SIMONET Gabriela

• Only a few studies assess the impacts of local REDD+ initiatives on forests, due to the financial, methodological, data and political challenges of implementing rigorous impact evaluations. • Local REDD+ projects and programmes frequently include a mix of interventions, i.e., incentives, disincentives and enabling measures. Disincentives are used to reduce deforestation, and incentives – either conditional on results or not – are used to help minimise the trade-offs between carbon and well-being outcomes. • The scarce evidence that is available on local REDD+ outcomes shows modestly encouraging results for forest conservation and carbon stock enhancement. Three projects using conditional incentives showed positive results for forests, through reducing the negative impacts of smallholder agriculture and firewood collection.

The Paris Climate Agreement recognizes the importance of the mechanism to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation, and enhance carbon stocks (REDD+). We reviewed 45 articles from the recent scientific literature to understand the outcomes of REDD+ interventions on the ground, in terms of local participation in REDD+, and its carbon and non-carbon (e.g. tenure, well-being, biodiversity) goals. Our review finds few studies that use a counterfactual scenario to measure REDD+ impacts, and relatively little attention to carbon (versus non-carbon) outcomes. The few studies focused on carbon/land use outcomes show moderately encouraging results, while the more numerous studies on non-carbon outcomes (especially well-being) highlight small or insignificant results. To enhance REDD+ performance, these studies recommend improved engagement with local communities, increased funding to bolster interventions on the ground, and more attention to both carbon and non-carbon outcomes in implementation and evaluation.

Since the emergence of the REDD+ mechanism, hundreds of projects have emerged around the globe. Much attention has been given to REDD+ projects in the literature, but the conditions under which they are likely to be efficient ares till not well known. In this article, we study how the location of REDD+ projects is chosen and how those location choices influence project additionality. Based on a sample of six REDD+ projects in Brazil, we propose an empirical analysis of the location choices and estimate additionality in the first years of implementation using impact evaluation techniques. In order to explain the heterogeneity of the empirical results, we present a simple theoretical model and show that project location is strongly influenced by the type of project proponent, which appears to be a good proxy for its objectives, whether oriented toward environmental impacts, development impacts, or external funding. Our results suggest that (1) the incentives behind REDD+ certification mechanisms can lead to low environmental efforts or an investment in areas that are not additional, (2) location biases are dependent on the REDD+ project manager’s type, and (3) the existence of a location bias does not necessarily preclude additionality.

We estimate the additional effects of a REDD+ pilot project offering Payments for Envi-ronmental Services to reduce deforestation by smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon. We collected original data from 181 individual farmers. We use DID-matching and find evi-dence that supports the parallel trend assumption. We estimate that an average of 4 ha of forest have been saved on each participating farm in 2014, at the expense of pastures versus croplands. This amounts to a decrease in the deforestation rate of about 50 percent. We find no evidence of leakage effects. Finally, we find that the project is cost-effective.

How is location of REDD+ projects chosen, and how do those location choices influence project additionality? This paper assesses these questions, presenting a simple theoretical model and using an original database of REDD+ projects in Brazil. We show that project location is strongly influenced by the type of project proponent, which appears to be a good proxy for its objectives, whether oriented toward environmental impacts, development impacts, or external funding. Our results suggest that the incentives behind REDD+ certification mechanisms can lead to low environmental effort or an investment in areas that are not additional.

We estimate the additional effects of a REDD+ pilot project offering Payments for Envi-ronmental Services to reduce deforestation by smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon. We collected original data from 181 individual farmers. We use DID-matching and find evi-dence that supports the parallel trend assumption. We estimate that an average of 4 ha of forest have been saved on each participating farm in 2014, at the expense of pastures versus croplands. This amounts to a decrease in the deforestation rate of about 50 percent. We find no evidence of leakage effects. Finally, we find that the project is cost-effective.

We estimate the additional effects of a REDD+ pilot project offering Payments for Envi-ronmental Services to reduce deforestation by smallholders in the Brazilian Amazon. We collected original data from 181 individual farmers. We use DID-matching and find evi-dence that supports the parallel trend assumption. We estimate that an average of 4 ha of forest have been saved on each participating farm in 2014, at the expense of pastures versus croplands. This amounts to a decrease in the deforestation rate of about 50 percent. We find no evidence of leakage effects. Finally, we find that the project is cost-effective.

Beyond their high potential for climate change mitigation, forests provide many other benefits, notably on livelihood, biodiversity, soil and water quality. In this paper, we assess the level of consideration for such co-benefits in REDD+ projects and carbon markets. We first show that the topic is particularly relevant when climate change mitigation and other benefits are substitutable. Then, we discuss the impact of managing co-benefits in REDD+ projects. We give an overview of the current level of consideration for co-benefits in the voluntary carbon market, based on the results of a survey conducted on players of this market. Finally, we discuss the impacts of integrating more broadly REDD+ projects in compliance markets and show that it might lead to a decrease in the production of co-benefits.

Using original data collected from 181 small farmers in the State of Para in Brazil in 2010 and 2014, we show that REDD+ pilots using positive economic and agricultural incentives can slow down deforestation rates in areas dominated by smallholder properties, where command-and- control policies arise political and equity concerns. In the present paper we analyze, using an econometric approach based on DID-matching, the forest conservation impacts of a REDD+ pilot program in the Transamazon highway that combines Payments for Environmental Services (PES) with environmental sensitization and agricultural technical assistance. Although the program attracted farmers who do not depend on livestock and often have a higher wage income than non-participants, a potential limitation to maximizing the environmental additionality of the project, we find a significant conservation impact of the project. Yet at its early implementation stage, our results show that program participants devoted on average 66% of their land to forest in 2014 while it would have decreased to an estimated 61% without the project. We find that the forest conservation impact is even higher for the subset of farmerswho had previously participated in a similar program, suggesting a process of time-cumulative learning and confidence on external support that acts as a facilitator for reaching positive conservation outcomes. Moreover, our results show that the forest area has been preserved at the expense of pastures, not of croplands. Extending the average estimate to all participants, we conclude that the project avoided the emission of around 830 000 tCO2.

The sociological survey carried out among stakeholders in the middle Garonne reveals a shift in the interpretation of the factors responsible for the territorial evolution observed, pointing to local anthropic factors rather than climate change. The article shows that the latter, which has become a negotiating argument, tends to reinforce opposing development logics between quantitative exploitation of water resources and protection of natural river environments.

No summary available.

The adaptEau project is an interdisciplinary research experience on the water governance.