REDD+ is being questioned by the particular status of High Forest/Low Deforestation countries. Indeed, the formulation of reference levels is made difficult by the confrontation of low historical deforestation records with the forest transition theory on the one hand. On the other hand, those countries might formulate incredibly high deforestation scenarios to ensure large payments even in case of inaction. Using a wide range of scenarios within the Guiana Shield, from methods involving basic assumptions made from past deforestation, to explicit modelling of deforestation using relevant socio-economic variables at the regional scale, we show that the most common methodologies predict huge increases in deforestation, unlikely to happen given the existing socio-economic situation. More importantly, it is unlikely that funds provided under most of these scenarios could compensate for the total cost of avoided deforestation in the region, including social and economic costs. This study suggests that a useful and efficient international mechanism should really focus on removing the underlying political and socio-economic forces of deforestation rather than on hypothetical result-based payments estimated from very questionable reference levels.

中文翻译：

---

在高森林覆盖率/低森林砍伐率国家质疑基于排放的方法来定义REDD +森林砍伐基准。

REDD +受到高森林/低森林砍伐国家的特殊地位的质疑。的确，一方面由于历史悠久的毁林记录与森林过渡理论的对立使得参考水平的制定变得困难。另一方面，即使在不采取行动的情况下，这些国家也可能制定令人难以置信的高毁林情景，以确保大笔付款。在圭亚那盾构内使用各种情景，从涉及过去毁林的基本假设的方法，到使用相关的社会经济变量在区域范围内对毁林进行显式建模，我们表明最常见的方法可以预测毁林的大量增加，鉴于现有的社会经济状况，这种情况不太可能发生。更重要的是，在大多数情况下提供的资金不可能弥补该区域避免的森林砍伐的总成本，包括社会和经济成本。这项研究表明，一个有用而有效的国际机制应真正着重于消除毁林的潜在政治和社会经济力量，而不是根据可疑的参考水平估算的基于结果的付款。