• Save
Assessing progress in national REDD+ policy processes
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Assessing progress in national REDD+ policy processes

on

  • 149 views

This presentation by Monica Di Gregorio, M. Brockhaus, K. Korhonen-Kurki, J. Sehring, T. Cronin, S. Mardiah, L. Santoso, and E. Muharrom during the Forests Asia Summit in the discussion forum "Climate ...

This presentation by Monica Di Gregorio, M. Brockhaus, K. Korhonen-Kurki, J. Sehring, T. Cronin, S. Mardiah, L. Santoso, and E. Muharrom during the Forests Asia Summit in the discussion forum "Climate change: Low-emissions development and societal welfare - trade offs, risks and power struggles in forest and climate change policy arenas" focuses on the REDD Global Comparative Study (GCS), key policy challenges and regime types, how progress in REDD+ is actually defined and what conclusions can be drawn.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
149
Views on SlideShare
149
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Assessing progress in national REDD+ policy processes Assessing progress in national REDD+ policy processes Presentation Transcript

  • THINKING beyond the canopy Assessing progress in national REDD+ policy processes Monica Di Gregorio, M. Brockhaus, K. Korhonen-Kurki, J. Sehring, T. Cronin, S. Mardiah, L. Santoso, E.Muharrom (CIFOR and University of Leeds/SRI) 5th May2014– Forest Asia, Jakarta
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Comparative studies  Policy context analysis (enabling conditions) • Policies supporting and clashing with REDD+, and autonomy of the state in 7 countries  Qualitative comparative analysis • Assesses factors that have enabled REDD+ policy progress • Remote (institutional) and proximate conditions (policy processes) in 12 countries  Comparative media analysis • Investigates the potential of public discourses to facilitate policy change in 7 countries 2
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Key policy challenges and regime types 3 Country Drivers of Defor & Forest Degradation Policies Clashing with REDD+ Policies Supporting REDD+ Lack of autonomy / possible capture by special interests Democrac y category score (index ) Level of centra lizatio n Indonesia Agriculture (large scale incl. oil palm, small scale & subsistence), logging, mining Pulp and paper; Mining permits in protected areas; fiscal and non- fiscal concessions for food estate/energy estate; biofuel development; land allocation for oil palm plantations Moratorium on Granting of New Licenses and Improvement of Natural Primary Forest and Peatland Governance (but considered a ‘weak’due to the influence of business on government) Medium-High (pressure from large scale plantations and logging, pulp and paper, mining and electoral campaigns) Flawed democracy (6.53) Decent ralised with tension s Nepal Agriculture; illegal logging; resettlement; infrastructure; fire Agricultural modernisation; Infrastructure development; road construction; mining; lack of overarching land use policy Subsidies for kerosene, biogas, micro-hydro, solar and improved cooking stoves; community forestry programme Medium-high (illegal logging and smuggling to India and Tibet (China); encroachment of forestlands; corrupt politicians, and bureaucrats) Hybrid regimes (4.24) Decent ralised Vietnam Agriculture; infrastructure; logging; fire; shifting cultivation; migration Infrastructure; food and cash crop development (self-sufficiency); National Socio-Economic Development Plan; credit schemes to alleviate poverty; land allocation; economic development as main goal of Forest Development Strategy Payments for forest environmental services & benefit-sharing regulation (weak implementation); Law on Forest Protection and Development 2004; Land Law 2003: legal foundation for carbon rights; National Climate Change Strategy Medium-high (especially at the local level and in relation to state-owned companies and land administration) Authoritari an (2.96) Central ised
  • THINKING beyond the canopy QCA: How is progress in REDD+ defined? The phased approach (Meridian 2009, UNFCCC) Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Activities National REDD strategy development including inter alia: • Institutional strengthening • Demonstration activities National REDD strategy implementation, including inter alia; • Land tenure reforms • Forest law enforcement • PES Consolidation of REDD strategy implementation, including inter alia: • Improved forest management • Supply chain modernization 4 Progress = Establishment of comprehensive policies targeting transformational change in the REDD+ policy domain (phase II)  Brazil, Indonesia and Vietnam
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Analysis: Two-step QCA Six factors divided into two categories to explain outcome  Institutional setting: • Pressure on forest resources • Effective forest policy and governance • Pre-existing CC/ reduction of deforestation policies  Policy process: • National ownership • Transformational coalitions • Inclusiveness of the policy process 5
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Remote conditions 6 Pre-existing forestry and CC reforms are a prerequisite for progress REDD+ but only in the presence of either • high pressure on forest resources (Brazil and Indonesia) or • key features of effective forest legislation, policy and governance (Vietnam)
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Proximate conditions 7
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Proximate conditions 8 Where an enabling institutional setting is in place, two proximate conditions proofed to be crucial for all three successful countries (Brazil, Vietnam and Indonesia): • National ownership • Transformational coalitions
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Comparative media: Results Dominant public discourse: simplistic win-win scenarios (state & international actors)  Avoids debates around drivers of deforestation (legal and illegal logging and conversion of forest to plantation agriculture or other land uses)  Recognizes the need for institutional and governance reforms Transformational change discourse: domestic environmental justice NGOs/CSOs:  Recognizes trade-offs between REDD+ & economic development, resource access and livelihoods  Questions power structures supporting drivers of deforestation and degradation (indirectly) 9
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Conclusions Achieving emission reductions through REDD+ requires specific conditions:  Relative autonomy of nation states from key interests that drive deforestation and forest degradation  Pre-existing policy reforms (forestry and CC) + pressure of forests or effective forest legislation, policy and governance in place  National ownership over REDD+ policy processes  Transformational change coalitions: • Need to include key state and business actors to break up institutional/political barriers 10
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Where do we go from here?  Keep the major drivers of deforestation high on the agenda – no action without awareness • Facilitate REDD+ progress through policy integration and sectoral reforms (forestry, agriculture, economic development – low carbon economy) • Engage actors from sectors driving deforestation and forest degradation in REDD+ policy debates (private sector)  Ensure equity and safeguards are in place: • Bring together state and non-state actors around debates on tenure, benefit-sharing and multiple benefits debates (consider possible trade-offs) 11
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Further readings: Di Gregorio, M., Brockhaus, M., Cronin, T., & Muharrom, E. 2012. Politics and power in national REDD+ policy processes. In A. Angelsen, M. Brockhaus, W. D. Sunderlin & L. V. Verchot (Eds.), Analysing REDD+: Challenges and choices (pp. 69–90). Bogor, Indonesia: Centre for International Forestry Research. Korhonen-Kurki, K., Sehring, J., Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M. 2014. Enabling factors for establishing REDD+ in a context of weak governance. Climate Policy, 14(2): 167-186. Brockhaus, M., Di Gregorio, M., & Mardiah, S. Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency. Forest Policy and Economics(0). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.003 Di Gregorio, M., Brockhaus, M., Cronin, T., Muharrom, E., Mardiah, S., Santoso, L. Deadlock or transformational change? Exploring public discourse on REDD+ across seven countries (submitted Global Environmental Politics) Di Gregorio, M., Brockhaus, M., Cronin, T., Muharrom, E., Santoso, L., Mardiah, S. and Büdenbender,, M. 2013. Equity and REDD+ in the Media: A Comparative Analysis of Policy Discourses. Ecology and Society, 18:2. DOI: 10.5751/ES-05694-18023  www.cifor.cgiar.org
  • THINKING beyond the canopy Acknowledgements This work is part of the policy component of CIFOR’s global comparative study on REDD (GCS). The methods and guidelines used in this research component were designed by Maria Brockhaus, Monica Di Gregorio and Sheila Wertz-Kanounnikoff. Parts of the methodology are adapted from the research protocol for media and network analysis designed by COMPON (‘Comparing Climate Change Policy Networks’). Case leaders: Thuy Thu Pham (Nepal), Thuy Thu Pham & Moira Moeliono (Vietnam), Thuy Thu Pham and Guillaume Lestrelin (Laos), Daju Resosudarmo & Moira Moeliono (Indonesia), Andrea Babon (PNG), Peter Cronkleton, Kaisa Korhonen- Kurki, Pablo Pacheco (Bolivia), Mary Menton (Peru), Sven Wunder & Peter May (Brazil), Samuel Assembe & Jolien Schure (Cameroon), Samuel Assembe (DRC), Salla Rantala (Tanzania), Sheila Wertz-Kanounnikoff (Mozambique), Suwadu Sakho- Jimbira & Houria Djoudi (Burkina Faso), Arild Angelsen (Norway). Special thanks to our national partners from REDES, CEDLA Libelula and DAR, REPOA, UEM, CODELT, ICEL, ForestAction, CIEM, CERDA, Son La FD, UPNG, NRI-PNG, and UMB. Thanks to contributors to case studies, analysis and review : Levania Santoso, Tim Cronin, Giorgio Indrarto, Prayekti Murharjanti, Josi Khatarina, Irvan Pulungan, Feby Ivalerina, Justitia Rahman, Muhar Nala Prana, Caleb Gallemore (Indonesia) Nguyen Thi Hien, Nguyen Huu Tho, Vu Thi Hien, Bui Thi Minh Nguyet, Nguyen Tuan Viet and Huynh Thu Ba (Vietnam), Dil Badhur, Rahul Karki, Bryan Bushley, Naya Paudel (Nepal), Daniel McIntyre, Gae Gowae, Nidatha Martin, Nalau Bingeding, Ronald Sofe, Abel Simon (PNG), Walter Arteaga, Bernado Peredo, Jesinka Pastor (Bolivia), Maria Fernanda Gebara, Brent Millikan, Bruno Calixto, Shaozeng Zhang (Brazil), Hugo Piu, Javier Perla, Daniela Freundt, Eduardo Burga Barrantes, Talía Postigo Takahashi (Peru), Guy Patrice Dkamela, Felicien Kengoum (Cameroon), Felicien Kabamba, Augustin Mpoyi, Angelique Mbelu (DRC), Demetrius Kweka, Therese Dokken, Rehema Tukai, George Jambiya, Riziki Shemdoe, (Tanzania), Almeida Sitoe, Alda Salomão (Mozambique), Mathurin Zida, Michael Balinga (Burkina Faso), Laila Borge (Norway). Special thanks to Efrian Muharrom, Sofi Mardiah, Christine Wairata, Ria Widjaja-Adhi, Cecilia Luttrell, Frances Seymour, Lou Verchot, Markku Kanninen, Elena Petkova, Arild Angelsen, Jan Boerner, Anne Larson, Martin Herold, Rachel Carmenta, Juniarta Tjajadi, Cynthia Maharani
  • Thanks to