CO2 emission

The concept of REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) was introduced into UN climate talks in 2005 with the promise to reduce deforestation as well as the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from forest loss. REDD is now becoming the dominant international forest policy mechanism.

Despite over a billion US dollars for pilot initiatives by multilateral agencies and subsidies for private sector REDD+ projects and research programmes over the past 15 years, REDD+ has not fulfilled its promise of being a silver bullet in the fight against deforestation: global forest loss continues at alarming rates.

REDD+ was praised as a tool that could quickly and cheaply reduce emissions. This prediction has not been fulfilled. Instead, global emissions and deforestation are increasing.  

Obviously, the destiny of sustainable transition of Western Balkan and Eastern European economies is above all in control of the respective countries themselves. Still, the EU is in a decisive position to create conditions for a dynamic of change and a successful modernisation.

A new climate agreement intended to ensure “carbon-neutral growth” in international aviation could lead to a massive increase in demand for problematic offsetting projects.

Geoengineering – large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s natural systems – is increasingly being presented as a strategy to counteract, dilute or delay climate change. Which international legal norms and agreements would contradict the different measures?

Do figures on natural capital actually deliver the information that we need for the necessary changes in industry and society?

Does economic valuation make nature more visible and hence lead to better decisions for nature conservation?

Can an economic valuation of nature actually internalise environmental costs?

Does the valuation of nature really mean that those who destroy nature are forced to pay for it?

So why does REDD+ not prevent deforestation?

The United Nations play a key role in establishing the idea of nature as natural capital. However the practical implementation lags behind the noble goals stated in their documents and decisions.

You want to know more about the key terms mentioned in this dossier? Hereby we are delivering the explanations for the terminology of the "New Economy of Nature".

Coffee, bananas, smartphones, automobiles: cargo ships transport goods around the world. 90 percent of global trade is seaborne. Who does what – and who pays for it all?

Without the ocean, climate change would proceed far more quickly. The massive volumes of water in the seas greatly influence the changes occurring in our atmosphere.

Emission trading systems aim to put a price on carbon, to save emissions where it is cheapest and benefit the global climate. But the approach has failed so far. In the EU, the price for carbon has dropped to a low, so producers can easily continue polluting. And they are actually making huge profits from the permits they receive. This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy. Open external content on original site This external content requires your consent. Please note our privacy policy.

At the UN’s COP 22 climate conference in Marrakech, the international community closed ranks despite (or perhaps because of?) the election of Donald Trump as the next U.S. president.