Social measures or requirements

International Law (UNFCCC)

REDD+ under the UNFCCC

According to decisions under the UNFCCC, developing countries, when undertaking REDD+ activities, are to respect the knowledge and rights of indigenous and local communities.  They are also requested, when developing and implementing REDD+ national strategies and action plans, to address forest governance and land tenure issues, and gender considerations (Decision 1/CP.16). 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.

Joint Implementation (JI) Kyoto Protocol

Social impacts are not included in the project design document template, and no explicit social safeguards are mentioned in JI requirements, leaving the agreements on safeguards that go beyond national legislation to the partnering countries.

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)

The project design document for A/R CDM includes a section on “Socio-economic impacts of the proposed A/R CDM project activity”. Analysis of significant socio-economic impacts, including outside the project boundary, and in accordance with procedures required by the host country is required.  If any negative impact is considered significant by the project participants or the host Party, a socio-economic impact assessment is required, along with planned monitoring and remedial measures to address such impacts.

 

Social and Environmental Standards

REDD+ Social and Environmental Standards (REDD+ SES)

The following principles apply to the REDD+ SES assessment, i.e. the REDD+ programme:  recognises and respects rights to lands, territories and resources (Principle 1); shares benefits equitably among all relevant rights holders and stakeholders (Principle 2); improves long-term livelihood security and well-being of Indigenous Peoples and local communities with special attention to women and the most marginalized and/or vulnerable people (Principle 3); contributes to good governance, to broader sustainable development and to social justice (Principle 4); ensures all relevant rights holders and stakeholders participate fully and effectively in the REDD+ programme (Principle 6).

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: compliance with social demands, addressing land tenure and resource rights, enhanced livelihoods (including income generation, access to credit, employment opportunities), benefit sharing (including support to social programmes), human resources (including improved skills, knowledge, capacities and health), and population displacement. As the standard is based on continuous improvement there is no minimum requirement for achieving each indicator. The Indicators for Forest Projects do not specifically address gender or vulnerable groups or the need to implement Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, although they do include potential indicators related to compliance with social demands, acceptance of the project, and avoidance of conflict. 

Climate, Community, & Biodiversity (CCB) Standards

CCB Standards require that projects generate net positive impacts on the environmental, social and economic well-being of all community groups ensuring that costs, benefits and risks are identified. High Conservation Values, such as areas important for livelihoods or cultural identity of the communities, must be maintained or enhanced in the project zone and the project must ‘do no harm’ to the well-being of offsite stakeholders.

Project proponents must identify unresolved issues related to land tenure, and in cases where disputes exist must demonstrate that no activity is undertaken by the project that can prejudice the outcome of an unresolved issue. If applicable, the project may describe how the project is helping to resolve the conflict.. Free, prior and informed consent (and adequate compensation, where appropriate) must be obtained in instances where rights will be affected or where resettlement will occur. One of the principles of effective consultation is a “gender and inter-generationally inclusive” design. 

The Third Edition of the Standards includes a stronger emphasis on gender as it is requires that women be identified as a “Community Group” that must benefit from the project “where they derive different income, livelihood and cultural values from the project area from other community members”.

Gold Level certification requires that exceptional benefits be provided to communities, such as project approaches that are explicitly pro-poor, or which are led by smallholders or communities, with equitable benefit sharing. The Gold Level certification also requires that projects generate net positive impacts for the well-being of women.

Donor Financed Initiatives

Germany's REDD+ Early Movers Programme

REM follows principles formulated by the German development cooperation including participation, empowerment, do-no-harm, free prior and informed consent, improvement of living conditions through benefit-sharing arrangements, and the participation of Indigenous Peoples, small-scale farmers and forest-dependent communities. In addition and prior to programme start, REM identifies (and potentially supports the establishment of) quantifiable benefit-sharing programs in the respective partner country (or subnational jurisdiction) that comply with the safeguard framework in place, and which are directed towards the improvement of living conditions through equitable benefit-sharing.

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility’s Carbon Fund

ER Programs must meet the World Bank social and environmental safeguards and promote and support the safeguards included in UNFCCC guidance related to REDD+. Safeguard plans must consider social and environmental issues and related risk mitigation measures identified during the national Readiness process e.g. relevant measures in the Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) process and the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF).

The ER Program must also develop and provide a Benefit Sharing plan that describes the categories of potential beneficiaries; the types and scale of potential monetary and non-monetary benefits; criteria, processes and timelines for distribution; and monitoring provisions for the implementation of the Benefit Sharing Plan.

In some circumstances, ER Programs also undertake and make publicly available an assessment of the land and resource tenure regimes in the accounting area.

In addition, appropriate Feedback and Grievance Redress Mechanisms must be developed during the Readiness phase or otherwise exist before the signing of an ERPA.

Developing Country Programmes

Guyana | The Guyana REDD+ Investment Fund and Norway Partnership

Projects funded under the GRIF will follow the social safeguards of the partner entities chosen to implement projects. As it stands, partner entities nominated are the UNDP, the Inter-American Development Bank (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 2011 Joint Concept Note include protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and other local forest communities. Progress against the indicators is evaluated by an independent expert chosen by both Guyana and Norway.

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 project proponents to provide evidence of land use rights. Project proponents are required to identify and mitigate negative socio-economic impacts, and use of the CCB Standards is recommended to show additional benefits beyond carbon mitigation. Safeguards related to benefit sharing, avoided resettlement, Free, Prior and Informed Consent, vulnerable groups or gender are not explicitly mentioned in VCS project documentation.

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

Jurisdictional proponents must provide information in the monitoring reports with respect to how they have avoided (and where necessary mitigated) negative, and enhanced positive, social impacts in accordance with the safeguards contained in Appendix 1 of Decision 1/CP.16 of the UNFCCC Cancun Agreements and relevant jurisdictional (national and subnational) REDD+ safeguards requirements.

Climate Action Reserve: Mexico Forest Protocol

Projects on communally owned land must adhere to requirements that address free, prior, and informed consent to the project, proper meeting notification, participation, and documentation, and project governance. The protocol provides guidance for how project concepts are presented to the community, along with a discussion of costs and benefits associated with the project and the process for project approval by the community.  Requirements exist to ensure the occurrence of periodic meetings, that those meetings are noticed, that opportunities for participation exist for all participants, and that the meetings are documented. Additionally, the MFP includes requirements for project governance, including the establishment and succession of a project coordinator, to assist in project administration and oversight. 

The Gold Standard Land Use and Forests Framework

The principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) needs to be applied across all Gold Standard project activities. A local stakeholder consultation process should be carried out during the initial project design phase in accordance with the A/R Requirements, in order to ensure local participation and success of the project. During this process appropriate safeguards and sustainability indicators are identified and these are to be measured and monitored throughout the project.

Project developers must have uncontested land title for the duration of the project and have all land, timber, and carbon rights. In cases where the project developer does not own all rights, evidence must be presented that the respective owner of the rights consents to the project for the project’s lifetime.

The Standard requires project developers to carry out a ‘do-no-harm’ assessment which contains minimum safeguards in regards to the rights of indigenous peoples, members of local communities and workers. No explicit safeguards mention benefit sharing beyond the creation of employment opportunities. Potentially negative social impacts must be mitigated, and the project must not lead to the involuntary resettlement or displacement of people. Employers must ensure workers have a safe and fair labour environment and that labour rights are respected and protected in accordance with the fundamental International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions, even if these have not been ratified by the host country.

Plan Vivo Standard

The Plan Vivo Standard requires that project interventions take place on land where participant smallholders/community groups have clear and stable land tenure, either in the form of ownership or user rights. Areas that are not owned or subject to user rights of smallholders/communities may still be included in the project area provided certain requirements are met.

The Plan Vivo standard requires projects to apply a benefit-sharing mechanism. A description of the benefit-sharing mechanism that has been agreed with the participation of local communities should be included in a written PES Agreement, identifying how PES funding will be distributed among project participants, the project coordinator and any other identified stakeholders. Projects selling Plan Vivo Certificates (Verifiable Emissions Reductions) should aim to deliver at least 60% of the proceeds of sales to communities with the project coordinators taking no more than 40% of sales income to cover operational costs. Where less than 60% is delivered, it must be explained and justified how the project is fairly benefitting communities.

Prior to entering into a PES agreements the Plan Vivo standard requires participants to have been properly consulted about the project through a process of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC). The Plan Vivo Guidance Manual from 2012 includes instructions on FPIC and what consultations could cover.

The Plan Vivo standard also includes labour requirements and provides that community members, including women and members of marginalised groups, must be given an equal opportunity to fill employment positions in the project where they have the skills required for the roles or where they can be cost-effectively trained.

Natural Forest Standard

The Natural Forest Standard requires that project activities provide positive impacts to local communities and indigenous people and enable such stakeholders to engage in a participatory manner and receive benefits associated with the implementation of the project. Project developers are required to ensure their needs, rights and interests are recognised, and that projects take into account relevant social, cultural and environmental factors in the proposed project area. They must also adhere to the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) according to which the consent of stakeholders impacted by the project should be obtained prior to the commencement of project activities. FPIC should be considered as a process throughout the duration of the project rather than a one-time decision, to take account of any appropriate changes.

Project developers are required to hold evidence of necessary use rights to the project area; this includes the carbon rights and/or ownership of the land for the project area.

The standard requires projects to establish a relevant Benefit Distribution Mechanism (BDM) in order for the people within the project area or who have rights over the land or resources to receive benefits from the project. The BDM should be designed in consultation with local communities and relevant organisations, including as appropriate, government bodies. The development of the mechanism should also be guided by the principles of FPIC. The standard is flexible in allowing for different approaches that projects may take to implementing the benefit mechanism and recognises that the design, implementation and governance of this mechanism will be specific to individual projects, however it should reflect the eligibility of stakeholders within the project area to make claims regarding the scale, timing and type of benefits accrued.  

Developed Country Programmes

Australian Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI)

The CFI legislation contains a ‘negative list’ to identify ineligible activities and was designed to ensure such projects were not considered additional and to address residual risks not addressed through the existing regulation. The negative list identifies types of projects that are likely to cause adverse impacts to one or more of a list of topics, which includes employment, the local community, and land access for agricultural production. The enabling legislation also has specific provisions relating to indigenous lands.