10 rules for making REDD+ projects more equitable

The International Institute for Environment and Development has published a new report on benefit distribution under Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) programs. The report includes a top ten list of recommendations to ensure REDD+ works for poor communities that live in and around forests. The list, as laid out in a blog post on IIED's web site: -    Communities should be consulted on whether they prefer to have benefits transferred to the entire community or directly to households. -    Consider economic feasibility, local institutional capacity and governance structures before deciding whether to transfer benefits to communities as a whole or directly to households. -    Three factors need to be considered to make REDD+ benefit the poor: proportionality, equality and need. -    In such unequal societies equitable benefit distribution could be achieved by systematically favoring the poor, such as landless and small landholders. -    Projects should be designed to use the primary asset of the poor – their labour. -    Whether to transfer cash or in-kind benefits should be based on a careful assessment of community preferences and the logistical and social consequences of each payment type. -    An analysis of the availability and access to local markets should decide whether to provide cash or in-kind payments. -    Consider whether the type of payment will have a negative impact on the local economy. -    Where cash payments are made, some measures need to be taken to overcome inflationary pressures. -    Project design needs to be flexible and include the periodic assessment by participants of their payment preferences. For more details check out the paper, titled Pro-poor benefit distribution in REDD+ and IIED's blog post.