Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB
Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB
Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
REWARDING BENEFITS THROUGH PAYMENTS AND MARKETS<br />
Key Messages of Chapter 5<br />
As highlighted throughout this report, the value of biodiversity and ecosystem services is not (fully) recognised<br />
by markets: degradation and loss result from decision making that ignores or understates the local and global<br />
benefits provided by ecosystems. We urgently need new policy frameworks that reward the provision<br />
of ecosystem services and promote the greening of supply chains.<br />
This chapter focuses on innovative tools to reward ecosystem benefits efficiently and equitably through direct<br />
payments and tax incentives or by stimulating markets for products and services that have reduced environmental<br />
impact. These tools can be combined with instruments and approaches discussed in other chapters<br />
of this report. Effective policy mixes in each country will depend on national context and priorities.<br />
National and international payments for ecosystem services (PES)<br />
PES schemes that compensate those who maintain or enhance the flow of ecosystem services have already<br />
demonstrated their potential. In a global context of stagnant funding for biodiversity conservation, PES offer<br />
considerable potential to raise new funds for biodiversity or to use existing funding more efficiently. Both the<br />
public and private sectors can play a role in establishing PES in different contexts. PES have proven to be a<br />
highly flexible tool, providing both direct and indirect rewards for various ecosystem services and biodiversity<br />
conservation at a range of different scales.<br />
At an international scale, one of the most significant PES opportunities on the table is REDD (Reducing<br />
Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries), which is being negotiated<br />
as part of the post-2012 climate change regime under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate<br />
Change. Recent proposals for ‘REDD-Plus’ would offer incentives for forest conservation, sustainable forest<br />
management and enhancement of existing forest carbon stocks. Deforestation is estimated to account for<br />
up to 17% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: an agreement on such a mechanism could make a<br />
significant contribution to addressing global climate change and also provide substantial biodiversity benefits<br />
if designed and implemented with due consideration to the wide range of values of nature.<br />
Recommendation: Promote PES demonstration activities and capacity building to develop the<br />
knowledge base, reduce transaction costs and scale up successful initiatives. Further efforts are<br />
needed to confirm where, in what form, and under what conditions PES work best for biodiversity, and to<br />
improve their targeting, monitoring and governance. PES should be designed to ensure additionality<br />
(i.e. going beyond ‘business as usual’) and to minimise leakage (i.e. displacement of damaging activities<br />
elsewhere). Spatial analysis – including data on economic costs and benefits – can help to map areas that<br />
are most important for providing ecosystem services, as well as the distribution of providers and beneficiaries,<br />
in order to identify synergies and priorities for both policy makers and private investors. Due engagement<br />
of local populations in the design and implementation of PES can be a critical factor in the success of<br />
the instrument.<br />
Recommendation: Support an international agreement on a REDD-Plus mechanism as part of the<br />
global climate regime, while ensuring that other ecosystem services besides climate mitigation are<br />
taken into account. Depending on how REDD-Plus is designed and implemented, it could not only provide<br />
incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation but also secure biodiversity and other<br />
benefits at international, national and local levels. Appropriate safeguards should be formulated to reduce<br />
potential adverse impacts on biodiversity and to respect the rights and needs of indigenous and local communities,<br />
without making the rules so onerous that investors are unduly discouraged.<br />
<strong>TEEB</strong> FOR NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL POLICY MAKERS - CHAPTER 5: PAGE 2