Dr. Arvind Kumar*
The renewed political and financial commitment towards forest climate action shown at COP27 is creating a new momentum for REDD+. We need to realise that the climate crisis is just a symptom; our real problem is that human consumption and activity have exceeded the regenerative capacity of our planet.
The significance of forests in the tackling climate change is becoming abundantly evident to the world. In addition to helping with climate change adaptation and mitigation, forests are crucial to the global carbon cycle. The Declaration on Forest and Land Use at COP 26 in Glasgow reaffirmed an accelerated and increased financial commitment for forests which was seen in the several financial announcements made during COP26 that amount to $19 billion in public and private funds, In official decisions that emerged from Glasgow, parties “protection” was expressly acknowledged for forests, rather than just relying on the term “conservation” that includes sustainable use as is usually the case in UN discussions, in the context of the role of forests in limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 C degrees.
Important progress on sustainable forest management and conservation has been made at the UN Climate Change Conference COP27 in Sharm el-Sheikh with the launch of the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership (FCLP), which aims to unite action by governments, businesses and community leaders. Twenty-seven countries, representing over 60% of global GDP and 33% of the world’s forests, have already joined the new partnership and are committed to leading by example on one or more of the FCLP’s action areas. These include mobilizing public and donor finance to support implementation, supporting Indigenous Peoples’ and local communities’ initiatives, and incentivizing the conservation of high-integrity forests.
The Declaration on Forest and Land Use at COP 26 in Glasgow reaffirmed an accelerated and increased financial commitment for forests which was seen in the several financial announcements made during COP26 that amount to $19 billion in public and private funds, In official decisions that emerged from Glasgow, parties “protection” was expressly acknowledged for forests, rather than just relying on the term “conservation” that includes sustainable use as is usually the case in UN discussions, in the context of the role of forests in limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 C degrees. Government representatives meeting at COP27 announced that of the $12 billion committed in Glasgow to protect and restore forests over 2021-2025, $2.67 billion have already been spent and that public and private donors have committed a further $4.5 billion since COP26, whether it’s done or not is actually debatable.
According to the UNECE report, climatic changes have an impact on forests and their function in the carbon cycle. It is extremely difficult to anticipate whether changes in rainfall and temperature would be detrimental or advantageous to the health and production of forests. Climate change could decrease or enhance carbon absorption in forests, depending on the situation, which raises questions about how much the world’s forests will be able to do long-term to mitigate climate change. Through the stimulation of specific processes and the mitigation of the effects of detrimental factors, forest management practices have the ability to affect carbon sequestration. A key report published this year by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) – the State of the World’s Forests Report 2022 – highlights the need to step up action to unlock the potential of forests in tackling climate change and biodiversity loss.
Forests strive to bring the most practical storage capacity for carbon despite improvements in carbon sequestration technologies over the past 10 years. Consequently, there has been a resurgence of interest in these natural carbon sinks as affordable sinks that can be developed and increased. Strategies that commodify carbon emissions, such as carbon pricing and trading, are anticipated to become more prevalent in the near future as pressure mounts to reduce the amount of carbon pumped into the atmosphere. This would require a change in strategy for managing forests. With possible interests from both industries and governments, the governing stance is likely to shift away from conservation and toward utilizing them as carbon reservoirs. Such a technique has the potential to upset the country’s long-standing conservation equilibrium. Instead of tinkering with natural forests, a different strategy might be more in line with the expansion of artificial ones.
The predominant GHG, CO2, has increased from 172 ppm in the pre-industrial era to 417 ppm now after several centuries of heedless industrialization. The end result has been a quick ascent up the climate change curve, with severe effects spreading and intensifying year after year. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was signed in 1992 to address the climate crisis, emerged as the global response. Following the signing of the Kyoto Protocol under the Convention in 1997, numerous other initiatives, including the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+), and others were launched to enable the trading of carbon credits, including those from forestry, as crucial GHG mitigation tools.
According to Article 5 of the Paris Agreement, all nations are expected to protect and improve their forests, including by providing incentives for actions that will reduce their emissions while sustaining the value of their non-carbon benefits. Due to their considerable wooded areas, developing forested nations like Indonesia, India, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo have sparked resurgence in awareness for mitigating global forest loss through international cooperation. For instance, India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the UNFCCC contain a sizable portion of forest-related information.
The more recent policies mention, among other things, improving carbon capture in wood and enacting a carbon fee. In accordance with the Paris Agreement, India pledged to enhance its carbon sink by 2.5–3.0 GtCO2 by 2030 through new forestry initiatives in addition to its current forest carbon stock of about 26 GtCO2.
In trying to attain India’s forestry obligation under the NDC, additional non-forested lands measuring 6.8 to 8.2 million hectares, or nearly the size of Assam, would need to be reforested or afforested in order to have the same biomass density as natural forests. The growing stock (trees volume) and carbon in India’s natural forests is interestingly either declining or essentially steady throughout many assessments made over the previous few decades, despite rising “forest and tree cover (FTC)” estimates. The ongoing deforestation of India’s forests, which is seen by a decline in the amount of forest cover in officially designated forest areas, is even more concerning.
Agro forestry is perceived as a win-win solution in light of the competing needs for limited land resources and worries about sparing natural forests for conservation. However, India’s linked tree farming infrastructure need urgent improvement. Additionally, determining whether and to what degree India can afford to treat its remaining natural forest resources as carbon commodities is a strategic priority moving forward. In conclusion, India’s national priorities need to be determined between forests as carbon sinks alone or forests providing a variety of other ecosystem services in the midst of numerous components of NDC, REDD+, CDM, NAMA, Bonn challenge, Sustainable Development Goals, Green India Mission, etc. In any instance, carbon capture and sequestration will be by-products of agroforestry and forest conservation. Finance for preserving our natural forests and establishing new ones should not be a constraint given the available and potential domestic funding.
Against this backdrop, the strategy for forests in India can be three-pronged:
a) To create an atmosphere that would support the growth of the private plantations and agroforestry industries. This could improve the long-term atmospheric CO2 collection from short-rotation bamboo and trees into high-quality, long-lasting items like furniture.;
b) For sustained ecosystem services, such as long-term carbon capture in living trees, biodiversity, and healthy soils, last surviving natural biodiverse forests must be protected utilizing ecosystem-based and forest landscape restoration methodologies. Lastly,
c) Forestry initiatives should not be perceived as a replacement for reducing emissions, despite the fact that forests are important and will continue to be included in national climate strategies. Planning a comprehensive climate strategy is essential in light of the growing global issues.
Meanwhile, developing countries are taking ongoing concrete actions to protect forests under the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) mechanism. REDD+ provides a holistic framework for forest climate action, including by providing results-based payments for emission reductions achieved in the forestry sector. The renewed political and financial commitment towards forest climate action shown at COP27 is creating a new momentum for REDD+. We need to realise that the climate crisis is just a symptom; our real problem is that human consumption and activity have exceeded the regenerative capacity of our planet. In a rapidly changing and uncertain environment, timely, transparent and reliable forest information is crucial for the knowledge-informed and collective action that we need to put forward this decade to protect, restore and manage sustainably our global forest ecosystems. Technology, at best, can assist us, not lead us, on the pathway to a sustainable, regenerative and equitable world.
*President, India Water Foundation
