Implications of uncertainty and scale in carbon emission estimates on locally appropriate designs to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+)

Abstract

This study combined uncertainty analysis of carbon emissions with local stakeholders' perspectives to develop an effective Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) scheme at the district level. Uncertainty of carbon emission estimates depends on scale while local stakeholders' views on plausible REDD+ schemes influence and limit transaction costs. The uncertainty analysis formed the basis for determining an appropriate scale for monitoring carbon emission estimates as performance measures for REDD+ incentives. Our analysis of stakeholder' perspectives explored (i) potential location and activities for lower emission development pathways, and (ii) perceived fair allocation of REDD+incentives. Our case study focused on frontier forest in Tanjung Jabung Barat District, Jambi, Indonesia. The uncertainty analysis used Monte Carlo simulation techniques using known inaccuracy of land cover classification and variation in carbon stocks assessment per land cover type. With decreasing spatial resolution of carbon emission maps, uncertainty in carbon estimates decreased. At 1 km2 resolution uncertainty dropped below 5%, retaining most of the coarser spatial variation in the district. Fairness, efficiency and transaction cost issues in the design of REDD+ mechanisms were readily recognized by local stakeholders, who converged on an equal allocation to short-term efficiency (emission reduction activities) and long-term fairness (alternative livelihood development). A striking difference occurred in desirable transaction costs (which include monitoring, reporting and verification), with Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) aiming for 8%, while government and researchers accepted transaction costs of 40%. Feasible measures for emission reduction in the district, derived from a participatory planning process, are compatible with the 1 km2 spatial resolution of performance measures. © 2013 The Author(s).