redd+ses exchange nepal

Pokhara, Nepal 13th 16th April 2015

Exchange & Learning Workshop Report

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal Contents

1. Introduction 2

1.1. REDD+ SES Initiative 2

1.2. Objectives of the workshop 3

1.3. Participants 3

2. New objectives, strategies and activities of the REDD+ SES Initiative 4

3. Experiences developing elements of the Country Safeguards Approach 5

3.1. Interpreting Cancun safeguards in the country context, in particular safeguards e), f), g) 6

3.2. Establishing grievance and redress mechanisms 7

3.3. Analysis of policies, laws and regulations (PLRs) 8

4. Experiences developing Safeguards Information Systems (SIS) 9

3.1. Interpreting safeguards to reflect the country context : Indonesia, Tanzania & DRC 10

3.2. Establishing institutional arrangements and processes for stakeholder participation : Guatemala, Peru and the Yucatan Peninsula 11

3.3. Developing country-specific indicators: Mato Grosso, Nepal and Central Kalimantan 12

3.4. Collecting, compiling and analyzing information : East Kalimantan and Kemitraan 13

3.5. Reviewing, reporting and using information : Acre 13

5. Articulation of Country Safeguards Approach and Safeguards Information Systems between national and sub-national level 15

6. Multi-stakeholder participatory processes for safeguards 17

7. Options for SESA/ESMF to support participatory safeguards monitoring 18

8. Outcome evaluation of a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS 18

9. Addressing equity in REDD+ 23

10. Tools to support the development of CSA and SIS 24

Annex 1. Agenda 26

Annex 2. List of participants 30

1

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 1. Introduction

1.1. REDD+ SES Initiative

The REDD+ SES Initiative was started in 2009 to develop voluntary best-practice standards used through a multi-stakeholder process to support effective implementation and credible reporting on safeguards for government-led REDD+ programs. Up to 2014, thirteen countries (including some initiatives at the subnational level)1 have participated in the Initiative, using the content and process of the REDD+ SES in different ways, either as good practice guidance, as the basis for their SIS, or as a quality assurance standard. The Initiative has also provided a dynamic learning and exchange platform to support south-south exchanges among government and civil society organizations for the identification and dissemination of good practices for safeguards, for multi-stakeholder approaches and for development and implementation of SIS. The Initiative has evolved considerably from the initial promotion of voluntary standards for REDD+ to become a leading REDD+ safeguards initiative providing capacity building and technical support tailored to the context of participating countries and a learning network for comprehensive, participatory and transparent country safeguards approaches.

The REDD+ SES Initiative is overseen by an International Standards Committee representing a balance of interested parties. The majority of committee members are from countries where REDD+ will be implemented, recognizing that developing country governments and civil society should lead the adoption of the standards. The process for development and use of the standards is being facilitated by an International Secretariat composed of the Climate, Community & Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) and CARE International with technical support from the Proforest Initiative.

This workshop, held over three days 13th to 15th April 2015 in Pokhara, Nepal, provided an opportunity for exchange and learning between the teams from government and civil society facilitating the development and implementation of SIS from the countries participating in the REDD+ SES Initiative. This workshop was the eighth exchange and learning event of the Initiative, and follows previous exchange and learning events held 3-5 August 2010 in Washington DC, USA; 15-17 February 2011 in Quito, Ecuador; 4-6 October in Acre, Brazil; 3-5 May 2012 in Dar es Salaam,Tanzania; 16-19 October 2012, Antigua, Guatemala; 1-3 July 2013 in Bogor, Indonesia; and 15-17 July 2014 in Merida, Mexico. For more information about the REDD+ SES exchange and learning workshops, please visit http://redd-standards.org/exchange-learning

After this REDD+ SES exchange and learning workshop, participants joined a field visit to communities in Ghorkha on 16th April 2015 to learn more about community-based forest management and community participatory governance assessment. The field trip was hosted by CARE Nepal.

1 State of Acre, State of Mato Grosso, State of Amazonas in Brazil; Ecuador; Region of San Martin in Peru; Chile; Costa Rica; Honduras; Guatemala; States of the Yucatan Peninsula and State of Jalisco in Mexico; Liberia; Tanzania; Democratic Republic of Congo; Nepal; Province of Central Kalimantan and Province of East Kalimantan in Indonesia

2

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 1.2. Objectives of the workshop

The overall aim of the workshop was to support countries in the development of a REDD+ country safeguards approach (CSA), in particular the safeguards information system (SIS). Objectives

1. Exchange experiences on elements of CSA on: o Interpreting Cancun safeguards in the country context o Establishing grievance and redress mechanisms o Analysis of policies, laws and regulations

2. Exchange experiences on development of SIS: o Interpreting safeguards to reflect the country context o Developing country-specific indicators o Establishing institutional arrangements and processes for stakeholders participation o Collecting, compiling and analyzing information o Reviewing, reporting and using information

3. Explore articulation of CSA & SIS at sub-national and national levels 4. Learn from experiences of establishing multi-stakeholder committees and processes for

stakeholder participation, and the challenges encountered 5. Exploring options for SESA/ESMF to support participatory safeguards monitoring 6. Present available tools to support the development of CSA and SIS and examples of application 7. Learn about outcome evaluation of a transparent, participatory and comprehensive approach to

CSA and SIS 8. Raise awareness about addressing equity in REDD+ 9. Provide an overview of the new objectives, strategies and activities of the REDD+ SES Initiative

1.3. Participants

A total of 31 participants from 8 countries (14 jurisdictions), of which 11 were from government, 17 from civil society and 3 from support organizations (see Annex 1).

The target participants were the key government and civil society partners who are facilitating the development and implementation of country safeguards approach and safeguards information system in each country or jurisdiction including Brazil, the State of Acre, the State of Mato Grosso, Indonesia, the Province of Central Kalimantan, the Province of East Kalimantan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Nepal, Mexico, Guatemala and Peru.

One participant was from the UN-REDD Programme, one from the World Bank and one from CIFOR and three from the REDD+ SES international secretariat (CCBA, CARE).

3

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal The workshop was organized around thematic sessions to exchange experiences on developing and implementing Country Safeguards Approach and Safeguards Information Systems and to explore and discuss upcoming issues related to these. The following sections present the results of the discussions of the sessions.

2. New objectives, strategies and activities of the REDD+ SES Initiative

In order to provide tailored support to participating countries, the REDD+ SES Initiative has revised its goal, objectives and activities. The full presentation is available here.

Overall goal of the SES Initiative from 2015

To support the development and implementation of effective social and environmental safeguards for government-led strategies and action plans for REDD+ and related low-emissions land use to make a substantial contribution to human rights, poverty reduction and biodiversity conservation goals while avoiding social or environmental harm.

Objectives for support to countries participating in the SES Initiative Countries participate in the SES Initiative according to the themes that are of particular interest to them. Overall, the objectives of the country support provided by the SES Initiative are:

1. To build capacity and provide technical support, guidance and tools for a country safeguards approach, and particularly for a safeguards information system;

2. To provide a platform for exchange and learning between governments and civil society in different countries on the country safeguards approach, including safeguards information systems;

3. To facilitate the documentation, synthesis and broad dissemination of experiences and lessons learned about the design, implementation and outcomes of a participatory country safeguards approach, including safeguards information systems, to relevant stakeholders including government and civil society as well as financing agencies, donors, and the private sector.

The elements of a country safeguards approach are explained on page 4. The SES initiative focuses on the following aspects:

Country Safeguards Approach (CSA) a) managing multi-stakeholder processes for effective stakeholder participation in CSA; b) interpreting safeguards to reflect the country context, including the risks and

opportunities of the REDD+ strategies and actions, and breaking the safeguards down into a comprehensive set of key elements, drawing on international best-practice standards;

4

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal c) addressing the rights and interests of Indigenous Peoples, local communities and

women, and ensuring their effective participation;

Safeguards Information System (SIS) as part of the CSA a) defining the scope and objectives of the SIS; b) assessing existing information systems, including those linked to relevant policies, laws

and regulations (PLR); c) establishing the institutional arrangements for the SIS and the processes for stakeholder

participation; d) identifying the specific information needed to assess how safeguards are addressed and

respected; e) collecting, compiling and analyzing safeguards information; f) reviewing, reporting and using safeguards information.

From 2015, the REDD+ SES Initiative is focusing on the following themes of support:

A. Management of multi-stakeholders processes B. Design and implementation of a system for providing information on safeguards (SIS) C. Participation in a community of practice D. Empowerment of civil society to engagement effectively with government on safeguards E. Use of the Social & Environmental Standards for REDD+ and related low-emissions land use

3. Experiences developing elements of the Country Safeguards Approach

To meet international commitments on safeguards, to comply with social, environmental and human rights commitments in existing and proposed national policies, laws and regulations, and to strengthen sustainable development benefits, many countries are adopting a Country Safeguards Approach (CSA) that involves, among other elements:

a legal framework of policies, laws and regulations (PLR) an institutional framework a grievance and redress mechanism a safeguards information system (SIS)

5

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal

The CSA builds on and strengthens the countrys legal and institutional frameworks and information systems by ensuring that they support effective application of internationally and nationally agreed safeguards. In this way, the CSA contributes to lasting improvements in the countrys governance framework, supporting not only the implementation of REDD+ but also related policies, measures and safeguards. Countries have started to develop some of these elements and have identified challenges and possible solutions to address these.

3.1. Interpreting Cancun safeguards in the country context, in particular safeguards

e), f), g)

Country experiences

Some countries have reviewed their existing policies, laws and regulations to interpret the Cancun safeguards in the country context (Peru, Indonesia)

Some countries are integrating MRV and SIS (Guatemala, Ghana) while others are keeping them separate (Peru)

Some countries have developed principles, criteria and indicators (Nepal, Indonesia) while others have decided not to use indicators (Peru)

In some countries social safeguards have received more attention than environmental safeguards (Mexico, East Kalimantan), while for other countries is this the contrary (Brazil)

6


3.2. Establishing grievance and redress mechanisms

Country experiences

Use existing laws and grievances mechanisms such as transparency and information laws (Mexico, Peru, Nepal)

Use informal grievance / conflict resolution mechanisms such as civil society coalitions (Indonesia), multi-stakeholder groups reviewing and addressing grievances (Tanzania) or other community mechanisms (Nepal)

Importance of mechanisms that address grievances at different levels e.g. local, district and national (Peru, Brazil, Indonesia)

Most countries have started with social issues for safeguards and are finding it hard to link with biodiversity and ecosystem services difficult for stakeholders to understand e), f) and g)

Find that f) and g) are the most difficult to show address and respect as there are no clear PLRs to address them

Cross-sectoral coordination agency responsible for REDD is not responsible for biodiversity, agriculture, indigenous peoples

REDD+ is a climate change mitigation instrument donors focus on carbon, government focuses on social issues, what about biodiversity?

Need to consider sub-national coordination

Have customary law which respects safeguards recognized by government

For f) and g) need a defined REDD+ strategy, REL, MRV to be addressed

Need to assess risks and threats to reversals and leakage, and measures in place

Coordination across government must be mandated by law

Consider how to link MRV/NFMS and SIS

Keep it simple and only consider carbon for safeguards f) and g) and not social issues

Dont try to address all rights and biodiversity issues but focus on the scope of REDD+ activities

Capacity building is needed for stakeholders to understand all safeguards, in particular environmental safeguards f) and g) and structural safeguards a) and b)

Challenges Solutions

7


3.3. Analysis of policies, laws and regulations (PLRs)

Country experiences

Most countries have completed their PLR analysis (Indonesia, Peru, Mexico, Acre, Tanzania) or it is ongoing (East Kalimantan, DRC)

Laws may exist but regulations and implementation, and associated information, are often weak In Acre and East Kalimantan the REDD+ SES assessment process has enabled comparison of

existing PLRs and existing information sources against country-specific interpretation of indicators.

PLR assessment has led to identification of gaps, and countries are now developing action plans to strengthen existing PLRs and to address gaps.

Stakeholder involvement ensures continuity in case of change in government - and promotes accountability.

Acceptance of local community informal grievance and dispute resolution mechanism

Lack of capacity of stakeholders to use grievance redress mechanisms

Align grievance redress mechanisms with SESA/ESMF to prevent conflicts

It is not possible to separate REDD+ from other sectors such as land use and land tenure when addressing grievances

Facilitation to access grievance mechanisms how to bridge the gap between local and national level

Develop a systematic approach that allows the grievance redress mechanisms to predict future conflicts

Clearly identify the appropriate level and institutions to address different types of grievances

Clearly define the eligibility for grievances

Define timeframe for disputes to be addressed and resolved to ensure timeliness and responsiveness of the grievance redress mechanisms

Institutionalize customary institutions/ procedures that are recognized to be effective to address grievances

Use community monitoring as a feedback mechanism


8


4. Experiences developing Safeguards Information Systems (SIS)

The Safeguards Information System element of the CSA serves multiple objectives at different levels including reporting internationally for results-based financing, and providing information within the country to improve the REDD+ strategy (adaptive management) and to build and maintain stakeholder and political support for REDD+.

Approaches to developing and implementing SIS vary between countries but generally comprise six key elements on which countries exchanged experiences (see diagram on right hand side).

Different interpretations of laws appear when implementation starts due to the lack of specific regulations

Weak articulation between national and sub-national levels regarding institutional arrangements and commitment to different safeguards and priorities

Takes times to develop PLRs and temptation to analyze too many PLRs while focus should be on the ones related to REDD+

Should PLR analysis cover both statutory and customary laws?

It takes time to develop new regulations with a participatory approach

Link safeguards indicators to legal

framework Link different international

frameworks: UNFCCC, CBD, ILO169, UNDRIP etc.

Safeguards should go beyond forests and apply to all land use


9

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 4.1. Interpreting safeguards to reflect the country context : Indonesia, Tanzania &

DRC

Indonesia

Different safeguard approaches are being used in Indonesia, like PGA (Participatory Governance Assessment) at national level and REDD+ SES at subnational level. Now, the country aims to integrate different safeguards approaches into one based on their technical and implementation feasibility. The national safeguards information system developed by the Ministry of Forestry has 7 principles, 17 criteria and 32 indicators which they call PCI system. The process was started since 2011 and it has already been implemented in two provinces.

Who is monitoring the process? Institutional structures were created in parallel with the PCI development process. A multi-stakeholder forum has formed including government and civil society participants which is the main body for monitoring the PCI process.

Is there any assessment report available? Data is being collected and uploaded in a web-based system which is accessible to everyone. The data is only in Bahasa Indonesian language for now. Collaboration with East Kalimantan is also ongoing to make those data more systematic and facilitate dissemination.

In case of Indonesia, the government is leading the safeguard process, how do you ensure that the process is inclusive? As an inclusive multi-stakeholders forum is monitoring the overall process, the PCI process is also inclusive.

Democratic Republic of Congo

DRC started to develop REDD+ since 2009 and developed a national REDD+ framework strategy in 2012. Different safeguard frameworks have been developed at national level under the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) like indigenous peoples planning framework, FF (process framework, cultural heritage management framework, pest and pesticide management framework but the country has not yet developed a safeguard information system. However, the country is discussing how to develop bottom up SIS where there are linkages from local to national to international level. DRC has implemented eight pilot projects until now but is waiting for support from international level for SIS.

Tanzania

Tanzania developed a REDD+ Framework in 2009 and later developed a REDD+ Strategy in 2010. A national facilitator, the technical working group, secretariat and national facilitation team were established. Capacity building events were conducted for these structures. After reviewing UN-REDD, FCPF and REDD+ SES initiatives, Tanzania interpreted safeguards integrating all other safeguards at international level through 6 steps. As the safeguards have already been interpreted into the national context, the country is planning to integrate in one process the SIS, SESA and ESMF.

10

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 4.2. Establishing institutional arrangements and processes for stakeholder

participation : Guatemala, Peru and the Yucatan Peninsula

Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico

A technical consultative committee (CTC) composed of government and civil society was established in 2011 to provide feedback and recommendations on REDD+ related issues. In 2013, a safeguards committee was established that included regional NGOs, academia, regional governments of the 3 States of the Yucatan Peninsula and the National Forestry Commission (CONAFOR). The committee interpreted the Cancun safeguards to fit the context of the Yucatan Peninsula using REDD+ SES. An analysis of PLRs was also produced and recommendations were made for SIS, in particular with respect to equity, gender and inclusion of vulnerable groups. It has been challenging to involve stakeholders because of lack of knowledge of safeguards. It has been helpful to work with NGOs to involve Indigenous Peoples as they have already established a trust relationship with them while there might be mistrust of government because of previous programs. The safeguards committee still exists but there are no more activities planned at the moment since the regional process has been much faster than national process and CONAFOR asked them to wait.

Peru

A small technical committee for safeguards has been established including representatives from about 15 organisations from Indigenous Peoples, NGOs, government (Ministry of Agriculture, National Forest Service, and Ministry of social inclusion, Ministry of Culture, and Regional governments). There has not been a formal mapping to identify the stakeholders but it has been more of an ongoing process depending on stakeholders interests or competencies on safeguards. Other stakeholders may join the process for designing and implementing SIS later in the process. The technical working group is ad hoc for now because it would have taken a long legal process to make it formal. The technical working group will validate the different steps for establishing a safeguard information system.

In addition, a consultancy is ongoing to define the institutional arrangements needed. Institutional arrangements are important because most of the relevant information is not managed by the Ministry of Environment. It will be key to define: which organization has competency for specific information? which organization has capacity? (most of time the institution that is responsible does not have capacity) What information already exists? What should be the institutional arrangements?

In San Martin, a decree has established a safeguards committee that could be replicated to other regions. Stakeholders were identified based on stakeholder mapping and drivers of deforestation. The committee will be composed of private sector, public sector, NGOs and Indigenous Peoples.

Guatemala

The consultations have started with a gender and cultural approach using an existing governance platform for consultations including beneficiaries of existing programmes, the climate change council, the forest, biodiversity & climate change group and the safeguards committee. A facilitation team has been established to support the safeguards committee in the process of developing SESA, ESMF and

11

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal REDD+ SES. The safeguards committee has defined a work plan that includes capacity building, developing tools for safeguards, conducting an analysis of safeguards in the legal framework of Guatemala, and mapping of existing stakeholders.

4.3. Developing country-specific indicators: Mato Grosso, Nepal and Central Kalimantan

Mato Grosso

When developing indicators, the main challenges encountered included the lack of clarity of the national REDD+ Strategy; the lack of REDD+ project experience in Mato Grosso which resulted in a very theoretical discussion for the development of indicators and the difficulty of engaging Indigenous Peoples and representatives of small-scale farmers. The interpretation of REDD+ SES principle 3 related to contribution to well-being of Indigenous Peoples and local communities proved to be particularly challenging to interpret given that Mato Grosso has 91 Indigenous Peoples territories with 31 ethnic groups and each of these has a different approach and vision regarding this issue. Mato Grosso is currently organizing consultations with representatives of different sectors. Once finalized, the indicators will be tested in a couple of field forest conservation and sustainable management projects.

Nepal

The interpretation of indicators was led by the REDD Implementation Center with REDD+ stakeholders and support from the facilitation team and technical working groups. Prior to developing country specific indicators, awareness and capacity building workshops were organizes with the different stakeholder groups so that they can engage effectively in the process. Local, regional and national workshops were organized to draft the country specific indicators and consultations were conducted with interest groups to receive additional feedback. Two public comment periods (60 days and 30 days) was organized and publicized in the national newspapers, REDD+ website and partners. The technical working group incorporated the comments received and the final draft was reviewed by safeguards experts. The Nepal specific interpretation has 65 indicators of which 29 were maintained and 35 were adapted. The main challenge during the process has been that there was no REDD+ strategy at the time when the indicators were developed. It would have been better to have waited till this strategy was done, then conduct a benefits and risks analysis and then developed indicators, but in this case Nepal would only be starting the process now.

Central Kalimantan

A Working Group was established out of the Standards Committee to draft the specific indicators for Central Kalimantan. The final indicators were included in the regional REDD+ strategy for Central Kalimantan. The indicators were tested in the field which helped to show that indicators were too complex for people to understand at community level and as a result there has been an effort to simplify indicators. The main challenge that Central Kalimantan is facing is around sustainability of SIS. The work to date has been supported by REDD+ SES and the interest of the provincial government in REDD+ has been declining and there is currently no progress because of lack of direction from national level since the national REDD+ Agency is being merged into the Ministry of Forestry.

12

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 4.4. Collecting, compiling and analyzing information : East Kalimantan and

Kemitraan

East Kalimantan

East Kalimantan developed principles, criteria and indicators to fit the province context using REDD+ SES. A multi-stakeholder workshop series was organized with Indigenous Peoples, NGOs and private sector to prepare the draft indicators which were subsequently field tested in the 3 districts of Berau, Paser and Kutai Kartanegara. The information was collected by the REDD Working Group with some help from people trained in information collection. The field test of indicators has helped to improve the indicators. East Kalimantan will try to translate the indicators to local languages so that they can be understood by local stakeholders eg 4-5 languages. In addition, the REDD+ working group created by Governor Decree with voluntary participation of its members may be integrated with the provincial climate change council. People contribute time on a voluntary basis.

Kemitraan, national Indonesia NGO

Kemitraan facilitated community preparedness on REDD+ experience in 8 pilot sites in Indonesia, working with communities representing up to 10,000 households and 150,000 ha. Kemitraan used PRISAI, a safeguard developed by national government and civil society to cover Cancun safeguards, and worked on principles most relevant to the community level. The communities already know about safeguards but using their own terminology and there are disparities of knowledge. This process has been conducted in collaboration with the REDD Agency, a national government agency which has recently been dissolved so Kemitraan will need to engage with the new Ministry of Environment and Forestry to see how this work can feed into the national SIS.

4.5. Reviewing, reporting and using information : Acre

Acre

The process in Acre for reviewing, reporting and using information followed 3 phases: 1st phase self evaluation process which resulted in a compliance report presented to 3 councils

of about 80 representatives of government, civil society and private sector and validated by them. This report is now publicly available.

2nd phase International review which is a process review with detailed information on positive and challenges/gaps e.g. transparency, gender aspect etc. The internal document has been shared with the working team in Acre to improve the process.

3rd phase an outcome harvesting report when a consultant did interviews about what stakeholders thought what was the additional value of implementing safeguards

CEVA, the multi-stakeholder commission created since 2012, includes social and environmental movements, private sector, and government. An indigenous working group was later created as a sub-group of CEVA. The next steps include:

13

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 1. Develop an action plan to address gaps and strengthen existing policies based on safeguards

assessment 2. Develop a SIS which will be supported by consultant from University of Minas Gerais who will

include carbon and social and environmental based on REDD+ SES 3. Further align with national and international safeguards processes 4. Implement monitoring at outcome level (not yet well developed), compliance, jurisdictional and

local scale 5. Provide capacity building on transparency, equity, inclusion, rights, quality and diversity (15

indigenous ethnic groups)

The government of Acre has shared information on safeguards with the 3 Councils (around 80 representatives) and the information is publicly available but not yet widely disseminated and understood. This is a weak point as there is no guarantee that the information is transferred to their constituents. In addition, the Indigenous Groups are represented in the IP working group. Other stakeholder groups are interested to create their own working group which would be helpful as CEVA needs knowledge and specificity of the different working groups.

4.6. Experiences of developing CSA and SIS UN-REDD Programme

Country approach to safeguards

Safeguards should be interpreted in the specific context of the countrys selection of REDD+ activities (relevant PaMs to address identified drivers)

Assessments of exisiting PLRs, and their implementation can help identify how safeguards might be addressed and respected

Operational procedures and their implementation should be the focus of addressing/respecting safeguards (new PLRs need time/political capital)

Differing expectations among stakeholders can constitute a major challenged a national dialogue is time consuming and needs careful planning

Safeguards Information Systems

Countries should align their SIS to the national agendas related to environment, forest management and sustainable development goals

Countries need to consider the most appropriate means for providing information in a format accessible to all relevant stakeholders

Managing expectations is particularly important when developing PCIs extensive list of indicators can be difficult and expensive to maintain

REDD+ activities will happen at the local level so information will need to be aggregated from the sub-national to the national level

14

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal Reflection by UN-REDD regional/global teams

Links o national strategies and action plans need to be explicitly made in the country approach : driver analysis, then identify candidate PaMs and conduct a benefit/risk assessment

Goal and scope of safeguards need to be explicitly defined, without which they serve as a source of confusion

National interpretation of Cancun safeguards need to be expressed as an important iterative step in the country approach

PLR assessments purpose is to primarily identify existing PLRs that address safeguards, less so on identifying gaps for subsequent PLR reform

Institutions should be positioned from and centre of the country approach as these are essential in implementing PLRs (i.e. respecting safeguards).

5. Articulation of Country Safeguards Approach and Safeguards Information

Systems between national and sub-national level

Many countries implementing REDD+ strategies or action plans may choose to pursue a nested approach and integrate sub-national jurisdictional activities into their national strategy or action plan, including in their country approach to safeguards and safeguards information system. While developing their country approach to safeguards, sub-national considerations will need to be taken into account including their specific environmental and social context, different risks and opportunities for different strategy options, different interpretation of safeguards, specific policies, laws, regulations, procedures and institutions and existing information systems and grievance mechanisms at sub-national level.

In addition, the objectives and needs for safeguards information may be different at sub-national and national level. While a national summary is needed for the UNFCCC, other donors and finance agencies may need additional details for certain regions and projects. It would also be necessary to define appropriate levels for quality control, assessment of performance to ensure feedback for adaptive management and feedback to stakeholders to facilitate participation. The full presentation is available here.

Participants worked in groups to identify the main challenges of articulation of the country safeguards approach and safeguards information system between national and sub-national level and possible solutions to address these.

15


Increase transparency Validation of methodology

by research institutions Social validation of

information through multi-stakeholder forum at each appropriate level

Monitoring and validation of information

Use existing platforms such

as the Governors Forest and Climate Task Force and civil society organisations to facilitate the dialogue between sub-national and national level

Lack of recognition of sub-national by national

government

Define clear roles and mandates at each level

Define communication channels

Give attributions/ competences to sub-national government institutions that are already collecting information

Establish an independent structure dedicated to coordination of sub-national with national level

Institutional arrangements

Establish a specific knowledge/network support

Develop technology solutions : database, easy format, protocols

Different information needs at different levels

Allocate funds to subnational level to build capacities

Develop a training/knowledge network

Involve NGOs and academia as resource person/institutions

Strong capacity building programmes for stakeholders including the private sector

Lack and/or disparity in capacities

Allow sub-national specific safeguards or interpretation of safeguards including indicators

Maintain flexibility while having a common reporting framework keeping a clear reference to the Cancun safeguards elements

Variety of conditions at sub-national level

16


Lessons learned identified by participants

Adapting indicators to sub-national context is key to reflect the diversity of conditions The process of tailoring indicators/adapting safeguards is as important to strengthen

stakeholders capacities as is the output Use existing institutions that are already collecting information such as district forest offices,

civil society organisations, academia Civil society organisations play a key role to socialize and raise awareness about safeguards at

community or sub-national level

6. Multi-stakeholder participatory processes for safeguards

The REDD+ SES Initiative has put a strong emphasis on promoting a balanced participation of stakeholders potentially affected by the REDD+ or other land use strategy and action plans in the development of a Country Safeguards Approach and Safeguards Information Systems. The multi-stakeholder process should engage government, civil society, Indigenous Peoples and local communities, private sector and other relevant stakeholders in the interpretation of REDD+ safeguards to country context, identifications of risks and opportunities of the different strategies options, the development of country-specific indicators if needed and the review of information on how REDD+ safeguards are addressed and respected.

Countries have been involving stakeholders in the development of their country safeguards approach and safeguards information system in different ways, using:

A multi-stakeholder consultation process which aims to consult widely, and maximise opportunities for engagement. However, while stakeholders opinions will almost certainly

Identify communities interested in being involved in providing information/monitoring

Use existing institutions/organizations that are already collecting information

Specific capacity building to simplify safeguards language

Local community involvement

Projects within one jurisdiction can report to sub-national that feed information in national SIS

Cross-jurisdictional projects can report directly to national SIS

Consider reporting by ecological sub-national zones

Reporting of cross jurisdictional projects

Involve academia to ensure

continuity of processes

Lack of political commitment/ turnover of

staff

17

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal influence decision-making, the final decisions are made through processes in which they are not necessarily directly involved.

A multi-stakeholder decision-making process in which representatives of key stakeholder groups come together in a mechanism which allows them to make decisions using democratic processes: i.e. it goes beyond expressing an opinion.

Combining a multi-stakeholder consultation and decision making process. It is often the case that both types of processes are used together within the same project, i.e. a multi-stakeholder decision-making process frequently also employs multi-stakeholder consultation processes to make its work more effective.

During the workshop, the Region of San Martin in Peru, the State of Mato Grosso in Brazil and the States of the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico shared their experiences of conducting consultation processes and establishing multi-stakeholder committees.

7. Options for SESA/ESMF to support participatory safeguards monitoring

Countries that are participating in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) are required to do a Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) and to develop an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF). The SESA aims to improve design of the National REDD+ Strategy by combining analytical work and consultations in an iterative fashion. The ESMF is one of the outputs of the SESA and provides a framework to mitigate and manage risks with respect to existing World Bank safeguards (or those of the relevant Delivery Partner IADB, UNDP etc. if other than the World Bank) that is used to screen activities and develop activity- and site-specific mitigation plans (referred to as Safeguards Plans in the FCPF Carbon Fund methodological framework) before the implementation of activities. There is potential for the results of the SESA and ESMF to provide inputs to the development and implementation of participatory safeguards monitoring. The full presentation is available here.

8. Outcome evaluation of a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS

The REDD+ SES Initiative is conducting an outcome evaluation during 2015. The overall objective of the outcome evaluation is to identify the outcomes that have resulted from adopting a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to safeguards for REDD+ with the purpose of providing constructive feedback

(i) to the government and civil society partners in the participating countries to help them to communicate about and to improve their country safeguards approach,

(ii) to the REDD+ SES secretariat and International Steering Committee to help them to improve the Initiatives strategies and to provide guidance to assist other countries, and

(iii) to the donor of the REDD+ SES Initiative (Norad).

18

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal In addition, the outcome evaluation will also be used to explain the benefits of a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to social and environmental assessment for REDD+ to share broadly with governments, civil society and donors/finance agencies that may be involved in designing, implementing and evaluation REDD+ or related low emissions land use strategies and action plans.

The session focused on responding the following question:

What outcomes have resulted from adopting a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to REDD+ safeguards, including outcomes influenced by participation in the REDD+ SES Initiative, in the following domains of change:

i. Government support for strong, effective safeguards ii. Civil society engagement to strengthen safeguards

Participants of the workshop identified the following outcomes:

Building support from government for

strong, effective safeguards Engaging civil society to strengthen

safeguards East

Kalimantan In 2012, the Provincial Government officially created the multi-stakeholder REDD+ Working Group, with a mandate to work on safeguards, among other aspects

From 2012, the main safeguards issues were identified. As a result land rights and tenure has become the Provincial Governments main consideration when issuing land use permits (eg. oil palm, plantation, mining, infrastructure etc.)

From 2016 (secured in 2015), the Provincial Government is starting to give financial support for capacity building on safeguards

Central Kalimantan

In 2013,the Provincial Commission of REDD+ adopted the input from REDD+ SES Working Group to integrate the proposed institutional arrangements for REDD+ SES monitoring into the Provincial REDD+ strategy document

Indonesia national level

From 2014, the national government in Indonesia started the process of linking safeguards frameworks and initiatives at the sub-national levels (pilots) to the national SIS

Nepal From 2014, the REDD Implementation Centre (government) reorganized safeguards in policy documents, eg.

Since 2011, indigenous peoples, marginalized communities, local communities and women have been

19

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal REDD+ strategy, ER-PIN actively participating and providing

feedback in the REDD+ safeguards development process e.g. during first and second public comment periods on indicators, SESA etc.

Since 2011, REDD Implementation Centre (Government) officials, and REDD working group members have had their awareness raised about safeguards for REDD+.

Since 2012, the National Indigenous Peoples Federation in Nepal (NEFIN) has published information, education and communications materials on REDD+ safeguards

From 2012, local communities from the Terai Arc landscape and Chitwan Annapurna landscape are capacitated to claim their rights on REDD+ (through support from Hariyo Ban project)

DRC In 2014, a safeguards working group including both government and civil society was created by the Government to support the development of the Mai Ndombe ER Programme document

In 2010, the GTCR (Climate and REDD Working Group civil society platform) created a SESA Commission that became more active because of the standards development in 2010

In 2015, the coordination unit of the Forest Investment Program (Government) created a safeguards position

In 2014, WWF and UNDP created a position to work on REDD+ safeguards

In 2012, the National REDD Coordination created a safeguards position

In 2015, 32 representatives of local communities and indigenous peoples were identified to participate in development of Mai Ndombe ER Programme, identified by national NGO OCEAN under supervision by CN-REDD, WWF, GTCR and ERA

In 2014, a new womens NGO was legally created Commission des Femmes Leaders pour lEnvironnement et le Developpement Durable (CFLEDD) from the GTCR Gender Commission In 2015, the Youth Forum for REDD+ was created as an NGO from the GTCR Youth Commission From 2012, GTCR created a gender commission and women started to participate more actively in REDD+ safeguards From 2012, the Network of Indigenous Peoples and Communities for the Defence of Forest Ecosystems (REPALEF) started to participate more actively in REDD+ and safeguards.

20

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal From 2014, influenced the participatory management of mining and extractive industry sectors In 2010, the GTCR (Climate and REDD Working Group civil society platform) created a SESA Commission that became more active because of the standards development in 2010

Tanzania In 2012, the Government REDD+ task force decided to develop safeguards principles, criteria and indicators for Tanzania

From 2010, 14 civil society organisations implemented REDD+ projects addressed issues of safeguards awareness, alternative livelihoods, land use plans etc.

In 2012, the Government REDD+ Task Force created a Technical Working Group on governance and safeguards with members from government, NGOs and private institutions

In 2012, members of various civil society organisations engaged in consultation meetings/workshops for inputs on REDD+ safeguards including during validation workshop in 2013

In 2013, the stakeholders proposed and the government agreed that a grievance mechanism for REDD+ should be incorporated into the existing grievance mechanism and that it should be transparent, accessible, and gender sensitive.

In 2013, the Minister responsible for the environment (in the Vice Presidents Office) approved the safeguards principles, criteria and indicators for Tanzania

In 2013, the Department of Forestry in the Ministry of Agriculture designated a local NGO JUMCIAZA (Association for Conservation of Community Forests of Zanzibar) was established having the role of Administrating Carbon trading and related uses:

- Monitoring REDD+ activities - Planning conservation - Administration of carbon benefits

In 2013, a consultation meeting was held with members of Standing Committee on National Resources of the Tanzanian Parliament and provides input to safeguards document

In 2012, government revised the membership of the REDD+ task force to include members representing civil

21

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal society organisations

Guatemala From 2011, the institutions of the interministerial coordination group (MARN, INAB, CONAP) worked in a coordinated manner for the preparation of the National REDD+ Strategy

From the end of 2014, the technical teams in the National Council of Climate Change worked on specific themes of mitigation, adaptation and vulnerability to climate change including a specific team on REDD+ safeguards

From 2014, technical staff from other agencies linked with climate change in political institutions have worked in a coordinated manner to elaborate specific products like SESA, ESMF, consultation processes on safeguards etc.

From 2012, the National Safeguards Committee worked in a joint and coordinated manner to develop the framework for compliance on REDD+ safeguards

The Forest, Biodiversity and Climate Change group worked together from 2012 on the preparation of the National REDD+ Strategy In 2014, the participation of different sectors of society was formalised by integrating them into the working group on safeguards

Peru In 2014, the Ministry of Environment begins to lead a safeguards process in coordination with the regions

From 2014, key actors started to participate in the committee meetings contributing to the construction of safeguards

From 2013, the Ministry of Environment created a road map for REDD+ safeguards

From March 2012, the Regional Government of San Martin started to lead a safeguards process in the region From 2015, the Ministry of Environment has invited relevant actors to participate and accompany the safeguards process, through the creation of a technical working group,

Yucatan Peninsula

From 2012, the region of Yucatan Peninsula was successful in obtaining resources for early action on REDD+ from CONAFOR

There was an increase in interest and participation of NGOs (IUCN, TNC, Pronatura, M-REDD, GIZ) leading to funding of projects, including gender, and technical assistance

From the empowerment of Yucatan Peninsula on REDD+ and safeguards in 2013, the government was able to obtain a better exchange of experiences in the technical REDD platform (CTC) at national and international level.

Mato Grosso In 2013, SEMA and ICV started working

22

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal together on safeguards for Mato Grosso State Since December 2014, the Government started to organize an open participatory consultation process to develop safeguards indicators

9. Addressing equity in REDD+

Equity means different things to different people, a reflection of different principles, frames of reference and scales. Equity is important for both moral and instrumental reasons and while there is no one right way to understand equity it is important both in terms of social and environmental objectives that there is a common understanding of equity in a particular context.

Equity can be understood through three key questions:

i. Equitable in terms of what? Equity can be defined around 3 dimensions within which there are 10 principles. First of all, Recognition in terms of recognition and respect of rights and respect for knowledge and traditions; then Procedure to ensure effective participation, access to justice and access to information and capacity building; and finally Distribution according to results, efforts, costs, rights and needs.

ii. Equitable in reference to what? Equity can be defined in relation to safeguards or standards (absolute) or one situation versus another (relative).

iii. Equitable at what scale? The scale at which and scale within which comparisons are made.

The full presentation is available here.

Participants shared experiences on strategies to strengthen equity in REDD+, including the role of safeguards, identifying aspects of policy and process that promote equitable sharing of REDD+ benefits in their countries.

23

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal Recognition of

rights & knowledge Procedure for

participation, information and justice

Distribution of benefits and costs

Social clause Free, prior and

informed consent

Regional land planning Transparent multi-

stakeholder/ participatory process

Include vulnerable groups in decision-making

Fair process Access to information

including about existing processes, risks and adjustments of decisions

Stakeholders have sufficient information to make decisions

Results Integration with existing benefit sharing practice of CFUG

Performance based payment Benefit providers of environmental

services Sharing between conservation and

reduction in deforestation results Effort Benefits should be proportional to the

effort of stakeholders

Rights - Cost - Needs Clear guidelines to share the REDD+

benefits equitably e.g. Carbon Fund guidelines 35% of funds should be allocated to poor peoples

Identify socially excluded people and make sure that benefits go to these groups

Gender consideration

10. Tools to support the development of CSA and SIS

Training kit on REDD+ safeguards and REDD+ SES - REDD+ SES Secretariat The training kit is aimed at REDD+ practitioners to help them to provide capacity building on REDD+ safeguards in an interactive manner. The kit is composed of a manual, presentations, activities and summaries. English Manual Presentations Summaries Espaol Manual Presentaciones Resumenes

Gender checklist - REDD+ SES/WEDO

This publication presents the results of the action research on gender and REDD+ carried out by the Women Environment and Development Organization in collaboration with the REDD+ SES Initiative. The publication is composed of two parts: Booklet 1 - Lessons learned from action research describes the development of the action research project, the methodology and process of the action research, the baselines developed in each of the 4

24

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal countries, the steps to design a gender sensitive strategy or program, and the research outcomes. English | Espaol Booklet 2 Actions Steps for National REDD+ Programs summarizes the action research, and contains three distinct action checklists: 1. Essential actions to develop a gender sensitive REDD+ Program 2. Actions to address the gender components of the REDD+ SES Principles, Criteria, and Indicators 3. Actions to develop a gender responsive country-level interpretation of Indicators English | Espaol

Benefits & Risks Tools - UN-REDD

The UN-REDD Programme Benefits and Risks Tool (BeRT) supports REDD+ countries to: a) assess the social and environmental risks and benefits associated with potential REDD+ actions (also known as candidate Policies and Measures, PAMs) and b) analyse how existing policies, laws and regulations (PLRs) address the Cancun safeguards. BeRT can be downloaded in English, Spanish and French here.

Global comparative study on REDD+ - CIFOR Through comparative studies of the implementation of REDD+ around the world, the GCS REDD+ project takes stock of international, national and subnational REDD+ experiences to identify challenges and opportunities in designing and implementing effective, efficient, and equitable REDD+ policies and projects. To deliver policy relevant evidence, our approach is comparative and longitudinal, and combines biophysical, socio-economic and political economy analysis with an active knowledge sharing element to provide an holistic understanding of what works and what doesnt - in REDD+. The overall aim of the GCS REDD+ project is to inform the REDD+ policy arenas and practitioner communities with evidence, analysis, and tools so as to ensure 3E+ outcomes: (carbon-) effectiveness, (cost-)efficiency, and equity as well as co-benefits. More information is available here.

25

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal Annex 1. Agenda

Day 1 Monday 13th April

Learning from country experiences Session Objective Activity

9.00 Welcome and getting to know each other

Kick off. Explain general purpose of workshop.

Explain outline of agenda: overall outline for 3 days

Make logistical announcements

Objectives and agenda Logistical announcements Getting to know each other Presentation of REDD+ SES

Initiative new objectives, strategies and activities

10.25 Coffee break 10.45 Exchange of

experience on elements of CSA

Exchange experiences on key issues related to developing CSA

World caf with rotating interactive discussions on key issues for the development of CSA:

o Interpreting Cancun safeguards in the country context

o Establishing grievance and redress mechanisms

o Analysis of Policies, Laws and Regulations

Participants will rotate from tables where facilitated discussion and exchange of experience will be held on the key issues for the development of CSA.

12.45 Lunch Exchange of

experience on SIS

Exchange country experiences on key topics for SIS

Rounds of open space style opportunities to discuss specific topics related to the practical implementation of SIS including:

o Interpreting safeguards to reflect the country context

o Developing country-specific indicators

o Establishing institutional arrangements and processes for stakeholders participation

o Collecting, compiling and analyzing information

o Reviewing, reporting and using

26

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal information

15.30 Coffee break 15.50 Learning about

addressing equity in REDD+

Learn about country experiences of addressing equity in REDD+

Presentation and group work

17.15 End of the day

Day 2 Tuesday 14th April

Exploring key issues and challenges Session Objective Details

9.00 Explore articulation of CSA & SIS at sub-national and national levels including, stakeholders participation

Identify issues that need to be addressed for articulating sub-national & national levels and identify potential solutions

Presentation

Group work on key issues for articulating CSA & SIS at sub-national and national level and possible options to address these

10.45 Coffee break 11.05 Experience of

establishing multistakeholder committees and processes for stakeholder participation and the challenges

Learning from experience of establishing multistakeholder committees and processes for stakeholder participation and the challenges encountered

Representatives of countries that established multistakeholder committees will be interviewed by groups of participants who will then report back to plenary to share these experiences.

13.00 Lunch 14.00 Exploring options

for SESA/ESMF to support participatory safeguards monitoring

Present and discuss ways that SESA/ESMF can provide inputs for SIS based on country cases

Parallel sessions combining short presentations and group work, providing a clinic to assist countries with practical aspects of developing a country safeguards approach and SIS.

In each group, identify one rapporteur (not the REDD+SES facilitator) who will report back to plenary on the conclusions/key issues discussed.

Exchange about addressing safeguards in sub-national initiatives

Discussion about solutions to address the challenges of implementing safeguards at subnational level and identification of way forward

27

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal 16.00 Coffee break 16.20 Exchange tables

on specific topics identified during Day 1 exchange of experiences

Further exchange on topics of particular interest in a free manner

17.15 End of the day

Day 3 Wednesday 15th April

Using approaches & tools Session Objective Details

9.00 Marketplace about tools and approaches for CSA and SIS

Learn about available tools to support the development of SIS and CSA and their application - Capacity building kit

(REDD+ SES) - Gender checklist (REDD+

SES/WEDO) - Country Approach to

Safeguards Tool & BeRT (UN-REDD)

- CIFOR Global comparative study on REDD+

- DRC capacity building materials

Marketplace for tools and materials: each organization/person presents a tool and participants go to different stands to learn about tools that can help in developing CSA and SIS

11.00 Coffee break 11.20 Learning from a

participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS: Acre case study

Learn about outcomes of a transparent, participatory and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS

Presentation about Acres outcome evaluation

Presentation of outcome harvesting approach to help identify concrete lessons learned and what influenced the change

12.30 Lunch 13.30 Learning from a

participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS: group

Activity: countries using approach to help identify concrete lessons learned and what influenced the change

28

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal work

15.00 Coffee break 15.20 Learning &

applying Groups by regions identify what they have learned from the workshop and they will use it moving forward

Group work & presentation in plenary

Update and next steps for REDD+ SES

Presentation from the REDD+SES secretariat on recent events, and future plans, including International Reviews, International Steering Committee, guidance etc.

Presentation

17.00 Feedback Participants share feedback about the workshop

17.30 Close of workshop

29

REDD+ SES Learning & Exchange Workshop 13th -15th April 2015 Pokhara Nepal Annex 2. List of participants

Name Country Organization 1 Pavel Jezek Acre, Brazil Climate Change Institute 2 Ricardo Mello Acre, Brazil CEVA, WWF 3 Alcilene Freitas Mato Grosso, Brazil Secretary of Environment 4 Edilene Fernandes Mato Grosso, Brazil Instituto Centro de Vida 5 Marina Piatto Brazil Imaflora 6 Patricia Porras Peru Regional Government of San Martin 7 Milagros Sandoval Peru Conservation International 8 Lucas Durojeanni Peru Ministry of Environment 9 Jos Roch Vasquez Quintana Roo, Mexico Ecology and Environment Secretary

10 Angelica Lara Campeche, Mexico Secretary of Environmental 11 Novia Widyaningtyas Indonesia Ministry of Forestry and Environment 12 Jasmine Puteri Indonesia Kamitraan 13 Amalia Prameswari Indonesia Kemitraan 14 Jagau Yusurum Central Kalimantan University of Palangka Raya 15 Wilma Febrina East Kalimantan Forestry Agency 16 Fadjar Pambudhi East Kalimantan REDD Working Group 17 Aym Sosa Guatemala IDB 18 Jolly Sassa Kiuka DRC WWF 19 Julien Kabalako DRC GTCR 20 Alain Binibangili DRC CN REDD 21 Tamrini Said Tanzania Ministry of Forestry 22 Narendra Chand Nepal REDD Implementation Center 23 Dil Raj Khanal Nepal FECOFUN 24 Tunga Bhadra Rai Nepal Nepal Federation of Indigenous People 25 Devi Chandra Pokharel Nepal Department of Forests 26 Pabitra Jha Nepal CARE Nepal 27 Keshav Khanal Nepal WWF Nepal 28 Krishna Khadka Nepal CARE Nepal 29 Akihito Kono Thailand UN-REDD 30 Ken Green USA World Bank 31 Daju Resosudarmo Indonesia CIFOR 32 Joanna Durbin US CCBA 33 Aurlie Lhumeau US CCBA 34 Phil Franks UK CARE 35 Nanibeti Shakya Nepal CARE Nepal

30

1. Introduction2. New objectives, strategies and activities of the REDD+ SES Initiative3. Experiences developing elements of the Country Safeguards Approach4. Experiences developing Safeguards Information Systems (SIS)5. Articulation of Country Safeguards Approach and Safeguards Information Systems between national and sub-national level6. Multi-stakeholder participatory processes for safeguards7. Options for SESA/ESMF to support participatory safeguards monitoring8. Outcome evaluation of a participatory, transparent and comprehensive approach to CSA and SIS9. Addressing equity in REDD+10. Tools to support the development of CSA and SISAnnex 1. AgendaAnnex 2. List of participants

redd+ses exchange nepal

Documents