REDD+ progress: a qualitative comparative analysis

560 views
401 views

Published on

Dr Maria Brockhaus gave this presentation in Bonn, Germany on 5 June 2013 at an event organized by CIFOR titled ‘REDD+ performance and verification: Insights from CIFOR’s Global Comparative Study (GCS) on REDD+’. This was an official side event to the 2013 Bonn Climate Change Conference.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
560
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
18
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

REDD+ progress: a qualitative comparative analysis

  1. 1. THINKING beyond the canopyREDD+ progress: a qualitativecomparative analysisMaria Brockhaus, Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki,Jenniver Sehring, and Monica Di GregorioBonn, 5th June 2013
  2. 2. How is progress in REDD+ defined?The phased approach (Meridian 2009, UNFCCC)2
  3. 3. THINKING beyond the canopyTo move forward with REDD+ towardresult based payments,transformational change is needed:Definition and policy outcomes a shift in discursive practices, attitudes, powerrelations, and deliberate policy and protest actionthat leads policy formulation and implementationaway from business as usual policy approachesthat directly or indirectly support deforestationand degradation
  4. 4. THINKING beyond the canopyExamples oftransformational changeIn the context of REDD+, transformational outcomes can bei) changes in economic, regulatory and governanceframeworks, including the devolution of rights to localusers;ii) removals of perverse incentives, such as subsidies andconcessions that serve selective economic interests andstimulate deforestation and forest degradation; andiii) reforms of forest industry policies and regulations thateffectively reduce unsustainable extraction
  5. 5. THINKING beyond the canopyHow to measure country progress?QCAKaisa Korhonen-Kurki, Jenniver Sehring, Maria Brockhaus and Monica DiGregorio. Enabling factors for establishing REDD+ in a context of weakgovernance: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. (submitted to Climate Policy) QCA designed for comparisons of a small tointermediate number of cases (Ragin, 1987 2000,2008; Rihoux & Ragin, 2009; Schneider & Wagemann2012) QCA allows for systematic cross-case comparisonwithout neglecting case complexity  modest, medium-range generalization and theorizing In QCA, each case is understood as a specificcombination (or ‘configuration’) of factors, called‘conditions’
  6. 6. THINKING beyond the canopy Background studies (country profiles, media analysis,comparative analysis) in 12 countries in South America,sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and Oceania Expert country teams with in-depth case knowledge• Workshops: Identification of relevant factors,identification of relevant indicators• Online survey: revision of factors, indicators, and firstassessment  selection of final factors andassessment• Final workshop in September 2012: assessmentsfinalised and verified 2-step QCAQCA for REDD+: approach
  7. 7. THINKING beyond the canopyAnalysis :Two-step QCAOutcome variable: Establishment of comprehensive policiestargeting transformational change in the REDD+ policydomain (phase II)Remote conditions spatiotemporally distant from the outcome,stable over time , difficult to change  institutional settingProximate conditions spatiotemporally close, vary over timeand easier to change  policy arena Six factors divided into two categories to explain outcome• Institutional setting: pressure from forest-resource shortage;effective forest legislation, policy and governance; alreadyinitiated policy change• The policy arena: national ownership; transformationalcoalitions; inclusiveness of the policy process
  8. 8. THINKING beyond the canopyDefinition of the outcome: Establishment ofcomprehensive policies targeting transformationalchange in the REDD+ policy domainPresence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationNew institutions,procedures andcapacity-buildingmeasures areestablished bycommitted actors.Such policies andoutputs are built on abroad societalconsensus for change.New institutions andprocedures are notestablished or are metwith resistance, thusundermining theircapacity to function.REDD+ policyformulation remainsfragmented or isundertaken mainly byexternal actors.Business-as-usualapproaches dominatemedia and politics.* MRV systemdeveloped* Coordination bodyestablished* REDD financing usedeffectively* National strategy inplace* Grievanceprocedures or othermechanisms toenhance accountabilityin REDD+ systemsestablishedTwo or more indicatorsof presence = 1Zero or one indicator ofpresence = 0Only Brazil, Indonesia and Vietnam (at least two indicators present) - outcome 1.
  9. 9. THINKING beyond the canopyKey features of effective forestlegislation, policy and governance (EFF)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationA sound and clear legalframework with clearlyassigned rights andmanagementregulations is in place.Laws and policies are atleast partly effectivelyimplemented bynational and localadministrations, whichhave at their disposal aminimum ofenforcementmechanisms andimplementationcapacity.Tenure and rights are inmany respects unclearand contested.There are unresolvedcontradictions betweenformal and customarylaw.There are no adequatelaws and policies, orthey exist but areineffective because oflack of implementationmechanisms andenforcement capacityand/or elite capture andcorruption.*Sound and consistent legalforestry framework and policies*Effective implementation andenforcement mechanisms*Capacity-building efforts forimplementing agencies*High compliance with the law bycitizens and businesses*Awareness and effective use ofrights*Low level of corruption andclientelistic patterns underminingpolicy implementationTwo or moreindicatorspresent = 1Zero or oneindicatorpresent = 0
  10. 10. THINKING beyond the canopyTransformational coalitions (COAL)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationExistence ofcoalitions of driversof change with roomto manoeuvre in thepolitical structuresand impact on thediscourse.Policy actors andcoalitions calling fortransformationalchange are moreprominent in themedia than thosesupporting the statusquo.No observablecoalitions of driversof change, or anypresent are toomarginal toinfluence policy-making and are notvisible in thepolitical discourseon REDD+.Media and policycircles aredominated bycoalitionssupporting thestatus quo andbusiness as usual.*Notions or existence of coalition buildingamong actors supporting REDD+ policies (e.g.umbrella organization, regular meetings, jointstatements, personal relations)*There are drivers of change (policy actorsthat lead discourse in pro-REDD+ direction)both inside and outside governmentinstitutions.*Policy actor coalitions calling for substantialpolitical change in forest policies are moreprominent in media than those supporting thestatus quo.*Pro-REDD+ policy actors have good access topolitical decision-makers (e.g. invited toexpert hearings, members in advisorycouncils).Two ormoreindicatorspresent,includingthe firstindicator = 1Zero or oneindicatorpresent orfirstindicatorabsent = 0
  11. 11. THINKING beyond the canopyResults I: Institutional settingThe results reveal path dependencies and institutional stickinessin all the study countries: Only countries already undertaking institutional change (CHA)have been able to establish REDD+ policies in a relativelyshort period but only in the presence of either• high pressure from forest-resource shortages (PRES: Braziland Indonesia)• or key features of effective forest legislation, policy andgovernance (EFF: Vietnam).positive outcome (REDD = 1):PRES*eff*CHA (Indonesia)+ pres*EFF*CHA (Vietnam) + PRES*EFF*CHA (Brazil)
  12. 12. THINKING beyond the canopy
  13. 13. THINKING beyond the canopyResults II: Policy arenaWhere an enabling institutional setting is in place(EFF*CHA or PRES*eff*CHA), two conditions of the policyarena proofed to be crucial for all three successfulcountries (Brazil, Vietnam and Indonesia): National ownership (OWN) Transformational coalitions (COAL)Countries that have these two conditions of the policyarena, but not the enabling institutional setting (e.g. Peruand Mozambique), were not successful in establishingREDD+ yet.
  14. 14. THINKING beyond the canopyNote: Indonesia has the alternative configuration for enabling environment(PRES*eff*CHA)and the policy arena configuration is *OWN*COAL*incl
  15. 15. THINKING beyond the canopyFactors affecting national REDD+ policiesCase Institutional setting Policy arena OutcomePRES EFF CHA OWN COAL INCL REDDBolivia 1 1 1 0 0 0 0Brazil 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Burkina Faso 1 0 0 0 0 0 0Cameroon 1 1 0 0 0 0 0DRC 0 0 1 0 1 1 0Indonesia 1 0 1 1 1 0 1Mozambique 1 0 0 1 1 1 0Nepal 0 1 0 0 1 1 0Peru 0 0 1 1 1 1 0PNG 0 0 0 0 1 0 0Tanzania 0 0 0 0 1 1 0Vietnam 0 1 1 1 1 0 1
  16. 16. THINKING beyond the canopyMeasuring progress? Somereflections Findings:• Context matters: Already initiated institutionalchange allows for faster REDD+ design , buteither forest pressure needs to be high or effectiveforest legislation, policy and governance in place• Actor-related factors of national ownershipand transformational coalitions crucial: butcould only be effective in an enabling institutionalsetting
  17. 17. THINKING beyond the canopyMeasuring progress? Somereflections Method:• Combinations of conditions includingpresence/absence specification allows to deal withREDD complexity• Factors (conditions) identified can be useful examplesfor performance assessments in REDD+ countries• Limitations are given with outcome variable, and withlimited case numbers that have achieved this, will bevery interesting when emission trajectories will beaffected through REDD+
  18. 18. We acknowledge the support from:Norad and the Ministry of Environment of Norway,AusAID (Australia),European Commission,Dept. of Energy and Climate Change & Dept. for Int. Dev. (UK),& all research partners and individualsthat have contributed to the GCS researchThanks
  19. 19. THINKING beyond the canopyPressure from shortage of forestresources (PRES)Presence Absence Indicators EvaluationForests are underpressure from highdeforestation rateAbundant orrecovering forestresources with a lowto medium ornegative(reforestation)deforestation rate*Forest transitionstagea*Deforestation rateForest transitionstage 2 or 3 anddeforestation rateabove 0.5% annually= 1Forest transitionstage 1, 4 or 5 anddeforestation ratebelow 0.5% annually= 0
  20. 20. THINKING beyond the canopyKey features of effective forest legislation, policy andgovernance (EFF)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationA sound and clear legalframework with clearlyassigned rights andmanagementregulations is in place.Laws and policies are atleast partly effectivelyimplemented bynational and localadministrations, whichhave at their disposal aminimum ofenforcementmechanisms andimplementationcapacity.Tenure and rights are inmany respects unclearand contested.There are unresolvedcontradictions betweenformal and customarylaw.There are no adequatelaws and policies, orthey exist but areineffective because oflack of implementationmechanisms andenforcement capacityand/or elite capture andcorruption.*Sound and consistent legalforestry framework and policies*Effective implementation andenforcement mechanisms*Capacity-building efforts forimplementing agencies*High compliance with the law bycitizens and businesses*Awareness and effective use ofrights*Low level of corruption andclientelistic patterns underminingpolicy implementationTwo or moreindicatorspresent = 1Zero or oneindicatorpresent = 0
  21. 21. THINKING beyond the canopyAlready initiated policy change(CHA)Already initiated policy change(CHA)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationThe government hasalready formulated andis implementing policystrategies on climatechange (e.g. NAMA)and deforestation, or alow-carbondevelopment strategiesor/and PES schemesare already establishedindependently fromREDD+ policiesThe government hasnot yet formulatedadvanced policystrategies on climatechange (e.g. NAMA)and deforestation or alow-carbondevelopment strategy,or existing policies arehighly insufficient ornot at all implemented.No PES schemes havebeen established.* Evidence ofimplementation ofpolicy strategies inrelated fields (e.g. oneor more of thefollowing: NAMA, PES,deforestation, low-carbon development)Present = 1Absent = 0
  22. 22. THINKING beyond the canopyNational ownership (OWN)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationPro-REDD+ mediastatements bygovernment (nationaland subnational).National research andNGO actors dominatepolicy discourse (mediaanalysis).Engagement ofnational politicalinstitutions in REDD+policy formulation.Donor agendas do notdominate process.Budget allocation toREDD+.Anti-REDD+ mediastatements by nationalstate actors and/orpro-REDD+ statementsby international actorsdominate policydiscourse.Policy formulation ismainly by foreignactors.Financial incentivesfrom donors are mainreason for REDD+implementation.No budget allocationto REDD+.*Regular pro-REDD+statements bygovernment appear inthe media.*REDD+ policyformulation is led bynational politicalinstitutions.*Foreign donors/actorshave only aminor/advisory roleand agenda in REDD+policy formulation.All 3 indicators present= 1Fewer than 3 indicatorspresent = 0
  23. 23. THINKING beyond the canopyTransformational coalitions (COAL)Presence Absence Indicators of presence EvaluationExistence ofcoalitions of driversof change with roomto manoeuvre in thepolitical structuresand impact on thediscourse.Policy actors andcoalitions calling fortransformationalchange are moreprominent in themedia than thosesupporting the statusquo.No observablecoalitions of driversof change, or anypresent are toomarginal toinfluence policy-making and are notvisible in thepolitical discourseon REDD+.Media and policycircles aredominated bycoalitionssupporting thestatus quo andbusiness as usual.*Notions or existence of coalition buildingamong actors supporting REDD+ policies (e.g.umbrella organization, regular meetings, jointstatements, personal relations)*There are drivers of change (policy actorsthat lead discourse in pro-REDD+ direction)both inside and outside governmentinstitutions.*Policy actor coalitions calling for substantialpolitical change in forest policies are moreprominent in media than those supporting thestatus quo.*Pro-REDD+ policy actors have good access topolitical decision-makers (e.g. invited toexpert hearings, members in advisorycouncils).Two ormoreindicatorspresent,includingthe firstindicator = 1Zero or oneindicatorpresent orfirstindicatorabsent = 0

×