Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-13 (section)

=== Box 13.16 | Latin America Region Adaptation Linking Mitigation: REDD+ Lessons ===

<div id="h2-55-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Thirty-three countries in the Latin American region have submitted their NDCs, and 70% of their initiatives have included mitigation and adaptation options focusing on sustainable development ( [[#Bárcena--2018|Bárcena et al. 2018]] ; [[#Kissinger--2019|Kissinger et al. 2019]] ). However, most of these policies are disconnected across sectors ( [[#Loaiza--2017|Loaiza et al. 2017]] ; [[#Locatelli--2017|Locatelli et al. 2017]] ). National governments have identified their relevant sectors as: energy, agriculture, forestry, land-use change, biodiversity, and water resources (see Figure 1 below). The region houses 57% of the primary forest of the planet. REDD+ aims to reduce GHG while provide ecosystems services to vulnerable communities ( [[#Bárcena--2018|Bárcena et al. 2018]] ). Lessons from successful REDD+ programmes include the benefits of a multilevel structure from international to national down to strong community organisation, as well as secure resources funding, with most of the projects relying on external sources of funding ( ''medium evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ) ( [[#Loaiza--2017|Loaiza et al. 2017]] ; [[#Kissinger--2019|Kissinger et al. 2019]] ). However, there is limited evidence of effective adaptation co-benefits, which may be related to the lack of provision of forest standards; a disproportionate focus on mitigation and lack of attention to the well-being of the population in rural and agricultural areas ( [[#Kongsager--2015|Kongsager and Corbera 2015]] ).

Conflicts have emerged over political views, government priorities of resources (oil, bioenergy, hydropower), and weak governance among national and local authorities, indigenous groups and other stakeholders such as NGOs which play a critical role in the technological and financial support for the REDD+ initiative ( [[#Reed--2011|Reed 2011]] ; [[#Kashwan--2015|Kashwan 2015]] ; [[#Gebara--2014|Gebara et al. 2014]] ; [[#Locatelli--2011|Locatelli et al. 2011]] , 2017). a more holistic approach which recognises these social, environmental and political drivers would appear to have benefits but assessment is needed to allow evidence-based actionable policy statements.

[[File:4416bd3047bfb614cc47f18c404dabf6 IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Box_13_16_Figure_1.png]]

'''Box 13.16, Figure 1 | Latin America and Caribbean: high priority sectors for mitigation and adaptation.''' Number of countries that name the following sector in their national climate change plans and/or communications. The purple and green bars represent adaptation and mitigation respectively. Source: reproduced with permission from [[#Bárcena--2018|Bárcena et al. (2018)]] .

<div id="13.8.3" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="relationships-between-mitigation-and-adaptation-measures"></span>