Paper short abstract:

This paper argues that, REDD+ in Zambia has underplayed the contribution of energy deficits to the countries rate of deforestation and forest degradation thereby negatively affecting the potential of the programme to meet its central objective of reducing 20% GHG emissions from the forest sector. .

Paper long abstract:

Classification and naming of drivers of deforestation and degradation under the UNFCCC REDD+ does not use the term "energy" to classify what I argue to be simply "energy driven deforestation". It rather disintegrates it into various uses of wood-energy: charcoal production, wood fuel consumption; brick drying; tobacco drying and as wood used in kilns by mines and industries. In fact these fragments of various uses of energy, are not considered as drivers of deforestation but only as drivers of degradation under the UNFCCC. The implications of this classification and naming, as observed during this study are that 1) the calculation of national deforestation and degradation rates has been significantly affected 2) the understanding of what the main drivers of deforestation and degradation has also been affected 3) the institutional design for addressing deforestation and degradation has left out energy institutions who in our findings are very critical stakeholders as far as addressing deforestation is concerned 4) the intervention strategies developed under REDD+ are skewed away from "energy driven deforestation" despite it being (according to our findings) the main driver of deforestation and degradation. Based on these revelation, we argue that unless energy is rightfully defined, categorised and included as a driver of both deforestation and degradation, there is little chance that REDD+ strategies will be able to achieve the central objective of reducing GHG emissions as expected by the UNFCCC.