Procedural measures or requirements

International Law (UNFCCC)

REDD+ under the UNFCCC

When undertaking REDD+ activities, the full and effective participation of stakeholders, in particular indigenous peoples and local communities, and transparent forest governance should be promoted and supported. In addition, actions should be consistent with national forest programmes and agreements and relevant international conventions and agreements (Appendix I of Decision 1/CP.16).  Countries are asked to submit a summary of information on how the Cancun Safeguards were addressed and respected in their National Communications to the UNFCCC. A summary of information on such safeguards should be provided periodically in a country’s UNFCCC national communication (or future communication channels agreed by the UNFCCC). The summary could also be provided, on a voluntary basis, via the UNFCCC web platform.

Kyoto Protocol Land use, Land-use Change and Forestry

There are no procedural safeguard requirements (related to stakeholder participation, safeguard information systems, grievance mechanisms, etc.) for developed country parties under the Kyoto Protocol.  Transparency, however, is required through the submission of various mandatory documents (see Monitoring and Reporting).

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)

The project design document for A/R CDM includes a section on Stakeholders’ comments that includes a description of how comments by local stakeholders have been invited and compiled, a summary of comments received, and a report on how due account was taken of any comments. However, there is no formal right of review process for decisions made by the CDM Executive Board.

Social and Environmental Standards

REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES)

There are a number of procedural safeguards that address integration in policies, laws, regulations; transparency; stakeholder participation; provision of information; and avenues for stakeholders to air grievances. Principle 7 seeks to ensure that the REDD+ programme complies with applicable local and national laws and international treaties, conventions and other instruments. Transparency is highlighted throughout REDD+ SES (benefit sharing, stakeholder engagement and governance). Particular emphasis is given with regards to governance structures, accountability, and finances under Principle 4.

All relevant rights holders and stakeholders must be identified and “fully involved through culturally appropriate, gender sensitive and effective participation.” Regarding provision of information, Principle 6 states ensures that ‘stakeholders have the information that they need about the REDD+ program, provided in a culturally appropriate, gender sensitive and timely way’.

In addition, the ‘Guidelines for the Use of REDD+ SES at Country Level’ support the development of a country’s safeguards information system by providing guidelines and good practice guidance for the identification of country-specific indicators through a multi-stakeholder process, the collection of information against each indicator, preparation of monitoring and assessment plans and a multi-stakeholder review of the assessment report.

A process must be instituted for resolution of grievances and disputes, including specific guidelines on response, redress, timeliness and consideration of customary processes.

SocialCarbon

The SocialCarbon Standard includes a variety of indicators from which project proponents may select or develop their own. For forest projects, preapproved indicators include those related to stakeholder participation, political risk and regulatory approval (including accordance with existing national or subnational REDD+ programmes), consultation (i.e. a systematic approach for communicating with stakeholders),  and conflict resolution. There are not, however, specific preapproved indicators related to safeguard information systems or transparency. As the standard is based on continuous improvement there is no minimum requirement for achieving each indicator.

Climate, Community, & Biodiversity (CCB) Standards

CCB Standards require that project proponents document all relevant local and national laws that are relevant to the project activities , provide assurances that the project will comply with these, and where relevant, demonstrate how compliance is achieved.

Related to transparency, CCBA publishes on line: project design documents, project implementation reports, public comments received, the audit report and validation/verification statements, the project’s status with respect to CCB Standards (validated, verified etc.) and any validations or certifications achieved by the project against other relevant standards.

On stakeholder engagement, the Third Edition of the Standards includes a criterion dedicated to stakeholder engagement in its “General Section”.  Project proponents must play an active role in distributing key project documents to affected communities and other stakeholders and hold widely publicized information meetings in relevant local or regional languages.

Evidence must be provided that community members and other affected stakeholders have been effectively consulted in the project design and involved in project implementation. Furthermore, a plan must be developed to continue communication and consultation between project managers and all community groups about the project and its impacts to facilitate adaptive management throughout the life of the project. In addition, the proponent must describe the measures taken, and communications methods used, to explain to communities and other stakeholders the process for validation and/or verification against the CCB Standards by an independent auditor, providing them with timely information about the auditor’s site visit and facilitating direct and independent communication between them and the auditor.

On grievance mechanisms, the project must formalise clear feedback and grievance redress procedures for handling feedback, unresolved conflicts and grievances that arise during project planning and implementation. The feedback and grievance redress procedure must include a three tier system, where- there is first an attempt to resolve grievances through amicable negotiations, then unresolved grievances are referred to mediation by an independent third party, and when this is not successful the grievances are referred to a third level of the ‘laws of the relevant jurisdiction’ that may include an option for arbitration.

Donor Financed Initiatives

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s Carbon Fund

An ER Program must provide information on how it meets the World Bank social and environmental safeguards, and addresses and respects the safeguards included in UNFCCC guidance related to REDD+, during ER Program implementation.

Benefit Sharing plans must be prepared through a consultative, transparent and participatory process. Safeguard Plans and Benefit Sharing Plans are then publicly disclosed in a form, manner and language understandable to the affected stakeholders of the ER Program.

Information on the implementation of Safeguard Plans and Benefit Sharing Plans is provided in each ER Monitoring Report and Interim Progress Report. The implementation of such plans is required prior to receiving payment for ERs.

Developing Country Programmes

Guyana | The Guyana REDD+ Investment Fund and Norway Partnership

Projects funded under the GRIF will follow the safeguards of the partner entities chosen to implement projects. As it stands, partner entities nominated are the UNDP, the IDB and the World Bank. Additional partner entities may be added if the GRIF Steering Committee deems it necessary and if the entities meet standards established by the committee. In addition, “enabling indicators”, upon which payments are dependent, in the 2012 Joint Concept Note include a section on: (a) Governance, i.e. progressive strengthening of a transparent, rules-based, inclusive forest governance, accountability and enforcement system, and (b) Continuous multi-stakeholder consultation process. Progress against the indicators is evaluated by an independent expert chosen by both Guyana and Norway.

In terms of transparency, the Government of Guyana hosts a website on the partnership that includes annual progress, progress on enabling activities, MRV, and third party verification reports. The Joint Concept Note specifies that necessary information to assess Guyana’s delivery on the agreed performance indicators (on which payment is based) will be easily accessible in the public space.

Brazil | The Amazon Fund

Brazil does not yet have a common or formal system for addressing safeguards at the national or state level for the implementation of activities that lead to reduced emissions from deforestation. In 2010, however, the Ministry of Environment organised a series of working groups to engage civil society and other governmental agencies to establish criteria for the implementation of safeguards. Civil society organisations presented to the Ministry of Environment Social and Environmental Principles and Criteria for REDD+ as a minimum requirement that public and private REDD activities should comply with. This process continued in 2012 when the Ministry of Environment created a technical panel with experts from civil society to discuss and provide recommendations for the creation of a national Safeguards Information System (SIS) for Brazil. 

Voluntary Carbon Standards

Verified Carbon Standard

The VCS requires projects to abide by all laws, statutes, and regulatory frameworks relevant to the project’s implementation and to demonstrate that they are in compliance with applicable laws, even if they are not enforced. The VCS project documentation does not explicitly mention stakeholder participation, transparency beyond GHG accounting or grievance mechanisms. However, projects are required to demonstrate that any relevant stakeholder consultations are conducted and that their outcomes discussed in the project description. Further, new methodologies submitted for approval are posted online for a global stakeholder consultation, and then independently assessed before approval by the VCS Association. 

Verified Carbon Standard | Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ (VCS JNR)

There are a number of procedural safeguards that address integration in policies, laws, regulations; transparency; stakeholder participation; provision of information; and avenues for stakeholders to air grievances. Implementation of the jurisdictional program and any nested project shall not lead to the violation of any applicable law, regardless of whether or not the law is enforced. Jurisdictional programs, baselines and crediting options including benefit sharing mechanisms must be developed in a transparent manner, and in consultation with relevant stakeholders (including private land owners, local communities, indigenous peoples, and/or relevant government agencies). The standard refers to Principle 6 of the REDD+ SES, the FCPF Guidelines on Stakeholder Engagement in REDD+ Readiness, and UN-REDD procedures as a basis to guide consultation processes. Monitoring reports must be provided which contain information on how the Cancun Safeguards are being addressed and jurisdictional proponents must ensure such information is made readily available to all relevant stakeholders throughout implementation of the jurisdictional REDD+ program.

A mechanism for handling and resolving grievances and disputes related to the design, implementation and evaluation of the jurisdictional REDD+ program is required.  The standard references Principle 6.6 of the REDD+ SES as potential guidance.

The Gold Standard Land Use and Forests Framework

The Gold Standard requires all project owners to be compliant with the requirements and procedures of the Standard. This includes compliance with all relevant national laws, the Gold Standard Principles, and for project owners to meet their obligation to maintain the project carbon stock during the crediting period.

In addition to FPIC and the initial local stakeholder consultation process, a mechanism for continuous dialogue and for solving grievances must be agreed to by stakeholders at the beginning of the project. The Input and Grievance Mechanism allows for continuous feedback throughout the lifetime of the project. At least three methods for input and grievance expression must be established. This could be via the internet, telephone, or written down in a specific input and grievance book. A fourth and optional option is to nominate an independent mediator, who will be selected by the project developer in agreement with the local stakeholders. Any recorded input and grievances, including actions taken, are reported in the ‘Annual Report’ which is uploaded to the Gold Standard Registry and sent to interested stakeholders.

In order to increase awareness about project performance in terms of safeguards and co-benefits, project developers are required to monitor and list identified social, economic and environmental impacts and discuss how to improve these with stakeholders. Any negative impacts must be addressed and positive impacts should be worked towards in collaboration with stakeholders. Information about safeguards and mitigation measures are then reported annually in the ‘Sustainability Monitoring Plan’, which is submitted to the Gold Standard Secretariat.

Independent certification bodies validate and verify the project against socioeconomic, environmental and governance safeguards. The Gold Standard A/R Requirements can be used as a standalone standard for creating credits, or can be combined with certification schemes such as the FSC or Fairtrade.

Plan Vivo Standard

The Plan Vivo standard puts strong emphasis on participation and transparency throughout the development and running of a project. It includes transparency requirements for governance structures, accounting, annual reports, and the system of payments, which are published as project documentation on the Plan Vivo website. Projects are required to demonstrate community ownership during the design and implementation phase of the project and be able to produce evidence of the participatory methods used to develop the plan vivos e.g. through videos, photographs or any other written outputs from community discussions. The emphasis on participation is also meant to support the development of the contractual agreement between communities and the project coordinator, which is based on the plan vivos. The PES Agreement specifies the rights and responsibilities of the contracting parties and outlines the conditions for receiving staged payments and project support in exchange for ecosystem or climate services.

A feedback and grievance mechanism should be established in the form of a forum, where communities can discuss the design and running of the project and raise any issues or grievances with the project coordinator. This does not have to involve the establishment of a new structure and existing forums could also be used for this purpose. At validation, projects are assessed by an expert reviewer for compliance with social and environmental requirements. Verification is carried out by an approved third-party verifier within 5 years of project registration.

Natural Forest Standard

The Natural Forest Standard requires projects to be in compliance with all requirements and procedures of the standard and with all applicable laws, regulations or nationally ratified international treaties, conventions and agreements.

Project developers should design an appropriate Dispute Resolution Mechanism to address any conflicts or grievances that may arise during the development or implementation of the project. This mechanism should seek to address any issues in a timely and transparent manner and projects should ensure that all stakeholders are aware of, and can use the mechanism. Conflict resolution occurrences and outcomes shall be included in the projects’ annual implementation report. 

Developed Country Programmes

Australian Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI)

Projects must adhere to regional natural resource management plans (a mechanism for local communities to have broad input on land use) and comply with water, planning and environmental laws. Projects must be consistent with applicable laws and regional natural resource management plans.  There are no explicit provisions for stakeholder participation, except for public commenting on methodologies and changes to the negative and positive list which requires public consultation.