Opposition to REDD+
Funding Turned Down
Recently one of our partner organisations applied to a foundation for funding and it was turned down. Not uncommon, but what was unusual was that the foundation actually gave detailed reasons for refusing, and one of these was that REDD+ projects were being implemented by the NGO concerned, and the reasons for opposing REDD+ projects were that Carbon Trade Watch, Indigenous Environmental Network, Global Forest Coalition, Friends of the Earth International, were all apparently opposed to REDD+.
REDD+ the only option?
As you may imagine, the World Land Trust (WLT) is aware of all the arguments against REDD, but we believe it is also important to recognise that the organisations writing the reports against REDD are campaigning organisations, not implementers. We are actually trying to do conservation (or rather fund our partners) on the ground. What the organisations campaigning against REDD don't always appreciate is that there aren't many viable alternatives to REDD, for those of us trying to preserve biodiversity.
While I have every sympathy with the Anti-REDD stance, by the time the world catches up, millions more acres will have been lost. My view is that taking a totally anti-REDD stance is fiddling while Rome burns. The WLT actually only supports REDD+ (the plus is for biodiversity), for largely tactical reasons. Until those campaigning against REDD+ can come up with a viable alternative, I think it is by far the best option on the table for raising significant funds for biodiversity conservation. Many of the best biodiversity conservation NGOs are going to have to accept funding from this source, simply because there are few other sources.
This is a serious dilemma and views and comments from our supports would be useful