This event discussed elements and mechanisms of three Latin American payments for ecosystem services (PES) programs and their relationship with REDD+ schemes. Michael Jenkins, Forest Trends, facilitated the event and distinguished between REDD+ and PES, saying PES was “broader” and that the success of REDD+ will be built on the development of PES programs.

Marcela Aguiñaja Vallejo, Ecuador, discussed the necessary steps for developing market mechanisms in her country, noting recent collaboration with Costa Rica and Mexico. Juan Manuel Torres Rojo, CONAFOR, underlined the importance of: integrating knowledge and public participation at the national level; the differentiation of payments and flexibility within the market sector; making PES focal areas more effective; and integrating PES into rural development programs.

Jorge Mario Rodriguez, Costa Rica National Forestry Financing Fund (FONAFIFO), described the pillars of Costa Rica’s PES program as: strong legal support; integration into national development planning; support from public and private sectors; and solid accountability and monitoring. Sergio Graf Montero, CONAFOR, described the allocation of funding and the legal aspects of Mexico’s PES program. Though noting substantial growth in Mexico’s PES program since 2007, he cited difficulties in: guaranteeing provision of ecosystem services; guaranteeing the sustainability of the mechanism; and preventing leakage.

Marco Chiu, Ecuador, described Ecuador’s Programa Socio Bosque (PSB), a national policy of incentivizing ecosystem conservation, and its contributions to REDD+. He said to enhance REDD+ developments Ecuador needs to, inter alia, re-strategize forest management and develop a carbon inventory. René Castro Salazar, Costa Rica, said REDD+ will be the “transitional topic” linking ecology and environmental economics to foreign affairs. He emphasized the importance of visual mapping.

This event discussed the impacts of climate change on low lying islands in the Pacific, and discussed adaptation measures used by the Republic of Kiribati, Tuvalu and Cook Islands. The event was moderated by Toani Benson, Republic of Kiribati.

Claire Anterea, Republic of Kiribati, said youth from the Kiribati Climate Action Group are actively supporting the work of NGOs and the Republic of Kiribati government on adaptation. She offered her support for the Ambo Declaration on climate change, signed by Pacific leaders at the Tarawa Climate Change Conference (TCCC) in the Republic of Kiribati in 2010. Anterea said climate change threatens the land, traditions and family values of the people of Kiribati. She performed a traditional dance to demonstrate a part of her culture that she said is at risk due to climate change.

Luana Bosanquet-Heays, Cook Islands, performed a traditional dance from the Cook Islands. She said the dance signified the three regions of the Pacific: Polynesia; Micronesia; and Melanesia.

Peter Emberson, Pacific Conference of Churches, emphasized the need for the UNFCCC COP to consider climate-forced migration as a serious option for people living on vulnerable islands in the Pacific. He said it is important for climate-forced migration and displacement to be part of the UN agenda. He stressed that climate-forced migration is a human rights issue.

Taukei Kitara, Tuvalu, said there is no time for delay in negotiations as climate change is threatening the existence of the islands of Tuvalu.

Maria Tiimon, Pacific Calling Partnership (PCP), said PCP is working with people of the Pacific to adapt to the impacts of climate change through consultations and awareness-raising campaigns. She said some residents of rural Kiribati are not aware of climate change, yet experience the direct impacts where they live.

Taati Eria Sakamoto, Republic of Kiribati, said climate change has caused the loss of settlement areas, land, and natural resources in his country.

This event discussed the US federal government’s efforts to reduce emissions and energy consumption and highlighted recent private sector initiatives in this regard.

Describing the ongoing GreenGov initiative within the US federal government, Nancy Sutley, US, stressed that the health of our economies is inextricability linked to the health of our environment. She highlighted the federal government’s target to reduce operational GHG emissions by 28% by 2020 and by 13% for indirect sources, such as employee commuting. She highlighted recent rules and standards, including those related to fuel economy standards and GHG emission standards for vehicles.

Delivering an address via videoconference, Dorothy Robyn, US, discussed the US Department of Defense’s (DoD) efforts to reduce energy consumption. She said energy dependence and climate change are threats to US effectiveness as a “war fighter” and are “threat multipliers.” She said DoD is well positioned to be a “solution multiplier.” She highlighted DoD’s target to reduce emissions by 34% by 2020, noting that this target excludes operational energy because support for combat forces is the DoD’s highest priority.

Anne Kelly, Ceres, discussed her work with private sector actors to develop climate change initiatives. She emphasized the need for companies who claim that their operations are sustainable to refrain from lobbying for policies that are in contradiction with that claim. She said environmental policies must be fully integrated in companies from the “board room to the copy room.” She highlighted examples of companies who have climate-relevant initiatives in place, including Timberland, Nike, Virgin America, Dell, Levi Strauss and the Gap. She stressed that her organization seeks to work with companies who are willing to step away from the “lowest common denominator” positions advocated by certain trade unions.

Participants discussed the US federal government’s supply chain, the need to share clean energy technologies outside the US and zero net energy installations in US military facilities.

Anton Hilber, Switzerland, explained that the panel would not debate the political aspects of how to allocate finance, but rather discuss how to prioritize funding when it arrives in countries.

J. Warren Evans, World Bank, presented the Bank’s recent report entitled “Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change,” noting the report can help countries determine how to efficiently use scarce adaptation resources. He highlighted key lessons from the report, including that: the impacts of climate change will be more costly if adaptation measures are not undertaken now; economic development is the best way to adapt; and tackling the root causes of poverty will reduce vulnerability of communities.

David Bresch, SwissRe, discussed findings from recent studies conducted by his organization and partners on the cost of climate change adaptation in different countries, including Tanzania, Samoa, China, Mali, Guyana and India. He said key variables in determining adaptation costs include: current climate risk estimates; projected economic growth; and future estimated risks presented by climate change. He said adaptive measures include: reef and mangrove revival; coastal zoning; sea walls; beach nourishment; coastal stilts; and rigorous building codes.

Axel Michaelowa, University of Zurich, discussed efficiency in adaptation financing. Underlining the difficulty in monetizing human life for funding purposes, he discussed research on effective adaptation indicators, project ranking systems, and incentives. He presented three potential indicators: Saved Wealth (SW), as related to infrastructure, property, natural resources and services; Saved Health (SH), as related to Disability Adjusted Life Years Saved (DALYs), which is based on mortality and disability; and Environmental Benefits (EBs). He said projects can be ranked by comparing project costs to savings using the different indicators and then calculating an “adaptive ranking value.” He recommended that adaptation funding provide incentives for long-term performance.

Facilitated by Saleemul Huq, IIED, participants discussed various issues related to adaptation finance, including Huq’s suggestion that the world’s poorest people be prioritized.