Experience in Piloting REDD+Payments in Tanzania

Shemdoe R.S and Zahabu E
Ardhi University, P.O.Box 35176 Dar es Salaam Tanzania
Sokoine University of Agriculture, P.O.Box 3011, Morogoro,Tanzania
rizikis@yahoo.com

Outline Background; Status of REDD implementation;
 REDD payment; Lessons leant; Proposed Payments and Benefits Distribution

Mechanisms.

Background Forests play important role in climate change

mitigation and adaptation as sources and sinks ofcarbon dioxide gas.

 Various initiatives are being carried out to ensurethat the impacts of climate change to thecommunity and ecosystems are reduced.

 REDD is one of the initiatives piloted in Tanzania
 In Tanzania 9 NGOs have received funds from theGov of Norway to implement REDD Pilot Projects
through which different models for the REDD
payments are being tested.
3

PAYMENTS EXPERIENCE FROM REDDPILOT PROJECTS IN TANZANIA
4

SNNGO

Project

1

TFCG/MJUMITA

Making REDD Work for communities and Forest
Conservation in Tanzania: Carbon Enterprise
Development

2

MCDI

Combining REDD, PFM and FSC Certification inSouth – Eastern Tanzania

3

TATEDO

Community – Based REDD Mechanisms forSustainable Forest Management in Semi-Arid Areas(Case of Ngitilis in Shinyanga Region)

4CARE

Carbon Incentive Payment Test

5JGI

Building REDD Readiness in the Masito Ugalla
Ecosystem Pilot Area in Support of Tanzania’s
National REDD Strategy

Case 1: TFCG/MJUMITA

 Title: Carbon Enterprise Development Requirements:

 To develop a simple and transparent system that ensuresfair decisions in REDD implementation

 To develop a village by-laws for REDD revenues sharing

guided by Local Government Act 0f 1982;

 The village by-laws be prepared in a participatory manner; Equally distribution of funds to all villagers in the respectivevillages.

Case 1: TFCG/MJUMITA
 Conditions for payments
 Completion of :• VLUP and CBFM at village level• Carbon assessment according National Forestry
Resources Monitoring and Assessment (NAFORMA)
protocol• Estimates of potential carbon revenues according to thehistorical deforestation rate, potential leakage factor
and current prices of carbon credits in the voluntarymarket
 REDD

revenue distribution by-law approved by thevillage assembly Absence ofany conflict within and betweencommunities

Case 1: Simple Model

Note that: Under this model, individuals receive payments in cash

Case 2: Mpingo Conservation and Development
Initiative (MCDI)
 Title: Combining REDD, PFM and FSC Certification

in South – Eastern Tanzania
 The model:

 Revenue generated from the sale of carbon credits provide thefunding for further expansion of PFM work The

existing Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification
scheme deliver community benefits from selling logging rights.

 For

the REDD payments, Village Natural Resources
Committees (VNRC) have the responsibility of monitoringrevenue from the sale of timber and providing reports to thevillage governments.
8Case 2: Mpingo Conservation and Development
Initiative (MCDI)
 Conditions required for the payments:
 Involvement of the Villagers in the planning of thethrough village assembly meetinguse of funds

 Communities decide to either give certain amount to the districtbased on responsibilities in maintaining and managing theforest

 The

revenue are shared between the Village and the Village
Natural Resources Committee (VNRC)

 Revenue

that remains in the village are used for forest
management activities as set out in the annual action plan.
9Case 2: Mpingo Conservation and Development
Initiative (MCDI)
REDD earnings
re-invested in
more PFMVLFR established underPFM

Verified Carbon Savings
under REDDPFM underpins
REDD & FSC

Small income for communities
not able to profit
from timber

Community Benefits

Community
sells sustainably-managed timber

FSC Certification for Timber

In this model, individuals do not get any cash from the REDD funding
10

Case 3: Tanzania Traditional Energy
Development Organisation (TaTEDO)
11

 The Model:
 TaTEDO model is based on a traditional in-situ pasture

conservation system known as Ngitiri The ngitili area remains closed to livestock at the beginning of
the wet season and is opened up for grazing at the peak of dry
season.
 Three categories of ngitili ownership exist in the project area.
 households owned ngitili,
 communal owned ngitili e.g. Village ngitilis and institution owned ngitili e.g. schools.

Case 3: Tanzania Traditional Energy
Development Organisation (TaTEDO) Criteria to determine amount of payments to ngitili

owners: Increment in carbon stock in the ngitili (with reference to thebaseline level); Size of the Ngitili; and Effort/action undertaken to improve ngitili

improved grazing management, improved crop production,
 use of efficient and alternative energy technologies,
 tree planting, etc. as agreed in the ngitili management plan.
12

Case 3: Tanzania Traditional Energy
Development Organisation (TaTEDO)

In this model, in some cases individuals can get cash from the REDD
funding based on the nature of Ngitili ownership and performance13

Case 4: CARE Tanzania Project Title: Carbon Incentive Payment Test The model CARE has developed a payment sharing model

which takes into account forest aspects whereby : 60% of the funding is being directed to forest

activities,
 30% of the funding is directed to social anddevelopment projects and 10% of the funding is uses as a transaction cost.
14

Case 4: CARE Tanzania Project Conditions
 Establishment of aggregation entity
 Establishment of payment systems

under Community Forest Management
Agreements (COFMAs)
 Establish the list of the communities inthe areas that should share the 30 %.

15

Case 5: JGI REDD+ Project Title: Financial Incentive

Payment Test.

 Works under three levels
 CBO
 Village Council and

Community Requirements:/Criteria
 Involvement in forest patrols
 Action taken on Illegal forest harvesters/poaching Law enforcement
 Conservation awareness creation
 Efforts towards reduced illegal activities

Case 5: JGI REDD+ Project The criteria used to distribute the trial

payments:
 10% is retained by CBO as a transaction cost, 90% will be distributed to village development
projects for various used including
establishment of alternative income generatingactivities.
 IGAs under JGI include: bee keeping , poultry project and improved crop production

Lessons
 Allmodels are still in the INFANT stage,
thus there is a need to evaluate the models
in their final year of implementation toascertain which model should suit thecountry;

 Thereis a need to balance the benefit
sharing for the forest activities and theincome to the communities in the respective
areas where these models are tested;18

Lessons Alternative

income generation activities are needed toassist the community not to depend entirely in the forests

 There is no guideline for REDD payments in the Country There is a need of establishment and capacitating CBOs

under REDD to sustain REDD activities after the pilot
phases out.

 There is a need to ensuring that the existing government

structure is not excluded to ensure sustainability

 Transparency in handling the carbon finance is needed

19Proposed Payments and Benefits Distribution
Mechanisms


Based on the models that are being tested by various Pilot Projects thefollowing is recommended: For JFM, funds should be distributed and allocated to the followingcategories:• Community based development projects• Income generating activities (i.e. Revolving funds, VICOBAetc)• Funds for addressing Deforestation and Forest Degradation
 For CBFM

• Transaction cost be overseen by the government based unit
• Major part of the funds be allocated to the villages throughVillage Council (the distribution will depend on the number ofthe village councils and the size of the forest they own).
• Village assembly to determine the use of the funds that havebeen channeled to the villages.
20Acknowledgement
CCIAM Programme for Financial Support

THANK YOU FOR
LISTENING21