41 / 68
CARBON POOLS AND MULTIPLE BENEFITS OF MANGROVES
ASSESSMENT FOR REDD+ IN CENTRAL AFRICA
41
highest carbon values possible. This report
thus presents a strong case for policy-makers
in Central Africa to include mangroves in
national and regional REDD+ readiness plans
and strategies.
Unfortunately, these valuable ecosystems were
cleared at a rate of 17.7% for the region over
10 years (1.77% per year) from 2000 to 2010,
although there seems to be significant grow
back and the net loss rate was only 1.58% over
the same period (0.16% per year). The rate of
clearing in protected areas was an average
of 12.2% over the same 10 year period with
net loss of 1.3% over 10 years. This implies
that there might be a lack of enforcement
in the mangrove protected areas, and the
enforcement capacity in the protected areas
should be reinforced. However, it should be
verified when the protected areas were put in
place and the trajectory of mangrove cover,
since the protected areas were declared, before
assessing their effectiveness.
As well as carbon benefits, mangroves also
provide multiple benefits to communities
living in their vicinity. The multiple benefits
of mangroves can exceed the value of carbon,
and this study has shown that mangroves
could provide values up to the equivalent of
USD 11,286 per ha in seawall replacement,
USD 7,142 per ha in benefits for protection of
rural infrastructure against shoreline erosion
(151,948 USD per ha for urban mangroves),
USD 545 (49.53 tons of wood) per ha per year
per household in wood consumption and USD
12,825 per ha per year in fisheries benefits.
The benefits of tourism are still very small,
with opportunities for growth. Furthermore,
the carbon values have not been capitalized
upon yet, as no carbon finance mechanism
(either through funds or carbon markets)
exist for mangroves in the region despite
the high potential. At the time of writing,
the prices of carbon credits are at an all-time
low and carbon market projects are often
not financially viable given the high upfront
costs, the high transaction costs and the
low market price of carbon. This may evolve
in the coming years with negotiations on a
global climate agreement. Carbon finance
can also nonetheless be available through a
combination of non-market and market based
approaches, for instance, through national
REDD+ funding arrangements.
At the time of writing, the prices of carbon
credits are at an all-time lowand carbonmarket
projects are often not financially viable given
the high upfront costs, the high transaction
costs and the low market price of carbon. New
methodologies for the Clean Development
Mechanism and for voluntary market
standards have recently been developed
so an increase in mangrove carbon market
projects is possible in the future, however
currently the incentives for this are low and
only afforestation/reforestation projects are
permissible (meaning that avoided emissions
from conservation of pristine mangroves are
not currently taken into account). Also, the
implementation and transaction costs of small
scale projects will always strongly challenge
economic effectiveness and success, and
possibly prevent any scaling up. New
methodologies for carbon accounting are
© Günther Klaus