Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

Keynote Speech

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)
I am going to try to walk you through what has been happening in REDD since Montreal.

I am going to look back to the past even beyond Montreal because everyone remembers Montreal,
but things had started being discussed quite long time before Montreal.
which basically will be until Paris and where we stand there.
dialogue about what could be the future.

I will go through the present,

Finally, I will try to enable a smallFirst of all, REDD is a piece among many other pieces that

we have to use in order to fight and try to mitigate climate change.

Therefore, it has a context.

The Past up until Paris

I will talk about the past up to Paris.
The whole thing about deforestation started in The Hague.
Hague already.

There was a long debate in The

COP6 was also a failure in part due to difficult discussions on LULUCF,

avoiding

deforestation inclusion as an activity in the in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was
considered there already. Finally, while COP6 resumed in Bonn at COP6bis, the Bonn agreements
which resulted later on in the Marrakesh agreements did not include avoiding deforestation as a CDM

47

Keynote Speech
activity.

The main reason why is because the estimated potential was so big and the uncertainty andthe insipient concept of markets were so unclear that it was seen as a threat for markets.
However, later on in Montreal, Papua New Guinea and Costa Rica brought back the concept of
deforestation, of avoiding deforestation.

They succeeded to include it in the agenda of the COP.

Then we started the 10 years that Mitsuo was indicating of discussions on REDD that resulted onwhat we have today.
The main steps were first the inclusion of paragraph 1biii in the Bali Action Plan and a fullindependent decision on REDD (1/CP.16).

Then the other major stages were the inclusion of

REDD+ in the Cancun Agreements and the COP19 in Warsaw where most of the methodologicalframework was resumed.

Only one decision was left that it was finally adopted in Paris.

This is thepast story of how forests in developing countries were brought into the convention and the mitigation
challenges.
It is very important to be reminded that one of the factors that brought back deforestation was
the fact that, in the Fourth Assessment Report 1 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2(IPCC) it was very much highlighted that the deforestation potentially could be up to approximately
20% of the global emissions.

This is a detail of how the major milestones were achieved from COP11 to COP21.

I will not go

in detail there, but it is important to say that the rulebook of methodologies and modalities started
from Bali.

In Bali we had one decision on REDD+ and the inclusion on the Bali Action Plan.

Then we went through COP15 3 in Copenhagen and had also a decision in Poznań which was
methodological.

However, in Copenhagen we were almost ready to adopt what was adopted in

Cancun, but unfortunately the context and the failure of the overall COP did not allow for that.
While it was preserved from the Copenhagen discussions along a very difficult year in 2010, it was
finally incorporated as one section of the Cancun Agreement.

This is the framing decision for1

https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_report_synthesis_
report.htm
2 http://www.ipcc.ch/
3 http://unfccc.int/meetings/copenhagen_dec_2009/session/6262.php

48

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

REDD+ as it is conceived today.

Keynote Speech

Then the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action 4 evolved and we

progressed into the guidance for certain aspects like this admission of reference levels.

Unfortunately,

we could not achieve a lot of progress in COP17 5 in Durban and COP18 6 in Doha, but finally Warsaw
brought seven decisions on REDD which were providing a lot of stands on methodological guidance.
COP20 7 in Lima was preparing for Paris, so what was very crucial before Lima was the UN
Climate Summit 8 and the New York Declaration on Forests 9.

That was a very good push forendorsing what was happening on the ground on REDD including private sector and stakeholders
engagement who were there committing themselves to do actions on the ground.
finance was highlighted.

Of course, theFinally, Paris is closing the methodological rules for REDD, and a decision

on safeguards and guiding countries on what they can include in the safeguards summary has been
provided.

We can consider that the so-called REDD rulebook is completed.
have in the rulebook.

This is the decision that you

The secretariat is very keen to compile those and put it in a booklet so that you

can easily access all of them, but what you can see here is that, within all the decisions that are being
taken, there are different types of decisions.

There are the framing decisions, which is the Cancun

Agreement.

There are methodological decisions that you can see in gray, and there are otherprovisions.

Within the other provisions, the main topics which are highlighted are how to finance,

the need of coordination, and the encouragement of developed countries to help developing countries
in the different phases of REDD.

There is a very complex summary of decisions that, if you do notread carefully you may be a little bit lost in, but it meant it is a very detailed reading.

4

https://unfccc.int/files/meetings/durban_nov_2011/decisions/application/pdf/cop17_durbanplatfo
rm.pdf5 http://unfccc.int/meetings/durban_nov_2011/session/6294.php
6 http://unfccc.int/meetings/doha_nov_2012/session/7049.php
7 http://unfccc.int/meetings/lima_dec_2014/meeting/8141.php
8 http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/
9

http://www.un.org/climatechange/summit/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/07/New-York-Declar
ation-on-Forest-%E2%80%93-Action-Statement-and-Action-Plan.pdf

49Keynote Speech
REDD+ Methodological Guidance

Trying to summarize the methodological guidance, what REDD provides, the Warsaw Framework,and the rulebook provides is basically four building blocks.

Countries will have to develop fourbuilding blocks in order to be able to access what is being called results-based payments or
results-based finance, which is supposed to be on the long term.

We enable to push more and more

ambitious implementation of REDD on the ground.
The first building block is national forest monitoring system which is something that the countrybuilds as they think it should be built with certain guidance that is provided under the convention.
There is no nitty-gritty guidance.
and ground validation.

The only thing that is said is it has to be based on remote sensing

Usually, countries combine remote sensing activity data with the emission

factors coming from the national forest inventories or specific surveys.

The timing is that you haveto have some articulated national forest monitoring system when you start submitting, for example,
your reference level or want to access forest results-based payment later.

You can describe these andsend it to the information hub which is being created by the Secretariat, and you have the reference
decisions there on the guidance floor.

There are relations between the national forest monitoring

system and the national communications (Nat Coms) because Nat Coms include the reference GHG
inventories and includes also some information about the forest sector in terms of mitigation and soon.

Therefore, you could gather this information from your national forest monitoring system ifcollected there.
The second building block is the national forest reference levels, and this is the topic that it
occupies as today in this seminar.

I will not go into detail there, but there are several decisions fromthe submission to the review or their technical assessment of the reference levels which are provided
by the Warsaw Framework.
The third element is the national strategy for REDD, which provides your own framework on
where your REDD implementation is going, how it fits with other issues, what the drivers are, which
actions are you taking, and so on.

It is again something that you develop yourself and there is notmuch guidance provided in the Warsaw Framework.

The reason for that is because every country will

have a very specific strategy, and every country is very different so you cannot provide nitty-gritty
guidance for any strategy.

50

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

The final element is the safeguard information system.

Keynote Speech

Safeguards have been one of the mostinnovative and outstanding issues that REDD has been bringing to the climate change debate. How
do you do REDD better?
from collateral damage?

How do you preserve REDD from perversion, from perverse incentives
This is what safeguards are trying to do.

Therefore you have to have a way

to provide information to the public and to the convention on how you are addressing those problems
that the safeguards which are in the Cancun Agreement may highlight.
All this is the basis for the implementation.

There are strong linkages of some of the elementsof the building blocks of REDD with the greenhouse gas inventory, which is one of the bases for
mitigation in the convention.

It is not very exciting to do on greenhouse gas inventory.

Manypeople think it is boring, but if we do not have good greenhouse gas inventories it is impossible toassess the progress and it is impossible to inform our decisions on what may b the most effective
mitigation actions.

Therefore, there are strong linkages between the national forest monitoring

system as well as a reference level with the greenhouse gas inventory.

That is why the convention

highlights that they have to be consistent and this is a key principle to be followed..

This is an illustration of these four elements and how they could evolve from the phases that havebeen identified for REDD.
approach.

REDD has been identified to be implemented in a stepwise or phase

We were all aware of the problem that developing countries did not have the capacity

many times, so there was a need to do or to support readiness.
building.

This is the first phase: capacity

All these four elements go through the readiness process and then go to somepre-implementation, demonstration, or piloting, which is the second phase.

In the third phase, you

are supposed to be fully ready to start doing actual things on the ground to demonstrate yourcontributions to mitigation and therefore to get back the payments for results.
In the case of the national forest monitoring system, you can see that sometimes you start
sub-national, but with the intention always to become national.

Usually, for the national forest

monitoring system, what happens is that you may start with a much simpler one and you may improve
it over time but start national.

Although, some countries may start more confined in some regions

and then expand it to national. In particular for the reference levels, it is very important to consider
when designing how to scale up.

This is probably one of the big topics that we are going to discuss

51

Keynote Speechin this workshop.

I will not go into detail but I want to highlight that there are some decisions that are notexclusively methodological at all, but they highlight certain topics of certain issues that are very
important; for example the need of capacity building and technical assistance; the coordination of
support and the results-based finance; and the results-based payments for implementation.

These areenabling elements that will allow REDD to progress together with the methodological guidance.

It was a long road from Bali to Paris.
from readiness towards piloting.

It was a full set of decisions that were guiding countries

This is where we stand today, and we stand today starting to pilot

things.

There have been many actors in readiness because readiness was not a regulated or guided

process.

Since we were learning by doing, it was left open to everyone to support.

This is good

because everyone can support, but at the same time it is challenging because not everyone has thesame view, so the coordination of the actors within the countries has been a challenge.
countries even perceive this as a burden rather than a help.

Sometimes

I think many of us here have been

responsible for that, but I believe that we are improving in terms of talking to each other andcoordinating better so that we become something that supports the country rather than to become achallenge for them.
It is also true that it has been a longer process than expected.

52

Everyone was very excited, “Now,Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

we can do REDD in three years.
know that it is not that easy.

Keynote Speech

That is going to happen. Everyone is very committed,” but we all

We know that dealing with land use, dealing with forest, it takes time.

Making our policy makers aware of the importance of forests is also sometimes challenging.

One ofthe challenge that we are facing today and in the last few years is also managing expectations because
we do not REDD to stop.
expectations.
people.

We do not want people to be discouraged, so we have to manage

Yet financing is to come for implementation, so that also discouraged sometimes

They think, “We are here to do that hard thing. No, just forget about it.

money in the plate,” but that is not true.

There is a lot of money in the plate.

There is no

The point is how tobring the money in a coherent and effective manner.
The Present: up to 2016.

The present: up to 2016.
I will focus a bit on the reference levels because this is the hottest topic of 2014, 2015, and 2016
because it is going through the submission and the technical assessment process.
There have been six countries reviewed already, and almost ten countries will be reviewed this year.

53

Keynote Speech
The emerging challenge that are being observed, while countries are being pulling together thereference levels or the review process has been happening for some and even beyond, is consistency
across the different potential scales of implementation.

This is becoming a challenge.

How we linknational, sub-national, and project levels, we understand that all of the three scales are very useful
because when you do things at the local level, projects can be useful at the implementation of actions
on the ground but policies e usually national.

When you design strategies that affect certain regionsof your country, the sub-national level can be useful as well. Of course, you need a national umbrella
for everything.

That is very important to use properly the three scales.

The consistency and credibility of estimates is also a very important challenge today, particularly
for the reference levels, which is the first element that this is going to be assessed internationally.
One of the issues that comes back and forth is historic data versus present and the future data. We
cannot sometimes improve that much the historic data, but we can improve a lot in the future. How
we balance these different data sets is a challenge.

That also links to the greenhouse gas inventory,

which has the same challenge of how to have consistency between past and future of the greenhousegas inventory.

To what extent can you do recalculations in the past?

Then another emerging challenging is the assessment of adjustments. You know that it has beenrecognized that countries should have the possibility to adjust for national circumstances.

They use

the historical trends and datasets, but they can adjust from national circumstances, which are a ways toreflect what it will happen otherwise in the future, and each one is doing it in their own way.
assessment of adjustments is complex and requires some reflection.
of countries that submitted last year with adjustments.

The

There have been so far a couple

The challenge observed while the countries

are constructing their reference levels and TAs, I will summarize on that one.
The next challenge is that some countries are submitting the biennial update reports (BUR) annex,
and then the consistency with BUR links again to the consistency across the greenhouse gas inventory
times you use.

It has to be done in parallel with improvements of reference levels.

Again, you haveto play with the reference level improvement and your actual greenhouse gas inventory for great
improvement.

Again, consistency is an issue.

The presentation late in the morning will summarize better than this, but this is just to give you a54

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

flavor.

Keynote SpeechThis is the diversity of approaches that for the countries which are being assessed is being

observed. For example, on the scale you have from sub-national to national and different ways ofapproaching biomes, or even country presented some narrow approach.

Which is sort of similar to

the narrow approach of Japan for forest management, so that they use their permanent forest reserves,which is what they are doing now in forest management as the boundaries or the scale for REDD+ in
the country.

It is national, but it is confined to a narrow activity.

concentrated in deforestation.

The

scope

is

mostlyThere is only one country which included degradation, and there is

only one country that only included sustainable management of forest.

However, in general, most of

the countries that provide deforestation as a scope are indicating that they will include degradation assoon as they will have reliable data. Of course, adjustments, as I said, have been done so far in two
countries which have been assessed.

This year I did not get time to carefully look into thesubmissions.

Another issue is the pools.
pools.

Not all the pools are included.

Different countries include different

Different pools are included for different activities so that you see a variety of things.

Of course, the periods are also different, and this depends very much on the reliability of thehistorical data that the countries have.

Although remote sensing has been helping a lot, remotesensing is not the only issue that you have to resolve. You have to have emission factors. You haveto stratify, and you have to have confidence in that.
so different.

55

That is one of the factors that makes the periods

Keynote Speech

I want to make a point because two main activities indicated that will be included soon are
deforestation and degradation, which is perhaps the ones that are more seen for the countries having
potential.

For deforestation, the medium resolution imagery Landsat is being used widely.

Sometimes high resolution imagery and land registries are being used to combine with that.
In the case of degradation, you see that is more demanding.

Usually you need thehigh-resolution imagery or testing Landsat-NDVI 10 combination. When you do not have possibility
to have that, or you have timber records or management plans, you can assess it from the respective
statistics if available.

Of course, fuel wood use statistics are being used some times, but there is nocommon approach yet for degradation. Each country is testing with the available data what they cando. For example, Brazil is experimenting a lot, but many other countries are doing it as well.

In summary, where can we say developing countries are today?
readiness activities are happening in up to 60 countries already.

Most of them undergoing

Readiness is a process that iscontinuous. We thought that you are ready and you start something else.

It is not the case.

You

are more or less ready and you start something else, but you continue to do readiness activities.

Manydeveloping countries are doing the national strategies already.

They are trying.

They are doing a lotof studies on assessment of drivers and trying to put these things in the context of the national
strategy.
10

A few countries have more defined strategies, and they are moving towards someNormalized Difference Vegetation Index

56

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

Keynote Speechdemonstration activities or piloting, slowly trying to move into implementation, and asking forresults-based payments.

For example, Brazil, Mexico, Ecuador, Vietnam, Guyana are countries thatare moving a bit faster.

Hopefully it includes also Indonesia, but we will know better today.

National Forest Monitoring Systems and Reference Levels

Where do countries stand in national forest monitoring systems and reference levels?

Manycountries developed already important elements of the national forest monitoring system or they havedesigned it.

There are six countries that submitted the reference level and have been assessed already;Brazil, Columbia, Ecuador, Mexico, Guyana, and Malaysia. We have evidence that the nine newcountries will submit this year by the end of the month.

This is Vietnam, Peru, Chile, Costa Rica,

Paraguay, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Republic of Congo, Zambia, and may be Cambodia.

In terms of starting to think on accessing through the process results-based payments, while there
is already one BUR which has been assessed, which is Brazil, for which the reference level was assessedin 2014, there are two to three expectations of annexes to be sent in 2016.

The assessment will

happen in 2016, and there are a few countries that have other visions, for example, broader sustainable
developments.

They do not see REDD as REDD-only but they see REDD as part of a small pieceof the broader sustainable development like Gabon, or other visions of not only mitigation and not
mitigation as the main objective, but a joint adaptation and mitigation approach like Bolivia, which has

57

Keynote Speech
been also recognized in the Paris Agreement, although there is no guidance.

It is true that some of

the guidance for REDD can be used for that too, but probably they will need to develop some extra
guidance for that.

However, what is true is this range of countries is all struggling with how they aregoing to get the necessary investments. Where are the investments going to come from?
Financing

Where is financing is going to come from? What we learn is that there is not going to be one
single source of finance.

The reason is because REDD phases are associated to different financial

needs along the path of achieving results.
mean of finance.

These financial needs cannot be covered by one single

Obviously, you are not going to cover readiness with results-based payments

because the results-based payments will come later on when you achieve the actual results.
graph shows that certain types of finance are very important depending on the phase.

.

This

For example,

climate finance in terms of investments, it is required in the stage when you already have the capacities,
have created the elements, and have started to implement your strategy.
on when the results-based payments will come.

These will be minimized later

All of this sequence is very important.

I stole this graph from a colleague from the World Bank 11. At the very end, when you will beable to match these processes with this finance you will see is cumulative emission reductions.

Weknow that they will stabilize later because the system becomes saturated (maximum storage capacity).
The increase will be more or less effective and visible if the combination is appropriate for each of thecountries.

11

http://www.worldbank.org/

58

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

I will define REDD as complex, but also as integrative.

Keynote Speech

Indeed, REDD has been opening theeyes of many countries towards the need of integration as well as participation.

What REDD has

been doing is it has been changing mindsets. George Bernard Shaw said a sentence that I like verymuch which is, “Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds
cannot change anything.”

REDD has been changing minds.

We still have these realities.

We still have deforestation. We still have degradation. We still

have fires, but we have something new.

We have more participation. We have the idea of planning

as a framework for REDD and we have integration.

I think this has been a major change in the last

10 years.
Of course, there are pending issues.

If you remember, in Doha and in the Warsaw Framework

there is still a provision somewhere that says that maybe we may need stronger provisions forverifications if markets are going to be used for results-based payments or if markets will evolve.
Some attention in the coming years may need to be paid to the non-carbon benefits that are beingreflected in the Paris Agreement as well.

Of course, there is probably a need for somemethodological guidance more ad hoc for the joint adaptation and mitigation approaches. Also, there
may be some new issues from the Paris mitigation articles that will require methodological advice
where REDD may be evaluated.

However, what is very clear is that the guidance is completed andthat the Warsaw Framework plus the decision in Paris is what will prevail.

59

Keynote Speech

The Future of REDD+

Let us debate a bit about the future of REDD+.
First of all, we have a different context today.
(SDG) and climate change is one of them.
goal 13.

We have the sustainable development goals 12

REDD is a small piece within sustainable development

I think by adapting the sustainable development goals in September 2015, it has been

providing also a framework for the Paris Agreement and for REDD within the Paris Agreement.
Therefore, REDD again represents one piece.

Towards the future, it is very encouraging that developing countries are seriously considering theirpotential to contribute to mitigation of climate change.

The intended nationally determined

contributions (INDC) process has been showing that very clearly.

The Paris Agreement endorsed the

INDC process as the way forward to show and to increase ambition.

The emerging question which

was not emerging necessarily in Paris, but also when countries were starting to develop their INDCs
before Paris, is how REDD is going to be used to increase the global level of emission in the context
of their INDCs.

12

http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

60Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

Keynote Speech

We have long discussions about LULUCF and some of those discussions were very useful also to
be brought into the REDD context.
Within the REDD+ piece, we had in the past the CDM afforestation/deforestation projects.
you can see, there have been several attempts to address these pieces within the process.

As

Some havebeen addressed through the Kyoto Protocol activity-based approach, even regionally for the second
commitment period modalities where land activities were included, and the CDM AR 13 was in thecontext of the Kyoto Protocol.

Then REDD came and brought the possibilities for developing

countries in the forest sector.

In order to reflect about the future it is always nice to have different opinions.

This is a summaryof opinions that are provided in a blog from the Center for International Forestry Research 14 (CIFOR).
I took it because there are very different types of people there.

From an Indonesia implementer tothe director of resource center, you see different countries’ scientists reflected there.

The question is,

if you read it separately, you think that they may bring different visions, but if you try to highlight theconcepts that are behind this, you ask yourself, “Are these views that far apart?”

What you see is that they are not that far apart.
13
14

Afforestation and Reforestation
http://www.cifor.org/

61

One says, “We are in the building phase now, butKeynote Speech
we have everything we need,” which is true.
multiple priorities,” which is true.
is true.
true.

The other says, “It is a complex policy context with“We need to combine approaches for generating resources,” which“We know that it can be inserted in the broader management of large landscapes,” which is“A number of tropical forest countries are acting,” which is true.

will engage,” also true.

“They will evolve towards broader land use and agriculture issues,” and this isparticularly very true at the domestic level.
to attract investment,” also true.

“Among the states, provinces, and nations, each is seeking

Finally, “Incorporate it to the INDCs and the domestic emission

targets,” which is also what countries have been doing.
INDCs in one way or another.
future.

“Expect that more countries

Sixty countries included REDD in their

Finally, all these views converge to something which can shape the

Therefore, there is no real diversion of views, but how to achieve the long-term mitigation

goals, that is the question, and how those views and those elements can be combined to do so.

Basically, when a country or government deals with lands, they look for the best options in theircircumstances.

The tools that we use for REDD+ are not so different than the tools that the

governments used for land planning, so inventories (in the case of national forest inventories), andland cover and use maps.

Therefore, definitely these are layers of information that inform what

could be the best options in the land use planning.

You can attribute in the overall planning the mostsuitable use for the land according to your priorities; protection, forestry, agriculture, urban. In manycases, rather than doing only the national forest monitoring system, countries just go and plug this into
the land roadmap.

Yesterday we had a very interesting presentation where Myanmar was saying‘Myanmar one map’, which illustrates that very well.

In essence, it should not be so difficult toconnect the REDD discussion with the broader country domestic discussions, although theimplementers here know that sometimes it is not so easy.
in the future in the domestic context.

62

However, that is how REDD could be seen

Past and Present of REDD+
Maria Jose Sanz-Sanchez (Basque Centre for Climate Change)

Keynote Speech

You can see that there are diversity of approaches emerging from the REDD implementation anddemonstration.

For example, Mexico is approaching REDD from the management of theirterritorial units, which are called ejidos.

They use the finance of REDD to contribute to the integral

management of those land units where you have all sorts of services and communities, including thedrivers. Ghana has the cocoa landscapes and they want to address the drivers and the deforestationin those ones.

Therefore, you see countries depending on the circumstances are approaching thingsin slightly different ways, but the intention is always to integrate.
If we think in terms of present towards future of REDD+, REDD is moving towards piloting
and implementation in many countries.
potential different scales.
design if possible.

testing.

The challenges are consistency across the

We are learning is that these need to be considered in the early stages of

If not possible, you have to see how you will address later, but if you can you

should address these in the early stages.
readiness.

That is true.

We know that REDD is not a linear process.

You start trying to test, and then you may need more readiness.

You doThen you go beyond

Therefore, you can go and have feedback in the different phases and loops, but it is clear that,in these non-linear processes, the timing and the scale of finance matters to the country process anddifferences.

What Paris provided is a broader context for REDD.

Domestically, there is a need toensure that REDD will continue and will continue to contribute to sustainable land use if we want toachieve long-term mitigation goals.

63Keynote Speech
The Paris Agreement

In terms of articles, Article 5 of the Paris Agreement signals huge political support in theagreement to what has been happening and what is being developed for REDD and endorses the
REDD Framework.

There are also other articles like Article 4 and Article 13 which are relevant

because they indicate the need of reporting and they provide some principle for accounting foremission reductions of emissions and removals to ensure transparency.

I think we have been trying

to be champions in transparency in REDD+. Of course, it could improve over time.

In essence,

most of these principles for accounting are already embedded into what REDD+ as today.

Overall,also the agreement strengthens the efforts in mitigation with the INDC process, but also highlights thefinance in Article 9, and provides room for considering markets.

This can be seen in Article 6.

Those are three very important elements for success of REDD+ in the future.
Just to highlight Article 5, you see that Article 5 has also Article 5.1, which indeed brings thewhole things in reservoirs as an important element for the future of the commitments for mitigation.
I hope this has been useful to give you an overview of where we come from and where we stand today.

Thank you very much.

We all agree that forests are important.

64