evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Uganda's REDD+ Results-Based Payment — Africa's First GCF Forest Carbon Disbursement

Uganda · Kampala · See the Uganda profile · See the Kampala profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 76% 33/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Uganda became the first African country to receive a UN Green Climate Fund results-based payment for REDD+, with FAO channelling $31 million for verified 2016–2017 forest emission reductions of over 8 million tonnes of CO2, even as agriculture still drives ~90% of deforestation.

31 USD million
GCF results-based payment
>8 million tonnes CO2
Verified net emission reductions (2016-2017)
~90%
Share of forest loss from agricultural expansion

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Ministry of Water and Environment (Uganda); FAO (GCF Accredited Entity)
Period
2016–2017 results period; GCF Board approval October 2025
Keywords
forest carbon, REDD+, results-based payments, national programme, MRV

Context

In October 2025 the Green Climate Fund approved Africa's first REDD+ results-based payment to a national government: USD31M to Uganda, channelled through FAO, for verified 2016-2017 forest emission reductions.

Results

FAO and UN-REDD report net emission reductions of over 8 million tonnes of CO2 for the results period, following a 16-year policy process including Uganda's National REDD+ Strategy (2017) and an ART-TREES concept note (2022).

Conclusions

Agricultural expansion still drives nearly 90% of Uganda's forest loss, so the payment rewards a historical verified period rather than proof the underlying deforestation driver is resolved.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Very high (> €5M)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Ministry of Water and Environment forestry/REDD+ programme staff, FAO as GCF Accredited Entity

Conditions for success

  • sustained technical cooperation and finance
  • addressing agricultural drivers of deforestation

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful