Avoiding Re‐Inventing the Wheel in a People‐Centered Approach to REDD+

One important debate regarding Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) in developing countries concerns the manner in which its implementation might affect local and indigenous communities. New ways to implement this mechanism without harming the interests of local communities are emerging. To inform this debate, we conducted a qualitative research synthesis to identify best practices (BPs) from people‐centered approaches to conservation and rural development, developed indicators of BPs, and invited development practitioners and researchers in the field to assess how the identified BPs are being adopted by community‐level REDD+ projects in Latin America. BPs included: local participation in all phases of the project; project supported by a decentralized forest governance framework; project objectives matching community livelihood priorities; project addressing community development needs and expectations; project enhancing stakeholder collaboration and consensus building; project applying an adaptive management approach; and project developing national and local capacities. Most of the BPs were part of the evaluated projects. However, limitations of some of the projects related to decentralized forest governance, matching project objectives with community livelihood priorities, and addressing community development needs. Adaptive management and free and prior informed consent have been largely overlooked. These limitations could be addressed by integrating conservation outcomes and alternative livelihoods into longer‐term community development goals, testing nested forest governance approaches in which national policies support local institutions for forest management, gaining a better understanding of the factors that will make REDD+ more acceptable to local communities, and applying an adaptive management approach that allows for social learning and capacity building of relevant stakeholders. Our study provides a framework of BPs and indicators that could be used by stakeholders to improve REDD+ project design, monitoring, and evaluation, which may help reconcile national initiatives and local interests without reinventing the wheel.

[1]  T. Ohska,et al.  Fukushima: Unpaid soil-research effort , 2013, Nature.

[2]  D. Ganz,et al.  Community Participation and Benefits in REDD+: A Review of Initial Outcomes and Lessons , 2013 .

[3]  F. Nelson,et al.  Social safeguards and co-benefits in REDD+: a review of the adjacent possible , 2012 .

[4]  A. Booth,et al.  Why the public thinks natural resources public participation processes fail: A case study of British Columbia communities , 2011 .

[5]  B. Williams Adaptive management of natural resources--framework and issues. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[6]  N. Salafsky Integrating development with conservation: A means to a conservation end, or a mean end to conservation? , 2011 .

[7]  B. Swallow,et al.  Locating REDD: A global survey and analysis of REDD readiness and demonstration activities , 2011 .

[8]  E. Sills,et al.  Evaluating land use and livelihood impacts of early forest carbon projects: Lessons for learning about REDD+ , 2011 .

[9]  B. Cashore,et al.  Implementing REDD+: lessons from analysis of forest governance , 2011 .

[10]  L. Persha,et al.  Nesting local forestry initiatives: revisiting community forest management in a REDD+ world. , 2010 .

[11]  J. Ribot,et al.  REDD-plus, forest people's rights and nested climate governance , 2010 .

[12]  A. Angelsen,et al.  Realising REDD+: National strategy and policy options edited by A. Angelsen with M. Brockhaus, M. Kanninen, E. Sills, W.D. Sunderlin & S. Wertz-Kanounnikoff (2009), xxiv + 362 pp., CIFOR, Bogor, Indonesia. ISBN 9786028693035 (pbk), also available from http://www.cifor.cgiar.org/publications/pdf_file , 2010, Oryx.

[13]  A. Larson,et al.  New Rights for Forest-Based Communities? Understanding Processes of Forest Tenure Reform , 2010 .

[14]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest Governance? , 2010, Science.

[15]  T. Sunderland,et al.  Getting REDD to work locally: lessons learned from integrated conservation and development projects , 2010 .

[16]  M. Savin-Baden,et al.  An Introduction to Qualitative Research Synthesis: Managing the Information Explosion in Social Science Research , 2010 .

[17]  Katherine J. LaJeunesse Connette,et al.  Conservation Biology , 2019, Springer US.

[18]  Florence Daviet,et al.  A Review of 25 Readiness Plan Idea Notes from the World Bank Forest Carbon Partnership Facility , 2009 .

[19]  Maria E. Fernandez-Gimenez,et al.  Adaptive Management and Social Learning in Collaborative and Community-Based Monitoring: a Study of Five Community-Based Forestry Organizations in the western USA , 2008 .

[20]  David A. Crocker,et al.  Ethics of Global Development: Agency, Capability, and Deliberative Democracy , 2008 .

[21]  Peter Taber,et al.  Indigenous, Colonist, and Government Impacts on Nicaragua's Bosawas Reserve , 2007, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[22]  Arun Agrawal,et al.  Forests, Governance, and Sustainability: Common Property Theory and its Contributions , 2007 .

[23]  D. Sheil,et al.  Conserving What and for Whom? Why Conservation Should Help Meet Basic Human Needs in the Tropics , 2007 .

[24]  O. Coomes,et al.  Targeting conservation-development initiatives in tropical forests: insights from analyses of rain forest use and economic reliance among Amazonian peasants , 2004 .

[25]  F. Berkes Rethinking Community‐Based Conservation , 2004 .

[26]  Carl Auerbach,et al.  Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis , 2003 .

[27]  Sandra A. Brown,et al.  A conceptual framework and its application for addressing leakage: the case of avoided deforestation , 2003 .

[28]  E. Lambin,et al.  Proximate Causes and Underlying Driving Forces of Tropical Deforestation , 2002 .

[29]  S. Biggs,et al.  Evolving Themes in Rural Development 1950s- 2000s , 2001 .

[30]  E. Wollenberg,et al.  Linking Livelihoods and Conservation: A Conceptual Framework and Scale for Assessing the Integration of Human Needs and Biodiversity , 2000 .

[31]  A. Agrawal,et al.  Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation , 1999 .

[32]  Victoria J. Michener The participatory approach: Contradiction and co-option in Burkina Faso , 1998 .

[33]  G. Brady Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action , 1993 .

[34]  I. Dey Qualitative Data Analysis: A User Friendly Guide for Social Scientists , 1993 .

[35]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[36]  D. Gow Collaboration in Development Consulting: Stooges, Hired Guns, or Musketeers? , 1991 .

[37]  D. Groggel Practical Nonparametric Statistics , 1972, Technometrics.

[38]  H. Albers,et al.  Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation , 2013 .

[39]  K. Brandon,et al.  Lessons for REDD+ from protected areas and integrated conservation and development projects , 2009 .

[40]  C. Streck Rights and REDD+: Legal and regulatory considerations , 2009 .

[41]  P. Cronkleton,et al.  Forest tenure rights and REDD+: From inertia to policy solutions , 2009 .

[42]  A. Angelsen,et al.  Using community forest managementto achieve REDD+ goals , 2009 .

[43]  A. Angelsen,et al.  What is the right scale for REDD , 2008 .

[44]  F. Seymour,et al.  How do we achieve REDD co-benefits and avoid doing harm? , 2008 .

[45]  A. Angelsen Moving ahead with REDD: issues, options and implications , 2008 .

[46]  Arun Agrawal,et al.  Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya , 2006 .

[47]  C. Folke,et al.  Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience , 1998 .

[48]  G. Noblit,et al.  Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies , 1988 .