Opening speech
Gerhard Dieterle (Executive Director, The International TropicalTimber Organization)

Opening Session

Opening speech
Gerhard Dieterle (Executive Director, The International Tropical Timber Organization)
It is a pleasure to be here today for this opening session.
REDD Research and Development Center.

This year marks the 10th anniversary of theI would like to congratulate FFPRI for the many achievements

in advancing the discussion on forests, which has been instrumental to climate change mitigation to a large
extent.

It is also a good time for me to look back at how REDD evolved and what the new and emergingchallenges and developments are, in light of past experience.

I myself was part of the REDD+ discussions

from the beginning, first in 2005 and then substantially from the 2007 Bali COP131 onwards, in the context
of the development of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility2 (FCPF) and my work at the World Bank3 atthat time.
At that time, many of my colleagues, including myself, were enthusiastic because we assumed that themagic remedy to stop deforestation had finally been found.
very easy and fast way.

Large volumes of funding went into forests in aHowever, I returned home from COP13 quite worried, asking myself if all the good

approaches in the past were all of a sudden obsolete.

Many questions immediately came to my mind.

How

to address degradation and regular forest management activities as opposed to the approach on large-scale
deforestation by agriculture?

How to deal with situations of low forest cover and high population as opposed

to high forest cover and low population situations?
contribute to emission reductions?
indigenous people?

How to distribute funds?

Who earns the credits?

Who decides who has toWhat about land rights and the rights of

Is REDD leading to recentralization and top-down approaches after many years ofsuccessful decentralization work?

How can countries with low governance manage such approaches?

For me, the philosophical question was, whether it is right or wrong to compensate avoiding wrongdoing,illegal activities, or unsustainable practices on the basis of market-based payments.

It became clear over theyears that forestry was not the “low-hanging fruit” as Nicholas Stern proclaimed in his famous report, “TheEconomics of Climate Change.”

While brilliant in theory, it is not in sync with reality and the needs of people.

For urbanized citizens in the north, a standing tree was seen as a good tree and therefore forest management
and cutting trees were generally seen as a dirty, destructive, and corrupt business, as well as the cause of climatechange.

That is what directed the funding to climate change activities.

definition of REDD was too narrow.
immediately.

Soon it became evident that theWe had to shift to REDD+, and more issues for consideration surfaced

Many specialists started to work on carbon accounting, carbon finance, social and rights issues,

MRV issues, and so on.

It became clear that REDD was in fact one of the most complex undertakings in thefight against climate change.
There is no doubt that the REDD discussion and process resulted in a number of key achievements
regarding general awareness on the role of forests for climate change and development.

Without Nicholas

https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/conferences/past-conferences/bali-climate-change-conferencedecember-2007/cop-13
2 https://forestcarbonpartnership.org/
3 https://www.worldbank.org/
131

Opening Session
Stern, the massive influx of money into the forest and climate agenda would not have been possible.

Forestry

was an early success story in the complicated United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change4(UNFCCC) agenda, as results are documented in the decisions in many of the COPs we have seen since then.
It was also a major achievement that developing countries now have a much better understanding and tools
at hand regarding the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, land tenure issues, and so on.

It is clearthat the global discussion and our understanding about the role of forests is now at a completely different levelcompared to 15 years ago.

However, do we see real financial flows and results-based payments at a scale ofjurisdictional levels now?

Most of the REDD funds so far have been spent on readiness, employing large

numbers of consultants, and this is a little bit of a cynical analysis.

Many countries who have invested

themselves in getting ready are trapped in unrealistic expectations and express frustrations because the moneythat flows does not come in so easily.
What is missing?
grassroots levels?

Is the theory of change right?

Is there bottom-up ownership and proactivity at theWill small, middle, and large-scale producers on the ground react to prospects of receiving

results-based payments decided at jurisdictional levels, or will they need different incentives for reinvesting andrestoring forests?

A big question for me is, does the current REDD approach still work in situations whereexternal factors are outpacing human action, such as situations where forests have reached tipping points andbecome net-emitters without influence from outside?

Currently, we can observe such cases in all climatic

zones such as in the boreal forests of Europe, California, and Australia, but also the Amazon where we reachsuch tipping points.

So the question is, can the REDD methodology address these issues in an effective way?

The 2019 UNEP Emissions Gap Report5 draws a dramatic conclusion that we are currently on the way toa 3°C world if additional measures are not taken.

An honest look at what happens on the ground, therefore

signals that we need a differentiated approach and additional elements for success.

This is a substantial shift

from previous approaches worldwide, in which timber and wood-based energy were often treated as a cause of
the problem rather than an integral part of the solution.

We are now seeing a trend towards integrated

approaches in which development and economic growth, as well as climate and the multiple other benefits offorests and forest products are seen as a part of win-win solutions with tremendous potential, especially forproducer countries and poor people.

In reality, most of the big players such as the World Bank, FAO, UN-REDD, Norway, and Germany apply a mix of approaches and have already returned to more traditional orproxy-based activities.

The train has departed towards a landscape restoration approach and engagement withthe private sector.
In this case, what is the role of ITTO?
the work of my organization.

Let me give you a couple of observations and thoughts guiding

In the light of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)6 Special

Report 20197, the roles of productive forest and legal and sustainable supply chains need much higher emphasis.
Forest products have an important climate mitigation effect through substitution and storage.
https://unfccc.int/
https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/emissions-gap-report-2019
6 https://www.ipcc.ch/
7 https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
4532

Therefore, weOpening speech
Gerhard Dieterle (Executive Director, The International Tropical
Timber Organization)

Opening Sessionneed approaches which go beyond the forests themselves and include the whole value and supply chain fromthe tree to the market.

There was a statement that without including forest products, we cannot achieve the1.5°C target, so we need all resources at hand.
If the demand for wood from rapidly-growing populations is not addressed, and I refer to Africa which
will grow by three billion people by 2100, it will lead to substantial gaps of supply which will invalidate ongoing
REDD+ efforts.

There is a strong need for upfront finance as opposed to REDD+ payments on results.

There is also a changing awareness that forests and forest industries need to contribute, and to their maximum
extent, for the advancement of bio-based and circular economies, while meeting the needs of a growing global
population.
There is a need to look at alternative incentive mechanisms, similar to those used to incentivize individual
decisions such as for solar panels or electric cars.

We need a different understanding of the theory of change

in which impact and change will be the cumulative result of individual decisions and actions, and not only fromtop-down guidance.

This means a modification of jurisdictional payment systems, towards a set of additional

flexible results-based upfront transfers on a competitive basis.

Fiscal and macroeconomic incentives need toprovide a secure framework for private sector action and investment.

Large-scale jurisdictional approaches

should be directed primarily to situations such as to protect protected areas.

Their unique global values need

to be protected and stakeholders need to be compensated for loss of income or livelihood.
Compared to the big players within the Collaborative Partnership on Forests8 (CPF), ITTO is a relatively
small player and therefore has to assume a specific role, defined through the International Tropical Timber
Agreement of 20069, which is to promote the expansion and diversification of international trade in tropicaltimber from sustainably-managed and legally-harvested forests, and to promote the sustainable managementof tropical timber-producing forests.
We are very happy that the 55th Session of the International Tropical Timber Council 10 last year in
December took account of the fact that winning the fight against climate change cannot be done without
addressing the development needs of rapidly-growing populations in the tropics.

It endorsed the ITTO

Secretariat proposal for piloting a new programmatic approach to focus future work on the following threeprogram lines.

First, legal and sustainable supply chains to enhance tropical timber supply chains from theforest to the markets, to achieve legality and sustainably, and to contribute to climate change mitigation.
Second, forest landscape restoration and the sustainable management of productive forests to help scale up thearea of forest landscape restoration and increase the provision of goods and services from productive andeconomically-viable planted and restored forests, in line with the needs of populations which is a contribution
to climate change as well.

Third, biodiversity and climate change in context to strengthen the capacity oftropical timber-producing countries to maintain and enhance biodiversity in productive forests and landscapes.
89

http://www.cpfweb.org/en/
https://www.itto.int/direct/topics/topics_pdf_download/topics_id=3363&no=1&disp=inline

10

https://www.itto.int/events/55th_session_of_the_international_tropical_timber_council_and_sessions_of_t
he_associated_committees/

33

Opening Session
I would like to conclude by saying that ITTO and other organizations alone cannot solve the tremendous
challenges ahead.

More than ever, we need to act in partnership with other organizations in the CPF, as wellas with civil society, local communities, indigenous peoples, and importantly the private sector.

ITTO

continues to reach out to and work with partners all over the world, including those involved in global andregional processes, students, local authorities and communities, and high-level national and private sector
leaders.

I hope this provided a sort of stimulation for the discussion today.

34

Thank you very much.