Restoration 
Plantations and tree crop commodities 
Enhanced nutrition and food security 
Biodiversity, safeguarding and conservation 
Nationally determined contributions 
Bioenergy and biomaterials 
Blue carbon and peatlands 
Climate change adaptation 
Landscape governance 
Gender 
Silvopastoral systems 
Market-based agroforestry-forestry 
Farm-forest policy interface 
Agroecology 
Livelihood trajectory modelling and assessment 
Inclusive finance and business models 
Innovating finance for sustainable landscapes 
Public and private commitments to zero deforestation 
Orphan tree crops 
Effectiveness of approaches to sustainable supply 
Quality of FTA research for development 
Sentinel landscapes 
Foresight 
Seeds and seedlings delivery systems 
Smallholder tree-crop commodities 
Key messages
- Results-based finance is a cornerstone in the approach to REDD+, as outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement.
- Results-based finance will need to consider not only carbon/emissions-related payments but also incentives for intermediate outputs (such as policy performance) in order to effectively reduce deforestation and forest degradation.
- A major gap in the current guidance for REDD+ finance is a lack of clear, context-relevant criteria and metrics to help justify and mobilize payments.
- Negotiation and agreement on performance outputs and outcomes and their indicators are critical to ensuring national/local ownership and compliance.
- Understanding the variation in costs and who is bearing the different costs of REDD+ will be critical in setting payment levels that can incentivize both carbon-effective and equity outcomes.
Authors:
Wong, G.; Angelsen, A.; Brockhaus, M.; Carmenta, R.; Duchelle, A.E.; Leonard, S.; Luttrell, C.; Martius, C.; Wunder, S.
Subjects:
climate change, carbon, emission, finance
Publication type:
Brief, Publication
Year:
2016
