Safeguards for REDD+ from a Donor Perspective
It notes that most donors have ratified or endorsed international agreements with implications for how public finance is spent and delivered, which in turn have been translated into domestic laws. The paper also outlines various financing instruments; how monitoring and evaluation can be applied and how a funder could respond to a failure to implement safeguard protections.
The authors explain cross-cutting implications of REDD+, such as the fact that countries must abide by conditions established by the financing institution. Funders very in the extent to which they rely on the recipient country’s own system to avoid potential harm associated with REDD+ projects. Stakeholder participation also varies, but engagement is increasingly encouraged.
The paper draws four conclusions:
- There is still a lack of clarity on the application of Cancun Safeguards
- Successful safeguards enhance client capacity, responsibility, ownership and include systems and instruments for accountability and grievance redress
- A different set of safeguard tools may be required for readiness funding versus payment-for-results
- Specific approaches may be used to create positive incentives, i.e. encourage a “race to the top” for REDD+ financing.