integrate REDD+ into a green economy transition - Unredd.net

implementation, or for estimating the functioning, distribution, and effects of biophysical
changes on the delivery of ecosystem services. Some ecosystem services are also inputs to
the production of other services, so aggregation may double count benefits (TEEB 2010b).
Alternatively, aggregation may fail to capture the trade-offs that might exist between
ecosystem services or social objectives in a particular area. A monoculture tree plantation
might sequester a lot of carbon, for example, but would not support the same level of
biodiversity as a mixed-species plantation.
Nonetheless, the multiple benefits that could arise from REDD+ implementation make a
clear rationale for why REDD+ can inherently be part of the transition to a green economy.
Firstly, forest ecosystem services are rarely reflected appropriately in market prices, or are
not present in markets at all. A better appreciation of the multiple contributions of REDD+
to human well-being is a first step towards understanding the true benefits provided by
forests, and consequently correcting the market and policy failures that have led to their
decline. Such information may also help move forest and land use management away from
the periphery of national planning processes by generating a shift in thinking that takes into
account the multiple benefits of forests, including climate change mitigation.
REDD+ policies and measures will have implications for a large group of people, given the
need to harmonise REDD+ efforts with, for example, energy and agriculture policies, which
are also important drivers of development (Graham, 2011). Integrating REDD+ within
planning and investments for a green economy transition could allow for synergistic
opportunities to be maximised. This is particularly true in policy planning as the same
actors, networks and institutions will likely be engaged in the green economy transition and
in REDD+ implementation. Integration at an early stage can reduce the proliferation of
institutions and thereby the transaction costs of pursuing REDD+ and a green economy. It
can also provide a platform to share REDD+ experience and tools. Progress already made
on REDD+ safeguards, for example, can be applied or adapted where necessary, to suit the
social objectives in the context of contributing to a green economy transition. In addition,
established safeguards can help reduce investor risks by setting clear rules. This is
evidenced by the prominence of social and environmental standards in the voluntary forestcarbon
markets (Jagger et al., 2012; Peter-Stanley et al., 2012). The relationship could also
be mutually supporting, with the clear pursuit of a green economy able to reduce risks of
non-permanence and leakage risks of REDD+ investments (Sukhdev et al., 2010).
10