In the latest installment of RFF's Weekly Policy Commentary Series RFF Senior Fellow Allen Blackman examines whether programs to incentivize avoiding deforestation and forest degredation will be the cost-effective emission reduction tool many are counting on:
An international system that enables countries to earn carbon credits by reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) will almost certainly be a prominent feature of whatever post-2012 international climate architecture emerges from ongoing negotiations.
One of the main arguments for creating such a system is that REDD will be inexpensive compared to fuel switching, carbon capture and storage, and other greenhouse gas abatement options. As a result, allowing countries to sell REDD credits will cut the total global cost of combating climate change. This argument underpins numerous high-profile reports and white papers—including the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report and the 2006 Stern Review—and has even inspired widespread concern about, and research on, a coming deluge of low-cost REDD credits.
Yet the scientific foundation for the hypothesis that REDD credits will be cost effective is thin, is contradicted by emerging evidence on the effectiveness of forest conservation policies in developing countries, and deserves serious scrutiny before critical REDD policy decisions are made.
Read the rest of Blackman's “Will REDD Really Be Cheap?” here.
