Texto oficial: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2014/sbsta/eng/crp01.pdf
Propuesta de “Enfoque conjunto de mitigación y adaptación para el manejo integral y sostenible de los bosques” – JMA (por sus siglas en ingles) plantea que JMA no promueve mercados de carbono (paragrafo 7.b) pero que si constituye un pago por servicios ambientales (paragrafo 4) que no es excluyente con REDD+ (paragrafo 8).
Submission from the Plurinational State of Bolivia
JOINT MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION APPROACH FOR THE INTEGRAL AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS-JMA
CRP Proposal by the Plurinational State of Bolivia
December 1, 2014
1. Takes note of the report of the in-session expert meeting on methodological guidance for nonmarket-based approaches as requested at SBSTA 38.
2. Reaffirms that in the context of the provision of adequate and predictable support to developing country parties, Parties should collectively aim to slow, halt and reverse forest cover and carbon loss, in accordance with national circumstances consistent with the ultimate objective of the Convention, as stated in its article 2.
3. Recalls decisions 9 to 15/CP.19, the Warsaw Framework for REDD+, as the methodological guidance for the activities referred to in decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 70, seeking to obtain and receive results based payments for results based actions, expressed in tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year as referred to in Decision 9/CP.19.
4. Further recalls the importance of the recognition of alternative policy approaches to resultsbased payments such as the Joint Mitigation and Adaptation Approach for the Integral and Sustainable Management of Forests (JMA as agreed in paragraph 8 of decision 9/CP.19, for the full implementation of the activities referred to in paragraph 70 of decision 1/CP.16.
5. Recognizes that alternative policy approaches, such as joint mitigation and adaptation approaches, need differentiated methodological guidance, in accordance to national circumstances and national policies, in the context of sustainable development supported by financial, technical and capacity building within the context of the convention.
6. Recalls that entities financing the activities referred to in Decision 1/CP.16 paragraph 70, when providing financial resources to alternative policy approaches, such as joint mitigation and adaptation approaches, as per paragraph 8 in Decision 9/CP.19 to provide financial, and technical support for the development and implementation of national proposals, when not seeking to receive results based finance.
7. Further recognizes that the joint mitigation and adaptation approach for the integral and sustainable management of forests (JMA), as an alternative policy approach, should be guided, inter alia, by the following methodological aspects:
a) Development of joint mitigation and adaptation actions is based on the promotion and support to the integral and sustainable managements of forests, ecosystems and environmental functions taking into account the holistic views of indigenous peoples, local communities and local resource users about environment and Mother Earth, and the
achievement of gender equality and empowerment of all women and girls.
b) Identification of financial needs for joint mitigation and adaptation actions, as a non market-based approach, including ex-ante financing, technological support and capacity building.
c) Monitoring and evaluation carried out through the use of quantitative and qualitative information, as appropriate, for mitigation and adaptation according to national circumstances and capacities of countries and oriented towards building adaptive management and enabling learning.
8. Further recognizes that REDD+ and alternative policy approaches, such as the JMA, are not mutually exclusive.
9. Requests the COP to establish a Joint SBI-SBSTA process to address financial, technology transfer and capacity building needs for the implementation of alternative policy approaches referred to in paragraph 5 above, as per elements outlined in paragraph 7 above, and to identify adequate follow-up actions, with the Green Climate Fund in a key role and other entities financing the activities referred to in Decision 1/CP.16, paragraph 70, when channeling
finance for the development and implementation of alternative policy approaches, and to report to COP21.
10. Conclude consideration on this matter.