Worldwide Forestry Deal Left Without a Legal Framework

United Nations climate talks in Copenhagen ended without a clear directive to save the world's forests, an issue seen as critical for averting dangerous climate change.

An agreement on REDD, or Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in developing countries, was expected to be completed last week as the talks wrapped up.

But the final "Copenhagen Accord" only recognized the importance of ending deforestation; it gave no specifics on what REDD will look like or what it will include.

"Business as usual logging and forest conversion will continue," said Stephen Leonard of the Australian Orangutan Project.

About 32 million acres of forests, an area the size of Nicaragua, are razed each year, according to figures from the Global Canopy Programme (GCP), an alliance of 37 scientific institutions in 19 countries.

The idea behind REDD is to pay poor nations to keep those trees standing. The scheme is seen as critical to a new international climate change regime. Forests store carbon; chopping them down is responsible for almost 20 percent of global warming emissions, according to UN scientists.

Analysts are still trying to wrap their brains around the meaning of the Copenhagen agreement.

In terms of REDD, the accord "is a little hard to interpret," Bill Barclay of the Rainforest Action Network told SolveClimate.

Barclay said the promise of short-term cash offers a fissure of clarity amid the ambiguity. The accord specifically calls for the "immediate establishment" of a mechanism to unleash funds for forest protection.

The money is on the table. In Copenhagen, six countries — the United States, United Kingdom, France, Japan, Australia and Norway — pledged $3.5 billion over the next three years to kick start REDD. A billion of that would come from the U.S.

The funds would be pumped into poor nations to do prep work for REDD.

Some observers say it's not enough, though. They're calling for at least $25 billion a year to get REDD off the ground, based on research from the Informal Working Group for Interim Finance on REDD, a project of the Prince of Wales and the government of Norway.

The group found that between $22.4 billion and $37.3 billion would be needed from 2010-2015.

In the meantime, the committed, fast-start forestry cash could flow from the "Copenhagen Green Climate Fund" in a matter of months. The fund, agreed to in Copenhagen, would deliver $10 billion in total climate financing each year from 2010-2012 to developing countries.

Barclay said the "the green fund is positive" but "still uncertain."

"The [Copenhagen Accord] doesn't have the legal authority to adopt this fund," he added.

The reason is simple: It is not a binding treaty. Delegates from 193 nations merely took "note" of the text's existence in the frantic, final hours of the conference.

What is certain is that climate talks have been given another chance. Nations agreed to continue negotiations until the next UN summit in Mexico at the end of 2010, but they set no firm goal for conclusion of a binding international treaty.

For REDD, that means it will "be negotiated for another year," Kate Dooley, a forest campaigner for the Belgium-based FERN, told SolveClimate.

Rich-Poor Rift Taints REDD

REDD is the "'A' student" of the UN climate change negotiations, Stewart Maginnis, director of the Environment and Development Group of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) told SolveClimate during week one — at a time when progress was being made.