The LDCs, along with some of the developing countries from Latin America such as Mexico, Colombia, Dominican Republic as well as Southeast Asia such as Singapore and Indonesia, advocated for interventions under reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) as one of the more effective means to leverage climate finance for a sustained period of time.
However, several developing countries including the small island developing states (SIDS), highlighted the difficulty of monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) mechanisms under REDD+ apart from the challenge of ensuring transparency of data such as in estimating carbon stocks. Resolving this would require cutting-edge technologies that can track the changes in land use with enhanced accuracy in addition to the financial and technical resources needed for building capacity of the people who are directly involved in such initiatives.
Conundrum of accessing public-private finance for forests
Zimbabwe, on behalf of the African countries, mentioned that REDD+ has been a well-established channel to receive funds. However, these are inadequate and do not necessarily serve the purpose of enhancing livelihoods for the people.
It added that most of the African countries are highly indebted and operate on limited budgets. Thus when health and education is prioritised, for instance, it leaves little room for management of forests through public finance. This, in turn, exacerbates the situation of communities on ground who are conserving without any means.
According to The State of the World’s Forests report published by the Food and Agriculture Organization in 2022, less than 2 per cent of the global climate finance has gone to smallholders, indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLC) in the developing countries.
The IPLC representative, while stressing on this point, also stated multiple reasons for disparity. These include the burden of donor compliance that entails increased administrative work as well as complex reporting.