The presentation of Monica Di Gregorio, of the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and University of Leeds, to the IIED-hosted Moving ahead with Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) workshop on 9-10 April 2014. The presentation, made in the second session on moving beyond readiness and the role of the private sector, focused on whether NGOs and the private sector was heading in the right direction with REDD+ schemes, and doing the right thing. More information on CIFOR's work: http://www.cifor.org/. Further details of the workshop and IIED's work on REDD+ are available via http://www.iied.org/coverage-moving-ahead-redd-prospects-challenges-workshop.

1. THINKING beyond the canopy
Comparing progress in national
REDD+ policy processes
Monica Di Gregorio (CIFOR and University of Leeds/SRI)
9th April 2014– IIED, London

2. THINKING beyond the canopy
Analysis of national REDD+ policy
processes
• 13 countries studied since 2009
• Analysis of the Context of REDD+ 2)Media analysis 3) Policy network analysis
• Case studies and comparative studies
2

3. THINKING beyond the canopy
Comparative studies
 Qualitative comparative analysis
• Assesses factors that have enabled
REDD+ policy progress
• 2 step-QCA: Institutional and
proximate conditions (policy
processes) in 12 countries
 Comparative policy network analysis
• Investigates progress in relation to:
• Power structures: distribution of power
& type of interactions in 7 countries
 Comparative media analysis
• Investigates the potential of public
discourses in the national media to
facilitate policy change in 7 countries
3

4. THINKING beyond the canopy
QCA: How is progress in REDD+ defined?
The phased approach (Meridian 2009, UNFCCC)
4

5. THINKING beyond the canopy
Analysis: Two-step QCA
Outcome variable: Establishment of comprehensive
policies targeting transformational change in the
REDD+ policy domain (phase II)
 Brazil, Indonesia and Vietnam
 Six factors divided into two categories to explain outcome
• Institutional setting: pressure on forest resources
(PRES); effective forest policy and governance (EFF);
pre-existing CC/ reduction of deforestation policies (CHA)
• Policy process: national ownership (OWN);
transformational coalitions (COAL); inclusiveness of the
policy process (INC)
5

6. THINKING beyond the canopy
Results:
Institutional conditions Policy conditions
Pre-existing CC and forestry reforms (CHA) as a
prerequisite for progress REDD+
but only in the presence of either
 high pressure on forest resources (PRES:
Brazil and Indonesia)
 or key features of effective forest
legislation, policy and governance (EFF:
Vietnam)
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 (OWN)
 Transformational coalitions (COAL)
Indonesia: PRES*eff*CHA*OWN*COAL*incl
6

7. THINKING beyond the canopy
Policy
Network
Analysis
 Assess impact of power structures on REDD+ progress
 Analysis underway in 8 countries
(Brazil, Cameroon, Indonesia, Nepal, Peru, Papua New
Guinea, Tanzania, Vietnam >1000 interviews hours)
 One comparative and seven case study analysis
(forthcoming special issue Ecology and Society)
7

8. THINKING beyond the canopy
Comparative PNA: Power structures
8

9. THINKING beyond the canopy
Comparative PNA: Power structures
Policy change in arenas with
complex socio-ecological
relations and high trade-offs
between development and
conservation agendas can
entail high political costs
(Bumpus and Liverman
2011).
Hypothesis: In such
circumstances, a mix of
conflict and cooperation
facilitates policy change and
progress
9

10. THINKING beyond the canopy
PNA Results
Honeymoon phase: Nepal, Tanzania and Cameroon:
 Countries in the early stages of national REDD+ policy
debates, display dominance of cooperation
Bargaining for change: Indonesia, Brazil, PNG:
 Power struggles intensify: bargaining (conflictual
cooperation) becomes dominant when the national
REDD+ policy process starts to address specific policies
and measures, particularly on controversial issues such
as benefit sharing
State driven: Vietnam: dominance of cooperation indicates
lack of inclusion, underreporting of conflict (latent)
10

11. 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: environmental
justice of domestic NGOs and CSOs:
 Recognizes trade-offs between REDD+ & economic
development, resource access and livelihoods
 Questions power structures supporting drivers of
deforestation and degradation (indirectly)11

12. THINKING beyond the canopy
Summary
 Context matters: Pre-existing institutional change (forestry &
CC) facilitates REDD+ design, but either forest pressure
needs to be high or effective forest legislation, policy and
governance in place
 Policy processes factors of national ownership and
transformational coalitions crucial: but could only be
effective in an enabling institutional setting
 Power structures: (symmetric) bargaining (conflictual
cooperation) facilitates policy change and progress
 Public discourse: limited engagement of state actors with
demands of domestic non-state actors, and lack of attention
to business sector in areas that drive deforestation and forest
degradation
12

13. 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)
 Bring equity back on the agenda both at international and
national level
• Bring together state and non-state actors around
environmental justice issues: tenure, benefit-sharing
and safeguards debates (consider possible trade-offs)
13

14. THINKING beyond the canopy
www.cifor.cgiar.org
Based on:
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., and Di Gregorio, M., Forthcoming. National REDD+ policy
networks: From cooperation to conflict. Ecology and Society.
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. et al. 2013. Equity and REDD+ in the Media: A Comparative
Analysis of Policy Discourses. Ecology and Society, 18:2. DOI: 10.5751/ES-
05694-18023
We acknowledge the support from:
Norad and the Ministry of Climate Change and Environment, Norway, , AusAID
(Australia), European Commission, DECC& DFID (UK), & all research partners and
individuals that have contributed to the GCS research

15. THINKING beyond the canopy
Appendix QCA: Outcome
Outcome Presence Absence Indicators of
presence
Evaluation
comprehensi
ve policies
targeting
transformatio
nal change in
the REDD+
domain
New institutions,
capacity-building
established by
committed actors
They support
concrete
policy formulation
and outputs
Policies built on a
broad societal
consensus for
change
New institutions and
procedures
not established or met
with resistance
REDD+ policy
formulation
fragmented or
undertaken mainly
by external actors
Business-as-usual
approaches
dominate media and
politics
• MRV system
developed
• Coordination body
established
• REDD financing used
effectively
• National strategy in
place
• Grievance
procedures or other
mechanisms to
enhance
accountability in
REDD+ systems
established
Two or more
indicators of
Presence = 1
Zero or one
indicator of
Presence = 0
15

16. THINKING beyond the canopy
Appendix QCA: Institutional factors
Condition Presence Absence Indicators of presence Evaluation
Pressure from
shortage of
forest resources
(PRES)
PRES
Forests are under
pressure from high
deforestation rate
Abundant or recovering
forest resources with
a low to medium or negative
(reforestation)
deforestation rate
Forest transition stage
Deforestation rate
FT stage 2 or defor
rate> 0.5% =1
FT stage 1, 4, 5
deforestation rate
<0.5% = 0
effective forest
legislation,
policy and
governance
(EFF)
clear legal
framework (rights &
management
regulations) in place
Laws partly
Implemented
minimum
enforcement &
implementation
capacity
Tenure and rights
unclear/contested
unresolved contradictions in
formal & customary law
inadequate laws & policies,
or ineffective
Sound legal for. framework
Effective implementation &
enforcement
Capacity-building efforts
Compliance with law
Awareness and effective use
of rights
Low corruption
Two or more
indicators
Present = 1
Zero or one indicator
Present = 0
Already
initiated policy
change (CHA)
Existing policy
strategies on CC,
defor., low-carbon
development, PES
schemes
independently from
REDD policies
No advanced strategies on
CC, deforestation or a
low=carbon
Existing policies insufficient
or not implemented at all;
no PES schemes
Evidence of implementation
of policy strategies in
related fields (e.g. one or
more of the following:
NAMA, PES,
deforestation, low-carbon
development)
Present = 1
Absent = 0
16

17. THINKING beyond the canopy
Proximate conditions: OWN
Condition Presence Absence Indicators of
presence
Evaluation
National
ownership
(OWN)
Pro-REDD+ media
statements by gov.
National actors
dominate p olicy
discourse
Nat. pol. Inst.
engag in REDD+
policy formulation.
Donor agendas do not
dominate the process.
Adequate
budget allocation to
REDD+.
Anti-REDD+ media
statements by state
actors and/or
pro-REDD+ statements
by int. actors
dominate policy
discourse.
Policy formulation
carried out by
foreign actors.
Financial incentives
Are main reason for
REDD+ implementation.
There is no budget
allocation to REDD+.
• Regular pro-
REDD+ statements
by
gov. in media
• REDD+ policy
formulation led by
nat. pol. institutions
• Donors have only
advisory role in
REDD+
All three indicators
present = 1
Fewer than three
indicators present
= 0
17

18. THINKING beyond the canopy
Proximate conditions: INCL
Condition Presence Absence Indicators of
presence
Evaluation
Inclusiveness
of the policy
process
(INCL)
Key stakeholders
including civil society,
private sector and
indigenous people (if
applicable) participate
or are at least
consulted
during the REDD+
process.
There are formal
participation
or consultation
mechanisms, and
the views expressed
by stakeholders are
considered in REDD+
policy documents.
There are no formal
mechanisms for
participation by or
consultation with key
stakeholders, civil
society, indigenous
people and the private
sector, or existing
mechanisms are not
applied.
Stakeholders’ views
are not represented
in REDD+ policy
documents.
• Key stakeholders
(CSOs, private
sector) participate
In REDD+ process.
• participation
mechanisms are
present.
• views from
consultations
included in REDD+
policy docs.
• There is
knowledge about
REDD+ at the
local level.
Two or more
indicators present,
including one of the
last two indicators
= 1
Zero or one
indicator
present, or neither
of the last two
indicators = 0
18

19. THINKING beyond the canopy
Proximate conditions: COAL
Condition Presence Absence Indicators of
presence
Evaluation
Transformati
onal
coalitions
(COAL)
Coalitions of drivers of
change exist and have
room to maneuver in
the political structures
and affect the
discourse.
Policy actors and
coalitions calling
for transformational
change are more
prominent in the
media
than those supporting
the status quo.
There are no
observable coalitions
of drivers of change, or
those that exist are too
marginal to influence
policy-making and
are not visible in the
political discourse on
REDD+.
Media and policy
circles are dominated
by coalitions
supporting the status
quo.
• some degree of
coalition building
among actors
supporting
REDD+
• Drivers of change
inside and outside
government
institutions.
• coalitions for
change more
prominent than
status quo
coalitions
• Pro-REDD+ actors
good access to
decision-makers
Two or more
indicators present,
including the first
indicator = 1
Zero or one
indicator
present or first
indicator absent = 0
19