Section 1. Introduction and Background1.4. Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics

USAID LEAF Regional Climate Change Curriculum DevelopmentModule: Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)

Name Affiliation Name AffiliationSurin Onprom; Co-Lead Kasetsart University,

ThailandTran Thi Thu Ha Vietnam Forestry University

Penporn Janekarnkij; Co-Lead Kasetsart University, Thailand

Nguyen Dinh Hai Vietnam Forestry University

Rejani Kunjappan; Co-Lead RECOFTCThailand

Vo Mai Anh Vietnam Forestry University

Claudia Radel; Co-Lead Utah State University Tran Tuan Viet Vietnam Forestry University

Sarah Hines; Co-Lead US Forest Service Cao Tien Trung Vinh University, Vietnam

Sidthinat Prabudhanitisarn Chiang Mai University, Thailand

Nguyen T. Trang Thanh Vinh University, Vietnam

Sharifah Zarina Syed Zakaria University Kebangsaan Malaysia Nguyen Thu Ha USAID Vietnam Forests & Deltas

Mohd Rusli Yacob University Putra Malaysia Maeve Nightingale IUCN MFF

Kaisone Phengspha National University of Laos Guada Lagrada PACT MPE

Phansamai Phengspha National University of Laos Le Van Trung DARD Lam Dong

Kethsa Nanthavongduangsy National University of Laos Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh AIT Thailand

Freddie Alei University of Papua New Guinea David Ganz USAID LEAF Bangkok

Chay Kongkruy Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia

Kalpana Giri USAID LEAF Bangkok

Soreivathanak Reasey Hoy Royal University of Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Chi PhamProject Coordinator

USAID LEAF Bangkok

AcknowledgementsSo

cial

and

Env

ironm

enta

l Sou

ndne

ss

(SES

) Mod

ule

Dev

elop

men

t Tea

m

Soci

al a

nd E

nviro

nmen

tal S

ound

ness

(S

ES) M

odul

e

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND1.1. Introduction to Climate Change1.2. The Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation Context 1.3. Introduction to Social and Environmental Soundness (SES)1.4. Guiding Frameworks – Sustainable Development & Ethics

II. WHAT SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EXIST: STRENGHENING DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF REDD2.1. Environmental Co-benefits: Introduction to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2.1.1. Carbon/REDD+ Project Accounting, Carbon Monitoring & MRV2.2. Governance 2.2.1. Regulatory Framework, Forest Tenure, and Carbon Rights2.3. Stakeholder Participation 2.3.1. FPIC2.4. Social Co-benefits2.5. Gender Equity and Women’s Empowerment 2.5.1. Gender Analysis Tools 2.5.2. Women’s Empowerment in Agriculture Index2.6. Indigenous Peoples and their Empowerment2.7. Local Livelihoods: An Introduction 2.7.1 Livelihoods impact Case Study: April Salumei, PNG2.8. REDD+ Benefits Sharing2.9. Economic and Financial Viability and Sustainability

III. STATE OF THE ART IN ACTION: BRINGING THE PIECES TOGETHER3.1. Safeguard Mechanisms in REDD+ Programs 3.2. Streamlining of Safeguards and Standards3.3. Developing National Level Safeguards

At the end of this section, learners will be able to: Identify the principles of sustainable development linked

to social, economic and environmental issues Describe the concept of environmental ethics and the

essential features of moral or ethical thinking Identify how a human-rights-based approach can arise

from an ethics framework Relate and develop the skills to recognize and apply moral

discourse for leadership in environmental fields, including in climate change mitigation

Learning Objectives

Outline

1. Introduction

2. Sustainable development concepts

3. Environmental ethics

4. Activities

Methodology

Lecture presentation of concepts and information

Class discussion decision making identifying issues

Pre-Class Preparation

Read: The concept of sustainable development published in “Our

Common Future” report in 1987 (The Brundtland Report) Kortenkamp, K & Moore, C. F. 2001. Ecocentrism and

Anthropocentrism: Moral Reasoning About Ecological Commons Dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21, 000-000. (http://www.idealibrary.com)

Introduction

This module section: Examines in detail the applicability of the sustainable

development concept as the framework for REDD+ Relates the use of ethical frameworks for decision

making

Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development (SD) Framework consists of three pillars:

Economic (Goal: Growth?) Environment (Goal: Conservation?) Social/Livelihood (Goal: Equity?)

We then also add a fourth consideration: Governance/Political (political process and how decisions

are made)

Economic

Commonly accepted considerations: Maximize human well-being. Ensure efficient use of all resources, natural and otherwise, by

maximizing rents. Seek to identify and internalize environmental and social

costs. Maintain and enhance the conditions for viable enterprise.

Environmental

Commonly accepted considerations: Promote responsible stewardship of natural resources and

the environment, including remediation of past damage. Minimize waste and environmental damage along the

whole of the supply chain. Exercise prudence where impacts are unknown or

uncertain. Operate within ecological limits and protect critical natural

capital.

Commonly accepted considerations: Ensure a fair distribution of the costs and benefits of

development for all those alive today. Respect and reinforce the fundamental rights of human

beings, including civil and political liberties, cultural autonomy, social and economic freedoms, and personal security.

Seek to sustain improvements over time; ensure that depletion of natural resources will not deprive future generations through replacement with other forms of capital.

Social

Governance / Political

Commonly accepted considerations:

Support representative democracy, including participatory decision-making.

Encourage free enterprise within a system of clear and fair rules and

incentives.

Avoid excessive concentration of power through appropriate checks and

balances.

Ensure transparency through providing all stakeholders with access to

relevant and accurate information.

Ensure accountability for decisions and actions, which are based on

comprehensive and reliable analysis.

Encourage cooperation in order to build trust and shared goals and values.

Ensure that decisions are made at the appropriate level, adhering to the

principle of subsidiarity where possible.

Framework for a National SD Strategy

SOCIAL human rights, equal opportunity, health, education, housing, security, families & villages

ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL

population, GDP, exports, employment, entrepreneurship, innovation

air quality, water quality, waste recycling, energy, forest renewal, biodiversity

Sustainable Development

(SD)

For Discussion:

1. Where, diagrammatically, does the governance / political element fit?

2. Can the three SD pillars be effectively balanced? Why or why not?

National Scorecard

National Strategy Scorecard

Vital indicator metrics Current value

Bench-mark country

Bench-mark country

Milestones2015

Goal Actual2016

Goal Actual 2017Goal Actual

Social: 1. Human rights

indicator2. Equal opportunity

indicator3. Etc.Economic:1. Population indicator2. Growth indicator (e.g.

GPD per capita)3. Etc.

Environmental:1. Air quality2. Water quality3. Etc.

Tools to Support Sustainable Development in REDD+

Is REDD+ “conservation as development”?

Can environmental conservation be economic development at the same time?

Environmental conservation

Economic development

Sustainable development

REDD+

Ethics

Ethical Standards

Environmental Ethics

the study of good and bad, right and wrong

criteria that help differentiate right from wrong

the study of ethical questions regarding human interactions with the environment

Ethics Basics: Meaning and Function

What is Environmental Ethics?

Environmental ethics: guides humans behavior and relations with nature and other

species on earth. deals with the moral relationships between humans, nature

and other species on earth. addresses the ethical dimensions of humans’ relations with

and behavior towards nature and other species on earth more generally.

Environmental Ethics Encompasses:

Understanding human ethical attitudes towards themselves and

nature.

Understanding how environmental exploitation affects livelihoods

(social/economic/political)

Understanding how conduct of social/economic/ political activities

affects the environment.

Understanding how technologies affect the environment, livelihood,

social well-being and nature.

In the context of this course: understanding, from an ethics

perspective, the role of REDD+ in addressing both conservation and

development.

Differing Environmental Ethics Perspectives

Environmental ethicists define three value systems that differ sharply with

regards to on whom the ethics are centered:

1. Anthropocentrism – Human-centered

considers the effects of environmental actions on humans only

humans as more important than any other species

2. Biocentrism – Life-centered

considers the effects of environmental actions on all living things

all species are important elements in a system of interdependence

3. Ecocentrism – Ecosystem-centered

considers the effects of environmental actions on all components of our

environment, both living and nonliving

totality is more important than individuality

What obligation do humans have…?

to other humans? to other living things? to other species? to non-living things? to future human generations?

The recognition of values or importance can strengthen relations within all living, non-living, humans and other species as a moral obligation and responsibility.

Human Rights and Ethics

One framework we use to consider our obligations to other humans is that of:

Human Rights

Different peoples and different countries may recognize different sets of human rights based on different collectively shared ethical principles.

International human rights debates and agreements are attempts to build a shared discourse of moral obligation and then to codify this discourse in law.

A Human-Rights-Based Approach

Four Fundamental Principles:

1. Participation

2. Non-discrimination

3. Transparency

4. Accountability

Ethical Principles

environmental benefits and co-benefits

governance, tenure, legal processes

participation and stakeholder engagement

social benefits and co-benefits

gender equity and women’s empowerment

indigenous empowermentlocal livelihoods

economic / financial viability and sustainability

Do we need ethical principles that

constrain and guide our actions?Do we need

guiding frameworks?

Activity A: Judging Actions

Consider the following:“A farmer has to clear land by cutting trees / forests to feed and support his or her

family“What do we need to include in our consideration of the farmer’s actions?1. Identify arguments for and against the farmer’s actions based on the SD

framework: conservation perspectives (environment) economic perspectives (economy) humanity perspectives (social / political)

2. Identify arguments for the “rightness” or “wrongness” of the farmer’s actions based on environmental ethics perspectives (anthropocentrism, biocentrism, ecocentrism).

3. Now consider the impact of processes at broader scales: Why might the farmer clear forest to farm? (consider the potential roles of national policies, legal frameworks, markets, etc. in shaping the farmer’s actions) Does this change our judgment of the farmer’s actions?

Activity B: Applying the SD framework to various human actions in the environment

Social Economic Environmental Political

Actions that can cause the extinction of other species for convenience of humanity

Cutting down of trees for the sake of human consumption

Performing animal testing for scientific research

Restoring lands that were destroyed

Protecting endangered species

TAKE HOME MESSAGE (1)

The sustainable development framework can be a tool to support decision-making to address multiple policy aspects: social, economic, environmental, and political.

Environmental ethics are the constraining and guiding value perspectives which shape the intention and purpose for conservation and development actions.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE (2)

The framework of human rights is a key system of ethical thinking that positions obligation to other humans in terms of “rights.” A human-rights-based approach can provide ethical guidance to projects design and implementation.

By providing frameworks for development of ethical decisions, these theories strengthen our ability to reach balanced and insightful judgments and to clarify and communicate the bases for those judgments.

References

1. World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future. London: Oxford University Press. (The Brundtland Report)

2. Corbera, E., Schroeder, H. 2010. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environ. Sci. Policy, doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.11.002.

3. Clugston R. 2011. Ethical Framework for a Sustainable World. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development. 5, September: 173-176.

4. Gary W. Luck, Kai M. A . Chan, Uta Eser, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, Bettina Matzdorf, Bryan Norton, & Marion B. Potschin. 2012. Ethical Considerations in On-Ground Applications of the Ecosystem Services Concept. BioScience. Vol. 62, No. 12, December.

5. Jagger P., Sills E.O., Lawlor, K. and Sunderlin, W.D. 2010. A guide to learning about livelihood impacts of REDD+ projects. Occasional paper 56. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia.

6. Rolston. H. 2003. Environmental Ethics. In The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy, 2nd ed. Bunnin. N and Tsui-James. E.P (eds), Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

7. Ulvin, Peter. 2007. From the right to development to the rights-based approach: how ‘human rights’ entered development. Development in Practice 17(4-5): 597-606.