Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) in developing countries is based on the premise that conserving tropical forests is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions and therefore can be fully funded by international actors with obligations or interests in reducing emissi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luttrell, C., Sills, E.O., Aryani, R., Ekaputri, A.D., Evnike, M.F.
Formato: Journal Article
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: Springer 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93930
_version_ 1855540666960969728
author Luttrell, C.
Sills, E.O.
Aryani, R.
Ekaputri, A.D.
Evnike, M.F.
author_browse Aryani, R.
Ekaputri, A.D.
Evnike, M.F.
Luttrell, C.
Sills, E.O.
author_facet Luttrell, C.
Sills, E.O.
Aryani, R.
Ekaputri, A.D.
Evnike, M.F.
author_sort Luttrell, C.
collection Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace)
description Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) in developing countries is based on the premise that conserving tropical forests is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions and therefore can be fully funded by international actors with obligations or interests in reducing emissions. However, concerns have repeatedly been raised about whether stakeholders in REDD+ host countries will actually end up bearing the costs of REDD+. Most prior analyses of the costs of REDD+ have focused on the opportunity costs of foregone alternative uses of forest land. We draw on a pan-tropical study of 22 subnational REDD+ initiatives in five countries to explore patterns in implementation costs, including which types of organizations are involved and which are sharing the costs of implementing REDD+. We find that many organizations involved in the implementation of REDD+, particularly at the subnational level and in the public sector, are bearing implementation costs not covered by the budgets of the REDD+ initiatives. To sustain this level of cost-sharing, REDD+ must be designed to deliver local as well as global forest benefits.
format Journal Article
id CGSpace93930
institution CGIAR Consortium
language Inglés
publishDate 2018
publishDateRange 2018
publishDateSort 2018
publisher Springer
publisherStr Springer
record_format dspace
spelling CGSpace939302025-06-17T08:24:18Z Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation? Luttrell, C. Sills, E.O. Aryani, R. Ekaputri, A.D. Evnike, M.F. climate change mitigation deforestation degradation costs conservation Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD+) in developing countries is based on the premise that conserving tropical forests is a cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions and therefore can be fully funded by international actors with obligations or interests in reducing emissions. However, concerns have repeatedly been raised about whether stakeholders in REDD+ host countries will actually end up bearing the costs of REDD+. Most prior analyses of the costs of REDD+ have focused on the opportunity costs of foregone alternative uses of forest land. We draw on a pan-tropical study of 22 subnational REDD+ initiatives in five countries to explore patterns in implementation costs, including which types of organizations are involved and which are sharing the costs of implementing REDD+. We find that many organizations involved in the implementation of REDD+, particularly at the subnational level and in the public sector, are bearing implementation costs not covered by the budgets of the REDD+ initiatives. To sustain this level of cost-sharing, REDD+ must be designed to deliver local as well as global forest benefits. 2018-02 2018-07-03T10:56:39Z 2018-07-03T10:56:39Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93930 en Open Access Springer Luttrell, C., Sills, E.O., Aryani, R., Ekaputri, A.D., Evnike, M.F.. 2017. Beyond opportunity costs : who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-016-9736-6
spellingShingle climate change
mitigation
deforestation
degradation
costs
conservation
Luttrell, C.
Sills, E.O.
Aryani, R.
Ekaputri, A.D.
Evnike, M.F.
Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title_full Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title_fullStr Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title_full_unstemmed Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title_short Beyond opportunity costs: who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation?
title_sort beyond opportunity costs who bears the implementation costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation
topic climate change
mitigation
deforestation
degradation
costs
conservation
url https://hdl.handle.net/10568/93930
work_keys_str_mv AT luttrellc beyondopportunitycostswhobearstheimplementationcostsofreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT sillseo beyondopportunitycostswhobearstheimplementationcostsofreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT aryanir beyondopportunitycostswhobearstheimplementationcostsofreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT ekaputriad beyondopportunitycostswhobearstheimplementationcostsofreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation
AT evnikemf beyondopportunitycostswhobearstheimplementationcostsofreducingemissionsfromdeforestationanddegradation