Understanding similarities and differences of safeguards mechanisms for REDD+ and how they

support development of a country safeguards system

• WHY?– to promote effective design and adaptive management (that addresses

safeguards effectively - avoiding harm and generating benefits)– to access and maintain funding– to demonstrate compliance with national law and with international

obligations– to build and maintain support among stakeholders

• interest groups/NGOs • general public • local people affected by REDD+ activities

Understanding similarities and differences of safeguards mechanisms for REDD+

• WHEN?– Design-readiness phase– Implementation phase

• WHAT?– Governance: coherence, participation, disclosure, accountability,

grievance mechanisms – Rights: respect for rights, Indigenous Peoples and local communities– Impacts: social and environmental, negative and/or positive, for

different stakeholder groups– Actions to avoid or mitigate negative & enhance positive impacts

• WHO?– Defines what information is to be collected– Collects, reviews and reports information – Participates in governance of safeguards mechanisms– Ensures implementation of agreed mitigation/enhancement actions

Design - Readiness Implementation

Strategic Environmental & Social Assessment (SESA)

An iterative process of analysis and consultation to improve design based on World Bank safeguards and issues identified through the process

Environmental & Social Management Framework (ESMF)

Framework for development of plans to mitigate and manage risks with respect to World Bank safeguards

Why: required for funding, improve design

What: WB safeguards, negative impacts, rights, compliance monitoring

Who: government and World Bank, possibly other delivery partners

Why: improve design, build support , required for funding

What: governance, rights, positive & negative impacts,Who: multi-stakeholder, participatory

Design - Readiness ImplementationSocial & Environmental Principles & Criteria (SEPC)

Guiding framework for addressing social and environmental issues in UN-REDD National Programmes and to support countries in developing a national approach to safeguards in line

with UNFCCC. BeRT and other tools to be developed for application

Benefit and Risks Tool (BeRT)Guides design of UN-REDD National programs. Principles, criteria and questions for comprehensive consideration of risks and benefits.

Participatory Governance Assessment (PGA)

Inclusive multi-stakeholder process identifies priority governance issues, defines indicators, collects information, to feedback into design. No predefined content.

Why: improve designWhat : governance, rights, positive/negative

impactsWho: national UN-REDD program design team

Why: improve design, build stakeholder support

What: priority governance issues identified for the country

Who: multi-stakeholder, participatory identification of indicators and assessment

Design - Readiness Implementation

REDD+ Social & Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES)Inclusive, multi-stakeholder process uses a comprehensive

framework to define country-specific indicators and to review performance for monitoring and reporting of process and impacts

throughout implementation

Why: monitoring & reporting, build stakeholder support, improve designWhat: governance, rights, positive & negative impacts, adapted to country contextWho: multi-stakeholder, participatory identification of indicators, assessment & review

Policy and legal framework that defines and operationalizes country-specific safeguards interpretation for REDD+- Existing policies, laws and regulations- REDD+ specific polices, laws and regulations

Policies, Laws and Regulations

Monitoring and reporting

Country-specific monitoring and reporting framework- Indicators for process and outcomes related to country-specific safeguards interpretation- Monitoring methodologies- Reporting frameworks to address different information needs (for adaptive management, for national

stakeholders, for donor agencies, for UNFCCC etc)

Institutional framework that defines roles, responsibilities and interrelations of those responsible for the safeguards system- Institution(s) to ensure fair, effective and transparent processes for design and implementation- Institutions to implement policies, laws and regulations- Institutions to collect and process information for monitoring and reporting on safeguards

Processes and procedures

Grievance mechanism

National-level mechanism to receive and address grievances related to the national safeguards system

Institutions

Processes and procedures that are followed to implement the safeguards system- Consultations- Capacity building- Action plans to mitigate harm and support benefits

Potential elements of a national safeguards system for REDD+

Institutions

Main steps for development of a country safeguards system

Policies, Laws and Regulations

Monitoring and reporting

Grievance mechanism

Country interpretation of REDD+ safeguards

Gap analysis and development of new PLRs and institutions

Identification of indicators for social/environmental performance

Development of monitoring and reporting methodology

Development of grievance mechanism

Gap analysis and development of new processes and procedures

- What existing PLRs/institutions help to meet REDD+ safeguards-Where are the gaps ?- What PLRs/institutions are needed to fill gaps?

- What are the key indicators to determine if safeguards are met and performance with respect to country interpretation of safeguards?

What are the data needs and gaps?- How will monitoring be carried out?- How will data be reported?- Who should be responsible?

- How will grievances relating to REDD+ safeguards be heard and responded to?- Who should be responsible?

-What existing processes/procedures help to meet REDD+ safeguards?-What new ones are needed?

-What are the potential soc/env risks of the REDD+ strategy?-- What should be protected or supported when doing REDD+?

Development processThe ‘system’

Processes and procedures

Institutions

Policies, Laws and Regulations

Monitoring and reporting

Grievance mechanism

National interpretation of REDD+ safeguards

Gap analysis and development of new PLRs and institutions

Identification of indicators for social/environmental performance

Development of monitoring and reporting methodology

Development of grievance mechanism

Gap analysis and development of new processes and procedures

- FCPF SESA- UN-REDD BeRT- UN-REDD PGA (for governance)

-REDD+ SES- UN-REDD PGA (for governance)-Governance of Forests Indicators (for governance)

- REDD+ SES- FCPF ESMF (for WB OPs)-UN-REDD BeRT- PGA (for governance)- UN-REDD guidelines on FPIC

- Cancun SG- Donor Ops - Internati’l conventions agreements- UN-REDD SEPC-REDD+ SES-FCPF SESA (for risks/ opportunities)

The ‘system’

Processes and procedures

Potential international inputs

Existing PLRs (statutory and customary)

Existing PLRs and institutions (statutory and customary)

Biodiversity, social and forest indicators

Biodiversity, social, forest monitoring

Existing grievance mechanisms

Existing processes/procedures

Potential country inputs

Durban decision on safeguards information

2. Agrees that systems for providing information on how the safeguards [in Cancun agreement] are addressed and respected should,

• taking into account national circumstances and respective capabilities, • recognizing national sovereignty and legislation, and• relevant international obligations and agreements, and• respecting gender considerations:

(a) Be consistent with guidance [in para 1 Cancun agreement];

(b) Provide transparent and consistent information that is accessible by all relevant stakeholders and updated on a regular basis;

(c) Be transparent and flexible to allow for improvements over time;

(d) Provide information on how all of the safeguards [in Cancun agreement] are being addressed and respected;

(e) Be country-driven and implemented at the national level;

(f) Build upon existing systems, as appropriate;

A Safeguards Information System