Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards
Reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation and forest degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) is key to mitigating global climate change. The aim of REDD+ social safeguards is to ensure that REDD+ does not harm, and actually benefits, local people. To be eligible for result...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
Resilience Alliance, Inc.
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93871 |
| _version_ | 1855523870099898368 |
|---|---|
| author | Duchelle, Amy E. Sassi, Claudio de Jagger, P. Cromberg, M. Larson, A.M. Sunderlin, William D. Atmadja, S. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. Pratama, C.D. |
| author_browse | Atmadja, S. Cromberg, M. Duchelle, Amy E. Jagger, P. Larson, A.M. Pratama, C.D. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. Sassi, Claudio de Sunderlin, William D. |
| author_facet | Duchelle, Amy E. Sassi, Claudio de Jagger, P. Cromberg, M. Larson, A.M. Sunderlin, William D. Atmadja, S. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. Pratama, C.D. |
| author_sort | Duchelle, Amy E. |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | Reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation and forest degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) is key to mitigating global climate change. The aim of REDD+ social safeguards is to ensure that REDD+ does not harm, and actually benefits, local people. To be eligible for results-based compensation through REDD+, countries should develop national-level safeguard information systems to monitor and report on the impacts of REDD+. Although safeguards represent a key step for promoting social responsibility in REDD+, they are challenging to operationalize and monitor. We analyzed the impacts of different types of REDD+ interventions (incentives vs. disincentives) on key safeguard-relevant indicators, i.e., tenure security, participation, and subjective well-being, as well as on reported forest clearing. We used household-level data collected in Brazil, Peru, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam from approximately 4000 households in 130 villages at two points in time (2010-2012 and 2013-2014). Our findings highlight a decrease in perceived tenure security and overall perceived well-being over time for households exposed to disincentives alone, with the addition of incentives helping to alleviate negative effects on well-being. In Brazil, although disincentives were associated with reduced reported forest clearing by smallholders, they were the intervention that most negatively affected perceived well-being, highlighting a clear trade-off between carbon and noncarbon benefits. Globally, although households exposed to REDD+ interventions were generally aware of local REDD+ initiatives, meaningful participation in initiative design and implementation lagged behind. Our analysis contributes to a relatively small literature that seeks to operationalize REDD+ social safeguards empirically and to evaluate the impacts of REDD+ interventions on local people and forests. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace93871 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateRange | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | Resilience Alliance, Inc. |
| publisherStr | Resilience Alliance, Inc. |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace938712025-06-17T08:23:38Z Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards Duchelle, Amy E. Sassi, Claudio de Jagger, P. Cromberg, M. Larson, A.M. Sunderlin, William D. Atmadja, S. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. Pratama, C.D. climate change mitigation livelihoods monitoring social impacts Reducing carbon emissions through avoided deforestation and forest degradation and enhancement of carbon stocks (REDD+) is key to mitigating global climate change. The aim of REDD+ social safeguards is to ensure that REDD+ does not harm, and actually benefits, local people. To be eligible for results-based compensation through REDD+, countries should develop national-level safeguard information systems to monitor and report on the impacts of REDD+. Although safeguards represent a key step for promoting social responsibility in REDD+, they are challenging to operationalize and monitor. We analyzed the impacts of different types of REDD+ interventions (incentives vs. disincentives) on key safeguard-relevant indicators, i.e., tenure security, participation, and subjective well-being, as well as on reported forest clearing. We used household-level data collected in Brazil, Peru, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Vietnam from approximately 4000 households in 130 villages at two points in time (2010-2012 and 2013-2014). Our findings highlight a decrease in perceived tenure security and overall perceived well-being over time for households exposed to disincentives alone, with the addition of incentives helping to alleviate negative effects on well-being. In Brazil, although disincentives were associated with reduced reported forest clearing by smallholders, they were the intervention that most negatively affected perceived well-being, highlighting a clear trade-off between carbon and noncarbon benefits. Globally, although households exposed to REDD+ interventions were generally aware of local REDD+ initiatives, meaningful participation in initiative design and implementation lagged behind. Our analysis contributes to a relatively small literature that seeks to operationalize REDD+ social safeguards empirically and to evaluate the impacts of REDD+ interventions on local people and forests. 2017 2018-07-03T10:56:33Z 2018-07-03T10:56:33Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93871 en Open Access Resilience Alliance, Inc. Duchelle, A.E., de Sassi, C., Jagger, P., Cromberg, M., Larson, A.M., Sunderlin, W.D., Atmadja, S., Resosudarmo. I.A.P., Pratama, C.D.. 2017. Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+ : implications for social safeguards. Ecology and Society, 22 (3) : 2. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09334-220302 |
| spellingShingle | climate change mitigation livelihoods monitoring social impacts Duchelle, Amy E. Sassi, Claudio de Jagger, P. Cromberg, M. Larson, A.M. Sunderlin, William D. Atmadja, S. Resosudarmo, I.A.P. Pratama, C.D. Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title | Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title_full | Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title_fullStr | Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title_full_unstemmed | Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title_short | Balancing carrots and sticks in REDD+: implications for social safeguards |
| title_sort | balancing carrots and sticks in redd implications for social safeguards |
| topic | climate change mitigation livelihoods monitoring social impacts |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93871 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT duchelleamye balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT sassiclaudiode balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT jaggerp balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT crombergm balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT larsonam balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT sunderlinwilliamd balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT atmadjas balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT resosudarmoiap balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards AT pratamacd balancingcarrotsandsticksinreddimplicationsforsocialsafeguards |