CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Ani A. Nawir - Thinking about REDD+ benefit sharing mechanism (BSM)

Community forestry (CF) provides valuable lessons for REDD+ benefit-sharing mechanisms (BSMs) for three reasons. First, CF institutions generally have an established BSM that incentivizes forest conservation, which is recognized by national law. Second, CF generates and distributes co-benefits from timber and other forestry products, including ecological services and carbon sequestration. Lastly, CF is a forest management option for the implementation of REDD+.CIFOR’s infobrief compares CF schemes in Nepal and Indonesia for REDD+ implementation and assesses them in terms of their effectiveness, efficiency and equity. The infobrief documents and analyzes institutional arrangements and incentive structures that can be adopted in designing REDD+ BSMs in different contexts: (1) Different approaches to BSMs - that is, based on rights allocation, inputs or performance - must be considered, as each has a specific and complementary role in achieving the effectiveness, efficiency and equity in REDD+ BSMs; (2) To achieve effectiveness and efficiency, structuring shared benefits, such as under an exclusive bundle of rights, can be more effective in changing behavior than, for example, input-based incentives that are not tied to conditions for halting deforestation and degradation, and/or to performance in tree-planting and wood production; And (3) For equity, opportunity costs are an important consideration in deciding how benefits are shared, particularly if land-use competition is high. For example, individual household opportunity costs might differ from the average in an area under REDD+, and so the final valuation should consider trade-offs.http://www.cifor.org/library/5506/thinking-about-redd-benefit-sharing-mechanism-bsm-lessons-from-community-forestry-cf-in-nepal-and-indonesia/To watch previous Science@10 presentations, please go to CIFOR TV https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZ1FEAFDHOWcnCwld2Qjio_vqHIExpcwG

Other videos you might be interested in