Mongolia, One of the World’s Fastest Growing Economies, Named as Global Host of World Environment Day 2013

Nairobi, February 22 2013 – Mongolia, which is prioritizing a Green Economy shift across its big economic sectors such as mining and promoting environmental awareness among  youth, is to host this year’s World Environment Day (WED) celebrations on June 5, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) announced today.

The 2013 theme for the event, the single biggest day for positive action on the environment worldwide, is Think.Eat.Save. Reduce Your Foodprint – building on the global campaign of the same name to reduce food waste and loss launched earlier this year by UNEP, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and partners.

UNEP made the announcement during the close of its first Governing Council session under universal membership, where hundreds of environment ministers, senior UN officials, and civil society representatives met to discuss some of the most-pressing environmental issues of the day, including food waste as part of the transition to a low-carbon, resource-efficient future.

Mongolia’s President Tsakhia Elbegdorj was named as one of six recipients of UNEP’s Champions of the Earth 2012 award for leadership that had a positive impact on the environment. 

“Mongolia is facing enormous challenges including growing pressure on food security, traditional nomadic herding and water supplies as a result of the impacts of climate change,” said UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner. “Indeed it is estimated that annual mean temperature has increased by over 2°C during the last 70 years and precipitation has decreased in most regions, except the western part of the country, indicating that Mongolia is among the most vulnerable nations in the world to global warming.” 

“Yet its government is also determined to meet these challenges and seize the opportunities of a less-polluting and more-sustainable future – from a moratorium on new mining pending improved environmental regulations to plans to become a renewable energy power-house and exporter of clean energy regionally,” added Mr. Steiner. “I am sure that as the global host of WED, Mongolia will demonstrate to the world that a transition to a Green Economy is possible, even within some of the most traditionally challenging industrial sectors, when leadership, vision, smart policies and political will are translated into action on the ground.” 

Mr. Steiner also announced that a UNEP mission to Mongolia was scheduled to depart in April to assist the country with Green Economy Advisory Services across areas such as energy, land and water.

Mongolia’s transition is already underway. It has passed a law on decreasing the air pollution that was triggered by a growing population and coal usage in the capital Ulaanbaatar. It is planning to establish a satellite-city near the capital for the purposes of limiting coal-burning in the capital, transferring energy-saving technology, and imposing air-pollution tax in some regions of Ulaanbaatar. 

Since 2010, Mongolia has suspended the issuance of all new mining licenses until fresh regulations are drawn up, citing the protection of the mineral-rich Asian country’s environment and herdsmen’s livelihoods as well as promotion of green development with consideration of water shortage and land degradation.

Projects that enhance youth understanding of environmental protection have been set up, and national tree planting days to combat desertification and water scarcity have seen over two million trees planted across Mongolia’s vast desert regions since 2011. Mongolia also has huge solar power potential, particularly in the sparsely populated Gobi region, and is looking for ways to exploit this.

“Our government has shown its commitment to positive environmental actions, not just with words but with concrete action,” said Mr. Tulga Buya, Vice Minister of Environment and Green Development, “so we seized the opportunity to host World Environment Day with both hands.”

“We hope our leadership in terms of what we have done at home and hosting this important yearly event will show the world that change is possible,” he added.

About World Environment Day

WED aims to be the biggest and most widely celebrated global day for positive environmental action. WED activities take place year round but climax on June 5. WED celebrations began in 1972 and have grown to become the one of the main vehicles through which the UN stimulates worldwide awareness of the environment and encourages political attention and action. Through WED, the UN Environment Programme is able to personalize environmental issues and enable everyone to realize not only their responsibility, but also their power to become agents for change in support of sustainable and equitable development.

In 2010, the dynamic WED challenge asked people to name baby gorillas in Rwanda to raise awareness, and in 2011 our Goodwill Ambassadors were asked to go head-to-head in a battle to have their supporters carry out the most activities, with the winner then planting a forest. Gisele Bündchen beat Don Cheadle, helping drive 4,229 WED activities in 144 countries – ranging from a bicycle rally in Nepal to a public litter clean-up in the Republic of Congo, and an environmental street procession by young people in Albania. Other celebrities such as Vampire Diaries star Ian Somerhalder and Bollywood regulars Priyanka Chopra and Rahul Bose have promoted the event over the last few years. Visit the WED site here: http://www.unep.org/wed/ 

Think.Eat.Save. Reduce Your Foodprint

The campaign harnesses the expertise of organizations such as WRAP (Waste and Resources Action Programme), Feeding the 5,000 and other partners, including national governments, who have considerable experience targeting and changing wasteful practices. It aims to accelerate action and provide a global vision and information-sharing portal for the many and diverse initiatives currently underway around the world. Visit www.thinkeatsave.org

- See more at: http://www.unep.org/wed/news/hostcountry2013.asp#sthash.eDseecpR.dpuf

WED THEME

The theme for this year’s World Environment Day celebrations is Think.Eat.Save. Think.Eat.Save is an anti-food waste and food loss campaign that encourages you to reduce your foodprint. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), every year 1.3 billion tonnes of food is wasted. This is equivalent to the same amount produced in the whole of sub-Saharan Africa. At the same time, 1 in every 7 people in the world go to bed hungry and more than 20,000 children under the age of 5 die daily from hunger.  

Given this enormous imbalance in lifestyles and the resultant devastating effects on the environment, this year’s theme – Think.Eat.Save – encourages you to become more aware of the environmental impact of the food choices you make and empowers you to make informed decisions.  

While the planet is struggling to provide us with enough resources to sustain its 7 billion people (growing to 9 billion by 2050), FAO estimates that a third of global food production is either wasted or lost. Food waste is an enormous drain on natural resources and a contributor to negative environmental impacts. 

This year’s campaign rallies you to take action from your home and then witness the power of collective decisions you and others have made to reduce food waste, save money, minimise the environmental impact of food production and force food production processes to become more efficient.

If food is wasted, it means that all the resources and inputs used in the production of all the food are also lost. For example, it takes about 1,000 litres of water to produce 1 litre of milk and about 16,000 litres goes into a cow’s food to make a hamburger. The resulting greenhouse gas emissions from the cows themselves, and throughout the food supply chain, all end up in vain when we waste food.

In fact, the global food production occupies 25% of all habitable land and is responsible for 70% of fresh water consumption, 80% of deforestation, and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. It is the largest single driver of biodiversity loss and land-use change.

Making informed decision therefore means, for example, that you purposefully select foods that have less of an environmental impact, such as organic foods that do not use chemicals in the production process. Choosing to buy locally can also mean that foods are not flown halfway across the world and therefore limit emissions.     

So think before you eat and help save our environment!

UNEP.

My visit to the evening fish market in Mwanza

This is just an evening fish market in mwanza,more than 10 deferent fish species are sold here

7-year-old Indian youngest to reach Everest base camp

Overcoming obstacles like cold temperatures and a high wind-chill, seven-year-old Aaryan Balaji has recorded his name in Mount Everest [ Images ] history by trekking all the way to the mountain's Southern Base Camp in Nepal situated at an altitude of 5,364 metres.

In the process, the seven-year-old defied his age to beat an eight-year-old American's record, displaying his adaptability to the highest standards of physical fitness, mental and moral strength, determination, courage, endurance, a never say die spirit and, above all, perfect teamwork.Young Aaryan, the son of an Indian Navy officer, is the youngest ever in the world to have trekked all the way from Lukla to the Everest Base Camp in Nepal on May 13. He is also the youngest to climb Mt. Kalapattar (5,554 meters) on May 15.

Reaching the base camp below Mt. Everest is considered one of the most arduous tasks on earth.

This successful attempt by a small boy, underlines all laudable attributes that are required to be developed among children across the board. Aaryan made the nation proud by unfurling the tricolour at the frontier of adventure activity that challenges the human spirit of courage and survival.

"Hiking to the Everest Base Camp is a unique challenge, and the excitement in doing this as a family could not be spelt. Aaryan had trained hard for this trek for over a month in the Andaman Islands, and we had full confidence in him reaching this goal. He has done us proud, no doubt, but has definitely brought laurels to India [ Images ] in a big way," said Riki, Aaryan's mother who accompanied him along with her husband.

Aaryan set out on this adventurous trip from Port Blair along with his father and mother on April 29 with a goal to trek to the Everest Base Camp and climb Mount Kalapattar.

 Commander Balaji, Aaryan's father, is also an avid adventurer who has been on many successful expeditions in the last decade, including to Mount Everest, South Pole and North Pole.

Thirteen-year-old American Jordan Romero is the youngest person to climb Mount Everest.

Praful Kumar Singh

Source: ANI

More corruption involving Norwegian REDD funding in Tanzania?

In 2006, an evaluation of Norwegian aid to Tanzania revealed that about US$30 million had been lost to corruption and mismanagement in the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism. The money was about half of the total that Norway spent on a Management of Natural Resources Programme. This week, Norwegian aid is in the headlines again over allegations of corruption in Tanzania.

Norway supported the MNRP from 1994 to 2006 to the tune of US$5 million a year. An independent evaluation in 2006 found that money was syphoned off through buying overpriced or non-existent goods and services. Procurement rules were not followed. More than half of Norway’s money went on workshops and “capacity building” exercises. Large amounts of money were lost to the “per diem culture” that surrounds aid-agency funded workshops in Africa.

Norway stopped aid to Tanzania. But after Tanzania returned a small part of the missing money, Norway turned the aid flow back on, committing US$100 million over five years for forest climate projects in Tanzania. Some of the money went to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism – the same Ministry that had syphoned off US$30 million from the MNRP budget.

This time around, Norway wanted Tanzanian-based NGO to implement the REDD projects. WWF were hired to work on a project titled “Strengthening Capacity of Environmental Civil Society Organizations”. Last year WWF was embroiled in a corruption scandal in Tanzania and recently returned just over US$120,000 to Norway.[*]

Norway chose to work with the Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST) to implement a US$3.9 million project titled, “Piloting REDD in the Pugu and Kazimzumbwi Forest Reserves”. The contract between Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and WCST can be downloaded here (pdf file, 313.3 kB) and the annexes to the contracthere (pdf file, 2.7 MB).

The four-year REDD project started in February 2011 and was aimed at reducing deforestation and “improving carbon stocks” in the Pugu and Kazimzumbwi forest areas near Dar Es Salaam, the largest city in Tanzania. At the end of the first year, the Tanzania Forest Conservation Group reported that the forests continued to be destroyed, mainly for charcoal production. TFCG estimated that at the current rates of destruction, Kazimzumbwi will be completely deforested by the end of 2014 and Pugu by the end of 2017.

In 2012, consulting firm Deloite produced a mid-term review of the WCST project. While the tone of the report is positive, there are warning signs. “Significant work remains on the ground level,” Deloite writes.

The stated project goal, “to manage the forest properly including participation of communities, supports surrounding community livelihood and provides ecosystem services” has not been observed during site visits and document review. Overall, the project has made progress, yet as the project has only just completed the inception phase, quantifiable impacts towards the stated goal are not yet appreciable.

In May 2012, Ivar Jørgensen, a senior adviser with NORAD, visited the project. He told the Norwegian newspaperAftenposten that, “WCST did not follow the agreement, did not cooperate with other actors as they were supposed to and did not have the correct contacts with the authorities.”

When Inger Naess, Counsellor at the Norwegian Embassy in Dar es Salaam, tried to visit the project site in June 2012, she was advised not to go because of the level of conflict over the use of the forest. Conflicts took place between local communities in the area, between Government departments and between communities and WCST staff. Communities were upset because WCST had not implemented an alternative livelihoods strategy that was part of the project design.

Naess visited the project area in August 2012, but found that the few project activities that had been set up were inoperative and parts of the forest had burned down.

Norway stopped disbursement to the project and commissioned an external audit by Baker & Tilly. The audit found that disbursed funds were not accounted for, procurements were massively overpriced and payments were made for services that were never provided.

On Sunday, 3 February 2012, Norway’s largest newspaper, Aftenposten published an article about the misuse of Norwegian aid funds in Tanzania. The article (in Norwegian) can be downloaded by clicking on the image:

Here’s a rough translation of the Aftenposten article (based on google translate – any corrections from Norwegian speakers would be welcome!).

Conflict around money for forest protection

Misuse of Aid

By Siri Gedde-Dahl, Aftenposten, 3 February 2013

Cheating staff have repeatedly carted off Norwegian environmental assistance in Tanzania. Now, the Norwegian Embassy in Dar-es-Salaam halted payments to another organization.

This time we are talking about government’s prestigious project, the international forest campaign.

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) recently repaid Norad just over NOK 700,000 after malpractice cases related to environmental projects from the Norwegian aid budget in Tanzania, Congo and Kenya. Norway has now handed over the investigation of disloyalty to the local police, the organisation declared fit after a clean up and assistance opened up again to WWF. Meanwhile, the voluntary organisation Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST) has been put under scrutiny. The forest that Norwegian money was supposed preserve, is partially burnt down. And conflict over the use of resources has reached new heights.

Save the forests

WCST has been granted NOK 25 million to 2015, from the so-called REDD funds (see fact box). It was paid NOK 6.8 million in 2011. When WCST did not report on the project as agreed, all further payments were stopped in 2012. In December of the same year, the remaining amount of WCST’s project account was also frozen.

It’s almost been a year since the embassy took action. A new chief coordinator at WCST, took office in August and promised to clean up. But the Norwegian government has not yet received proper progress reports, financial statements and audit reports from WCST. Inger Naess, a Counsellor at the Norwegian Embassy in Dar es Salaam, said that the embassy has now requested audited accounts directly from WCST’s auditor, Deloitte. The embassy has ordered an external investigation from the firm Baker & Tilly.

The WCST project takes place in peri-urban forest at Pugu-Kazimzumbwi Forest Reserves, near Dar-es-Salaam. The forest is protected, but the protection is not respected. Illegal construction and illegal logging for wood and charcoal production threaten the tropical forest. WCST is supposed to use the Norwegian money to help local people with alternative employment, control use of the forest, reduce conflicts, and assist people to take care of the forest.

A good start

The project aims to reduce CO2 emissions by preventing deforestation and forest degradation, according to the agreement with Norway.

“When I visited the area five to six months after the start, everything was good. They had established local tree nurseries, with trees for alternative charcoal production, and native trees for planting in the forest. They had also built a guardhouses at the entrance to the forest,” says Naess.

But when Ivar Jørgensen a senior advisor at Norad visited the project a few months later, in May 2012, things had become worse.

“WCST did not follow the agreement, did not cooperate with other actors as they were supposed to and did not have the correct contacts with the authorities,” says Jørgensen. So he sent a warning letter to the Norwegian Embassy in Dar es Saalam, which Aftenposten has seen.

Jørgensen says that later suspicion arose that project staff had been paid without having carrying out the work they should have.

When Naess wanted to visit the area again in June 2012 the level of conflict over the use of the forest had risen so much that she was advised not to travel into the area itself. She had to be content with talking to local authorities. In August 2012 she entered the forest. The guardhouses had been partially destroyed, the new tree nurseries were inoperative and parts of the forest had burned down. People without legal ownership had sold land inside the forest. Also, WCST had not done anything in particular to reduce the level of conflict.

The Embassy believes the contract has been breached because the activities have not been carried out. Naess says that today they have no basis to say whether there has been direct financial fraud.

The management of WCST were sent questions on Friday but by last night had not yet sent their comments.

Fact box: Aid Corruption in Tanzania

• In 2008 comprehensive fraud was revealed in the Management of Natural Resources Programme Norwegian aid project. The case went deep into the Ministry of Wildlife and Tourism (MNRT). The first audit estimated that NOK 150 of the NOK 300 million had disappeared. Norway ended up having to claim back NOK 12 million. A number of critics believe Norway has not got to the bottom of the case and allowed cheats to escape.
• In 2012 an audit report showed that NOK 2.4 million had disappeared in corruption and fraud relating to four aid projects run by WWF in Tanzania. The issue has boiled down to NOK 560 000, as Tanzania Norway has repaid the Foreign Ministry. WWF is out of the cold again to recieve funding for a variety of projects.
• In 2012 Norway believes that the Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST) has breached the contract on Norwegian REDD money and has stopped further payments.

Fact box: Climate Aid Norway will provide NOK 15 billion over five years as compensation for land / local people that contribute to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by reducing deforestation and planting new forests. Forests contribute to global emission reductions by binding CO2. Tanzania will receive NOK 500 million of this money. Much of the money channeled through the REDD programme, Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation. In Tanzania, nine non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including the WWF and the WCST, have received money for REDD pilot projects. In addition, Norway provided funds for research and a secretariat to develop a national REDD strategy.

Risks must be taken “If we are to bring anything through aid, we must be willing to take risks. It is also the signal from our Minister: We must be willing to take the risk, but also follow up with zero tolerance,” says Counsellor Inger Naess in Tanzania, with reference to development minister Heikki Holmås (SV). Are the malpractice cases now coming up, the tip of an iceberg? “I think it comes up more than before because we have followed up much more in the past four years. It is not necessarily more corruption. But we know there is corruption and breach of contract, and simply in part the lack of skills to manage money properly.” Are you alarmed by the things that you have seen in recent years? “This type of abuse is sad, not only in the aid sector, but in the country in general. It is mentioned in the papers and people react strongly. The opposition is running on this towards elections in 2015. It is bad to know that the scope is huge, but good to see that it is being addressed.”

Photo caption: Peri-urban forest at Dar es Salaam in Tanzania, Pugu-Kazimzumbwi Forest Reserves, is prized as a recreational area. The protected forest area is threatened by illegal logging and development. Norwegian climate money was supposed to protect the area, but it has gone badly so far.

Photo: pugukwakiki.com

---

UPDATE – 7 February 2013: Wildlife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST) is a Tanzanian NGO. It has no links to the international NGO Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), which also works in Tanzania. Thanks to Tim Davenport for pointing this out. WCST’s website seems to be down, but a snapshot from 11 November 2010 isavailable on archive.org.

---

CORRECTION – 8 February 2013: This post originally stated that the US$120,000 that WWF returned to the Norwegian Government “is less than 10% of the US$1.3 million that was reported missing in an audit carried out by Ernst & Young”. In fact, AlertNet reported that the Ernst & Young audit found that “a share” of US$1.3 million disappeared, not the entire amount. Thanks to Jason Rubens for pointing this out.

source:http://www.fikrapevu.com/more-corruption-involving-norwegian-redd-funding-in-tanzania

Kenya to legalize charcoal trade

We suspect this might come across as shocking to some people concerned about the implications of Kenya’s decision to legalize and regulate the charcoal trade. But to people, including many conservationists, that have long studied the multiple risks and opportunities posed by sub-Saharan Africa’s massive charcoal business, this is a big ray of hope!

– The Charcoal Project

PS – Hey, maybe it was charcoal that rastaman Peter Tosh was singing about all along!

This article appeared in Kenya’s CapitalFM News.

Kenya seeks to legalise charcoal trade

Posted by WAMBUI NDONGA on November 5, 2012

NAIROBI, Kenya, Nov 5 – The government now wants to legalize the charcoal business in an attempt to beat illegal charcoal burning which is largely to blame for the loss of the country’s forest cover.

Kenya Forest Service (KFS) Director David Mbugua said on Monday that the move would ensure that the trade was properly regulated to guarantee that the country’s forest cover was sustained.

He said the government was in the process of implementing a law that would facilitate the trade and encourage bona fide investors to cut down on losses incurred.

“Once you bring in order then you’re likely to attract private investments that will come in with technology so that we can upscale the recoveries. It is surprising that for every 10 tonnes of wood you burn for charcoal, you only get one tonne of charcoal,” he said.

The announcement came soon after the government and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) released a report indicating that Kenya lost an average of Sh6 billion between 2009 and 2010 to deforestation.

Mbugua however added that profits made from charcoal burning would be reverted to the conservation of forests noting that over 80 percent of Kenyans derived their energy needs from charcoal.

“We want to do it by regulating the producers, transporters and marketers. And more importantly is to levy fees and charges on charcoal and then plough back certain percentages of those levies to the communities where the charcoal came from,” he explained.

He added that deforestation led to decreased river flow which caused a Sh1.5 billion loss on average while monies lost due to the inability of the country to generate hydropower electricity was Sh8 million.

Mbugua also said that Kenya only had a 20 percent forest cover (according to data from the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation) that supported 80 percent of its population warning that if the cover was not increased the economy would be in jeopardy.

“We will not move forward without growing trees in our agricultural landscape. We have to grow trees not just plant them and we have to do it as a business,” he said.

“There are 40 million Kenyans now but our forestry has not grown since 1963 when we were seven million Kenyans. So we have 40 million depending on the same resource that supported seven million Kenyans,” he noted.

He further revealed that the logging ban that had been in place since 1999 had been lifted although the government had set up stringent control measures.

Mbugua explained that the ban was lifted two years ago after the KFS Board reviewed its decision owing to the growing demand for wood products.

“But even when the ban was in place a few companies like Pan Africa Paper Mills and some big saw milling companies were exempted. But please note that logging only takes place in the plantation forests which are manmade and not the indigenous forests,” he said adding that there were about 140,000 hectares of plantation forests.

UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner also expressed concern at the long term effects of illegal logging on the country’s economy.

He said there was need for the government to reign in loggers who were not government certified.

“There is an enormous demand for wood in Kenya and although illegal logging is profitable to a few it is very expensive to the nation,” he said.

He also stressed the need for the country to secure its water towers saying they were the heart of the region’s social, political and economic environments.

“Without these water towers the lights will literally go out; the water taps will dry up and farms will lose their crops. It is as simple and as dramatic as that,” he argued.

The Mau Forest Complex, Mount Kenya, the Aberdares, Mount Elgon and Cherangany feed filtered rainwater to rivers and lakes and provide more than 15,800 million cubic metres of water per year, which represents over 75 percent of the country’s renewable surface water resources.

These forests store water during the rainy season and release it slowly, thus ensuring water flow during dry periods.

Yet between 2000 and 2010, deforestation in the water towers amounted to an estimated 28,427 hectares, leading to reduced water availability of approximately 62 million cubic metres per year.

Inflation spiked above 10 percent on three occasions between 2000 and 2010, each time driven by drought combined with increasing crude oil prices and weaker exchange rates.

“Kenya is today underlining its determination to be among a group of pioneering countries putting its nature-based assets at the centre of its sustainable development ambitions,” said Steiner.

Climate Conversations - Scientists show technical concerns no longer an obstacle to progress on REDD+

By Kate Evans | Mon., December 24, 1:18 AM | Comments ( 0 )

Source: CIFOR (Center for International Forestry Research)

Scientists have shown that the technical challenges of making a scheme like REDD+ work are surmountable. James Maiden/CIFOR.

BOGOR, Indonesia (21 December, 2012)_The challenges in implementing a scheme to reduce carbon emissions by avoiding deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) are now more political than technical, said scientists on the sidelines of last fortnight’s UN climate change talks in Doha.
REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) aims to reward developing nations for protecting, restoring and sustainably managing forests.
The technical challenges of making a scheme like REDD+ work are considerable, says Louis Verchot from the Center for International Forestry Research: how to identify what factors are driving deforestation and design effective policies; how to determine what ‘business as usual’ emissions would be if action wasn’t taken (reference emissions levels or RELs); how to measure, report and verify the emissions reductions claimed by projects or countries (MRV); and how to fund the scheme.
But Verchot says scientists from CIFOR, together with partners, have shown that these problems are surmountable.
“We’ve developed tools, ideas, and concepts that do give us practical solutions,” he said.
“We’re saying to countries, here are some practical approaches: everyone can do this, you can do it in your own ministries, and do your own calculations, make it appropriate for your specific context, and refine it over time as you learn and gain experience.”
“Our work shows how to get started and the steps to making improvements.”
Negotiations on REDD+ stalled at the Doha talks, but the obstacles to reaching agreement on the critical measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) of carbon emissions were political rather than technical.
The impasse was reported to be between Brazil and Norway, with Norway pushing for an independent, international verification process for deforestation-related carbon emissions, while Brazil and other developing countries refused to commit to external verification, saying donor countries are also major greenhouse gas emitters and are not yet subject to such stringent verification.
But until recently, it wasn’t just politics holding up progress on REDD+ at the annual UN meeting.
When the idea of an international scheme for reducing emissions from deforestation was first floated at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change’s 7th Conference of the Parties (UNFCCC COP 7) in Marrakech in 2001, it was rejected because, among other reasons, it was perceived to be too difficult to calculate the emissions avoided by keeping forests standing and healthy, Verchot says.
But since COP 11 in Montreal in 2005, when developing countries raised the idea again as part of their contribution to addressing climate change, scientists have been working to resolve the technical problems and figure out ways to make the necessary calculations – even in countries with low capacity and few data.
CIFOR and the Global Observation for Forest Cover and Land Dynamics (GOFC-GOLD) have been working to assist countries to develop effective national forest monitoring systems and improve capacity in readiness for REDD+, through workshops and publications.
Stepwise approach for setting reference emissions levels
At a joint CIFOR/GOFC-GOLD side event in Doha, Lou Verchot and CIFOR colleagues presented what they call the “stepwise approach” which allows countries to begin setting RELs.
“Reference emissions levels are the reference point from which you begin counting how much emissions reductions you’ve been able to achieve. RELs set up the counterfactual, of how much emissions would have occurred in the absence of REDD+ activities,” Verchot said.

Verchot says the approach gives national ministries a method to follow to generate the most accurate numbers possible.
“The stepwise approach means that countries can start simple with current data and increase accuracy and precision over time as the capacity increases and better data becomes available,” he said.
Emissions reductions are defined as the actual emissions minus the reference levels. To estimate the actual emissions, you need two types of data.
“First, you need what we call ‘activity data’, which is information on the types of deforestation or land-use changes taking place in the country, you need to know how much reforestation is happening. Second, you need emissions factors, which are an estimate of the greenhouse gas emissions generated per hectare of forest that is converted to another use – say converting a peat swamp to an oil palm plantation,” he said.
“You can then put all that information together, following our method, to come up with an estimate of how much carbon would be emitted from deforestation in a country – and how much would be saved by leaving it alone.”
What’s driving deforestation?
Scientists have also been working to give countries guidance on the drivers of deforestation. Until recently, few countries have been able to say exactly what proportion of deforestation was linked to agriculture, infrastructure development, mining or logging due to a lack of data.
But a new report from CIFOR associate Martin Herold and colleagues outlines the major drivers for 46 REDD+ countries, and provides a way to estimate drivers for countries without data, until more detailed work is done.
Such information is vital to help countries design and implement effective policies to slow down degradation and deforestation.
Fixing the finances
In addition, Arild Angelsen – a professor of economics at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences and a senior CIFOR associate – is working to resolve some of the financial problems associated with REDD+.
“The basic question is what to pay for, and how,” he says.
“The simple answer is to pay a set rate for emissions reductions. But there are good reasons for not doing that.”
Firstly, Angelsen says, the initial emissions reductions a country makes are easier to achieve, so paying a set carbon price for these could imply overcompensating countries or projects. The scarce money the global community has for REDD+ could be spent more effectively, he says.
Secondly, REDD+ countries have different responsibilities and capabilities, and this should also be reflected in international REDD payments.
“Middle-income countries should assume higher responsibility compared to the poorest countries. Key REDD+ countries such as Brazil and Indonesia have also clearly said that REDD+ bill should be shared between the countries themselves and the international community,” Angelsen says.
The exact split is ultimately a political question, but researchers can help in formulating some principles and the implications of these.
Angelsen and co-researchers have developed an approach to setting a “financial incentive benchmark”. It will balance different considerations, such as the financial interest of the countries to participate, and to economize the use of the REDD funding available.
“We need to find a system that we can afford,” Angelsen says.
“This is often overlooked. The UN climate negotiations sometimes comes up with promises I believe everybody knows are highly unrealistic, for example a Green Climate Fund disbursing USD 100 billion per year by 2020.
“Negotiators need to look at how to fund and implement their promises, if not their credibility is undermined.”
Countries can start now
Lou Verchot says the recent advances in the technical side of REDD+ mean the scheme is ready to go forward – once the political hurdles on MRV and finance have been cleared.
“It is going to come down to a political decision at some point, countries are going to have to negotiate and make some decisions,” he said.  “This means committing to emission reduction actions, committing finance and agreeing on how emissions reductions will be verified.”
“But this work should help to facilitate the political process as well, because we’ve done this very transparently. Everyone can see the numbers and use them as a basis for negotiations – to decide what you will accept as activity data, what you will accept as emissions factors, what are you willing to accept with respect to the drivers of future deforestation.”
He says countries can start this process now.
“Here is a framework, we’ve shown different ways that countries could formulate solutions to the problem,” he said.
“What you need to do now is find the proper formulation that fits the specific country.”
“It’s much less of a mystery now than it was in 2005.”

Kilosa villagers set to benefit from sustainable charcoal industry

BY PROSPER MAKENE

11th December 2012

Email

Print

Sustainable Charcoal Project advocacy officer Sisty Basil says opportunity exists for rural communities to make fortune from forest management at the same time protecting the environment.

During a recent visit to Kilosa District, Morogoro Region, Correspondent PROSPER MAKENE interviewed Sustainable Charcoal Project advocacy officer SISTY BASIL on how villagers can benefit from forestry management in their quest to protect the environment. Excerpts:

QUESTION: Why do we need sustainable charcoal in the country?

ANSWER: Tanzania’s charcoal industry is one of the country’s largest industries. The World Bank estimated that the industry is worth US$ 650 million and employs several hundred thousand people in rural and urban areas. Over one million tons of charcoal is consumed each year in the country. Millions of urban consumers also depend upon charcoal for the energy required to prepare their meals. Over 90 percent of urban Tanzanians uses charcoal as either their primary or secondary source of domestic energy. Alternatives – such as electricity, LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) or biomass briquettes – are either perceived as too expensive or hampered by undeveloped distribution and marketing networks.

The charcoal industry is characterized by weak governance. National and local governments lose an estimated US$ 100 million per year due to their failure to effectively regulate the industry. Little value accrues to the producers and to the villages on whose land, most charcoal is produced.

Currently, charcoal production in Tanzania is a major cause of deforestation and forest degradation. It has depleted forests and woodlands in forest reserves and on village land including biologically irreplaceable forest

Over the last decade, communities in Tanzania have established 814 village forest reserves covering 2.3 million hectares of forest and woodland. Sustainable charcoal production could offer a much-needed revenue stream for these reserves as well as providing rural employment. To achieve this new model of charcoal production and marketing is needed.

Q: What is sustainably produced charcoal?

A: Sustainably produced charcoal is charcoal produced from wood from woodlands under participatory forest management that applies ecologically sound harvesting principles. Charcoal is produced using efficient kiln technology and is transported and sold in accordance with national regulations.

Q: Why have you planned to establish a sustainable charcoal project?

A: Well, first of all the Sustainable Charcoal project is a partnership project that aims to establish a commercially viable value chain for legal, sustainably produced charcoal. The overall goal is to improve climate change adaptation and mitigation; to enhance environmental sustainability and to leverage returns on biomass resources; thereby delivering sustainable development to Tanzania and its people.

Q: What will the charcoal project do?

A: The project will work with communities and local government to establish sustainable and energy efficient charcoal production from woodland in village forest reserves. This will include training to village leaders and village natural resources committees; training to charcoal producers on improved charcoal production techniques; agreement on good practice in terms of harvesting, production techniques and governance; and integration of sustainable charcoal production into village forest reserve management plans. The project will also be linking the sustainable charcoal production with ongoing REDD (Reducing greenhouse gas Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries) initiatives. Also the project will train communities on the principles of conservation agriculture so as to increase their yield and decreasing dependency on the forest

Working with community networks, the project will support advocacy initiatives for improved governance of the charcoal sector. The project will also conduct an assessment of the environmental and social impacts of different charcoal value chains as well as life cycle assessment of the charcoal produced in Kilosa

However, the eco-conscious charcoal buyers in Dar es Salaam and other urban centres will be presented with the option to buy sustainably produced charcoal.

Q: Where is the sustainable charcoal project operating?

A: The project started operating in Kilosa District, Morogoro Region in June this year, where Tanzania Forest Conservation Group (TFCG) and Tanzania Community Forest Conservation Network (MJUMITA) has been supporting a community-oriented REDD project since 2009.

The project has focused on woodland adjacent to the high biodiversity forests of the Rubeho and Ukaguru Mountains, part of the Eastern Arc Mountains biodiversity hotspot.

Q: How long would this project exists and who are project partners supporting the project?

A: The proposed project lifetime is six years, comprising a two-year inception and design phase and a four year period of expanded implementation.

The project is financed by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). SDC is Switzerland’s international cooperation agency within the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA).

The project will work with two Swiss Research institutions: The Centre for Development and Environment (CDE) of which is the University of Bern’s centre for sustainable development research with the aim of fostering sustainable development-oriented research and the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA) which is also is an interdisciplinary research and services institution for material sciences and technology development oriented to meet the requirements of industry and the needs of our society.

Meanwhile, Tanzania Traditional Energy Development Organisation ( TaTEDO) will provide expertise on charcoal production techniques.

While, TFCG a national non-governmental organization whose mission is to conserve and restore the biodiversity of globally important forests in Tanzania, is providing advocacy, participatory forest management, environmental education, community development and research to ensure that there sustainable charcoal production in the country.

TFCG has succeeded in rolling out innovative and high-impact solutions to the challenges facing Tanzania’s forests and the people that depend on them.

Other partner is the Tanzania Community Forest Conservation Network (MJUMITA) of which MJUMITA play its role as a national network of community groups involved in participatory forest management.

The network provides a forum for capacity building, advocacy and communication for these groups to make sure that there is sustainable charcoal production that will ensure forest and environment protection.

Q: Who are the project beneficiaries?

A: The project aims to benefit rural communities in Kilosa District, particularly in areas where participatory forest management (PFM) processes already forms part of the pilot REDD programme. Sustainably charcoal production and support for climate smart, small-scale agriculture will be introduced in eight villages in Kilosa District.

Q: Are there any challenges that face the project since started in June this year?

A: Currently at the national level there is no dedicated policy which deals with charcoal sector in the country, this makes it easy for people to harvest charcoal in an unsustainable manners hence leading to increasing deforestation in the country.

However, the project plans to mark charcoal bags with a specifically designed log to show that the product was prepared according to the required environmental standards; the system will control the packaging of the commodity

We want to reduce degradation of our forests by insuring that charcoal is produced sustainably from identified sources

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

African governments must leave ‘climate tourists’ behind and drive action in Doha

By Thabit Jacob
With the United Nations climate conference (COP 18) less than a week away, it is that time of the year when delegates from various corners of the world, including Africa are packing their bags ready for yet another international summit, this time in Qatar.
In Tanzania, this is the time for intensive lobbying among members of various government ministries and civil society organizations to make sure they make it to Doha.
Most of these people are just too excited to be part of delegations because the chance comes with a big expenses account and an opportunity to travel abroad.
Some of us working in this field call them “climate tourists” a term used to describe delegates who attend these conferences to see new places, take snaps of nice beaches and attractive landscapes, and engage in lavish shopping, instead of representing their countries and organisations.

Delegates from across the world will be arriving at the Qatar National Convention Centre next week to further the debate on climate action (Source: UNclimatechange/Flickr)

As delegates from around the world gather in Doha, a big question emerges: What issues will African delegates negotiate at the conference?
It’s important to remind ourselves that Africa is already facing the socio-economic impacts of climate change and research shows the continent will be particularly vulnerable. This is due to the considerably limited adaptive capacity (capacity to adapt to the effects of climate change), worsened by widespread poverty.
The following in my view, are the key issues that African delegates and negotiators should press hard in Doha.
Priorities
First I expect African countries to voice their concerns on the need for developed countries to bring their emissions reduction targets in line with the recent scientific recommendations. I expect this to go hand in hand with negotiations to renew the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in at the end of this year.
A second commitment period under Kyoto is crucial to ensure countries stick to their emission reductions targets.
I expect African negotiators to remind others that the Kyoto Protocol is the only legally binding international agreement with quantifiable targets for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and its fate is crucial.
Another important issue that African delegates must be very strong on is the issue of climate financing. Since 2009, there has been a big gap between aid pledges and delivery. Climate aid is seen as a moral obligation because around 75% of the greenhouse gas emissions to date have come from the rich countries, but it is the poor countries, notably those in Africa, that are suffering from the effects climate change.
In 2009, world leaders agreed to reach a goal of $100 billion in annual climate aid by 2020 to help the poor to slow global warming but the process has been slow. Currently, many donor countries are struggling to fix their own economies and have limited cash for climate aid to help poor nations.
The Green Climate Fund was agreed recently and is seen by many as an important tool to enable poor countries to finance climate change adaptation.

Funding clean cook stoves, off grid electricity and resilient agriculture are among the projects tackling climate change and boosting development in Africa. (Source: DfID)

However, the fund is new and empty and developing countries want rich nations to inject new cash to the pot to channel aid towards poor nations. Finance is key and I expect fierce debates between delegates on that aspect.
Another key area of concern for Africa is the issue of capacity building.
African countries lack capacity in a number of areas and there is a need to improve Africa’s understanding of the impacts and vulnerability to climate change. There is also the need to enhance the ability to make informed decisions on adaptation and mitigation measures. These are important issues that African’s delegates will need to press hard in Doha.
Technology
Another is technology transfer, an often overlooked issue.
Africa lacks appropriate technology to invest in low-carbon energy sources. Africa’s renewable energy potential remains untapped due to a lack of appropriate technology. African delegates must push to ensure the continent is able to access technologies that can ensure sustainable development and also boost local economies.
African delegates are also expected to continue with negotiations related to Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF), including negotiations related to REDD+ (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, sustainable management of forest, conservation and enhancement of forest carbon stocks).
REDD+ is based on the idea that countries willing and able to reduce emissions from deforestation should be financially compensated for doing so. African delegates must stand strong because Africa needs to be supported financially and technologically to reverse the trend of deforestation and in doing so positively contributing to mitigation efforts globally.
Vocation not vacation
My experiences from last year’s UN Climate conference in South Africa and this year’s UN conference on sustainable development (Rio+20) in Brazil shows that these meetings can be frustrating, especially for delegates from less developed countries.
However, I learned that these kinds of UN meetings are also the only avenues we have for government representatives, civil society organizations, world leaders and other stakeholders to voice their concerns and contribute in global efforts to achieve sustainable development.
I strongly believe that increased engagement by African countries in the UNFCCC process remains the best multilateral option to address the challenges of climate change on the continent.
Finally, my message to African countries including Tanzania is that, instead of sending “climate tourists”, they should send experienced negotiators who have been attending these talks over the years.
These negotiations require continuity and experience from African negotiators and policy makers to ensure maximum and informed representation of the African agenda.
Thabit Jacob is the Chair of African Young Scientist Initiative on Climate Change and Indigenous Knowledge. An initiative based in South Africa with presence in other African countries.
He is currently Assistant Lecturer and Course Instructor in the Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, at the University of Dodoma in Tanzania where he lectures courses in Climate Change and Development and also Natural Resources Management.

How Much Sea Level Rise Would be Avoided by Aggressive CO2 Reductions?

One of the more reasonable discussion points to emerge from efforts to link Hurricane Sandy to the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions focuses on the role that future sea level rise will have on making storm impacts worse. Logically, it would seem that if we can "halt the rise of the seas" then this would reduce future impacts from extreme events like Sandy.

The science of sea level rise, however, tells us that our ability to halt he rise of the seas is extremely limited, even under an (unrealistically) aggressive scenario of emissions reduction. Several years ago, in a GRL paper titled "How much climate change can be avoided by mitigation?" Warren Washington and colleagues asked how much impact aggressive mitigation would have on the climate system. Specifically, they looked at a set of climate model runs assuming stabilization of carbon dioxide at 450 ppm.

Here is what they concluded for sea level rise:

[A]bout 8 cm of the sea level rise that would otherwise occur without mitigation would be averted. However, by the end of the century the sea level rise continues to increase and does not stabilize in both scenarios due to climate change commitment involving the thermal inertia of the oceans ...

Eight cm is about three inches. Three inches. Then sea level rise continues for centuries.

Though it seems logical to call for emissions reductions as a way to arrest sea level rise to reduce the impacts of hurricanes, recent research suggests that our ability to halt the rise of the seas is extremely limited. With respect to hurricanes, we have little option but to adapt, and improved adaptation makes good sense.

Efforts to use future hurricane damages to justify emissions reductions just don't make much sense. Fortunately, there are far better reasons to focus on emissions reductions than hurricanes.

Source :http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2012/10/how-much-sea-level-rise-would-be.