Proceedings_DSDS_2Feb2011 & List of Participants

7/27/2019 Proceedings_DSDS_2Feb2011 & List of Participants

1/24

Responding to climate change

Adopting A lAndscApe perspective

pRoceedings of dsds special event

2 FebruAry 2011, new delhi


2/24


3/24

~ 1 ~

b a c k g r o u n d a n d k e y

m e s s a g e s

It is being increasingly realized that the response to

climate change needs to be mainstreamed into the

broader development agenda. Climate change affects

poor people disproportionately and the response too

would have varying impacts on different groups of

people. Thus, climate change response needs to be

seen not just in terms of GHG reduction but also in

terms of the overall social and economic impacts. In

this context, two considerations need to be flagged: a)

Climate change action must take into cognizance the

overall social and economic context to achieve the

most desirable development outcomes and b) Climate

change action must take into account cross-sectoral

linkages to optimize outcomes.

In the context of forestry, the transition towards

REDD and REDD+ approaches exemplify these. The

objective of international debates and discussions

around REDD is to create a monetary value for

the carbon stored in forests that are under the ever

increasing threat of deforestation or degradation. Once

this forest carbon value can be created and agreed upon,

participating developing countries can be paid for

protecting, conserving, and sustainably managing their

forests rather than cutting them or letting them becomedegraded. And not only would one be able to sequester

more carbon in the forests, but also be able to promote

forestry-based livelihoods, ecosystem based services,

biodiversity conservation, among others. In addition,

the specific REDD+ aspects - role of conservation,

sustainable management of forest and enhancement of

carbon stocks in developing countries, could be better

delivered upon at a larger scale than that of individual

projects.

This larger scale however needs to be appropriately

defined. Not only must this scale integrate across linked

ecosystems but it should also integrate across the social

and ecological context. A useful notion here is that of

a landscape that could achieve such integration. A

landscape approach (to climate action) is therefore one

that designs and implements climate action at a scale

where optimal mitigation, adaptation and development

goals can be achieved. Such an approach could be

viewed in contradistinction to sectoral approaches

such as achieving maximum carbon sequestration form

a defined forest patch.

This workshop co-organised by TERI

and IUCN on the sidelines of Delhi Sustainable

Development Summit (DSDS) 2011 was intended

to be a deliberative platform on the practicability of

the landscape approach. The workshop was organized

around three sessions with the following themes:

Understanding climate response in the national

and international context: Exploring the potential

for a landscape approach

Experiencesfromtheground:Sharingoflandscape

approaches tested and demonstrated

Theorytopractice:Drawingimportantlessonsforthe next climate change summit

The following are some of the key messages that

emerged during the deliberation:

Understanding climate response in the national and

international context: Exploring the potential for a

landscape approach

Attheoutset,itisimportanttodistinguishbetween

natural processes and climate change induced

processes while defining the climate problem.


4/24

} R e s p o n d i n g t o c l i m a t e c h a n g e

~ 2 ~

Periodic submergence of deltaic lands for example

is not a climate induced process. It is important

that preconceived notions of climate impact are

not used for framing the policy response.

The climate action agenda and the developmentagenda are intricately linked. For example, climate

impacts on agriculture impinge on the achievement

of several Millennium Development Goal (MDG)

targets.

The REDD+ approach to climate action could

demonstrate the landscape approach meaningfully.

The REDD+ incentives could be seen as co-

benefits, and additional to forest ecosystem

services accruing to communities. The policy

regime needs to ensure that these incentives flowentirely to the local community.

Experiences from the ground: Sharing of landscape

approaches tested and demonstrated

IUCNs global programme, Livelihoods and

Landscapes Strategy (LLS), being implemented

in Haryana and Orissa (by TERI and Winrock

International India respectively) represent a field

application of the landscape approach. In the

Haryana case, the key objective was to enhancelocal (natural resources based) livelihoods through

a mix of physical interventions, institutional

strengthening and capacity building activities,

planned at a landscape scale.

The SDC funded climate change adaptation

project in Andhra Pradesh and Rajasthan, focuses

simultaneously on interventions and institutions in

four sectors - agriculture, livestock, rural energy

and water.

GIZhasembracedanecosystembasedadaptationapproach worldwide; for instance, in the Mekong

delta, the GIZ initiative aims to increase the

resilience of mangroves to increased storm surges

by enhancing biodiversity.

IUCNsMangovesfortheFuture(MFF)programme

also emphasizes the integration of ecosystem

services within the climate adaptation strategy. Such

approaches work best, and are most cost-effective,

where the habitat is not completely degraded.

The use of pine needles for biomass energy in

Uttarakhand represents an innovative case of

converting an invasive species into an energy and

livelihood source.

Theory to practice: Drawing important lessons for thenext climate change summit

Forestsarevieweddifferentlyatdifferentlevels,

providing goods of direct use, biodiversity, and

carbon sequestration services at the local, national/

regional and global levels respectively. It is

important to integrate across these levels so that

local level responses could be linked to policy

issues at higher levels.

It is important to explicitly link community

concerns with policy, such as looking at ecologicalresilience as a framework for livelihood security.

Thekeychallengesofadoptingalandscapeapproach

include issues of competing land-uses, limited

understanding of landscape level conservation,

excessive dependence on natural resources and

disintegration of community value systems.

Ecosystems are challenged by livelihood

dependency and developmental pressures,

accentuated by climate change. For example,

livestock exerts huge pressures on grasslands;

however, the issue is difficult to tackle as it does

not fall in the ambit of any single institution. In

such situations, cross-sectoral (landscape level)

approaches are necessary.

TheGreenIndiaMissionidentifiesthelandscape

approach as a key strategy, where all land prioritized

for this approach must be treated simultaneously

and by multiple organizations.

Thereisa need to systematicallycollectdata on

climate change and biodiversity to assess long

term impacts on livelihoods.

Thereisaneedforanationalandlocalaccounting

and reward distribution system for REDD +.

Thereisalsoaneedforlocalactionsothatthemost

vulnerable are able to adopt adaptive practices.

In this context,weneed to expand thenotionof

a landscapeto a natural-cultural landscape that

includes community institutions at the lowest

levels of governance.


5/24

~ 3 ~

Dr Leena Srivastava, Executive Director, TERI,

started the days deliberations with her welcome

remarks. She said that the opportunities and threats

that might arise from REDD and REDD+ have caught

global attention. It is important to have a well-designed

mechanism to implement REDD+, as this mechanism

has great potential to not only protect the forests and

biodiversity but also benefit the communities that are

dependent on these ecosystems.

Moving from REDD+ and looking at the area of

biofuels and bio mass energy, there are two issues thatrequire interventions: energy efficiency and energy

access. One of the key energy resources that has

been identified as important to providing energy

access to three billion people who do not have

access to clean cooking solutions in rural areas is

biomass, which also relates to the issue of land use.

There could be a direct conflict between promoting

access and use of biomass energy and REDD+

mechanism. The relative balance between the two is

of key importance, which will determine the direction

we should go in.

In his inaugural address, Mr J M Mauskar,

Additional Secretary, Ministry of Environment

and Forests (MoEF) spoke of the conflict of nature

versus man. While in earlier times, nature being

more dominant man was largely responding to it.

However, with progress in scientific discoveries and

technology, man now has the ability to change nature

in an irreversible manner, resulting in imbalances.Such resultant imbalances also underlie the varied

forms of climate change. The climatic variation in

India is largely influenced by the monsoons, which

bear huge impacts on sectors like agriculture, given

that a major part of agriculture in the country is rain

fed. Deforestation and other developmental activities

are putting stress on the climatic equilibrium, and are

thereby bound to impact the man-nature relationship.

I n a u g u r a l s e s s I o n


6/24


~ 4 ~

The missions on Sustainable Agriculture, Water,

Green India, and Himalayan Ecosystem as envisaged

in the National Action Plan on Climate Change

(NAPCC), that deal with the different challenges of

climate variability also demonstrate the interplay of

man and nature.

In her Special Remarks, Ms Aban Marker

Kabraji, Regional Director (IUCN, Asia) stressed

that the central point in climate change adaptation

strategies is vulnerability of the poor. The extent to

which poor people are vulnerable to disturbances

and shocks is determined by multi-level interactions

between components of the ecosystem. Poor and

vulnerable groups in society often lack the adaptive

capacity that allows them to accommodate changes,

and the unequal distribution of vulnerability among

people can be exacerbated due to pre-existing

social, gender and economic inequalities. Hence,

understanding and reducing vulnerability is essential

to conservation efforts that aim to reducing poverty.

There is a constant relationship between vulnerability

and resilience, and to move out of poverty, resilience

is important.A landscape approach is a vital tool in

reducing vulnerability. Landscape and seascape

level interventions provide more opportunities for

specialization of use and management, and for

trade-offs between conservation and intensive use

of ecosystems. Interventions at site-level do not

generally work since they tend to become isolated.

Hence, interventions need to be scaled up at the level

of landscape and ecosystems. There is also a need toinvest in understanding the institutional and political

contexts that shape landscape functions. Furthermore,

there is a need for a practical framework to apply a

systems approach; wherein experts instead of imposing

their own vision and ideas of how a system should

work, should rather respond to how a system works in

practice and adapt to that.

Dr Leena Srivastava

Mr J M Mauskar

Ms Aban Marker Kabraji


7/24

p R o c e e d i n g s o f d s d s s p e c i a l e v e n t |

~ 5 ~

s e s s i o n 1

clImate response In the

natIonal and InternatIonal context

Cte epone n te nton n

ntenton context Potent o

ncpe ppoc

Mr Anirban Ganguly, Fellow, TERI while setting the

theme for looking at landscape and ecosystem based

approach to climate change adaptation, also delvedon policy issues like the recent decisions at Cancun

on REDD+. He first discussed how the landscape

approach has been viewed traditionally. Landscape

is a heterogeneous area composed of a cluster of

interacting ecosystems that are repeated in various

sizes, shapes and spatial relationships (throughout the

unit/area that is identified as landscape). There are

patterns emerging across a space. The classic example

of the use of this approach is in wildlife ecology. In

the social science perspective, systems approach

is emerging as a buzz word. Its essence is viewing

problems as parts of an overall system, rather than

reacting to specific parts, outcomes or events and

potentially contributing to further development of

unintended consequences. The systems approachcould be used while dealing with the uncertainties

involved. So, a reaction to a problem includes within

it the reaction to unintended consequences.

The pillars of climate change response are

mitigation action which are binding commitments for

developed countries within the Kyoto Protocol and

the long term cooperative action, adaptation action

in terms of engineering and social mechanisms as


8/24


~ 6 ~

well as ecosystem-based measures, access to financeand capacity building. The important point here is

defining boundaries for the responses.

There have been several ways in which these

issues have been addressed. The REDD and REDD+

mechanism besides aiming to mitigate climate change

brings up the issue of poverty alleviation. We also need

to look at institutional landscape, addressing issues

ofbenefit-sharingoutofforestproduce.Lookingat

the link of climate change and development agenda,

climate change impacts on agricultural production

has a direct impact on the achievement of the

fourth and fifth Millennium Development Goals

(MDG) targets.

There is an issue of financing carbon and

ecosystem services. Net Present Value calculations

for forests are not entirely carbon-centric and accounts

for ecological services of forests. For the first time

in the national forest finance agenda, a payment has

been mandated for diversion of forest land, which

explicitly takes into account ecological services

of forests. In the Thirteenth Finance Commission

recommendations, the density of forests has been

used as one of the criteria for the ecological value of

forests. While it can be considered as a fair estimation,

one should also look at specific issues of externalities.

The presentation ended with an illustration

of climate refugees in the Sundarbans, drawing

primarily from research conducted by the UrbanEconomic Research group at Calcutta University. The

climate change induced submergence of islands and

inundation off Sagar island (that is on the tip of the

delta), exacerbated by disasters likeAila, has resulted

in hundreds of families travelling inward to settlements

in Sonarpur in the outskirts of Kolkata. This has put

enormous stress on peri-urban infrastructure. The

issue no longer just a coastal issue or just a migration

issue. It now becomes a broader issue of human

security. So, what is needed is a redefinition of the

problem boundary.

Ecosystem based approach for

Climate Change adaptation

Dr N M Ishwar, MFF- India Coordinator, IUCN

discussed the ecosystem based approach for climate

change adaptation. IUCN has categorized over

55000 floral and faunal species till date, of which

almost 18000 species are known to be threatened.

Ecosystem-based adaptation integrates the use of

biodiversity and ecosystem services to help people to

adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change. It is

based on sustainable management, conservation and

restoration of ecosystems, aims to increase resilience

and reduce the vulnerability of ecosystems. Such an

approach works best in habitats that are not completely

degraded. Therefore, working on them will be cost-

Mr Anirban Ganguly Dr N M Ishwar


9/24


~ 7 ~

effective and this should be done by involving the

local communities.

A range of projects undertaken by IUCN, such

as Mangroves for the Future in the Indian Ocean,

make use of such nature-based solutions. People who

stay near the coastal areas are more vulnerable to

sea-level rise, storms and other natural disasters.

Understanding the valuation of mangroves helps to

advocate for policy level changes and also helps to get

more investments in ecosystems. As an example, in

Southern Gujarat in India, where a mangrove area was

not only not well documented in terms of diversity and

habitat, but was also under threat from industrialization,

a detailed survey of mangrove areas was done andsocio-economic pressures that these habitats face

was documented. This process led to the discovery

of good quality mangroves in a couple of areas. For

effective, efficient and equitable adaptation to climate

change, provision for conserving ecosystems needs

to be advocated and implemented, and investment

in ecosystems would help poor communities benefit

from it.

rEdd+ n co-benetMr Jagdish Kishwan, Additional Director General of

Forests (Wildlife), MoEF spoke on REDD + and co-

benefits drawing from the recent Cancun agreements

and what the countries are expected to do.

The REDD+ approach itself fits in with and

demonstrates the landscape approach. REDD+

is not just a project, it is a holistic approach. The

REDD+ mechanism comprises five broad activities

that guide the countries in their mitigation actionsin the forestry sector. These are: reducing emissions

from deforestation, reducing emissions from forest

degradation, conservation of forest carbon stocks,

sustainable management of forests and enhancement

of forest carbon stocks. The last three are the + (Plus)

aspects. Any actions that reduce emissions in the

forestry sector should fit into any of the aforementioned

five broad activities.

In the context of India and other developing

countries, REDD+ incentives need to be seen as co-

benefits, and only additional to other ecosystem services

that the communities are getting from the forests.

REDD+ is a national level, comprehensive accounting

approach which covers: a national strategy of actions

(to enhance and improve forest cover), construction

of national reference levels (to assess incremental

forest carbon stocks by having a baseline forest carbon

stock), and development of a national reporting and

monitoring system. It is not a project level approach.

Even the project level actions need to get coalesced

into the national accounting and reporting.

If we take the example of India, our nationalstrategy of actions for REDD+ is as following: we

have the existing National Afforestation Programme

(NAP), to which we can add the Green India Mission

(GIM). This is basically based on enhancing and

improving forest and tree cover. Our national strategy

is also very clear that enhanced forest carbon stock is

only a co-benefit.

The national forest reference level will define the

baseline forest carbon stocks, with reference to which

the incremental forest carbon stocks will be assessed

and a year fixed corresponding to the baseline/

incremental stocks.

In India, national level status of forest assessment

is already being done. To this we need to add some

innovative additionalities, to know the state of forest

carbon stock. In the monitoring and estimation, the

Forest Survey of India needs to be supported by

the state level remote sensing and space application

centers; and reporting should be done by a central

agency, the REDD + cell of the MoEF.

Furthermore, we need to develop and use our

own specific models. Presently, many agencies are

using models like Biome, GCOMAP, IBIS and other

foreign models. These are good as stopgap

arrangements. However, we need to improve and

fine-tune existing methodologies for assessment of

forest carbon stocks both biomass and soil organic


10/24


~ 8 ~

redd-plus and

co-benefIts

carbon (SOC). The background and knowledge

of methodologies needs to be used to develop

indigenous models.

An appropriate and conducive policy regime

is also significant. The central theme in the policy

regime in India is participation of local community.

The policy regime supports this by means of the

following (given in order of priority): Forests Rights

Act, Joint Forest Management and Community Forest

Management. Our policy statement needs to endorse100% share of REDD+ to local community. However,

there is a need to work out the mechanism to do this.

When we mean REDD+, it does not mean any

specific changes in the existing forest management

regime / policy. It is something happening alongside

other actions. The significant point here being that

it has never been estimated and so it has never been

incentivized.

What is essential is a) local community

participation in assessment and monitoring of forest

carbon stocks because they will be the recipients of

additional benefits of REDD+ mechanism, and b)

capacity building which includes all stakeholders.

Concuon by te C

Concluding the session, Dr Prodipto Ghosh,

Distinguished Fellow, TERI, drew attention to the

linkage between natural processes and climate change.

We need to be careful in differentiating what is a

natural process of climate change and what is induced.

For instance, what is happening in the Sundarbans

(the submergence of islands) is not a case of induced

climate change, but a natural process that has been

occurring over many years. He also cited an example

to illustrate how experts should not impose their own

preconceived ideas and solutions. Three years ago, on

a World Bank project on the Economics of Adaptation

to Climate Change, he had visited Bangladesh shortlyafter the monsoons to study these impacts and to look

at appropriate adaptation measures. Where the River

Jamuna had changed its course the existing villages

and paddy fields were inundated but even three months

after the villages were washed away it was found that

the villagers were still camping on the banks of the

river in makeshift huts, somehow eking out a living.

They preferred to continue staying there and continue

paying the land revenue for the lands they had lost!

By continuing to pay the land revenue they said they

were protecting their rights to the new char lands that

were being formed. Therefore, the social and economic

impacts and the societal response measures must

be studied very carefully. The appropriate response

measure in this case was not to resettle them elsewhere

but to expedite the settlement of their new legal rights

and provide them resettlement in the newly formed

char lands.

Mr Jagdish Kishwan Dr Prodipto Ghosh


11/24


~ 9 ~

s e s s i o n 2

experIences from the ground

lveoo n conevton:

Expeence o te lveoo n

lncpe sttegy n in

Ms Sirisha Indukuri, Research Associate,

TERI presented the Livelihoods and Landscapes

Strategy (LLS), a global programme of IUCN.

LLS is being demonstrated in Haryana and Orissa

in India, partnered with TERI and Winrock India

Internationalrespectively.Livelihoodhereisdefined

as a way people secure and use assets and goods for

consumption and generate income. Landscape is a

contiguous area, intermediate in size between an eco-

region and a site, and with a special set of ecological,

cultural, and socio-economic characteristics distinct

from its neighbours. It is essential that the residents

of a landscape identify with the landscape boundaries.

The LLS approach represents a blend of

many good ideas, but it is different because it goes

beyond forests to explore links with agriculture, it

integrates policy with practice, and it provides a new

conservation paradigm wherein there is a shift from

a threat-based approach to an outcome approach,

which is more sustainable. Forests are part of a

landscape, they are not isolated land use units, and

they provide income that can address rural poverty

through the provision of goods and services. The four

themesof theLLS approach are poverty reduction,


12/24


~ 10 ~

markets and incentives, governance, and transforminglandscapes.

TheHaryanaLLSinitiativeisbeingdemonstrated

in the Shivalik foothills belt in Yamunanagar Forest

Division by TERI and IUCN in a pilot site of four

villages. The community here is dependent on the

forests of the region for water (for irrigation) and

non-timber forest products like grasses, particularly

bhabbar and fodder. Local institutions have been

managing the natural resources through the JFMprogramme for many years. The goal of the project

is to ensure effective, efficient, and sustainable use

of natural resources. This is achieved through a host

of activities such as making a case for the landless to

share water rights, training and capacity building and

institutional strengthening of self-help groups (SHGs),

local Hill Resource Management Societies (HRMSs),

Gram Panchayats and other local institutions, and

establishing linkages with the line departments

and NREGS. The various activities are aimed at

institutional strengthening, improved benefit sharing,

integrated village development planning process, and

landscape restoration and income generation activities.

The focus is to facilitate restoration of forests by

providing incentives, strengthening institutions, and

promoting integrated planning by bringing together

all relevant stakeholders both at the village, district,

and the state levels for planning and implementation

of natural resource based activities. Thus the LLSapproach is an eco-system based adaptation strategy

that focuses on the most vulnerable resources to

climate change: forests, water, productive land, and

social groups. The LLS activities have a positive

impactoneachofthesedimensions.LLSthusflows

from an understanding that NRM benefits take time

and institution development at the local level is

critical to make a shift from livelihoods dependent

on forest resources to more diversified, resilient, andlandscape-based livelihoods.

Expeence on Cte Cnge

ptton o rjtn n an

Pe

Dr A A Nambi, Project Director, Climate Change

Programme of M S Swaminathan Research Foundation

(MSSRF) shared experiences in implementation of a

climate change adaptation project in Andhra Pradeshand Rajasthan. Many exogenous factors, including

climate change, affect the livelihoods of the poor

as well as their social, natural, and human capitals.

The project, funded by the Swiss Development

Cooperation, aims at vulnerability assessment and

enhancing adaptation to climate change in the states

of Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh. It is aimed at

improved delivery systems and extension services,

and enhancement of the adaptive capacity of local

Ms Sirisha Indukuri Dr A A Nambi


13/24


~ 11 ~

Ecoyte vunebte n mtgton

o foet fe n Uttkn

hy

Dr R B S Rawat, IFS, Principal Chief Conservator

of Forests, Uttarakhand Forest Department shared

Uttarakhands unique experience of tackling forest

fires and hence reducing ecosystem vulnerabilities.

There is a need for striking a balance between

development and environment, and given this, the

NAPCC has been developed along with increasing

pressure for the implementation of State Action

Plan on Climate Change (SAPCC) by the state

governments. In Uttarakhand, the Forest Departmenthas finalized its contribution to SAPCC and

Uttarakhand has been one of the pioneers in initiatives

on climate change. The approach of the Forest

Department is to determine how best to use invasive

species (such as pine needles), or biomass, and

convert it to biomass energy. In addition to this, there

is an emphasis on linking products and services with

markets as an adaptive measure.

Climate considerations and recommendations fromotherprogrammes,particularlyIUCNsLLSapproach

for poverty reduction has potential to be incorporated

into the working plans of the Uttarakhand Forest

Department.Thereisafocusonpeoplesparticipation

and Community Based Natural Resource Management

(CBNRM), particularly through the Van Panchayats

which have been engaging in sustainable forest practices

for decades. The primary aim is to develop a method of

using pine needles as an alternative and efficient source

of sustainable livelihood. The key vulnerabilities of the

Himalayan ecosystem that must be considered while

formulating policies in Uttarakhand are the melting

of glaciers, erratic precipitation, increased pressure on

resources due to tourism, and forest fires, particularly

in the pine areas.

Uttarakhand has also set up carbon influx towers

and two carbon influx centers. Carbon influx data

communities through multi-level dialogue. The project

focuses on institutional structures and components in

four areas: agriculture, livestock, rural energy, and

water. There are four project villages, two each in

Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh. The aim is to create a

participatory process, build a strong knowledge-base

and use it to weave story-lines that can be used as a

leverage to improve policy.

The catalytic interventions under the project

involve the promotion of locally best practices, training

of climate managers and Gram Panchayat leaders, and

improvement of extension services (which is done in

cooperation with the National Institute of Agriculture

Extension Management (MANAGE), Hyderabad.

Land-use based interventions include control of

erosion losses, designing ideal crop mixes, encouraging

weather-based farming to reduce vulnerability to

weather variability, and adoption of systems of rice

intensification. Water-based interventions include

increasing water availability and efficiency in use,

decreasing agricultural water demand, lining canals,

renovation of wells, and enhancing local water

management practices. Energy-based interventionsinclude providing improved chulhas, an activity that

has large gender and health implications. In addition

to this, knowledge management is a big part of the

project and agro-meteorological stations have been set

up to assist with weather-based farming and develop

scientific rules-of-thumb for best times to sow,

harvest, etc. Climate literacy and awareness is also

spread through local media.

Thus the project aims at skill development, socialmobilization, and awareness. An amalgamation of the

three aims of the project is critical to ensure secure

livelihoods. While there are some challenges such as

uncertainty in climate variability, limitations of up-

scaling projects, and massive adaptation costs, there

are also opportunities for convergence and synergies

with existing state programmes, and with State-level

action plans.


14/24


~ 12 ~

collected by these towers could be used to manageforest ecosystem physiology, understand the role

of forest ecosystems in the global carbon cycle, and

link these with sustainable management plans.

There is also a need to exchange and share information

with other Himalayan countries so as to learn

lessons from these countries could be adapted for

Uttarakhand. We also need to shift from routine

approaches to out-of-the-box models that have strong

emphasis on the marketing of products and servicessuch as eco-tourism.

roe o bovety n Cte Cnge

ptton

Ms Ilona Porsche, Senior Technical Adviser

- Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale

Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), explored the three-way

linkage between biodiversity, climate, and people.

Climate change exacerbates the problems ecosystems

are facing already. Biodiversity provides climate-

regulating services, thus it mitigates climate change. It

also helps to adapt to climate change, and itself adapts

to climate change.

GIZ is embracing ecosystem based adaptation

approaches looking at both short-term time horizons

(activities such as farming, tourism, annual crops, and

tree crops), as well as long-term horizons that focus

on the need to plan for impact of climate change on

protected areas, landscapes, and forest secession.TheGIZinitiativeintheMekongDeltainVietnam

aims at increasing the resilience of the mangroves to

increased storm surges by improving biodiversity.

Since the plantation form of mangroves implies that

all plants are of identical height, width, etc., these

areasareextremelyvulnerabletostorms.GIZistrying

to increase biodiversity in these areas so the coastal

protection system is preserved and the mangroves can

regenerate themselves.GIZ projects worldwide deal with biodiversity

and adaptation to climate change: in Indonesia, there

is a focus on policy advice and a bottom-up strategy; in

the Philippines there is a more nature-based approach

towardsanationaldevelopmentstrategy;inFiji,GIZis

assisting with sustainable forestry management. Apart

frompolicyadvice,GIZhasalsoinstitutedpayment

for environmental services in Peru and Ecuador, as

well as REDD and readiness for REDD+ initiatives

in Brazil, Congo basin, Laos, and the Philippines.

GIZ also focuses on activities involving protected

area management and benefit-sharing. An ecosystem

vulnerability analysis is being conducted in Peru and

Tunisia, whereas in India and China there is a focus on

agro-diversity development.

GIZhasfourpilotprojectsforclimateadaptation

in rural areas of India in Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh,

Tamil Nadu and West Bengal. The most important

Dr R B S Rawat Ms Ilona Porsche


15/24


~ 13 ~

issue that is addressed in these projects is that of

vulnerability and risk assessment at the state level.

While this is already conducted at the national and

locallevels,thestate-levelisthemissinglinkthatGIZ

is attempting to put into place. The idea is to combine

top-down and bottom-up approaches, and suggest

which method is useful in which circumstances, to

develop a basis for decision making. The focus is

on guiding policy makers and technical adaptation

issues as opposed to a focus on merely enhancing

scientific knowledge. There are pilot projects in the

aforementioned four states, with a focus on climate

proofing of rural development programmes, adjusting

activities and policies to increase their adaptive

capacity, and development of adaptation-oriented

market instruments like insurance. An upcoming

project in North-East India aims at adaptation to

climate change through enhancing the livelihood

resilience of the rural poor. There is a special focus

on the rural community in the north-east and climate-

proofing agricultural value chains to see how

people could be at risk through their participation in

agricultural value chains and to devise ways for them

to adapt. Information and knowledge management is

a big component of the project. The north-east is an

ideal location as it is a biodiversity hot-spot and has

a high potential for carbon storage. GIZ also plans

to look at biodiversity with a possible focus in the

Himalayan region in the near future.

The session ended with the chairperson, Prof K

C Malhotra, thanking all the speakers.

Prof K C Malhotra


16/24


~ 14 ~

s e s s i o n 3

theory to practIce

Dr T P Singh, Regional Group Head - Ecosystem and

Livelihoods,Asia,IUCNdrew attention to the issue

that though the focus of development discussions has

been on conversion of theory to practice, there is a

need to also look at closing the loop and going from

practice to theory. The IUCN approach of knowledge,

empowerment, governance (KEG) is the key here.

Better knowledge leads to greater empowerment

which leads to better governance, which in turn feeds

back into better knowledge.

The perception of forests differs at different levels.

At the local level, forests provide goods which are of

direct use. At the national and regional level, forests are

viewed as providing an additional service: biodiversity.

At the international level, forests are looked at from

the point of view of REDD and their large contribution

to carbon emissions, along with their capacity for

sequestering carbon.

Adaptation, particularly ecosystem based

adaptation is a very popular topic of discussion

these days and this too can be viewed differently

at different levels. At the international and regional

levels, the question is how communities and

ecosystems will respond to climate change. At

the national level, the question is how ecosystems

themselves adapt to changes that are induced by

climate (such as changes in natural vegetation

patterns), and how communities in turn adapt to these

changes. The key message for all this is how we

can look at integration at three or four levels so

responses at local level can be taken up as policy

issues at higher levels.


17/24


~ 15 ~

For development to be linked with the integrity

of maintaining ecosystems, these different aspects at

different levels must be considered and integrated.

The aim is to design and execute policies that can

close the loop and link the community, state, national,

and global levels together.

Mr Shirish Sinha, Senior Thematic Advisor,

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

(SDC) shared his experience on the development

of the Chennai Action Plan. A series of workshops

and consultations were conducted with a range

of stakeholders including government agencies,

financial institutions, and academic and civil society

organizations. The partners for the project included

M S Swaminathan Foundation, Development

Alternatives, IUCN and UNDP among others. These

consultations were aimed at the formulation of action

points for each region covered, and it culminated atChennai in the Chennai Action Plan.

The Chennai Action Plan is a people-centric

plan which links the voice of communities to policy

changes, wherein ecosystem resilience is viewed as

the framework for livelihoods security. The focus is

on sustainable and secure livelihoods. Interventions

include food security, smart water management,

the efficient use of energy to move out of energy

poverty, mainstreaming climate risk management,

executing actions at each level to mainstream climate

information. There is also a focus on some enabling and

cross-cutting issues such as linking R&D with field-

level interactions, adaptation with eco-technology

mission, and provision of possible financial assistance

like micro-credit or insurance.

The Chennai Action Plan encouraged a national

level policy dialogue in the Parliament, where it was

agreed that the Plan adopts a different approach from

the National Action Plan. While NAP is more top-

town oriented, the Chennai Action Plan focuses on

taking the voices of the community to give direction

to state-level action.

Mr Pramod Krishnan, Programme Analyst, UNDP

shared his thoughts on practicing the landscape level

approachinthefield.Landscapeapproachtocombat

climate change essentially hinges on the conceptof ecosystem goods and services provided by the

landscape in question. Ecosystem goods and services

flow as a continuum across landscapes, whether man-

modified or natural, though vastly varying in quantity

and quality.

The health of a landscape in the context of

climate change revolves around its resilience and

functional ability to (i) continue provisioning

Dr T P Singh Mr Shirish Sinha


18/24


~ 16 ~

ecosystem goods and services, and (ii) providing

micro-climatic amelioration functions. In other

words, integrity of a landscape and its effectiveness

in the context of climate change is a function of (i) its

extent or geographical spread, (ii) its continuity and

connectedness with other landscape units, and (iii)

the functional networking of individual subsystems

withinthelandscape.Landscapescanbecategorized

into macro, meso, and micro.

The key challenges of adopting a landscape

level perspective would involve three types of issues

institutional, knowledge based and community

based. At the institutional level there are issues of

competing land use patterns in the same landscape,

habitat degradation, and persistent cross-sectoral

coordination issues. Individual sectors pursue

their own developmental agenda and there is no

mechanism for having cross-dialogue with each other.

There is also lack of a clear and comprehensive landscape

management policy. As regards the knowledge related

barriers we have very limited understanding and

experience related to landscape level conservation

friendly development strategies, the information base

is weak, and there is no consideration of traditional

knowledge in landscape level management practices.

There are also emerging issues like climate change

andinvasivespeciesforwhichwedonthaveaclear

strategy. At the community level there is excessive

dependence on natural resources, markets are entering

into landscapes, value systems of the communities are

disintegrating, and the resilience of communities may

not be adequate to cope with the pressures.

While thinking of the possible strategies for an

ideal landscape level management, we can theoretically

start by strengthening national and sub-national

capacity for planning adaptive management strategies

for multiple use landscapes and also including a

mechanism for strict monitoring and enforcement.

We should also look at issues of securing access and

tenurial rights of the people, livelihood issues - both

ecosystems based as well as alternative livelihood

issues. We may have to unleash the economic

potential of sustainably managed natural resource

systems; the knowledge based quantifying ecosystem

goods and services, carbon capture potential of the

systems, etc. In an ideal theoretical governance model

for a landscape, perhaps the political boundaries

may wither away; instead governance systems based

on agro-ecological considerations should come in.

Schemes and programmes should coalesce around a

single framework based on ecosystem based approach

for the identified landscape.

As a first step, we have to start with identification

of viable meso level landscape units in the country. As

a second step, in selected landscapes we can start with

preparation of landscape level strategic plans about

how the landscape should function and perform. This

can be followed by preparation of individual sector

plans that aim at mainstreaming the ecosystem basedapproaches into the existing production sector.

Mr B M S Rathore, IFS, Joint Secretary, MoEF,

who is at the helm of the Green India Mission of

the MoEF, shared his thoughts on the ecosystem

approach. He mentioned that a landscape consists of

many ecosystems. The literature always stresses two

facts: the first, that ecosystems are hugely challenged

from both dependency and developmental pressure,

Mr Pramod Krishnan


19/24


~ 17 ~

and the second that the pressure is further accentuated

because of climate change. One particular example

of livelihood dependency challenging ecosystem is

that of livestock, and in India the ratio of livestock

heads to hectares of grasslands is approximately 4:1,

and in some regions in Rajasthan it is as high as 9:1.

This shows how livestock can exert huge pressures on

grassland ecosystems.

The problem of grass and fodder is difficult

to address as it does not lie within the jurisdiction

of any of the institutions at the grassroots. The

agricultural ambit is more concerned with grain and

yield enhancement, Gram Panchayats and Revenue

Departments have separate roles, and the Forest

Department is more focused on timber and plantations.

How then can these issues of pressure on ecosystems

be addressed?

These ecosystem pressures can be integrated into

the landscape approach. However, it must be kept

in mind that forests, grasslands, wetlands and agro-

ecosystems all exist together in a particular area or

village. To consider these channels and linkages and

use them in making policies, cross-sectorial working

is necessary. Only if we step outside of the designated

forest area can an ecosystem-based landscape

approach be successful.

The Green India Mission identifies the landscape

approach as a key strategy for India. All land

prioritized for landscape approach must be treated

simultaneously and by multiple organizations.

Moreover, identification of landscape areas should

involve vulnerability mapping particularly at the

micro-level, identifying critical biodiversity areas,

spring recharge areas, carbon sink areas as well

as developing a poverty and scheduled-area map.

These will point towards the areas which should be

earmarked for landscape approach on a priority basis.

Instead of having just one model, an amalgamation

of different models such as JFM, community

forest resources, Van Panchayat practices, village

councils, and a host of other institutional possibilitiesneed to be considered. There is no one-size-fits-all

possibility. Landscape practice needs to work with

these diversities and build on existing institutions of

development and conservation practices that are tried

and tested over many years. Working at the village

level, with micro watersheds, Gram Panchayats, and

user committees, is the key to successful landscape

approach outcomes.

Concung ek o te C

DrK D Singh sharedhis views on the subject. Climate

Change takes place over a long period, not like

drought which occurs more often. To understand this

Mr B M S Rathore

Dr K D Singh


20/24


~ 18 ~

phenomenon fully, there is a need to set up observation

plots and collect climatic data, as well as biodiversity

data across India to assess the long term changes in

climate, biodiversity, and livelihoods. Further, this

data needs to be aggregated and integrated across

the world as climate change is a global phenomenon.

Secondly, India needs to develop a complete

accounting system for national as well as local level

accounting and reward distribution of REDD+. Given

IndiasinitiativeatBali,itscontributioninthisarea

should be global, not national.

Finally, there is a need for local action so that

the poorest of the poor and those most vulnerable to

climate change are able to adopt adaptive practices.

For this paradigm shift in institutional focus, we

must consider not just the natural landscape, but the

natural cultural landscape.GramSabhas, self-help

groups, user committees, Van Panchayats and similar

community-level institutions at the lowest levels

of administration and self-governance should be

reinvented. This will enable the best possible response

to climate change through adaptation.

Ms sonali BishtadIntitute of Himalaan Reearch &Education (INHERE)Mai Bazar, Dit. AlmoraUttarakhand - 263 658

Ph: (05966) 257217, -257374-246342-257217 (Fax)

Mr aBhinaBa ChakravartiM/s PRAgyA766, Udo Vihar Phae-Vguraon - 122 016Ph.: (0124) 4574500-2341559 (Fax)email: [email protected] anish ChatterjeePcp rc CdClimate Chane Action for Food

Production (AFPRO)25/1A Intitutional Area, PankhaRoad, Janakpuri, New Delhi 58Ph: 97183 49433email: [email protected] M l DewanPdHimalaan Conortium forHimalaan Conervation (HIMCON)N-44 Panchheel Park, New DelhiPh: 2649-7791, -6916email: [email protected]

Mr BrahaM DuttWorld Aid Expre113-A, DDA Flat, shahpur JatNew Delhi 110 011, Ph: 2649 9209

Mr jai kuMar Gaurav

CUnited Nation DevelopmentProramme (UNDP)Pot Box No. 3059, 55 Lodi Etate,New Delhi - 110 003Ph: 4653 2333. 2462 7612 (Fax),98118 08661email: [email protected]

Mr nilanjan GhosePgmm offcWinrock International788 Udo Vihar, Phae-V

guraon 122 001Ph: 0124-4303844, -4303862 (Fax),98118 24999email: [email protected]

Ms Gitika GoswaMiPgmm offcWinrock International788 Udo Vihar, Phae-Vguraon 122 001Ph: 0124-4303844, -4303862 (Fax),99105 43361email: [email protected]

Dr n M ishwarMFF (id Cd)IUCN India, 20 Anand Lok(2nd Floor),Auut Kranti MarNew Delhi - 110 049, Ph: 4605 2583email: [email protected]

Dr raMesh kuMar jalanReource Peron & ModeratorUnited Nation DevelopmentProramme (UNDP)Pot Box No. 3059, 55 Lodi Etate,New Delhi 110 003Ph: 4653 2333. 2462 7612 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Ms uPasana joshiPgmm aIUCN India

20 Anand Lok (2nd Floor)Auut Kranti MarNew Delhi - 110 049, Ph: 4605 2583email: [email protected]

Ms aBan Marker kaBrajirg Dc, aIUCN Aia Reional Office63 sukhumvit soi 39Wattana, Bankok - 10110ThailandPh: +66 2 662 4029, -4389 (Fax)email: [email protected]

List of speakers and participants


21/24

~ 19 ~


Mr jaGDish kishwanadd Dc G f F(wdf)Minitr of Environment and Foret441 Paravaran Bhawan, CgOComplex, Lodi Road, New Delhi - 10Ph: 2436 3247, -4790 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Mr PraMoD krishnanPgmm aUnited Nation DevelopmentProramme India, 55 Lodi EtateNew Delhi - 110 003Ph: 4653 2262, 2462 7612 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Dr sue Mainkahd scc d kdg

Mgmscience and KnowledeManaementIUCN - International Union forConervation of NatureRue Mauverne 28gland, 1196, switzerlandTel: ++41 (22) 999-0150, -0025 (Fax)email: [email protected]

ProF k C MalhotraC385, sector 29, Noida 201 301

Tel: 95120-0120 2453405email: [email protected]

Mr j M Mauskaradd sc(Climate Chane, Ozone Cell andImpact Aement)Minitr of Environment and Foret,Paravaran Bhawan, CgO ComplexLodi Road, New Delhi 110 510Fax 91-011-2436 6912

Ms Divya Mohan

WWF-India172 B, Lodi EtateNew Delhi - 110003Ph: 4150 4815, 2469 1226 (Fax)

Dr k s MuraliPgmm offc (CmCg)World Food Proramme2 Poorvi Mar, Vaant ViharNew Delhi - 110 057Ph: 4655 4046, 4655 4000 x 2460,(Fax), 98101 15570

email: [email protected]

Dr a a naMBiDc Cm CgPgmmM s swaminathan ReearchFoundation3rd Cro Road, TaramaniIntitutional Area, Chennai 600 113Ph: 044-2254 27902254 1319 (Fax)

Mr suDhir k PanDeadNational Miion on BambooApplication2nd Fl., Vihwakarma Bhawan,shaheed Jeet sinh MarNew Delhi - 110 016Ph: 4252 5666, 2696 2267 (Fax),98114 80567


Mr C s PanDeyDcCAPARTIndia Habitat CentreCore V-A, 2nd Floor, Lodi RoadNew Delhi - 110 003Ph: 2465 6701, 2464 8607 (Fax)

Dr suPrava PatnaikUnited Nation Educational,scientific and Cultural Oranization

UNEsCO Houe, B-5/29 safdarjunEnclave, New Delhi 110 029Ph: 2671 3000, -3001/2 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Mr varGhese Paultcc adTechnical Cooperation Projectsupport UnitMadha Pradeh Rural LivelihoodProject (DFID & govt of MP)Madha Pradeh AricultureMandi Board, Firt Floor, 26 Arera

Hill, Jail Road,Kian Bhavan BhopalPh: (0)755-3255334, -4229168 (Fax),98930 43691email: [email protected]

Dr inDrani Phukans Pgmm offc,strenthenin Climate ReilienceProrammeChritian Aid south Aia ReionalOffice, D-25D, south ExtenionPart II, New Delhi 110049Ph: 2626-8068 70, -8071 (Fax)


Ms ilona PorsChes tcc adDeutche geellchaft frInternationale Zuammenarbeit(gIZ), B-5/1, 2nd Floor, safdarjunEnclave, New Delhi 110 029Phone: + 91 11 46027617-19email: [email protected]

Mr B M s rathore, iFsj scMinitr of Environment and Foret441 Paravaran Bhawan, CgOComplex, Lodi Road, New Delhi - 10

Dr j s rawatC-d (P&C)IUCN India, 20 Anand Lok (2ndFloor), Auut Kranti Mar, New

Delhi - 110 049, Ph: 4605 2583email: [email protected]

Dr r B s rawat, iFsPcp Cf C fFUttarakhand Foret Department85 Rajpur Road, Dehradun 248 001Ph: 0135-274 6934, -2583158 (Fax),94120 51550email: [email protected]

Ms niDhi sarinPc offc Cm FcBritih Hih CommiionDepartment for IndutrialDevelopment (DfID), B-28, TaraCrecent, Qutab Intitutional AreaNew Delhi 110 016,Ph: 98187 05809email: [email protected]

Mr viPul sharMaPgmm aIUCN India, 20 Anand Lok,(2nd Floor), Auut Kranti MarNew Delhi 110 049

Ph: 4605 2583, 099370 92684email: [email protected]

Mr Balour sinGhDcPunjab Ener Development Aenc(PEDA),sector 33, Chandiarh 34Ph: 098766 93975email: [email protected]

Dr k D sinGhAcadem of Foret & EnvironmentK-30 Hauz Kha Enclave

New Delhi 110 016


22/24


~ 20 ~

Dr t P sinGhrg Gp hd -ecm d ld, aIUCN63 sukhumvit soi 39, sukhumvitRoad, Wattana, Bankok 10110,

Thailand, Ph: 66-2-662 4096, -6624388 (Fax), 66 81 824 2836email: [email protected]

Mr Pranav sinhaPgmm offcClimate Parliament126-D, Pocket F, Maur ViharPhae II, New Delhi 110 091Ph: 97174 45454

Mr shirish sinhas tmc ad - Cm

CgEmba of switzerland,Chandraupta MarChanakapuriNew Delhi 110 021Ph: 4995-9570, -9589 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Dr Preeti soniad Cm CgUnited Nation DevelopmentProramme (UNDP)Pot Box No. 3059, 55Lodi Etate, New Delhi - 110 003Ph: 4653 2333, 2462 7612 (Fax),99101 61881email: [email protected]

Mr surinDer sinGh sursdTERI Univerit, 10, IntitutionalArea, Vaant Kunj, New DelhiPh: 2612 2222, 2612 2874 (Fax)

Mr vishaish uPPalhd - sb ldGc

WWF-India172 B, Lodi EtateNew Delhi - 3Ph: 4150 4815, 2469 1226 (Fax)email: [email protected]

sPeakers/PartiCiPants FroMteri/teri university

Ms tara BraraM.sc. (ec.) sdTERI Univerit10, Intitutional Area, Vaant Kunj,

New Delhi 110 070, Ph: 26122222

Mr suresh ChauhanFThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003

Ph: 24682100email: [email protected]

Mr anirBan GanGulyFThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003Ph: 24682100email: [email protected]

Dr ProDiPto GhoshDgd F

The Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003Ph: 24682100email: [email protected]

Ms arushi GoelM.sc. (ec.) sdTERI Univerit10, Intitutional AreaVaant KunjNew Delhi 110 070

Ph: 26122222

Dr yoGesh GokhaleFThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi Road, New Delhi 110 003Ph: 24682100email: [email protected]

Ms sirisha inDukurirc acThe Ener and Reource Intitute

India Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003Tel : 91 11 24682100email: [email protected]

Mr vivek jhaac FThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003Ph: 2468-2100email: [email protected]

Ms GraCe lhouvuMac FThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat CentreLodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003

Ph: 24682100email: [email protected]

Mr asiM MirzaFd Mg-sctfmThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi Road,New Delhi 110 003Ph: 2468-2100email: [email protected]

Dr araBinDa MishraDc, e scc dCm Cg DThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi Road,New Delhi 110 003Ph: 2468 2100email: [email protected]

Mr rakesh PrasaDFd Mg-sctfmThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003

Ph: 2468 2100email: [email protected]

Dr Pia sethiFThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi Road,New Delhi 110 003Ph: 24682100, 24682144-45 (Fax)email: [email protected]

Ms riDhiMa suDac F

The Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi Road,New Delhi 110 003Ph: 2468 2100email: [email protected]

Dr leena srivastavaexc Dc-opThe Ener and Reource IntituteIndia Habitat Centre, Lodi RoadNew Delhi 110 003Ph: 2468-2100email: [email protected]


23/24

09301000 Rgistrati

10001010 Wlcm Rmarks

Dr Leena Srivastava,Executive Director (Operations), TERI

10101020 Iaugural Addrss

Mr J M Mauskar,Additional Secretary, MoEF

10201030 Spcial Rmarks

Ms Aban Marker Kabraji,Regional Director (IUCN, Asia)

1030-1130 SeSSIon 1 Climate response in the national and international context

Chair : Dr Prdipt Ghsh,Distinguished Fellow, TERI

Climat rsps i th atial ad itratial ctxt Pttial fr a ladscap apprach

- Mr Anirban Ganguly, Fellow, TERI

ecsystm basd apprach fr Climat Chag adaptati

- Dr N M Ishwar,MFF- India Coordinator, IUCN

ReDD + ad c-bfits

- Mr Jagdish Kishwan,Addl Director General of Forests (Wildlife), MoEF, New Delhi

11301145 Tea

1145-1230 SeSSIon 2 Experiences from the ground

Chair : Prf K C Malhtra

Livlihds ad csrvati: exprics frm th Livlihds ad Ladscaps Stratgy i Idia

- Ms Sirisha Indukuri,Research Associate, TERI

exprics Climat Chag adaptati frm Rajastha ad Adhra Pradsh

-Dr A A Nambi, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation

ecsystm vulrabilitis ad Mitigati f Frst Firs i Uttarakhad Himalayas

- Dr R B S Rawat, IFS,Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, UttarakhandForest Department

Rl f bidivrsity i Climat Chag adaptati

- Ms Ilona Porsche, Senior Technical Adviser - Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)

1230-1330 SeSSIon 3 Theory to practice

Chair : Dr K D Sigh

Pal Discussi Rspdig at glbal, atial, ad lcal lvls

Panelists

Dr T P Singh,Regional Group Head - Ecosystem and Livelihoods, Asia, IUCN

Mr Shirish Sinha, Senior Thematic Advisor, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)

Mr Pramod Krishnan,Programme Analyst, UNDP

Mr B M S Rathore, IFS,Joint Secretary, MoEF, New Delhi

Ccludig rmarks by th Chair

1330 1340 Vt f Thaks

Mr Anirban Ganguly,Fellow, TERI

1340 Lunch

AgendA

Vu: Jacaraa II, Iia Habitat Ctr, Lohi Roa, nw dlhi


24/24

f o r f u r T h e r d e T a i l s , c o n T a c T

The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)

Darbari Seth Block, IHC Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003, India

Tel: +91 (11) 2468 2100/4150 4900 Fax: +91 (11) 2468 2144/2468 2145

E-mail: [email protected] www.teriin.org

Documents

Proceedings_DSDS_2Feb2011 & List of Participants