• Treffer 15 von 1375
Zurück zur Trefferliste

Who owns REDD+?

  • The question of who is entitled to benefit from transactions under the United Nations framework to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) remains one of the most controversial issues surrounding cooperative efforts to reduce deforestation in developing countries. REDD+ has been conceived as an international framework to encourage voluntary efforts in developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon removals from forest activities. It was designed as an international framework under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to enable the generation of emission reductions and removals (ERRs) at the national-and, provisionally, the subnational-level and is, thus, primarily a creature of international law. However, in defining forest carbon ERRs, the international framework competes with national emission trading systems and domestic REDD+ legislation as well as private standards that define units traded on the voluntary carbon market. As results-based andThe question of who is entitled to benefit from transactions under the United Nations framework to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) remains one of the most controversial issues surrounding cooperative efforts to reduce deforestation in developing countries. REDD+ has been conceived as an international framework to encourage voluntary efforts in developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance carbon removals from forest activities. It was designed as an international framework under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to enable the generation of emission reductions and removals (ERRs) at the national-and, provisionally, the subnational-level and is, thus, primarily a creature of international law. However, in defining forest carbon ERRs, the international framework competes with national emission trading systems and domestic REDD+ legislation as well as private standards that define units traded on the voluntary carbon market. As results-based and carbon market systems emerge, the question remains: Who can claim participation in REDD+ and voluntary carbon market projects? The existence of different international, national and private standards that value ERRs poses a challenge to countries that participate in REDD+ as well as to communities and private actors participating in voluntary carbon market projects. This paper seeks to clarify the nature and limitation of rights pertaining to REDD+ market transactions. It also links the notion of carbon rights to both carbon markets and government's decision on benefit sharing. Applying a legal lens, this paper helps to understand the various claims and underlying rights to participate in REDD+ transactions and addresses ambiguities that can lead to conflict around REDD+ implementation. The definition of carbon rights and the legal nature of carbon credits depend on local law and differ between countries. However, by categorizing carbon rights, the paper summarizes several legal considerations that are relevant for regulating REDD+ and sharing the financial benefits of transacting ERRs.zeige mehrzeige weniger

Metadaten exportieren

Weitere Dienste

Suche bei Google Scholar Statistik - Anzahl der Zugriffe auf das Dokument
Metadaten
Verfasserangaben:Charlotte StreckORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/f11090959
ISSN:1999-4907
Titel des übergeordneten Werks (Englisch):Forests
Untertitel (Englisch):carbon markets, carbon rights and entitlements to REDD+ finance
Verlag:MDPI
Verlagsort:Basel
Publikationstyp:Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
Sprache:Englisch
Datum der Erstveröffentlichung:01.09.2020
Erscheinungsjahr:2020
Datum der Freischaltung:08.02.2023
Freies Schlagwort / Tag:REDD plus; REDD+; avoided deforestation; benefit sharing; carbon rights; emissions; trading; voluntary carbon markets
Band:11
Ausgabe:9
Aufsatznummer:959
Seitenanzahl:15
Organisationseinheiten:Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Sozialwissenschaften / Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft
DDC-Klassifikation:6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 63 Landwirtschaft / 630 Landwirtschaft und verwandte Bereiche
6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 64 Hauswirtschaft und Familie / 640 Hauswirtschaft und Familie
6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 69 Hausbau, Bauhandwerk / 690 Hausbau, Bauhandwerk
Publikationsweg:Open Access / Gold Open-Access
Lizenz (Deutsch):License LogoCC-BY - Namensnennung 4.0 International
Verstanden ✔
Diese Webseite verwendet technisch erforderliche Session-Cookies. Durch die weitere Nutzung der Webseite stimmen Sie diesem zu. Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier.