Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Impact of REDD+ initiatives on local stakeholders’ income, wellbeing, and land use behavior: Global overview and Indonesia case study

615 views

Published on

By Claudio de Sassi and Christy Desta Pratama. Presentation for the “Understanding Transformational Change for REDD+ Implementation in Indonesia – Workshop and Policy Dialogue”. Jakarta, August 24 2015

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Impact of REDD+ initiatives on local stakeholders’ income, wellbeing, and land use behavior: Global overview and Indonesia case study

  1. 1. THINKING beyond the canopy Impact of REDD+ initiatives on local stakeholders’ income, wellbeing, and land use behavior: Global overview and Indonesia case study Claudio de Sassi and Christy Desta Pratama Presentation for the “Understanding Transformational Change for REDD+ Implementation in Indonesia – Workshop and Policy Dialogue” Jakarta, August 24 2015
  2. 2. Outline • Module 2 sample and objectives • Research question and data • Results: global overview • Global summary and conclusions • Preliminary findings: Indonesia • Preliminary conclusion: Indonesia
  3. 3. Module 2 on subnational initiatives: REDD+ on the ground • Aim: Know what works and does not in setting up REDD+ initiatives • Criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, equity, wellbeing, rights, biodiversity (3E+)
  4. 4. BRAZILPERU TANZANIA CAMEROON INDONESIA VIETNAM 3 7 8 6 4 2 1 5 9 10 11 16 13 14 15 12 22 19 20 18 17 23 21 BRAZIL 1.Acre 2.BolsaFloresta 3.Cotriguaçu 4.Jari/Amapá 5. SFX 6.Transamazon PERU 7.MadredeDios 8.Ucayali CAMEROON 9.Mt.Cameroon 10.SECameroon REDD+ initiatives Legend TANZANIA 11.Kigoma 12.Zanzibar 13.Kilosa 14.Lindi 15.Mpingo 16.Shinyanga INDONESIA 17.KFCP 18.Katingan 19.KCCP 20.RimbaRaya 21.TNCwithin BFCP 22.UluMasen VIETNAM 23. Cat Tien Location of subnational initiatives included in the CIFOR GCS study
  5. 5. Module 2 on subnational initiatives • Counterfactual approach: Before- After, Control-Intervention (BACI) • 6 countries, 23 initiatives (of which 16 are BACI) • Of these, 17 have household data • Surveys of 4,185 households, 150 villages and women’s groups (87 inside and 63 outside REDD+), 23 proponent organizations, other stakeholders • Forest cover change through remote sensing
  6. 6. Are REDD+ initiatives protecting and enhancing income and wellbeing of local stakeholders? We examine the effects of REDD+ intervention on target households through: - Detailed household income data (agricultural, forest, business, wage, and other income) at two points in time (roughly 2010 and 2013-14) - Data on perception of wellbeing change at the household level at two points in time (roughly 2010 and 2013-14) - Data on land use practices due to involvement with interventions (2013-2014)
  7. 7. Household income: before-after Overall increase in income over time, but variable: Increase: Brazil, Indonesia Stagnant: Tanzania, Cameroon, Vietnam Decrease: Peru Before After
  8. 8. Before - Control Before - Intervention After - Control After - Intervention Differences between REDD+ and control households, where any, are smaller than changes over time Household income: before-after/ control-intervention
  9. 9. Perceived wellbeing: baseline • High variation among countries/ different start point 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Brazil Peru Cameroon Tanzania Indonesia Vietnam Percent of households answering "better off" or “worse off” in answer to: “Overall, what is the wellbeing of your household today compared with the situation two years ago?” Better-off Worse-off
  10. 10. Perceived wellbeing: before-after/control-intervention • Slightly higher in intervention than in control in aggregate, though declining over time in intervention and rising in control Brazil Peru Cameroon Tanzania Indonesia Vietnam Total Cont -0.6 -10.7 0.8 3.3 7.5 -0.1 1.5 Int -2.9 -14.9 4.5 5.2 5.4 -8.4 -0.4 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 %changebefore-after Percent of households answering "better off" in answer to: “Overall, what is the wellbeing of your household today compared with the situation two years ago?”
  11. 11. Global overview: summary • Increase in income variable at the initiative site level, but showing a significant overall increase • At most initiative sites (10), no apparent difference between control and intervention villages • But at six sites, significant difference emerging over time between control and intervention villages, both positive and negative • Subjective perception of wellbeing shows similarities (and dissimilarities) in comparison with “objective” income data, i.e.:  slight improvement on average over time at both intervention and control villages, but not in all countries  advantage tends to decline in intervention and rise in control
  12. 12. • We detect no clear evidence that REDD+ has yet had a significant role in protecting and enhancing income and wellbeing.  Both income and wellbeing show both positive and negative changes over time  However, where there are changes they tend to be small compared to background dynamics Global overview: conclusions
  13. 13. At sites where we observe significant changes between control and intervention villages’ income and perceived wellbeing, it is unclear whether and to what extent positive changes are due to:  REDD+ conditional interventions, i.e. what is new and distinctive about REDD+  Interventions by REDD+ organizations that predate REDD+  Other factors And whether negative changes are attributable to disincentives/restrictions Global overview: conclusions
  14. 14. We are skeptical that the marginal benefit seen in some intervention villages can be attributed to REDD+ conditional incentives because our previous research has shown that: • Only 4 of 23 initiatives are selling forest carbon credits • Only 10 have piloted conditional incentives • 6 have ceased operating • Without adequate REDD+ financing, REDD+ by default relying mainly on ICDP approach Source: Sills et al. (2014) Global overview: conclusions
  15. 15. Indonesia preliminary findings
  16. 16. • The survey was conducted in 41 villages (divided into control and intervention), across 5 REDD+ initiatives* (project site), consisting of 1,340 households. • Full analysis of data has not been carried out (including distinction between the effect of REDD+ and non-REDD+ intervention). This is an ongoing work.. *there are actually 6 REDD+ initiatives studied in Indonesia, but one initiative was not surveyed intensively.
  17. 17. Household income: Indonesia Before - Control Before - Intervention After - Control After - Intervention • Changes in income over time can vary among sites. • Significant differences between intervention and control villages emerge in phase 2.
  18. 18. Household income: Indonesia Before - Control Before - Intervention After - Control After - Intervention • No effect (income increase in both control and intervention villages is the same)
  19. 19. Household income: Indonesia Before - Control Before - Intervention After - Control After - Intervention • Positive effects (intervention villages have higher increase in income)
  20. 20. Household income: country case IndonesiaBefore - Control Before - Intervention After - Control After - Intervention • and negative effects (intervention villages have lower increase in income or overall decrease) • Is this the effect of REDD+? Not necessarily.
  21. 21. Pattern of change in land use due to involvement in interventions 0.3% 30.4% 22.5% 46.7% Not answered No change in land use No clear answer Change in land use • At least 46.7% of 946 household involvements* in interventions indicated change in land use behavior. • Need to distinguished between intervention- control villages. • Need to distinguished between REDD+ and non-REDD+ interventions. *a single household can be involved in more than one intervention.
  22. 22. Pattern of change in land use due to involvement in interventions 28.4% 14.5% 51.5% 5.6% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% CAP CFP ENLA Other • The biggest land use change behavior are engagement in new land use activities (ENLA), change in agricultural practices (CAP), and change in forestry practices (CFP).
  23. 23. • In line with the global findings, we detect no clear evidence that REDD+ has yet had a significant role in enhancing income. • But, there are indications that interventions implemented on the ground may have changed land use behavior. Indonesia overview: Conclusions
  24. 24. Follow up • Fine tune analyses at the household level with regards to specific REDD+ and non-REDD+ interventions. • Moreover we plan to assess socioeconomic impacts (or lack thereof) in relation to REDD+ carbon effectiveness.
  25. 25. Thank you

×