Integrating genderconsiderations in REDD+
Ms Lisa Ogle, UNDP / UN-REDD Programme, Consultant
Contact: lisa@lisaogle.net
Prepared for the UNDP/JICA Joint Workshop on REDD+and Gender, held on 14 December 2011, Tokyo, Japan
Supported by the UNDP Gender Team and theUNDP-Japan Partnership Fund

Outline of presentation• Part 1: How do the UNFCCC and UN
REDD frameworks address gender?
• Part 2: Gender dimensions of REDD+– Stakeholder engagement and FPIC
– Developing REDD+ strategies– Land tenure– Benefit-sharing– Forest monitoring and MRV• Part 3: Practical guidancePart 1:
UNFCCC and UN-REDD
frameworks for genderHow does the UNFCCC
framework address gender?
• REDD+ decision requires countries to:– address gender considerations when developing and implementing
national REDD+ strategies (Ref: 1/CP.16, para 72)– ensure the full and effective participation of stakeholders• this includes women• Although gender is not expressly listed as a safeguard in
Appendix 1, it is incorporated in the safeguards in otherways:– By reference to the UN Declaration on the Rights of IndigenousPeoples (UNDRIP)– By requiring REDD+ actions to be consistent with relevantinternational conventions (eg CEDAW)International conventions
relevant to REDD+Category

International treaty or declaration
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of IndigenousPeoples (2007) (UNDRIP)

Human rights

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (1965) (CERD)
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms ofDiscrimination Against Women (1979) (CEDAW)ILO 169, Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in
Independent Countries, 1989 (Fiji only)

Governance

United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2003)

EnvironmentalConvention on Biological Diversity (1992)

Note: All countries in the Asia-Pacific region have ratified
CEDAW, except Tonga, Palau and Nauru

How does UN-REDD addressgender?
• UN-REDD Social and Environment Principles and Criteria– Purpose: to ensure that its activities promote social andenvironmental benefits– To be used as an aid when formulating national programmes, whenseeking funding, and to assess national programme delivery• UN-REDD Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent– Integrate gender considerations• Operational Guidance on Mainstreaming Gender in REDD+(pending)UN-REDD
Social and Environmental Principlesand CriteriaPrinciple 2 – Respect and protect stakeholder rights, including human rights,
statutory and customary rights, and collective rights
Criterion 7

Respect and promote the exercise of equitable land tenure and carbon
rights by indigenous peoples and other local communities

Criterion 8

Promote and enhance gender equality, gender equity and women’s
empowerment

Criterion 9

Seek free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples and otherforest dependent communities and respect and uphold the decision
taken (whether consent is given or withheld)

Part 2:
Gender dimensions ofREDD+Understanding
women and forests• Women (and children) are often responsible for thesubsistence needs of their families:– collection of fuel wood, water, non-forest products (honey, nuts,mushrooms, etc), fodder for livestock, medicinal plants• Poor rural households have high levels of forest
dependence– Forest provides a crucial safety-net for food

• Risk: if women’s rights are ignored, REDD+ may increase
their marginalization– Eg restricted access to fuel wood may force them to harvest illegally• Therefore we need to integrate gender in REDD+Constraints and opportunities
for women’s participation in REDD+• Gender-related constraints– Limited education and lower literacy levels ofwomen– Limited access to information andunderstanding (eg policy and legal processes)– Less time to participate in REDD+ decisions
because of domestic and income generating
responsibilities• Opportunities– REDD+ revenues can improve women’s lives– Engagement in decision-making in REDD+ canpromote women’s empowerment incommunity/political lifeWhy does gender matter forREDD+?
• Gender equality is a human right(CEDAW)• Mainstreaming gender into REDD+ can:– Improve the effectiveness of REDD+ strategies• Eg it should reduce disputes later on– Increase mitigation potential• If women’s needs are addressed, there will be agreater uptake of changes in behaviour– Increase sustainability of REDD+ (ensuringpermanence and reducing the risk of reversals)• Engage women in forest protection• Remove perverse incentives for forest
destruction

Gender dimensions of REDD+
1. Stakeholder engagement–

Gender and the FPIC process

2. Developing REDD+ strategies–How will they affect men?/women?

3. Land tenure
4. Benefit-sharing
5. Forest monitoring and measurement,
reporting and verification (MRV)1. Stakeholder engagement
Gender and the FPIC process• Women must be consulted as stakeholders– But we should be aware that women do not always participate
equally in community consultations or in decision-making– Eg Social structures may limit women’s ability for free expression in
public meetings; women may have lower literacy rates• United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples (2007) establishes a framework for protecting
indigenous peoples’ rights– But we should avoid the assumption that women’s rights areautomatically protected by engaging with indigenous peoples andlocal communities– Women can often be marginalized within their own indigenouscommunity

UNDRIP:How to reconcile competing rights?
• UNDRIP establishes the right of indigenous peoples:– to participate in decision-making in matters affecting them (Art 18)– to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) (Art 32)– to choose their own representatives, chosen in accordance with theirown procedures and institutions• But what happens if these procedures or institutions
discriminate against or exclude women?
– Note: UNDRIP expressly requires the interests of women to beconsidered (Art 22) and requires the provisions to be interpreted in a
non-discriminatory manner (Art 46.3)– How to ensure that representatives are legitimate representatives of
the community, and of women?

2. REDD+ strategies
examples of potential gender impacts
Driver ofdeforestation orforest degradation
Illegal logging

Unsustainable
collection of fuel wood

Encroachment ofsubsistence agriculture
on forest

Potential REDD+ strategy

Potential gender
impacts

Improved forest law
enforcement

Men: Loss of employment
or incomeArea declared as ‘protected
area’

Women: unable to accessfuel wood for heating andcooking; Loss of access tomedicinal plants

Land use planning to identify
separate areas for agriculture
and forest conservation

Women: food gardens arelocated further away

Tanzania
Proposal for mainstreaming gender in REDD+• Tanzania: a UN-REDD country since 2009
• Published a draft REDD+ strategy in January 2011
– but there are concerns that it has left out the gender dimension• Ministry of Environment and civil society have written a proposal for acomprehensive gender analysis of the national REDD+ framework,including:– Identify and review Tanzania’s national commitments on gender andwomen’s empowerment (eg CEDAW)– Undertake gender analysis of proposed REDD+ structures to determine
whether they are gender sensitive (eg REDD+ Taskforce, REDD+Secretariat, REDD Trust Fund, benefit-sharing)– Consult ministry responsible for gender and women’s affairs– Include gender in university curriculum on climate change– Organize workshops with gender networks

3. Land and resource tenure• National REDD+ strategies must consider land tenure– Risk that indigenous peoples and local communities who have
uncertain land tenure may be exploited as REDD+ is implemented– REDD+ may result in a push for registration of customary land

• However, women may be disadvantaged or marginalized in
traditional or formal processes that establish land tenure– Women may have unequal access to information and legal
processes– Women’s customary rights of full involvement in decision-making canbe usurped by male relatives when land titling occurs or when naturalresources (eg carbon) become economically valuable– Risk of exclusion from REDD+ benefits due to weak right to land andtrees

Customary land tenure in thePacific• The Pacific has the highest level of customary landownership in the world– Eg Compared to Africa where most land is owned by the State• In the Pacific, REDD+ may trigger a push for land
registration; but this carries risks, including risks to women:– Eg in PNG, a ‘big man’ may represent the landowning group in
negotiations with investors and state institutions, but may not always
make decisions in the best interest of the group, as required undercustomary law (referred to in corruption terminology as the ‘agentprincipal problem’)• Lesson: land registration, if necessary, must not be rushed
and must be participatory

4. Benefit-sharing• Each country will need to develop its own benefit-sharing
system– National level: eg National REDD+ Fund
– Local level: eg Village Fund or trust fund

• Purpose of benefit sharing is to:– give incentives to local communities to preserve forest areas, and tocommunity ownership of REDD+– To alleviate poverty.

• Each country will need to develop its own, unique, benefitsharing system.

Benefit-sharing and gender• Management of REDD+ funds– How to ensure that management of REDD+ funds is transparent andaccountable and is not subject to ‘elite capture’?
– Women may be less aware of rights and therefore less likely todemand account for missing funds– Women’s groups are usually effective structures for communitybased forest management and could be used for benefit-sharing• How to distribute benefits?
– Is cash the best way to deliver REDD+ benefits to a community?
• Cash can have adverse impacts on women, eg if funds are used topurchase vehicles or alcohol– REDD+ benefits could be used for community programmes, eg
maternal health clinics, scholarships, etcPapua New Guinea
Case study: Improved ILG governance andbenefit-sharing• PNG has one of the highest levels of customary landownership in the world (97%),– BUT, this has not led to open and transparent benefit-sharing
arrangements for natural resources (oil, gas, timber)• Main vehicle for benefit-sharing before REDD+ has been
through Incorporated Land Groups (ILGs)– Potential for ILGs to be used for benefit-sharing for REDD+• ILG Act amended in 2007 to improve governance, including:– Requirement for Management Committees to have between six to 10people, at least two of whom must be women– A Code of Conduct which prohibits ‘self dealings’

5. Monitoring and MRV:
Gender issues• REDD+ will require forest monitoring, and possibly carbon
monitoring too, to demonstrate ‘results-based actions’– this should include indigenous peoples and local communities
carrying out on-the-ground forest monitoring activities• Data can be collected at two levels:– Participatory Monitoring (of forest area only); and– Participatory Carbon Monitoring (PCM)• When establishing monitoring framework, safeguards shouldbe put in place to ensure that women:– Have equal access to training and employment opportunities– Are compensated equitably with men for forest protection and carbon
monitoring activities

Viet Nam
Participatory monitoring• With support from the UN-REDD Programme, Viet Nam ispiloting Participatory Monitoring– local communities collect basic forest measurements (eg diameter atbreast height, tree species, basic GIS data, etc)

• Data will be used to supplement the national forest inventory
and satellite-based data showing forest cover change• Benefits: improving local communities understanding andownership of REDD+; employment and training• A Participatory Monitoring manual is being developed– See: Piloting Participatory Carbon Management in Vietnam under theUN-REDD Programme:
http://www.youtube.com/v/MfBsw3a8aIE?version=3

Part 3:Practical guidancePractical guidancein the field• Collect separate statistics on men and women so that you
can measure gender-differentiated impacts– called ‘disaggregated data’• Consider using women-only interviews and men/women
only group consultations• Use gender as an indicator to measure the impact of
REDD+ activities:– Number of women on REDD+ decision-making bodies?
– Number of women directly receiving REDD+ benefits?
– Number of children completing primary/secondary school?

• Clearly target women as project beneficiaries– Eg. Women’s names on land titles and certificatesPractical guidance:
REDD+ governing structures• Consider gender balance in any REDD+ governing bodies– are women represented on REDD+ Taskforce / REDD+ Trust Fund?
– general rule: women should make up 30% of a governing body for
effective and sustained participation (USAID report)• Be aware of gender balance in government institutions– women are often under-represented in Forestry Agencies, in bothadministrative and management positions– Eg Nepal: 246 professional forestry officers / only 5 are women• Link up with government ministries responsible for women’sempowerment (eg Human Rights Commission) andwomen’s organizations– Provide them with capacity-building on REDD+

References
UN-REDD / UNDP documents• UN-REDD Global Programme documents– Social and Environment Principles and Criteria, Version 3 draft forconsultation, September 2011
– Guidelines on Free, Prior and Informed Consent (draft for comment,December 2011)– Operational Guidance on Mainstreaming Gender in REDD+(pending)• Rutherford, K., (2011)‘The Business case for Mainstreaming
Gender in REDD+’, Working Draft, UNDP, New York

References••••

PIFS (2008), ‘Customary Land Management and Conflict Minimization: GuidingPrinciples and Implementation Framework for Improving Access to Customary
Land and Maintaining Social Harmony in the Pacific’, Pacific Islands Forum
Secretariat, Suva, Fiji
Innovations for Gender in REDD+, held at Swiss Lodge, Bangkok, Thailand, 21
Nov 2011, organized by Women Organizing for Change in Agriculture andNatural Resource Management (WOCAN)
Kaijage, E., Munishi, PKT (Prof), Kibona, E., (2011) Concept note and proposal
to undertake a situation analysis to identify entry points for integrating genderdimension in REDD+ processes and university curriculum in Tanzania, preparedby Ministry of Environment and civil society
Gurung, Dr J., et al, (2011) Getting REDD+ Right for Women: An analysis of thebarriers and opportunities for women’s participation in the REDD+ sector in Asia,USAID and WOCAN

References: presentations• Rutherford, K., Erneus, K., Ndunda, P., and Bandiady, S., Gender,
Forestry and REDD+• Suzuki, R., ‘Regional Capacity Development and Planning
Workshop’ (22–26 August 2011, Bangkok), convened by the Global
Gender & Climate, Alliance (GGCA), organized by UNDP in collaboration
with the Adaptation Knowledge Platform for Asia.

Thank you!
The author wishes to thank the following
people for assistance with this presentation:
Mr Timothy Boyle: timothy.boyle@undp.org
Mr Thomas Enters: thomas.enters@unep.org
Mr Akihito Kono: akihito.kono@undp.org
Ms Mariko Saito: mariko.saito@undp.org