Rights for REDD+ or REDD+ for rights?: successful experiences and remaining challenges

One of the most controversial issues on REDD+ is the one related to the clarification of the rights over the land, trees; rights on the use, right on the carbon. The range of positions on this debate is broad and diverse making agreements difficult at local, national and international level. REDD+ is a new terminology but what is understood as REDD activities are forest practices that indigenous peoples and forest practitioners have carry out for long. This workshop offers examples on how IUCN, our members and partners have provided clarification on the rights for forest management / conservation practices and how that experience is currently used for REDD+.

We would like also to extend the analysis to explore the issue related to the rights of participation, consultation and information for decision making of most vulnerable groups on REDD processes. Governments have acknowledged that gender considerations and indigenous rights should be fundamental elements under this mechanism. Unfortunately, while the language of global REDD+ initiatives refers to the need to engage indigenous peoples and local communities, it fails to recognize the differentiated needs of women and men within communities; women´s rights and women as a major stakeholder both at the local and global level.

We want to present country cases that have used different tools for the clarification of rights; we aim to analyze also the limitations of such tools and discuss the challenges that still exist in this field. We would like to discuss if we need to have the rights clarified before any REDD+ activity or if we can build REDD+ national strategies as a mean to clarify the rights of indigenous peoples and forest communities. If IUCN and other partners are interested in building a pro-poor approach for REDD, the question also is whether the clarification of rights is the base or just a condition for it.

Objectives and outputs of the Workshop

The workshop aims to explore the diversity of views and approaches to the issue of rights and REDD+, so that the audience leaves with a broader understanding of problems and some possible solutions.

The workshop output will be a list of priority actions which should be taken to advance REDD and rights. This output will be the results of discussion of draft recommendations (see 4.6) which have been amended or added to in small groups, and then voted on by the whole audience.

Contact Persons: Carole Saint Laurent (Carole.SAINT-LAURENT@iucn.org), Adewale Adeleke (Adewale.Adeleke@iucn.org), Mario Escobedo (Mario.ESCOBEDO@iucn.org) and Pete Wood (pete.n.wood@gmail.com)

Geographical scope:

Rating: 
No votes yet
Connection could not be established.
Array ( [0] => Array ( [0] => 28000 [SQLSTATE] => 28000 [1] => 18456 [code] => 18456 [2] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'drupal'. [message] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'drupal'. ) [1] => Array ( [0] => 42000 [SQLSTATE] => 42000 [1] => 4060 [code] => 4060 [2] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Cannot open database "aspnetdb" requested by the login. The login failed. [message] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Cannot open database "aspnetdb" requested by the login. The login failed. ) [2] => Array ( [0] => 28000 [SQLSTATE] => 28000 [1] => 18456 [code] => 18456 [2] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'drupal'. [message] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Login failed for user 'drupal'. ) [3] => Array ( [0] => 42000 [SQLSTATE] => 42000 [1] => 4060 [code] => 4060 [2] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Cannot open database "aspnetdb" requested by the login. The login failed. [message] => [Microsoft][SQL Server Native Client 10.0][SQL Server]Cannot open database "aspnetdb" requested by the login. The login failed. ) )