and lack international business

knowledge and information)

• Most contracts are in English and legal terms and bulky. Often LOs just signed without fully understand the documents



25. Conclusion

• The future

of

REDD+

is

uncertain

• April Salumei Sustainable Forest Management Project could be a scam because Voluntary Market is risky

• Landowners are illiterate or semi literate and can be

easily be manipulated by developers and

“middleman”

• REDD+ may

bring

conservation

and

development

however it depends on international negotiations and

in‐country polices and legislations

26. Take Home Message• Be careful of fraudulent deals with overseas carbon traders or fraudters

• Proper and effective awareness is necessary and must be done to educate locals and

landowner company reps.

• Never raise expectations and make promises to people in negotiations or writing contracts because it may backfire when landowners are not happy

• Voluntary and compliance market for carbon trade has its own loopholes and this need to

be rectified so all parties can benefit

• We need collective actions by all‐ governments and institutions‐ to assist the world’s poor and eradicate poverty thus meeting the UN’s Millennium Development Goal

•

We need

to

conserve

our

forest

as

a major

carbon

sink

for

GHGs

and

at

the

same

time

improve the livelihood of forest so they can maintain or enjoy the environmental services

the forest provides for them

• Without a government legislative framework or policy, REDD won’t work because it will still compete with other alternative land‐uses.

• We need good and effective MRV methods to monitor the project over its lifespan



Thank You!!

PNG_REDD+ Scheme for April Salumei Sustainable Forest- Biatus Bito

Documents

Transcript of PNG_REDD+ Scheme for April Salumei Sustainable Forest- Biatus Bito