152
6
eral ways of organizing the economy. The most wealthy parts of the world are currently responsible for high and increasing levels of consumption, which are clearly
not sustainable nor justifiable in a climate justice perspective. As an alternative,
degrowth is increasingly receiving more attention in public debates as well as in the
academic literature (see 7 Chap. 2).
Conclusions
In this chapter, we have discussed how Norway as a fossil fuel producing nation has had
a policy for the last 30 years of outsourcing its climate mitigation to so- called low-cost
countries, because this is seen as more ‘cost-effective’. Forest conservation in tropical
countries to store carbon is an example of this, and when the REDD programme was
launched in 2007, Norway soon became its biggest sponsor.
Furthermore, the chapter discusses the case of a Norwegian funded REDD project in Tanzania and how it had adverse effects on the livelihoods of people in the 21
villages around the two forest reserves that were highly restricted for local use as a
consequence of the project. At the same time, the compensation for lost forest access
that was provided mainly in the form of support to ‘conservation agriculture’ failed
to generate sustained income for the farmers. The short time-period of the project
(3 years of funding) combined with the harmful consequences for the villagers and
a modest and failed compensation programme, demonstrate that neither the funder
(Norway) nor the implementing NGO (African Wildlife Foundation) took the social
impacts of this initiative seriously. At the same time, Norway has presented this particular project as a uniquely successful example of REDD implementation. Through
the presentation of this and other forest-based climate interventions, Norway has
been able to use its discursive power to support a win-win discourse about REDD as
a highly successful climate mitigation programme.
In addition, outsourcing climate mitigation also depends on the existence of a
functioning carbon market. The chapter discusses different forms of carbon trade
and problematic aspects of this trade that may easily occur. Finally, we end up the
chapter with discussing how a climate policy based on international cost-effectiveness could be replaced with policy guided by principles of climate justice.
? Questions
1. What are the main sources contributing to climate change in your home
country (or in another country you are interested in)?
2. How large is your country’s total contribution of climate emissions at present?
How have these emissions evolved so far, and what targets have been made for
emission cuts in coming years?
3. Discuss climate justice of your country’s total emissions.
4. Find some texts about your country’s climate mitigation measures. Discuss
similarities and differences in comparison with the discourses presented in this
chapter.
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...
6
eral ways of organizing the economy. The most wealthy parts of the world are currently responsible for high and increasing levels of consumption, which are clearly
not sustainable nor justifiable in a climate justice perspective. As an alternative,
degrowth is increasingly receiving more attention in public debates as well as in the
academic literature (see 7 Chap. 2).
Conclusions
In this chapter, we have discussed how Norway as a fossil fuel producing nation has had
a policy for the last 30 years of outsourcing its climate mitigation to so- called low-cost
countries, because this is seen as more ‘cost-effective’. Forest conservation in tropical
countries to store carbon is an example of this, and when the REDD programme was
launched in 2007, Norway soon became its biggest sponsor.
Furthermore, the chapter discusses the case of a Norwegian funded REDD project in Tanzania and how it had adverse effects on the livelihoods of people in the 21
villages around the two forest reserves that were highly restricted for local use as a
consequence of the project. At the same time, the compensation for lost forest access
that was provided mainly in the form of support to ‘conservation agriculture’ failed
to generate sustained income for the farmers. The short time-period of the project
(3 years of funding) combined with the harmful consequences for the villagers and
a modest and failed compensation programme, demonstrate that neither the funder
(Norway) nor the implementing NGO (African Wildlife Foundation) took the social
impacts of this initiative seriously. At the same time, Norway has presented this particular project as a uniquely successful example of REDD implementation. Through
the presentation of this and other forest-based climate interventions, Norway has
been able to use its discursive power to support a win-win discourse about REDD as
a highly successful climate mitigation programme.
In addition, outsourcing climate mitigation also depends on the existence of a
functioning carbon market. The chapter discusses different forms of carbon trade
and problematic aspects of this trade that may easily occur. Finally, we end up the
chapter with discussing how a climate policy based on international cost-effectiveness could be replaced with policy guided by principles of climate justice.
? Questions
1. What are the main sources contributing to climate change in your home
country (or in another country you are interested in)?
2. How large is your country’s total contribution of climate emissions at present?
How have these emissions evolved so far, and what targets have been made for
emission cuts in coming years?
3. Discuss climate justice of your country’s total emissions.
4. Find some texts about your country’s climate mitigation measures. Discuss
similarities and differences in comparison with the discourses presented in this
chapter.
Chapter 6 · Climate Mitigation Choices: Reducing Deforestation ...