Madame Chair

Forest Mitigation actions are of great importance, but we should not see forest as only sinks or carbon storages. Forest are the home of local communities and indigenous people. They are places with great biodiversity.

The forest definitions currently used in the UNFCCC do not distinguish natural forests from plantations. It is important that this definitional anomaly be fixed to ensure that the current problems associated with LULUCF do not negatively affect the outcome in forest mitigation actions.

In forest related actions we should fully recognize and guarantee indigenous peoples rights. The participation of local communities and indigenous people in the management of forest should be streightenen. In that regard we expect to see a stronger language in the new revised text.

We don’t see forest related actions as a part of any future clean development mechanism. Forest mitigation actions should ensure national sovereignty control over related activities and should not be project based. Each developing country should present a national plan of action for its international support.

Madame chair, we are very concerned because we see that REDD  is being used to promote a new market mechanism and a new offsetting mechanism that will allow developed countries to further shift the burden of mitigation on to developing countries.

The funding for forest mitigation actions should come from public funding. All forest mitigation activities including capacity building, readiness and full implementation should be financed through the Multilateral Climate Fund that should be established under the COP. The establishment of such a funding window supported by an expert group or committee must ensure the predictable, adequate and timely access to financial resources for developing countries for the implementation of Article 4.1(d) of the Convention.

Forest should not be the new business of the XXI century. Market mechanisms need certainty and in order to obtain it we begin to see proposals toward the establishment of so called carbon rights that can lead us to the privatization of forest, but also to the privatization of  land, rivers and biodiversity that are in the forest.

We encourage the support for forest mitigation actions but we really call to all the countries to analyze in a very deep manner the consequences of the carbon market mechanisms that are promoted in relation to forests.

Bolivia considers that this is a vital issue and that should not be solved in venues outside the UNFCCC and this AWG-LCA.

Thank You