3 Deforestation and climate change
(30047)
14473/08
+ ADDs 1-3
COM(08) 645
| Commission Communication: Addressing the challenges of deforestation and forest degradation to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss
|
Legal base | |
Document originated | 17 October 2008
|
Deposited in Parliament | 22 October 20008
|
Department | Energy and Climate Change
|
Basis of consideration | EM of 26 February 2009
|
Previous Committee Report | None
|
To be discussed in Council | See para 3.13 below
|
Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
Committee's decision | Cleared, but relevant to the debate recommended on proposed climate change agreement
|
Background
3.1 According to the Commission, forests deliver a multitude of
economic and social benefits, together with major environmental
benefits related to biodiversity and climate change. However,
it notes that they are under threat from deforestation and degradation,[8]
with these losses accounting for some 20% of global emissions
of carbon dioxide, and it points out that reducing these will
be essential if the Community's
aim of limiting global warming to 2°C
is to be achieved. It notes that deforestation has a central place
in the UN climate negotiations, and that the Copenhagen conference
at the end of this year will provide a unique opportunity to tackle
the challenge this presents
which it suggests will in turn require a number of Community
policies to be reinforced. In particular, it says that a new instrument
(the Global Forest Carbon Mechanism) should be established to
generate sufficient funding to tackle deforestation and forest
degradation, accompanied by the inclusion of deforestation in
carbon markets. Consequently, without intending to give definitive
answers to the many issues which arise, it has sought in this
Communication
to set out the main lines of a Community
response, and to set in train a series of initial actions to provide
the foundations of a viable global approach to this problem.
The current document
The challenges of deforestation
3.2 The Commission points out that the world has
lost over 3% of its forest cover between 1990 and 2005, equivalent
to 13 million hectares, of which 96% has occurred in tropical
regions, adding that the loss of tropical forests must be the
prime focus of action because of their impact on climate and the
biodiversity they contain. It notes that the causes are diverse,
complex and vary according to the geographical locations involved,
but that the most important tends to be changes in land use, where
profitable alternatives provide incentives to deforestation. It
adds that, although infrastructure development is a factor, the
most important underlying cause is poor governance, linked to
poorly enforced land use policies and uncertain land tenure regimes.
3.3 The Commission says that deforestation has a
number of particular adverse consequences. As regards climate,
it notes that emissions of carbon dioxide are generated from decomposition
of biomass and burning, emissions from soil, reductions in the
amount of energy reflected from the earth's surface, and changes
in the interaction between forests and the chemistry and hydrology
of the atmosphere; that, since tropical forests host about half
of all terrestrial species and play a central role in the functioning
of the biosphere, it will give rise to a significant biodiversity
loss; that it will increase poverty because of the ecosystem services
which forests provide and because many of the world's poor depend
on them for their livelihoods; and that it has an adverse impact
on human health, due to increases in air pollution and the spread
of insect-borne diseases.
Addressing the challenges of deforestation
3.4 The Commission says that the cut in global emissions
needed to meet the aim of limiting temperature rises to 2°C
will be impossible to achieve without substantial action to combat
deforestation, and that the UN negotiations should aim to halt
the loss of global forest cover by 2030 at the latest, and to
reduce gross tropical deforestation by at least 50% by 2020, compared
with current levels. It goes on to identify specific areas of
action as being the strengthening of forest governance and institutions;
a recognition of the importance of economic factors as a driver,
requiring a policy which rewards the value of the services provided
by forests; and the need to focus on demand and the responsibility
of consumers. These would be underpinned by the provision of high
quality information in order to guide policy decisions and monitor
implementation.
Contribution of Community policies
3.5 The Commission notes that many internal and external
Community
policies have indirect impacts in this area, and that a number
of these notably
trade, energy, agriculture, food security, and development cooperation
can play a significant role, given that the Community
is a major consumer of timber and timber products from around
the world. It suggests that measures which can directly promote
sustainable forest management include action through the Forest
Law Enforcement Governance and Trade (FLEGT) Action Plan, which
ensures that exports from participating countries are covered
by a license attesting that the timber has been produced legally;
a related proposal that Community operators should be obliged
to minimise the risk of illegally harvested products entering
their supply chain; participation in international fora, such
as the International Tropical Timber Organisation; green procurement
policies, eco-labelling; and developing sustainability criteria
for wood and other biomass used to generate renewable energy.
In addition, initiatives such as the Global Monitoring for Environment
and Security (GMES) enable monitoring land use changes to be monitored.
3.6 As regards Community policies related to non-timber
products, the Commission notes that there is a tension between
deforestation and increasing food production, and that the latter
should be increased without further deforestation, for example
by increasing yields and stepping up sustainable production in
developing countries. It says that a similar consideration applies
to the development of biofuels, with guidance being prepared under
the Convention on Biological Diversity. More generally, the Commission
notes that it is committed to assessing the impact of future Community
and international policy initiatives on deforestation, ensuring
that future reviews and assessments of trade and agricultural
agreements include a specific analysis of their impact on deforestation;
studying the impact of Community consumption of imported food
and non-food commodities which are likely to contribute to deforestation;
doubling support for international agricultural research in order
to improve productivity; and supporting developing countries in
their efforts to attain the Millennium Development Goals.
3.7 The Commission also addresses the question of
the significant additional funding which it says will be needed
in order to tackle deforestation successfully. It suggests that
an estimated 15 to 25 billion a year would be needed to
halve deforestation by 2020, that developed countries will need
to allocate considerable resources to help tackle deforestation
in developing countries, and that this will need to come from
both public and private sources. It adds that funding will only
be effective if developing countries are first provided with the
assistance needed to build capacity and strengthen institutions,
if work is carried out to resolve remaining technical issues,
if performance can be assessed and rewarded against agreed baselines
and if existing and proven aid delivery practices are used and
the principles of sound management followed. The Commission suggests
that the amount of funding provided to developing countries should
depend upon the level of mitigating actions they undertake, and
that a major portion of this could come from the proceeds of auctioning
allowances within the Emissions Trading Scheme, with a proposed
amendment[9] to that Scheme
having suggested that at least 20% of those proceeds should be
used to support climate objectives. More specifically, it says
that, if 5% of this revenue were to be earmarked for this purpose,
1.5-2.5 billion could be raised in 2020. This funding would
be complemented by development assistance from the Community and
Member States to improve governance, and by private funding.
Deforestation in the UNFCCC context
3.8 The Commission says that the Community
should aim to establish an internationally supported incentive
scheme to reduce deforestation and forest degradation in developing
countries as part of the future UNFCCC global agreement for the
period 2013-2020, and that such a scheme should be open to all
developing countries which ratify the agreement and are able to
contribute to its objectives through a commitment to take national
mitigation action to reduce emissions from these sources.
3.9 It advocates a two-track approach, involving
first the establishment of a Global Forest Carbon Mechanism, which
would support capacity-building activities in developing countries,
involve nationwide implementation covering the whole forestry
sector, aim to secure eco-benefits to the greatest possible degree,
enable the results to be assessed, monitored and accounted for
by independent verification, and require effective forest governance
systems to be in place. In the longer-term, the Commission suggests
that the case for including deforestation in carbon markets should
be examined, on the basis of an international agreement with ambitious
emission reduction commitments and the creation of a new sectoral
market mechanism, but it cautions that the inclusion of forestry
credits in the Emissions Trading Scheme should only be considered
after 2020 and following a thorough review.
The Government's view
3.10 In her Explanatory Memorandum of 26 February
2009, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department
for Energy and Climate Change (Joan Ruddock) says that tackling
deforestation is vital to addressing climate change and the future
climate change agreement as well as contributing to wider environment
and development agendas, and notes that there is likely to be
a large funding gap. She goes on to say that the UK's views differ
from those of the Commission in two respects.
3.11 On the suggestion that the proposed Global Forest
Carbon Mechanism would pay for forest credits largely from the
proceeds of auctioning allowances within the Community's Emissions
Trading Scheme, she says that the Government is in principle opposed
to hypothecation as an inefficient means of determining public
expenditure priorities. It is therefore considering innovative
sources of financing which will maximise leverage from the private
sector, in conjunction with demands for financing for low carbon
technology and adaptation.
3.12 Likewise, she says that the UK would like to
see consideration of market credits earlier than 2020, commenting
that a review published in October 2008 has advocated an approach
under which carbon market finance starts to grow in 2013 onwards,
and that this would produce a more positive outcome than that
suggested by the Commission. The UK would therefore like to see
full consideration of carbon market access, based on conditions
dependent on understanding the relationship with the carbon price;
understanding the price impacts on other market mechanisms which
are still under negotiation; and long term responsibility for
the forests.
3.13 Finally, the Minister notes that the Commission
intends that the approach outlined in this Communication should
form part of the Community's position in relation to the climate
change conference in Copenhagen, on which it had recently put
forward a further Communication,[10]
for discussion at the European Council on 19-20 March.
Conclusion
3.14 It is clear that the issue of deforestation
is of considerable significance in the context of wider climate
change developments, and, for that reason, we are drawing this
Communication to the attention of the House. However, the Commission
has made it clear that it does not see this document as providing
a definitive answer to the various issues which arise in this
area, and that its principal purpose is to set out the main lines
of a Community response. In view of this, we do not think it necessary
to withhold clearance, but we do regard the document as relevant
to the debate which we have recently recommended should take place
in European Committee A on the Communication setting out wider
Community objectives for the Copenhagen conference at the end
of this year.
8 "Degradation" is defined by the FAO as
the "long term reduction of the overall supply of benefits
from the forest, which includes carbon, wood, biodiversity, and
other goods and services". Back
9
(29402) 5862/08: see HC 16-xiii (2007-08), chapter 4 (27 February
2008). Back
10
(30412) 5892/09: see HC 19-ix (2008-09), chapter 1 (4 March 2009). Back
|