Suchergebnisse

It is now well accepted that deforestation is a key source of greenhouse gas emissions and of climate change, with forests representing major sinks for carbon. As a result, public and private initiatives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) have been widely endorsed by policy-makers. A key issue is the feasibility of carbon trading or other incentives to encourage land-owners and indigenous people, particularly in developing tropical countries, to conserve forests, rather than to cut them down for agricultural or other development purposes. This bo

Deforestation and forest degradation are major contributors to climate change. The international REDD+ framework aims to mitigate climate change by rewarding developing countries for conserving and sustainably managing their forests and for enhancing forest carbon stocks. This report synthesizes the existing evidence about the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact of REDD+ measures supported by the German Federal Government. Primary and secondary REDD+ documents and literature were analysed and triangulated with qualitative interviews.

The synthesis study provides evidence-based insights into the results and impact of REDD+ measures that have been designed, financed, and implemented by or on behalf of German actors. It is the first inter-ministerial study by the German Institute for Development Evaluation (DEval) that encompasses measures commissioned by three different Federal Ministries.

The report highlights heterogeneous results on the numerous REDD+ objectives. REDD+ leads to notable changes in partner countries and renews attention to forests, Indigenous Peoples, and rural communities. German efforts are unique and have shaped and advanced the REDD+ concept internationally. The initial expectation of reducing emissions in the forest sector has not (yet) been fulfilled, also because most countries needed considerable readiness support. The report confirms the difficulties in countering deforestation and forest degradation, and in setting effective incentives vis-à-vis the powerful drivers behind forest destruction.

The report derives several implications for improving and further developing REDD+ strategies and portfolios, coordination, transparent communication, and learning by German implementing organizations and Federal Ministries.

Well into its second decade REDD+ is still struggling to achieve what it set out to do. The envisioned win-win scenario was believed to be a cost-effective measure, where the protection of forests would be made more profitable than deforestation, by paying the owners and users of the forests for the carbon stored within the trees. However, REDD+ has proven to be neither cheap, quick or simple. Some of the criticism has been that it does not have a sound economic system in place, it fails in addressing the major drivers of deforestation, and its results are delayed and uncertain. Furthermore, studies have found that in certain areas REDD+ has led to green grabs, increased inequality and exclusions. Despite widespread criticism abroad, there has been little controversy on REDD+ within Norway, its largest contributor - fueling the program with 3 billion NOK annually. From the onset on, there has been political agreement on continuing the support, even through a shift in government from a red-green coalition to a blue-blue conservative government. This thesis investigates Norwegian politicians' perceptions of REDD+ and how these have developed throughout a decade of experiences with the program. It argues that the malleable, flexible structure of REDD+ has served in favour of the program, and allowed divergent motivations and ideologies to co-exist despite its obvious challenges. Furthermore, this thesis argues that a general lack of interest for acquiring new knowledge on REDD+ over the last decade – intentionally or not – may have led to a lack of debate on whether REDD+ is purposeful at this time in history. This could come at high costs. ; M-IR

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) attempts to address climate change from one angle - by paying developing countries to slow or stop deforestation and forest degradation. Trumpeted as a way to both mitigate climate change and assist countries with development, REDD was presented as a win-win solution. However, there have been few attempts to understand and analyse the overall framework. Why REDD Will Fail argues that the important goals will not be met under the existing REDD regime unless the actual drivers of deforestation and forest degradation are diminished. The book delves into the problematic details of the regime, ranging from; national capacity to monitor results, the funding mechanism, the definition of a forest, leakage, and the impetus behind the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. As the international community rallies around REDD and developed countries and companies are willing to commit substantial amounts to implement the scheme, this books seeks to address whether REDD has the potential to achieve its purported goals. This is an important resource for academics and students interested in the policy and management aspects of mitigating climate change, environmental policy, international relations and development studies as well as policy makers involved in the REDD process.

Recent discussions on REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation, plus conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks) have raised optimism about reducing carbon emissions and deforestation in tropical countries. If approved under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), REDD+ mechanisms may generate a substantial influx of financial resources to developing countries. Some authors argue that this money could reverse the ongoing process of decentralization of forest policies that has spread through a large number of developing countries in the past two decades. Central states will be accountable for REDD+ money, and may be compelled to control and keep a significant share of REDD+ funds. Supporters of decentralization argue that centralized implementation of REDD+ will be ineffective and inefficient. In this paper, I examine the relation between subnational governments and REDD+ in Brazil. Data show that some state governments in the Brazilian Amazon have played a key role in creating protected areas (PAs) after 2003, which helped decrease deforestation rates. Governors have different stimuli for creating PAs. Some respond to the needs of their political constituency ; others have expectations to boost the forest sector so as to increase fiscal revenues. Governors also have led the discussion on REDD+ in Brazil since 2008. Considering their interests and political power, REDD+ is unlikely to curb decentralization in Brazil.

The financial implications of implementing a new forest management paradigm have not been well understood and have often been underestimated. Resource needs for e.g., stakeholder consultation, capacity building and addressing the political economy are seldom fully accounted for in the resource needs estimates put forward in connection to REDD+. This report investigates the economics of implementing forest and REDD+ projects through eight case studies from Africa, Latin America and Asia, analyzing real forest and REDD+ investments.

This paper addresses the question of legitimacy in REDD+ governance in Indonesia. It develops a legitimacy framework that builds on elements of Scharpf (J Eur Pub Policy 4(1):18–36, 1997) input and output legitimacy concept and the political economy lens described by Brockhaus and Angelsen (Analysing REDD+: Challenges and choices, CIFOR, Bogor, 2012). Using data collected through key informant interviews and focus groups, we identify and explore stakeholder perceptions of legitimacy. The analysis reveals a complex interplay between input and output legitimacy, finding that state, non-state and hybrid actors perceive output legitimacy (i.e. project outcomes) as highly dependent on the level of input legitimacy achieved during the governance process. Non-state actors perceive proxies for input legitimacy, such as participation and inclusion of local people, as goals in themselves. In the main, they perceive inclusion to be integral to the empowerment of local people. They perceive output legitimacy as less important because of the intangibility of REDD+ outcomes at this stage in the process. The findings also highlight the challenges associated with measuring the legitimacy of REDD+ governance in Indonesia.