REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath (Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)
I will try to focus on the Indian experience of what kind of policies, programs they have, how
they link up with SFM criteria, and the provisions or requirements of REDD+ under UNFCC. It isquite a complex one.

I will first present on: what is the area under forests in India; what are the deforestation
trends; what is the potential for REDD+ activities in India; what are the major policies that are relevant
to REDD+ in India such as afforestation, deforestation, and community forestry programs; and SFM
process in India, to what extent SFM is being mainstreamed or not; and then, what are the forest
policies and their implication for SFM and REDD+. I will try to present two case studies which arevery important. Then I will talk about challenges in mainstreaming SFM and REDD+ in India.
Then I will conclude with few lessons from India’s forest policies which are very important in thecontext of forest conservation or REDD+.

1

DAY1Session 4

Well, if you look at this map, there is not much forest in India. Actually, the national policy
states that we should have one-third, 33%, under forests, but currently we have only about 20%; out ofthat, only 12% is good forest. So imagine for a large country, having only 12% of geographic area
under forest. If you compare the forest extent to population density, say, per hectare or number ofpersons per square kilometers, you can compare for the top 10 countries, India is far out from all othercountries. We have very little forest for the population we have, unlike all the other tropical or othertemperate countries.

Let us look at what are the pressures on forests in India. We have very little forest at 0.06
hectares per capita. In other words, there are about 2000 persons per square kilometers of forest,
which is very low. We have a high rural population density coupled with high dependence on forests
for fuel wood, timber, and non-wood forest products.
Thirdly, there is a high livestock population density. There is a huge livestock grazingpressure. There are almost 400 million livestock in India for a population of 1.1 billion. There ishigh dependence of human population on forests. Almost 200,000 villages are in and near the forests,
so you can imagine the pressure on the forests.

2

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

There is significant occurrence of fire. Almost half the forests are prone to fire in India.
Invasive species are invading all the degraded or canopy-opened forests. There is, to a small extent,
shifting cultivation in Northeast India, close to China and the Burmese border. Of course, there isdemand for forest land for infrastructure.
Given this kind of pressure in a country of something like one billion plus, let us see what ishappening to the area under forest.

India has one of the best remote-sensing based forest monitoring.

India has its own

satellites and has its own agencies to monitor and report forest area. Every two years there is an
update of forest area. It is published and it is on the Internet.

If we just look at the area underforests from 1987 when the remote-sensing-based forest reporting started, to 2011, you can see forest
area is stable and, if anything, in the last 10 years there is a marginal increase in area under forest.

One of the reasons is there is a large afforestation program in India. Next to China, India
has been implementing, since 1980, one of the largest afforestation programs between 1.2 to 1.5 million
hectares of plantations are raised in India. That means this main purpose is to meet the fuel wood,

3DAY1Session 4
timber, and other demands of the rural communities.

If you look at deforestation, even though the total area under forest is increasing, there issome level of forest loss. I would not call it deforestation. If you look at the last six years, it is about
60,000 to 100,000 hectares. For a large country, a loss of 60,000 to 100,000 hectares is not really muchat all.
If you look at forest degradation, the green is open forest. In the recent past, open forests
have declined, but moderate dense forest and dense forests have increased. That means, if you gostrictly by the remote-sensing maps on forest tree crown cover, there is no degradation of forests inIndia.

4

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

What is the potential for REDD+ in such a case? Though I put significant scale in India, we
do not want to have any – we want to have zero deforestation. There is some forest loss. We do notknow whether it is forest conversion to non-forest. Personally, I feel a lot of it is not conversion offorest to non-forest, it is simply cutting trees to meet the industrial needs and the urban needs of timber,
pulp wood, and so on and so forth.
We do not have any estimates of REDD+ or even the estimates of forest degradation. Only
based on forest tree canopy cover, from remote sensing data, I was showing that, in fact, there is noforest degradation, if you go strictly by the data. We still do not know to what extent there isconversion of forest land to non-forest land or there is degradation of ground vegetation ordegradation of soil organic matter and so on. We still do not know what the potential for REDD+ isin India.

Regarding the SFM process post-UNCED 1 in 1992, under a large project initiated by FAO,ITTO, and Government of India, SFM was initiated in India. A set of criteria and indicators and theUnited Nations Conference on Environment and Development:
http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html
15

DAY1
Session 4process has been initiated.

There is a sustainable forest management cell at the Ministry ofEnvironment 2 in Delhi. Surprisingly, the National Forest Policy of 1988, which is a basis for all theprograms on forests, it does not use the word SFM, but it has all the components of SFM much before
the 1992 process.

If you look at the FAO criteria for SFM, between the key themes or guidelines and the SFM
India criteria, there is not much difference. It matches very well. Plus, there are one or two additional
items. Otherwise, you have seen them, what are the FAO principles or themes for SFM, and India hasmore or less slightly modified, but basically the same criteria and indicators.

I want to look at SFM interventions at two levels.

Firstly, the incorporation of SFM

principles and practices in forest management, in protected area management, in undertaking
afforestation and reforestation programs, community forestry, commercial forestry, and REDD+projects.
I think it is very important that we should adopt SFM principles and practices in all the forest2

http://envfor.nic.in/

6REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

management programs.

DAY1
Session 4

The second level is SFM criteria indicators; it is monitoring, assessment, andreporting. This is important for certification of forest, for example. Of course, it will be required
from meeting the UNFCC REDD+ safeguards and also for monitoring, reporting and verification of
not just carbon, but also the other socioeconomic and ecological components.

As for the challenges or problem with respect to REDD+ in India, there is lack ofopportunity. There is a lack of clarity and the definition of degradation and the “plus” components,
the three other components. For India deforestation is not a major issue. That is the reason whyeven in the UNFCCC negotiations, India was particularly fighting for the “plus” components. We still
do not have clear guidance, guidelines, definitions, or procedures for identifying the “plus”
opportunities.
There is absence of criteria for identification of land for ‘REDD’ as well as ‘plus’ activities.
We still do not know. There is some level of forest loss happening. There is some change in theforest crown cover. We still do not know to what extent we can attribute it to or it will qualify for
REDD+ activities.
Of course, India has a significant amount of enabling forest policies.

India has very

progressive forest policies with respect to conservation, community participation, biodiversity
conservation, and so on. India also has the intuitional capacity for technical monitoring, reporting andverification, and so on. However, there is a need for reorienting these institutions and these policies
for REDD+. That is yet to happen.

7

DAY1
Session 4

In India we do not have any UN REDD or World Bank REDD projects. There is one
externally funded project and it is called Forest-PLUS 3. India decided not to call it REDD+. The
Government of India also has national REDD+ policy guidelines prepared, but it is under approval
process in Government of India.

I was trying to map India’s key major forest polices and their features with the relevance orlinkage to SFM. If I take the three very important forest policies, there is Forest Conservation Act,
which has led to completely halting, more or less, the deforestation rate. It can be linked to several
SFM criteria.
Similarly, if you look at the National Forest Policy, which is a benchmark for all forest
programs, it includes maintaining environmental stability, preserving natural forests and its biodiversity,
checking soil erosion, undertaking afforestation program, meeting the biomass requirements,community engagement, so on and so forth.
India’s forest policy, announced in 1988, is fully compatible with the SFM criteria. Of
course, then India introduced another major program called Joint Forest Management in 1990 involving3

http://climatechange-asiapac.com/projects/india-forest-plus-program8

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

local communities formally and legally in managing forests, and for which they will be paid in terms offorest products, timber sales, and so on and so forth. They also meet the SFM criteria.

India has several major programs, one, of course, called Greening India Mission 4. It is apart of Climate Change National Action Plan 5. It aims at climate change mitigation and adaptation.
It also meets the SFM criteria.

Of course, there is a National Afforestation Programme 6, one of thebiggest in the world. We also have Compensatory Afforestation 7. If a hectare of forest is converted,
two hectares of forest have to be raised.

4
5
6

http://www.naeb.nic.in/documents/GIM_Brochure_26March.pdf
http://pmindia.nic.in/Pg01-52.pdf

http://envfor.nic.in/public-information/national-afforestation-programme-participatory-approach-sustainable-development-f
7

http://envfor.nic.in/major-initiatives/compensatory-afforestation-fund-management-and-planning-authority-campa-0

9DAY1Session 4

I also tried to map the UNFCCC REDD+ criteria provisions and link them with SFM criteria
and the Indian Forest Policy. Obviously, I cannot go into the details. If you take, for example, thatactions complement or are consistent with the objectives of National Forest Programme and relevantinternationally conversion agreements, it covers multiple SFM criteria.

If you look at the Indian Forest

Policy, National Forest Policy, and Joint Forest Management Policy, they are perfectly compatible withthese ones.
Again, if we take another issue addressing the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation,
land tenure issues, forest governance issues, gender consideration, and other safeguards, it really meetsseveral SFM criteria such as socioeconomic functions, legal, policy framework, forest resource utilization,and so on. At the same time, it is perfectly compatible with India’s National Forest Policy, Policy on
Joint Forest Management, and also, what you call, Forest Rights Act, and Compensatory Afforestation.
There are many policies which perfectly match the requirements of SFM criteria, and, at thesame time, the provisions of UNFCCC REDD+ safeguards.

I will present two short case studies which are very important for any REDD+ program
anywhere. As I mentioned, the Joint Forest Management programmers announced based on the 1988

10

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in IndiaProf. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

Forest Policy. Under this program, the main goal is conservation and regeneration of degraded forests
by involving local communities by the forest department.

It is a legal agreement between local

communities and the forest department where local communities protect, manage, regenerate forests,
and for which they get incentives in terms of non-wood forest products, grass, leaves, fuel wood, andalso 50% to 80% of timber harvest, if it is plantations.
Currently, there are more than 274,000 forest management committees. They are calledvillage forest committees, forest management committees, and so on, at the village level. They aremanaging almost more than 270,000 village forest committees, forest patches. Of course, not all ofthem are alive and functioning, but some of them are functioning. Some have been not performed
very well.
As for the implications for REDD+, it provides and institutional mechanism that safeguards
the rights of the forest dependent communities, and it provides a framework for benefit-sharing. In
some states, 90% of the benefit from the forests go to the communities. Here is a framework forsharing benefits from the communities legally by law. It promotes regeneration of degraded forestsand conservation of biodiversity by involving local communities.

JFM 8 could be an example of adecentralized institutional basis for implementing REDD+ projects.

If we take the other example, the Forest Conservation Acts enacted in 1980, it is one of themost effective legislations contributing to reduction in deforestation. If anyone wants to convert morethan five hectares even for laying railway line or for irrigation projects, it has to go through stringent
procedures and be approved by Government of India, which is very difficult in India given thebureaucracy. In fact, deforestation rates used to be 150,000 to 200,000 hectares before 1980. It hascome down to 15,000 to 20,000 hectares for legally approved deforestation.
The implications for REDD+: this highlights the need for effective forest legislation. If wehave very strong effective legislation, and also of course its implementation, that is the first condition
8

Joint Forest Management

11

DAY1
Session 4
for any REDD+ program.

Let me conclude by saying that strong Forest Conservation Act, Wildlife Act and many othernational forest policies are very critical. These acts, supported by the judiciary, Supreme Court and soon, have effectively reduced deforestation. It is impossible for anyone to go and encroach for fivehectares forests in India, no matter how powerful. It will be on the front pages of newspapers and it
will be reported on nation television and it goes to Supreme Court. That is the level of consciousness
with respect to forest conservation and its act.
Second is the National Forest Policy. It incorporates all components of SFM. That is thebasis for all the forest management, afforestation, and forest conservation programs. I think such anational forest policy should drive REDD+ rather than REDD+ driving national policy. I would liketo underline this point.
India also has been implementing huge programs. The Greening India Mission is almost a$10 billion program. It incorporates both mitigation and adaptation. If you ask me, we need to reallyadd one of the other conditions to SFM criteria, and that is to make forests resilient to climate change.
In 1982 when the criteria were developed for SFM, probably climate impacts and forests were not anissue. However, today we all know from observations and modeling, climate change could impact
forest biodiversity; it will impact forest carbon stocks, and so on and so forth. We need to really lookat REDD+ not just from conservation or enhancing carbon sinks, but also building resilience in forests
to impending climate change.
Fourthly, large afforestation programs to meet the community biomass needs are necessary
not only to meet the needs, but also to reduce pressure on forests and to conserve forest sinks. India’ssocial forestry program, the Joint Forest Management program and the National Afforestation program
ensure that REDD+ safeguards’ and criteria and many socio-economic functions are met.
Fifth, community participation and empowerment for decentralized forest management isvery critical. India’s experience of social forestry as well as Joint Forest Management shows the way on

12

REDD+ and SFM: Status, Opportunities, and Challenges in India
Prof. N.H. Ravindranath(Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science)

DAY1
Session 4

really how to really reduce the pressure on forests, meet the community needs, and also involve them inforest management where they have rights that have been enacted by law, rather than just being
intention.
Sixth, of course, you need institutional capacity for enforcing REDD+ safeguards or even for
implementing or adopting SFM principles in the forest management, afforestation/deforestation
program. You need institutional capacity. India has one of the best remote sensing based forest
monitoring systems. India also has its own satellites.
What is lacking is, India has all the policies, technical capacity, but we need to really reorient it
towards ‘REDD’ and ‘plus’ components. Yes, ‘REDD’ may not be important reducing deforestation
degradation, but the ‘plus’ components are very important. We really need to reorient at least ourinstitutions and policies to promote the ‘plus’ component leading to enhancing carbon sinks throughSFM, enhancing carbon stocks in forests, afforestation/deforestation, and so on.
Thank you very much.

13