IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enscpo/v63y2016icp161-169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges and opportunities for REDD+: A reality check from perspectives of effectiveness, efficiency and equity

Author

Listed:
  • Pasgaard, M.
  • Sun, Z.
  • Müller, D.
  • Mertz, O.

Abstract

Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+) is a promising mechanism of payments for ecosystem services with the aim to effectively reduce emissions in an efficient and equitable manner. REDD+ is part of the Paris-agreement reached at the UNFCCC COP21 in December 2015, but questions on whether REDD+ will work and bring multi-benefits are still hotly debated. Moreover, the results and messages from research on REDD+ in different regions are mixed, context-based and fragmented. Here, we employ a survey among REDD+ stakeholders, researchers, and consultants to evaluate the opportunities and challenges of REDD+ for achieving effective, efficient and equitable outcomes and co-benefits (3E+). We substantiate our survey results with a literature review. Results suggest that the challenges in achieving the 3E+ relate to the disproportionality between deforestation drivers and mitigation measures, diverging perceptions of equity among REDD+ stakeholders, complexity of property rights, and fragile willingness of stakeholders to engage in REDD+. If these challenges can be successfully addressed by the involved stakeholder groups, they can be turned into opportunities for realizing REDD+.

Suggested Citation

  • Pasgaard, M. & Sun, Z. & Müller, D. & Mertz, O., 2016. "Challenges and opportunities for REDD+: A reality check from perspectives of effectiveness, efficiency and equity," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 161-169.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:63:y:2016:i:c:p:161-169
    DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116302428
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kubo, Hideyuki & Wibawanto, Ari & Rossanda, Dicko, 2019. "Toward a policy mix in conservation governance: A case of Gunung Palung National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. Adam Bumpus & Thu-Ba Huynh & Sophie Pascoe, 2019. "Making REDD+ Transparent: Opportunities for MobileTechnology," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(4), pages 85-117, November.
    3. Aggarwal, Ashish & Brockington, Dan, 2020. "Reducing or creating poverty? Analyzing livelihood impacts of forest carbon projects with evidence from India," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    4. Jewel Andoh & Yohan Lee, 2018. "National REDD+ Strategy for Climate Change Mitigation: A Review and Comparison of Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Ackerschott, Adriana & Kohlhase, Esther & Vollmer, Anita & Hörisch, Jacob & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2023. "Steering of land use in the context of sustainable development: A systematic review of economic instruments," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    6. Yvonne Hargita & Lukas Giessen & Sven Günter, 2020. "Similarities and Differences between International REDD+ and Transnational Deforestation-Free Supply Chain Initiatives—A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-33, January.
    7. Pelletier, Johanne & Horning, Ned & Laporte, Nadine & Samndong, Raymond Achu & Goetz, Scott, 2018. "Anticipating social equity impacts in REDD+ policy design: An example from the Democratic Republic of Congo," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 102-115.
    8. Lee, Jean, 2017. "Farmer participation in a climate-smart future: Evidence from the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 72-79.
    9. Guillaume Lestrelin & Jean-Christophe Castella & Qiaohong Li & Thoumthone Vongvisouk & Nguyen Dinh Tien & Ole Mertz, 2019. "A Nested Land Uses–Landscapes–Livelihoods Approach to Assess the Real Costs of Land-Use Transitions: Insights from Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enscpo:v:63:y:2016:i:c:p:161-169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/environmental-science-and-policy/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.