Tenure Conditions and Challenges at REDD+ Project Sites in Five Countries

Transcription

1 Tenure Conditions and Challenges at REDD+ Project Sites in Five Countries William D. Sunderlin, Abdon Awono, Therese Dokken, Amy Duchelle, Thu Ba Huynh, Anne Larson, Daju Pradnja Resosudarmo, Arild Angelsen World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty Washington DC, April 18-20, 2011

2 Outline of presentation CIFOR S GCS-REDD Why tenure important in REDD Preliminary study findings Concerns Policy options

3 CIFOR s Global Comparative Study on REDD Four years ( ) Evaluate REDD on basis of 3 Es and co-benefits Provide policy & technical guidance Three research components C2: REDD+ project sites BACI Currently in midst of collecting before data 11 of 20 sites today

4 Research countries and projects Continent Country REDD project site LATIN AMERICA BRAZIL Brazil 1 Brazil 2 Brazil 3 Brazil 4 Brazil 5 AFRICA CAMEROON Cameroon 1 Cameroon 2 TANZANIA Tanzania 1 Tanzania 2 Tanzania 3 Tanzania 4 Tanzania 5 Tanzania 6 ASIA INDONESIA Indonesia 1 Indonesia 2 Indonesia 3 Indonesia 4 Indonesia 5 Indonesia 6 VIETNAM Vietnam 1

5 Why tenure important in REDD? Forest tenure unclear and contested in most forested developing countries because of dispossession Most of forest estate owned by governments, with great unevenness: Latin America > Asia > Africa Important to determine legitimate right holder and resolve ambiguities in advance to: Assure equity in distribution of REDD benefits Hold people accountable under conditional incentives Prevent rush for resource control Protect existing resource rights of communities

6 Why tenure important in REDD? Clarified tenure important to the carbon effectiveness of REDD because: Creates incentives for local users to protect forests Increases scope of policy instruments that can be used (e.g. PES)

7 Tenure in five countries and at 11 sites Country National tenure Project site Project site tenure Brazil Cameroon Tanzania Indonesia More than ½ private. About 1/3 owned by or designated for use by communities 5-10% designated for community use More than 10% under CF (JFM & CBFM) 0.25% designated for use by communities Brazil 1 Brazil 2 Brazil 3 Cameroon 1 Cameroon 2 Tanzania 1 Tanzania 2 Indonesia 1 Indonesia 2 Indonesia 3 100% indiv use. 0% indiv ownership 94% indiv use. 6% indiv ownership 100% indiv use. 0% indiv ownership 100% com use. 0% com ownership 100% com use. 0% com ownership Unknown. Village mapping not yet done. Unknown. Village mapping not yet done. 0% com use. 0% com ownership 0% com use. 0% com ownership 0% com use. 0% com ownership Vietnam 1.5% community use Vietnam 1 19% com use. 0% com ownership

8 Findings: Perception of tenure security Country Site No. & % villages perceiving insecure tenure Reasons for insecurity Brazil Brazil 1 4 of 4 (100%) Lack of titles; contestation by former estate owners; in 2 of 4 villages, inability to enforce local rules and incursion of timber company Brazil 2 0 of 4 (0%) n/a Brazil 3 1 of 4 (25%) Lack of land titles and ongoing conflicts with neighboring cattle rancher in 1 village in protected area Cameroon Cameroon 1 2 of 2 (100%) No land titles. Rights can be easily revoked. Restrictions on land use by government. Competition for land with people from other village Cameroon 2 4 of 4 (100%) Conflict over land. Destruction by elephants. Restrictions on land & resource use by company. Competition for land with neighboring village. Tanzania Tanzania 1 1 of 4 (25%) Restrictions on land use by government. Tanzania 2 3 of 5 (60 %) Lack of land titles in all three villages. Restriction on land/forest use by village government in one of them. Indonesia Indonesia 1 1 of 4 (25%) Have no title, village rights were overturned or revoked, Rights can be easily revoked Indonesia 2 4 of 4 (100%) Have no title. Rights easily revoked. Government land use restrictions. Competition for land among villagers, increasing population. Indonesia 3 4 of 4 (100%) Have no title. Rights can be easily revoked and are only temporary. No legal basis for customary rights claim, competition for land with outside company. Vietnam Vietnam 1 0 of 4 (0%) n/a

9 Findings: Rights to exclude outsiders Country Site No. & % of villages with perceived right to exclude No. & % of villages with successful attempt to exclude No. & % of villages with unsuccessful attempt to exclude No. & % of villages where right to exclude DNA (no unwanted outsiders) Brazil Brazil 1 2 of 4 (50%) 2 of 4 (50%) 2 of 4 (50%) 0 of 4 (0%) Brazil 2 4 of 4 (100%) 2 of 4 (50%) 0 of 4 (0%) 2 of 4 (50%) Brazil 3 4 of 4 (100%) 3 of 4 (75%) 0 of 4 (0%) 1 of 4 (25%) Cameroon Cameroon 1 2 of 2 (100%) 2 of 2 (100%) 0 of 2 (0%) 0 of 2 (0%) Cameroon 2 4 of 4 (100%) 3 of 4 (75%) 1 of 4 (25%) 0 of 4 (0%) Tanzania Tanzania 1 4 of 4 (100%) 2 of 4 (50%) 1 of 4 (25%) 1 of 4 (25%) Tanzania 2 4 of 5 (80%) 3 of 5 (60%) 2 of 5 (40%) 0 of 5 (0%) Indonesia Indonesia 1 3 of 4 (75%) 3 of 4 (75%) 0 of 4 (0%) 1 of 4 (25%) Indonesia 2 4 of 4 (100%) 2 of 4 (50%) 2 of 4 (50%) 0 of 4 (0%) Indonesia 3 4 of 4 (100%) 3 of 4 (75%) 1 of 4 (25%) 0 of 4 (0%) Vietnam Vietnam 1 4 of 4 (100%) 0 of 4 (100%) 0 of 4 (0%) 4 of 4 (100%)

10 Findings: Proponent actions on tenure Country Site Tenure challenge perceived? Nature of tenure challenge What are the plans to address challenge? Brazil Brazil 1 YES No recognition of territorial rights in project priority area Brazil 2 YES Many squatters with no documentation of land rights Brazil 3 YES Most stakeholders do not have official land titles Cameroon Cameroon 1 YES Collective vs family rights. Need community forest approval. Cameroon 2 YES Land tenure and land use planning. Tanzania Tanzania 1 YES Migrants and livestock keepers versus farmers Tanzania 2 YES Carbon rights unclear. No statutory rights for some villages. Indonesia Indonesia 1 YES Indonesia 2 Indonesia 3 YES YES Concession holders may sue. Community is not a problem. Overlapping forest land use is obstacle to Hutan Desa status. Communities claim ancestral rights not recognized by law. Vietnam Vietnam 1 YES Forests have unclear tenure and not allocated. Carbon benefits. Process of land regularization begun in 2009 Improve system of property registration with National Agrarian Reform Agency Implement Environmental Rural Cadastres (CARs) via two projects Facilitating participatory approach, group norms, and equity as a goal. Implement a tenure strategy with stakeholders consistent with national policy. Clearly define borders before starting the project Advocacy and secure community tenure through village land certificates. Implementers trying to negotiate with concession holders. Proponents seeking Hutan Desa status as path to determining carbon rights. Project will develop community maps and facilitate spatial plan at village level. Continue allocation, engage in land use planning, clarify carbon revenue rights.

11 Findings: Villager knowledge & participation Country Site No. & % of villages knowledgeable about REDD No. & % of villages giving permission for project No. & % of villages involved in design &/or implementation Brazil Brazil 1 0 of 4 (0%) 4 of 4 (100%) 0 of 4 (0%) Brazil 2 2 of 4 (50%) 3 of 4 (75%) 0 of 4 (0%) Brazil 3 not asked not asked not asked Cameroon Cameroon 1 2 of 2 (100%) 2 of 2 (100%) 2 of 2 (100%) Cameroon 2 3 of 4 (75%) 2 of 4 (50%) 1 of 4 (25%) Tanzania Tanzania 1 2 of 4 (50%) 2 of 2 (100%) 0 of 2 (0%) Tanzania 2 4 of 5 (80%) 3 of 4 (75%) 1 of 4 (25%) Indonesia Indonesia 1 0 of 4 (0%) 0 of 4 (0%) 0 of 4 (0%) Indonesia 2 3 of 4 (75%) 3 of 4 (75%) 3 of 4 (75%) Indonesia 3 3 of 4 (75%) 0 of 4 (0%) 0 of 4 (0%) Vietnam Vietnam 1 0 of 4 (0%) 0 of 4 (0%) 0 of 4 (0%)

12 Findings: Going slowly with public education about REDD in project sites Country Site Proponents discuss REDD openly in project areas Proponents prefer to avoid discussing REDD at site to avoid raising expectations Brazil Brazil 1 NO YES Brazil 2 YES NO Brazil 3 NO YES Cameroon Cameroon 1 YES NO Cameroon 2 YES NO Tanzania Tanzania 1 YES NO Tanzania 2 YES NO Indonesia Indonesia 1 NO YES Indonesia 2 NO YES Indonesia 3 YES NO Vietnam Vietnam 1 YES NO

13 Summary Question Match of national to site tenure Perception of tenure security Rights to exclude outsiders Proponent actions on tenure Villager knowledge & participation Going slowly with education Summary of main findings Matches: Indonesia and Vietnam [Minimal community use at national and site levels] Mismatch: Brazil [~100% indiv idual lots at site] and Cameroon [100% comm. use at sites] Unknown: Tanzania At 24 of 43 villages (56% of total) there is perceived lack of tenure security. Dominant reasons: Lack of title and claims made by outsiders. Perceived right to exclude: 39 of 43 villages = 91% Successful effort to exclude outsiders: 25 of 43 villages = 58% Unsuccessful attempt to exclude outsiders: 9 of 43 villages = 21% DNA because there are no unwanted outsiders: 9 of 43 villages = 21% At all project sites, proponents perceive tenure as a challenge that must be addressed. Main challenges perceived: lack of formal recognition, conflict, and many other issues. Main steps: regularization, land use planning, rights formalization, clarify carbon benefits. Villagers are knowledgeable about REDD or project: 19 of 39 villages = 49% Villagers have given permission for REDD project: 19 of 36 villages = 53% Villagers involved in design & implementation of REDD: 7 of 36 villages = 19% Proponents prefer to avoid discussing REDD at site to not raise expectations: 4 of 11 projects = 36%

14 Concerns Proponents recognize tenure as problem and have taken some important steps toward addressing them, BUT: Lack of perceived tenure security at ½ of villages Unsuccessful exclusion of outsiders at 1/5 of villages Villagers have knowledge of REDD or project at < ½ of villages Proponents avoid discussion of REDD at 1/3 of project sites To date permission for REDD at just ½ of sites Villager involvement in design & implementation at just 1/5 of villages Some lack of progress on FPIC and participation because not done yet While there are clear grounds for concern now and room for improvement, our concerns are greater as we look to the future.

15 Concerns Reasons for concern as we look to the future: What is at stake at site is not yet clearly defined (type of conditional incentives both positive and negative) It s not clear villagers know what they need to know to bargain capably on their own behalf Carbon rights have yet to be clarified and could alter existing arrangements Knowledge is power, and villagers only fully aware of what is at stake when benefits & constraints are in place, and at that time it may be too late to bargain Adequate resolution of some tenure issues requires addressing them at national level and not just at site It takes years for thorough forest tenure reform yet REDD could take off in the next year or two

16 Policy options Conduct FPIC where it has not been done Increase education of villagers about CC and REDD in spite of risks so fully-informed decision can be made To frame policy appropriately, look not just at tenure conditions now, but what they will be when REDD begins Assure ways that villagers can bargain effectively when it becomes clearer what REDD will actually be Link local-level tenure clarification to national initiatives Develop guidelines for appropriate action on tenure on the basis of findings to date

17