05.06.2013 Views

Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB

Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB

Download (PDF, 6.71MB) - TEEB

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!