Think PINC Chiribiquete
THINK PINC
CHIRIBIQUETE
Financing
Solutions for
the Territorial
Sustainable
Land Use Plan
About the Global Canopy Programme
Table of Contents
The Global Canopy Programme is a tropical forest think-tank focused on accelerating the world’s transition to a deforestationfree economy. Our team of policy experts, researchers, communicators, and support staff is based in Oxford, and works
closely with networks of decision-makers in the inancial sector, corporations, government and civil society across the world.
We are dynamic, determined and creative in pursuit of 3 high-level objectives: (1) To grow the forest-friendly economy (2) To
end the global market for deforestation (3) To account for impacts and dependencies on forests.
To ind out more about GCP’s work visit www.globalcanopy.org or write to info@globalcanopy.org
About the FCDS
FCDS is an environmental NGO focused on providing technical support to governments, civil society and private sectors
1. The Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
2. Potential Solutions: Existing Flows of Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.1 Public-Private Partnerships
3
2.2 Redirection of Royalties
5
2.3 Reform of Land Property Tax
6
2.4 Compulsory Investment in Watersheds
6
in sustainable development strategies and land-use regulation. The FCDS team have experts in different areas such as:
anthropology and cultural heritage, protected areas, GIS and mapping, socio-environmental conlict resolution, and
management of territorial conlicts.
3. Potential Solutions: New Flows of Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
3.1 Biodiversity Offsetting
7
Citation
3.2 Carbon Offsetting
7
Lead author: Alexandra Pinzon
3.3 Ecotourism
9
Contributing authors: Angelika Müller, Gleice Lima, Helen Bellield, Jacqueline Wagnon, Nick Oakes, Rachel Pasternack
3.4 Access to Climate Finance
11
Please cite this publication as:
3.5 Conservation Notes
11
Pinzon, A. et al. 2015. Think PINC: Chiribiquete. Global Canopy Programme.
4. Roadmap: The Way Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarollo Sostenible and Parques Nacionales Naturales de
13
4.1 Overarching Recommendations
13
4.2 Next Steps
13
Colombia for their important guidance and feedback in producing this report.
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Funding
This report has been funded by Fondo Patrimonio Natural (http://www.patrimonionatural.org.co), Parques Nacionales de
Colombia (http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co), and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (http://www.moore.org).
The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to the Global Canopy Programme. No representation or warranty (express or implied)
is given by the Global Canopy Programme or any of its contributors as to the accuracy or completeness of the information and opinions contained in this report. The Global
Canopy Programme the activities of which are hosted by The Global Canopy Foundation, a United Kingdom charitable company limited by guarantee, charity number 1089110.
15
1. The Issue
The Chiribiquete National Park and surrounding
buffer zones are strategically important areas
for conservation and sustainable land use. These
areas, spanning both the Amazonian rainforest
and a key biological corridor leading to the Andes,
are under increasing pressure from the expansion
of the agricultural frontier, the development of
hydrocarbon reserves in or very close to the areas,
and infrastructure development such as hydropower
plants and roads.
Armed conlict has also played a signiicant role
in creating environmental pressures in this area.
According to the OECD, land tenure uncertainty
for indigenous populations, illegal land grabbing
because of armed conlict and the consequent
displacement of more than 8% of the population,
have concentrated lands in the hands of a narrow
clique of landowners (OCDE, 2014).
Many habitats - including parks and reserves are located in zones affected by conlict and drug
traficking. As a result, these zones sit outside
of surveillance efforts and the enforcement of
environmental regulations. This is a major reason
why, for example, between 40% and 50% of timber is
felled illegally and commercialised (OCDE, 2014).
Exacerbating these pressures is the fact that public
expenditure on environmental protection is low in
comparison to other OECD Countries at a similar
stage of development, which prevents authorities
from adequately implementing their tasks.
Meanwhile, private expenditure on environmental
protection is only partially monitored and
contributions from key sectors linked to
deforestation are not assessed (OCDE, 2014).
To counter this wave of pressure on the areas
surrounding the Chiribiquete National Park, the
Territorial Sustainable Land Use Plan (TSLUP) is
being developed as a means to proactively invest
in natural capital. If this plan is going to succeed
in conserving ecosystems whilst also ensuring
that regions can develop in a sustainable way, it
must demonstrate that sustainable development
is better than business as usual (natural resource
extraction, deforestation, etc.). To do this requires
making upfront capital investments in sustainable
development, and generating a long-term inancial
return that is dependent upon the sustainable use of
the land and forest.
This report outlines a series of innovative
inancial mechanisms, which can be used by local
stakeholders to raise the capital needed to invest
in sustainable development and generate a long
term inancial return. It focuses irst on a series of
inancial mechanisms that can be used to redirect
existing lows of inance, and then looks further into
the mechanisms which can be leveraged to raise
additional capital. The report ends by outlining a
Roadmap for the implementation of these inancial
mechanisms.
Fig.1 Chiribiquete National Park and buffer zones
HUILA
META
GUAVIARE
CAQUETÁ
PROJECT
AREA
CHIRIBIQUETE
NATIONAL PARK
VAUPÉS
PUTUMAYO
CAQUETÁ
COLOMBIA
1
AMAZONAS
2
2. Potential Solutions:
Existing Flows of Finance
2.1 Public-Private Partnerships
An increasing number of global food and
agriculture companies are recognising the risk that
deforestation presents to their business activities.
In coordination with civil society and governments,
many of these businesses are now attempting to
mitigate these risks by investing in the sustainable
production of key commodities in their supply
chains. This could entail, for example, a consumer
goods company, a local NGO and a municipal
government investing in the development of agroforestry or silvopastoral systems in sustainable use
zones, or the conservation of protected areas. This
type of multi-stakeholder, collaborative effort is
known as a Public Private Partnership (PPP).
A well-known and wide-ranging PPP is the
Tropical Forest Alliance (TFA) 2020. The TFA
2020 brings together governments (e.g. Indonesia,
UK), consumer goods companies (e.g. Unilever,
Nestlé) and civil society (e.g. CDP) to tackle
the deforestation caused by the production of
commodities such as palm oil, soya, beef, pulp and
paper.
Alternatively, a consumer goods company may
also form its own PPP, working with third parties
to purchase sustainable and/or ethically sourced
commodities. For example, Starbucks uses the
CAFÉ and Cocoa Practices to verify that its cocoa
and coffee beans are produced in an ethical and
sustainable way (Starbucks, 2015a; Starbucks,
2015b), and Mondelez International buys Fairtrade
and Rainforest Alliance certiied cocoa (Mondelez,
2015). However, it is unlikely these partnerships
can have the transformative effect needed to move
supply chains towards sustainable production
unless strong company-wide or sectoral targets for
sustainability (e.g. the deforestation reduction target
set by the TFA 2020), accompany them.
© Juan Manuel Cardona Granda
Some of the companies that have signed up to the
objectives of the TFA 2020 are known to be active in
the regions targeted by TSLUP. For example, Nestlé
buys milk from the Caquetá department and is
known to be one of the few multinational companies
active in the Colombian Amazon (Nepstad, 2013).
Two other multinational TFA members, Mondelez
International and Grupo Éxito, are also active in
Colombia, although it is not clear if the products
purchased have been grown in the regions
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park.
Among the TFA’s objectives is “working with
smallhold farmers and other producers on
sustainable agricultural intensiication, promoting
the use of degraded lands and reforestation” (TFA,
2015). This is similar to the type of activities
that would be inanced by TSLUP, and this
complimentary overlap could help facilitate the
fulilment of the TFA and other sustainability
objectives of companies operating in the region. This
could also pave the way for Colombian companies to
engage with PPP’s in the development of sustainable
commodity production as part of TSLUP.
3
2.2 Redirection of Royalties
Royalties are a fee, charge or tax on the extraction
of non-renewable natural resources, normally
minerals and hydrocarbons. Royalties are an
important source of income generation in Colombia,
budgeted to reach COP 18.3 billion over the 201520161 period (Gaceta del Congreso 663, 2014).
However, in 2011 Colombia reformed the royalty
system to ensure a more equitable distribution
of royalties across sub-national jurisdictions and
ethnic groups (República de Colombia, 2012a;
República de Colombia, 2012b).
Before the reform, 80% of resources collected from
royalties were concentrated in the hands of only
17% of the Colombian population (Minminas, 2010).
The new system redistributes the resources through
all Colombian municipalities and departments,
and centralises the control of royalties as a
strategy to halt corruption (Unimedios, 2013).
This redistribution also led to the creation of the
Regional Development Fund to inance projects
contributing to social and economic development,
as well as the Regional Compensation Fund which
inances human development and infrastructure in
the poorest municipalities in Colombia (Minminas,
2010).
The implementation of this new system has
increased the amount of resources allocated to all
the municipalities found within the project area. A
comparison between funds allocated in 2012 and
those allocated for the period of 2013-2014 reveals
that in the worst case scenario, there was still an
increase of around 50% in funding for Solano, while
San Vicente del Caguan experienced the largest
increase, at 136%2. This increased revenue from
royalties is expected to continue over the next
decade3.
the National Development Plan to channel royalties
and leverage private investment into sustainable
development.
Transport and infrastructure dominate the
currently approved projects, with only 6.9% of
resources being allocated to agricultural projects
and 3.6% to environmental and social development
projects (SGR, 2014). In principle, funding for
environmental and sustainable land-use projects
can be scaled up, as reforestation and restoration of
ecosystems and the environment are also priorities
alongside territorial development goals. However,
lack of local capacity to develop projects could
potentially hamper the ability of these lows of
inance to grow in certain regions. In particular,
governments and other stakeholders in poorer
regions need capacity building for project proposal
design, fund management and alignment of projects
with the Amazon Vision4 (UNIMEDIOS, 2013).
They will also need improved capacity to monitor
and enforce regulations and regional targets if this
approach is to be effective (OCDE, 2014).
A barrier to scaling-up investment streams has been
the limited accountability of where and how funds
generated from royalties are spent. A transparent
monitoring and information system is essential to
effectively track the low of inance from royalties,
identify priorities (e.g. buffer zones), and monitor
the environmental and social impacts of projects.
The new General System of Royalties has set aside
1% of revenues to fund such a system, the SMSCE,
to monitor the collection, consolidation, analysis
and veriication of lows of inance generated from
royalties. To promote transparency, the information
on approved projects is available online, however
there is an opportunity to improve the system
through the integration of environmental and social
information as well (SGR, 2014).
To access inance from the funds listed above, local
authorities and indigenous communities must
develop a project and present it to the fund, to be
assessed on whether or not it should be inanced.
All projects must also be aligned with national and
regional development plans, such as the Amazon
Vision - an initiative to reduce carbon emissions
from the Amazonian regions. However, local
municipalities can now use the Contratos Plan of
5
1
2
It would be equivalent to approximately USD 7.6 billion using the exchange rate of COP 2392,46 - TRM for
31 December 2014.
Calculations based only in comparison between the resources for 2012 and those for 2013-2014, according to data
from General Royalties System.
2.3 Reform of Land Property Tax
An important source of revenue for municipalities
in Colombia is the land property tax collected from
property owners5; however Protected Areas and
Indigenous Reserves are exempt from making this
payment (República de Colombia, 1991; República
de Colombia, 1988). Consequently, municipalities
with Indigenous Reserves and Protected Areas
receive less overall revenue as a result.
To mitigate this, municipalities are compensated
for a loss in revenue from Indigenous Reserves
(República de Colombia, 1995), but there is no
such recompense for revenue lost from Protected
Areas. This problem however, is not unique to
Colombia. In Brazil, the National Congress created
the ICMS-Ecológico (ICMS-E) to address the same
issue. However, their tax reform compensates
municipalities for both Protected Areas and
Indigenous Reserves. To facilitate this, Brazilian
states are required to redistribute 25% of their VAT
revenues to municipalities, while states are able to
choose how one quarter of these funds (i.e. 6.25% of
the total) are spent, based on their own criteria.
Using this legislation, Parana State created their
own environmental criteria in 1991 and applied
it to the redistribution of 6.25% of VAT revenues
which compensated the municipalities that had
Protected Areas. As of today, sixteen of Brazil’s
twenty-seven states have now adopted some form
of the ICMS-E. It should be noted however, that the
redistributed funds are not speciically earmarked
for environmental protection or sustainable land
use.
In Colombia, a tax reform such as the ICMS-E could
be used to compensate municipalities for the loss
of revenue from Protected Areas. Building on the
current process to create a National Rural Cadastre,
Colombia could go a step further to formulate
criteria based on compliance with territorial
land-zoning. One potential source of revenue
could be through reforms to the General Revenue
Distribution System (República de Colombia, 1991).
However, to ensure this revenue is being used to
inance sustainable development, lows of inance
must be earmarked (e.g. by hypothecating revenue
through a fund).
2.4 Compulsory Investment in
Watersheds
All natural resource extraction projects, or those
that have to seek an environmental license and use
water directly from a watershed, have to earmark 1%
of their total investment in the project to fund the
recuperation, preservation and monitoring of the
affected watershed (República de Colombia, 1993).
However, even when the project proponent (e.g.
a mining company) presents an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) and an investment
plan for the earmarked funds to the authorities,
departments can only exert control over
environmental outcomes through the approval
process and follow-up inspections by local
authorities. Subsequently, this makes the
mechanism prone to corruption and other forms of
weak enforcement. In addition, while environmental
risks to watersheds are managed at a project level,
investment plans are still needed at landscape
or regional scales to address these risks more
effectively (Chacon & Suarez, 2012).
Another issue is that private expenditure in
environmental protection is only partially
monitored, and contributions from key sectors are
not assessed. This means that no clear information
is currently available about compulsory investment
in watersheds. Compounding these problems
further, compulsory investments in watersheds
are not proportional or even related to the
environmental impact of the projects affecting the
watersheds themselves (Rudas, 2002).
In the short term, any increase in the investment
directed into watersheds needs enhanced
monitoring and public disclosure, a more equitable
distribution of resources, and linking of investments
to their environmental impact. In the long term,
inance could be channelled into a dedicated fund
administered by regional authorities. This will
require a change in law, but it will also raise the
eficiency of investments and increase state control
over environmental outcomes.
3 Embassy of Colombia. 2011. Colombia’s Royalty Reform: Fuelling Fairness, Saving and Equitable Growth
4 Within the new system, some of the better positioned departments have presented proposals for an amount higher
than the available resources, while others are behind in the presentation of proposals (UNIMEDIOS, 2013).
6
3. Potential Solutions:
New Flows of Finance
3.1 Biodiversity Offsetting
3.2 Carbon Offsetting
Biodiversity offsetting is a way to mitigate the
negative outcomes that may result from natural
resource exploitation (ten Kate & Crowe, 2014). For
example, if a mining company is unable to avoid
causing environmental damage, they may choose
to offset that damage by paying for biodiversity
conservation elsewhere (Forest Trends, 2015).
Biodiversity offsetting is usually voluntary, but it
can be part of a national political framework or even
a requirement, such as in the loan screening process
of banks.
Similar to biodiversity offsetting, carbon offsetting
involves a polluter mitigating their impact on the
environment by paying another party to conserve
greenhouse gas emissions. However, carbon
offsetting involves a transaction and the creation of
a inancial asset called an emission reduction (ER)
unit. For example, Drummond might purchase ERs
from a forest community that is actively eschewing
deforestation. It should be noted though, that
in Colombia carbon offsetting is voluntary, and
polluters are not purchasing ERs because they are
legally obligated to do so.
However, biodiversity offsetting is not currently
being implemented at scale, primarily because of
the low capacity of the regulatory bodies responsible
for screening and approving eligible offsetting
projects. To capitalise on existing capacity, a fund
with a proven track-record (such as Patrimonio
Natural or FundePublico), could be used to develop
eligible projects and centrally channel all resources
(FundePublico & WCS, 2013).
In the areas surrounding Chiribiquete National
Park, carbon offsetting can be used to direct
investment into projects that avoid deforestation or
forest degradation, conserve forests, and sustainably
manage or enhance forests. This grouping is known
as ‘REDD+’ activities, and it can be done at two
different scales: the project or the jurisdictional.
At irst glance, given the scale of the buffer zones
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park, the
jurisdictional approach might seem to be the most
appropriate (called JNR7). However, the rules
governing JNR require one government in control of
the entire jurisdictional zone, whereas TSLUP spans
portions of three separate departments.
An exception to this rule is by deining a jurisdiction
in terms of ‘ecoregions’ (VCS, 2014). If the provinces
covered by TSLUP are deined as a single ecoregion
with a body created to govern it, REDD+ activities
could then be implemented and ERs sold to offset
the impact of buyers throughout the world. This
approach has not yet been trialled, so no precedent
exists to validate its viability.
In contrast, at the project scale there is a welldemonstrated pathway for directing investment into
sustainable land use, conservation, and etc. from
large ecosystems that span multiple jurisdictions.
Although it would be around ive times larger than
any other REDD+ project in the world, a project
could be created spanning all of the Chiribiquete
buffer zones as long as it was run by a single
governing entity with the legal mandate to manage
7
6
5 See https://www.gobiernoenlinea.gov.co/web/guest/home/-/government-services/T4719/maximized
Colombia is also considering frameworks to address biodiversity offsets in both marine and freshwater ecosystems.
© CIFOR
As of 2012, it is mandatory in Colombia for all
companies seeking to exploit natural resources to
submit a biodiversity offsetting plan to the licensing
agency ANLA (MADS, 2012). The framework for this
process, called the Manual for Allocating Offsets for
Loss of Biodiversity, sets an ambitious target of zero
net loss of biodiversity6. There are a number of ways
companies can offset their biodiversity impacts,
including inancing the creation or expansion of
public protected areas, establishing voluntary
agreements and incentives for conservation, and
conducting ecological restoration in priority areas.
the entire region (such as Parques Nacionales).
Despite these barriers there are precedents, such
as the Guatecarbon project in Guatemala which
covers around 7.5% of the country’s total land area
and is managed by the Consejo Nacional de Áreas
Protegidas (Carbon Decisions International, 2014).
An alternative and more straightforward approach
would be for the departmental or municipal
governments to jointly manage the area and
share in the revenue generated. For example, in
Zimbabwe the Kariba project spans four provinces
in which all four provincial governments are joint
administrators of the project (South Pole Carbon,
2013).
3.3 Ecotourism
Ecotourism is a form of travel where visitors pay
to see pristine natural habitats (Lindberg, 1997). It
is the fastest growing form of tourism, expanding
at three times the rate of any other sector in the
industry (The International Ecotourism Society,
2012).
While ecotourism has long been in existence in
South-East Asia and Africa, it is only now gaining
traction in Latin America. For example, over recent
years Costa Rica has signiicantly increased its
area under nature preservation in order to boost its
ecotourism industry and consolidate its position as
a leader in this sector. It has now even capitalised a
conservation endowment fund through ecotourism
revenues (Weaver & Lawton 2007).
the government provides long-term tax exemptions
(up to 20 years) for ecotourism businesses (Oxford
Business Group, 2015; PNN, 2014).
Ecotourism could be scaled-up in the buffer zones
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park by offering
tax incentives to local businesses or by expanding
local infrastructure. Perversely however, increased
demand for tourism infrastructure - such as roads
and hotels - can threaten biodiversity and local
communities, as it increases access to and the
habitability of remote areas that were previously
challenging to deforest (Drumm and Moore, 2002).
Nor are all areas within and around Chiribiquete
easy to reach, and some have a signiicant FARC
presence as well (Global Post, 2014).
The 2014-2018 National Development Plan proposes
increasing the presence of green businesses in the
Amazonian, Paciic, Caribbean, Central and Orinoco
regions. Green businesses in these areas would
leverage their ecological competitive advantages
to develop sustainable economic activities that
include ecotourism (DNP, 2014). The region looked
at in this report is in an area of inluence across
three National Parks: Tinigua, La Macarena and
Chiribiquete, making it a prime location for these
green businesses.
However, any increase in the ecotourism industry
must be accompanied by regulatory frameworks
that can ensure environmental and social integrity
(e.g. consultations with indigenous populations on
new ecotourism projects, or limits on the number of
visitors to a national park).
© Dirk Henker
To grow the ecotourism industry in Colombia,
Parques Nacionales Naturales (PNN) distributes
concessions on their land (e.g. national parks) to
leading tourism operators and hotel chains. In 2012,
the national parks managed by PNN had nearly 1
million visitors, representing a 19% annual growth
rate. Operators pay 10% of their income to PNN, and
7
JNR stands for Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ and was developed by the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS).
10
3.4 Access to Climate Finance
3.5 Conservation Notes
Climate inance is any funding that is directed
towards climate change mitigation or adaptation.
Over the coming years, it is expected that the Green
Climate Fund (GCF) will become one of the major
sources of funding for climate inance. The GCF
was created in 2010 under the UNFCCC8 and will
provide large-scale inance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, including those caused by deforestation
and forest degradation in tropical forest countries
(Leonard, 2014).
A conservation note is a inancial product comparable to a bond - where the proceeds are
channelled towards conservation (TNC, 2014). An
example is The Nature Conservancy Conservation
Notes. These notes have low credit risk and are
targeted at High Net Worth Individuals (HNI).
Investors are able to choose both the interest rate
they will receive every year for their investment
- between 0% and 2% - and how long before they
are repaid in full, the maximum being 5 years with
the option to renew at the end of the chosen period
(TNC, 2014).
At present Colombia participates in the Readiness
Programme9, but a new institutional framework
under the authority of the National Planning
Department (DNP)10 called the Institutional
Strategy to Articulate Climate Change Policies and
Actions in Colombia has been created to access
future large-scale funding. In 2014, a Focal Point
from the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable
Development was also nominated to align the GCF
objectives with Colombia’s strategic priorities,
ensuring the country could access GCF resources in
the future.
In addition, Colombia has established an
institutional framework for their overarching
project, the Amazon Vision. Under this framework,
the World Bank has granted USD 10.4 million
from the GEF to reduce deforestation in Caquetá
and Guaviare - two departments located within
the project area (World Bank, 2014). This existing
framework could be leveraged to access funding
from the GCF, and channel resources into the
implementation of special management areas
under the Amazon Vision. Activities within these
areas could then be regulated and encompass
interventions such as the strengthening of existing
protected areas and biological corridors, the
establishment of buffer zones, or the deinition of
areas for sustainable agricultural practices.
11
9
In the case of the Caguan Axis and the North of
Chiribiquete, an instrument like a conservation
note could be issued to inance part of the upfront
cost of implementing land-use zoning, or the capital
investments required to grow local green businesses
such as ecotourism and organic agriculture (DNP,
2014). However, issuing a conservation note
requires a credible issuer (e.g. a bank) who can
manage the resources, repay the debt and report
back to investors. Similar to other mechanisms
proposed here, this could be done through an
existing entity, preferably a national-level inancial
institution with a proven track record, such as
Finagro or Findeter. However, any entity would
need to earmark the proceeds speciically for
environmental activities in the zone.
Another option is having a fund (e.g. Patrimonio
Natural), issue the bond. A Multilateral
Development Bank (MDB) such as the World Bank
could then provide a partial guarantee for the debt,
making the repayment of the bond more credible
to investors11. Additionally, the MDB could directly
issue the bond and channel the resources to be
managed by Patrimonio Natural - a framework
currently in use. Alternatively, a new entity could
be created to issue the bond, but this would require
either a guarantee from another entity or investors
with a very high appetite for risk.
Monitoring and safeguard systems must be in
place to ensure resources are used solely for the
implementation of the land zoning plan, whilst
simultaneously measuring the impact of these
investments and linking them to ‘on the ground’
activities. This will not only ensure transparency,
but will also guarantee resources are deployed in a
way that catalyses sustainable economic growth in
the region.
8 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
This programme is developed by UNDP, UNEP and WRI and funded by the German Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMUB).
© Billtacular
To access funding from the GCF, countries
will need to meet a series of administrative
requirements, including nominating a National
Designated Authority (NDA), appointing a
National Implementing Entity (NIE) (GCF, 2015),
and meeting the GCF’s inancial management,
environmental and social safeguards (Brown &
Terpstra, 2014). Not all countries currently have
the capacity to meet these requirements, so the
GCF also provides support through its Readiness
Programme, which has so far channelled USD 400
million to countries for support (BMZ, 2013; GCF,
2013).
4. Roadmap:
The Way Forward
In order to implement TSLUP, one or more of the inancial mechanisms described in this report could be
deployed. However, to do so will require addressing a set of overarching policy, capacity, and regulatory
barriers. Section 4.1 outlines a set of recommendations that can help to overcome these barriers, and
Section 4.2 describes some immediate tasks that local stakeholders can undertake to help to catalyse one or
more of the inancial mechanisms
4.1 Overarching Recommendations
4.2 Next Steps
Link finance to land use
Assess creation of new, or identify existing,
regional fund
A territorial land-use zoning map could be used
to prioritise where different types of public and
private lows of inance might be most appropriate,
and then facilitate working with inancial providers
such as banks to redirect those lows (e.g. focusing
their credit lines for sustainable production in
the ‘sustainable use’ areas of the buffer zones).
Compliance with land-use zones, as deined in the
map, could also be utilised to restrict access to
inance for non-compliant producers.
Monitor compliance with land use and finance
If access to inance is linked to compliance with
land zoning criteria, a public system which
monitors that compliance and ensures it is being
distributed to the right zones for the correct uses
is essential. This system could also help assess
whether the investments being made are having
the environmental and social impacts expected.
Subsequently, by enhancing transparency,
possibilities open up for third parties to assess the
eficiency of project inancing and execution. This
system would be particularly important for three of
the inancial mechanisms proposed: land tax, forced
compensation, and royalties.
Build capacity of local stakeholders
Local government oficials, fund managers, project
proponents and other stakeholders should receive
training in the development of investable projects,
the links between land use and inance, and the
monitoring systems which can be used to oversee
compliance and lows of inance.
13
Identify the existing funds that could be used to
centrally channel all resources for conservation
and sustainable development in the regions. If
existing funds cannot be used, the possibility
of creating a new fund should be investigated.
Either option would make implementation of the
monitoring system relatively straightforward. For
the compulsory investment, it would give control
of investment priorities back to the regional
governments.
Strengthen and grow engagement with PPPs
Working with consumer goods companies that are
already active in the area (e.g. Nestlé), partnerships
can be strengthened to help build local capacity
and implement best practice. These producers
could then be brought into dialogue with other,
larger PPPs (e.g. the TFA 2020) to access bigger
markets for sustainably produced commodities.
This increased access to markets would reinforce
the incentive for other producers to switch to more
sustainable practices and in turn create more
demand from the larger, international PPPs. The
new royalties system could then provide resources
to projects under the form of PPPs.
Compensate for loss of land tax from PAs & buffer
zones
differentiated tax schemes could be used to
disincentivise certain activities in the sustainableuse areas of the buffer zones in line with the
territorial land-use zoning maps.
Implement a capacity building strategy
The overwhelming majority of royalty funding is
directed towards transportation and infrastructure.
To change this dynamic, both stakeholders in
sectors vital to the implementation of territorial
land-use zoning (e.g. AFOLU), and in poorer and
environmentally critical regions, should receive
training in the project development process and
in how to draw down inance from royalty funds
(e.g. mapping projects onto regional and national
strategies, such as the Amazon Vision).
Ensure regional preparedness for GCF funding
Funding from the GCF can be large-scale, and
an important catalyser for a sustainable regional
economy. However to access this, the national
government would have to link TSLUP to strategic
activities in the area. This means that the region
would need to have a policy and institutional
framework in place, such as a regional fund with
all municipalities represented on the board, an
investment plan that links funding to land use, and
an effective monitoring system.
Assess viability of a cross-departmental carbon
project
Payment for carbon credit is a viable pathway for
accessing inance, but it requires a centralised entity
that can manage the project as its implementation is
closely linked to the identiication of new or existing
regional funds. Because the area is also signiicantly
larger than any other existing carbon project, a
irst step would be the completion of a viability
assessment.
Access capital markets
A bond or similar type of ixed-income instrument
could be leveraged to raise additional capital, and
a new or existing regional fund could be used to
issue said bond. However, once the issuer is chosen
it is critically important to deine the portfolio of
investments that will be inanced with the proceeds
from the bond, along with how the principal and
interest will be repaid to investors, and what
reporting mechanism will be used for different
stakeholders.
Increase ability of ANLA to source biodiversity
offsetting projects
Colombia is pioneering the inclusion of biodiversity
offsetting in public policy. However, the policy
cannot be properly implemented with ANLA’s
current lack of personnel and expertise to source
and assess potential biodiversity offset projects. To
overcome this barrier, a team with relevant scientiic
experience will be required. In addition, given the
high biodiversity content of the Chiribiquete area,
this scientiic committee could work closely with
local stakeholders in and around Chiribiquete to
develop pilot projects as well.
Build South-South learning exchange on
ecotourism
In light of Costa Rica’s extensive experience using
conservation to promote ecotourism, a ColombiaCosta Rica learning exchange could be developed
to share knowledge on building an ecotourism
industry. The exchange could help demonstrate
how tourism can be increased without causing
deforestation (e.g. by building roads), but would
need to be tailored to Colombia’s unique security
context and the likely effect of a positive outcome
from the peace talks.
Signiicant areas of some departments are
designated as protected areas, which are not
subject to land tax. Local governments should be
compensated for this loss in the same way they are
compensated for indigenous lands. In addition,
10 DNP formulates long-term public policies and possesses signiicant political power to coordinate all the ministries and
interested stakeholders involved in climate change (Ross, M., 2012).
11 Althelia Climate Fund used a similar framework by partnering with USAID. USAID provided a partial guarantee on the
loans Althelia makes for business involved in ecotourism and agroforestry. Increased security of loan repayment makes the
instrument more attractive to investors, bringing more private capital. For more information see USAID (2014).
14
5. References
Brown, L.H.; Terpstra, P., 2014. 2 Messages from the
Green Climate Fund on Supporting “Readiness”. 13
February. World Resources Institute. http://www.wri.
org/blog/2014/02/2-messages-green-climate-fundsupporting-%E2%80%9Creadiness%E2%80%9D
GIIN (2014). Impact Investing. http://www.thegiin.
org/cgi-bin/iowa/investing/index.html
Global Climate Fund, 2015. Readiness Programme Overview.
http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
Readiness/2014-11-28_GCF_Readiness_Overview.pdf
Mondelez, 2015. Sustainable Resources and Agriculture.
http://www.mondelezinternational.com/wellbeing/sustainable-resources-and-agriculture
Global Post, 2014. http://www.globalpost.com/
dispatch/news/regions/americas/colombia/131023/
colombian-national-parks-civil-war-farc
Nepstad et al, 2013. Addressing Agricultural Drivers of
Deforestation In Colombia: Increasing Land-Based Production
While Reducing Deforestation, Forest Degradation, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Rural Poverty. https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/
ile/274185/drivers_of_deforestation_in_colombia.pdf
Chacon, H. & Suarez M. (2012) La inversión del 1% en
proyectos objeto de licencia ambiental, para el sector de los
hidrocarbonos en Colombia http://repository.unimilitar.edu.
co/bitstream/10654/7838/1/ChaconMorenoHugo2012.pdf
Green Climate Fund, 2015. FAQ on NDA and Focal Point.
http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
Readiness/2014-11-28_GCF_NDA-FP_FAQ.pdf
OCDE/CEPAL, 2014. Evaluaciones del desempeño ambiental:
Colombia 2014. OECD Publishing. http://repositorio.cepal.org/
bitstream/handle/11362/36663/lcl3768_es.pdf?sequence=1
Climate Finance Options, 2013. UNDP / UNEP / WRI
Green Climate Fund Readiness Programme. http://
climateinanceoptions.org/cfo/node/3611
Green Climate Fund, 2013. Green Climate Fund Workshop
on Readiness Summary of Proceedings. 11-12 July.
http://gcfund.net/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
pdf/13-07-25_WS_Readiness_Summary_-_inal_for_
Submission_to_GCF_I-Sec.docx_rev__2.1.pdf
Carbon Decisions International, 2014. Reduced
Emissions from Avoided Deforestation in the Multiple
Use Zone of the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala
(GuateCarbon), Project Description, VCS Version 3.
DNP, 2014. Bases del Plan Nacional de Desarrollo
2014-2018. Preliminary version to be discussed by
the National Planning Council. https://colaboracion.
dnp.gov.co/CDT/Prensa/Bases%20Plan%20
Nacional%20de%20Desarrollo%202014-2018.pdf
Drumm and Moore, 2002. http://pdf.usaid.
gov/pdf_docs/PNADB952.pdf
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development
(BMZ), 2013. Climate Finance Readiness Programme
– Early Actions for Ambitious Goals. November 2013.
Open Energy Information. http://www.bmz.de/de/
zentrales_downloadarchiv/themen_und_schwerpunkte/
klimaschutz/Climate_Finance_Readiness_Programme.pdf
FundePublico & WCS, 2013. Towards Habitat
Banking in Colombia. http://www.forest-trends.
org/documents/iles/doc_4597.pdf
Forest Trends, 2015. Biodiversity Offsets: Policy options
for governments. An input paper for the IUCN Technical
Study Group on Biodiversity Offsets. http://www.foresttrends.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=4777
Forest Trends, 2014. Working towards NNL of
Biodiversity and Beyond Ambatovy, Madagascar.
http://www.forest-trends.org/publication_
details.php?publicationID=4813#
Gaceta del Congreso, 2014. Ponencia para primer debate en las
comisiones económicas conjuntas al proyecto de ley número
104 de 2014 Senado y 131 de 2014 Cámara. https://www.sgr.gov.
co/LinkClick.aspx?ileticket=zO-bmuidvNw%3D&tabid=82
15
Green Climate Fund, 2015. Green Climate Fund National
Designated Authority (NDA) and focal point designations. 6
February. http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/
documents/Readiness/2015-2-6_NDA_and_Focal_Point_
nominations_for_the_Green_Climate_Fund.pdf
Leonard S., 2014. REDD+ and the Green Climate Fund
– As Worlds Collide. 3 March. Forest Climate Change.
http://www.forestsclimatechange.org/forests-climatechange-inance/redd-and-the-green-climate-fund/
Little Forest Finance Book, 2012. http://www.
globalcanopy.org/materials/little-forest-inance-book
Lugo, D., 2014. Colombia CLCDS. 5 June. Mitigation
Action Plans and Scenarios (MAPS). http://www.
mapsprogramme.org/category/projects/colombia-projects/
Machado, Absalon, 2004. Tenencia de la tierra,
problema agrario y conlicto. In: Desplazamiento
forzado: Dinámicas de guerra, exclusión y desarraigo.
ACNUR, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
MADS, 2012. Resolución 1517, Diario Oicial 48555, 16
september 2012. http://faolex.fao.org/docs/texts/col117869.doc
Minminas, 2010. Modiicación del Régimen de
Distribución de Regalías en Colombia: Un Camino hacia
la Equidad Regional. http://www.minminas.gov.co/
documents/10180/23400/02-REGALIAS2010-2011.
pdf/e0e8f100-45f8-4792-9568-204a5981fd52
Oxford Business Group, 2015. http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.
com/analysis/natural-market-rich-biodiversityand-government-incentives-boost-ecotourism
PNN, 2014. http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co/PNN/
portel/libreria/php/decide.php?patron=01.0107
SGR, 2014. Mapa de regalías.http://maparegalias.sgr.gov.co/#/
Starbucks, 2015a. Starbucks C.A.F.E. Practices. http://
www.scsglobalservices.com/starbucks-cafe-practices
Starbucks, 2015b. Cocoa Practices. http://www.
starbucks.com/responsibility/sourcing/cocoa
South Pole Carbon, 2013. Kariba REDD+ Project,
Project Description, VCS Version 3.
ten Kate, K. and Crowe, M.L.A., 2014. Biodiversity Offsets:
Policy options for governments. An input paper for the
IUCN Technical Study Group on Biodiversity Offsets. http://
www.forest-trends.org/documents/iles/doc_4777.pdf
TFA, 2015. Tropical Forest Alliance 2020: Reducing
Commodity-Driven Deforestation. http://www.tfa2020.com
TNC. 2014. The Conservation Note Prospectus. http://www.
nature.org/media/aboutus/tnc-prospectus-january-2014.pdf
República de Colombia, 2012a. Ley 1606, Diario Oicial
48651, 21 december 2012. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=51016
TNC. 2014. TNC Conservation Note Fact Sheet. http://www.
nature.org/gift-planning/conservation-note-fact-sheet.pdf
República de Colombia, 2012b. Ley 1530, Diario Oicial
48433, 17 may 2012. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=47474
UNIMEDIOS, 2013. Sistema General de Regalías: El sabor
amargo y dulce de la mermelada. Claves para el Debate
Público, Número 59. http://www.agenciadenoticias.unal.
edu.co/uploads/media/Claves_Digital_No._59.pdf
República de Colombia, 1998. Ley 488, Diario Oicial
43460, 28 december 1998. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=187
República de Colombia, 1995. Ley 223, Diario Oicial
42160, 22 december 1995. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=6968
República de Colombia, 1993. Parágrafo del Artículo 43,
Diario Oicial 41146, 22 december 1996. http://www.
alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=297
República de Colombia, 1991. Constitución Política de Colombia,
Artículo 317. http://www.constitucioncolombia.com/indice.php
Ross, M., 2012. David v Goliath? – How Colombia tackles
climate change. 17 September. International Centre for
Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). http://dapa.ciat.cgiar.org/
david-v-goliath-how-colombia-tackles-climate-change/
Rudas, G. (Editor), 2002. Instrumentos Económicos
y Financieros para la Politica Ambiental. Documentos
de Economia, Pontiicia Universidad Javeriana. http://
www.cepal.org/ilpes/noticias/paginas/6/40506/6_
Rudas_2002_Contaminacion_Industrial_en_Bogota.pdf
USAID, 2014. U.S. Government, Althelia Climate Fund Mobilize
$133.8 million for Forest Conservation and Alternative
Livelihoods. http://www.usaid.gov/news-information/
press-releases/may-28-2014-us-government-altheliaclimate-fund-mobilize-1338-million-forest-conservation
VCS, 2014. Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+
(JNR) Requirements, Version 3 Requirements
Document 30 October 2014, v3.2
Weaber, D., Lawton, L., 2007. Twenty years on:
the state of contemporary ecotourism research.
http://www98.grifith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/
handle/10072/26545/51660_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
World Bank, 2014. World Bank and GEF to
Support Conservation of Colombian Amazon and
Opportunities for Its Inhabitants. http://www.
worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2014/12/09/
world-bank-and-gef-to-support-conservation
16
CHIRIBIQUETE
Financing
Solutions for
the Territorial
Sustainable
Land Use Plan
About the Global Canopy Programme
Table of Contents
The Global Canopy Programme is a tropical forest think-tank focused on accelerating the world’s transition to a deforestationfree economy. Our team of policy experts, researchers, communicators, and support staff is based in Oxford, and works
closely with networks of decision-makers in the inancial sector, corporations, government and civil society across the world.
We are dynamic, determined and creative in pursuit of 3 high-level objectives: (1) To grow the forest-friendly economy (2) To
end the global market for deforestation (3) To account for impacts and dependencies on forests.
To ind out more about GCP’s work visit www.globalcanopy.org or write to info@globalcanopy.org
About the FCDS
FCDS is an environmental NGO focused on providing technical support to governments, civil society and private sectors
1. The Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
2. Potential Solutions: Existing Flows of Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3
2.1 Public-Private Partnerships
3
2.2 Redirection of Royalties
5
2.3 Reform of Land Property Tax
6
2.4 Compulsory Investment in Watersheds
6
in sustainable development strategies and land-use regulation. The FCDS team have experts in different areas such as:
anthropology and cultural heritage, protected areas, GIS and mapping, socio-environmental conlict resolution, and
management of territorial conlicts.
3. Potential Solutions: New Flows of Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7
3.1 Biodiversity Offsetting
7
Citation
3.2 Carbon Offsetting
7
Lead author: Alexandra Pinzon
3.3 Ecotourism
9
Contributing authors: Angelika Müller, Gleice Lima, Helen Bellield, Jacqueline Wagnon, Nick Oakes, Rachel Pasternack
3.4 Access to Climate Finance
11
Please cite this publication as:
3.5 Conservation Notes
11
Pinzon, A. et al. 2015. Think PINC: Chiribiquete. Global Canopy Programme.
4. Roadmap: The Way Forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the Fundación para la Conservación y el Desarollo Sostenible and Parques Nacionales Naturales de
13
4.1 Overarching Recommendations
13
4.2 Next Steps
13
Colombia for their important guidance and feedback in producing this report.
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Funding
This report has been funded by Fondo Patrimonio Natural (http://www.patrimonionatural.org.co), Parques Nacionales de
Colombia (http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co), and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (http://www.moore.org).
The contents of this report may be used by anyone providing acknowledgement is given to the Global Canopy Programme. No representation or warranty (express or implied)
is given by the Global Canopy Programme or any of its contributors as to the accuracy or completeness of the information and opinions contained in this report. The Global
Canopy Programme the activities of which are hosted by The Global Canopy Foundation, a United Kingdom charitable company limited by guarantee, charity number 1089110.
15
1. The Issue
The Chiribiquete National Park and surrounding
buffer zones are strategically important areas
for conservation and sustainable land use. These
areas, spanning both the Amazonian rainforest
and a key biological corridor leading to the Andes,
are under increasing pressure from the expansion
of the agricultural frontier, the development of
hydrocarbon reserves in or very close to the areas,
and infrastructure development such as hydropower
plants and roads.
Armed conlict has also played a signiicant role
in creating environmental pressures in this area.
According to the OECD, land tenure uncertainty
for indigenous populations, illegal land grabbing
because of armed conlict and the consequent
displacement of more than 8% of the population,
have concentrated lands in the hands of a narrow
clique of landowners (OCDE, 2014).
Many habitats - including parks and reserves are located in zones affected by conlict and drug
traficking. As a result, these zones sit outside
of surveillance efforts and the enforcement of
environmental regulations. This is a major reason
why, for example, between 40% and 50% of timber is
felled illegally and commercialised (OCDE, 2014).
Exacerbating these pressures is the fact that public
expenditure on environmental protection is low in
comparison to other OECD Countries at a similar
stage of development, which prevents authorities
from adequately implementing their tasks.
Meanwhile, private expenditure on environmental
protection is only partially monitored and
contributions from key sectors linked to
deforestation are not assessed (OCDE, 2014).
To counter this wave of pressure on the areas
surrounding the Chiribiquete National Park, the
Territorial Sustainable Land Use Plan (TSLUP) is
being developed as a means to proactively invest
in natural capital. If this plan is going to succeed
in conserving ecosystems whilst also ensuring
that regions can develop in a sustainable way, it
must demonstrate that sustainable development
is better than business as usual (natural resource
extraction, deforestation, etc.). To do this requires
making upfront capital investments in sustainable
development, and generating a long-term inancial
return that is dependent upon the sustainable use of
the land and forest.
This report outlines a series of innovative
inancial mechanisms, which can be used by local
stakeholders to raise the capital needed to invest
in sustainable development and generate a long
term inancial return. It focuses irst on a series of
inancial mechanisms that can be used to redirect
existing lows of inance, and then looks further into
the mechanisms which can be leveraged to raise
additional capital. The report ends by outlining a
Roadmap for the implementation of these inancial
mechanisms.
Fig.1 Chiribiquete National Park and buffer zones
HUILA
META
GUAVIARE
CAQUETÁ
PROJECT
AREA
CHIRIBIQUETE
NATIONAL PARK
VAUPÉS
PUTUMAYO
CAQUETÁ
COLOMBIA
1
AMAZONAS
2
2. Potential Solutions:
Existing Flows of Finance
2.1 Public-Private Partnerships
An increasing number of global food and
agriculture companies are recognising the risk that
deforestation presents to their business activities.
In coordination with civil society and governments,
many of these businesses are now attempting to
mitigate these risks by investing in the sustainable
production of key commodities in their supply
chains. This could entail, for example, a consumer
goods company, a local NGO and a municipal
government investing in the development of agroforestry or silvopastoral systems in sustainable use
zones, or the conservation of protected areas. This
type of multi-stakeholder, collaborative effort is
known as a Public Private Partnership (PPP).
A well-known and wide-ranging PPP is the
Tropical Forest Alliance (TFA) 2020. The TFA
2020 brings together governments (e.g. Indonesia,
UK), consumer goods companies (e.g. Unilever,
Nestlé) and civil society (e.g. CDP) to tackle
the deforestation caused by the production of
commodities such as palm oil, soya, beef, pulp and
paper.
Alternatively, a consumer goods company may
also form its own PPP, working with third parties
to purchase sustainable and/or ethically sourced
commodities. For example, Starbucks uses the
CAFÉ and Cocoa Practices to verify that its cocoa
and coffee beans are produced in an ethical and
sustainable way (Starbucks, 2015a; Starbucks,
2015b), and Mondelez International buys Fairtrade
and Rainforest Alliance certiied cocoa (Mondelez,
2015). However, it is unlikely these partnerships
can have the transformative effect needed to move
supply chains towards sustainable production
unless strong company-wide or sectoral targets for
sustainability (e.g. the deforestation reduction target
set by the TFA 2020), accompany them.
© Juan Manuel Cardona Granda
Some of the companies that have signed up to the
objectives of the TFA 2020 are known to be active in
the regions targeted by TSLUP. For example, Nestlé
buys milk from the Caquetá department and is
known to be one of the few multinational companies
active in the Colombian Amazon (Nepstad, 2013).
Two other multinational TFA members, Mondelez
International and Grupo Éxito, are also active in
Colombia, although it is not clear if the products
purchased have been grown in the regions
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park.
Among the TFA’s objectives is “working with
smallhold farmers and other producers on
sustainable agricultural intensiication, promoting
the use of degraded lands and reforestation” (TFA,
2015). This is similar to the type of activities
that would be inanced by TSLUP, and this
complimentary overlap could help facilitate the
fulilment of the TFA and other sustainability
objectives of companies operating in the region. This
could also pave the way for Colombian companies to
engage with PPP’s in the development of sustainable
commodity production as part of TSLUP.
3
2.2 Redirection of Royalties
Royalties are a fee, charge or tax on the extraction
of non-renewable natural resources, normally
minerals and hydrocarbons. Royalties are an
important source of income generation in Colombia,
budgeted to reach COP 18.3 billion over the 201520161 period (Gaceta del Congreso 663, 2014).
However, in 2011 Colombia reformed the royalty
system to ensure a more equitable distribution
of royalties across sub-national jurisdictions and
ethnic groups (República de Colombia, 2012a;
República de Colombia, 2012b).
Before the reform, 80% of resources collected from
royalties were concentrated in the hands of only
17% of the Colombian population (Minminas, 2010).
The new system redistributes the resources through
all Colombian municipalities and departments,
and centralises the control of royalties as a
strategy to halt corruption (Unimedios, 2013).
This redistribution also led to the creation of the
Regional Development Fund to inance projects
contributing to social and economic development,
as well as the Regional Compensation Fund which
inances human development and infrastructure in
the poorest municipalities in Colombia (Minminas,
2010).
The implementation of this new system has
increased the amount of resources allocated to all
the municipalities found within the project area. A
comparison between funds allocated in 2012 and
those allocated for the period of 2013-2014 reveals
that in the worst case scenario, there was still an
increase of around 50% in funding for Solano, while
San Vicente del Caguan experienced the largest
increase, at 136%2. This increased revenue from
royalties is expected to continue over the next
decade3.
the National Development Plan to channel royalties
and leverage private investment into sustainable
development.
Transport and infrastructure dominate the
currently approved projects, with only 6.9% of
resources being allocated to agricultural projects
and 3.6% to environmental and social development
projects (SGR, 2014). In principle, funding for
environmental and sustainable land-use projects
can be scaled up, as reforestation and restoration of
ecosystems and the environment are also priorities
alongside territorial development goals. However,
lack of local capacity to develop projects could
potentially hamper the ability of these lows of
inance to grow in certain regions. In particular,
governments and other stakeholders in poorer
regions need capacity building for project proposal
design, fund management and alignment of projects
with the Amazon Vision4 (UNIMEDIOS, 2013).
They will also need improved capacity to monitor
and enforce regulations and regional targets if this
approach is to be effective (OCDE, 2014).
A barrier to scaling-up investment streams has been
the limited accountability of where and how funds
generated from royalties are spent. A transparent
monitoring and information system is essential to
effectively track the low of inance from royalties,
identify priorities (e.g. buffer zones), and monitor
the environmental and social impacts of projects.
The new General System of Royalties has set aside
1% of revenues to fund such a system, the SMSCE,
to monitor the collection, consolidation, analysis
and veriication of lows of inance generated from
royalties. To promote transparency, the information
on approved projects is available online, however
there is an opportunity to improve the system
through the integration of environmental and social
information as well (SGR, 2014).
To access inance from the funds listed above, local
authorities and indigenous communities must
develop a project and present it to the fund, to be
assessed on whether or not it should be inanced.
All projects must also be aligned with national and
regional development plans, such as the Amazon
Vision - an initiative to reduce carbon emissions
from the Amazonian regions. However, local
municipalities can now use the Contratos Plan of
5
1
2
It would be equivalent to approximately USD 7.6 billion using the exchange rate of COP 2392,46 - TRM for
31 December 2014.
Calculations based only in comparison between the resources for 2012 and those for 2013-2014, according to data
from General Royalties System.
2.3 Reform of Land Property Tax
An important source of revenue for municipalities
in Colombia is the land property tax collected from
property owners5; however Protected Areas and
Indigenous Reserves are exempt from making this
payment (República de Colombia, 1991; República
de Colombia, 1988). Consequently, municipalities
with Indigenous Reserves and Protected Areas
receive less overall revenue as a result.
To mitigate this, municipalities are compensated
for a loss in revenue from Indigenous Reserves
(República de Colombia, 1995), but there is no
such recompense for revenue lost from Protected
Areas. This problem however, is not unique to
Colombia. In Brazil, the National Congress created
the ICMS-Ecológico (ICMS-E) to address the same
issue. However, their tax reform compensates
municipalities for both Protected Areas and
Indigenous Reserves. To facilitate this, Brazilian
states are required to redistribute 25% of their VAT
revenues to municipalities, while states are able to
choose how one quarter of these funds (i.e. 6.25% of
the total) are spent, based on their own criteria.
Using this legislation, Parana State created their
own environmental criteria in 1991 and applied
it to the redistribution of 6.25% of VAT revenues
which compensated the municipalities that had
Protected Areas. As of today, sixteen of Brazil’s
twenty-seven states have now adopted some form
of the ICMS-E. It should be noted however, that the
redistributed funds are not speciically earmarked
for environmental protection or sustainable land
use.
In Colombia, a tax reform such as the ICMS-E could
be used to compensate municipalities for the loss
of revenue from Protected Areas. Building on the
current process to create a National Rural Cadastre,
Colombia could go a step further to formulate
criteria based on compliance with territorial
land-zoning. One potential source of revenue
could be through reforms to the General Revenue
Distribution System (República de Colombia, 1991).
However, to ensure this revenue is being used to
inance sustainable development, lows of inance
must be earmarked (e.g. by hypothecating revenue
through a fund).
2.4 Compulsory Investment in
Watersheds
All natural resource extraction projects, or those
that have to seek an environmental license and use
water directly from a watershed, have to earmark 1%
of their total investment in the project to fund the
recuperation, preservation and monitoring of the
affected watershed (República de Colombia, 1993).
However, even when the project proponent (e.g.
a mining company) presents an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) and an investment
plan for the earmarked funds to the authorities,
departments can only exert control over
environmental outcomes through the approval
process and follow-up inspections by local
authorities. Subsequently, this makes the
mechanism prone to corruption and other forms of
weak enforcement. In addition, while environmental
risks to watersheds are managed at a project level,
investment plans are still needed at landscape
or regional scales to address these risks more
effectively (Chacon & Suarez, 2012).
Another issue is that private expenditure in
environmental protection is only partially
monitored, and contributions from key sectors are
not assessed. This means that no clear information
is currently available about compulsory investment
in watersheds. Compounding these problems
further, compulsory investments in watersheds
are not proportional or even related to the
environmental impact of the projects affecting the
watersheds themselves (Rudas, 2002).
In the short term, any increase in the investment
directed into watersheds needs enhanced
monitoring and public disclosure, a more equitable
distribution of resources, and linking of investments
to their environmental impact. In the long term,
inance could be channelled into a dedicated fund
administered by regional authorities. This will
require a change in law, but it will also raise the
eficiency of investments and increase state control
over environmental outcomes.
3 Embassy of Colombia. 2011. Colombia’s Royalty Reform: Fuelling Fairness, Saving and Equitable Growth
4 Within the new system, some of the better positioned departments have presented proposals for an amount higher
than the available resources, while others are behind in the presentation of proposals (UNIMEDIOS, 2013).
6
3. Potential Solutions:
New Flows of Finance
3.1 Biodiversity Offsetting
3.2 Carbon Offsetting
Biodiversity offsetting is a way to mitigate the
negative outcomes that may result from natural
resource exploitation (ten Kate & Crowe, 2014). For
example, if a mining company is unable to avoid
causing environmental damage, they may choose
to offset that damage by paying for biodiversity
conservation elsewhere (Forest Trends, 2015).
Biodiversity offsetting is usually voluntary, but it
can be part of a national political framework or even
a requirement, such as in the loan screening process
of banks.
Similar to biodiversity offsetting, carbon offsetting
involves a polluter mitigating their impact on the
environment by paying another party to conserve
greenhouse gas emissions. However, carbon
offsetting involves a transaction and the creation of
a inancial asset called an emission reduction (ER)
unit. For example, Drummond might purchase ERs
from a forest community that is actively eschewing
deforestation. It should be noted though, that
in Colombia carbon offsetting is voluntary, and
polluters are not purchasing ERs because they are
legally obligated to do so.
However, biodiversity offsetting is not currently
being implemented at scale, primarily because of
the low capacity of the regulatory bodies responsible
for screening and approving eligible offsetting
projects. To capitalise on existing capacity, a fund
with a proven track-record (such as Patrimonio
Natural or FundePublico), could be used to develop
eligible projects and centrally channel all resources
(FundePublico & WCS, 2013).
In the areas surrounding Chiribiquete National
Park, carbon offsetting can be used to direct
investment into projects that avoid deforestation or
forest degradation, conserve forests, and sustainably
manage or enhance forests. This grouping is known
as ‘REDD+’ activities, and it can be done at two
different scales: the project or the jurisdictional.
At irst glance, given the scale of the buffer zones
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park, the
jurisdictional approach might seem to be the most
appropriate (called JNR7). However, the rules
governing JNR require one government in control of
the entire jurisdictional zone, whereas TSLUP spans
portions of three separate departments.
An exception to this rule is by deining a jurisdiction
in terms of ‘ecoregions’ (VCS, 2014). If the provinces
covered by TSLUP are deined as a single ecoregion
with a body created to govern it, REDD+ activities
could then be implemented and ERs sold to offset
the impact of buyers throughout the world. This
approach has not yet been trialled, so no precedent
exists to validate its viability.
In contrast, at the project scale there is a welldemonstrated pathway for directing investment into
sustainable land use, conservation, and etc. from
large ecosystems that span multiple jurisdictions.
Although it would be around ive times larger than
any other REDD+ project in the world, a project
could be created spanning all of the Chiribiquete
buffer zones as long as it was run by a single
governing entity with the legal mandate to manage
7
6
5 See https://www.gobiernoenlinea.gov.co/web/guest/home/-/government-services/T4719/maximized
Colombia is also considering frameworks to address biodiversity offsets in both marine and freshwater ecosystems.
© CIFOR
As of 2012, it is mandatory in Colombia for all
companies seeking to exploit natural resources to
submit a biodiversity offsetting plan to the licensing
agency ANLA (MADS, 2012). The framework for this
process, called the Manual for Allocating Offsets for
Loss of Biodiversity, sets an ambitious target of zero
net loss of biodiversity6. There are a number of ways
companies can offset their biodiversity impacts,
including inancing the creation or expansion of
public protected areas, establishing voluntary
agreements and incentives for conservation, and
conducting ecological restoration in priority areas.
the entire region (such as Parques Nacionales).
Despite these barriers there are precedents, such
as the Guatecarbon project in Guatemala which
covers around 7.5% of the country’s total land area
and is managed by the Consejo Nacional de Áreas
Protegidas (Carbon Decisions International, 2014).
An alternative and more straightforward approach
would be for the departmental or municipal
governments to jointly manage the area and
share in the revenue generated. For example, in
Zimbabwe the Kariba project spans four provinces
in which all four provincial governments are joint
administrators of the project (South Pole Carbon,
2013).
3.3 Ecotourism
Ecotourism is a form of travel where visitors pay
to see pristine natural habitats (Lindberg, 1997). It
is the fastest growing form of tourism, expanding
at three times the rate of any other sector in the
industry (The International Ecotourism Society,
2012).
While ecotourism has long been in existence in
South-East Asia and Africa, it is only now gaining
traction in Latin America. For example, over recent
years Costa Rica has signiicantly increased its
area under nature preservation in order to boost its
ecotourism industry and consolidate its position as
a leader in this sector. It has now even capitalised a
conservation endowment fund through ecotourism
revenues (Weaver & Lawton 2007).
the government provides long-term tax exemptions
(up to 20 years) for ecotourism businesses (Oxford
Business Group, 2015; PNN, 2014).
Ecotourism could be scaled-up in the buffer zones
surrounding Chiribiquete National Park by offering
tax incentives to local businesses or by expanding
local infrastructure. Perversely however, increased
demand for tourism infrastructure - such as roads
and hotels - can threaten biodiversity and local
communities, as it increases access to and the
habitability of remote areas that were previously
challenging to deforest (Drumm and Moore, 2002).
Nor are all areas within and around Chiribiquete
easy to reach, and some have a signiicant FARC
presence as well (Global Post, 2014).
The 2014-2018 National Development Plan proposes
increasing the presence of green businesses in the
Amazonian, Paciic, Caribbean, Central and Orinoco
regions. Green businesses in these areas would
leverage their ecological competitive advantages
to develop sustainable economic activities that
include ecotourism (DNP, 2014). The region looked
at in this report is in an area of inluence across
three National Parks: Tinigua, La Macarena and
Chiribiquete, making it a prime location for these
green businesses.
However, any increase in the ecotourism industry
must be accompanied by regulatory frameworks
that can ensure environmental and social integrity
(e.g. consultations with indigenous populations on
new ecotourism projects, or limits on the number of
visitors to a national park).
© Dirk Henker
To grow the ecotourism industry in Colombia,
Parques Nacionales Naturales (PNN) distributes
concessions on their land (e.g. national parks) to
leading tourism operators and hotel chains. In 2012,
the national parks managed by PNN had nearly 1
million visitors, representing a 19% annual growth
rate. Operators pay 10% of their income to PNN, and
7
JNR stands for Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+ and was developed by the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS).
10
3.4 Access to Climate Finance
3.5 Conservation Notes
Climate inance is any funding that is directed
towards climate change mitigation or adaptation.
Over the coming years, it is expected that the Green
Climate Fund (GCF) will become one of the major
sources of funding for climate inance. The GCF
was created in 2010 under the UNFCCC8 and will
provide large-scale inance to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, including those caused by deforestation
and forest degradation in tropical forest countries
(Leonard, 2014).
A conservation note is a inancial product comparable to a bond - where the proceeds are
channelled towards conservation (TNC, 2014). An
example is The Nature Conservancy Conservation
Notes. These notes have low credit risk and are
targeted at High Net Worth Individuals (HNI).
Investors are able to choose both the interest rate
they will receive every year for their investment
- between 0% and 2% - and how long before they
are repaid in full, the maximum being 5 years with
the option to renew at the end of the chosen period
(TNC, 2014).
At present Colombia participates in the Readiness
Programme9, but a new institutional framework
under the authority of the National Planning
Department (DNP)10 called the Institutional
Strategy to Articulate Climate Change Policies and
Actions in Colombia has been created to access
future large-scale funding. In 2014, a Focal Point
from the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable
Development was also nominated to align the GCF
objectives with Colombia’s strategic priorities,
ensuring the country could access GCF resources in
the future.
In addition, Colombia has established an
institutional framework for their overarching
project, the Amazon Vision. Under this framework,
the World Bank has granted USD 10.4 million
from the GEF to reduce deforestation in Caquetá
and Guaviare - two departments located within
the project area (World Bank, 2014). This existing
framework could be leveraged to access funding
from the GCF, and channel resources into the
implementation of special management areas
under the Amazon Vision. Activities within these
areas could then be regulated and encompass
interventions such as the strengthening of existing
protected areas and biological corridors, the
establishment of buffer zones, or the deinition of
areas for sustainable agricultural practices.
11
9
In the case of the Caguan Axis and the North of
Chiribiquete, an instrument like a conservation
note could be issued to inance part of the upfront
cost of implementing land-use zoning, or the capital
investments required to grow local green businesses
such as ecotourism and organic agriculture (DNP,
2014). However, issuing a conservation note
requires a credible issuer (e.g. a bank) who can
manage the resources, repay the debt and report
back to investors. Similar to other mechanisms
proposed here, this could be done through an
existing entity, preferably a national-level inancial
institution with a proven track record, such as
Finagro or Findeter. However, any entity would
need to earmark the proceeds speciically for
environmental activities in the zone.
Another option is having a fund (e.g. Patrimonio
Natural), issue the bond. A Multilateral
Development Bank (MDB) such as the World Bank
could then provide a partial guarantee for the debt,
making the repayment of the bond more credible
to investors11. Additionally, the MDB could directly
issue the bond and channel the resources to be
managed by Patrimonio Natural - a framework
currently in use. Alternatively, a new entity could
be created to issue the bond, but this would require
either a guarantee from another entity or investors
with a very high appetite for risk.
Monitoring and safeguard systems must be in
place to ensure resources are used solely for the
implementation of the land zoning plan, whilst
simultaneously measuring the impact of these
investments and linking them to ‘on the ground’
activities. This will not only ensure transparency,
but will also guarantee resources are deployed in a
way that catalyses sustainable economic growth in
the region.
8 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
This programme is developed by UNDP, UNEP and WRI and funded by the German Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMUB).
© Billtacular
To access funding from the GCF, countries
will need to meet a series of administrative
requirements, including nominating a National
Designated Authority (NDA), appointing a
National Implementing Entity (NIE) (GCF, 2015),
and meeting the GCF’s inancial management,
environmental and social safeguards (Brown &
Terpstra, 2014). Not all countries currently have
the capacity to meet these requirements, so the
GCF also provides support through its Readiness
Programme, which has so far channelled USD 400
million to countries for support (BMZ, 2013; GCF,
2013).
4. Roadmap:
The Way Forward
In order to implement TSLUP, one or more of the inancial mechanisms described in this report could be
deployed. However, to do so will require addressing a set of overarching policy, capacity, and regulatory
barriers. Section 4.1 outlines a set of recommendations that can help to overcome these barriers, and
Section 4.2 describes some immediate tasks that local stakeholders can undertake to help to catalyse one or
more of the inancial mechanisms
4.1 Overarching Recommendations
4.2 Next Steps
Link finance to land use
Assess creation of new, or identify existing,
regional fund
A territorial land-use zoning map could be used
to prioritise where different types of public and
private lows of inance might be most appropriate,
and then facilitate working with inancial providers
such as banks to redirect those lows (e.g. focusing
their credit lines for sustainable production in
the ‘sustainable use’ areas of the buffer zones).
Compliance with land-use zones, as deined in the
map, could also be utilised to restrict access to
inance for non-compliant producers.
Monitor compliance with land use and finance
If access to inance is linked to compliance with
land zoning criteria, a public system which
monitors that compliance and ensures it is being
distributed to the right zones for the correct uses
is essential. This system could also help assess
whether the investments being made are having
the environmental and social impacts expected.
Subsequently, by enhancing transparency,
possibilities open up for third parties to assess the
eficiency of project inancing and execution. This
system would be particularly important for three of
the inancial mechanisms proposed: land tax, forced
compensation, and royalties.
Build capacity of local stakeholders
Local government oficials, fund managers, project
proponents and other stakeholders should receive
training in the development of investable projects,
the links between land use and inance, and the
monitoring systems which can be used to oversee
compliance and lows of inance.
13
Identify the existing funds that could be used to
centrally channel all resources for conservation
and sustainable development in the regions. If
existing funds cannot be used, the possibility
of creating a new fund should be investigated.
Either option would make implementation of the
monitoring system relatively straightforward. For
the compulsory investment, it would give control
of investment priorities back to the regional
governments.
Strengthen and grow engagement with PPPs
Working with consumer goods companies that are
already active in the area (e.g. Nestlé), partnerships
can be strengthened to help build local capacity
and implement best practice. These producers
could then be brought into dialogue with other,
larger PPPs (e.g. the TFA 2020) to access bigger
markets for sustainably produced commodities.
This increased access to markets would reinforce
the incentive for other producers to switch to more
sustainable practices and in turn create more
demand from the larger, international PPPs. The
new royalties system could then provide resources
to projects under the form of PPPs.
Compensate for loss of land tax from PAs & buffer
zones
differentiated tax schemes could be used to
disincentivise certain activities in the sustainableuse areas of the buffer zones in line with the
territorial land-use zoning maps.
Implement a capacity building strategy
The overwhelming majority of royalty funding is
directed towards transportation and infrastructure.
To change this dynamic, both stakeholders in
sectors vital to the implementation of territorial
land-use zoning (e.g. AFOLU), and in poorer and
environmentally critical regions, should receive
training in the project development process and
in how to draw down inance from royalty funds
(e.g. mapping projects onto regional and national
strategies, such as the Amazon Vision).
Ensure regional preparedness for GCF funding
Funding from the GCF can be large-scale, and
an important catalyser for a sustainable regional
economy. However to access this, the national
government would have to link TSLUP to strategic
activities in the area. This means that the region
would need to have a policy and institutional
framework in place, such as a regional fund with
all municipalities represented on the board, an
investment plan that links funding to land use, and
an effective monitoring system.
Assess viability of a cross-departmental carbon
project
Payment for carbon credit is a viable pathway for
accessing inance, but it requires a centralised entity
that can manage the project as its implementation is
closely linked to the identiication of new or existing
regional funds. Because the area is also signiicantly
larger than any other existing carbon project, a
irst step would be the completion of a viability
assessment.
Access capital markets
A bond or similar type of ixed-income instrument
could be leveraged to raise additional capital, and
a new or existing regional fund could be used to
issue said bond. However, once the issuer is chosen
it is critically important to deine the portfolio of
investments that will be inanced with the proceeds
from the bond, along with how the principal and
interest will be repaid to investors, and what
reporting mechanism will be used for different
stakeholders.
Increase ability of ANLA to source biodiversity
offsetting projects
Colombia is pioneering the inclusion of biodiversity
offsetting in public policy. However, the policy
cannot be properly implemented with ANLA’s
current lack of personnel and expertise to source
and assess potential biodiversity offset projects. To
overcome this barrier, a team with relevant scientiic
experience will be required. In addition, given the
high biodiversity content of the Chiribiquete area,
this scientiic committee could work closely with
local stakeholders in and around Chiribiquete to
develop pilot projects as well.
Build South-South learning exchange on
ecotourism
In light of Costa Rica’s extensive experience using
conservation to promote ecotourism, a ColombiaCosta Rica learning exchange could be developed
to share knowledge on building an ecotourism
industry. The exchange could help demonstrate
how tourism can be increased without causing
deforestation (e.g. by building roads), but would
need to be tailored to Colombia’s unique security
context and the likely effect of a positive outcome
from the peace talks.
Signiicant areas of some departments are
designated as protected areas, which are not
subject to land tax. Local governments should be
compensated for this loss in the same way they are
compensated for indigenous lands. In addition,
10 DNP formulates long-term public policies and possesses signiicant political power to coordinate all the ministries and
interested stakeholders involved in climate change (Ross, M., 2012).
11 Althelia Climate Fund used a similar framework by partnering with USAID. USAID provided a partial guarantee on the
loans Althelia makes for business involved in ecotourism and agroforestry. Increased security of loan repayment makes the
instrument more attractive to investors, bringing more private capital. For more information see USAID (2014).
14
5. References
Brown, L.H.; Terpstra, P., 2014. 2 Messages from the
Green Climate Fund on Supporting “Readiness”. 13
February. World Resources Institute. http://www.wri.
org/blog/2014/02/2-messages-green-climate-fundsupporting-%E2%80%9Creadiness%E2%80%9D
GIIN (2014). Impact Investing. http://www.thegiin.
org/cgi-bin/iowa/investing/index.html
Global Climate Fund, 2015. Readiness Programme Overview.
http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
Readiness/2014-11-28_GCF_Readiness_Overview.pdf
Mondelez, 2015. Sustainable Resources and Agriculture.
http://www.mondelezinternational.com/wellbeing/sustainable-resources-and-agriculture
Global Post, 2014. http://www.globalpost.com/
dispatch/news/regions/americas/colombia/131023/
colombian-national-parks-civil-war-farc
Nepstad et al, 2013. Addressing Agricultural Drivers of
Deforestation In Colombia: Increasing Land-Based Production
While Reducing Deforestation, Forest Degradation, Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Rural Poverty. https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/
ile/274185/drivers_of_deforestation_in_colombia.pdf
Chacon, H. & Suarez M. (2012) La inversión del 1% en
proyectos objeto de licencia ambiental, para el sector de los
hidrocarbonos en Colombia http://repository.unimilitar.edu.
co/bitstream/10654/7838/1/ChaconMorenoHugo2012.pdf
Green Climate Fund, 2015. FAQ on NDA and Focal Point.
http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
Readiness/2014-11-28_GCF_NDA-FP_FAQ.pdf
OCDE/CEPAL, 2014. Evaluaciones del desempeño ambiental:
Colombia 2014. OECD Publishing. http://repositorio.cepal.org/
bitstream/handle/11362/36663/lcl3768_es.pdf?sequence=1
Climate Finance Options, 2013. UNDP / UNEP / WRI
Green Climate Fund Readiness Programme. http://
climateinanceoptions.org/cfo/node/3611
Green Climate Fund, 2013. Green Climate Fund Workshop
on Readiness Summary of Proceedings. 11-12 July.
http://gcfund.net/ileadmin/00_customer/documents/
pdf/13-07-25_WS_Readiness_Summary_-_inal_for_
Submission_to_GCF_I-Sec.docx_rev__2.1.pdf
Carbon Decisions International, 2014. Reduced
Emissions from Avoided Deforestation in the Multiple
Use Zone of the Maya Biosphere Reserve in Guatemala
(GuateCarbon), Project Description, VCS Version 3.
DNP, 2014. Bases del Plan Nacional de Desarrollo
2014-2018. Preliminary version to be discussed by
the National Planning Council. https://colaboracion.
dnp.gov.co/CDT/Prensa/Bases%20Plan%20
Nacional%20de%20Desarrollo%202014-2018.pdf
Drumm and Moore, 2002. http://pdf.usaid.
gov/pdf_docs/PNADB952.pdf
Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development
(BMZ), 2013. Climate Finance Readiness Programme
– Early Actions for Ambitious Goals. November 2013.
Open Energy Information. http://www.bmz.de/de/
zentrales_downloadarchiv/themen_und_schwerpunkte/
klimaschutz/Climate_Finance_Readiness_Programme.pdf
FundePublico & WCS, 2013. Towards Habitat
Banking in Colombia. http://www.forest-trends.
org/documents/iles/doc_4597.pdf
Forest Trends, 2015. Biodiversity Offsets: Policy options
for governments. An input paper for the IUCN Technical
Study Group on Biodiversity Offsets. http://www.foresttrends.org/publication_details.php?publicationID=4777
Forest Trends, 2014. Working towards NNL of
Biodiversity and Beyond Ambatovy, Madagascar.
http://www.forest-trends.org/publication_
details.php?publicationID=4813#
Gaceta del Congreso, 2014. Ponencia para primer debate en las
comisiones económicas conjuntas al proyecto de ley número
104 de 2014 Senado y 131 de 2014 Cámara. https://www.sgr.gov.
co/LinkClick.aspx?ileticket=zO-bmuidvNw%3D&tabid=82
15
Green Climate Fund, 2015. Green Climate Fund National
Designated Authority (NDA) and focal point designations. 6
February. http://www.gcfund.org/ileadmin/00_customer/
documents/Readiness/2015-2-6_NDA_and_Focal_Point_
nominations_for_the_Green_Climate_Fund.pdf
Leonard S., 2014. REDD+ and the Green Climate Fund
– As Worlds Collide. 3 March. Forest Climate Change.
http://www.forestsclimatechange.org/forests-climatechange-inance/redd-and-the-green-climate-fund/
Little Forest Finance Book, 2012. http://www.
globalcanopy.org/materials/little-forest-inance-book
Lugo, D., 2014. Colombia CLCDS. 5 June. Mitigation
Action Plans and Scenarios (MAPS). http://www.
mapsprogramme.org/category/projects/colombia-projects/
Machado, Absalon, 2004. Tenencia de la tierra,
problema agrario y conlicto. In: Desplazamiento
forzado: Dinámicas de guerra, exclusión y desarraigo.
ACNUR, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
MADS, 2012. Resolución 1517, Diario Oicial 48555, 16
september 2012. http://faolex.fao.org/docs/texts/col117869.doc
Minminas, 2010. Modiicación del Régimen de
Distribución de Regalías en Colombia: Un Camino hacia
la Equidad Regional. http://www.minminas.gov.co/
documents/10180/23400/02-REGALIAS2010-2011.
pdf/e0e8f100-45f8-4792-9568-204a5981fd52
Oxford Business Group, 2015. http://www.oxfordbusinessgroup.
com/analysis/natural-market-rich-biodiversityand-government-incentives-boost-ecotourism
PNN, 2014. http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co/PNN/
portel/libreria/php/decide.php?patron=01.0107
SGR, 2014. Mapa de regalías.http://maparegalias.sgr.gov.co/#/
Starbucks, 2015a. Starbucks C.A.F.E. Practices. http://
www.scsglobalservices.com/starbucks-cafe-practices
Starbucks, 2015b. Cocoa Practices. http://www.
starbucks.com/responsibility/sourcing/cocoa
South Pole Carbon, 2013. Kariba REDD+ Project,
Project Description, VCS Version 3.
ten Kate, K. and Crowe, M.L.A., 2014. Biodiversity Offsets:
Policy options for governments. An input paper for the
IUCN Technical Study Group on Biodiversity Offsets. http://
www.forest-trends.org/documents/iles/doc_4777.pdf
TFA, 2015. Tropical Forest Alliance 2020: Reducing
Commodity-Driven Deforestation. http://www.tfa2020.com
TNC. 2014. The Conservation Note Prospectus. http://www.
nature.org/media/aboutus/tnc-prospectus-january-2014.pdf
República de Colombia, 2012a. Ley 1606, Diario Oicial
48651, 21 december 2012. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=51016
TNC. 2014. TNC Conservation Note Fact Sheet. http://www.
nature.org/gift-planning/conservation-note-fact-sheet.pdf
República de Colombia, 2012b. Ley 1530, Diario Oicial
48433, 17 may 2012. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=47474
UNIMEDIOS, 2013. Sistema General de Regalías: El sabor
amargo y dulce de la mermelada. Claves para el Debate
Público, Número 59. http://www.agenciadenoticias.unal.
edu.co/uploads/media/Claves_Digital_No._59.pdf
República de Colombia, 1998. Ley 488, Diario Oicial
43460, 28 december 1998. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=187
República de Colombia, 1995. Ley 223, Diario Oicial
42160, 22 december 1995. http://www.alcaldiabogota.
gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=6968
República de Colombia, 1993. Parágrafo del Artículo 43,
Diario Oicial 41146, 22 december 1996. http://www.
alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=297
República de Colombia, 1991. Constitución Política de Colombia,
Artículo 317. http://www.constitucioncolombia.com/indice.php
Ross, M., 2012. David v Goliath? – How Colombia tackles
climate change. 17 September. International Centre for
Tropical Agriculture (CIAT). http://dapa.ciat.cgiar.org/
david-v-goliath-how-colombia-tackles-climate-change/
Rudas, G. (Editor), 2002. Instrumentos Económicos
y Financieros para la Politica Ambiental. Documentos
de Economia, Pontiicia Universidad Javeriana. http://
www.cepal.org/ilpes/noticias/paginas/6/40506/6_
Rudas_2002_Contaminacion_Industrial_en_Bogota.pdf
USAID, 2014. U.S. Government, Althelia Climate Fund Mobilize
$133.8 million for Forest Conservation and Alternative
Livelihoods. http://www.usaid.gov/news-information/
press-releases/may-28-2014-us-government-altheliaclimate-fund-mobilize-1338-million-forest-conservation
VCS, 2014. Jurisdictional and Nested REDD+
(JNR) Requirements, Version 3 Requirements
Document 30 October 2014, v3.2
Weaber, D., Lawton, L., 2007. Twenty years on:
the state of contemporary ecotourism research.
http://www98.grifith.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/
handle/10072/26545/51660_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
World Bank, 2014. World Bank and GEF to
Support Conservation of Colombian Amazon and
Opportunities for Its Inhabitants. http://www.
worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2014/12/09/
world-bank-and-gef-to-support-conservation
16