Suchergebnisse

In June 2022, the EU Commission adopted a Proposal for a Nature Restoration law which aims to restore the degraded levels of biodiversity within the European Union. The proposed instrument has been misinterpreted, in part by an active agroindustry lobby, seeking to prevent the adoption of the restoration law. These scientific and economic myths have been contested. Yet, legal myths, oversimplifications or concerns often remain unaddressed.

REDD+ is a legal instrument which aims to address emissions associated with deforestation and forest degradation in developing nations. Whilst REDD+ sets out to sequester carbon in a sustainable manner on paper, the framework has been subject to a wide range of critiques. This paper highlights the REDD+ regime from the perspective of biodiversity conservation, as it is often presumed that the framework comes with an automatic package of biodiversity co-benefits. Contrary to this statement, this paper finds that REDD+ breaches natural ecosystem values in key areas. The latter is a direct result of the inherent focus on forest ecosystems – which excludes other biodiverse habitat types such as peatlands or shrubs. Moreover, this paper finds a lacune within REDD+ with regard to rewilding policies. Additionally, pressing concerns are raised due to the wide State discretion and weak procedural obligations - which lead to the overstate¬ment of biodiversity co-benefits of REDD+ projects. In turn, an amendment of the framework is required if monoculture plantations are to be permanently excluded under REDD+. A case study of the Juma Reserve in Brazil, and Central Kalimantan in Indonesia further highlight these complications.