Introduction Asquith and others 2002 Pagiola and others 2005 Klooster and Masera 2000 Poffenberger and others 2002 Smith and Scherr 2003 Agrawal 2001 Armitage 2005 Barrett and others 2005 The CDM is one of three “flexible mechanisms” in the Kyoto Protocol designed to accomplish the objectives of the UNFCCC. It makes provision for investment by industrialised countries and industry in projects related to carbon emissions reduction and carbon sequestration in developing countries. These projects should contribute to sustainable development in developing countries (i.e., Non-Annex 1 countries) while enabling developed countries (i.e., Annex 1 countries with quantified emission reduction targets) to meet the Kyoto emission reduction and quantified emission limitation targets (Art. 12.2 of the Kyoto Protocol). additionality leakage contribution to sustainable development Brown and others (2000) We use conceptual notions of CDM criteria and community capacity to empirically analyse two community forestry cases in Tinto and Bimbia Bonadikombo, Cameroon. The intention is to identify, document, and interpret local strategies and conditions affecting past community forestry successes and failures, in order to recognise and understand those factors that might enhance or limit community capacity for CDM implementation. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 highlights the criteria and conditions for CDM projects and the main features of community forestry in Cameroon. Appropriate community capacity requirements for CDM projects are derived in section 3. Section 4 presents the methods used and the study context. In section 5, we evaluate community capacity and draw implications for CDM and the wider CDM/Kyoto policy framework. Armitage 2005 Li 2002 Li (2002) We, therefore, see community capacity as the collective ability of individuals and groups acting in concert toward sustainable development in a given locality. In operational terms, community forests in Cameroon are managed by legal entities or community-based organisations constituted by a given “community” for the purpose. But first, we present the requirements for CDM forestry projects and community forestry modalities in Cameroon. CDM Requirements and Community Forestry CDM Requirements CDM projects are expected to meet a set of requirements prior to the issuance of certified emission reductions by the CDM Executive board. These requirements are articulated in the Kyoto Protocol and in subsequent decisions taken during the Conference and Meetings of Parties (mainly in Decisions 19/CP.9 and 14/CP.10 and the Marrakech Accords). These requirements can be summarised under the following categories: additionality, acceptability, externalities, and certification. It suffices to mention that these rules apply to afforestation and reforestation. These two are the only land use land use change and forestry activities accepted under the CDM. Additionality Programme additionality Financial additionality Investment additionality Acceptability The Kyoto Protocol states that all carbon offset projects in developing countries are required to contribute to sustainable development (Article 2.1 and 12.2). Host countries have to have criteria for sustainable development by which projects will be judged. In addition, projects must be consistent with other international agreements and guidelines such as the Convention on Biodiversity, Agenda 21, Ramsar, and others. Externalities (Environmental Impact and Leakage) Projects must demonstrate a clear strategy to deal with all impacts/effects that may arise from project implementation. These impacts could include positive or negative social, cultural, economic, or environmental impacts. Projects have to show how the negative impacts would be mitigated or countered. leakage. Certification The concreteness, measurability, and long-term characteristics of the project will have to be checked independently by a third-party (i.e., a Designated Operational Entity) accredited by the CDM executive board. This takes place in three stages during the CDM project cycle namely validation, verification, and certification. Validation Verification Certification Small-Scale Afforestation and Reforestation Projects Following discussions on the complications and costs involved in responding to the rules or requirements outlined above, baseline, monitoring, and certification modalities were simplified for “small-scale projects.” Decision 14/CP.10 defines small-scale projects as those that will result in net anthropogenic greenhouse gas removals by sinks of less than 8 kilo tonnes of carbon dioxide per year during the crediting period. However, the host country has to approve that the project developers are a low-income community or individuals. Community Forests GEF 2000 Klooster and Masera 2000 Smith and Scherr 2003 White and Martin, (2002) Minang and others 2007 MINEF 1998 MINEF 1998 The community has constituted a legal entity and appointed a community forest manager who shall represent them in negotiations with government in matters of community forestry; The community has delineated and mapped the intended community forest area; The community has completed an 8–10% inventory of the timber, non-timber forest products, and wildlife of the forest; The community has provided a description of previous activities carried out in the intended forest area; The community presents a simple management plan for the intended forest; and The community shows proof of stakeholder agreement on the intentions of forest management. That 100 % inventories are carried out in the compartments prior to the commencement of activities; The management of community forests provide annual activity plans for approval; The management of community forests provide annual reports to government; and The community forest management plans are reviewed every five years. Many community forests in Cameroon are a mix of natural and secondary forests. Some cocoa agroforests are also found within community forests as well. Therefore, a broad spectrum of activities including regeneration, afforestation, logging, and non-timber forest product collection is implemented within community forests. Santili and others, 2005 Private individuals, companies, or government own most current CDM projects institutions where decision-making and management are likely to have more structure and simplicity. Community ownership and management is complex and problematic in terms of resource tenure, project responsibilities, benefit allocation, and governance aspects. CDM rules have not been tested in those complex communities that harbour tremendous biosphere carbon management potential. Community Capacity Assessment Framework Project developers are required to put forth arguments and supporting evidence for each CDM requirement in a Project Design Document. Special knowledge, skills, technology, and infrastructure are also needed for collecting and analysing the required evidence. Furthermore, planning, coordination, and management skills will be required in the project development process. 1 Table 1 CDM community capacity assessment framework CDM requirement Community Capacity requirements Additionality Does the community have access to adequate financial resources for baseline and other analysis? Does community have access to required technology for data collection and analysis? D Acceptability Are the necessary national sustainable development policy analysis knowledge and skills available within the community? Externalities Are the necessary impact assessment and leakage analysis knowledge and skills available within the community? Certification How adequate is the community forest monitoring system? How adequate is the community information infrastructure? Is the relevant CDM information (forest inventory, socio-economic) available? Does community have required financial resources to engage Designated Operational Entities? Management Capability Are actors effectively participating in decision-making and implementation? How effectively are resource rules being implemented? How good are actor relationships in forest management? Are communities receiving adequate government and NGO support? Additionality: Preliminary screening based on the starting date of the project activity and the specific features of the afforestation and reforestation activity (mapping and map analysis, land use analysis); Identification of alternatives to the project activity consistent with current laws and regulations (land use analysis, estimates/measurements of carbon stocks, projections, baseline development); Investment/financial analysis (Internal Rates of Return, Net Present Value, cost benefit ratio, sensitivity analysis, etc.) Barrier analysis (investment, institutional, technological, cultural, social, ecological, and other kinds of barriers); and Impact of CDM registration (Expected). Lee (2004) Zahabu 2006 Poffenberger and others 2002 de Jong and others 2000 Eligibility: Externalities: Certification: Ecosecurities (2002) Lee 2004 Management Capabilities and Conditions: Poffenberger and others (2002) Subak (2000) FERN (2000) 1 Ivey and others 2004 Methods and Context Methods 1 Frankfort-Nachmias and Nachmias 1996 Yin 1994 The Empirical Setting Tinto community Bimbia Bonadikombo community 1 RCDC 2002 Fig. 1 Location of study areas in Cameroon  Community Forest Actors 2 Table 2 Summary description of community forestry actors Actor Interests and Responsibility 1. Bimbia Bonadikombo Natural Resource Management Council (BBNRMC) Manages Bimbia forest; Has an elected Board and a Forest Management Officer overseeing day-to-day operations 2. Tinto Clan Community Forest–Common Initiative Group (TCCF–CIG) Manages Tinto forest; Has an elected Management Committee and a Forest Management Officer in charge of day-to-day operations. 3. Chiefs Village heads; custodians of forests; authorise access to all resources and land; in both cases are members of the BBNRMC board and TCCF-CIG committee, respectively 4. Forest User Groups Includes all user groups; interested in access rights; participate in general assemblies of organisations; In the case of Bimbia, each user group has a representative on the Board 5. Women in communities Interested in access rights for non-timber forest products and farmland 6. Elites defined by these communities): 7. Ministry of Forests and Fauna (MINFOF) Mandated to ensure sustainable forest management; provide technical support; conflict resolution 8. Municipal Authorities Interested in contributions of community forest to development of municipality 9. Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) Interested in sustainable forest management; provides technical, institutional, and financial support; Mount Cameroon Project supported Bimbia, while Living Earth Foundation supported Tinto. The makeup of institutional structures differs slightly between the two communities and some actors such as charcoal burners are only found in the Bimbia community. It is worth noting that forest use and livelihood activities often involve combinations of activities. But we present the actors in terms of forest use activities in order to capture specific issues that could otherwise be diluted in the analysis of various activity combinations. Assessing Community Capacity for CDM project development 1 5 Additionality The key additionality capacity question to address is whether or not communities have access to the financial, technological and human resources required to fulfil additionality requirements. Bimbia 3 Tinto Table 3 Estimated income and expenditure of community forests (January–December 2005) Description Bimbia Bonadikombo Tinto Income   Total (XAF/USD) 14,867,000/30200 a   From forest operations- wood (%) 28.5 100   From grants/donations (%) 10.4 0   From service delivery (ecotourism and tree care services to Urban Council (%) 23 0   Fines and auction sales (%) 19.1 0   Loans (%) 18.8 0 Expenditure   Total (XAF/USD) 15,910,000/32300 940,000/1900   Operational costs, Office (%) 11 100   Operational costs, Field (%) 23.4 0   Salaries (%) 62.8 0   Investments (%) 0 0 a 4 4 −1 4 2 –1 −1 Table 4 Projected carbon mitigation potential for community Forests  Without Project With Project Scenario 1 c With Project Scenario 2 c Tinto Community   Total area (ha) 1295     Vegetation type Natural forest     Scenario description Conversion Averted DEForestation Reduced Impact Logging   (ADEF)- Conservation (RIL)   Potential area (ha)/yr  7.77 52 −1a  220 104 −1 b — 1.7 5.3 Bimbia Community   Total area (ha) 3714     Vegetation type Natural forest (50%) and mixed cocoa farms and secondary forests (50%)     Scenario description Conversion ADEF — Conservation of natural forest/Conservation +regeneration Conservation + regeneration (RIL)/conservation + regeneration   Potential area (ha)/Yr — 11 (ADEF)/ 928 (Conservation) 74 (RIL)/928 (Conservation) −1a — −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 — 2.4/4.64 7.7/4.64   7.04 12.34 a Kotto-Same and others 1997 Justice and others 2001 Palm and others 2000 b c • Secondary forests are made available for conservation and regeneration • There will be no fires, droughts or disasters during the project lifetime • Illegal logging will be minimal and not sufficient to significantly affect project • Forest areas do not include roads, water bodies and minor human settlements • Exercise of usufruct rights for subsistence purposes including fuel wood, and non timber forest product harvesting is unlikely to significantly affect carbon flows Smith and Scherr 2003 De Jong and others (2000) 3 Bimbia Tinto Bimbia Tinto Bimbia Tinto Acceptability MINEF 1998 McCall and Minang 2005 Bimbia Tinto However, problems may emerge if national sustainability criteria for CDM eventually include international environmental conventions. Externalities The key capacity question addressed below is do communities have the knowledge and skills for the required impact assessment and leakage analyses. Bimbia Tinto Certification Communities would have to collect, analyse, archive, and eventually share information with designated operational entities responsible for validation and verification. Hence, the key capacity questions for certification include, how functional are community forestry monitoring systems? How adequate are community information infrastructures? And do communities have enough financial resources to engage Designated Operational Entities for validation? Bimbia Tinto Neither community has conducted post-management agreement forest surveys or inventories of designated exploitation compartments as required by law. They have equally failed to convene general assemblies of stakeholders to discuss and review progress as their statutes demand since the commencement of community forest activities. Community information systems were found in both cases to have relevant biophysical, socio-economic, and market data that could be used for further analysis on impact, baselines, leakage, and other CDM requirements. However, inventory data available to these community forests are inadequate for carbon estimation as they were done for timber exploitation as required by extant community forestry rules. Most of these studies were done with the help of NGOs prior to the management agreement. As demonstrated in the preceding text, further collection of complementary data for CDM without such assistance may be less reliable because communities do not have adequate skills. Bimbia In Tinto Management Capability and Conditions In this section, we examine the extent to which community decision-making processes, rules compliance, actor relationships, and relationships with government and NGOs are adequate for carbon project development. Participation and Decision-making Involving actors in building consensus and decision-making de Jong and others 2000 Smith and Scherr 2003 Bimbia In Tinto Annual general assemblies in which popular community participation is expected have not been convened in either case since mid-2002, implying that actors have not had the opportunity to participate in more strategic decision-making in community forestry. Implementation of Community Forestry Rules community forestry rules compliance In Bimbia 3 3 Tinto 3 Actor Relations Good actor relationships 2 Fig. 2 Sociogram showing community forest actor relationships in both communities  In Bimbia 2 Relations between communities and government Bimbia community 2 Ekoko 2000 Relations between communities and NGOs But very often these NGOs have been using overseas development assistance funds. Such funds may not be acceptable under the CDM given the financial additionality criterion. This makes a compelling argument for the creation of a national fund to support CDM project development. 5 Table 5 Summary of findings Requirement Bimbia Bonadikombo Tinto Additionality   Access to financial resources Insufficient financial resources. Deficit of $3000 in 2005 accounts; Little experience with high interest loans; Eligibility unlikely due to use of ODA funds in forestry implementation Insufficient financial resources. Functioning for past three years with $784 in total; No experience with loans; Eligibility unlikely due to use of ODA funds in forestry development.   Knowledge and skills Limited knowledge and skills. One person with undergraduate knowledge of cost benefit analysis and none in investment or financial analysis methods. Fourteen employees have knowledge and skills in timber inventories only. Knowledge and skills are extremely limited. No knowledge or experience of financial or investment analysis in community. Eleven people have knowledge and skills in timber inventories only.   Access to technology Little or no access to satellite data and other technologies required. Same as in Bimbia Acceptability   Knowledge and Skills Community fulfilled “sustainability” criteria in the development of management plans with NGO support. Hence have some relevant experience. Same as in Bimbia Externalities   Environmental impact and leakage Three members in community have knowledge skills and experience in environmental and social impact assessment, therefore good potential No knowledge or skills in environmental or social impact assessment observed No knowledge or understanding of leakage observed Same as in Bimbia Certification   Monitoring systems Monitoring systems are functional, but inadequate for CDM because they do not involve ongoing inventories; Short of manpower (ratio of staff to forest area is 1:285 ha) No documented evidence of monitoring. The lone staff cannot ensure any proper monitoring for an area of 1 295ha.   Information system Both physical and digital Information systems (computers) are operational. This can allow for “sharability”; hence, the system is potentially adaptable to CDM archiving requirements. Information system consists of two cardboard folders. Hence, inadequate in form, content, and quality for CDM purposes.   CDM Information availability Some relevant geographical, socio-economic, ecological, and general information is available for CDM use within current systems. But much more is required Same as in Bimbia   Financial resources Inadequate financial resources to pay for validation services Same as in Bimbia Management Capability   Actor relationships Conflicts exist, (i) between 6 chiefs and management board of community forest; (ii) between community—MINFOF over 14 permits and proceeds from auctioning of seizures; and (iii) between farmers and forest management. Conflicts between 3 chiefs and management officer.   Forestry rules enforcement Illegal activity income accounts for about 67% of income from legal forest activities and 19% of total revenue in 2005. It is significant and poses threats to the success of potential carbon project. No illegal activity observed. Rules are being respected.   Government community relationship Government short of forestry personal (staff to forest area ratio in the province is about 1:1500ha); Government staff do not understand the CDM and have no relevant skills to support communities Same as in Bimbia   NGO community relationship The Cameroon Mountain Conservation Foundation (CAMCOF) is interested in providing support for carbon forestry in the area, but lack the knowledge, skills and resources. Living Earth Foundation is interested in providing support for carbon forestry in the community, but lacks the knowledge, skills and resources. Bimbia In Tinto Agrawal 2001 Armitage 2005 Conclusions and Practical Implications Several studies have supported payment for environmental services within the commons as an emerging model of sustainable development for poor communities. Yet community capacity to implement such models often falls short of expectations. This paper set out to assess the capacity of communities to implement CDM projects in Cameroon. From experiences of success and failure in community forest implementation, we draw conclusions on the implications for CDM implementation within community forestry setups, i.e., in the case where communities currently managing forests decide to add on carbon sequestration as another land use. Analysing the dimensions and determinants of community capacity for CDM in both the Bimbia and Tinto cases points to substantial inadequacies. It indicates that taking up CDM carbon management procedures complicates the challenges of local communities already grappling with huge community forest management difficulties within host country modalities and procedures. The inadequacies revealed serve as good arguments for varying dimensions of additionality in the CDM certification process. But more importantly however, evidence from the Bimbia and Tinto cases, though limited, also points to a number of generalizable observations on community capacity to manage terrestrial CDM projects. Desanker 2005 Nelson and de Jong 2003 de Jong and others 2000 Smith and Scherr 2003 Thirdly, this research brings a number of cross-scale CDM issues to the fore. It shows that community capacity depends on and is part of a forest/land use policy framework. The CDM framework assumes that the necessary macro-institutional and regulatory support for micro-level implementation would be available. This study found out that neither sustainable development criteria nor supportive institutions and personnel exist in Cameroon. Smith and others 2003 Minang and others 2007 FAO 2004 Subak 2000 Brown and others (2000) Poffenberger and others (2002) −1