气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): Narratives in REDD+ benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector

CCPortal

DOI	10.1080/14693062.2019.1618786
	Narratives in REDD+ benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector
	Wong G.Y.; Luttrell C.; Loft L.; Yang A.; Pham T.T.; Naito D.; Assembe-Mvondo S.; Brockhaus M.
发表日期	2019
ISSN	14693062
起始页码	1038
结束页码	1051
卷号	19 期号:8
英文摘要	REDD+ was designed globally as a results-based instrument to incentivize emissions reduction from deforestation and forest degradation. Over 50 countries have developed strategies for REDD+, implemented pilot activities and/or set up forest monitoring and reporting structures, safeguard systems and benefit sharing mechanisms (BSMs), offering lessons on how particular ideas guide policy design. The implementation of REDD+ at national, sub-national and local levels required payments to filter through multiple governance structures and priorities. REDD+ was variously interpreted by different actors in different contexts to create legitimacy for certain policy agendas. Using an adapted 3E (effectiveness, efficiency, equity and legitimacy) lens, we examine four common narratives underlying REDD+ BSMs: (1) that results-based payment (RBP) is an effective and transparent approach to reducing deforestation and forest degradation; (2) that emphasis on co-benefits risks diluting carbon outcomes; (3) that directing REDD+ benefits predominantly to poor smallholders, forest communities and marginalized groups helps address equity; and (4) that social equity and gender concerns can be addressed by well-designed safeguards. This paper presents a structured examination of eleven BSMs from within and beyond the forest sector and analyses the evidence to variably support and challenge these narratives and their underlying assumptions to provide lessons for REDD+ BSM design. Our findings suggest that contextualizing the design of BSMs, and a reflexive approach to examining the underlying narratives justifying particular design features, is critical for achieving effectiveness, equity and legitimacy. Key policy insights A results-based payment approach does not guarantee an effective REDD+; the contexts in which results are defined and agreed, along with conditions enabling social and political acceptance, are critical. A flexible and reflexive approach to designing a benefit-sharing mechanism that delivers emissions reductions at the same time as co-benefits can increase perceptions of equity and participation. Targeting REDD+ to smallholder communities is not by default equitable, if wider rights and responsibilities are not taken into account Safeguards cannot protect communities or society without addressing underlying power and gendered relations. The narratives and their underlying generic assumptions, if not critically examined, can lead to repeated failure of REDD+ policies and practices. © 2019, © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
英文关键词	co-benefits; effectiveness; equity; legitimacy; Results based payments; safeguards
语种	英语
scopus关键词	deforestation; emission control; environmental degradation; environmental policy; forest management; smallholder
来源期刊	Climate Policy
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/153376
作者单位	Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; Center for International Forestry Research, Bogor, Indonesia; Working Group Ecosystem Services Governance, Leibnitz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Müncheberg, Germany; Edinburgh Centre for Carbon Innovation, School of Geosciences Research, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science (HELSUS), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Wong G.Y.,Luttrell C.,Loft L.,et al. Narratives in REDD+ benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector[J],2019,19(8).
APA	Wong G.Y..,Luttrell C..,Loft L..,Yang A..,Pham T.T..,...&Brockhaus M..(2019).Narratives in REDD+ benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector.Climate Policy,19(8).
MLA	Wong G.Y.,et al."Narratives in REDD+ benefit sharing: examining evidence within and beyond the forest sector".Climate Policy 19.8(2019).