Daniel Murdiyarso, CIFOR climate change senior scientist comments on Norwegian REDD aid to Indonesia goverment. Kerjasama Indonesia-Norwegia dalam moratorium sangat penting untuk mengurangi dampak kerusakan hutan. “Dana itu penting bagi pemerintah untuk belajar cara melestarikan hutan. Dan tidak perlu mencurigai ada kepentingan apapun dari komitmen tersebut,” ujarnya.

CIFOR Director General, Frances Seymour comments on a turning point for deforestation, but high food price. REDD (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation), a concrete steps towards for avoided deforestation which would allow companies and countries to claim carbon credits for maintaining trees. But at the same time, record high food prices could reverse all of that progress, if farmers around the world choose to clear forest to make room for more crops. “In my view, 2011 is going to be the critical year,” says Frances Seymour, the director-general of the Center for International Forestry Research. “This is the year we’ll find out whether we’ll be successful or not.”

According to the Center for International Forestry Research, cattle ranching for beef has caused the majority of felled forests in Latin America, tens of thousands of square kilometers each year! The overwhelming majority of that lost forest becomes pasture, and most of that pasture is used for grazing cattle, intended for eventual export on the international market. Modern-day beef consumption may thus represent the pursuit of our own material comfort at the expense of our forest

CIFOR’s list of the main issues under REDD and REDD+ quotes in proposal mechanism that would benefit rainforest nations. They are:

– How can the carbon stored in forests be accurately measured so as to put a value on it?

– Forest data in many countries is poor or non-existent – how can emission reductions be monitored, reported, and verified?

– Who will make payment?

– Who will receive payment – national governments, indigenous communities or logging companies?

– How do we ensure transparency and accountability in these transactions?

– How do we ensure that emission reductions are permanent and the forests remain standing?

– Where will the money for the compensation come from – governments, donors or carbon markets?

Douglas Sheil, CIFOR’s senior associate comments on current palm oil expansion as a series of trade offs.”Implementing oil palm developments involves many tradeoffs,” Sheil and CIFOR colleagues wrote in a report published in 2009. “Oil palm’s considerable profitability offers wealth and development where wealth and development are needed—but also threatens traditional livelihoods. It offers a route out of poverty, while also making people vulnerable to exploitation, misinformation and market instabilities. It threatens rich biological diversity—while also offering the finance needed to protect forest. It offers a renewable source of fuel, but also threatens to increase global carbon emissions.”

Frances Seymour, CIFOR’s Director General comments on importance awareness of forest initiatives. “[Given that] governments face significant political and financial risks [from the domestic forestry sector] in undertaking deforestation initiatives, this gives us a chance to show support for their decisions,” said Seymour. According to FAO report, high rate of forest clearing is continues in order to make way for agriculture.