REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway
The initiative known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) officially became part of the international climate agenda in 2007. At that time, REDD+ was an idea regarding payment to countries (and possibly also projects) for reducing emission from forests, with fundin...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
Wiley
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95516 |
| _version_ | 1855523025287380992 |
|---|---|
| author | Angelsen, A. |
| author_browse | Angelsen, A. |
| author_facet | Angelsen, A. |
| author_sort | Angelsen, A. |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | The initiative known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) officially became part of the international climate agenda in 2007. At that time, REDD+ was an idea regarding payment to countries (and possibly also projects) for reducing emission from forests, with funding primarily from carbon markets. The initiative has since become multi‐objective in nature; the policy focus has changed from a payments for environmental services (PES) approach to broader policies, and international funding primarily originates from development aid budgets. This “aidification” of REDD+ has made the program similar to previous efforts using conditional or results‐based aid (RBA). However, the experience of RBA in other sectors has scarcely been addressed in the REDD+ debate. The alleged advantages of RBA are poorly backed by empirical research. This paper reviews the primary challenges in designing and implementing a system of RBA, namely, donor spending pressure, performance criteria, reference levels, risk sharing, and funding credibility. It then reviews the four partially performance‐based, bilateral REDD+ agreements that Norway has entered with Tanzania, Brazil, Guyana, and Indonesia. These agreements and the aid experience provide valuable lessons for the design and implementation of future REDD+ mechanisms. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace95516 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publishDateRange | 2017 |
| publishDateSort | 2017 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| publisherStr | Wiley |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace955162025-06-17T08:23:36Z REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway Angelsen, A. carbon markets climate change deforestation emission environmental degradation forestry policies funds The initiative known as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) officially became part of the international climate agenda in 2007. At that time, REDD+ was an idea regarding payment to countries (and possibly also projects) for reducing emission from forests, with funding primarily from carbon markets. The initiative has since become multi‐objective in nature; the policy focus has changed from a payments for environmental services (PES) approach to broader policies, and international funding primarily originates from development aid budgets. This “aidification” of REDD+ has made the program similar to previous efforts using conditional or results‐based aid (RBA). However, the experience of RBA in other sectors has scarcely been addressed in the REDD+ debate. The alleged advantages of RBA are poorly backed by empirical research. This paper reviews the primary challenges in designing and implementing a system of RBA, namely, donor spending pressure, performance criteria, reference levels, risk sharing, and funding credibility. It then reviews the four partially performance‐based, bilateral REDD+ agreements that Norway has entered with Tanzania, Brazil, Guyana, and Indonesia. These agreements and the aid experience provide valuable lessons for the design and implementation of future REDD+ mechanisms. 2017-05 2018-07-03T11:03:07Z 2018-07-03T11:03:07Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95516 en Open Access Wiley Angelsen, A.. 2017. REDD+ as Result-based Aid : General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway. Review of Development Economics, 21 (2) : 237-264. https://doi.org/10.1111/rode.12271 |
| spellingShingle | carbon markets climate change deforestation emission environmental degradation forestry policies funds Angelsen, A. REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title | REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title_full | REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title_fullStr | REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title_full_unstemmed | REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title_short | REDD+ as Result-based Aid: General Lessons and Bilateral Agreements of Norway |
| title_sort | redd as result based aid general lessons and bilateral agreements of norway |
| topic | carbon markets climate change deforestation emission environmental degradation forestry policies funds |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/95516 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT angelsena reddasresultbasedaidgenerallessonsandbilateralagreementsofnorway |