Maria Brockhaus

An assessment of deforestation and forest degradation drivers in developing countries

Countries are encouraged to identify drivers of deforestation and forest degradation in the development of national strategies and action plans for REDDC. In this letter we provide an assessment of proximate drivers of deforestation and forest degradation by synthesizing empirical data reported by countries as part of their REDDC readiness activities, CIFOR country profiles, UNFCCC national communications and scientific literature. Based on deforestation rate and remaining forest cover 100 (sub)tropical non-Annex I countries were grouped into four forest transition phases. Driver data of 46 countries were summarized for each phase and by continent, and were used as a proxy to estimate drivers for the countries with missing data. The deforestation drivers are similar in Africa and Asia, while degradation drivers are more similar in Latin America and Asia. Commercial agriculture is the most important driver of deforestation, followed by subsistence agriculture. Timber extraction and logging drives most of the degradation, followed by fuelwood collection and charcoal production, uncontrolled fire and livestock grazing. The results reflect the most up to date and comprehensive overview of current national-level data availability on drivers, which is expected to improve over time within the frame of the UNFCCC REDDC process.

Who Should Benefit from REDD+? Rationales and Realities

Benefit-sharing mechanisms are a central design aspect of REDD+ because they help to create the necessary incentives to reduce carbon emissions. However, if stakeholders do not perceive the benefit sharing as fair, the legitimacy of REDD+, and support for the mechanism, will be weakened. In this paper, drawing on data from CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study on REDD+, we analyze national policy processes in 6 countries and incipient benefit-sharing arrangements in 21 REDD+ project sites. Through our analysis of current practices and debates, we identify six rationales that have been put forward to justify how benefits should be distributed and to whom. These rationales encompass a range of perspectives. Some hold that benefit sharing should be related to actual carbon emission reductions or to costs incurred in achieving the reduction of emissions; others emphasize the importance of a legal right to benefit, the need to consider aspects such as poverty reduction or the appropriateness of rewarding those with a history of protecting the forest. Each rationale has implications for the design of benefit-sharing mechanisms and the equity of their outcomes. We point out that, given the wide range of rationales and interests at play, the objectives of REDD+ and benefit sharing must be clearly established and the term “benefit” defined before effective benefit-sharing mechanisms can be designed. For stakeholders to support REDD+, the legitimacy of decision-making institutions, consideration of context, and attention to process are critical. Building legitimacy requires attention not only to fair distributional outcomes but also to consensus on relevant institutions’ authority to make decisions and to procedural equity.

Equity and REDD+ in the Media: a Comparative Analysis of Policy Discourses

Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) is primarily a market-based mechanism for achieving the effective reduction of carbon emissions from forests. Increasingly, however, concerns are being raised about the implications of REDD+ for equity, including the importance of equity for achieving effective carbon emission reductions from forests. Equity is a multifaceted concept that is understood differently by different actors and at different scales, and public discourse helps determine which equity concerns reach the national policy agenda. Results from a comparative media analysis of REDD+ public discourse in four countries show that policy makers focus more on international than national equity concerns, and that they neglect both the need for increased participation in decision making and recognition of local and indigenous rights. To move from addressing the symptoms to addressing the causes of inequality in REDD+, policy actors need to address issues related to contextual equity, that is, the social and political root causes of inequality.

Ecosystem services in the National Adaptation Programmes of Action

The extent to which ecosystem services have been considered in the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) and the proposed adaptation projects is assessed. By August 2010, 44 least developed countries had prepared their NAPAs in response to climate change. The NAPAs constitute a starting point for planning adaptation nationally and sub-nationally, but need to be evaluated and improved as new knowledge emerges. Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is an emerging approach that recognizes that ecosystem services play an important role in reducing peoples vulnerability to climate change. The importance of ecosystem services is acknowledged in more than 50% of the NAPAs. Approximately 22% of the proposed projects include ecosystem activities for social well-being or adaptation, with most of them in support of other adaptation measures (e.g. infrastructure). These projects deal mainly with regulating services (soil rehabilitation, erosion control and water regulation) and provisioning services (food, fibre and fuel wood). They also have the potential to promote integrative and cross-sectoral adaptation, as many of them consider multiple ecosystem services and beneficiary sectors. However, more technical, political and financial support is needed to foster the role of ecosystem services in adaptation.

How countries link REDD+ interventions to drivers in their readiness plans: implications for monitoring systems

Countries participating in the REDD+ scheme are in the readiness phase, designing policy interventions to address drivers of deforestation and forest degradation (DD). In order for REDD+ interventions to be effective, it is essential that they take into account the specific drivers that they aim to address. Moreover it is crucial to design systems that monitor the effectiveness of the planned interventions. In this article we provide a comprehensive and comparative assessment of interventions proposed by 43 REDD+ countries in 98 readiness documents. We summarize the types of interventions and assess if they are formulated referring to the drivers of DD that they are aiming to address. Based on this assessment we consider the implications for systems for monitoring effectiveness of proposed interventions. Most countries reviewed link proposed interventions to specific drivers of DD. The majority of the countries making this link have better driver data quality, in particularly those that present their data in ratio or ordinal terms. Proposed interventions focus not only on activities to reduce deforestation, but also on other forest related REDD+ activities such as sustainable forest management, which reduce forest degradation and enhance forest stocks. Moreover, driver-specific interventions often relate to drivers not only inside but also outside the forest sector. Hence we suggest that monitoring systems need to assess not only deforestation rates through remote sensing, but also degradation and other carbon stock changes within the forest, using more detailed ground level surveys and measurements. In addition, the performance of interventions outside the forest need to be monitored, even if the impacts of these cannot be linked to specific changes in forest carbon stock in specific locations.

The REDD+ policy arena in Vietnam: participation of policy actors

Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD+) has gained increasing global attention because of its potential to reduce carbon emissions and improve forest governance. Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation requires successful inclusive decision making and accountability. However, there have been limited empirical studies that examine the effectiveness of the current participatory mechanism used in REDD+. Our research analyzes the participation of policy actors in the development of the REDD+ instrument in Vietnam. We are interested in how the political context and the different interests of actors influence the degree of participation in national REDD+ policy decision making. We explored participation through the analysis of the mechanisms, e.g., how actors involve and participate in decision making, and dynamics of participation, e.g., highly centralized policy event vs. donor led event. The study aims to answer three research questions: (1) Who is involved in national REDD+ policy making and what are their interests in participating in core political events? (2) What level of participation do the different political actors have in core political events? and (3) To what extent do the outcomes, e.g., regulations and strategies, of REDD+ policy events incorporate different preferences of policy actors? Our findings highlighted the dominant role of government agencies in REDD+ policy making, which leaves limited political space for nonstate actors, e.g., NGOs and civil society organizations (CSOs), in Vietnam to exert an influence on the final policy outputs. Even in this highly centralized context, however, we found evidence to suggest that some political space in decision making is given to nonstate actors. Within this space, such actors are able to propose alternative policy options. Ensuring inclusive decision making and accountability in the Vietnam context requires a shift in current governance from traditional top-down approaches to a more participatory form of decision making.

Once there was a lake: vulnerability to environmental changes in northern Mali

Vulnerability assessment is increasingly recognised as a starting point to identify climate adaptation needs and improve adaptive capacity. However, vulnerability assessments are challenging because of the complexity of multifaceted biophysical, human and institutional factors, interacting at different scales and levels within socio-ecological systems. Using a participatory approach across levels and genders, this paper explores the vulnerability of livestock- and forest-based livelihoods to climate variability and change in Lake Faguibine, northern Mali, where drastic ecological, political and social changes have occurred. Our results show that the distribution of vulnerabilities within livelihoods and groups shifted when the ecosystem evolved from a lake to a forest. New vulnerability drivers have emerged, related to resources availability, access and power relations. In addition, political interests and psychological barriers hinder the local transition to an equitable and sustainable use of forest ecosystem services. Divergent perceptions, social identities, interests and power explained why different actors—governmental and non-governmental, men and women, local, sub-national and national—differed in their vulnerability assessments. This is exemplified in the way actors at different levels and of different gender analysed the effects of herders’ mobility and in the way women analysed men’s migration. This case study confirms the need for participatory and gender-sensitive vulnerability assessments across different scales and levels that consider the interaction between socio-ecological systems and the dynamics and distribution of vulnerability across different social sub-systems.

Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: what scope for payments for environmental services?

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in payments for environmental services (PES) for ecosystem-based adaptation (EBA). So far, however, experiences and theoretical analyses of PES specifically for adaptation have not been well documented. This paper addresses this gap by analysing the opportunities and constraints of PES as an instrument for EBA. Specifically, we examine the potential for PES to address key elements for adaptation by focusing on three pathways: the user side, the provider side and institutional and societal change. In addition, we assess whether PES fulfils key requirements for adaptation policy instruments, notably effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy. We find that PES are not a panacea for all environmental services and country contexts, but can be promising adaptation policy instruments where certain preconditions are met and synergies prevail. We conclude on four points especially relevant for the practical scope for PES-adaptation synergies: (i) natural adaptation co-benefits (where the targeted environmental service serves a dual function, e.g. secured water quality and increased adaptive capacity), (ii) piggy-backing (where adaptation benefits are coincidental outcomes), (iii) adaptation-relevant institutional and sectoral spillovers from PES schemes, and (iv) direct payments for adaptation benefits.

Learning from REDD+: a response to Fletcher et al.

Although REDD+ is approaching its 10th anniversary, major impacts in terms of reduced forest loss are hard to document. Conservation practitioners and scholars are therefore increasingly asking why REDD+ has not delivered more tangible results. A recent Comment in Conservation Biology by Fletcher et al. (2016) addresses this question. We agree with Fletcher et al. that REDD+ has been hyped in some circles, which has created unrealistic expectations among policy makers and forest dwellers alike. Yet, we argue that Fletcher et al. put forward an incomplete interpretation of the evolving REDD+ concept and practice and wrongly place the responsibility for lack of progress on the principles of payment for environmental services (PES) and on reliance on market-based instruments (MBIs), in part based on their misunderstanding of the PES concept.Potential answers to the question of why REDD+ has not delivered more tangible results fall into 4 categories: REDD+ has not yet been implemented at the scale needed to make a difference, REDD+ has evolved from the initial PES vision to a modified version of previous and largely ineffective conservation efforts, REDD+ has been blocked by powerful actors interested in maintaining the status quo, and REDD+ is conceptually flawed in its design as a PES and MBI scheme. Fletcher et al. fail to fully appreciate the first 3 problems, overemphasize the presumed flaws in REDD+ as a PES design, and prepare the ground for the rise and fall of the next conservation fad (Redford et al. 2013). We believe that REDD+, although troubled, is not dead.

Deadlock or Transformational Change?: Exploring Public Discourse on REDD+ Across Seven Countries

This article investigates the public discourses on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) across seven countries, to assess whether they support policy reforms. We argue that transformational discourses have at least one of these characteristics: they advocate specific policy reforms that address the drivers of deforestation and forest degradation; take into account the potential risks of a REDD+ mechanism; go beyond technocratic solutions to reduce emissions; and explicitly challenge existing power relations that support drivers of deforestation. The evidence indicates the predominance of win-win storylines, a lack of engagement by state actors with debates on the potential negative socioeconomic outcomes of REDD+, and little attention to the drivers of deforestation. The article concludes that to achieve a shift toward transformational public discourse, reformist policy actors and the media need to engage dominant policy actors in debates about how to reduce pressure on the forest.