Guyana’s Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) is a logical and reasonable set of proposals but it does not consider in detail the balance of obligations and rewards to different groups and sectors of society, a report on the impact of Norwegian support here, has said.
The study is the first in an ongoing real-time evaluation of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative (NICFI) through which Oslo is providing support to Guyana to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) in a deal potentially worth up to US$250 million by 2015. It was commissioned by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) which oversees Norwegian aid.
The report observed that non-Amerindian rural groups (most of which include some Amerindian members), many of which are mainly dependent on mining and forestry, have been given no specific consideration and indeed will be subjected to increased rigour in the application of operational standards without receiving any direct compensation. “There was considerable opposition to this disparity from some specific groups interviewed. The issue here is not that Amerindian groups have been over-generously treated but that there is a significant lack of equity between their treatment and that of others whose livelihoods are affected,” the report said.
It said a number of important groups seem to be only marginally considered as potential beneficiaries. These include those managing the forest, the mining community, the non-Amerindian rural dwellers and the urban poor. Effectiveness in identifying and meeting the needs of these groups is harder to discern as is the question of securing equity between the costs of meeting obligations and the accrual of benefits, it was observed.
According to the report, urban poor groups are scarcely represented in Guyana other than by the PNC and may therefore be said not to be represented on the Multi-stakeholder Steering Committee (MSSC) or be ‘heard’ in the LCDS process at all, apart from through Dr George Norton who participates in the LCDS as a representative of Guyana Organisation of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP), not in his capacity as an official of PNC. While recent expansion of artisanal mining has created some employment opportunities, relatively little in the current LCDS proposals will benefit or be felt by the urban poor, it observes. “Greater equity for all poor, disadvantaged and vulnerable groups in Guyana would be beneficial,” it recommended.
The report, which was done by LTS International in collaboration with Indufor Oy, Ecometrica and Christian Michelsen Institute for NORAD made a number of observations and recommendations for the partners to follow up.
It observed that while the MoU between Guyana and Norway clearly states that it is about climate change, conservation and sustainable development, it is less clear that the partners have an identical view. Norway’s main aim is to demonstrate a feasible system for REDD payments; while Guyana wishes to use REDD funding from NICFI as means of securing finance for its LCDS. The partners thus have slightly different goals, with Guyana’s aims focused on the use of REDD funding rather than on the funding system itself as its desired outcome, it notes.
Mistaken
impression
It said that some people interviewed were under the mistaken impression that LCDS is in its entirety a Norwegian funded aid programme and stressed that it is not. Those elements of LCDS that are funded by Norwegian funds will be subjected to safeguards, as agreed in the MoU and defined in the GRIF. There are other elements in LCDS that may be funded from other sources, donor funds or Guyanese national funds. Within LCDS, there are elements that may not be consistent with Norway’s views and with the safeguards required on the use of its development funds, the report observes.
“It is theoretically possible that the Government of Guyana could choose to undertake activities using its own funds, not those from Norway. Examples could include the draining of the Rupununi wetlands and aspects of the Amaila hydroelectric scheme. Norway would not be responsible for such activities but the difference may not be appreciated and could lead to criticism,” the report explained. It said that it should be clarified that the LCDS itself is not a Norwegian programme.
Meanwhile, the report observed that in terms of biodiversity conservation, the current forestry Code of Practice provides a good basis provided it is observed. “The greatest threat to biodiversity appears to come from the plans to drain and farm the Rupununi, which is a unique wetland ecosystem. In addition to the loss of biodiversity, there would also be a huge GHG emission, which does not seem to have been adequately considered,” it observed.
It also said that there is no provision made to either improve processing efficiency or to control the current high volume of log exports, which includes prime species. It observed that there has also been interest in harvesting “lesser used species” in Guyana. “With the strong demand from Asia for a wide range of species, beyond the traditional ones, with a potential to greatly increase the harvest per unit area, which has implications for its impact on the forest structure and growing stock that would have significant implications for REDD calculations,” it noted. Action to address the high cost of wood processing in Guyana, through measures to improve conversion efficiency could reduce the demand for log exports and should be pursued vigorously in concert with policy changes to limit and ultimately obviate most log exports,” it recommended.
Guyana National
Forestry Standard
The report said that given the importance of wider achievement of SFM in parallel with REDD, there may be scope for resuscitating the Guyana National Forestry Standard, drafted in 2002, as a basis for an independently verified national certification scheme. It said that the lack of direct benefit from REDD to the forest sector, and the uncertainty surrounding this, was reported as leading to an unwillingness to make investments in more efficient processing technology and adding value. “Exporting logs is much easier and cheaper to do for as long as it continues to be permitted. This is a valid point, although the policy level changes seem to be a long way from fruition and the problems and issues in the sector relating to inefficiency of conversion and marketing have been unaddressed for more than a decade,” it said.
In relation to safeguards, it recommended that the partners identify any activities proposed in the LCDS where there could be potential conflicts with agreed safeguard requirements, and agree on this with the Government of Guyana. It would be unfortunate if national funding for the LCDS activities were to compromise Norway’s efforts to apply sound safeguards to those elements of the LCDS supported from its payments, it said.
The report also noted the intense frustration over slow payments with the argument presented being that the MoU related to a commercial payment for services rendered. This is partially true but it is not simply performance in terms of tasks or even achievement of REDD, the report noted. The MoU/JCN is very clear that biodiversity, poverty and governance are also important issues. “These riders are essential because the funding comes from Norway’s development budget and has to meet strict legal criteria when disbursed. The over-optimistic promotion of Guyana’s success in securing payments from Norway without taking into account the complexities of the agreed process was perhaps unhelpful, perhaps even disingenuous, in this regard,” it said.
It was also observed that in order to engage the population and secure buy-in for the LCDS, a very extensive system of consultation was undertaken. “This was impressive, country-wide and is generally regarded as having been successful in creating basic awareness but less successful in providing detailed understanding of the implications for specific groups”.
Trust
The report said that in order for this Guyanese ‘national initiative’ to succeed, it is critical that the various groups in the country, with sometimes very divergent interests, have trust in the overall system to meet their most fundamental needs. “In other words, democratic forms must become institutionalised, such that the Guyanese people can trust the governance system to provide a means for addressing the conflicts that exist among the various stakeholders and interests in a constructive and appropriate way.”
It said after an at times somewhat stormy past, even in the recent past, Guyana has made progress in establishing practices of governance that may be built upon productively in the future and inspire confidence in the institutions of government and the system of governance as the appropriate arenas for airing and resolving conflicts. Much remains to be done to build trust in the forms of governance among all members of Guyanese society, such as through building capacity for negotiation among groups with conflicting interests to achieve outcomes that may not be ideal for anyone but which represent the best alternative for everyone, the report observes.
“Transparency in decision-making, with full representation of all stakeholder groups including potential ‘losers’ can help to achieve full acceptance, in that they may either be encouraged that their sacrifice will ultimately benefit them in some way through benefiting society as a whole, or be able to negotiate and offset their losses in some way. This representation and consideration of all interests can help to build trust in the institutions in which such decisions are made. This in turn will help to institutionalise democratic forms in Guyana and build cooperation among the various groups within the Guyanese ‘civitas’ that hold very divergent interests”, it stressed.
This report is one of five national-level studies conducted as part of the Real-Time Evaluation of NICFI. It aimed to document the baseline on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) in November 2007 and identify changes in Guyana between then and October 2010. Changes found would then be analysed to determine the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of Norway’s support to Guyana so far and draw preliminary lessons learned and recommendations. There should be at least two further evaluation visits to Guyana over the next three years.
The evaluation team’s recommendations are intended for follow-up by NICFI and their partners in their ongoing dialogue and partnerships on REDD+.
