IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v115y2020ics138993411930382x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Whose climate? Whose forest? Power struggles in a contested carbon forestry project in Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Blum, Mareike

Abstract

The voluntary carbon offset market is legitimated in climate policy debates at the global level and has incentivized a large number of afforestation and reforestation projects that have produced new power relations at the local level. This paper aims to critically examine how a contested Gold Standard certified project in Western Uganda has been justified, opposed and adapted during its implementation. Using a political ecology approach, this article sheds new light on the complexity of global-local interlinkages regarding carbon forestry projects and examines discursive power struggles. Taking a social constructivist perspective, I assume that due to their different values and experiences, actors have differing perceptions of the tensions and power relations arising during the carbon forestry project. Building on interviews and project-relevant certification documents, practices, narratives and counter-narratives were analyzed. The results show that while local actors were excluded from the forest, local communities and civil society actors have resisted against the company's management regime. Although the company remains the most powerful actor, more collaborative and moderate practices have lowered the conflict level. The case study shows that carbon markets need to be legitimated not only at the global level but also during the implementation in interaction with local constituencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Blum, Mareike, 2020. "Whose climate? Whose forest? Power struggles in a contested carbon forestry project in Uganda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:115:y:2020:i:c:s138993411930382x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S138993411930382X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102137?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Neil Adger & Tor A. Benjaminsen & Katrina Brown & Hanne Svarstad, 2001. "Advancing a Political Ecology of Global Environmental Discourses," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 681-715, September.
    2. Fisher, J.A. & Cavanagh, C.J. & Sikor, T. & Mwayafu, D.M., 2018. "Linking notions of justice and project outcomes in carbon offset forestry projects: Insights from a comparative study in Uganda," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 259-268.
    3. Jessica F. Green, 2013. "Order out of Chaos: Public and Private Rules for Managing Carbon," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 13(2), pages 1-25, May.
    4. Heather C. Lovell, 2010. "Governing the carbon offset market," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(3), pages 353-362, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Lo, Kevin, 2021. "Authoritarian environmentalism, just transition, and the tension between environmental protection and social justice in China's forestry reform," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Espada, Ana Luiza Violato & Kainer, Karen A., 2024. "Decision making processes and power dynamics in timber production co-management: A comparative analysis of seven Brazilian Amazonian community-based projects," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tschakert, Petra, 2016. "Shifting Discourses of Vilification and the Taming of Unruly Mining Landscapes in Ghana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 123-132.
    2. Biddulph, Robin, 2018. "The 1999 Tanzania land acts as a community lands approach: A review of research into their implementation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 48-56.
    3. Philipp Pattberg, 2017. "The emergence of carbon disclosure: Exploring the role of governance entrepreneurs," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1437-1455, December.
    4. Kenneth W. Abbott & Benjamin Faude, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 263-291, April.
    5. Jason Thistlethwaite & Matthew Paterson, 2016. "Private governance and accounting for sustainability networks," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1197-1221, November.
    6. Denis Gautier & Hélène Dessard & Houria Djoudi & Laurent Gazull & Mamy Soumaré, 2020. "Savannah gendered transition: how woodlands dynamics and changes in fuelwood delivery influence economic autonomy in Mali," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 3097-3117, April.
    7. Jean‐Philippe Venot & Floriane Clement, 2013. "Justice in development? An analysis of water interventions in the rural South," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(1), pages 19-30, February.
    8. Lasse Folke Henriksen & Stefano Ponte, 2018. "Public orchestration, social networks, and transnational environmental governance: Lessons from the aviation industry," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 23-45, March.
    9. Smith, Jo U. & Fischer, Anke & Hallett, Paul D. & Homans, Hilary Y. & Smith, Pete & Abdul-Salam, Yakubu & Emmerling, Hanna H. & Phimister, Euan, 2015. "Sustainable use of organic resources for bioenergy, food and water provision in rural Sub-Saharan Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 903-917.
    10. Thomas Hale & Charles Roger, 2014. "Orchestration and transnational climate governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 59-82, March.
    11. Manuschevich, Daniela, 2016. "Neoliberalization of forestry discourses in Chile," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 21-30.
    12. Evan Gach, 2019. "Normative Shifts in the Global Conception of Climate Change: The Growth of Climate Justice," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Jessica F. Green, 2017. "The strength of weakness: pseudo-clubs in the climate regime," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 41-52, September.
    14. Petursson, Jon Geir & Vedeld, Paul & Sassen, Marieke, 2013. "An institutional analysis of deforestation processes in protected areas: The case of the transboundary Mt. Elgon, Uganda and Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 22-33.
    15. Rübbelke, Dirk T.G., 2011. "International support of climate change policies in developing countries: Strategic, moral and fairness aspects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1470-1480, June.
    16. Samndong, Raymond Achu & Bush, Glenn & Vatn, Arild & Chapman, Melissa, 2018. "Institutional analysis of causes of deforestation in REDD+ pilot sites in the Equateur province: Implication for REDD+ in the Democratic Republic of Congo," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 664-674.
    17. Leonie Netter & Eike Luedeling & Cory Whitney, 2022. "Agroforestry and reforestation with the Gold Standard-Decision Analysis of a voluntary carbon offset label," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 1-26, February.
    18. Cille Kaiser, 2022. "Rethinking polycentricity: on the North–South imbalances in transnational climate change governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 693-713, December.
    19. Massé, Francis & Margulies, Jared D., 2020. "The geopolitical ecology of conservation: The emergence of illegal wildlife trade as national security interest and the re-shaping of US foreign conservation assistance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    20. Patrick Bigger, 2018. "Hybridity, possibility: Degrees of marketization in tradeable permit systems," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(3), pages 512-530, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:forpol:v:115:y:2020:i:c:s138993411930382x. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.