This report is a contribution to the UN’s International Year of Biodiversity and is a complement to the UNEP-hosted Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) which is bringing visibility to the wealth of the world’s natural capital. It documents over 30 successful case studies referencing thousands of restoration projects ranging from deserts and rainforests to rivers and coasts. The report confirms that restoration is not only possible but can prove highly proftable in terms of public savings; returns and the broad objectives of overcoming poverty and achieving sustainability. It also provides important recommendations on how to avoid pitfalls and how to minimize risks to ensure successful restoration.Resource Type: Reports
This JNCC-commissioned report highlights biodiversity impacts of indirect land use change caused by biofuel production. Increased demand for biofuels to achieve renewable energy targets is putting pressure on biodiversity worldwide. The research highlights a new and so far little understood threat: the impact of indirect land use change on biodiversity.Resource Type: Tools / Applications
This document provides a basis for estimating the probable impacts of different forest cover creation approaches on the ecosystem-derived benefits of biodiversity, water provision, soil conservation and non-timber forest products.Resource Type: Reports
Co‐benefits, often called multiple benefits, are the positive impacts of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) that are additional to emissions reductions. These include ecosystem and social benefits such as biodiversity and non‐timber forest products. Potential co‐benefits from REDD are widely relevant in Tanzania, where forests and woodlands support the livelihoods of 87% of the rural poor (Milledge et al. 2007). Conserving biodiversity also promotes the continued provision of these benefits under environmental change (Campbell et al. 2009), thus increasing resilience to climate change. Depending on where REDD action is taken, the co‐benefits delivered will vary. Simple mapping tools can help identify how carbon, other services and pressures such as fire are distributed and relate to each other.
Here, we map the distribution of carbon stocks in relation to the possible co‐benefits of REDD, alongside other relevant factors. A new map of carbon in Tanzania’s ecosystems has been produced for this analysis.Resource Type: Reports
This publication presents the results of an analysis on the economic impact and the potential of five of goods and services provisioned by conservation units for the Brazilian economy and society: forest products, public use, carbon, water and sharing of tax revenue.Resource Type: Tools / Applications
The report, the fifth in UNEP's 'rapid response assessment' series, looks beyond forests and the REDD debates to the potential of natural and agricultural ecosystems to capture and store carbon. It examines the potential for gaining multiple benefits for livelihoods and ecosystem services through managing ecosystem carbon and considers the implications for policy.Resource Type: Reports
How do bioenergy policies relate to the REDD+ mechanism, is the subject of this new Bioenergy Issue Paper jointly authored by UNEP and UNEP-WCMC.
The potential contribution of bioenergy in reducing global emissions of greenhouse gases has been widely debated, both in terms of climate change mitigation potential and potential risk of increases in greenhouse gas emissions resulting from land use change. This has raised the question of how bioenergy policies relate to the REDD+ mechanism developed under the UNFCCC. This issue paper examines the complexity of this relationship and stresses the importance of ensuring policy coherence across the relevant sectors.
For a look at the UNEP Issue Paper Series, please visit:
UNEP-WCMC, with the financial support of the UN-REDD programme, wrote a paper on biodiversity monitoring for REDD+ published in the journal "Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability" as part of ongoing work on REDD+ safeguards. The paper observes the following three challenge to biodiversity monitoring for REDD: choosing which aspects of biodiversity to monitor, the difficulty of attributing particular changes to REDD+ and the likely scarcity of resources for biodiversity monitoring. It proposes three responses which may address these challenges: 1) agreed policy targets that identify what should be monitored; 2) making links to existing biodiversity monitoring and to monitoring to estimate GHG emissions and removals; and 3) developing clear theories of change to assist in determining which changes in biodiversity can be attributed to REDD+. The paper is available on the journal website here.Resource Type: Tools / Applications
©2013 UNEP All rights reserved