Key Arguments Against Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) PDF Print E-mail
CTW, GJEP and IEN | Monday, 20 June 2011
REDDkey_arguments2.gif No to REDD+!  REDD+ is still being negotiated. There are many who defend REDD+ for valuing ecosystems services; there are others who see it as the only way to protect forests and stabilize the climate. But whatever form REDD+ takes, even if it includes Human Rights safeguards, it will be designed to allow industrialized countries and polluting industries like Shell, BP and Rio Tinto to continue polluting. Corporations and Northern countries responsible for the climate crisis need to take responsibility for their own emissions by addressing the structural changes necessary to be made in the North and stopping pollution at the source. Human rights, environmental rights and cultural practices of forest-dependent and Indigenous Peoples must be protected from REDD+.
download [PDF 260KB] 
in the media
creativecommons 2024  Carbon Trade Watch