Comments on: The Pitfalls of ‘Saving’ the Rainforest http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2009/12/16/the-pitfalls-of-saving-the-rainforest/ Tapping experts in climate, geology, oceanography, ecology, sustainable development, global health, energy, food and water, State of the Planet captures stories of how the Earth works and how we can sustainably make our lives better. Fri, 17 May 2013 14:54:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Harry Jonas http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2009/12/16/the-pitfalls-of-saving-the-rainforest/comment-page-1/#comment-481 Harry Jonas Fri, 18 Dec 2009 11:13:02 +0000 http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/?p=979#comment-481 While Natural Justice supports the development of social and environmental guidelines, such as those recently developed by WRI among others, we agree with you, Alex, that communities cannot rely on these instruments alone. Guidelines can only provide generic advice about how communities should be consulted about any intended REDD projects on their lands. Communities also require information about REDD and legal empowerment to advocate for their rights, as guaranteed by national law and/or set out in international instruments such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

We propose that any REDD project be subject to the free, prior and informed consent of communities and subject to community protocols. The development of community specific protocols are a means by which communities can learn about and reflect on how REDD can be used to promote their endogenous development plans. Community protocols can be used to put outside interests on notice that a community understands its rights, has customary laws relating to the use of the forest with which any REDD project must comply and therefore have a natural right to be included in the development of any project they consent to. To read more, see http://www.naturaljustice.org.za

]]> By: Javier M. Claparols http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2009/12/16/the-pitfalls-of-saving-the-rainforest/comment-page-1/#comment-480 Javier M. Claparols Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:12:58 +0000 http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/?p=979#comment-480 Too much attention is on REDD and not on reducing CO2 emissions is very troubling. Even worse is allowing Indigenous Forest to be felled and Palm Oil and other PLANTATIONS classified as Forest!

]]> By: Jo Anderson http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2009/12/16/the-pitfalls-of-saving-the-rainforest/comment-page-1/#comment-479 Jo Anderson Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:08:57 +0000 http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/?p=979#comment-479 The very idea of measuring the carbon released by trees as a problem in this “equation” seems disturbing.

The climate issue is not because of trees. Mentioning this as a likely culprit, and weighing it as a legitimate and troublesome contributor disturbs me.

Are we missing something here?

]]> By: Ujala Qadir http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2009/12/16/the-pitfalls-of-saving-the-rainforest/comment-page-1/#comment-478 Ujala Qadir Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:15:05 +0000 http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/?p=979#comment-478 With regard to the fact that the percentage of carbon uptake by sinks is decreasing, I was wondering how important that is when you consider the amount stored not only in trees, but in the soil that is kept in tact below them. In the SAR, it was stated that in addition to the 330 Gt C that is stored in trees (both dead and alive and below and above ground), double that amount is stored in the soil below.

]]>