Search results

The Colombian Amazon has experienced rapid forest loss in the past decades due to growing colonization, infrastructure development, and commercial agriculture expansion. While much of the analyses of deforestation in the Amazon have been in Brazil, there is a need to extend to Colombia where forest and land use exploitation are driven by post-conflict social and political dynamics. This research contributes to this knowledge gap by unpacking the mechanisms underpinning deforestation on the northwestern side of the Colombian Amazon. We used theory-building process-tracing to guide us in conceptualizing the underlying logics of deforestation in the region through qualitative text analysis of policy documents, articles, reports, and grey literature, and virtual semi-structured interviews with key national, regional and local actors. Findings indicate that the power vacuum resulting from the demobilization of FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia), Marxist-Leninist guerrillas, acted as a window of opportunity for peasants, squatters, narco-traffickers, cattle ranchers, landlords, and other investors to access public lands and capitalize from converting forests to coca crops and pastures for cattle ranching. Accumulation of land and surplus primarily from cattle ranching and coca production has increased the ability of these actors to reshape the landscape and societal structures. Traditional elites and old and emerging narco-bourgeoisie have capitalized on preexisting power asymmetries by disproportionally accumulating land, money, gun power, influence, and prestige seeking to consolidate territorial hegemony, and controlling the means for material reproduction in society. Powerful actors use their resources and prestige to displace historically marginalized groups – such as indigenous communities, peasants and squatters – from their means of subsistence and production, resulting in the installation of a capitalist economy based on land rent and drug trafficking, where less powerful and marginalized actors engage in deforestation as means for capital accumulation and subsidizing their peasant and subsistence economies. All this has deepened forest loss, inequalities, and conflict over land access between actors. 

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is envisioned as a performance-based incentive to influence forest use behavior and governance towards the preservation and management of forests. In relatively forest-rich Lao PDR, the policy space that REDD+ planners are attempting to navigate is populated by enduring political and economic interests that affect the country's forest estate. A further layer to the problem of REDD+ planning is the tension between often expert-driven, externally proposed solutions; national ownership over interventions; and the extent of political will to take action to reform currently unsustainable patterns of forest and forest land exploitation. This paper draws from a series of semi-structured interviews conducted in 2013-2014, to develop a political and institutional analysis of the limitations to the effectiveness of REDD+ in steering towards a lower forest-derived emissions trajectory in Lao PDR. While internationally-driven projects follow long-standing national objectives to varying degrees, it remains unclear how REDD+ can target main drivers of deforestation in the absence of a more politically engaged and nationally-owned planning process, that also challenges the prevailing logic of avoiding these drivers. Despite the importance of improving domestic ownership over REDD+, this would arguably be of limited impact unless oriented towards transformational change that would seek to overcome political and economic barriers to avoided deforestation. Stronger ownership could be developed via more mutually driven REDD+ planning, while tackling main drivers of deforestation necessitates as a starting point the engagement of powerful actors that have so far been absent from REDD+ debate. ; Peer reviewed

Community forestry or social forestry (henceforth referred collectively as SF) programs have become new modes of forest management empowering local managers and hence, allowing integration of diverse local practices and support of local livelihoods. Implementation of these initiatives, however, face multiple challenges. State-prescribed community programs, for example, will remain isolated efforts if changes in the overall economic and social governance frameworks, including the devolution of rights to local users is lacking. Financial sustainability of these measures remains often uncertain and equity issues inherent to groups and communities formed for SF, can be exacerbated. In this article, we pose the question: Whose interests do SF policies serve? The effectiveness of SF would depend on the motivations and aims for a decentralization of forest governance to the community. In order to understand the underlying motivations behind the governments' push for SF, we examine national policies in Vietnam and Indonesia, changes in their policies over time and the shift in discourses influencing how SF has evolved. Vietnam and Indonesia are at different sides of the spectrum in democratic ambitions and forest abundance, and present an intriguing comparison in the recent regional push towards SF in Southeast Asia. We discuss the different interpretations of SF in these two countries and how SF programs are implemented. Our results show that governments, influenced by global discourse, are attempting to regulate SF through formal definitions and regulations. Communities on the other hand, might resist by adopting, adapting or rejecting formal schemes. In this tension, SF, in general adopted to serve the interest of local people, in practice SF has not fulfilled its promise. ; Peer reviewed

Community forestry or social forestry (henceforth referred collectively as SF) programs have become new modes of forest management empowering local managers and hence, allowing integration of diverse local practices and support of local livelihoods. Implementation of these initiatives, however, face multiple challenges. State-prescribed community programs, for example, will remain isolated efforts if changes in the overall economic and social governance frameworks, including the devolution of rights to local users is lacking. Financial sustainability of these measures remains often uncertain and equity issues inherent to groups and communities formed for SF, can be exacerbated. In this article, we pose the question: Whose interests do SF policies serve? The effectiveness of SF would depend on the motivations and aims for a decentralization of forest governance to the community. In order to understand the underlying motivations behind the governments' push for SF, we examine national policies in Vietnam and Indonesia, changes in their policies over time and the shift in discourses influencing how SF has evolved. Vietnam and Indonesia are at different sides of the spectrum in democratic ambitions and forest abundance, and present an intriguing comparison in the recent regional push towards SF in Southeast Asia. We discuss the different interpretations of SF in these two countries and how SF programs are implemented. Our results show that governments, influenced by global discourse, are attempting to regulate SF through formal definitions and regulations. Communities on the other hand, might resist by adopting, adapting or rejecting formal schemes. In this tension, SF, in general adopted to serve the interest of local people, in practice SF has not fulfilled its promise.

Halting forest loss and achieving sustainable development in an equitable manner require state, non-state actors, and entire societies in the Global North and South to tackle deeply established patterns of inequality and power relations embedded in forest frontiers. Forest and climate governance in the Global South can provide an avenue for the transformational change needed—yet, does it? We analyse the politics and power in four cases of mitigation, adaptation, and development arenas. We use a political economy lens to explore the transformations taking place when climate policy meets specific forest frontiers in the Global South, where international, national and local institutions, interests, ideas, and information are at play. We argue that lasting and equitable outcomes will require a strong discursive shift within dominant institutions and among policy actors to redress policies that place responsibilities and burdens on local people in the Global South, while benefits from deforestation and maladaptation are taken elsewhere. What is missing is a shared transformational objective and priority to keep forests standing among all those involved from afar in the major forest frontiers in the tropics.

Halting forest loss and achieving sustainable development in an equitable manner require state, non-state actors, and entire societies in the Global North and South to tackle deeply established patterns of inequality and power relations embedded in forest frontiers. Forest and climate governance in the Global South can provide an avenue for the transformational change needed—yet, does it? We analyse the politics and power in four cases of mitigation, adaptation, and development arenas. We use a political economy lens to explore the transformations taking place when climate policy meets specific forest frontiers in the Global South, where international, national and local institutions, interests, ideas, and information are at play. We argue that lasting and equitable outcomes will require a strong discursive shift within dominant institutions and among policy actors to redress policies that place responsibilities and burdens on local people in the Global South, while benefits from deforestation and maladaptation are taken elsewhere. What is missing is a shared transformational objective and priority to keep forests standing among all those involved from afar in the major forest frontiers in the tropics. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13280-021-01602-1.

World Health Organization (WHO) calls for global hepatitis strategy to eliminate viral hepatitis by 2030. Yet many high-income countries were unable to achieve HCV elimination by 2030. Apart from the tremendous efforts and resources from the governments, many non-government organizations (NGOs) have been working very hard to contribute to HCV elimination. In Hong Kong, the Center for Liver Health of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) has been working very closely with various NGOs to educate and screen subjects who previously use intravenous drugs. In this review article, we discussed in details the New Life New Liver Program, and the barriers to HCV elimination, with special highlight the role of NGOs in overcoming the barriers.

Halting forest loss and achieving sustainable development in an equitable manner require state, non-state actors, and entire societies in the Global North and South to tackle deeply established patterns of inequality and power relations embedded in forest frontiers. Forest and climate governance in the Global South can provide an avenue for the transformational change needed—yet, does it? We analyse the politics and power in four cases of mitigation, adaptation, and development arenas. We use a political economy lens to explore the transformations taking place when climate policy meets specific forest frontiers in the Global South, where international, national and local institutions, interests, ideas, and information are at play. We argue that lasting and equitable outcomes will require a strong discursive shift within dominant institutions and among policy actors to redress policies that place responsibilities and burdens on local people in the Global South, while benefits from deforestation and maladaptation are taken elsewhere. What is missing is a shared transformational objective and priority to keep forests standing among all those involved from afar in the major forest frontiers in the tropics. ; Peer reviewed

Halting forest loss and achieving sustainable development in an equitable manner require state, non-state actors, and entire societies in the Global North and South to tackle deeply established patterns of inequality and power relations embedded in forest frontiers. Forest and climate governance in the Global South can provide an avenue for the transformational change needed—yet, does it? We analyse the politics and power in four cases of mitigation, adaptation, and development arenas. We use a political economy lens to explore the transformations taking place when climate policy meets specific forest frontiers in the Global South, where international, national and local institutions, interests, ideas, and information are at play. We argue that lasting and equitable outcomes will require a strong discursive shift within dominant institutions and among policy actors to redress policies that place responsibilities and burdens on local people in the Global South, while benefits from deforestation and maladaptation are taken elsewhere. What is missing is a shared transformational objective and priority to keep forests standing among all those involved from afar in the major forest frontiers in the tropics. ; Peer reviewed