Page 1

REDDOGRAPHY


REDDOGRAPHIES

1.

INTRODUCTION

a report by:

2.

PREVENTING DEFORESTATION

Lorenzo Aprigliano Achille Viggo Calegari Guido Chiefalo Alessandro Piacentini Giacomo Traldi Laura Varisco Politecnico di Milano Scuola del Design Laurea Magistrale in Design della Comunicazione 2째 Anno - Sezione C3 - 2011/2012

2.1.

REDD & FUNDS

3.

CONTROVERSIES ABOUT REDD

4.

MAPPING

5.

RE-MAPPING

6.

DIGITAL METHODS

7.

CONCLUSIONS

Docenti: Prof. Paolo Ciuccarelli Prof. Donato Ricci Prof. Salvatore Zingale Prof. Stefano Mandato

2


Chapter 1 Introduction GLOBAL WARMING & CLIMATE CHANGE

TROPICAL FORESTS

Earth’s current rise in co2 levels, and consequently in temperature, is having a harsh effect on its croplands, pastures and forestry products.

Tropical forests cover about 15% of the world’s land surface and contain about 25% of the carbon in the terrestrial biosphere. But they are being rapidly degraded and deforested resulting in the emission of heat-trapping carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Roughly 13 million hectares – an area the size of Nicaragua – are converted to other land uses each year1. This loss accounts for a fifth of global carbon emissions, making land cover change the second largest contributor to global warming. Forests therefore play a vital role in any initiative to combat climate change.

Climate change increases the amount of population at risk of hunger, especially in the regions of Sub-Saharan Africa, but it might be lowered by choosing specific socio-economic policies. While moderate warming may be beneficial to crop and pasture yields in mid-to-high regions, it will have an adverse effect in low-latitude regions which will immediately face a drop in production. Apart from temperature, farming and forestry production is also severely influenced by the increased frequency and harshness of extreme climate events, as proven by the unexpected drought that Europe faced in 2003.

Forest resources directly support the livelihoods of 90% of the 1.2 billion people living in extreme poverty and are home to nearly 90% of the world’s terrestrial biodiversity. Local communities depend on forests as a source of fuel, food, 3


INTRODUCTION

medicines and shelter. The loss of forests jeopardizes poverty alleviation. Indigenous and forest-dependent peoples are stewards of their forests, providing the rest of humanity with vital ecosystem services. Climate change will hit the poorest hardest and so reducing deforestation will help build their resilience to climate impacts. At local to global scales, forests provide essential ecosystem services beyond carbon storage such as watershed protection, water flow regulation, nutrient recycling, rainfall generation and disease regulation. Old growth forests also soak up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, offsetting anthropogenic emissions. Protecting tropical forests has a double-cooling effect, by reducing carbon emissions and maintaining high levels of evaporation from the canopy.

THE CAUSES OF DEFORESTATION The causes of deforestation are multiple and complex and vary from country to country. Local pressures arise from communities using forests to provide sources of food, fuel and farmland. Poverty and population pressure can lead inexorably to the loss of forest cover, trapping people in perpetual poverty. Whilst millions of people still cut down trees to make a living for their families, a major cause of deforestation is now largescale agriculture driven by consumer demand. In recent decades deforestation has shifted from a largely state-initiated to an enterprise-driven process. The drivers of the demand for agricultural land vary globally. In Africa, it is primarily small-scale subsistence farming. In South America, it is large-scale farming enterprises, producing beef and soya for export markets. In South East Asia, the driver is somewhere between the two,

with palm oil, coffee and timber the main products. Demand for timber also drives deforestation and therefore contributes to land-use change emissions.

4


Chapter 2 Preventing Deforestation The Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC allows afforestation and reforestation projects within developing countries, geared to offset emissions in developed countries. There is little uptake as yet for forest projects within either process. There is also a growing voluntary market in tree planting to offset carbon dioxide emissions. There is some debate over its effectiveness, and standards have been called for to better document the longterm carbon storage benefits.

UNEP has identified a number of immediate priorities on taking action against deforestation: • Rapid and integrated assessment of forests and their services, including carbon and co-benefits, and of deforestation pressures. Investment in developing countries will need to be targeted, based on costs, benefits and risks. • Spatial planning tools, to identify priority areas for action, based on information on carbon, deforestation risk and co-benefits. • Methodologies and tools for the establishment of baselines and for whole-system carbon accounting and measurement.

5


PREVENTING DEFORESTATION

• Models and scenarios to identify the consequences of different approaches and alternative pathways. • Common monitoring and reporting guidance for carbon emissions and co-benefits, including the assessment of impacts of changes in forest management and of any displacement of land use change into non-target ecosystems. Assessment of success in the demonstration phase is crucial to inform any post-2012 agreement. • A global monitoring system for reforestation projects and forest cover changes.

The basic idea behind Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) is simple: Countries that are willing and able to reduce emissions from deforestation should be financially compensated for doing so. Previous approaches to curb global deforestation have so far been unsuccessful, however, and REDD provides a new framework to allow deforesting countries to break this historic trend. REDD is primarily about emissions reductions. The Bali Action Plan decided at the Conference of the Parties (COP) at its thirteenth session states that a comprehensive approach to mitigate climate change should include: “Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries”

A fundamental milestone was achieved at COP 11 in Montreal in 2005 when Papua New Guinea and Costa Rica supported by eight other Parties proposed a mechanism for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in Developing Countries. The proposal received wide support from Parties and the COP established a contact group and thereafter began a two year process to explore options for REDD. This decision resulted in a wide range of Parties and observers over this period submitting proposals and recommendations to the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technical Advice to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and degradation.

6


Chapter 2.1 Funds REDD FUNDINGS Climate Funds Update (CFU) data reports that $446 million was approved for REDD finance between 2008 and November 2011, of which $252 million has been disbursed. Today, REDD+ represents 13% of total climate finance. There has There is general agreement on the need for countries to have time and resources to prepare and build capacity for REDD+ implementation. The adoption of a phased approach allows countries with different circumstances to pilot and mainstream REDD+ actions, allowing necessary flexibility for countries to develop portfolios that combine fundbased (public) and market-based (private) sources of funding. Several major bilateral and multilateral funding initiatives have recently been created to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation plus conservation (REDD+).

Brazil has received the largest volume of REDD+ finance through its Amazon Fund. Public and private finance may be able to play complementary roles in delivering REDD+ finance: while public sources are essential in the initial preparation stages, the private sector may play a role in financing REDD+ implementation. Concerns over the scope of REDD+ financing, benefit sharing, effective stakeholder participation and the need for safeguards to avoid negative environmental and social impacts persist. The following initiatives all spend 100% of their funding in REDD+. • The Amazon Fund • The UN-REDD Programme • The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) • The Forest Investment Program (FIP) • The Congo Basin Forest Fund (CBFF) • Norway’s International Climate and Forests Initiative (ICFI). 7


FUNDS

The UN REDD Programme, a multidonor trust fund that aims to help reduce global emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries. It was established in 2008 by three UN Agencies: the UNEP, UNDP and FAO. Through its initial country programmes in Africa, Asia and Latin America, it is supporting national governments prepare and implement national REDD-plus strategies. As of September 2011, $80 million has been approved for project implementation, with a total of $63 million disbursed for 14 UN-REDD national programs. The UN-REDD programme has taken unique steps to engage civil society and Indigenous People’s groups, who are represented as full members on its governing policy board. It has developed guidance on the engagement of Indigenous Peoples and other Forest Dependent Communities, and worked with civil society to explore approaches

and tools to address governance issues as they relate to REDD+ implementation. The Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) is a World Bank pilot programme launched at the Bali COP in 2007, with the dual objectives of building capacity for REDD+ in developing countries and testing a programme of performancebased incentive payments in a small number of pilot countries. Thirtyseven forest developing countries (14 in Africa, 15 in Latin America and the Caribbean, and eight in Asia-Pacific) are participants in the FCPF. It consists of a Readiness Mechanism ($202 million), designed to assist developing countries reach a capacity level at which they will be ready to participate in a future system for positive incentives for REDD+, and a Carbon Fund ($118 million), intended to provide payments for verified emission reductions. The readiness mechanism has disbursed $5 million for readiness

preparation grants in 12 countries. 5 countries have been approved to participate in the Carbon Fund, which was made operational in May 2011. $578 million has been pledged to the Forest Investment Program (FIP) of the World Bank Climate Investment Funds (CIFs). The FIP became operational in 2009, with the objective of directing scaled up finance to reduce deforestation and forest degradation and to promote sustainable forest management, including by addressing the drivers of deforestation in a small number of pilot countries. Significant time and effort was spent on the design of the FIP. In June 2011, investment plans for the CongoKinshasa ($60 million) and Burkina Faso ($30 million) were provisionally endorsed. Investment Plans for Brazil, Ghana, Indonesia, Laos, Mexico and Peru are also under development.

The Congo Basin Forest Fund (CBFF) was set up as a multi-donor fund in 2008 to protect the forests in the Congo Basin. It aims to support the people and institutions of Congo Basin countries to manage their forests and help local communities find livelihoods that are consistent with the conservation of forests and reduced rates of deforestation. As of November 2011, the CBFF, which is managed by the African Development Bank, had approved $20 million in funding and disbursed $16 million to 14 projects. The government of Brazil has established the Amazon Fund to help prevent, monitor and combat deforestation, as well as to promote the preservation and sustainable use of forests in the Amazon Biome. It has approved almost $127 million in funding for 20 projects to date, and disbursed $33 million to 8 forestry projects. 8


FUNDS

Germany supports REDD+ programs through its International Climate Initiative and has approved and disbursed $103 million for 29 REDD projects between 2008 and 2011. Australia’s International Forest Carbon Initiative (IFCI) is a $48 million bilateral initiative focused on building monitoring capacity for REDD+, working primarily in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea. There has been no further disbursement of funding through the IFCI in 2011, however. Bilateral development assistance agencies have engaged with forest related issues for decades, including through tropical forest conservation programs focused on biodiversity. Such programs continue and may contribute to the success of REDD+ over the longer term.

DELIVERING FUNDS Delivering REDD+ finance has taken more preparatory work, capacity and tailoring than initially envisaged. Multilateral institutions financing REDD+ have made significant progress, and experience to date will inform and facilitate future implementation. Alongside this, Annex II countries are providing increasing volumes of finance through bilateral channels. There remains very little transparency around these bilateral arrangements. As REDD+ finance is not based on a compliance mechanism, but is supported by voluntary efforts, its financial mechanisms exhibit a number of shortcomings in ensuring effective delivery of REDD+ projects. Among the main obstacles are the tensions between the necessity to prevent deforestation at a global and national level, and the need to ensure that REDD+ activities are

tailored to the characteristics of different areas both between and within countries. The effective engagement of all affected stakeholders – particularly civil society organisations, forest dependent communities, women and Indigenous Peoples groups—in the design and implementation of effective national REDD+ strategies is essential. Strategies need to be designed to effectively target the drivers of deforestation, while addressing failures of governance that allow deforestation and forest degradation to persist. In this context, ensuring that the benefits of REDD+, including financial benefits, are shared equitably among countries, within countries and within communities, is a major challenge. It is not yet clear how forest-dependent communities who live mostly outside the market economy and often hold only traditional ownership rights might benefit from REDD+ schemes.

Clarification of rights over carbon tenure and traditional uses of forests, including the consideration of the gender dynamics of forest management, will be necessary in developing equitable benefit sharing schemes. Furthermore, robust safeguard policies to ensure that programs do not have negative environmental and social impacts will play an important role. A lack of analysis and consideration of the full value (including intangible benefits) forest owners and users place on forests in many developing countries is a further impediment to REDD+. Determining people’s willingness to accept compensation for benefits foregone as well as a clarification of which forest benefits cannot be replaced with income could be a useful way forward that can also enhance meaningful and broad stakeholder participation. Visualizing such information can also help clarify the benefits and hidden costs of REDD+. 9


FUNDS

DONORS

FUNDS

Amazon Fund

Australia

Bolivia

Bp Canada Cdc Climate Denmark European Union

Brazil Burkina Faso Cambodia

Finland France

Cameroon Central African Republic Colombia

Germany Interest (From Fund) Interest (From Participating Organizations) International Climate Fund (Uk > Etf/icf > Fcpf ) Italy

RECEIVERS Africa

Congo Congo Basin Forest Fund

Japan

Costa Rica Ecuador Ethiopia

Netherlands Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

Gabon Ghana Global Guyana Indonesia Kenya

Norway

Forest Investment Program

Laos Liberia Nepal Panama Papua New Guinea

Spain

International Forest Carbon Initiative

Switzerland The Nature Conservancy United Kingdom UN-REDD Programme United States

Paraguay Peru Philippines Regional Solomon Islands Tanzania Uganda Vanuatu Vietnam Zambia

legend: pledged deposited pledged deposited

10


Chapter 3 Controversies about REDD According to the publication, “The Little REDD Book”, the basic idea behind Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) is simple: Developing countries that are willing and able to reduce emissions from deforestation should be financially compensated for doing so. However, according to many Indigenous Peoples, REDD is CO2lonialism of Forests because it allows Northern polluters to buy permits to pollute or “carbon credits” by promising not to cut down forests and plantations in the South. The newspaper The Australian calls REDD a “classic 21st century scam emerging from the global climate change industry. REDD will probably include forests in the carbon market which raises a crucial property rights issue: REDD commodifies and privatizes the air and forests. Carbon traders require legal title to the carbon in the forests or rights to the land. REDD

projects that utilize carbon market financing could also generate profits for loggers, polluters and forest destroyers and reduce forests to mere carbon sequestration experiments. REDD-type projects already exist on the voluntary carbon market without a clear and agreed upon framework that ensures Indigenous land and forest rights, land tenure reforms and good governance. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is negotiating a mechanism for implementing REDD in the postKyoto Protocol 2012+ framework. “World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility ultimate goal is to jump-start a forest carbon market.” The World Bank isn’t waiting for the UN to adopt a REDD implementation framework, it has moved forward with its own REDD-type projects through R-PINs (Readiness Plan Idea Notes) and 11


FUNDS

through its other carbon and climate funds.The UN-REDD Program is also moving forward with its own initiative set up by UNDP, UNEP, FAO and the World Bank. Additionally, governments, polluting industry, private sector and large NGOs are investing in carbon market REDD initiatives with no agreed upon policies that address Indigenous Peoples’ concerns. There are hundreds of REDD-type pilot projects in the world and many of them violate Indigenous Peoples’ rights and have resulted in militarization, evictions, fraud, disputes, conflicts, corruption, coercion, conmen, crime, plantations and 30-100 year contracts, deals with oil companies and other so-called “climate criminals”. Furthermore, economic speculation with carbon credits from REDD may contribute to the next market crash and Indigenous Peoples could lose out if their “benefits” are subject to the volatile price of carbon.

Lastly, Indigenous Peoples could be held liable if REDD projects fail due to natural ecological or climate change-related disasters such as floods, droughts, forest fires, storms, pests or plagues. The going price for carbon credits from offsets is USD $25 to $35 but a REDD credit is calculated at as little as USD $4 which is more than 6 to 8 times cheaper. For big polluters, like oil companies and the United States, it will be cheaper to buy permits to pollute from REDD than to reduce emissions. Industrialized countries could find it easy to fulfill much of their targets with cheap REDD offset credits. According to The Economist, REDD “will push down the price. Companies would then buy cheap credits and continue doing business as usual rather than cutting their own emissions.” It’s just “trading thin air.”

According to the Director of NASA, James Hansen, the world’s most distinguished climatologist, “industrialized countries could offset 24-69% of their emissions via the CDM and REDD thus avoiding the necessary domestic cuts that are required to peak emissions around 2015 in line with avoiding dangerous climate change.” For many, the much trumpeted US climate change legislation is “counterfeit.

12


Chapter 4 Mapping Experts on all sides of the debate, from international police to politicians to conservationists, have warned this week that REDD may be impossible to monitor and may already be leading to fraud. The UN itself accepts there are “high risks”. Interpol, the world’s leading policing agency, said this week that the chances were very high that criminal gangs would seek to take advantage of REDD schemes, which will be largely be based in corruption-prone African and Asian countries. Most of the countries rich in forests are also home to some of the world’s most corrupt politicians and uncontrolled logging companies, who stand to make billions of dollars if they can get REDD projects approved, and the fraud could include claiming credits for forests that do not exist or were not protected or by land grabs. While there are so many controversial on-going situations that the project itself could be considered

controversial, it’s quite clear that REDD’s situation needs serious clarifying in order to fully comprehend it’s mechanisms, it’s relationships between countries and funds. VERSUS With Density Design’s tool Versus, it was possible to understand the main themes of online discussion and press about REDD. By usign the Google Query “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation” it was possible to extract the most important keywords resulting from this topic. As geographical locations were the most important and recurring set of keywords, the most obvious answer was that geography plays the most important role in REDD. This is the starting point in truly understanding REDD’s workflow and function. 13


AFRICA

EU

R

NO

RTH

OCCO MOR IA R ALGE ROON CAME A GHAN IA LIBER TOGO INA FASO BURK

E OP

VERSUS VISUALIZATION

S O UT H ZAMBIA CONGO KENYA RWUAND A MADAGA SCAR TANZANIA SOUTH AF RICA

ST

EA ST

AS

TH

CO S BO TA R IC L EC IVIA A U HO ADO R N PA DUR R A GU AGUA S Y Y ME ANA X GR ICO E PA NAD N A PE AMA RU

SOU

UNITED STA

N O RT H

INEA

PRIVATE FINCANCE

NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

KNOWLEDGE NETWORK

O CEA NIA

GU PAPUA NEW FIJI TUVALU AUSTRALIA

TES

AME

RIC

A

IA

IA D AL O SIA D ES EP B Y N N N AM ALA ILA PPI M C A LI A M TH HI ETN NA AN SIA P I V HI PAN NM NE C A YA O J M ND I

M O GD N IN AY K IO D W N R E E Y U O T C N K N NI AN MA AR AN U R R M PE F E N O G E U D R E

WE

IN D PA IA K AZ IST A E KY RBA N R I SR GYZ JAN I KA LAN STAN N K TA TIP A J U IR IKIS R A TA RU N N SS IA

RESEARCH

14


Chapter 5 Re-mapping As previously mentioned, there are many characteristics in REDD that at first sight appear controversial; much criticism is being moved against it and fundings and geography appear to play the main role within REDD’s complicated set of rules and behaviours. The concept behind this essay is therefore to conduct an extended quantitative analysis of online resources and documentation, foreseeing the possibility of outlining underlying schemes and possible obscure situations in REDD and REDD’s fundings.

Using digital methods for quantitative research, this essay mainly explores this network and every involved country’s specific weight by extrapolating three main sets of information: • The actual network weight of every involved country • The relationships that join the involved countries • The redrawn flag of every involved country based upon their specific sensitivity to the project’s themes.

Countries have a geographical physical dimension and outline but their “involvement weight” in REDD’s controversial situation greatly varies upon their implications into this project. This weight must be determined and redrawn according to their network of actions. 15


Chapter 6 Digital Methods To carry on with this essay’s concept and developing useful methods capable of sorting REDD’s difficult-to-read situation, three main questions need to be gradually answered. • Where REDD is mentioned • How REDD is mentioned • Which countries are mentioned by REDD These three main questions can and will be answered by this research protocol.

1. CREATING THE INITIAL CORPUS In creating the starting corpus the research started from three Google queries: “REDD”, “REDD+” and “Reducing emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation”. The first 100 results were extracted for each of the search terms through Harvester and a total of 199 were at last manually handpicked. By using the three main names of the REDD project it was possible to obtain a substantial and useful list for the initial Corpus. 2. CREATING THE SPECIFIC CORPUS Earlier generic results were refined researching the most relevant 5 pages related to REDD. This step brought 499 total pages.

16


DIGITAL METHODS - RESEARCH PROTOCOL

3. EXPANDING THE SPECIFIC CORPUS

4. CLEANING

5. DOMAIN & PAGE EXTRACTION

6. DOMAIN & PAGE GEO-LOCALIZATION

To expand the list, corpus pages were processed into a crawler. This process examined and saved a network of 58.000 links, a useful resource that helps and deepens the understanding of this phenomena and it’s relationships.

The pages obtained by the Crawler process were cleaned out by deleting the pages within a unique domain and using a scraper set to the keyword “REDD” to exclude irrelevant results. The list was therefore reduced to 5.175 links.

From 5.175 links, 2.984 target pages were extracted together with their relative 1.166 domains, expanding the corpus into two parts: one dedicated to unique domain names (1.285 in total) and one dedicated only to pages (3.483). This sorting started two separate research branches, the first focusing on domain geolocalization to count the amount of domains belonging to which nation, and the second focusing on semantic analysis of every page.

As finding out where REDD is a known issue was the first priority, the domain list was passed through GEO-IP to analyze the domain’s home countries. Geo-localization dug through a total of 38 countries, separating donors, receivers and outsiders. This ouput was synchronized with the pages corpus to have a better view of their distribution.

17


DIGITAL METHODS - RESEARCH PROTOCOL

7. SEMANTIC ANALYSIS

8. RESULT SORTING

9. NEW FLAGS

10. GENERAL DISCUSSION

To know in which terms REDD is mentioned throughout the world, the corpus categorization into countries helped proceeding with the pages’ semantic analysis by using Alchemy. This procedure provided only enough material to understand 27 of the original 38 countries.

Results from the semantic analysis where divided into two branches: mentioned countries and mentioned keywords.

Color-coded keywords allowed a redesign of the countries’ flags by a visual quantification of the amount of times a certain category of keyword is used

By using the link between used keywords and their belonging categories a global network of keywords and countries was created, its purpose being a visualization of common discussion patterns. From this network keywords related to city names, “Climate Change”, “Redd”, “Forest” and “Carbon” were excluded in order not to contaminate this visual pattern. For the same reason, keywords that occur just one or twice are so small they are almost invisible but still their connection is made clearly visible. The circles are sized according to the number of connections they are related to.

• Geography relationship: The list of countries mentioned by the 27 analyzed countries was helpful in understanding geography and the relationships within different parts of the world, integrating the already-existing records of domain geo-localization. • Word sorting In finding out how REDD is mentioned, the resulting keywords were organized by relevance and, choosing the first 20 for every country, have been associated with a color scheme depending on their category or argument of discussion: ENVIRONMENT, SOCIAL, ECONOMY, OTHER.

18


RESEARCH PROTOCOL GOOGLE QUERIES (100) REDD, (100) REDD+, (100) “Reducing Emission from Deforestation and Forest Degradation”

HARVESTER

FIRST CORPUS 199 pages

MANUAL SEARCH

SPECIFIC CORPUS

ALCHEMY API

Selection of the 5 most relevant pages for each generic domain

499 pages

Semantic analysis for every country Set to concepts, entity, keywords Results: 27 of the original 38 countries

CRAWLER

RESULTS SORTING

Depth: 2; Properties: check relevance, try to identify actor. Results: about 58.000 link

Results divided into two branches: countries and words

MANUAL CLEANING

ORGANIZATION

Deletion of links with unique domain

Words selected by relevance and organized by categories

SCRAPER

GEPHI

Keyword REDD delete pages with no reults. Results: 5175 links

Semantic relation between countries

EXTRACTION

PAGES

Selection of unique pages and relative domains

3.483 pages

GEOGRAPHY

REDD DATA

DOMAINS

GEO-IP

GEO-LOCALIZATION

found on climatefundupdate.org

1.285 domains

Geo-localization of hosts Results: 38 countries

Mapping speaking and mentioned countries with their relations

GEPHI

GEPHI

Relations between REDD countries

Geographical relations of REDD discussion

SEMANTIC NET COUNTRY FLAGS COUNTRY FILES


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

new geography

legend: donor receiver outsider

20


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

indegree connection Each country and each fund is represented by a circle scaled on the base of incoming links to other entities.

Regional - Asia NP LA

BF CR PA

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

LR

GY

CO

GH

CM

CF

GA

EC

AfricaUG KE

BR

BO

PH

ID

TZ

CD

PE

KHVN

ET

SB VU

PY

Amazon Fund

PG

ZM AU

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

UN-REDD Programme

Congo Basin Forest Fund

Forest Investment Program

International Forest Carbon Initiative

legend: donor receiver fund

Global

21


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

outdegree connection

NO CA

Each country and each fund is represented by a circle scaled on the base of outer links to other entities.

NL ES

US

FI

DK

GB

DE

FR CH IT

JP

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

AU

Amazon Fund

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

UN-REDD Programme

Congo Basin Forest Fund

Forest Investment Program

International Forest Carbon Initiative

legend: donor receiver fund

CDC The Nature Climate Conservancy

BP

EU

Interest

Interest

(From Fund) (from participating organizations)

22


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

pledged funds by country

DK

GB

CA

Localization of the pledged money flows. The size of the circles is determined by the amount of money pleadged by a country (blue) or by a fund (red). Each stroke weight is based on the amount of money “transfered”.

FI

NO

NL DE FR CH ES

US

IT

Regional - Asia

JP

NP LA

BF CR PA

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

LR

GY

CO

GH

CM

CF

GA

EC PE

AfricaUG KE

PH

ID

TZ

CD

BR

KHVN

ET

BO

SB VU

PY

Amazon Fund

PG

ZM AU

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

UN-REDD Programme

Congo Basin Forest Fund

Forest Investment Program

International Forest Carbon Initiative

legend: donor receiver fund

* Circles and edges weighted on pledged money

CDC The Nature Climate Conservancy

BP

EU

Interest

Interest

(From Fund) (from participating organizations)

Global

23


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

deposited funds by country

DK

GB

CA

Localization of the actually deposited money flows. The size of the circles is determined by the amount of money deposited by a country (blue) or by a fund (red). Each stroke weight is based on the amount of money transfered.

FI

NO

NL DE FR CH ES

US

IT

Regional - Asia

JP

NP LA

BF CR PA

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

LR

GY

CO

GH

CM

CF

GA

EC

AfricaUG KE

SB VU

PY

Amazon Fund

PG

ZM

BR

BO

PH

ID

TZ

CD

PE

KHVN

ET

AU

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

Congo Basin Forest Fund

UN-REDD Programme

Forest Investment Program

International Forest Carbon Initiative

legend: donor receiver fund

* Circles and edges weighted on deposited money

CDC The Nature Climate Conservancy

BP

EU

Interest

Interest

(From Fund) (from participating organizations)

Global

24


REDD FUNDING SYSTEM

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

pledged&deposited

FI

NO DK

GB

CA

NL DE FR CH ES

US

IT

Regional - Asia

JP

NP LA

BF CR PA

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

LR

GY

CO

GH

CM

CF

GA

EC

AfricaUG KE

SB VU

PY

Amazon Fund

PG

ZM

BR

BO

PH

ID

TZ

CD

PE

KHVN

ET

AU

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

Congo Basin Forest Fund

UN-REDD Programme

Forest Investment Program

International Forest Carbon Initiative

legend: donor receiver fund

CDC The Nature Climate Conservancy

BP

EU

Interest

Interest

(From Fund) (from participating organizations)

Global

25


FIRST CORPUS - HOSTS

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

localization GeoIP Gephi NO GB

CA

SE

DK NL

IE

DE

BE FR

CH IT

US

HK

IN VN ET

LK SG

ID

BR

ZA

AU

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Circles dimensions based on the number of hosts for each country

26


CRAWLING NETWORK

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

corpus expansion DensityCrawler Gephi NO CA

GB IE

FI

SE

RU

DK NL BE LU CH FR

DE AT IT

US

CN

AE

MX

KR

JP

HK

IN VN

ET

PH

LK MY

SG

ID

BR NC ZA

AU

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Circles dimensions based on the number of links between two countries

27


SPEAKING COUNTRIES

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

who is speaking? Localization of the countries whose websites gave us back results from the semantic analysis AlchemyAPI Gephi

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Circles dimensions based on the quantity of countries each state name

28


NAMED COUNTRIES

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

who is named? Localization of the countries named in the semantic analysis AlchemyAPI Gephi

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Circles dimensions based on the quantity each state is named

29


SEMANTIC ANALYSIS

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

who is speaking? who is named? Localization of the speaking countries compared to the visualization of hte countries named in the semantic analysis AlchemyAPI Gephi

climatefundsupdate.org Gephi

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Speaking countries (dark) and named countries (light).

30


SEMANTIC NETWORK

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

who speak about who? who is named by ? Visualization of the quoting flows between countries mapped thanks to the semantic analysis. AlchemyAPI Gephi

legend: donor receiver outsider

* Circles dimensions based on the quantity each state is named. Edges stroke weighted on the naming activity

31


SPECIFIC WORDS

GENERIC WORDS

CARBON MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

SERVICES CARBON

DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE

EARTH EUROPE

NATURAL SYSTEMS EFFICIENT COMMON SECURITY

SMALL BUSINESS CARBON

FOREIGN MINISTERS

COST SINGLE PRICE EUROPE PEAT

TROPICAL

CONSULATE

POLICY

NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

NATIONAL PROGRAMME CARBON PLANET LATEST SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

FOREST CARBON

CASE STUDIES

FUNDING SYSTEMS CONSERVATION DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

AGRICULTURE

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION

ECOLOGY

EXTINCTION

EARTH

COAL

CIVIL SOCIETY

NEW SCHOOL PROGRAMS

OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

JOURNALISM

OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE

AFRICA

DESTINATION CONSULTANCY

DERECHO FORESTAL

IBN MAAOUIA-HOUIMLI

NATURAL RESOURCE

COOLENATION RESOURCE PACK

AMAZON FUND

ARYA RESIDENCES

ECOSYSTEM SERVICES DOCTORATE CARBON EDUCATION

RESEARCH

KALIMANTAN

COP

PREVIOUS OPPOSING STAND

CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL

LAS PALMAS

ENERGY EFFICIENCY EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

LAND CHANGE SALEEMUL HUQ CLEAN CLOTHES KAMPAGNE

DEVELOPMENT VIEWER

BIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL

DANISH RESEARCH COUNCILS

JAN O'SULLIVAN

ASIA PACIFIC REGION VARIOUS SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS

GLOBAL FUND

MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

CEREMONIAL COUNTIES OF ENGLAND

CENTRAL AFRICA

CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE

DEFORESTATION

UNFOLDING ECOLOGICAL CRISIS

ASIA

CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME

ANDRE CORREA

TRAINING WORKSHOP

JOINT IMPLEMENTATION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE

CSDP

PARTNERS SERVICE DELIVERY

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES

PROGRAMME POLICY BOARD

FOREST INITIATIVE

ADAPTATION FUND

INDONESIAN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 2004

CENTRAL KALIMANTAN

METHANE

SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

WEST SUSSEX

HONORARY CONSULATE

BOLSA FLORESTA PROGRAM

ASSESSMENT MANAGERS WIEN ORGANISIERTEN TAGUNG

FOOD SECURITY

CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM

OPERATORS

REMOTE SENSING

ENDANGERED SPECIES

IRISH AID

BINDING CLIMATE DEAL

JENS STOLTENBERG

NON-GOVERNMENTAL INTERNATIONAL NETWORK

GREENPEACE JACQUIE MCGLADE

ENERGY ASSESSOR HUGE TENTS

LEAGUE OF NATIONS INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE

BOTTOM-UP APPROACH

AGUS PURNOMO AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK

SUSTAINABILITY

AFRICA PROGRESS PANNEL

AGENDA 21

INTERNATIONAL TREATY

AMAZONAS SUSTAINABLE FOUNDATION

TARJA HALONEN

IN THE WILD

EMISSIONS TRADING

UNITED NATIONS

PANKAJ GHEMAWAT EVALUATION

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION

DECISIVE ACTION DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

ABDOULIE JANNEH

DIRECTORY OF OPEN ACCESS JOURNALS ADAPTATION FUND BOARD

VIRGILIO VIANA

COST CURVES CLIMATE TALKS

WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE

GREENHOUSE GAS

TROPICAL RAINFOREST

FORESTRY MINISTRY UN CLIMATE TALKS

YANG

SOROS FUND MANAGEMENT

ADANSONIA DIGITATA

TUMBIRA COMMUNITY

SUSILO BAMBANG YUDHOYONO

WORLD CLIMATE SUMMIT

ANWARUL HODA

HUMANITY'S DEMANDS

SECONDARY FOREST

SWISS FEDERAL OFFICE

WEST YORKSHIRE

GLOBAL FOREST INFORMATION SERVICE

RAIN FORESTS

REGULATORY LANDSCAPE AUSTRALIA

BEN MANSOUR-GUEDDES

FOREST DEGRADATION

CARBON MARKET

UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR AFRICA

ENDE NOVEMBER AKTIVISTINNEN

DANIEL NELSON

GOLD CERTIFICATION

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY

PRIMARY FORESTS PYONGYANG

BIODIVERSITY

BIRD

VARIOUS MEASURES

ORANGE RIVER ROOM

READINESS PREPARATION PROPOSALS

SOLOMON ISLANDS MINISTRY OF FORESTS

MAIZE UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN

UN-REDD PROGRAMME POLICY

AMERICA LATINA

SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

PARALLEL EVENT

SHIPPING INDUSTRY

NORWEGIAN GOVERNMENT

PETER WARR CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY

TROPICAL AFRICA

UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE

NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS

INTERNATIONAL TROPICAL TIMBER

EURO ENVIRO AGENCY

AMAZON

POTABLE WATER USAGE

WORLD BANK

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

PROVINCES OF INDONESIA INDONESIAN GOVERNMENT

THREATENED SPECIES

WWF

GERMAN FEDERAL MINISTRY

PEATLANDS

3.200 TIGER

KUNTORO MANGKUSUBROTO

GEORGE MAGNUS ASEAN LEADERS

HUMAN RIGHTS

DR SEAN WEAVER

CARBON FINANCE

TROPICAL FORESTS

ASIA-PACIFIC

SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT

WESTERN SAHARA

CARBON EMISSIONS

POVERTY REDUCTION

CARBON POSITIVE

CARBON ABATEMENT ACCRUE

LOCAL COMMUNITIES

LAND CHANGE MODELER

BASHAR AL-ASSAD

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME

HAYMARKET HOUSE

MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS

ARCGIS

GABRIEL RIBENBOIM ALBERTO PANIAGUA

JACQUES DIOUF

DR MARTIN HEROLD

MARKET PRICE

EVALUATION DEPARTMENT

CARBON CREDITS

RAINFOREST

PEAT SWAMP ORESTS

ASIA-EUROPE ENVIRONMENT FORUM

DR IAN PAYTON

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX WEST MIDLANDS

FOSSIL FUEL

CARBON STOCK

FORESTRY

UN-REDD PROGRAMME

THOMSON REUTERS FOUNDATION

WORLD WAR II

KAMPAR PENINSULA TAE-HWAN KIM

EUROPEAN UNION

SUMATRA

ROMAIN PIRARD

MIKE ANANE

SIEMENPUU FOUNDATION

NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

LATIN AMERICA

WWF'S LIVING PLANET INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR CONSERVATION OF NATURE RED LIST

WANDOJO SISWANTO ASIA-EUROPE FOUNDATION

THAKSIN SHINAWATRA

TROPICAL SPECIES SHORT-LIVED CONTEMPORARY WORKS

HARD ECONOMIC TIMES

MONETARY POLICY

POVERTY

SWEDISH ENVIRONMENTAL SECRETARIAT

INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE

REGIONAL

CARBON DIOXIDE

DIGITAL DIVIDE

DEVELOPED NATIONS

PROPER MAINTENANCE

SECRETARIAT OF THE PACIFIC COMMUNITY

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME NEW SOUTH WALES

GULF OF ADEN GEORGE SOROS POLICY BOARD

PETER HAYES

G3MS LITE AFFILIATE INTERNATIONAL TROPICAL TIMBER ORGANIZATION

PUNJAB AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY

ENERGY CONSUMPTION

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

CAPSICUM ANNUUM

FAO

RIO CONVENTIONS

PRESIDENT OBAMA

WEATHER

GLOBAL ASIA

EAST ASIA

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF FOREST RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS

POLICY BOARD MEETING

FINANCE

SOUTHEAST ASIA CARBON OFFSETS

CLARK LABS

CLARK UNIVERSITY

REDD+ READINESS

SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

AFRICAN UNION

ECOSYSTEM

DAN GUIMBO

NAGOYA PROTOCOL

CORRUPTION ERADICATION COMMISSION

MELANESIA PARC NATIONAL FONDATION ROI BAUDOUIN MR GORDON KONAIRAMO

GERMAN SOCIETY FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL

LAKE VICTORIA

ERKKI TUOMIOJA

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

GREATER LEVERAGE

WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS

MILTON KEYNES

ECONOMICS PALM OIL

KOREAN PENINSULA POWERFUL EXTERNAL ACTORS

POOR COMMUNITIES

MEMBER COUNTRIES

PACIFIC ISLAND

EVICTION

LAND RESOURCE DIVISION

POOR FOREST DWELLERS

PRIVATE SECTOR

INDIRECT DRIVER

REGIONAL PROJECT NATIONAL REDD+ PROCESSES

FOREST TENURE FOREST LANDS

IMPORTANT MEASURE

GOVERNMENT

MANAGEMENT NGO MEDIA OFFICERS

GLOBAL CLIMATE REGIME NATURAL FOREST

SOUTH ASIA EQUITABLE REDD+ IMPLEMENTATION

FOREST AREAS

SOUTH CHINA SEA

CONCEPTUAL ART

INCENTIVE HEADS OF FORESTRY SERVICES WORKSHOP

PACIFIC COMMUNITY

EMISSION REDUCTION

INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

legend: environment

social + economic

environment + social

economic

receiver

social

economic + nature

outsider

* Words’ circles dimensions based on the number of links.

other

donor

generic

specific

32


DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Brazil

Canada

China

Czech Republic

Denmark

Etiopia

Finland

France

Germany

India

Indonesia

Ireland

Italy

Japan

Korea

Luxembourg

Malaysia

Netherlands

New Caledonia

Norway

Philippines

Singapore

United Kingdom

United States 33


DIGITAL METHODS - VISUALIZATION

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Brazil

Canada

China

Czech Republic

Denmark

Etiopia

Finland

France

Germany

India

Indonesia

Ireland

Italy

Japan

Korea

Luxembourg

Malaysia

Netherlands

New Caledonia

Norway

Philippines

Singapore

United Kingdom

United States 34


COUNTRIES THAT MENTION

XX Observed Country

COUNTRIES THAT ARE MENTIONED


AU Australia

35


AT Austria

36


BE Belgium

37


BR Brazil

38


CA United Kingdom

39


CN China

40


CZ Czech Republic

41


CZ Czech Republic

42


DK Denmark

43


ET Ethiopia

44


FI Finland

45


FR France

46


DE Germany

47


IN India

48


ID Indonesia

49


IE Ireland

50


IT Italy

51


JP Japan

52


LU Luxembourg

53


MY Malaysia

54


NL Netherlands

55


NC New Caledonia

56


NO Norway

57


PH Philippines

58


SG Singapore

59


KR South Korea

60


UK United Kingdom

61


US

62


Chapter 7 Conclusion Norway is both REDD’s top investing country and the one who is pledging the most funds at the same time. The “Forest Carbon Partnership” is the fund with the most simultaneously donations towards receiving countries and the most joined by donor countries. Congo, India e Ghana receive financial support from the most funds concurrently. Many investments were originally promised, while much less was actually donated to funds by pledging countries. Even less so is the money which actually got to receiving countries. USA is the most discussing nation about this theme, even if domain names attached to it could possibly belong to foreign countries. As found out through crawler processes, the most prolific discussion axis evolve between USA and Europe as a donor-donor relationship, and between USA and Indonesia (donorreceiver). Norway appears to fall into the USA-European axis.

Most cited countries are mostly donors or receiver, but many outsiders are still mentioned. The semantic network confirms the result outputs of the crawler processes. Donors and outsiders mention mostly generic words, while receivers take more care into using specific words, probably foreseeing and knowing better where and how those funds will be used. Discussion themes vary between countries, as seen in the remapped country flags. Norway is the most involved country within the economic theme, and its most relevant keyword is “Greenhouse Gas”. This result is confirmed by the fact that Norway is Europe’s worst Co2 polluter according to CDIAC’s “List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita”.

63


Profile for DensityDesign

REDDography  

DensityDesign Research Lab. A.Y. 2011-2012. Integrated Course Final Synthesis Studio. Credits: Lorenzo Apriliano, Achille Calegari, Guido C...

REDDography  

DensityDesign Research Lab. A.Y. 2011-2012. Integrated Course Final Synthesis Studio. Credits: Lorenzo Apriliano, Achille Calegari, Guido C...

Advertisement