Rules governing the REDD (Reductions of Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) scheme have yet to be established. Different national interests compete within the debate on baselines in order to maximize expected gains. The scheme could have a deleterious impact on the carbon market through massive hot air creation (fake emission reductions), and ultimately on the current international climate change regime derived from the cap-and-trade architecture adopted by the Kyoto Protocol. The political economy of avoided deforestation is frequently overlooked as is the issue of additionality, although both of them are more critical with deforestation at national level than they could be with project-based CDM. An alternative REDD architecture which relies on a special fund would not only allow protection of the carbon market against massive flooding by non additional credits, but could also help finance potentially efficient policies and measures. Sustaining long-term adequate funding is still an issue to be addressed on a multilateral basis.
You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither BioOne nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the BioOne website.
Vol. 10 • No. 3