Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T03:21:11.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - REDD+ Meets Local Realities

from Part I - Wicked Problems and Policies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2020

By
Arild Vatn ,
Maria G. Nantongo  and
Raymond A. Samndong
Edited by
William Nikolakis  and
John L. Innes
William Nikolakis
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
John L. Innes
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Get access

Summary

REDD+ (reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation) was introduced as a key policy measure to mitigate global climate change in tropical forests. REDD+ is framed as an incentive-driven payment for ecosystem services (PES) programmes for carbon sequestration and storage. REDD+ is also performance-based and demands substantial institutional change. Implementing REDD+ implies engaging and confronting several interests, creating complex and wicked problems for policy-makers. This chapter analyzes REDD+ in Kilosa, Tanzania; the ‘Bolsa Floresta’ project in the State of Amazonas, Brazil; and in the Bikoro, Equateur Province of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Forests are important to livelihoods in each of these contexts, but they vary in power structure and history. These variations aside, the three cases offer an opportunity to learn about the challenges REDD+ has encountered ‘on the ground’.

Keywords

REDD+Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)TanzaniaBrazilImplementation
Type
Chapter
Information
The Wicked Problem of Forest Policy
A Multidisciplinary Approach to Sustainability in Forest Landscapes
 , pp. 108 - 138
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Angelsen, A. and McNeill, D.. 2012. The evolution of REDD+. Pages 42–49 in Angelsen, A., Brockhaus, M., Sunderlin, W. D. and Verchot, L. V., editors. Analyzing REDD+. Challenges and Choices. Bogor: CIFOR.Google Scholar
Debroux, L., Topa, G., Kaimowitz, D., et al. 2007. Forests in Post-Conflict Democratic Republic of Congo: Analysis of a Priority Agenda. Bogor: CIFOR.Google Scholar
Eliasch, J. 2008 . Climate Change: Financing Global Forests. The Eliasch Review. London, UK: Earthscan Publishers.Google Scholar
FAO. 2009. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 Brazil. Country Report. Available at: www.fao.org/forestry/20288-0f6ee8584eea8bff0d20ad5cebcb071cf.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAO. 2010. Global Forest Resources. Assessment 2010: Main Report. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
FAO. 2016. Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015 Rome. How are the World’s Forests Changing? 2nd edition. Available at: www.fao.org/3/a-i4793e.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAS. 2012. Planificação Participative para REDD+: A Experiência de Aplicação do Programa Bolsa Floresta para Moçambique. Manaus: Fundação Amazonas Sustentável.Google Scholar
FAS. 2013. Apresentaçao Investimentos RDS Rio Negro. Manaus: Fundação Amazonas Sustentável.Google Scholar
GDRC (Government of DRC). 2002. Forest Code. Law No. 1 1/2002 29 August, 2002.Google Scholar
GDRC. 2012. National REDD+ Framework Strategy of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Ministry of Environment Conservation of Nature and Tourism. Kinshasa: Democratic Republic of Congo UNREDD Programme.Google Scholar
GDRC. 2016. Ministerial Order 025 Regarding Specific Provisions for the Management and Exploitation of Local Community Forest Concessions. Kinshasa: GDRC.Google Scholar
Governo do Estado do Amazonas. 2007. Lei Ordinária 3135 de 05 de Junho 2007, Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza e dá Outras Providências. Manaus: Governo do Estado do Amazonas.Google Scholar
Iliffe, J. 1979. A Modern History of Tanganyika. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
INPE. 2016. PRODES Estimates for Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Available at: www.inpe.br/noticias/noticia.php?Cod_Noticia=4344Google Scholar
IPCC. 2007. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
KDC (Kilosa District Council). 2010. Kilosa District Profile. Kilosa: KDC (Kilosa District Council).Google Scholar
Kilihama, F. B. 2014. Evolution and status of participatory forest management in Tanzania and future direction. Tanzania Journal of Forestry and Nature Conservation 83(1):5–26.Google Scholar
Lund, J. F., Sungusia, E., Mabele, M. B. and Scheba, A.. 2017. Promising change, delivering continuity: REDD+ as conservation fad. World Development 89:124–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, P. H., Millikan, B. and Gebara, M. F.. 2011. The Context of REDD+ in Brazil: Drivers, Agents and Institutions. Occasional Paper 55. 2nd edition. CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. Available at: www.cifor.org/publications/pdf_files/OccPapers/OP-55.pdfGoogle Scholar
MECNT. 2010. DRC Readiness Plan for REDD (2010-2012), R-PP Final Version. Kinshasa: Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Tourism.Google Scholar
MJUMITA. 2014. MJUMITA Community Forest Project (Lindi). Project Design Document (PDD) for the full Validation Using the Climate, Community, Biodiversity (CCB) Project Design Standard. Available at: www.climate-standards.org/2014/05/08/mjumita-community-forest-project-lindi/Google Scholar
Mohammad, A.J. and Inoue, M.. 2017. REDD+: global multilevel forest governance for building a climate resilient society. Pages 231–249 in Ninan, K. N. and Inoue, M., editors. Building a Climate Resilient Economy and Society. Challenges and Opportunities. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Movik, S., Birikorang, G., Enright, A., et al. 2012. Socio-Economic Conditions in REDD+ Pilot Areas: A Synthesis of Five Baseline Surveys. London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).Google Scholar
Naugthon-Treves, L. and Wendland, K.. 2014. Land tenure and tropical forest management. World Development 55:1–6.Google Scholar
Rantala, S. and Di Gregorio, M.. 2014. Multistakeholder environmental governance in action: REDD+ discourse coalitions in Tanzania. Ecology and Society 19(2): Article 66.Google Scholar
RF-UK. 2016. Community Forests in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Towards Equitable and Sustainable Forest Management. Policy brief. London: Rainforest Foundation UK.Google Scholar
Samndong, R. A. 2015. Institutional choice and fragmented citizenship in forestry and development interventions in Bikoro Territory of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Forum for Development Studies 43(2):1–29.Google Scholar
Samndong, R. and Vatn, A.. 2018. Competing tenures: Implications for REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Forests 9(11): Article 662.Google Scholar
Samndong, R. A., Bush, G., Vatn, A. and Chapman, M.. 2018. Institutional analysis of causes of deforestation in REDD+ pilot sites in the Equateur province: Implication for REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Land Use Policy 76:664–674.Google Scholar
SDS. 2009. Amazonas Initiative on Climate Change, Forest Conservation and Sustainable Development. Manaus, Brazil: Government of the State of Amazonas, Secretariat for Environment and Sustainable Development.Google Scholar
Stern, N., with Peters, S., Bakhshi, V., Bowen, A., et al. 2006. Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change. London: HM Treasury.Google Scholar
Sunderlin, W. D. and Atmadja, S.. 2009. Is REDD+ an idea whose time has come, or gone? Pages 45–53 in Angelsen, A., with Brockhaus, M., Kanninen, M., Sills, E., Sunderlin, W. D. and Wertz-Kanounnikoff, S., editors. Realising REDD+: National Strategy and Policy Options. Bogor: CIFOR.Google Scholar
Sunderlin, D., Larson, A. M., Duchelle, A. E., et al. 2014. How are REDD+ proponents addressing tenure problems? Evidence from Brazil, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam. World Development 55: 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TFCG. 2009. Making REDD and the Carbon Market Work for Communities and Forest Conservation in Tanzania. Project proposal presented to the Royal Norwegian Embassy, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.Google Scholar
TFCG and MJUMITA. 2012. Building a Village Company to Improve Community Based Forest Management in the Context of REDD. Available at: www.tfcg.org/makingReddWork.htmlGoogle Scholar
UNFCCC. 2011. The Cancun agreements: outcome of the work of the ad hoc working group on long-term cooperation under the Convention. Decision 1/CP.16. In Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010. FCC/CP/2010/7 Add.1. Bonn, Germany: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.Google Scholar
URT (United Republic of Tanzania). 1999. The Land Act No. 4. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development.Google Scholar
URT. 2002. Forest Act. Dar es Salaam: Forestry and Beekeeping Division, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism.Google Scholar
URT. 2010. National Strategy for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation. Dar es Salaam: Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism.Google Scholar
URT. 2013. National Strategy for Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+). Dar es Salaam: Vice President’s Office.Google Scholar
Vatn, A. 2015. Environmental Governance, Institutions, Policies and Actions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Vatn, A., Kajembe, G. C., Leiva-Montoya, R., et al. 2013. Instituting REDD+. An Analysis of the Processes and Outcomes of Instituting REDD+ in Two Pilot Areas – RDS Rio Negro (Brazil) and Kilosa (Tanzania). London, UK: International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED).Google Scholar
Vatn, A., Kajembe, G., Mosi, E., Nantongo, M. and Silayo, D. S. 2017. What does it take to institute REDD+? An analysis of the Kilosa REDD+ pilot, Tanzania. Forest Policy and Economics 83:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viana, V. M. 2010. Sustainable Development in Practice. Lessons Learned from Amazonas. London: IIED. Available at: http://fas-amazonas.org/versao/2012/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Viana_Lessons-learned-from-Amazonas.pdfGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×